Desktop APU vs Console GPU

[nawab u]

Recently released ps5 has no dedicated graphics card like pc.ps5 and xbox series x works on APU Which gives 10 and 12 teraflops respectively.

How a console APU provide that much performance comparing to the latest desktop apu of similar ryzen processor Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G.it provide just only  1.1 teraflops (FP32).

Why Console apu is  4 times better than desktop apu?

[PlayStation 2]

The Xbox Series X and PS5's APUs are better because they're built specifically for high-performance gaming applications in bulk stock. Both have Big Navi-based GPUs (roughly equivalent to the 2080? performance-wise) and 3rd-gen Ryzen cores (essentially what a 3700X would be).

The Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G is not specifically built for gaming applications. I believe it's intended more as a professional application APU with an integrated GPU component sufficient enough to drive a high-resolution monitor with ease combined with some professional applications.

 

As an aside, the GPU that the 4750G has is damn impressive. The fact that it's a competent 1080p gaming APU is wholly impressive on any level, but especially in a situation where it's just some integrated GPU on an 8-core CPU.

[Mohammad Saleh]

it depends on how software works and how software is designed to work is different from pc to console and also 90% of the people on pc do not need 10 teraflops of graphics because they do only browser stuff so manufactures can get anway with that

[Jurrunio]

They made the GPU way bigger with 2304 RDNA2 cores on the PS5, it's basically 6800XT in half. Also the whole APU runs on GDDR6 memory. They arent joking when they call it "custom APU".

[VixAAT]

25 minutes ago, nawab u said:

Recently released ps5 has no dedicated graphics card like pc.ps5 and xbox series x works on APU Which gives 10 and 12 teraflops respectively.

How a console APU provide that much performance comparing to the latest desktop apu of similar ryzen processor Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G.it provide just only  1.1 teraflops (FP32).

Why Console apu is  4 times better than desktop apu?

The gpu is built for games while the desktop apus are just used for web surfing and streaming

[Amias]

23 hours ago, nawab u said:

Recently released ps5 has no dedicated graphics card like pc.ps5 and xbox series x works on APU Which gives 10 and 12 teraflops respectively.

How a console APU provide that much performance comparing to the latest desktop apu of similar ryzen processor Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G.it provide just only  1.1 teraflops (FP32).

Why Console apu is  4 times better than desktop apu?

 

PC APU's are CPU's with an integrated GPU controller stuck on the side.

 

Console APU's are both a custom CPU and GPU's stuck together on one die.

[LogicalDrm]

-> Moved to Graphics Cards

[unsorted]

I *wish* I could understand it all. Most articles talking about it go over my head.

 

What I know is that consoles have unified memory which PCs don't. This helps developers and it helps with performance too, is my understanding. Consoles are purpose-built to do gaming very efficiently. Your game purchases / gaming service subscriptions help subsidise it all.

 

I am hoping these consoles radically change how PCs and operating systems (like linux, etc.) are made in the coming years, but that might be asking too much. Certainly general expectations will change regarding speed of loading, graphics, etc.. That will affect the PC market.

 

I am personally giving $0.00 of my currency to the new consoles because I am a believer in wired, microwave-free (Airplane Mode) gaming on the TV, which no currently-selling console offers. Why they took that choice away years ago is beyond me. But I am watching with interest.

[Devaniti]

Biggest difference is that PC APUs use DDR4 memory, CPU only works with CPU RAM.
That forces integrated graphic vendors to use CPU RAM for graphics, which have way less bandwidth which is critical for GPU.

Quote from https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2826-differences-between-ddr4-and-gddr5

Quote

GDDR5 is purpose-built for bandwidth; e.g., moving massive chunks of data in and out of the framebuffer with the highest possible throughput. This is made possible by a much wider bus—anywhere from 256 to 512-bits across 4-8 channels. Albeit it comes at the cost of increased latency via much looser internal timings when compared to DDR4. Latency isn’t entirely an issue with GPUs, as their parallel nature allows them to move across multiple calculations simultaneously. Although GDDR5 has the same prefetch buffer size as DDR4 of 8n, the newest GDDR5X standard surpasses that with a depth of 16n (16 data words per memory access). Moreover, GDDR can handle input and output on the same clock cycle, unlike DDR. In addition, GDDR5 operates at a lower voltage than DDR4 at around ~1V, meaning less heat waste and higher performing modules. In small packages that are packed together densely, like on a graphics card PCB, lower heat is critical. System memory has the entire surface area of the stick to spread, and is isolated from high-heat components (like the GPU).

Consoles on the other hand can afford to customize CPU to run from GDDR memory.

But that switch costs CPU performance. As that quote said, GDDR5 have bigger latency that DDR4, and latency is really important for CPU performance.

So APU running with GDDR memory have more GPU performance, but less CPU performance, which is absolutely fine for consoles, but not as good for PCs, which meant to be multi purpose (not just gaming).

So basically, to make PC APU have graphics performance on par with consoles vendors need:
1) Figure out how to put GDDR into PC, like DDR dimms

2) Invest a ton of money into RnD for GDDR PC APUs/Motherboards

3) Hope that anyone would actually buy special PC that runs all of that