Sony Working on AMD Ryzen LLVM Compiler Improvements, Possibly for PlayStation 5

[SickBeast]

HAHAHA yes wouldn't it make so much more sense to try and sell $2000 playstations, that play the same games developers will be targeting to run smooth on PS4 hardware for years after its release.

Nintendo could go Tegra cause they where building a Mobile+ gaming console... and they are Nintendo. Their games are 90% in house and designed to be good games not 3D effect demos. As development was in house and their own teams had made plenty of ARM compiled titles for earlier systems it likely wasn't a big conversion for those teams.

If sony goes ARM+Nvida. Developers have to now target 2 complete different architectures. Sony could build GNM tools to make that seemless for average PS developers... for the higher end PS developers that use GNMX (their lower level API that allows direct control of hardware) Sony would be doubling their workload.

Tegra is not equal remotely in terms of horsepower to an AMD Ryzen/Vega APU. And there really is no way in hell Sony is going to shove a GPU into a console that even if they get a smoking deal from Nvidia would DOUBLE at least their production cost.

I get it you love you your nvidia. Still I think you need to be a bit honest with yourself. In the Mid range where Sony is buying, between NV and AMD... AMD wins. That isn't likely going to change when NV releases their new cards either. The reason miners have loved AMD so much is simple their cards are more powerful, and operate at low voltages very well... and Sony has done a really good job harnessing that with their GNM APIs. Nvidia in PC land has done a really great job of paying off developers, I'll give them that... sometimes I really wish AMD would get their evil on like everyone else. (joking about that last bit)

Just explain to me one thing. How is the Playstation 5 going to be "better" than the current Xbox One X if it's also going to use a Vega GPU?

Perhaps you haven't seen that the Xbox One X isn't selling well. You mean to tell me that Sony's going to essentially release the same thing under their own brand and expect it to do better? How and why exactly? Because it has a Ryzen CPU instead of Jaguar? LOL.

 

[DukenukemX]

Well wouldn't it make a whole lot more sense if the PS5 used an nVidia Tegra ARM CPU paired with an integrated Volta GPU? This rumor seems like complete nonsense to me. Sony is nuts using AMD for the GPU in the PS5.

It would, given that Nvidia's Tegra chips were comparable to AMD's APU's, and they aren't. The Tegra K1 is no match for AMD's Ryzen 2400G. While it would use less electricity than the 2400G, the PS5 isn't exactly portable. Plus the ARM CPU in any machine is currently not comparable to x86 in performance. Nvidia particularly doesn't take the ARM design and redesign it for more performance, like Qualcomm and Apple. It's just a copy and paste with minor tweaks thrown in. Nvidia throws all their focus on the GPU performance, which again isn't comparable to a 2400G. Not to forget that by going with AMD you keep backwards compatibility, while a Tegra couldn't.

Nvidia could make a high performance Tegra that would be worthy of competing with AMD, but for what? You'd still lose that x86 compatibility, and Nvidia is known to be difficult when it comes to pricing. AMD has experience in dealing with APU's paired with HBM memory, which makes them a better fit than Nvidia. As much you wanna harp on Nvidia, AMD has done extremely well with the exception of high end GPU's. The PS5 won't be using a Vega 64 or 1080 Ti equivalent GPU, but instead whatever is mid range, which if you've been paying attention the RX 580 is actually faster in most games than the GTX 1060. Vega 64 is not competitive compared to the 1080, let alone the 1080 Ti, but that doesn't mean AMD failed at making faster GPUs. If Nvidia wants they could fart out what is the equivalent to the Titan and still beat AMD, but nobody is going to put a $2000 GPU in a $400 console.

 

[SickBeast]

It would, given that Nvidia's Tegra chips were comparable to AMD's APU's, and they aren't. The Tegra K1 is no match for AMD's Ryzen 2400G. While it would use less electricity than the 2400G, the PS5 isn't exactly portable. Plus the ARM CPU in any machine is currently not comparable to x86 in performance. Nvidia particularly doesn't take the ARM design and redesign it for more performance, like Qualcomm and Apple. It's just a copy and paste with minor tweaks thrown in. Nvidia throws all their focus on the GPU performance, which again isn't comparable to a 2400G. Not to forget that by going with AMD you keep backwards compatibility, while a Tegra couldn't.

Nvidia could make a high performance Tegra that would be worthy of competing with AMD, but for what? You'd still lose that x86 compatibility, and Nvidia is known to be difficult when it comes to pricing. AMD has experience in dealing with APU's paired with HBM memory, which makes them a better fit than Nvidia. As much you wanna harp on Nvidia, AMD has done extremely well with the exception of high end GPU's. The PS5 won't be using a Vega 64 or 1080 Ti equivalent GPU, but instead whatever is mid range, which if you've been paying attention the RX 580 is actually faster in most games than the GTX 1060. Vega 64 is not competitive compared to the 1080, let alone the 1080 Ti, but that doesn't mean AMD failed at making faster GPUs. If Nvidia wants they could fart out what is the equivalent to the Titan and still beat AMD, but nobody is going to put a $2000 GPU in a $400 console.

Tegra worked out pretty well for Nintendo, I'm not sure if you've noticed.

The GPU is the most important. And like I keep telling you guys, Vega just isn't good enough. It's not 4k capable. And it would be no better than what we have now with the Xbox One X.

It's also kind of laughable that you think AMD would be cheaper considering what we have seen with the Vega prices.

 

[DukenukemX]

When I talk about ps5 or 6 going streaming I'm not talking about a simple you buy game and stream game service. That is what is out now sure the tech is in the cradle. In 3-5 years from now I suspect someone is going to launch a proper streaming service that will include a good number of AAA games. Heck we may even live in a world in 10 years where every big publisher like EA attempts to start their own service with exclusive games. If more countries do things like make Loot boxes illegal they will be quite open to the idea of on going subscription money. Having seen streaming on a good connection...

If you don't buy the games then what incentive do companies have to make other good games? A game like GTA6 or 7 might get people to jump on the service and pay a $15 monthly fee, but what about all the other games that Rockstar makes? You're pushing Rockstar to be a company who exclusively works on GTA and nothing else, cause the subscription money doesn't cover making other game titles. Blizzard has certainly done this for a while where they milked World of Warcraft for years until they started to make other games again. I don't see how this will work in our favor. Imagine if Blizzard stopped making games like OverWatch in favor of Warcraft cause that game is their bread and butter.

If your paying the fee for one game, then why supply other games? It'll work like the movie industry where they don't care if you liked the movie or not, just that you came to watch it once. Cause statistically you're not going to watch it twice or more. Focus on making impressive trailers than an actual good movie. Blizzard nowadays works that way with World of Warcraft where they want you to grind in the game to continue that monthly fee, rather than making a good game. Hence why WoW's subscription numbers are a secret, cause it's secretly bad.

I know its technically already very possible, what needs to improve is the average quality of broadband. That will happen no question... how long it takes is the only real unknown. (I do doubt PS5 is anything less then a ZEN VEGA powerhouse... I would bet myself that is the last of the self game powering consoles, but I could be wrong and that may still be further out)

Broadband isn't the problem but distance. In order for cloud gaming to be bearable, you'd need to be really close to the server. Basically Steam or Sony needs to put a cluster of gaming PC's all over the world within a small distance. Which if you live in the middle of nowhere then good luck with cloud gaming cause much like your ISP, Sony and Valve aren't going to put servers in an area where hardly anyone lives.

 

[ChadD]

Just explain to me one thing. How is the Playstation 5 going to be "better" than the current Xbox One X if it's also going to use a Vega GPU?

Perhaps you haven't seen that the Xbox One X isn't selling well. You mean to tell me that Sony's going to essentially release the same thing under their own brand and expect it to do better? How and why exactly? Because it has a Ryzen CPU instead of Jaguar? LOL.

You don't really read anything on [H] do you ? lol

The GPU in the xbox one would be at best = to a AMD 580... which as the Duke just explained is faster then 1060 but a bit slower then 1070. (although to be really annoy you Sony squeezes more out of the AMD chips in their PS cause they have a much better 3D API)

Vega brings a bunch of architectural improvements over the older polaris based chips. It uses faster ram, has a faster compute engine, has a Draw Stream Binning Rasterizer as well as support for rapid packet math and a bunch of other interesting things. (that frankly PC game developers haven't yet taken advantage of). Also it supports all the features of shader model 6 (over the previous generations SM 5 feature level)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_RX_Vega_series

So yes Vega would be a massive step up, and Sony may well unlock a lot of very interesting features for their developers through their GNM API. The custom APU that would end up in a Sony PS5, would likely feature the upcoming Vega Die shrink, which will also have a handful of tweaks. There is a very good chance AMDs vega die shrink is going to be seen in a very different light when it launches even in the high end. All the talk of them not going after the high end parts sounds like BS to me. (we'll see soon)

 

[ChadD]

Tegra worked out pretty well for Nintendo, I'm not sure if you've noticed.

The GPU is the most important. And like I keep telling you guys, Vega just isn't good enough. It's not 4k capable. And it would be no better than what we have now with the Xbox One X.

It's also kind of laughable that you think AMD would be cheaper considering what we have seen with the Vega prices.

Nintendo is not competing with Sony or MS. Not sure if you have noticed.

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/03/05/asus_rog_strix_rx_vega_56_o8g_gaming_review/

Do yourself a favor and actually read [H]. The vega 56 beats down the 1070 these days... and Sony will squeeze even more out of a vega part. Chances are a custom APU they would get in the next year would feature die shrunk vega very likely comparable or slightly better then the Vega 56. (no consoles are not going to get actual high end $900 GPUs... they will get a custom part that they can spin marketing wise to make it sound like perhaps it is, but it won't be... it will be a mid range APU)

 

[SickBeast]

You don't really read anything on [H] do you ? lol

The GPU in the xbox one would be at best = to a AMD 580... which as the Duke just explained is faster then 1060 but a bit slower then 1070. (although to be really annoy you Sony squeezes more out of the AMD chips in their PS cause they have a much better 3D API)

Vega brings a bunch of architectural improvements over the older polaris based chips. It uses faster ram, has a faster compute engine, has a Draw Stream Binning Rasterizer as well as support for rapid packet math and a bunch of other interesting things. (that frankly PC game developers haven't yet taken advantage of). Also it supports all the features of shader model 6 (over the previous generations SM 5 feature level)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_RX_Vega_series

So yes Vega would be a massive step up, and Sony may well unlock a lot of very interesting features for their developers through their GNM API. The custom APU that would end up in a Sony PS5, would likely feature the upcoming Vega Die shrink, which will also have a handful of tweaks. There is a very good chance AMDs vega die shrink is going to be seen in a very different light when it launches even in the high end. All the talk of them not going after the high end parts sounds like BS to me. (we'll see soon)

The Xbox One X is about equivalent to a GTX 1070. At best, Vega is equivalent to a GTX 1080. And to reach that speed it runs pig rich consuming twice as much power as a GTX 1080 Ti. Not feasable for a console. They would have to undervolt it and underclock it. And then they would lose performance and wind up right back where they started.

As for Vega's untapped potential, that is well possible. But I really think the more likely scenario is that Sony is going to create a new console that is an also-ran and it could turn out to be a big failure for them.

I will also say that if Sony goes with nVidia for the PS5 it will be a critical blow to AMD's graphics division.

 

[ChadD]

If you don't buy the games then what incentive do companies have to make other good games? A game like GTA6 or 7 might get people to jump on the service and pay a $15 monthly fee, but what about all the other games that Rockstar makes? You're pushing Rockstar to be a company who exclusively works on GTA and nothing else, cause the subscription money doesn't cover making other game titles. Blizzard has certainly done this for a while where they milked World of Warcraft for years until they started to make other games again. I don't see how this will work in our favor. Imagine if Blizzard stopped making games like OverWatch in favor of Warcraft cause that game is their bread and butter.

If your paying the fee for one game, then why supply other games? It'll work like the movie industry where they don't care if you liked the movie or not, just that you came to watch it once. Cause statistically you're not going to watch it twice or more. Focus on making impressive trailers than an actual good movie. Blizzard nowadays works that way with World of Warcraft where they want you to grind in the game to continue that monthly fee, rather than making a good game. Hence why WoW's subscription numbers are a secret, cause it's secretly bad.

Broadband isn't the problem but distance. In order for cloud gaming to be bearable, you'd need to be really close to the server. Basically Steam or Sony needs to put a cluster of gaming PC's all over the world within a small distance. Which if you live in the middle of nowhere then good luck with cloud gaming cause much like your ISP, Sony and Valve aren't going to put servers in an area where hardly anyone lives.

Good points and as I say the services we see now are not what I'm talking about. Again the same types of arguments where used in regards to every type of streaming. Why would AAA houses offer up quality anything to streaming and cannibalize their own sales. Well because the streaming revenue can be quite lucrative of course. New titles draw more butts, and make more $$$. If Disney sells the newest Star Wars flick to Netflix to show in a market... they are not getting paid by Netflix the same amount of $ that some B movie flick house is getting. Streaming payments are not going be =. If say Valve goes forward and builds a real streaming service... they will pay say EA a much better royalty per stream then they would a indie getting a handful of streams.

Their are other options to make such a service work... the way I would do it would be to constantly revolve the games offered on the service. AAA game houses know now that the majority of their sales come during their short launch window. So imagine valve offering them a month of streaming 2-3 months after launch for X Royalty per stream... and and steam sale support at the end of the streaming month. Everyone wins in the scenario... gamers get AAA games to stream not long after they release (think of them as month long demos) as part of a Sub, get some nice deals on games they like. Developers get a second source of revenue from streaming (which could help offset losses on the lockbox going bye bye) they get a second sales push (which yes they do now anyway).

I don't see how it doesn't help developers make more money, and customers happy.

Latency I don't think is as big a problem as some people claim or worry. Its an issue but I have played enough MMOs over the years to know that the masses will put up with it. To me I put gamers complaining about input lag ect into the catagory of Gamaphile. (I know that sounds stupid) Average people don't notice really terrible input lag unless its extremely terrible. We'll have to wait and see where it goes I guess. I know in every other media format streaming has come despite the warnings of the Audiphiles, Cinaphiles that the quality is going to suck. They aren't wrong... its just that the masses don't care, they get a ton of crap for a low monthly fee.

 

[ChadD]

The Xbox One X is about equivalent to a GTX 1070. At best, Vega is equivalent to a GTX 1080. And to reach that speed it runs pig rich consuming twice as much power as a GTX 1080 Ti. Not feasable for a console. They would have to undervolt it and underclock it. And then they would lose performance and wind up right back where they started.

As for Vega's untapped potential, that is well possible. But I really think the more likely scenario is that Sony is going to create a new console that is an also-ran and it could turn out to be a big failure for them.

I will also say that if Sony goes with nVidia for the PS5 it will be a critical blow to AMD's graphics division.

You get that an Xbone X at load draws 160-180 watts right ? A 1070 Alone by itself draws 300 watts.

Unless Nvidia has some magic Tegra chip hiding somewhere that offers ARM performance on par with a Ryzen 3/5... and manages some physics busting miracle of also incorporating 1070 performance at 1/3 of a real 1070s power envelope. They simply don't have anything to offer Sony.

For the record NO the xbone x is not = to a 1070. Unless Nvidia has already pulled off that 1/3 power reduction miracle and have simply held it for MS. If AMD can put 1070 level performance into a APU for Sony for PS5 yes its a massive step forward.

 

[SickBeast]

You get that an Xbone X at load draws 160-180 watts right ? A 1070 Alone by itself draws 300 watts.

Unless Nvidia has some magic Tegra chip hiding somewhere that offers ARM performance on par with a Ryzen 3/5... and manages some physics busting miracle of also incorporating 1070 performance at 1/3 of a real 1070s power envelope. They simply don't have anything to offer Sony.

For the record NO the xbone x is not = to a 1070. Unless Nvidia has already pulled off that 1/3 power reduction miracle and have simply held it for MS. If AMD can put 1070 level performance into a APU for Sony for PS5 yes its a massive step forward.

It's not really that simple to compare the console and PC GPUs like that. Sure, the PS4 Pro GPU is essentially an underclocked RX480 (same as an RX580 really), but you need to keep in mind that the API overhead on the consoles is *much* lower compared to the PC to the point that I would say that the PS4 Pro is actually more powerful than a full blown RX580 on the PC. You say the Xbox One X is equivalent to an RX580 but it's not. The PS4 Pro is equivalent to the RX580. The Xbox One X is more powerful. It can actually run some games at native 4k resolution whereas the PS4 Pro relies on upscaling. Again, sure, the Xbox One X is not a true full blown Vega chip but it does run games comparable to how a desktop PC with a GTX 1070 would.

A GTX 1070 does not draw 300 watts. In fact I have two GTX 1080 Ti cards along with a Coffee Lake 8700K all running full blast on a 1000w PSU with headroom to spare. That's with both GPUs overclocked to 2000mhz core speed and +700mhz on the memory. My CPU is overclocked to 4.8ghz. I'm sure I could easily underclock one of my GTX 1070 cards to consume around 100 watts. It would be trivial. And it would blow away anything AMD makes from a performance-per-watt standpoint.

You tell me I should read more stuff at [H] to know stuff but quite frankly some of the stuff you are saying is inaccurate. I love [H] but it is far from the only place I get my information from. And quite frankly I recommend you get your information from a variety of sources.

 

[ChadD]

Xbone X is not running a vega.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11992/the-xbox-one-x-review/6
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11987/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-ti-founders-edition-review/15

I didn't word that exactly right I should have said an Xbone X uses around 160-180 watts as a system. A PC with a 1070 in it draws around 300. That is why Sony / MS / Nintendo are never ever going to go back to using a CPU + GPU. APU need only apply... which makes this entire conversation pointless. Nvidia doesn't have a high enough performance APU to be in the game. And are not in the span of a year going to design a new tegra chip that some how manages to triple their current SOC performance, which is about what they would have to do to simply = a Ryzen/Vega APU.

Nvidia simply doesn't offer, or have anything in the works that would fit the bill.

 

[DukenukemX]

Just explain to me one thing. How is the Playstation 5 going to be "better" than the current Xbox One X if it's also going to use a Vega GPU?

By the time the Xbox Two is out or the PS5, then something like Vega 64 or 1080Ti performance is likely. It's not like AMD is sitting on their asses doing nothing, there are faster GPU's coming. More likely the new mid range GPU from AMD will perform like a Vega 64 or 1080, which is still enough of an upgrade over the Xbox One. The Xbox One X should have never been made.

Perhaps you haven't seen that the Xbox One X isn't selling well. You mean to tell me that Sony's going to essentially release the same thing under their own brand and expect it to do better? How and why exactly? Because it has a Ryzen CPU instead of Jaguar? LOL.

I don't expect the PS5 or the Xbox Two to do any better. Next generation hardware is very hard to sell. You have to give people a very good reason to upgrad anything, like Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey.

 

[SickBeast]

By the time the Xbox Two is out or the PS5, then something like Vega 64 or 1080Ti performance is likely. It's not like AMD is sitting on their asses doing nothing, there are faster GPU's coming. More likely the new mid range GPU from AMD will perform like a Vega 64 or 1080, which is still enough of an upgrade over the Xbox One. The Xbox One X should have never been made.

I don't expect the PS5 or the Xbox Two to do any better. Next generation hardware is very hard to sell. You have to give people a very good reason to upgrad anything, like Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey.

Have you not seen AMD's GPU roadmaps? They have nothing coming down the pipe. Absolutely nothing. Not only that but their top GPU designer has left the company. Do you remember the Bulldozer CPU? AMD kept rehashing and rehashing it year after year. I'm going to say that went on for five years or so. The same thing is going to happen with Vega, just perhaps not quite as extreme. It is going to be a *long* time before we see a true next generation GPU from AMD. If we even see one at all. And like I keep telling you guys, Vega is just not good enough. And it's the best AMD has got both now and for the foreseeable future.

Signs are pointing toward Intel releasing a discreet GPU in the new year. AMD's graphics division is toast.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

A couple of things, sorry for not quoting directly:

HBM is absolutely possible for a console SOC- it only hurts Vega because of Vega's size, otherwise it's not that hard to do, and it's perfect for consoles, except with respect to latency. Possible solutions to HBM latency could be to include lower-latency DRAM on package or hooked up externally, an evolution to HBM to address latency with respect to the CPU, extra cache for the CPU, etc.

On Vega- the architecture is absolutely less efficient for gaming than it could be. This is very likely on purpose on AMD's part, in order to keep their compute appeal, but it does limit Vega's portability. AMD would likely design a 'skinnier' architecture that includes only what games- or even only what console games- need. Doing so well could put them in Nvidia's ballpark with respect to gaming efficiency.

On Ryzen vs. Arm- Arm could certainly be fast enough but the only company to really put some grunt behind it is Apple, who is unlikely to share. I believe that Nvidia could produce an Arm CPU befitting a next-generation console but the benefits over what would likely be a less expensive and otherwise likely faster AMD CPU that also supports far less complicated backward compatibility are basically nil.

 

[Neo_East]

I fully expect next-gen consoles to use custom ARM CPU's. You could go on a very long time explaining why ARM instead of Ryzen.

Ryzen is a premium AMD I.P. that neither Microsoft or Sony have any interest promoting or investing in. Ryzen is a PC/server architecture that is 'over-core' (too much core/wasted complex silicon) for a console. The most a Ryzen advocate could hope for is a custom cut-down Ryzen core, and, at that point, why bother? Did XBOX One X use Ryzen as heavily speculated?.. Ryzen compared to ARM is going to have lower performance *per watt* and *per mm2* while having lower yields due to x86 vs ARM architecture complexity. ARM by its nature is a high volume design which is what console makers want. Remember console makers design for lowest cost of targeted performance and not highest performance.

AMD has K12 as an ARM option and NVIDIA Carmel/Denver derivative. Secondly, the ARM CPU's in next-gen consoles are likely to be HMP's (heterogeneous multiprocessors), a mixture of a 'super' core, like K12/Carmel2 (for single threaded performance), and a 'big' core like A75 7nm successor (for multithreading), and perhaps 'Little' OS cores, and even a dedicated proprietary AI accelerator.

In any case, if you are thinking 'Ryzen' for next-gen consoles you are stuck in an old design paradigm. (For further examination read Eurogamer's explanation of X1X CPU design approach of using custom Jaguar while offloading draw calls to Command Processor in GPU w/ baked in DX12. Putting Ryzen cores is the opposite of this design approach, when in reality you will see an expansion of CPU/GPU integration next-gen).

Just look at the big picture for ARM and understand the eventual convergence of PC/server with the annuals billions of mobile and explosion of billions of IoT devices. Factor Apple's Project Kalamata (Mac x86 to ARM conversion) and Microsoft's Windows on ARM, ARM servers, and ARM IoT Azure Edge initiatives as evidence of the ARM ISA expansion those ahead of the tech curve clearly understand (despite the ignorant media narratives). Look at Tencent the number one game company by revenue (and owner of EPIC games whom has optimized their engines for ARM) with the number one and two most popular games right now (Fortnite/PUBG) running on ARM architecture. The ARM trend is plainly visible.

 

[misterbobby]

You get that an Xbone X at load draws 160-180 watts right ? A 1070 Alone by itself draws 300 watts.

That part of your comment alone shows there's no reason to read anything else you have to say.

 

[ChadD]

That part of your comment alone shows there's no reason to read anything else you have to say.

I corrected myself. lol To many posts in to short a time. The point is still valid. a 1070 or any discrete GPU draws far to much power for a console at this point.

 

[ChadD]

Signs are pointing toward Intel releasing a discreet GPU in the new year. AMD's graphics division is toast.

Exactly there is actually a better chance of Intel supplying the CPU and GPU of a Sony or MS console then Nvidia. As long as Sony is willing to wait 3-4 years anyway... cause Intel isn't going to have working in house tech for a good year never mind tapping one out and getting it ready to build a custom console part. Nvidia has burned MS in the past... and Sony is no fan either. The truth is for the GPU makers the consoles are not a huge money maker. AMD is making money on it but its hardly some gold mine that NV and Intel covet.

In any event dude you really hate AMD for some reason. lol

https://images.anandtech.com/doci/12233/gpu_to_2020_575px.jpg
https://hothardware.com/ContentImages/NewsItem/44159/content/amd_navi_slide.jpg

AMD has leap frogging design teams... Navi is the Vega follow up designed by a completely different team. I would imagine that gives them plenty of time to replace the turn coats that ran to Intel to deal with the generation after Navi.

 

[Brian_B]

Nvidia will never supply a GPU for a x86 based console. Consoles are expensive enough to manufacturer without having to include a CPU and a discrete GPU. The only way Nvidia gets back into a Playstation is if Sony switches to ARM.

Well. I wouldn't say ~never~. I would say it's unlikely though. It has been done in the past. The first Xbox was an Intel CPU with a GeForce GPU, after all.

 

[ChadD]

Well. I wouldn't say ~never~. I would say it's unlikely though. It has been done in the past. The first Xbox was an Intel CPU with a GeForce GPU, after all.

Yep and MS ended up suing NV over the whole deal... it ended up in arbitration. I don't think MS is going to forget that history. Sony had the same types of issues with their NV PS3 parts. NV name is mud in regards to working with other companies. MS Sony Intel they all have a pretty strong hate for NV.

 

[SickBeast]

Exactly there is actually a better chance of Intel supplying the CPU and GPU of a Sony or MS console then Nvidia. As long as Sony is willing to wait 3-4 years anyway... cause Intel isn't going to have working in house tech for a good year never mind tapping one out and getting it ready to build a custom console part. Nvidia has burned MS in the past... and Sony is no fan either. The truth is for the GPU makers the consoles are not a huge money maker. AMD is making money on it but its hardly some gold mine that NV and Intel covet.

In any event dude you really hate AMD for some reason. lol

https://images.anandtech.com/doci/12233/gpu_to_2020_575px.jpg
https://hothardware.com/ContentImages/NewsItem/44159/content/amd_navi_slide.jpg

AMD has leap frogging design teams... Navi is the Vega follow up designed by a completely different team. I would imagine that gives them plenty of time to replace the turn coats that ran to Intel to deal with the generation after Navi.

Nope. You have not been following things properly. Navi is Vega 2.0. Not a redesign. It could even be a straight node shrink. After that who knows. Sony can't afford to wait for the next design from AMD after Navi.

I don't hate AMD. I'm simply realistic. And I don't drink their Kool-Aid that can be found on various hardware websites and forums. Buying into any sort of AMD hype is a recipe for disappointment. I've probably been at this game for far longer than you have. Perhaps longer than you have been alive for.

 

[ChadD]

Nope. You have not been following things properly. Navi is Vega 2.0. Not a redesign. It could even be a straight node shrink. After that who knows. Sony can't afford to wait for the next design from AMD after Navi.

I don't hate AMD. I'm simply realistic. And I don't drink their Kool-Aid that can be found on various hardware websites and forums. Buying into any sort of AMD hype is a recipe for disappointment. I've probably been at this game for far longer than you have. Perhaps longer than you have been alive for.

Yes sonny its clear which colour the koolaid is in your cup. lol

 

[SickBeast]

Yes sonny its clear which colour the koolaid is in your cup. lol

Say that if you want. At least what I am saying is factually accurate. I can't say the same about what you have been posting. Yet you call me biased. LOL.

 

[Nobu]

So as not to repeat the same argument for another two pages...
* Nvidia is great! But they aren't doing custom chips = probably not going to happen.
* AMD is okay! But they don't have anything better than what's already out that doesn't consume loads of electricity = possible...
* nvidia/tegra is...maybe an alternative to AMD. But it's not x86, and probably won't be significantly better than AMD = unlikely, imho.

Here's my branch prediction:
1) sony makes a semi-custom chip based off of current best midrange from AMD, possibly shrunk and/or with extra bits thrown in, or a high-end part with reduced clocks and aforementioned mods.
2) sony waits for a new part from AMD/NV and releases nothing, riding on current sales, possibly commissions AMD for a lower power part for another ps4 respin.
3) ...I had a third idea, but can't think of it anymore. Maybe got combined with 1 or 2 above.

I don't see them abandoning x86 at this point, although I wouldn't put it past them. If they were going to use nvidia hardware, particularly if it was tegra based, we'd probably be seeing patches to the nvidia tegra drivers (they're all open, unlike their other 3d drivers). We're not, so I doubt that's in the future.

 

[Brian_B]

Nope. You have not been following things properly. Navi is Vega 2.0. Not a redesign. It could even be a straight node shrink. After that who knows. Sony can't afford to wait for the next design from AMD after Navi.

Why can't Sony afford to wait?

XBX1 may be faster, but it's not exactly flying off the shelves or threatening Sony. Switch is more or less a different weight class, and not competing for the same market. If I were Sony, I wouldn't be in a rush to push anything out before I was ready. Microsoft is in a very poor position right now. It's not impossible to dig out of, Sony was in almost the exact same situation with the PS3, after all. All it took was time for Sony to turn around cost control on the hardware, and get to a point where it was back to strong developer support.

The biggest issue with current gen hardware isn't the hardware. It's all in developer support. Sony has it, Microsoft doesn't, and that's a good part of what is driving the current delta between the consoles. MS shot itself in the foot off the beginning with the higher price/Kinect/slightly slower specs, so it had an uphill race to win at the beginning. Now it has faster hardware and competitive price, but it doesn't matter that much because it doesn't have developer chain to provide the games.

Sony has strong developer support, a strong suite of first and third party titles lined up, and the best exclusives lineup (short of Nintendo). If it were me, I would keep the hardware R&D engine running right now, because you don't want to be caught flat footed, but I wouldn't push new hardware out until the Devs start pushing for it, sales of your existing platforms have started to stagnate or decline, and you have a good financial plan to support the migration/backwards compatibility/etc for your users.

 

[SickBeast]

Why can't Sony afford to wait?

XBX1 may be faster, but it's not exactly flying off the shelves or threatening Sony. Switch is more or less a different weight class, and not competing for the same market. If I were Sony, I wouldn't be in a rush to push anything out before I was ready. Microsoft is in a very poor position right now. It's not impossible to dig out of, Sony was in almost the exact same situation with the PS3, after all. All it took was time for Sony to turn around cost control on the hardware, and get to a point where it was back to strong developer support.

The biggest issue with current gen hardware isn't the hardware. It's all in developer support. Sony has it, Microsoft doesn't, and that's a good part of what is driving the current delta between the consoles. MS shot itself in the foot off the beginning with the higher price/Kinect/slightly slower specs, so it had an uphill race to win at the beginning. Now it has faster hardware and competitive price, but it doesn't matter that much because it doesn't have developer chain to provide the games.

Sony has strong developer support, a strong suite of first and third party titles lined up, and the best exclusives lineup (short of Nintendo). If it were me, I would keep the hardware R&D engine running right now, because you don't want to be caught flat footed, but I wouldn't push new hardware out until the Devs start pushing for it, sales of your existing platforms have started to stagnate or decline, and you have a good financial plan to support the migration/backwards compatibility/etc for your users.

Well first of all, Vega was delayed for well over a year. So even if AMD is saying early 2018 for Navi, I would say early 2019 is a safer and more reasonable estimate. So when is the next architecture after Navi coming out? 2020? Does it even have a name? And should we bank on a 2021 release due to delays? I really don't think Sony can wait that long. Perhaps they can. But really waiting on a new from the ground up architecture from AMD when their lead chip designer just left them seems extremely risky to me. Perhaps it would pay off. But perhaps not. You are right though. They are currently in a very good position.

 

[ChadD]

Good points. Sony doesn't have to rush to PS5, they are not behind and no one is all that close in the rear view.

MS isn't likely to even have a follow up to Xbone One. There is a good chance that they finally make their exit from the console space. They have had to hide their sales numbers and Xbox operating losses for years now (since 2015) to keep shareholders from demanding they drop xbox. I don't see that continuing forever, something has to give. MS has to have sales they can actually talk about directly or exit. Shareholders won't accept, we are using a different "key metric for success.” forever.

So ya Sony has no need to rush out a new console. That they are simply keeping their libraries up to date with the Ryzen code fixes is very plausible.

 

[SickBeast]

Good points. Sony doesn't have to rush to PS5, they are not behind and no one is all that close in the rear view.

MS isn't likely to even have a follow up to Xbone One. There is a good chance that they finally make their exit from the console space. They have had to hide their sales numbers and Xbox operating losses for years now (since 2015) to keep shareholders from demanding they drop xbox. I don't see that continuing forever, something has to give. MS has to have sales they can actually talk about directly or exit. Shareholders won't accept, we are using a different "key metric for success.” forever.

So ya Sony has no need to rush out a new console. That they are simply keeping their libraries up to date with the Ryzen code fixes is very plausible.

While it is possible Microsoft could leave the console space completely, you are forgetting the fact that MS *needs* their gaming consoles in order to be able to force DirectX onto us and remain relevant. Without the Xbox consoles there is a much greater chance that an alternate API such as Mantle, Vulkan, or OpenGL could take over. If that happens Microsoft is screwed. Linux could take over.

 

[Nobu]

While it is possible Microsoft could leave the console space completely, you are forgetting the fact that MS *needs* their gaming consoles in order to be able to force DirectX onto us and remain relevant. Without the Xbox consoles there is a much greater chance that an alternate API such as Mantle, Vulkan, or OpenGL. If that happens Microsoft is screwed. Linux could take over.

Mantle is dead, but otherwise mostly yeah, this. MS wouldn't be screwed, imo (they could push windows PCs as xbone replacements, a la steam machines), but it does make DX as a cross-platform api less meaningful.

 

[ManofGod]

Good points. Sony doesn't have to rush to PS5, they are not behind and no one is all that close in the rear view.

MS isn't likely to even have a follow up to Xbone One. There is a good chance that they finally make their exit from the console space. They have had to hide their sales numbers and Xbox operating losses for years now (since 2015) to keep shareholders from demanding they drop xbox. I don't see that continuing forever, something has to give. MS has to have sales they can actually talk about directly or exit. Shareholders won't accept, we are using a different "key metric for success.” forever.

So ya Sony has no need to rush out a new console. That they are simply keeping their libraries up to date with the Ryzen code fixes is very plausible.

Microsoft is not leaving the console space, despite what you wants and desires might be, LOL! Yes dude, there will be a console after the One X and yes, it will not be a streaming console. In fact, every prediction I have seen you make for Microsoft is straight up wrong. No dude, the shareholders are not demanding they drop the Xbox and no, there is no Xbox operating losses being hidden, despite your desperate wishes to the contrary. Good thing your not a prophet, you would be an obvious false one.

Edit: They are profitable in the console space, deal with it.....

 

[ChadD]

While it is possible Microsoft could leave the console space completely, you are forgetting the fact that MS *needs* their gaming consoles in order to be able to force DirectX onto us and remain relevant. Without the Xbox consoles there is a much greater chance that an alternate API such as Mantle, Vulkan, or OpenGL could take over. If that happens Microsoft is screwed. Linux could take over.

Well nice that you have noticed. Yes long term MS gaming has no future. Vulcan which unifies the mobile and pc landscape will take over no doubt... yes at some point Linux will take over. That however is hardly the end of MS or Windows... MS has been planting the seeds for eventually turning Windows into a Linux powered DE for awhile. I mean but still it will happen. lol

 

[SickBeast]

Well nice that you have noticed. Yes long term MS gaming has no future. Vulcan which unifies the mobile and pc landscape will take over no doubt... yes at some point Linux will take over. That however is hardly the end of MS or Windows... MS has been planting the seeds for eventually turning Windows into a Linux powered DE for awhile. I mean but still it will happen. lol

Eh dude I have to say it's pretty frustrating that you continuously talk down to me on here while repeatedly showing that you're just not that knowledgeable. I have to say, if you're going to correct someone, get it right. You have done this multiple times.

 

[ChadD]

Microsoft is not leaving the console space, despite what you wants and desires might be, LOL! Yes dude, there will be a console after the One X and yes, it will not be a streaming console. In fact, every prediction I have seen you make for Microsoft is straight up wrong. No dude, the shareholders are not demanding they drop the Xbox and no, there is no Xbox operating losses being hidden, despite your desperate wishes to the contrary. Good thing your not a prophet, you would be an obvious false one.

Edit: They are profitable in the console space, deal with it.....

If they where profitable they would be singing that from the mountain tops. They are not and haven't been since 2015 when they where showing losses.

They rolled Xbox sales numbers into other business units. Its a trick employed by plenty of large Corps to hide losses on pet projects. Yes shareholders have been questioning the Xbox division pretty much since day one.

We'll see if they ever follow up one x. If they can keep hiding the losses perhaps, guess it depends if their advertising sales continue to grow. MS doesn't report xbox numbers profit or loss... but bundle into their "more computing" reporting unit which includes ad sales, surface sales, and corporate windows licences. Sounds legit I'm sure they aren't hiding anything. /s

 

[ChadD]

Eh dude I have to say it's pretty frustrating that you continuously talk down to me on here while repeatedly showing that you're just not that knowledgeable. I have to say, if you're going to correct someone, get it right. You have done this multiple times.

Don't mean to talk down to you. I just thought it was plainly obvious to everyone that DX has stalled. Unless MS does something drastic like open sourcing a fantastic DX 13 or something. (still not sure what it would offer over Vulcan).

Sony never adopted DX thankfully... between that and the growth of DX less mobile gaming. MS has not been able to lock the gaming industry down all that tightly.

 

[dragonstongue]

Seems logical. I would imagine this could well be the last console generation to sport big power chewing CPUs and GPUs, before the game streaming boxes and services take over in the mid 20s. So hopefully whatever they pack into the PS5 will be beefy enough to stick around for 5-6 years.

Big power hungry cpu and gpu current generation...lol, what?

if you look at the raw potency of what they are able to do vs the amount of power/heat they generate they are actually VERY good compared to their previous generation (ps3/xbox 360) the die shrunk versions (slim, arcade whatever you wanted to call them) got power/heat at much more reasonable levels (~105w peak), but if you factor in the raw performance advantage which is in the range of 4.5-25x more potent even at this "higher wattage" still they really are not using "all that much" in watts compared to what the "new generation" is capable of.

(say 200w for the "worst" first run which was xbox one, raw specs taken into account is VERY power efficient in comparison..current models are ~60w more vs 7th gen (averaged out) and likely given time with further shrinks or whatever might be in the range of ~40w more with far far more potency available to them compared to the best that "old" 7th generation were capable of)

Take that how you will..Jaguar might be seen as "is not that good and uses lots pof power for nothing, and that cusom Radeon 7770/7830-50 suck back SOO MUCH POWER" but at least they are able to do many things the previous generation COULD NOT, and they are not using 5-10x more power to do so either (~180w at peak for the worst review I seen for PS4 or Xbox1 for initial release information, both of which have since had revisions made to increase performance, reduce idle power use etc)

anyways, point is, even if they were able to draw the maximum that the xbox 360 PSU could deliver (280w continous) or for that matter PS4/Xbox1 are able to "dish out" are still very small in comparison to what a full blown high end L33T gaming rig will chew through right? HAHAHA

 

[dragonstongue]

Don't mean to talk down to you. I just thought it was plainly obvious to everyone that DX has stalled. Unless MS does something drastic like open sourcing a fantastic DX 13 or something. (still not sure what it would offer over Vulcan).

Sony never adopted DX thankfully... between that and the growth of DX less mobile gaming. MS has not been able to lock the gaming industry down all that tightly.

If it was not for AMD we would not know what Vulkan is, and some of what DX12 is, like DX 10 before it is also in no small part thanks to AMD giving info to MSFT directly to get their designs into DX (tessellation as a pure example was AMD way back in x2xxx days but MSFT caved to Nvidia pressure to make AMD go back to drawing board and let Nv "emulate it" instead).yes MSFT "boiled it in" to DX 12 and likely will go even further with DX13, who knows at this point right ^.^

I personally hope they put a heavy foot down on everyone who wants DX "official seal" so there is not more version level 1 2 3, part A B C or that type of BS, you either fully support it, or you do not, so someone like Ngredia can stop saying "full support" when a good chunk of its "features" they are instead emulating, mo more tricks to make sales damnit LOL

 

[dragonstongue]

I wonder if they ever will make them "capable" like a standard PC is, to use word processing, media encoding etc, seems that even though PS4/Xbox1 can do quite a bit, there is a very distinct difference of what they CANNOT do vs what they can.

MSFT especially always touted their Xbox to be "media centered" they seem to hit and miss every generation in this "everything console" especially as MSFT wants to upsell almost everything on their windows store for Win 10...I want to be able to take notes, write a book etc etc on my console ^.^

 

[DukenukemX]

Have you not seen AMD's GPU roadmaps? They have nothing coming down the pipe. Absolutely nothing. Not only that but their top GPU designer has left the company.

What about Navi? Also Raja Koduri didn't always work for ATI/AMD. For about 4 years he actually worked for Apple between 2009 and 2013. In 2012 AMD released the Radeon HD 7000 series which was a really good generation of GPU's. Pretty sure he's not the only one working on GPU technology at AMD.

Do you remember the Bulldozer CPU? AMD kept rehashing and rehashing it year after year. I'm going to say that went on for five years or so. The same thing is going to happen with Vega, just perhaps not quite as extreme. It is going to be a *long* time before we see a true next generation GPU from AMD. If we even see one at all. And like I keep telling you guys, Vega is just not good enough. And it's the best AMD has got both now and for the foreseeable future.

This is actually what companies usually do. Intel and Nvidia do this as well. They make a new huge leap in their product and then tweak it for around 5 years. Nvidia's Pascal is just a tweaked Maxwell, and Intel's Core i series has been around since 2010. Business as usually, move along.

Signs are pointing toward Intel releasing a discreet GPU in the new year. AMD's graphics division is toast.

Having a 3rd competitor in the industry is not a bad thing. Let AMD vs Intel vs Nvidia fight each other for our money. That's how true capitalism works.

 

[SickBeast]

Navi is not a redesign. It is Vega 2.0. It could even be a simple node shrink.

 

[DukenukemX]

On Vega- the architecture is absolutely less efficient for gaming than it could be. This is very likely on purpose on AMD's part, in order to keep their compute appeal, but it does limit Vega's portability. AMD would likely design a 'skinnier' architecture that includes only what games- or even only what console games- need. Doing so well could put them in Nvidia's ballpark with respect to gaming efficiency.

Keep in mind that if we do go the route of Ray-Tracing then wouldn't AMD's GPU with higher compute power do better than Nvidia?

I fully expect next-gen consoles to use custom ARM CPU's. You could go on a very long time explaining why ARM instead of Ryzen.

Ryzen is a premium AMD I.P. that neither Microsoft or Sony have any interest promoting or investing in. Ryzen is a PC/server architecture that is 'over-core' (too much core/wasted complex silicon) for a console. The most a Ryzen advocate could hope for is a custom cut-down Ryzen core, and, at that point, why bother? Did XBOX One X use Ryzen as heavily speculated?.. Ryzen compared to ARM is going to have lower performance *per watt* and *per mm2* while having lower yields due to x86 vs ARM architecture complexity. ARM by its nature is a high volume design which is what console makers want. Remember console makers design for lowest cost of targeted performance and not highest performance.

So far nobody has made a ARM CPU that even comes close to what Intel or AMD has with x86. Its been tested to death, and it turns out the higher performing Intel CPU's tend to do a lot better per watt than ARM chips. Take a look at this ARM 96 core CPU vs Intel/AMD x86. The 96-core Cavium ThunderX is a dual ARM CPU that doesn't come close.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=cavium-thunderx-96core&num=2

Just look at the big picture for ARM and understand the eventual convergence of PC/server with the annuals billions of mobile and explosion of billions of IoT devices. Factor Apple's Project Kalamata (Mac x86 to ARM conversion) and Microsoft's Windows on ARM, ARM servers, and ARM IoT Azure Edge initiatives as evidence of the ARM ISA expansion those ahead of the tech curve clearly understand (despite the ignorant media narratives). Look at Tencent the number one game company by revenue (and owner of EPIC games whom has optimized their engines for ARM) with the number one and two most popular games right now (Fortnite/PUBG) running on ARM architecture. The ARM trend is plainly visible.

ARM isn't there yet when it comes to replacing x86. And it isn't Nvidia or anyone else that'll make a x86 replacement except ARM themselves. Even Linus Torvalds doesn't like how ARM is currently handled.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/312...neer-linus-torvalds-prefers-x86-over-arm.html