Does anyone remember the PS5 reveal video with Mark Cerny? This guy went on and on and on about how the approach of fewer CUs at a high clock speed were better than more CUs at lower clock speed. He explained it really well too I guess.
I'm not a programmer but as a PC gamer that sh$t didn't make sense to me because I overclock graphics cards and it doesn't really do much. Yes sometimes it matters a little but the more you increase the lesser you gain and the more power it draws and the more it f&cks up your card and system and causes problems no matter how many hours you test it stable.
The better idea is buy the card you need for the performance you want and then do a mild overclock and that will give you modest performance gains and not too much more power draw or heat or anything.
For a console it makes all the sense in the world to create one with more CUs at less clock speeds. Because it you can turn off cores to get better yields as Microsoft did with the Series X, 60 cores, 52 active for better yields. Also the clock speed is high but not crazy super high so the system will stay cool and have a very long lifespan.
The PS5 has a dumb approach but it makes sense. The approach is lesser CUs at a very high crazy higher, higher than overclocked PC Radeon cards with the same chips high. And Mark Cerny claims this was done because it's the more intelligent better approach.
The reason it was done I believe is because the rumors were true that the PS5 has 9.2 teraflops. It was too late to change anything so they just overclocked the APU and then sent Mark Cerny in there to do damage control to explain how this is the intelligent approach and the 52 CUs as a much lower more stable clock speed is dumb and worse. It makes sense because they sort of had to to damage control and market the PS5. That's the only way it makes sense. But if that's true, then Mark Cerny lied to all of us. If that's true then no more quoting him as if he's some guru on this forum. He's a hype guy for Sony and full of it.
Yea Mark, the 52 CU approach gives you 12 teraflops, real teraflops not b$llsh#t variable teraflops like the PS5. And it give you a more stable, easier to keep cool and with a long lifespan but it's way more expensive this way.
You are telling me you believe Mark Cerny wasn't lying his arse off?
Some of the posters here are game programmers, right? You should know this stuff inside and out. Come in here and be honest with the forum, was Mark Cerny lying or was he right?
This is just my opinion obviously but I feel strongly about it. What is yours?
Don't get me wrong, I like Mark Cerny. He seems like a really cool guy. But he lied to us to shill for the company here works for. I just wanted to clear this up as there will be many performance arguments all gen over this.