Pemalite said:
GOWTLOZ said:
The PS4 CPU isn't much more powerful than a Cell CPU not enough to emulate it. My PC argument was to prove my point. There is lots of interest in PS3 emulation and huge support for it but its a difficult job. Sony can't make the PS4 hardware do wonders there are physical limits to what the PS4 can do.
|
The Playstation 4's CPU is significantly ahead of the Cell in anything that is not single precision, iterative refinement.
That means, integers, half precision, single precision, double precision will all be significantly better on Jaguar.
With that in mind... The overall performance gap between the Xbox 360 and Xbox One is significantly smaller than the Playstation 3 and Playstation 4... Microsoft still managed to pull it off by approaching the issue from multiple different angles.
I think people get the idea that emulating games on console is somehow going to be the same kind of situation on PC, when that simply isn't the case, Microsoft and Sony can get away with allot less overhead in their Emulation attempts.
GOWTLOZ said:
They don't have a magic wand to make PS4 powerful enough to emulate a PS3. I doubt you understand just how weak the Jaguar CPU on the PS4 is and the difficulty of emulating a very different architecture on hardware that's not vastly superior to the hardware you want to emulate.
It would be possible on the PS5 if it has a Zen CPU there's no doubt about that. PS4 just no.
|
Before you try and insult VGPolyglot's intellectual fortitude... Go look up Binary Translation, Virtualization, Code Morphing... And then come back... Especially look at what nVidia/Transmeta was attempting with Denver.
VGPolyglot said:
The PS4 is more powerful than a PS3, the argument that since PCs can't run it does sound fine, but even original Xbox games don't have solid emulators on the PC, despite the fact that the 360 had some BC support and the Xbox One does too:
|
Playstation 3 emulator is better than the 360 emulator on PC anyway.
DonFerrari said:
From what we know X1 on the months after release of BC had an average of 5m per user who used BC on it.
|
Hence my "Millions" claim. :)
flashfire926 said:
True. Fair point. But the PS3 and PS2 were very different architectures, so it took much more to implement it. Now, with PS5 most likely going to have X86 architecture with AMD based cpu/gpu (just like the PS4), that cost will likely be well below 50 bucks. Think of how Wii had gamecube BC while only being $249. Or XBO, PS2, GBA, early DS, 3DS, etc.
|
Just because they retain the same x86 Architecture doesn't mean that native backwards compatibility will not be broken.
There are so many other links in the chain that can break native backwards compatibility... Otherwise Microsoft would have had it baked in hardware from the outset on the Xbox One for the Original Xbox, rather they still had to do a ton of extra work and roll it out for specific games.
Same can happen with Next Gen... Especially as Ryzen is a significantly different uArch to Jaguar... And Navi could have some major deviations from the Graphics Core Next 1.0 derived parts on the Xbox One/Playstation 4.
Plus you have some custom parts of the SoC's as well, which may be removed. - For example on the Xbox One, Microsoft retained native hardware support for a few Xbox 360 features, some Xbox One developers may leverage some of that to a degree if it is exposed and beneficial.
Plus we may see a dramatic shift at the API and hardware level as we transition to Ray Tracing.
|
