• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD Navi 23 ‘NVIDIA Killer’ GPU Rumored to Support Hardware Ray Tracing, Coming Next Year

Status
Not open for further replies.
Calin Banc said:
You do know that those games you've mentioned are coming to the PC, right? :)
Click to expand...
You mean like the info I posted below a few days ago? Did you know that Horizon Zero Dark (PS4 title) was coming to PC? I was trying to point out the possibility that we might see more Playstation titles coming to PC, including PS5 titles.




EastCoastHandle said:


Hmm, looks like we will see more Playstation games on PC (AMD) in the future.
Not sure why this is bundled with CPU instead of GPU. However, it's clear it's coded with AMD GPUs in mind.
Click to expand...
 
EastCoastHandle said:
The reason for the disconnect(s) are do to the understanding of memory bandwidth vs capacity. You cannot equate 16GB of DDR4 as equal to 16 GB GDDR6 because the capacity is the same. DDR4 simply won't cut it for the amount of streaming that the PS5 is demoing in the new Unreal Engine and Ratche and Clank demo. 16 GB of DDR won't get you the same memory bandwidth of 16 GB GDDR6.
For example:
GDDR5 (7Gbps) @ 256bit can offer a potential of 224GB/s of bandwidth
GDDR5 (7Gbps) @ 384bit can offer a potential of 336GB/s of bandwidth
While DDR4 3200 has the potential to do 25.6 GB/s

These PS5 game demos are streaming data! It's not the traditional PC method.
That is why we, PC enthusiast, need video cards that are more then 16GB. Be it GDDR5/GDDR6/HBM2/HBM3. And I say more then 16B do the the inherent overhead of win10.
Click to expand...

PS4 had better system memory as well than the PC (which was at 176GB/sec), while XBOX One was way slower. It made no difference in the end as games usually performed the same and were limited by the slow HDD.

"When it comes to the memory bandwidth, the Xbox One has 68GB/sec of main memory (8GB DDR3) bandwidth, 102GB/sec of bandwidth to the embedded SRAM (32MB)"
https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/156467-xbox-one-hardware-and-software-specs-detailed-and-analyzed

When it comes to new consoles, you're still limited by storage speed. Even though fast, is not as fast as RAM. You still need to move data preventively into (v)RAM and then use it. Sure, you can access it a lot faster than from a standard HDD, but the speed is still low and you need still to limit what you can do based on that.

Also, don't forget you need to process that data. Large open worlds are not heavy only on bandwith. As you add more data on screen and in higher quality, the needs to process it increase as well.

With that said, I'm still waiting for the games to use proper physics in what's happening in the game world. I'm still waiting for games that have vehicles in to have them react significantly different based on what surface they're running and why not, a combination of Mud Tires (tuned properly) and BeanNG.drive for physics deformation. I'm still waiting for them to make the weather affect the environment realistically, for you to destroy buildings based on what weapons/magic you're using, still waiting of large crowds of NPCs with their own schedule using believable animations and so on.

Can't say I've seen any of that in the games shown so far. Is just the same old stuff dialed one step up - which is already possible on PC, depending per game. :)

EastCoastHandle said:
You mean like the info I posted below a few days ago? Did you know that Horizon Zero Dark (PS4 title) was coming to PC? I was trying to point out the possibility that we might see more Playstation titles coming to PC, including PS5 titles.
Click to expand...

Ah, ok, I thought that you've meant those are only possible on consoles.
 
EastCoastHandle said:
The reason for the disconnect(s) are do to the understanding of memory bandwidth vs capacity. You cannot equate 16GB of DDR4 as equal to 16 GB GDDR6 because the capacity is the same. DDR4 simply won't cut it for the amount of streaming that the PS5 is demoing in the new Unreal Engine and Ratche and Clank demo. 16 GB of DDR won't get you the same memory bandwidth of 16 GB GDDR6.
For example:
GDDR5 (7Gbps) @ 256bit can offer a potential of 224GB/s of bandwidth
GDDR5 (7Gbps) @ 384bit can offer a potential of 336GB/s of bandwidth
While DDR4 3200 has the potential to do 25.6 GB/s

These PS5 game demos are streaming data! It's not the traditional PC method.
That is why we, PC enthusiast, need video cards that are more then 16GB. Be it GDDR5/GDDR6/HBM2/HBM3. And I say more then 16B do the the inherent overhead of win10.
Click to expand...
You must have been in same school as Boris not-Yeltsin and other politicians.
GDDR's bandwidth doesn't do a **** for that data streaming when Flash memory delivers data only at decade lower rate than dual channel RAM of PC!
(+at two decades higher access latency)
No amount of marketing BS changes that Flash memory being the bottleneck in that equation.
And game textures have long been stored in compressed formats anyway and are unlikely to compress further.
Graphics cards also use data compression internally to save memory and increase effective bandwidth.
(because memory bandwidth hasn't increased at same rate as processing power)

And you're forgetting that use also as system RAM limits memory available for graphics assets.
Old gen reserves like 2-3GB for OS and its features and I can see that increasing some, because of general code bloat over time. (maybe depending what OS features game uses)
In PC that OS usage isn't away from VRAM.
Then also game code is going to need more memory than in old gen for storing more complex game world state etc.
That's very latency sensitive data and couldn't be "page filed" into Flash...
Even if burning through Flash write cycles like oxy-acetylene flame into butter didn't prevent that in the first place.
Also built for bandwidth GDDR is worser in latencies (than DDR) for CPU use and hence only GDDR memory architecture isn't all good.


So high end PCs with next-gen graphics cards will have no problems in handling same and some more.
Assuming games would be properly coded for PC, instead of being some half assed ports.

But anyway this isn't console marketing hype thread and it's time to stop talking about them.
 
Calin Banc said:
PS4 had better system memory as well than the PC (which was at 176GB/sec), while XBOX One was way slower. It made no difference in the end as games usually performed the same and were limited by the slow HDD.

"When it comes to the memory bandwidth, the Xbox One has 68GB/sec of main memory (8GB DDR3) bandwidth, 102GB/sec of bandwidth to the embedded SRAM (32MB)"
https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/156467-xbox-one-hardware-and-software-specs-detailed-and-analyzed

When it comes to new consoles, you're still limited by storage speed....
Click to expand...
Ok lets stop right there. You cannot relate last gen with next gen consoles and call it a correlation between the 2 vs PC. As you missed some vital differences:
16 GB GDDR6
Higher end 8 Core CPU


EsaT said:
You must have been in same school as Boris not-Yeltsin and other politicians.
GDDR's bandwidth doesn't do a **** for that data streaming when Flash memory delivers data only at decade lower rate than dual channel RAM of PC!
(+at two decades higher access latency)...
Click to expand...
So your argument is that there is no tangible difference that gaming developers can use between gddr6 vs DDR4. Well, at least having an education one would know not to make such sweeping false claims.
Do you realize how long we've been using double data rate and how far we've gotten using it?

DDR data transfer rates Since 1998/1999:
DDR 266：2.1 GB/s
DDR 333：2.6 GB/s
DDR 400：3.2 GB/s


DDR2 data transfer rates (2003):
DDR2 533：4.2 GB/s
DDR2 667：5.3 GB/s
DDR2 800：6.4 GB/s


DDR3 data transfer rates (2007):
DDR3 1066：8.5 GB/s
DDR3 1333：10.6 GB/s
DDR3 1600：12.8 G MB/s
DDR3 1866：14.9 G MB/s


DDR4 data transfer rates (2014):
DDR4 2133：17 GB/s
DDR4 2400：19.2 GB/s
DDR4 2666：21.3 GB/s
DDR4 3200：25.6 GB/s

DDR5 data transfer rates (2021/2022 for better):
DDR5 ????: 38.4 GB/s
DDR5 ????" 51.2 GB/s

We've been using DDR4 for the last 6 years...going on 7 before we are able to use DDR5. That's 7 years we've been held back on bandwidth on PC.
That is 20+ years since the inception of double data rate. That's a whooping 1.8 GB/s (roughly) increase per year for the last 21 or so years. And you think everything is just fine when consoles release specs showing they are now eclipsing double data rate as too slow and are using GDDR6?

I can only guess, accurately, why you don't understand why DDR isn't used in high end graphics cards. But I digress. Here, watch the pretty videos to gain some understanding of how just marginal improvements in bandwidth using DDR4 can improve framerates in open world games. Which I believe we will see more of as console ported to PC do to the gaming developers being less restricted. Ratchet and Clank (the video I posted earlier) was just one example of that. I do believe we will see more examples of games being "rebooted" with a more sandbox environment.

But what I found interesting is the fact that the energy used, in picojoules, is just as important as latency and capacity. With HBM2 having the lowest when compared to DDR4. But I digress. Before I forget, here is your video. Take note this is by the same developer who is creating Cyberpunk 2077.

Well what do you know..bandwidth does matter. Who knew? With a tad bit of critical thinking it's not hard to assume that with CB2077 the same thing will happen. But on console they are using GDDR6 while we are stuck waiting for an upgrade path for DDR5. How ironic.


The next GTA game coming out is rumored to be bigger. All we have to do is take note of the bandwidth of the current video
Well, well, well. A repeat of Witcher 3. Hmm, looks like a trend is formulating when comes to open world games and bandwidth. IE: They are bandwidth sensitive.

But wait, there is more. You remember Flight Simulator. Did you read the specs for the game? No? Have a look:


So, um, in order to play this smoothly on PC, you need 32GB of ram and a 50Mbps connection :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:.I can only assume this is at resolution higher then 1080p (from the talk). Are there any other game/sim requires both 32GB or ram and 50Mbps connection to stream textures? Because I don't know of any at the moment. Are you getting it yet? Nah... how else will you double down. :D

Oh btw, Flight Simulator is a gorgeous looking game.
 
Last edited:
Flight simulator ideal specs: 150GB SSD, 50Mbps connection and 32GB RAM.

Flight simulator is obviously EXTREMELY heavy on data streaming, but it also seems to scale well.

You're correct, it comes down to resolution and texture/asset quality. The worse the pc and slower the connection, the lower the textre quality the same can support
 
Grim5 said:
Flight simulator ideal specs: 150GB SSD, 50Mbps connection and 32GB RAM.

Flight simulator is obviously EXTREMELY heavy on data streaming, but it also seems to scale well.

You're correct, it comes down to resolution and texture/asset quality. The worse the pc and slower the connection, the lower the textre quality the same can support
Click to expand...
And I hear, from someone in the alpha, that it might be subscription based. So you better like playing that one if that turns out to be true.
 
Dirk Diggler said:
What's all this console pish in here? Is there any news/speculation regarding the next AMD card? I've went back 3 or 4 pages and it's wall to wall PS5 jibber jibber.

:confused:
Click to expand...
The discussion we are having is that a next gen GPU might not be the only upgrade needed if developers start pushing more open world games that are bandwidth sensitive. The whole point of getting a better GPU is gaming, right?
Well we have to peek at the potential games coming and what the requirements are to make sure that we can play those console ports when upgrading GPUs. We will also need to look at how much vram these new GPUs will offer. Not just raw gpu grunt alone.
 
Dirk Diggler said:
What's all this console pish in here? Is there any news/speculation regarding the next AMD card? I've went back 3 or 4 pages and it's wall to wall PS5 jibber jibber.

:confused:
Click to expand...
Is that Eastcoast person still banging on about bandwidth, just put them on ignore as they just won't stop going on and on and won't listen to reason.
 
Last edited:
hyperseven said:
Is it still that Eastcoast person banging on about bandwidth, just put then on ignore as they just won't stop banging on and on and won't listen to reason.
Click to expand...

LOL, yes it is and you have perfectly described the situation. I hate putting people on ignore though, because it ruins the flow of some conversations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom