KBG29 said:
I love gaming first hardware, and I want to see gaming first hardware devices expand their reach so they can be a more viable option for a wider range of consumers. Am I not allowed to want more from my gaming first hardware? Looking at the games you listed, they where all spin offs. People have very little interest in spin-offs, there is very little interest in spin-offs in the main console space, let alone asking people to buy another device just for spin-offs. Having the ability to play the same game on your home PS4 and your Mobile PS4 would be a very different situation.
As for hardware. Look at the 20nm Tegra X1 and the 16nm Tegra X2 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tegra
Compare them with the 14nm Raven Ridge Mobile chips (anything with a U at the end) https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/cores/raven_ridge https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:AMD_Ryzen_Mobile
Now use a little foresight, and where do you land logically with a 7nm successor to Raven Ridge? Take into account that Performance Per Watt gains are a focus of AMD's Road Map. Then remember, that Sony and AMD can work to make specific modifications that make the chip more power efficient and more capable than the stock chip, for use specifically in a Mobile PlayStation device as they did with the PS4 APU compared to stock AMD APU's of the time. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_accelerated_processing_unit_microprocessors https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:AMD_custom_APU
Looking at all of this, it looks pretty plausible that AMD will be capable of producing a chip on 7nm that is capable of surpassing the PS4 in CPU and GPU power at under 15 Watts. Raven Ridge is already capable of running circles around the PS4 CPU, and the advanced GPU tech, even at lower total flops is capable of outperforming PS4. The base 7nm Ryzen Mobile chips will only increase the power gap and reduce the power consumption. From there they can make modifications to support memory as needed, reduce power as needed, and increase performance as needed for a custom PlayStation Chip. |
First, I love how my post was about how the technology isn't there and then in response, you go about talking about hypothetical chips that do not exist that supposedly proves it does.
"Gaming first hardware" is hardware that focuses on gaming first - like the Switch - you know, that handheld that annoys you because Nintendo decided to focus on gaming first and not cell-phone functionality. Wanting more from "gaming first" hardware is asking for it to not be "gaming first" hardware. The Switch would not be "Gaming First Hardware" if you could play YouTube, Netflix and make phone calls on your Switch before you could have voice chat during network play. Make sense?
You still don't get it about the hardware do you? I think this must be one of those cases where you don't know enough to know how much you don't know. I'm not quite sure why you think Sony can work with AMD and both increase the performance and decrease the power draw. Increasing performance increases power draw. You're acting like Sony can just take something like the 2300U, increase a little of this, decrease a little that, and blammo! PS4 APU with a 12W TDP, and about the same price as the PS4's current APU. Sorry, it's not that simple. Decreasing power draw decreases performance. You might be able to take a more... bleeding edge approach to the design, the that will almost undoubtedly decrease yields and blow up the cost of the chip. Working chips pay for dead ones. That's how it works.
This isn't rocket science. Yet you're advocating for a higher performance, lower TDP chip, presumably for the same price seeing as you think Sony can make this PS4 portable for less than $400 even accounting for the fact that any memory and storage solution would be undoubtedly higher than what's in the PS4 and the fact that it would have to have a 1080p screen and a battery. It doesn't add up.
Furthermore, where do you think I to supposed to logically land going from 14 nm to 7 nm? What are you basing that off of? If you're basing it on previous advancements, such as say going from 20 nm to 14 nm, is it still reasonable to apply here? Do we know enough about this new 7nm fabrication process to be able to predict what kind of TDP improvement we should get? Will that 7nm process be stable enough to produce cost-effective yields in the next year or so? What kind of modifications (if any) can AMD make to the design of the chip to make it power efficient than their current offeringgs? How much customization (if any) will AMD have to make to account for the modifications the PS4's APU has, and how will that affect TDP, power and yields? You have to have a very good idea what the answer is to all of these questions before you can confidently say that this chip can be made in 2019 for the price you think it can be made for. And I'm not even getting into the current global supplier issues that is jacking up the prices of new electronics and computer hardware across the globe that might mean that no manufacturer is willing to make the chip for what they made similar chips before.
Remember, you're talking about hardware that currently does not exist, yet you're talking about it as confidently as you would be if you have intimate knowledge of an actual design, seen the yields of the fabrication process, and have seen it working with your own eyes.
P.S.I'm just not going to bother touching how confident you are that these "spin off" games are far less appealing than their core counterparts. Just look at the history of Nintendo's portable game lineup and note the hundreds of millions sold.
