I've heard from several people that Microsoft really did think that the Xbox One was the best thing ever and were shocked that Sony's message resounded so well with everyone. The DRM and price were just an extra kick in the junk.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
"GPU compute is the new SPU" - Will this be a big advantage for PS4 long-term?
- Thread starter James Sawyer Ford
- Start date
I've heard from several people that Microsoft really did think that the Xbox One was the best thing ever and were shocked that Sony's message resounded so well with everyone. The DRM and price were just an extra kick in the junk.
Is the same that Ninja Theory claimed with DmC console version? and seems like a 30fps game.
Why didn't try upgrade the RAM before the reveal? or there was no time?
I have to be careful. As much as I love sharing things, I have been given bad information / angered the mods. I have nothing but the utmost respect for them, and the time away from GAF literally kills me.
Back to the discussion, comparing GPGPU and programming for the PS4 GPU to being the new SPU's is a bit of poor comparison. The SPU's had several headaches and complexities.
A better comparison would be: "Taking advantage of ES RAM and DDR3 on the Xbox One is the new SPU." From what I understand this is a technical hurdle and a headache all on its own.
Not the same thing. This actually interpolates the frames to give the illusion of 60fps in a 30fps game whereas Ninja Theory was just talking about low response time for a 30fps game.
Completely understand. Don't want you to lose your head over trying to get us info.
BTW have you heard if devs are satisfied with the CPUs in XBO/PS4? No one has said much about them officially or unofficially and I'm just curious if it'll be a potential bottleneck. Don't need any specifics, just a simple yes or no will suffice.
I don't know. What I do know is, as much of a joke as GAF likes to make out of it, GDDR5 is a huge deal.
GDDR5 densities needed to shrink. The original plan was to go with 2 GB of GDDR5 UMA, that changed to 4 GB and unbeknowest to most of anyone 8 GB at the press reveal.
No one would have believed you if you were to say a next gen console was going to use 8 GB of GDDR5. Putting 8 GB of GDDR5 is like using an atomic bomb to attack your ram problem.
Is it that difficult? Didn't the Xbox 360 have similar RAM split but with EDRAM instead? I'd think they could use that experience to develop for the X1. I know the PS4 is easier to develop for, but I didn't think ESRAM on the Xbox One was anywhere as complicated as Cell. Don't completely understand all this tech stuff, so someone correct me if what I typed makes no sense.
I really want a transcript of the meeting where that decision took place and how close to the Feb conference it actually was. I remember I was following dev reactions on Twitter and DICE and Randy Pitchford freaked the fuck out.
You're going to need a massive battery at a 100W draw.
If GAF would like to hear a little story:
.
Off-topic...
Sometime in the future Thuway, it would be great for you to go into detail everything leading up to the reveals. Of course I know you have to be careful on details to not give away any identities but your post was a good read. I would pages of stuff like that
With the ACE and such, anybody have a good article that explains them in idiot speech? Loved reading up on the cell and such
James Sawyer Ford
Member
My argument about the SPUs isn't about technical hurdles; PS4 is immediately accessible and capable.
All I argued is that when devs code specifically to take advantage of that additional compute hardware, great things will result.
The ES RAM / DDR3 comparison isn't really analogous because that's just an additional hurdle with no real benefit
Could you imagine if Sony followed their original plan and only included 2GB of GDDR5? The PS4 would have been horribly gimped in terms of RAM in comparison to the Xbone and PC. It could have been, what, 1.5 GB for games and 0.5 GB for OS. Maybe 1.75 for games and 0.25 for OS if Sony went with a less feature rich OS.
They only thing I could think of is if they went a normal PC route with separate DDR3 ram alongside the GDDR5.
You came into a tech thread to bitch about people talking about tech?
Leadbetter is insinuating taking advantage of PS4's inherent GPU modifcations will be like taking adantage of the SPU. The problem is: the SPU's were a complicated piece of shit which offered great performance as long as you were willing to wine and dine them and give them years of programming hours.
ESRAM is similar to SPUs because both compensate for unoptimal decisions (RSX and DDR3) while adding a layer of complexity and annoyance.
Dark_AnNiaLatOr
Member
Yea, going from 2gb to 8gb must have been a crazy ride for the devs. I just can't wait to see what the machine is capable of in the future.
I don't get this, after the reveal of PS4 having 8 GB of GDDR instead of 4 (had an higher specs GPU compared to X1) the folks at MS "were even more confident in Durango's reveal"? They expected the price to be 600+ $?
Throwaway123456789
Member
If they went for 2GB and still wanted all the sharing/networking stuff that we've already seen, they would probably still need that 1GB for the OS.
It would have the same amount of RAM for games as the Wii U, though way faster.
Imagine the glorious threads we'd see!
It's pretty easy to get. They are (or were) clearly living in a fantasy land. They thought a goal (set at 600+ million Xbox One's sold) was realistic.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
Probably. Heck, a ton of people swore the 399 rumor was just a pipedream, even more so after the xbone price announcement.
Hmm, OK. I'm reading your response as the decision to go with SPU and ESRAM are both unoptimal, but not necessarily meaning that taking advantage of ESRAM is as difficult as taking advantage of Cell.
Actually, if you look at the Jimmy Fallon Forza 5 demo, Phil Spencer says "3 times the power of the 360" (done the youtube time thing, you don't have to look through it)
Jimmy Fallon Xbox One Demo
No, MICROSOFT internally referred to the PS4 as 12-16x PS3 while publicly stating XBO is 8x 360. Even crazier. That said, it was before the Conference announcement.
Pimpbaa
Member
Most likely as the hardware is fixed, so all they have to worry about is getting it running good on 2 sets of hardware (ps4 and xb1), and not just throw it in the game and hope people have the gpu power to use it.
I think you need to check the thread title...
Wow, so by their own admission, Xbone is less than 1/4 as powerful as PS4. Maybe even 1/5?
New thread?????
Both the Cell Processor and the ES RAM are there to compensate for a shitty decision. It was a stupid decision to go with RSX and DDR3 in terms of overall game performance.
ES RAM adds a level of complexity. How much complexity? I don't know, but engine's will have to be modified to take advantage of it, load times will be longer on Xbox One, and programmers will have to be clever in how they introduce you to new areas.
In other words, 8 GB of DRR3 is like bringing a Toyota Camry to a drag race. The ES RAM is a Nitrous boost. You have to decide when is the best time to use the Nitrous tank.
8 GB of GDDR5 is like bringing a Ferrari to the same race.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
x86......ARM....nope.
What the hell? Reading comprehension fail. I said before the PS reveal, Microsoft PREDICTED internally that PS4 was going to be 12-16X PS3.
edotlee
Member
If GAF would like to hear a little story:
Before PS4 and Xbox One were revealed, I remember having frank discussions with plenty of "insiders" while I was doing an observorship in Washington.
I talked to too many people (IRL and on GAF) who pretended to be somebody else, or were parroting information handed from tertiary sources. Eventually I found a few people who were spot on, and some who provided me with concrete evidence (the names of the Onion/Garlic, specific title names in development, and sheets that have still yet to leak).
However, what is relevant to the discussion was the paranoia at the time. Microsoft, I, and the rest of the developer community sternly believed Sony was going to go with 4 GB of GDDR5. Developers, engineers, and programmers all wrote off the PS4 as having a huge handicap with a distinct compute edge. However, unanimously they agreed mutliplatform titles would perform better on Xbox One.
I was having dinner with a GAF member / Microsoft employee before the February 20th Sony event, who told me Sony would be at a distinct disadvantage and should have bet the farm on RAM. Later in the week, BruceLeeRoy (who I personally know in real life) and I had both heard from a source that Sony had upped the RAM on PS4.
Bruce and I had numerous phone discussions about how this was possible, I contacted Jschrier from Kotaku, and even Richard Leadbetter, because this source who had provided me with 100% information in the past, was telling me that Sony upgraded the RAM (he didn't tell me how much). Not a single person corroborated.
In any case, internally at Microsoft before PS4 was announced they had a document which had expectations for PS4. The most interesting line was this:
"Estimate PS4 performance to be roughly 12-16X PS3".
They didn't mention anything about RAM, but I heard no one expected 8 GB GDDR5.
Fast forward to post February 20th and thats when the rumor mill and insiders became a little bizarre. I heard things like Microsoft had optimized hardware for dynamic resolutions, frame interpolation (120 hz modes to fake a 60 fps), and the magical power of the cloud. I gave up eventually, and E3 had come to pass.
It's been a wild ride, but I still remember the day February 20th happened, I received a text from an employee at MS that read: "GG MS". You are on GAF, and you know who you are
Interesting. So even though Sony has a 50% stronger GPU, Microsoft believed it would have the advantage in multiplats? If Sony had gone with the 4GB DDR5 RAM would that still be the case?
Edit: BTW awesome story.
Yes, sorry, I misread that.
Still though, it implies that MS believed that the PS4 would be over five times more powerful than what they're publically claiming the Xbone is.
Surely the 8GB GDDR5 only adds to that number.
Thanks for the explanation. I guess we'll see when the console is released.
Lifesontheline
Banned
Not that comparing the 360 to xbox one matters but
https://twitter.com/XboxP3/statuses/346901566789406720
Developers wanted RAM. It was integral to the ambition of the developers at the time.
It seemed rather obvious that MS were aiming for a relatively cheap (to produce) all-in-one box from the first rumors. So, they probably deemed the 8x the 360 figure to be good enough with that goal in mind. Then they announced that it's going to be $499 and I don't even know anymore.
I always thought that both consoles would fall inbetween $399 and $499, but I never expected the PS4 to be the cheaper out of the two (even if they were going for only 4GB GDDR5). All of this is interesting though.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
But what if that Ferrari is a Dino 246GTS? Can the Camry still compete with that?
Kidding; PS4's technical advantages should be pretty obvious by now, even w/ "just" 6 GB RAM for games. But it's really all about the games in the end, and right now, XBO and PS4 games are looking about on par, on average (my own opinion).
Yeah they do look pretty similar at this stage. I'm wondering how obvious the power advantages the PS4 has will be even 4-5 years down the line.
BleachAndPepsi
Banned
Whatever you say man.
There are more threads than just this, and I just saw several on the front page talking about games. Nothing holding you here.
If GAF would like to hear a little story:
Before PS4 and Xbox One were revealed, I remember having frank discussions with plenty of "insiders" while I was doing an observorship in Washington.
I talked to too many people (IRL and on GAF) who pretended to be somebody else, or were parroting information handed from tertiary sources. Eventually I found a few people who were spot on, and some who provided me with concrete evidence (the names of the Onion/Garlic, specific title names in development, and sheets that have still yet to leak).
However, what is relevant to the discussion was the paranoia at the time. Microsoft, I, and the rest of the developer community sternly believed Sony was going to go with 4 GB of GDDR5. Developers, engineers, and programmers all wrote off the PS4 as having a huge handicap with a distinct compute edge. However, unanimously they agreed mutliplatform titles would perform better on Xbox One.
I was having dinner with a GAF member / Microsoft employee before the February 20th Sony event, who told me Sony would be at a distinct disadvantage and should have bet the farm on RAM. Later in the week, BruceLeeRoy (who I personally know in real life) and I had both heard from a source that Sony had upped the RAM on PS4.
Bruce and I had numerous phone discussions about how this was possible, I contacted Jschrier from Kotaku, and even Richard Leadbetter, because this source who had provided me with 100% information in the past, was telling me that Sony upgraded the RAM (he didn't tell me how much). Not a single person corroborated.
In any case, internally at Microsoft before PS4 was announced they had a document which had expectations for PS4. The most interesting line was this:
"Estimate PS4 performance to be roughly 12-16X PS3".
They didn't mention anything about RAM, but I heard no one expected 8 GB GDDR5.
Fast forward to post February 20th and thats when the rumor mill and insiders became a little bizarre. I heard things like Microsoft had optimized hardware for dynamic resolutions, frame interpolation (120 hz modes to fake a 60 fps), and the magical power of the cloud. I gave up eventually, and E3 had come to pass.
It's been a wild ride, but I still remember the day February 20th happened, I received a text from an employee at MS that read: "GG MS". You are on GAF, and you know who you are
Nice read. It makes me wonder how did the 8 GB GDRR5 in the PS4 really came about.
We'll probably see some minor differences in cross gen titles, which will be the majority of games for the first year, but once development starts centering around next gen I think the PS4 advantages will become much more clear.
You do realize the person you are quoting is being sarcastic about the PS4 and Xbox One looking similar. The PS4's RAM absolutely mops the floor with Xbox One's design. Also the 50% GPU advantage of the PS4 insures that no multiplatform game will ever look better on Xbox One.
Also PS4 exclusives during the third and fourth years of the machine's life cycle will be doing incredible things.
What I really hope (and this is platform agnostic, albeit extra CUs in PS4 puts it at an advantageous position) is that the rise of small middlewares that are modular in nature, deal with physics/collision detection/cloth/fluid simulation (no matter how limited) and is/are run completely via GPGPU functionality.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
What's funny about you saying they will skip detailed talk about the Xbox One GPU is that what you're likely referring to as "detailed," are things like the number of compute units or ROPs, which isn't very detailed discussion at all.
There's far more detailed information regarding the GPU that they could talk about, and all of that stuff is quite a bit more detailed and advanced in nature than talking about the simpler and easier to understand higher level functions of the GPU, which is all most people ever talk about, because it's a lot easier to grasp. And most of that stuff regarding the Xbox One GPU that MS could talk about is every bit as advanced as the PS4 GPU, because they both carry the same GCN architecture. Would that fact suddenly make any detailed information about the architecture invalid? I don't think so.
What ESRAM may do for the system and how it's been incorporated at the lowest level is a very interesting discussion, because GCN is largely well known architecture, but that still doesn't make the advantages over the previous generation any less significant or important to discuss. The PS4 GPU has more raw execution resources, and even then Microsoft can talk about all the benefits of GCN compared to the 360 GPU, all without ever touching on the number of ROPS, number of compute units, or GDDR5 memory. The move engines and what they do is important and very valid in a detailed talk about the Xbox One Architecture, as is the sound hardware. Hell, even Kinect and what it's now capable of is interesting and can absolutely go over into detailed.
It seems to me like your idea of "detailed" is only the easier to understand, higher level functions that make it easier to see the PS4 as the stronger console. You want very detailed information on the Xbox One GPU? Hell, just go look at some of the vgleaks information on the GPU. None of that may be interesting for forum discussion, because it's more or less all standard GCN, but I'll tell you this much; It's a whole hell of a lot more advanced or detailed than the typical GPU conversation we see on here. Hearing about ESRAM, Move Engines, new Kinect capabilities, the sound hardware, and the various ways that this architecture is an improvement over the Xbox 360, for example, is precisely the kind of thing they should be communicating to people. Then again, most of this info came out via leaks.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
- Poll