By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Killzone developer 'PS4 has no performance bottlenecks'

walsufnir on 09 April 2013
VGKing said:
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
walsufnir said:
Killzone devs saying PS4 has no bottlenecks? Wow, surprising, first party-devs praising the system :) And of course wrong, every system has bottlenecks, it's just a computer and they all have bottlenecks.

Not just 1st party, all developers are praising the console, even indies. Not 1 negative thing has been said about the console.

I think the console did have a bottleneck and that was the 4GB of GDDR5. Eventually it was going to be an issue which is why they upgraded to 8GB.

It doesn't matter what you think, it of course has bottlenecks, like every other computer. Again, I repeat it just for you again, this doesn't have to be bad but it's the way it is. Like it or not.

NO, IT DOESN'T. Are you calling Guerilla Games liars?

A bottleneck is something that limits something else such as a low amount of RAM limiting the kind of graphics than can be displayed or a weak CPU that limits frame-rate.

The PS4 uses an APU design, everything works together. The GPU/CPU/RAM all play nice with each other. None of these components are too powerful or too weak. It is a balanced system designed to be easy to work with. NO BOTTLENECKS. NOT 1 LIMITNG FACTOR.

Could the PS4 be more powerful? Of course. But power isn't what is being addressed here, efficiency is.

what's this screaming for? people who need to scream have weak arguments. i say it has, you say it hasn't. i have a diploma in computer science, you have your opinion.

/discussion

There's no screaming. I'm using capitals to highlight important points in my comment.
No, I don't NEED TO use capticals, but using them puts a greater emphasis on the words like I just did in this sentence.

If you have no rebuttal, just admit defeat. No need to result to insults.

You say PS4 has a bottleneck. What is it then? I'm curious as to what you and your computer science diploma have to say.

read http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=5267274

to make it short: for the computing units mostly everything is bottleneck, that is why every computer has bottlenecks.

Of course if you look deep enough you're going to find something that is a "bottleneck". But I believe what GG is talking about is stuff they actually have control over such as CPU/GPU/RAM/etc. PS4 isn't a quantum computer, I think everyone knows that. No one said it is perfect and able to be used with 100% efficiency either. NOTHING is able to used at 100% as far as I'm aware.

PS4 has no performance bottlenecks. The system was built to be as efficient as humanly possible with todays current technology.

I know my post was picky with my post but it is still true: ps4 has a bottleneck. And again, there is nothing wrong with that. You are right, it was built for efficiency but that is true for almost all consoles ever built, except ps3. Again, no disadvantage for ps4. GG are just overdoing it a little bit, that is why the discussion is happening.



Around the Network
VGKing on 09 April 2013
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
CGI-Quality said:
VGKing said:
XxPS3_X360xX said:

I think he means on RAM issues. The PS3 only had 256 shared DDR3 Ram, but the PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5 memory. The GPU cand CPU are the only bottlenecks that could hurt the PS4..... in 2018

The CPU/GPU aren't exactly bottlenecks. Will they be weak in 5 years? Yes, but they won't be bottlenecks unless you are trying to port a game made for $5000 uber-PCs to the PS4.

It's not about how weak/strong something is down the line. A weaker CPU to a, relatively, stronger GPU can bottleneck a set-up. This can happen out of the gate. I just don't imagine that it will and this guy is mainly speaking about the balanced architecture of the system. Bottlenecks can still ahppen, no matter, though.

Are you saying the CPU inside the PS4 is too weak to handle the GPU? It's not a high-end CPU but I'm sure they went with it for a reason. If the CPU was a bottleneck, they woulndn't have went with it. Guerilla Games wouldnd't have gone on record saying PS4 has no performance bottlenecks. I think some early proof that what he is saying is true is by looking at the Killzone ShadowFall demo. Some website(maybe Digital Foundry) did an analysis of the trailer and it seemed to be running at a constant 30FPS. No performance dips.

If you saw early PS3/360 games or even Wii U games, there were performance issues. Why? Bottlenecks. Developers still hadn't found ways around them.

What exactly was the bottleneck from your understanding in 360's design?

Computers in general aren't very efficient and are full of bottlenecks. The Xbox 360 is built just like a typical computer as in they pick a CPU, pick a GPU...etc and put it into the system. These components weren't designed to work with each other. In fact they're made by different companies. IBM CPU w/ AMD GPU. That's why we're seeing next-gen consoles going with an APU design. The CPU and GPU in there are designed to make full use of each other. This is why it doesn't matter that we're not getting the GTX 680 or whatever in these consoles. It would be a lot more inefficeint, hot and bulky.

If you asked me this question back in 2005, I wouldn't have been able to tell you. It is 2013 though and the most obvious bottleneck is the RAM.



Kynes on 09 April 2013

I'm glad to see that people have recovered their faith on the capabilities of AMD graphics chips and CPUs, it seems that they have done the perfect chip and will destroy Intel and nVidia with it.

PS: Seriously, do people think that XCOM and Uncharted tax the systems equally? In some games, the most important part is the CPU, and it makes the other subsystems to wait, and in some games the GPU makes the other subsystems to wait. I just can't believe that people believe this PR without doubts, but it's clear that in this forum is more important the PR work of the companies than the technical data.



walsufnir on 09 April 2013
VGKing said:
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
CGI-Quality said:
VGKing said:
XxPS3_X360xX said:

I think he means on RAM issues. The PS3 only had 256 shared DDR3 Ram, but the PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5 memory. The GPU cand CPU are the only bottlenecks that could hurt the PS4..... in 2018

The CPU/GPU aren't exactly bottlenecks. Will they be weak in 5 years? Yes, but they won't be bottlenecks unless you are trying to port a game made for $5000 uber-PCs to the PS4.

It's not about how weak/strong something is down the line. A weaker CPU to a, relatively, stronger GPU can bottleneck a set-up. This can happen out of the gate. I just don't imagine that it will and this guy is mainly speaking about the balanced architecture of the system. Bottlenecks can still ahppen, no matter, though.

Are you saying the CPU inside the PS4 is too weak to handle the GPU? It's not a high-end CPU but I'm sure they went with it for a reason. If the CPU was a bottleneck, they woulndn't have went with it. Guerilla Games wouldnd't have gone on record saying PS4 has no performance bottlenecks. I think some early proof that what he is saying is true is by looking at the Killzone ShadowFall demo. Some website(maybe Digital Foundry) did an analysis of the trailer and it seemed to be running at a constant 30FPS. No performance dips.

If you saw early PS3/360 games or even Wii U games, there were performance issues. Why? Bottlenecks. Developers still hadn't found ways around them.

What exactly was the bottleneck from your understanding in 360's design?

Computers in general aren't very efficient and are full of bottlenecks. The Xbox 360 is built just like a typical computer as in they pick a CPU, pick a GPU...etc and put it into the system. These components weren't designed to work with each other. In fact they're made by different companies. IBM CPU w/ AMD GPU. That's why we're seeing next-gen consoles going with an APU design. The CPU and GPU in there are designed to make full use of each other. This is why it doesn't matter that we're not getting the GTX 680 or whatever in these consoles. It would be a lot more inefficeint, hot and bulky.

If you asked me this question back in 2005, I wouldn't have been able to tell you. It is 2013 though and the most obvious bottleneck is the RAM.


No, it wasn't. This applies to the first Xbox but not 360. The IBM PPC is a custom design, exclusively built for MS with some aspects of the Cell. The GPU from AMD is also very custom as the whole design was because of the rather new approach of unified memory which now PS4 and NextBox will use. And yes, retrospective it is easy to recognize bottlenecks although I don't know why it is RAM by 360. It could have more RAM, yes, but it wasn't a bottleneck by your definition.



VGKing on 09 April 2013
CGI-Quality said:
FFT: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?428946-CPU-Bottleneck-What-is-it-and-how-it-affects-your-games

Did you not read what you posted?

"Why do people say that CPU Bottleneck is bigger at low resolutions?


Because it is. 

All of the calculations that the CPU needs to do remain static regardless of the resolution. This is because the internal calculation process that the CPU has to do inside a game is dependent on what goes on in the game, and not how big the screen is. 

As your resolution gets larger, the GPU has to render more pixels which affects performance. Simply put the larger the resolution, the more powerful your GPU needs to be to keep equal framerates with the same settings.

That means, that as your resolution gets the larger, the less the CPU matters to bottleneck. No matter the resolution, CPU load stays the same, while GPU load increases."


The PS4 will support a max of 1080p @ 60FPS. I'd say the CPU and GPU insdie the console are more than powerful enough to handle it. Of course eventually a developer might end up making a game that's too demanding and the CPU could end up being a bottleneck.....that's where GPGPU comes in to save the day.(I expect this to be heavily used on Wii U games)

Skilled developers know how to make balanced games and won't run into bottlenecks any time soon.  What we saw with PS3/360 is a generation that ran way too long. Developers were basically making next-gen games on current-gen platforms. That's where we see games with performance drops or extremely linear scripted levels. Sometimes though its just a case of bad developers that are unable to properly optimize their games for these systems.



Around the Network
VGKing on 09 April 2013
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
CGI-Quality said:
VGKing said:
XxPS3_X360xX said:

I think he means on RAM issues. The PS3 only had 256 shared DDR3 Ram, but the PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5 memory. The GPU cand CPU are the only bottlenecks that could hurt the PS4..... in 2018

The CPU/GPU aren't exactly bottlenecks. Will they be weak in 5 years? Yes, but they won't be bottlenecks unless you are trying to port a game made for $5000 uber-PCs to the PS4.

It's not about how weak/strong something is down the line. A weaker CPU to a, relatively, stronger GPU can bottleneck a set-up. This can happen out of the gate. I just don't imagine that it will and this guy is mainly speaking about the balanced architecture of the system. Bottlenecks can still ahppen, no matter, though.

Are you saying the CPU inside the PS4 is too weak to handle the GPU? It's not a high-end CPU but I'm sure they went with it for a reason. If the CPU was a bottleneck, they woulndn't have went with it. Guerilla Games wouldnd't have gone on record saying PS4 has no performance bottlenecks. I think some early proof that what he is saying is true is by looking at the Killzone ShadowFall demo. Some website(maybe Digital Foundry) did an analysis of the trailer and it seemed to be running at a constant 30FPS. No performance dips.

If you saw early PS3/360 games or even Wii U games, there were performance issues. Why? Bottlenecks. Developers still hadn't found ways around them.

What exactly was the bottleneck from your understanding in 360's design?

Computers in general aren't very efficient and are full of bottlenecks. The Xbox 360 is built just like a typical computer as in they pick a CPU, pick a GPU...etc and put it into the system. These components weren't designed to work with each other. In fact they're made by different companies. IBM CPU w/ AMD GPU. That's why we're seeing next-gen consoles going with an APU design. The CPU and GPU in there are designed to make full use of each other. This is why it doesn't matter that we're not getting the GTX 680 or whatever in these consoles. It would be a lot more inefficeint, hot and bulky.

If you asked me this question back in 2005, I wouldn't have been able to tell you. It is 2013 though and the most obvious bottleneck is the RAM.


No, it wasn't. This applies to the first Xbox but not 360. The IBM PPC is a custom design, exclusively built for MS with some aspects of the Cell. The GPU from AMD is also very custom as the whole design was because of the rather new approach of unified memory which now PS4 and NextBox will use. And yes, retrospective it is easy to recognize bottlenecks although I don't know why it is RAM by 360. It could have more RAM, yes, but it wasn't a bottleneck by your definition.

Can you really call it unified memory when the system relies on 10mb of eDRAM though? The eDRAM is used to get around the bottleneck that is the main RAM. This is why the PS4 config is so good, it doesn't need eDRAM or eSRAM. It is truly UNIFIED. Also since this is a console I think Sony made the right choice in using GRAPHICS DOUBLE DATA RATE version 5.  

GDDR5 is defined as high performance RAM designed for computer applications that require high bandwidth.(LIke Games)



VGKing on 09 April 2013
CGI-Quality said:
VGKing said:
CGI-Quality said:
FFT: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?428946-CPU-Bottleneck-What-is-it-and-how-it-affects-your-games

Did you not read what you posted?

"Why do people say that CPU Bottleneck is bigger at low resolutions?


Because it is. 

All of the calculations that the CPU needs to do remain static regardless of the resolution. This is because the internal calculation process that the CPU has to do inside a game is dependent on what goes on in the game, and not how big the screen is. 

As your resolution gets larger, the GPU has to render more pixels which affects performance. Simply put the larger the resolution, the more powerful your GPU needs to be to keep equal framerates with the same settings.

That means, that as your resolution gets the larger, the less the CPU matters to bottleneck. No matter the resolution, CPU load stays the same, while GPU load increases."


The PS4 will support a max of 1080p @ 60FPS. I'd say the CPU and GPU insdie the console are more than powerful enough to handle it. Of course eventually a developer might end up making a game that's too demanding and the CPU could end up being a bottleneck.....that's where GPGPU comes in to save the day.(I expect this to be heavily used on Wii U games)

Skilled developers know how to make balanced games and won't run into bottlenecks any time soon.  What we saw with PS3/360 is a generation that ran way too long. Developers were basically making next-gen games on current-gen platforms. That's where we see games with performance drops or extremely linear scripted levels. Sometimes though its just a case of bad developers that are unable to properly optimize their games for these systems.

You aren't on the same page as me (and this makes two topics, in a row, now). You just don't get it, and, clearly, didn't read the entire link. Do you actually know what a computational bottleneck is?

Oh I read the entire link I just commented on the relevant parts. Anything I missed? Please tell me.



VGKing on 09 April 2013
CGI-Quality said:
VGKing said:
CGI-Quality said:

You aren't on the same page as me (and this makes two topics, in a row, now). You just don't get it, and, clearly, didn't read the entire link. Do you actually know what a computational bottleneck is?

Oh I read the entire link I just commented on the relevant parts. Anything I missed? Please tell me.

Yeah, you missed that it wasn't posted in relation to the PS4 ("FFT" = Food For Thought). Again I ask, do you know, for real, what a bottleneck is and what causes it? I'll be waiting.

You posted this in the thread so naturally I'm assuming you think this is related to PS4. 

Yes, I do know what a bottleneck is and what causes it. Using your link as reference. "In simple terms, this refers to a system not being able to optimum levels because one (or more) components are holding it back."

Now, let me ask you, which of the components inside the PS4 is holding it back? I'll be waiting.



walsufnir on 09 April 2013
VGKing said:
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
walsufnir said:
VGKing said:
CGI-Quality said:
VGKing said:
XxPS3_X360xX said:

I think he means on RAM issues. The PS3 only had 256 shared DDR3 Ram, but the PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5 memory. The GPU cand CPU are the only bottlenecks that could hurt the PS4..... in 2018

The CPU/GPU aren't exactly bottlenecks. Will they be weak in 5 years? Yes, but they won't be bottlenecks unless you are trying to port a game made for $5000 uber-PCs to the PS4.

It's not about how weak/strong something is down the line. A weaker CPU to a, relatively, stronger GPU can bottleneck a set-up. This can happen out of the gate. I just don't imagine that it will and this guy is mainly speaking about the balanced architecture of the system. Bottlenecks can still ahppen, no matter, though.

Are you saying the CPU inside the PS4 is too weak to handle the GPU? It's not a high-end CPU but I'm sure they went with it for a reason. If the CPU was a bottleneck, they woulndn't have went with it. Guerilla Games wouldnd't have gone on record saying PS4 has no performance bottlenecks. I think some early proof that what he is saying is true is by looking at the Killzone ShadowFall demo. Some website(maybe Digital Foundry) did an analysis of the trailer and it seemed to be running at a constant 30FPS. No performance dips.

If you saw early PS3/360 games or even Wii U games, there were performance issues. Why? Bottlenecks. Developers still hadn't found ways around them.

What exactly was the bottleneck from your understanding in 360's design?

Computers in general aren't very efficient and are full of bottlenecks. The Xbox 360 is built just like a typical computer as in they pick a CPU, pick a GPU...etc and put it into the system. These components weren't designed to work with each other. In fact they're made by different companies. IBM CPU w/ AMD GPU. That's why we're seeing next-gen consoles going with an APU design. The CPU and GPU in there are designed to make full use of each other. This is why it doesn't matter that we're not getting the GTX 680 or whatever in these consoles. It would be a lot more inefficeint, hot and bulky.

If you asked me this question back in 2005, I wouldn't have been able to tell you. It is 2013 though and the most obvious bottleneck is the RAM.


No, it wasn't. This applies to the first Xbox but not 360. The IBM PPC is a custom design, exclusively built for MS with some aspects of the Cell. The GPU from AMD is also very custom as the whole design was because of the rather new approach of unified memory which now PS4 and NextBox will use. And yes, retrospective it is easy to recognize bottlenecks although I don't know why it is RAM by 360. It could have more RAM, yes, but it wasn't a bottleneck by your definition.

Can you really call it unified memory when the system relies on 10mb of eDRAM though? The eDRAM is used to get around the bottleneck that is the main RAM. This is why the PS4 config is so good, it doesn't need eDRAM or eSRAM. It is truly UNIFIED. Also since this is a console I think Sony made the right choice in using GRAPHICS DOUBLE DATA RATE version 5.

The eDRAM is transparent like a cache is. So arguing this would mean systems with cache don't have unified ram. And we are talking about a console from 2005, technical aspects changed of course. But yes, it was unified ram. Devs could use it as they wanted. And why do you repeat saying known things about gddr5? We were talking about 360.



VGKing on 09 April 2013
CGI-Quality said:
VGKing said:
CGI-Quality said:
VGKing said:
CGI-Quality said:

You aren't on the same page as me (and this makes two topics, in a row, now). You just don't get it, and, clearly, didn't read the entire link. Do you actually know what a computational bottleneck is?

Oh I read the entire link I just commented on the relevant parts. Anything I missed? Please tell me.

Yeah, you missed that it wasn't posted in relation to the PS4 ("FFT" = Food For Thought). Again I ask, do you know, for real, what a bottleneck is and what causes it? I'll be waiting.

You posted this in the thread so naturally I'm assuming you think this is related to PS4. 

Yes, I do know what a bottleneck is and what causes it. Using your link as reference. "In simple terms, this refers to a system not being able to optimum levels because one (or more) components are holding it back."

Now, let me ask you, which of the components inside the PS4 is holding it back? I'll be waiting.

No matter how efficient a computational device is constructed, there will always, ALWAYS, A.L.W.A.Y.S., be bottlnecks. For someone who supposedly "gets it", that shouldn't have to be high-chaired and spoon-fed to you.

Ok, so what's the bottleneck inside the PS4? Your link refers to a bottleneck as a compoennt that holds back performance in a system.

Do I really have to keep repeating myself?