vivster said:
I'm pretty sure there will be some SSD cache in next gen consoles, if not full SSDs. And they'll sell it as if it is brand new never before used technology. |
Who knows.
Sony did invent 4k after all.
Silly Microsoft, they think they can steal Sony's ground breaking technology and get away with it.
Pemalite said:
GPU's are parallel processing monsters, but tend to lack on serial processing capability that a CPU is more suited for, which is why the CPU continues to exist today. |
Thing is, everything where really CELL exceeded falls under those parallel processes. Cloth simulation, you wouldn't actually do that on a CPU today. In other cases CELL was kind of a nightmare for programmers.
Many things CELL was intended for are simply done GPGPU-wise today, for the other stuff there are way more efficient ways.
caffeinade said:
Ah, that is fine for a relatively young emulator. |
Microsoft wont be around when the PS5 launches, because Sony will be first who will launch their next gen system duetto how PS4 Pro and Xbox 1 X were released. So Microsoft can respond to the PS5 no matter what.
But i tell one thing they wouldnt composite the extra power from a cell processor inside a PS5 by just adding in a Xeon from the 360 for their next xbox, because that would turn their BC roadmap they have taken so far into a waste.
What you just dont get is that a Ryzen is pretty much all what Sony could get out of AMD in 2019 looking at how expensive they are now. It doesnt just work that way that they you can add in an extra core for a CPU. You ether buy an affordable 8 core, or super expensive 12 or 16 core, looking at Ryzen.
| NATO said: go back to the cell processor and write off the entire ps4 games library, and have your competitors have hardware backwards compatibility... or stick with x86 and have native backwards compatibility and a massive library of games directly compatible (potentially with upgrades) at launch? hmmmmm |
| DialgaMarine said: No. They’ll face the same high costs that they faced with the original PS3, and it would basically mean no PS4 BC if they decide not to try and fit a PS4 inside of it. I like the idea of building around x86 because developers love it and it means all the games we play right can continue to be relevant as newer hardware offers boosts to performance. |
You clearly didnt read my opening post,
-i said BC with PS4
- Ryzen CPU by AMD,
the Cell is just being an extra processor for some extra graphics.
captain carot said:
Yeah, it was a floating point beast. But only under the right circumstances. Being in Order and depending massively on perfect scheduling it could be extremely slow at the same time though. Even low cost Jaguar cores from five years ago can easily outperform Cell in most disciplines. And over ten years later, why should anyone need an outdated Cell for floating point related stuff if he can go for GPGPU? Doesn't make the slighest sense. |
Of course it doesn’t. Especially since both processor types use different sets of instructions. I was just trying to understand why the OP would even suggest such a thing. You’re also right that more and more processing, physics and even 3D sound will be done by highly versatile GPUs in the future.
I can understand the appeal in someways, when you see the ps3 properly programmed like in some of the Resistance games with soo much happening on screen its incredibly impressive for such old hardware and the fact often ps3 games deliver by far the best soundtracks with 7.1 support with very high quality sound something neither 360 or even wii u does to a comparable standard. The clever way some developers use the cell to enhance the gpu and add some functionality.
However it won't happen and I hope the ps5 will be strong enough to software emulate the ps3. We are already seeing ps3 emulation on pc and surely the PS5 has a fighting chance of emulating it too especially as Sony have all the important hardware documentation on the ps3.
Sony ignored the accountants with the ps3 but today's Sony isn't like that and they have a much more intelligent and sensible approach to hardware. More powerful x86 hardware with the best gpu they can afford is pretty much what we are going to get.
Pemalite said:
No. |
Yes you can have as good of a GPU you want, it wont archive 60fps if still using the same Jaguar CPU cloacked @1.6-2.2 Ghz. The XBox One X is the definitive prove for that, Microsoft had all the time in the world to fix it, they went that way because 4k 30fps was the goal from the beginning.
Pemalite said:
Go do some basic research, gain an understanding of what flops is and how it relates to gaming and how irrelevant it is to the total performance of a system. |
So now i have to philosophy about the numbers 4 and 18? I can tell you what i know about this topic, that 4 is almost a fourth of the number 18 thats all you need to know about.
I mean if this is all too complicated for you and me, I can also express it visually by showing some pictures of the Last of Us on PS3 and ask you if it can hold a candle against Uncharted 4?
Pemalite said:
No. |
So are you, because you never provide any evidence for anything
| Pemalite said: No. The Cell lacks a ton of the basic functional components to perform GPU-type duties efficiently. The Cell was designed to be a CPU first and foremost, the fact it is using the PowerPC ISA is a testament to that very basic fundamental fact... It sounds like you have been drinking some fake news over the years. - Of course they did take a VLIW-like approach to it's core layout with Cell. But ultimately... Who cares? Do you know how rapidly GPU's and CPU's double their performance? Cell is ancient, outdated and downright archaic today. |
So what, it is using PowerPC? Just like Macs did or the Wii U. Doesnt mean its bad, just look at Wii U games like Bayonetta 2 or the latest Zelda, all praised for their graphics and scale and that wasnt even a Cell.
There are various benchmark showcasing how the Cell can render a lot of stuff without the GPU.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehwFOM4CBKA
| Pemalite said: If you think cherry picked benchmarks designed to conform to your own confirmation bias is somehow an accurate representation of Cell's capabilities... Then you are highly mistaken and you should again... Go do some basic research. The Cell is great when doing Iterative refinement floating point, but you throw a ton of integer calculations at the chip and the Cell will fold. To dumb it down for you (as it seems you need it) the Jaguar core is a more well-rounded balanced architecture that is essentially great at all sorts of calculations, where the Cell is only great at one thing and terrible at everything else. Which is fine if you only intend to do a single type of calculation... But guess what? That isn't how game engines work, they use all sorts of calculations. |
Yeah an integer calculation designed for x86. Sure the Jaguar is great but any processor would be with 8 Gigs of Ram and a powerful GPU, put that into the Cell and you would see the same performance for many games, if not even better in some games. Like in PUBG as an example, it would probably run better on the Cell than on a Jaguar processor, simple because its designed for dual or quad processor on PC, not 8th cores.
| Besides.... The games speak for themselves... And the games have told us that Jaguar beats Cell. It really is that simple. Playstation 4 games not only have more advanced A.I characters, but have more of them on screen. Allot of multiplayer games (battlefield for example) have more players in a multiplayer match. Also tend to have more impressive CPU based Physics, Particles and Smoke effects. |
And that was my main point that Cell wouldnt supposed to be used to render the entire game if it is just a co-processor
| Pemalite said: Clearly your knowledge on Ram is lacking. That is bandwidth per pin. DDR2 can technically be faster than XDR2 if you take it wide enough. However... You have conveniently omitted HBM, HBM2, GDDR6, GDDR5X as well in your comparisons. - So try again and try using sources that don't conform to your own confirmation bias. XDR2 has been beaten soundly by other technologies. |
A source is better than no source, you dont provide anything.
It doesnt matter what is better than XDR2, XDR2 is better than GDDR5 and is needed for the Cell. All the other types of RAM arent out there in any relevant form and probably ultra expensive too.
| Impressive for a console maybe. But it paled in comparison to what Intel was offering. AMD's GPU hardware isn't great compared to nVidia because AMD's GPU architecture is shit. - It's more compute focused whilst nVidia's is a little more well-rounded and gaming-orientated. In short, AMD GPU's can have tons and tons of Gflops... But games tend to need more than that, so AMD GPU's perform terrible, that's got nothing to do with developers or whatever other nVidia-having-a-monopoly conspiracy theory you have conjured up, that is strictly AMD's own fault. It does mean that AMD's GPU's are great in tasks that can make use of all that compute like Bitcoin Mining, but not much outside of that. Ryzen is actually a great CPU core, but it is limited by it's manufacturing, being stuck at an inferior 14nm Finfet Samsung-20nm-based Global Foundries process didn't really do it in any favors, especially when it comes to pushing up clock rates. (There may also be a bottleneck in say... The pipeline, not sure.) |
Yes it has everything to do with Developers and also gamers cheerleading for their favorite hardware monopolies. Look at PS4s Exclusive Uncharted 4, Driveclub, Bloodborne, they look beyond anything that runs on any Nvidia hardware, and that despite of the weak Jaguar CPUs. Software optimisation is all what matters, consoles arent effected by that because its only 1 or 2 pieces of hardware of the same brand, in this case on ''Weak'' AMD architecture.
Without outsourcing the process for their CPUs, AMD would have been bankrupt in the first place.
|
Pemalite said: We are not in 2005 anymore. x86 is extremely efficient, Intel even managed to get it's x86 processors to be competitive with ARM. Citation Needed. |
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-cellperf/
| Linpack 1kx1k (DP) | Peak GFLOPS | Actual GFLOPS | Efficiency |
|---|---|---|---|
| SPU, 3.2GHz | 1.83 | 1.45 | 79.23% |
| 8 SPUs, 3.2GHz | 14.63 | 9.46 | 64.66% |
| Pentium4, 3.2GHz | 6.4 | 3.1 | 48.44% |
| Pentium4 + SSE3, 3.6GHz | 14.4 | 7.2 | 50.00% |
| Itanium, 1.6GHz | 6.4 | 5.95 | 92.97% |
|
Pemalite said: $800 was for the entire machine. |
The Cell wasnt cheap at all, in order to make it affordable for consoles Sony had a dedicated CPU plant in order to produce them in massive quantities. The only used 7 SPUs instead of 8, in oder to save money too. The PS3 was an entire battle to cut production costs, no other console had so many hardware revisions.
Last edited by Ruler - on 27 December 2017
From Sony, I would essentially like to see 3 PS5 Formats:
1) A PS5 standard edition. Only plays cartridge based PS5 games and digital purchase of PS1 through PS5 titles to include PSP and Vita. 4K/60FPS.
2) A PS5 Anthology Edition. Contains everything the standard PS5 has but comes with a disc drive for backwards compatibility and media formats. Plays all prior PlayStation console discs and automatically upscales to 4k or better resolution.
3) PS5 Portable / controller that works similar to the Switch where you can play the game on the go. Cartridge based games instead of discs also of course. The handles or the Portable detach and are used as motion controls for Move 2.0 and PSVR 2.0. When synced with the PS5 or PS4 it serves as a second screen/texting/messaging/internet browsing companion as well as controller.
List of new items: 3 PS5 Formats.
*PS5 standard - all digital ($399-$499)
*PS5 Alpha - Bells and whistles edition ($499-$599)
*PS5 Portable $199-$299 plays all cartridge based games (PS5/Vita/PSP). Select PS1 through PS4 titles can be ported to a PS5 cartridge format usable in all 3 PS5 combinations. 250 gigabytes HD. 720p to 4K display.
*Dualshock 5 Standard Controller (1 supplied)
*PSVR 2.0
*Move 2.0
Give or take a few things I would like to see this concept happen. Appealing to the core gamer. Appealing to the gamers who want backwards compatibility. Also for those who want to play on the go.
I'm no expert, but I'm fairly sure combining even exactly identical processors isn't easy to do efficiently. There's a reason even multicore development is challenging, let alone multiprocessor development. Here we have a suggestion to combine a fairly standard processor with possibly the hardest processor ever to develop for in a console. I'd say this sounds like a recipe for a disaster.
| Azzanation said: Why would you alienate yourself from the majority? That would mean no PS4 BC for PS5 unless they work some magic. |
| Intrinsic said: This is just a bad idea in every sense of the word. The cell was powerful no doubt, but it was extremely difficult to use. And thats putting it mildly.... Then secondly, its like you have absolutely zero understanding of all the things that has made the PS4 successful. The PS4s success is clear and apparent that going with an "off the shelf" (even though thats a gross understatement of what these platform holders really do) solution was the better choice. Yet here you are suggesting that sony makes yet another over developed over complicated piece of hardware that will only be taken advantage of by their first party studios. And this group think nonsense has to stop. Yes, the jaguar CPU used in the PS4/XB1 is weak by the general standards of everything else that is out there. But I can't stress it enough when I say that like most things that tech evangelists would like you to think is important; its really not important. Just look at the games that we have got this generation so far. Look at the games running on PCs with CPUs that are literally 10 times more powerful than what we have in these consoles..... are those games 10 times better? Its flat out ignorant when people ask or want things simply because they can and not take into consideration all that really goes into these decisions. And do you realize that if they change the core hardware architecture for the PS5 (meaning they heavily deviate from the current setup) then it means PS4 games won't work on that platform? Make no mistake, if sony or anyone releases a console in the future that isn't fully BC, that console will be DOA. We have the rise in digital distribution to thank for that. Right now, its just better for sony to stick with AMD, make modifications to the chips AMD gives them like they did with the PS4pro and make the most they can of that hardware. Anything else at this point is just redundant and stupid. Keep an eye out on checkerboard rendering..... its going to be a very big component in the next PS console hardware. Long and short is this, if you are looking back or suggesting taking a step back to make future improvements, then you already are doing it all wrong. |
You didnt read my opening post, I said x86 Ryzen + Cell.
Heavenly_King said:
I know nothing about CPUs, GPUs and convoluted technical stuff. But having that kind of price at launch means DEAD on arrival. |
I dissagree, its not comparable because the PS5 would come out first before the next Xbox. And an 8 Core 3 Ghz Ryzen CPU and 11 tf GPU would be well worth the money, along with full PS4, PS3 and possible PS2, PS1 BC. If you present it that way that would make a huge difference.
| Birimbau said: PS3 architecture was the biggest mistake of Sony. they learned nothing from the already complex PS2. |
Yet it sold 150 Million units, the reason why PS3 was a failure is because it was too expensive
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
