| gentii said:
As you know the PS4 and XBOX One have a 8-core x86 CPU code named ‘Jaguar.’ They also have 8GB of system RAM. It is said that the PS4 GPU is either a 7870 or a 7850 and the XBOX1 GPU is a 7850. x86 architecture uses what is called CISC or (Complex Instruction Set Computing.) This allows for the hardware to do the majority of the work and gives developers most of the power available right away. |
The Playstation 4 has a Radeon 7870 derived graphics card (I.E. There are some minor changes like the increase in ACE units). - It's performance however is more around a Radeon 7850 due to clocks.
As for the CPU, yes x86 CPU's have historically been CISC (Complex Instruction Set) but these days they all might as well be internally RISC.
| gentii said: The Wii U has 3 CPUs. A custom tri-core PowerPC750 built to run like a Power7 code named ‘Expresso.’ It also has a dual-core input/output ARM processor and a dedicated sound CPU. So altogether the Wii U has 6 available physical cores. PowerPC runs on what is called RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computing.) This approach uses a much smaller memory footprint and has much faster communication. For those who are lazy this is kryptonite, but for those that are ambitious and talented this is a dream because it allows for better performance with very low power consumption. Once you actually take the time to figure out the architecture and make a engine making games will be just as easy as making them on the PS4 and XBOX1, but with better results. |
The ARM cores are for OS tasks, much akin to how the Next-gen twins use two of their x86 cores for the OS and other background tasks.
It's not available for games.
As for developers needing to figure out the architecture... WHAT have they been doing for over a decade!?
| gentii said: No only that, but PowerPC technology is more efficient than x86. One core of a PowerPC is worth 2 cores of an x86 So to put that in perspective. If you look at the fact that the Wii U has 3 CPUs with 6 cores between them that would be an equivalent to 12 cores of an x86. To show how this plays out in captivity, Resogun for the PS4 uses HALF of the 8-core PS4 CPU. Nano Assault NEO only uses on core of the Wii U. Nano Assualt NEO on the PS4 would use 2 cores. Not only that, Nano did not use any of the eDRAM on the Wii U GPU or any GPGPU functionality. And it was ported off of a last-gen engine. The games look virtually the same in terms of graphics. |
What? No.
There is a reason why Apple moved away from IBM, there is a reason why Microsoft and Sony moved away from IBM, there is a reason why servers have been shifting away from IBM... And it's not because they're more efficient than x86.
They're cheap "simple" cores, but excell in specific areas.
x86 processors however have had 10's of billions in research and development, decades worth of development time, super computer analaysing every little tidbit, you really still think that PowerPC is twice that of x86?
The only reason older consoles used PowerPC comes all down completely to costs.
When the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 launched, there was NO cheap x86 processors on the market, Intel Atom, AMD's Brazos hadn't even been thought of, these are the kinds of CPU's that are "cheap enough" to be thrown into a console. - Back then the cheapest CPU would have cost about $200 AUD, these days you can get them at a fraction of that price.
Enter: IBM with some contracts for cheap low-end CPU's to the console manufacturers, they were "good enough" allowing the consoles to spend the rest of their dollar, TDP and transister budgets on the GPU's.
| gentii said: So as you can see at WORST the Wii U is capable of doing anything the PS4 can. At best (probably 1st-party games only) we may see games that actually look BETTER on the Wii U than the PS4. People will never accept this and that is fine but I’m just glad I know the power the Wii U has. It didn’t even rally need to be this powerful but it’s nice that it is. This kind of reminds me of the GameCube vs XBOX debate. On paper it looked like the XBOX was more powerful but the GameCube actually was more efficient and outperformed the XBOX. It’s all about optimization. That’s what Slightly Mad has done for Project C.A.R.S. and what Criterion did for NFS:MWU. |
And this is where I know you are being sarcastic.
Due to the laws of physics, diminishing returns and how the wind blows, there is no logical or technical reason why the WiiU can exceed the Playstation 4 in any technical aspect.
| gentii said: x86 architechture runs on what is called CISC. Complex Instruction Set Computing. This allows for developers to have a lot of resources available at the beginning, but very little room to grow. Power-based architecture runs on what is called RISC. Reduced Instruction Set Computing. The memory footprint is much smaller and much faster than that of a CISC-based x86 CPU which are the type used in the XB1 and PS4. Loosely translated, it takes massive amounts of RAM and computational power do to the same thing that a Power-based CPU does with far less memory and computational power. The Wii U does not need 4GB of RAM to do the same level of performance as the PS4 and XB1 as was explained in detail in a link I will provide if you want. The reason Microsoft and Sony chose x86 over PowerPC this time around was to lessen the loss on hardware, and to entice more 3rd parties to develop for their console because of the relative ease of working with x86 which for all intents and purposes is like developing for a PC. However what you gain with ease of development, you lose out on longevity. |
Yes, in general the x86 architectures of varying types and periods are all generally CISC.
However, that's where the trend stops as you need to know how Intel and AMD's and even VIA's x86 processors work on a fundamental level.
Intel and AMD have complex and significant amounts of instructions, however the CPU breaks down the instructions internally, then uses it's microcode to convert the complex instructions into simpler ones, then executes those simpler instructions, which are almost RISC-level.
And with that, any advantage the WiiU potentially had purely looking at it from a RISC perspective, is gone.
| gentii said: The Wii U has 3 CPUs. A Tri-Core PowerPC750, a Dual Core ARM Processor, and a sound processor. The bandwidth of the eDRAM in the Wii U can be clocked as high as 1TB per second which smokes the XB1 eDRAM, eSRAM, and the PS4 GDDR5 RAM. It was a machine built on elegance, speed, and efficiency.
|
Here is where eSRAM, eDRAM and all it's derivatives fall flat on it's face.
What happens WHEN (Not if, but when!) that data isn't in that super fast cache? It has to travel all the way down to system ram to retreive it, when that happens it doesn't matter how fast the cache is, it means squat.
Unfortunatly, you cant hold everything into the eSRAM/eDRAM, there simply isn't enough space.
However, Intel and AMD with their particular architectures use "predictors" so that information is predicted ahead of time and stored in the CPU's caches, however having miss-hits still occurs and often, AMD and Intel actually spend a majority of their transister budgets not on execution resources, but in various technologies to hide the latency and bandwidth deficit by having to retrieve information from system memory, the WiiU doesn't have the transister budget to make sure the right stuff is in the right place at the right time, thus that work falls onto the developers and it will never be perfect.
| gentii said: Developers are already hitting walls with XB1 and PS4 dev kits. Resogun on the PS4 uses 50% of the PS4 CPU. Nano Assault NEO (made by Shin’en Multimedia who actually know what they are doing with the Wii U hardware) looks just as good if not better than that and only runs on one core. Whether the 50% means 50% of the entire PS4 CPU which is 8 cores or 50% of the allotted CPU for gaming use which would be 2 out of 4 cores, that still is a very bad sign that a downloadable launch-title uses that much CPU power. We already know that Killzone: Shadow Fall uses 3GB of RAM which is more than 80% of the allotted RAM on the PS4 (4-5GB.) Again, a launch title. These systems are going to have to last for at least 10 years for Microsoft and Sony. |
Rubbish.
| gentii said: The bottom line is that PowerPC architecture is superior to that of x86, but it’s not for lightweights. If you are lazy or lacking in development experience then you are going to struggle. Those who are very talented and well-versed in game developmental language of all kinds will have an easier time unlocking the power of the Wii U. The longer developers play around with it the more they discover how powerful it really is. If you have followed the comments from Slighty Mad Studios, guys who are working on Project CARS, you can tell that they keep discovering new things about the Wii U and are constantly surprised on how far they can push things without the console even breaking a sweat. Not to mention that the power consumption on the Wii U is superior to that of the PS4 and XB1. Only uses 33 watts of power. Not even 50% of what it is capable of handling. If the Wii U had an 8-core PowerPC CPU and 8GB of RAM along with the 32MB of eDRAM it has it would absolutely rip the PS4 and XB1 to shreds. |
PowerPC is inferior to x86 in many cases.
Heck, I'll make you a bet.
Find the fastest PowerPC based processor you can find...
Then compare it to my Core i7 3930K @ 4.8ghz. (6 cores, 12 threads.) in a cross-platform benchmark.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
