I knew not everyone would get it, but those that do would get a kick out if it
As Ms said, they actually had thermal room on the gpu, but the cpu was the overall limiter.
They still overdesigned the cooling system and could have pushed it further but decided for higher yields.
2 Likes
amd has been improving zen/rdna performance per watt by ~50% per generation for a little while now, so:
80 watt right now
40 with zen 3/RDNA3
20 with zen 4 RDNA4
to be safe lets assume it would use zen 4 and RDNA 5, thats only 3 generations from now, instead of a mid cycle refresh we might get a mid cycle portable
1 Like
Oh man. I just got it
They created 4 tfs and 12 tflops to sandwich a $399 8tflop PS5.
By the time they were aware of the PS5âs upgrade it was too late to revisit the console. Hardware is pretty much locked 3 years in advance. PS5 got revisited late in its life cycle and thatâs why itâs a huge mofo with liquid metal cooling and variable clocks.
Had MS being aware of the $499 PS5 early they would have done a $399 6tf S and $599 ~13.5tf X.
they could make the vast majority of series s consoles 6tf boxes with an over the air update (just adding an âoverclockâ) at the low clocks that the series S runs at it doesnt take much (if any really) increased power to run at an increased clock rate. They could have totally changed it prior to launch, and after the 399 PlayStation was announced.
They only started manufacturing the xbox consoles at scale after the cheaper playstation sku was announced actually, they started in earnest in Julyish
1 Like
Then the x would be perceived as too expensive and the S too weak (against a 399$ ps5 digital).
Anyway I have no idea why they didnât do a late slight overclocking on the gpu of both series consoles, I actually kind of expected them to do so. A series X with a gpu running at 1.9 GHz wouldnât really need a redesign. Series S is a mistake anyway, in general IMO.
They would have needed to increase the PSU, increase the heat sink size (possibly needing a vapor champer cooler), and they need to use 16gbps GDDR6 (256Gb/s, which is still not enough for 6TF) at the very least to not be bandwidth starved.
That would have been a pricier and hotter system than one thatâs conceived to be 6TF to begin with.
3.4ghz CPU
20CUs at ~2.3ghz, ~6tf
10GB of 16gbps GDDR6,124bit bus, 256GB/s
would be pricier, hotter, bigger, and weaker than
3.4ghz CPU
26CUs at ~1.8ghz, ~6tf
12GB of 14gbps GDDR6, 192bit bus, 336GB/s
Realistically, after the PS5 upgrade, they could have gave the S 12GB of ram, up the clocks so itâs 4.5TF. For the X, full 20GB and 1953mhz to hit 13TF.
The hardware hasnât been utilized fully at all in a single game yet, let alone efficiently. When mesh shaders, VRS, sampler feedback, and lower precision bits are all properly utilized, itâll do stuff that the 1X would never be able to do.
2 Likes
Are you saying the Series X is a system of a down-clocked variety?
1 Like
Heat and cooling is a factor, also unlike the PS5 xbox guarantee a sustained clock speed. Also having a more powerful GPU will also require faster RAM bandwidth otherwise the extra Tflops will go to waste.
Once this gen gets going I dont think the majority of us will be craving more power.
1 Like
Honestly this isnât how it works. They donât sit there for years trying to be a Tflop more than their competitors. They know the component availability and cost and they have a rough power target. But are constrained by power draw, heat, size, form and function and budget. You take all those things together and plan for years it gets drilled down over time and you come up with a final hardware design at which point your specs are locked in.
The âwhy didnât they overclockâ X conversation is a bit banal because nobody knows the thermal or power draw implications and the knock on effect to design. These things arenât just thrown together. The fan and box volume are calculated to have a small overhead for cooling based on your target spec. You donât just eat into that overhead unless you want another red ring on your hands.
These things are finely tuned mass production consoles. Not just someone but their bedroom throwing together a PC to see what works. Itâs not about hitting a number one bigger than Sony but is about maximising what they can within the limitations they have to work to.
I agree but Sony 100% didnât follow this. They revisited the PS5 multiple times in the past 3 years to make significant changes.
1 Like
I doubt they were surprised by an overclocked ps5 or that would warrant they changing anything as a ps5 costing the same as the SX but still being significantly weaker is a better position than the one they anticipated.
They could have upped the clocks, they run at lower temps than ps5 and their cooling system moves significantly more air despite the smaller size, but they had already reached their performance targets and were satisfied with how they were positioned against ps5 so thatâs why they didnât change anything.
Not sure ps5 upgrade changed anything really ps5 sits at around 5700 and 5700XT level performance on pretty much all games (in some even lower than 5700) which was the expected for the system specs.
But in this case we do have thermal analysis that shows:
- SX components operates at lower temperatures than ps5
- SX operates at lower noise levels than ps5
- SX cooler moves more air than ps5, despite the size
- MS themselves said that in the end the cooling system ended up over designed for their workload, but with the setup they chose they have nearly 100% yields and that was more important for them, as all their performance targets were met.
So Ms could have pushed the clocks higher if they wanted, but decided not to.
Hmmmm. I think lots of speculation as to what they did or didnât do and when is going on based on good but incomplete information. Sony had a different route and seemingly tweaked their performance to match their design but that happens. But everyone has the same hardware components same access to tech and same constraints. So itâs unlikely you will see huge differences in power and the manufacturers know that. Nowadays any differences are relatively minor.
In hindsight the Series S wasnât really necessary. They would have been better served to release an all digital Series X. The Series S hasnât really been in great demand. Itâs pretty easy to find one. The Series X on the other hand isnât so easy.
It has been like 6 months, its too early for hindsight. Launches attract the hardcore gamer, which leans towards high end. XSS will likely pay off in the future when MS/Sony struggle to reduce prices.
1 Like
An All Digital Series X only saves $24 from the bill of materials. Any price decreases over that is from calculations based on digital market lock-in and elimination of second hand market sales.
There is a reason the PS5 DigitalEdition was barely able to be found during launch. Initial launch ratios were like under 3% availability or some insane lopsided figure. Its only there so they can say âstarting at $399â. And they had to do that to counter the SeriesS system priced so low.
Its going to be a sight this upcoming holiday season when seeing SeriesS Black-Friday sale prices.
1 Like
The point of SS was never the launch window where itâs mostly enthusiasts looking for a new console.
Itâs appeal will come over time in the generation by having an incredibly low cost of entry into the next generation, specially when the component shortages make cost reductions on SX and Ps5 almost impossible at the moment