Shogmaster
Member
WTF, pixels per MB comparison? Holy crap what has this thread come to...
Even pixels per GFlops/TFlops comparison would be problematic, but pixels per MB? LOLZ
-
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.
PS4 Rumors , APU code named 'Liverpool' Radeon HD 7970 GPU Steamroller CPU 16GB Flash
- Thread starter onQ123
- Start date
- Status
WTF, pixels per MB comparison? Holy crap what has this thread come to...
Even pixels per GFlops/TFlops comparison would be problematic, but pixels per MB? LOLZ
No idea. I highly doubt that the (currently vaporware) steambox or appleTV upgrade will be using HMC, but then I'm also doubting something like that making it into a consumer product at a rate that would allow for a 2013 console.
Perhaps, but Microsoft has thrown a wrench into that statement.
jeff_rigby
Banned
Agreed, lots of ducks have to line up. Possible though. I just wish we'd get off this idea that it's business as usual. 2013 should be thought of as a dividing line between next generation and this generation.
HMC is just DDR3 packaged differently with a Logic layer. Big difference is the TSVs in the packaging. If you think of it that way what's exotic about it? What's going to keep it from being manufactured in quantity?
Eventually Memory will be in SOCs or in a HMC, there will be no embedded platform with standard memory.
Microsoft could infact give crytek the world though, but... Will they? UE4 only having 1TFLOP requirement is highly suspicious... and there seems to be a 1TFLOP XB3 version making the rounds with devs.
Death Dealer
Member
I said in the other 1TF UE4 thread, that bar they announced must be a threshold for one of the consoles. Likely Durango, if the 1-1.5 TF leak is correct. With Wii-U falling between 400-800 GFLOPS depending on your source.
8GB with 1TF for Durango seems absurd. So I think it will be that with 4-6GB or its GPU will be 1.5TF with 6-8.
8GB with 1TF for Durango seems absurd. So I think it will be that with 4-6GB or its GPU will be 1.5TF with 6-8.
I really am curious what developer's at Lucas Arts, Square Enix, and Epic are recommending Microsoft and Sony. I want the next generation to perfect high definition gaming. This generation is alot like the NES era, and the next generation is hopefully like the Super NES era.
As for the ram module, that thing looks fascinating. It's sad that the launch of both consoles won't be in time for it. Did someone say there was going to be a 16 gb variant?
As for the ram module, that thing looks fascinating. It's sad that the launch of both consoles won't be in time for it. Did someone say there was going to be a 16 gb variant?
You actually do need more memory as resolutions get higher, that is why when keeping the same resolutions as now, there should be a huge improvement (larger than XB to 360)
How many pixels per AI or persistent game world?
How many console resolution jumps have there been in the previous 7 gens, including this one?
Please tell me where there is any indication that XB3 will have a 1TFLOP GPU.
Also I think people are hanging on to that UE4 requirement too much. That's bottom of the barrel to enable all features. That's not the end goal.
It's one thing to assume and speculate, but now it just sounds like you're making things up.
Edit: Just saw your memory per pixel measurement. LMAO, yup you are making things up.
LOL no.
Actually yes, there are some rumours to that nature. Not saying they are true, but it's out there. (slightly more than 1TF GPU, iirc). Those rumours may have come from the notion presented by an MS engineer on Beyond3D gently prodding the idea that having a lot of ram and more silicon budget dedicated to CPU over GPU has some advantages, or they may have come from one of those website dev kit things (i.e. IGN, Kotaku) etc, but they're not out of thin air.
systemfehler
Member
Not if there is more "world detail", more controller input, big open worlds, bigger textures, etc.
The resolution in my eyes is the smallest issue when it comes to memory.
The only rumor that comes close to that low spec is the 6670 rumor IGN posted a long while back. Otherwise the other rumors (such as 6-8x power) would exceed such an estimate.
With how the xbox rumors have been all over the place, I wouldn't place my bets on any one right now, especially if rumors are spreading on Sony using a much more powerful GPU.
I'm going to respond to this post instead of the rest, because its more direct with my point, and that point is that resolution played a heavy factor in the ram sizes for this generation, now that they are keeping the same resolutions as last gen, the ram wouldn't be wasted on extra pixels, that's all I'm saying, the jump in ram from this gen to next is bigger even if the factor increase in ram ends up smaller... IE 4x the ram of current gen consoles is large, remember before this generation, up to 2GBs were mentioned for these boxes, so hearing about 8gb and even 16gb rumors doesn't surprise me.
Also to the person who asked how many console resolution changes have happened over the last 7 generations, the answer is... A lot, just because 480i TVs were standard, doesn't mean ps1's games ran at that resolution for instance.
I'm actually not really pointing out anything unheard of, even Nintendo mentioned that you'd need about 4x more memory for hd back in 2006 I believe.
Karak
Member
Ya the one from IGN is pretty old as rumors go. Strangely it gets more attention than other rumors later and those before that indicate something more powerful. Interesting times. This just in, XBOX720 to use 4 6670's
Lets see if IGN steals that news like they have stolen other bits and called it news.Ya the one from IGN is pretty old as rumors go. Strangely it gets more attention than other rumors later and those before that indicate something more powerful. Interesting times. This just in, XBOX720 to use 4 6670's
I'm not saying XB3 will have a 1TFLOPs gpu, but from multiple rumors, there is a second version of the console with a gpu around that performance, the other being almost twice that power. Microsoft likely hasn't decided exactly which one to go with, this is a lot like the wii u having multiple dev boxes out last year with different amounts of ram in them.
I'm interested in seeing what they do, it could completely change next gen. Same with what Sony does, because with UE4's spec being so low, they could actually go for a lower price point, still be 2x what Wii u is and focus on longer games with more content rather than a box with 3x Wii u's power and pushing more detail with a large budget.
Karak
Member
Sorry I wasn't saying you were. Many forums and such quote that rumor is all. Its not even just a neogaf thing. But after searching all that was ever found was a single rumor of that level of performance and other sites reposting it all from the same 1 single source. I consider that a single rumor covered by a couple places. That is different than the many other rumors from a couple sources concerning something more powerful. I don't personally think any of them are close to 100% right. Bits and pieces may be right but a real leak has yet to occur.
Ya the one from IGN is pretty old as rumors go. Strangely it gets more attention than other rumors later and those before that indicate something more powerful. Interesting times. This just in, XBOX720 to use 4 6670's
This is GAF, it's not surprising that one of the next box rumors to get the most attention is also the most illogical one. Hell in this very thread plenty of people were hoping the ps4 was more powerful than the next xbox. It's pretty telling that people already have their minds made up before we even know anything about these consoles
Please show me the multiple rumors that the next xbox will have that slow of a GPU.
And again, you are hanging too much on UE4's low end specs.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/12/amd-arm-hsa-foundation/
Seems like AMD and ARM are in bed. What implications will this have on next-gen hardware?
Seems like AMD and ARM are in bed. What implications will this have on next-gen hardware?
This is GAF, it's not surprising that one of the next box rumors to get the most attention is also the most illogical one. Hell in this very thread plenty of people were hoping the ps4 was more powerful than the next xbox. It's pretty telling that people already have their minds made up before we even know anything about these consoles
Please show me the multiple rumors that the next xbox will have that slow of a GPU.
And again, you are hanging too much on UE4's low end specs.
1. You are pointing to people's minds being made up as some sort of sign that xb3 will be more powerful than ps4, it is true that Microsoft can afford a stronger console and heavier loses, but it doesn't guarantee that Microsoft will do those things, also I just mentioned the 2tflop xb3 rumor.
2. As to what you are asking of me, just look up on this page, steviep points out a few sources for the rumor. I'm on my phone myself, but I'm not even the only person talking about such a box in this thread.
3. Honestly I don't see how my posts are taken so badly, if I had parapa as my avatar, would I be treated differently here? Saying that the spec leak of 2gbs is good is something I have to defend... I understand 4gbs is better, but there are limitations to that, its certainly possible though, I just feel like I'm being reasonable but my posts are quoted as if they are anything but.
Death Dealer
Member
Hell in this very thread plenty of people were hoping the ps4 was more powerful than the next xbox. It's pretty telling that people already have their minds made up before we even know anything about these consoles
Some people do know. And they are dropping hints. I recall a recent rumor that PS4 was more powerful than Xbox.
All of the leaks seem to suggest its GPU is better. Unless PS4 only ends up with 2GB of total ram, I don't see how it can end up weaker. If MS has a strong CPU and lots of ram with a lower tier GPU, I think that will pay off for windows 8 and other non-gaming functions, but unless the PS4 CPU is crippled, a superior GPU is more important for gaming.
Karak
Member
FYI those discussions that were considered rumors were actually started because the IGN rumor and that got people discussing possibilities. After people started looking at sites, this was 3-4 days ago maybe something changed, all the rumors were based on the single source and spawned discussions. If people are mistaking the discussions based around the single rumor as other possible sources, that is wrong, again unless something changed which is totally possible. Some devs may be seeding the conversations too. Just like they may be about all of them. But then again all you have is all this crap to wade through sadly
Its hard to know when you have have some devs saying one thing and other devs saying another thing and they don't jive. I agree with you that this probably points out to various machines...maybe?
Also I don't know about anyone else, but I haven't seen anyone treat you unfairly and I know that I haven't seen any reason for anyone to do so. Your posts are fine in my book! My original comment to Kage was because I was surprised that despite a couple people supposedly in the know all disagreeing on various things that it was surprising that 1 rumor was believed over others when it didn't seem it had any more traction or hidden dev backup than any other. I wasn't in any way pointing out YOU as an instigator. Carry on
The only implication is adoption of HSA and better tools for it. PS4 will be all AMD based.
Way too early to tell.
In reality, HSA doesn't even inherently mean moving away from x86 (though I think AMD is heading in that direction)
That's because XDR2 doesn't exist.
1. I'm not claiming that at all. I don't care to assume, and really I just don't care, which is more powerful. I already plan to buy the more powerful of the two on launch and wait for a killer app before picking up the other.
What I'm pointing to is people showing their bias or favoritism by already picking a system before we know anything about them.
2. I'm looking for links and sources to said rumors. Not someone mentioning it in a forum post.
3. I don't even know how to respond to this one since the defensive tone and question about parapa both confused the hell out me lol
I just don't think you should rely too much on that 1TFLOP requirement for UE4. That sounds like bottom of the barrel, just enough to get by, specs. I question how much freedom a developer would have using this engine on such a slow card.
Edit:
Sorry, I'm a skeptic at heart. It's going to take more for me to believe any rumor.
Death Dealer
Member
1 TF sounds low to me too. Hopefully MS stepped it up and went with a higher spec.
It would harm the PS4's multiplatform graphics potential if MS was too far behind like the Xbox vs PS2 with each role reversed.
It would harm the PS4's multiplatform graphics potential if MS was too far behind like the Xbox vs PS2 with each role reversed.
First: forget those 2Gb RAM.
Second: forget the speculation about 1TFlop machines. That would be related to "one part" of the console, not the whole thing.
Third: the problem with PS4 is that GPU "alone" cannot really rise the bar to MSs counterpart. MS machine may be a little bit weaker than Sony's, but its CPU is (or its supposed to be) far superior even considering Kinect's overhead.
The real deal is: Which will devs choose to develop for [in the first place]? Both have very good *reasons* in their favour, both have flaws... but (I think) the new Xbox will take the same advantages than its predecessor.*
*Speculation
Here's what a board with 4 GB GDDR5 through a 256-bit bus with 2Gbit GDDR5 modules looks like. Ignore the mass of voltage regulators to the right, as that's for a 300W chip, far bigger than the PS4 GPU.
Too expensive for a console's initial run of 15M units after which we're presuming 4Gbit modules will be available and cheaper?
Too expensive for a console's initial run of 15M units after which we're presuming 4Gbit modules will be available and cheaper?
This post actually helps clarify a lot of things. I thought that this rumor was mentioning an APU and a separate GPU until now. I need to keep my rumors straight.
Death Dealer
Member
Well I don't think it's for certain it will have more than that. Going with 4GB maybe out of their control. Even if they double up and use 16 of the current 2gigabit chips, the bandwidth will be compromised. Maybe they will go with that ram packaging tech Jeff Rigby described.
I think the 1-1.5 TF range refers to the discrete GPU. What else might augment that we don't know yet. One rumor is the Durango CPU will have beefed up vector units. It could have a similar SoC as Orbis, we'll see.
It depends on the differential. A GPU alone certainly could tilt a favorable advantage if it's higher performing and everything else in the system is well balanced. If one system has 2 TFs of graphics horsepower and the other is in the 1.5 range, that's a larger difference than between Xenos and RSX this generation. And RSX needed Cell or it would be toast. When it comes to current games, GPU is more bound than CPU performance. Especially since neither system is getting a GPU with state of the art performance to begin with. A fancy CPU will be great for running a complex multitasking OS, but I don't see it paying off over a better GPU for playing videogames. But again it's all down to the differential. If Orbis GPU graphic spec is 10% better, but it only has half the ram, and a crippled CPU (unlikely), it will end up with worse looking third party multi-platform graphics.
Everything points out to the PS3 having 2GB of shared memory as of now. As much as I would like the amount to be higher, I would not bet on it.
Reading pieces and bits over the internet, yeah, it seems the next Box has a more powerful CPU, although you make it sound as if the gap were considerable. Some rumors I have not come across yet or speculation on your behalf?
Now, talking about cryptic messages, I remember reading one on this very forum, a couple of months ago, where, to respond to someone's query, a forumer who seemed to be in the know dropped the following statement, almost in a sarcastic tone : "Yeah, the PS4 is more powerful, except in the RAM department...It's the current gen all over again"...or something to that effect. He did not add more, I am afraid!
Which is exactly why I'd be surprised if the difference was that big. Especially with MS' history for using good GPUs.
"Half the ram" should be quantified. There would be a difference on 2GB vs 4GB, but 4GB vs 8GB should not pose that many problems. More than 4GB in general purpose PC's even isn't necessary unless you're doing VM's and like...
I think that the reason MS may be going for that much RAM may have to do with Kinect 2 functions. If it's integrated into the OS more and has more varied applications I can see it needed a dedicated RAM partition. 8Gb would be kind of overkill if the rumored specs are correct since it wouldn't be anywhere near bottlenecked.
bgassassin
Member
That's what I was looking for before.
Karak
Member
Ya can't remember what forum. But a couple devs indicated that even 4 is more than enough for the Kinect 2 even with high end features and if 6-8 were used it had to be for something else entirely.
For gaming though, is a dramatically superior CPU going to be important?
With PS3, CELL has been quite instrumental in making their 1st/2nd party titles fly. However 3rd parties have been well documented in not taking advantage of it. So why would 3rd parties suddenly take advantage of its capabilities for the 720? The main advantage will be seen in exclusive titles, but if anything MS has been moving further and further away from exclusive titles. They've continued to cut away from 1st party devs throughout this gen, and haven't shown a willingness to contract a ton a 3rd party exclusives (though that may be more about 3rd parties not being willing). Sony simply releases more large-scale exclusives.
So really it's main usage would be in non-gaming situations ... but even then I'm finding it difficult to find a motivation for a crazy powerful CPU. Most of the non-gaming stuff on consoles is for media, etc. Basically all the 'set-top box' functionality that's been expanding throughout this gen. The thing is, the heavy lifting there is typically in the video and audio decoding - all things that are GPU accelerated. Moreover, you don't want a space heater when doing set-top box functionality. If anything you want a low-power solution. There's a reason some prefer to use stuff like a Roku, etc. They'd rather have 30w running all day than 150w +.
I'm not saying MS won't go with a high-power CPU solution, but I'm finding it difficult to understand what the motivation would be to make the delta as significant as many are speculating. Seems like an odd place to spend a ton of your limited resources. If anything the earlier rumors of it containing some kind of secondary SoC (APU or even ARM) to be used for set-top box functionality seems like a more logical direction if they're weighing these non-gaming functions so highly. Similar silicon cost, and better for running those features.
Karak
Member
From what has been explained the Cell and a high end fast CPU are not even close to the same thing in terms of complexity. The Cell had a boatload of things a normal fast CPU does not which led to complexities and difficulties. Lots of papers online and in various forum posts that really break down just how complex the Cell was/is/could be.
Now you know how us Nintendo fans felt, only to end up disappointed
Holy shit...That pains me to read. And I just read it again and it pains me again. So much time to wait...Its like getting kicked in the balls in super slow mo but somehow the pain runs through the entire action and not just the impact
Interesting. I still think that 8Gb figure is completely insane though. I can't see them needing it if the specs are on the lower end of the rumor spectrum. Can they even do much that would need that much with a lower end GPU? Unless the CPU is a real beast, then we may see it getting more use.
EDIT: Ugh, I can't seem to form sentences correctly tonight. Hopefully my point gets across. I'm just curious and want to see what both hardware makers goals are for next-gen.
Karak
Member
8 is insane no matter which way you slice it though if it was running the OS and they wanted very easy moving of games from PC to the 720 that could eat up a good deal of ram and would make some things easier when not having to worry about a ram ceiling when a PC game is ported. Which some devs have made clear is a big deal.
I would assume a very high goal for MS is to make PC porting as easy as possible and yes even with that card you could run those games but I don't think it would be too impressive. However since there are chips that are in the same or a small amount more price spectrum as that low end that offer far more punch it currently makes no financial, system, or goal sense. It seems like an artificial lowball spec.
We are talking less than 15-20 bucks more for a much more powerful GPU in bulk. A good amount of money when you multiply that by say 10 million sales but nothing that would indicate MS wouldn't do it. In one of the forums they were showing one that would run only 5-7 bucks more and was still a good deal more powerful and used nearly the same wattage and had the same heat. Thats why so many are stating its either some kind of error or 2 system specs being mixed because it just doesn't make sense. Not to mention others who have gone on record, developers I mean, who said that the 720 is very powerful. Shrugs, I just don't see a game dev saying that if it was just a CPU. It also only trully seems to have been mentioned as a source 1 time. But it exploded. I attribute a lot of that due to it making no sense.
FYI I am just going on what some of the devs have said, some of the Beyond3d peeps(I have a great deal of respect for those dudes and their knowledge past and present), and various tech peeps on forums who run this shit every time a system comes out. People could be missing something, or even more importantly something else could be going on that no one is preparing for. Currently, from those that have known what they are talking about during past system releases and so forth, they keep posting that it makes no sense at all. Possible, but just doesn't make sense. Shrugs, take that as you will.
That is ignoring the constant rumors about a settop low wattage system low power system with BC and an actual game system from MS with far more power. And the other rumor that the 6770 isn't a "normal" one at all. Whatever the hell that means.
But weren't those architectural complexities plus the usage of XDR would made CELL better suited for graphics work than a conventional CPU? Even if development is more straightforward, it still takes time and money to do a ton of coding specific to one SKU. And when you couple the rumors of 720 using a lot of slow main RAM, I'm not sure a conventional CPU, even a really high-powered one, is a great place for a ton of graphics work.
That leaves non-graphics work as a more logical usage, but again it causes some problems (I'd argue more than doing graphics work). Some of the more common CPU heavy items are things like AI. The problem is developers are not going to want to regularly make serious modifications to it for multiplatform games. Doing that completely changes the balance of the game. That would cause a lot of extra work. For tasks that have direct gameplay implications, they're going to want to target something that makes sense on everything. That means PS4 and PC's too. And while PC's obviously have high-end CPU's available, does the average game rig typically employ them? From the way people are talking, they're making it sound like this would be a relatively high-end PC part. I don't see devs targeting that for gameplay-specific processing for a while. Graphics are scalable, gameplay is not.
I could be completely wrong on this, but if it's true it sounds a lot like the promises Krazy Ken made for CELL ... and just like with PS3, I don't see it really panning out in too many title releases.
IcyRhythms
Member
Really doesn't matter what they use if the standard will stay at 720p 30FPS or less in favor of higher textures/pixel counts
Some of the best games today don't even run at a full 720p. 600p and lower for some of the most popular titles.
Is it TRULY next generation if they can't at the very least get everything running at 1080p 60FPS? Not in my opinion.
edit...
I'd like to note I'd be very happy if Sony gave the option for an SSD
Some of the best games today don't even run at a full 720p. 600p and lower for some of the most popular titles.
Is it TRULY next generation if they can't at the very least get everything running at 1080p 60FPS? Not in my opinion.
edit...
I'd like to note I'd be very happy if Sony gave the option for an SSD
Which is why 720p should be a standard. It doesn't mean all games will run @ 720p.
IcyRhythms
Member
Buying a 1080p TV for GAMING only purposes this generation was all of about worthless.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll