dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7678
share rss forum feed


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to me1212

Re: ps4 specs

said by me1212:

We know what to expect with that cpu. Its a chip made to compete with the intel atom, sure sure 8 cored blah blah, but only does so much. 8 weak cores are still 8 weak cores. Sure the gpu is mid rage but thats all thats midrage about it.

Is it going to be more powerful than the PS3? Um yeah. Is the PS3 considered a good system? Um yeah.


monchis
Premium
join:2002-12-09
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to me1212

It always boggles my mind when people dare to input on something they have not experienced themselves.

There aren't apes working for Sony, there are people making money that most of us will never probably see in our lifetime. These people make big business decisions for the now and the long run. Seems like there are indeed apes buying the product though and going ape shit about it.

I am super excited for the next gen console. Sony has been delivering since PlayStation 1 and in my opinion has yet to fail. I'm not saying they haven't had challenges though.

Whether it meets my needs, I won't know until I own it and most likely I will and use it to is extent. Same with my wiiu and with the next system MS comes out with.
--
dslreports.com


Pesterd

join:2013-01-22

2 recommendations

reply to 88615298

A gaming console doesn't need a 8 core running on 3.0 Ghz, not yet anyway... As others have already said, a gaming console is only running a game with some other minor processes in the background. A PC on the other hand requires much more power to run a resource heavy OS.

Same type of people complaining PS4 doesn't have enough CPU power and the ones who complain BB10 on a dual core is a mistake. Sure android phones are now quad core, but that is a requirement for a top of the line android phone to run smoothly. It hogs all the memory to run. BB10 doesn't need a quad core to run smoothly as it is optimized to require very little power.



gpupower

@anonymouse.org
reply to me1212

Dont need a strong cpu core for this.

-light weight os
-closer to metal programing
-more gpu doing calculations/ direct compute, opencl, tesselation that sort of thing.

cpu will play 2nd fiddle to the gpu.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS

said by gpupower :

Dont need a strong cpu core for this.

-light weight os
-closer to metal programing
-more gpu doing calculations/ direct compute, opencl, tesselation that sort of thing.

cpu will play 2nd fiddle to the gpu.

It already does on the PC too, but that doesn't mean it's irrelevant either, especially for things like AI processing.


Metatron2008
Premium
join:2008-09-02
united state

So much defense for a cpu that probably barely outperforms the ps3 cell.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS

said by Metatron2008:

So much defense for a cpu that probably barely outperforms the ps3 cell.

I'm more worried about under performing graphics to be honest.


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to Metatron2008

said by Metatron2008:

So much defense for a cpu that probably barely outperforms the ps3 cell.

agreed...1.6 Ghz...that shouldn't even be considered for a console....I would imagine a 1.6 Ghz CPU will just be a bottleneck on the GPU anyways...

Pair a decent GPU with a crap CPU will just result in a massive bottleneck....this PS4 will be limited to 30 FPS and no AA or AF sooner rather then later..and then comes the screen tearing...

This CPU is worse then an Intel Atom...its not very good at all...its slower then slow...game engines such as Havok and others still rely heavy on the CPU to perform certain operations, and this 1.6 Ghz CPU will suffer badly in that area.

This CPU isn't even as good as a Phenom II or Even an Athlon II X4 Propus...this CPU just seems terribly underpowered...

I would hope Microsoft has enough sense to put a decent CPU (atleast 2.7-2.9 ghz) in their next console so the CPU isn't a bottleneck on the decent GPU....because that 1.6 Ghz CPU has gotta be a bottleneck...no two ways about it...

me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

I doubt they do, both the wiiu and ps4 have sub par cpus, the bar has been set low. even if MS does, multipalts will still have to take the other consoles cpu in to account and be dumbbed down(cpu-wise) to get working on the other platforms save for pc. I see a generation of "pretty" graphics with not much meat(physics, ai, ect.) behind them a head of us.



Kulldar
Premium
join:2008-11-11
Warren, MI

1 recommendation

reply to Woody79_00

Sony should fire their research and development team and just have all you guys design the console. You obviously know better...



monchis
Premium
join:2002-12-09
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:1
reply to Metatron2008

said by Metatron2008:

So much defense for a cpu that probably barely outperforms the ps3 cell.

Have you not seen game play videos of Watch Dogs and Deep Down?
--
dslreports.com


Silvanos
It's a new Silvanos experience
Premium
join:2002-10-07
Tonawanda, NY
reply to Kulldar

said by Kulldar:

Sony should fire their research and development team and just have all you guys design the console. You obviously know better...


--
Any it new they in one. You here for mine you here.
-JV


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to Kulldar

said by Kulldar:

Sony should fire their research and development team and just have all you guys design the console. You obviously know better...

Thats not what we are saying, as me1212 summed up perfectly, we are in store for a generation of consoles with "pretty" graphics with not much meat(physics, ai, ect.) behind them.

I don't understand how anyone can defend a 1.6 Ghz CPU...a CPU meant for Netbooks and Tablets...AMD didn't design this chip with gaming in mind....there is no way this CPU, even if it is an 8 core, is going to be able to deliver a good generation of games that make heavy use of physics, AI, etc...and that's a big part of the evolution of games. This CPU is about on par with an Intel Atom..its a low power mobile netbook type of CPU, not a gaming CPU

When the Xbox 360 and PS3 came out, at the time of release, they at least had decent CPU and Graphics....but CPU still has some weight in games...pairing a mid-range GPU with a slow processor is a major bottleneck....whats the point? honestly?

And to think Sony is probably going to charge anywhere between 420-499 dollars for this?


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to me1212

said by me1212:

I doubt they do, both the wiiu and ps4 have sub par cpus, the bar has been set low. even if MS does, multipalts will still have to take the other consoles cpu in to account and be dumbbed down(cpu-wise) to get working on the other platforms save for pc. I see a generation of "pretty" graphics with not much meat(physics, ai, ect.) behind them a head of us.

True, but they may put a better CPU in the Xbox 720 for its platform exclusives to take advantage of. It MS uses a better CPU for exclusives, then its exclusives will mop the floor with Sony's in the eye candy and physics department which could make a big difference.

me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Thats a very good point, and one I really REALLY hope comes to fruition so sony can see the errors of its ways. Sadly though with multi-plats being nearly as big a bandwagon as COD right now I fear the xbox may not get many exclusives to take advantage of a better this gen. I do truly hope it happens though.



SRFireside

join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX

From another thread:

PlayStation 3:
Processing Power = 400 GFLOPS.
Total Memory = 256 system + 256 MB graphics = 512 MB
Memory Bandwidth = 22.4 GB/s

PlayStation 4:
Processing Power = 1840 GFLOPS (4.6 Times more powerful than PS3)
Total Memory = 8 GB Unified GDDR5, (16 times more memory)
Memory Bandwidth = 172 GB/s (7.6 Times more bandwidth)


So essentially the PS4 will have many times more processing power, memory and bandwidth than the PS3. Just like the next generation system should be. All this complaining about he CPU is really counter-intuitive, and many people have already stated why.


me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Yeah, except most of that is the gpu, AI and physics are done on the cpu, not gpu. Thata a decent amount of power sure, but its all concentrated in one area, not spread out like it would need to be to use say havok.

Kinda off topic, but for reference a 7970 alone has over 2 times the compute power, at over 4300 GFLOPS.



DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

You guys are saying an 8 core cpu is not capable of running physics in a game? That seems a little ridiculous.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS

said by DataRiker:

You guys are saying an 8 core cpu is not capable of running physics in a game? That seems a little ridiculous.

My cellphone has a quad core....the number of cores is meaningless.


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

4 edits

Let me rephrase then. Are you really claiming this CPU will be inadequate for games?

Game physics is not the same as scientific modeling physics that need to account for molecular interactions and such.

Modeling relatively large objects ( say larger than molecules ) is incredibly simple.

One could try to make an argument for particle debris and such. But honestly I don't thing anybody can tell the difference between a physically accurate model and an estimated model. Seems like a big waste of resources for a very subjective improvement. Furthermore I'm not certain the CPU in question would have any problem doing it anyway.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS

1 edit

said by DataRiker:

One could try to make an argument for particle debris and such. But honestly I don't thing anybody can tell the difference between a physically accurate model and an estimated model. Seems like a big waste of resources for a very subjective improvement. Furthermore I'm not certain the CPU in question would have any problem doing it anyway.

Perhaps not, but the models still require CPU power, and that's still ignoring the significant amount of CPU power that any AI system would use. Remember that a Dual-Core Atom is roughly equivalent to the CPU power of a Prescott P4 3.2 with HT (a little better actually). The CPU Sony wants to use is less powerful than an Atom, which means it's probably on par with the CPU I had in 2006. I would estimate a CPUMark score of no more than 5000, which still puts it well below AMD's own AMD FX-6300. The design and indications given by Sony and AMD (including the statement "allow the designers to effectively parallel process") means they expect programmers to code specifically for this chip, which for a multi-platform release can adversely affect performance.

Here's the architecture of the "Jaguar" core:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/picture/?src=/images/news/2012-09/amd_jaguar_2.jpg

Versus the 2 year old Cedarview Atom



DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

2 edits

said by sk1939:

The design and indications given by Sony and AMD (including the statement "allow the designers to effectively parallel process") means they expect programmers to code specifically for this chip, which for a multi-platform release can adversely affect performance.

This is entirely incorrect. This chip was chosen because it obviously does not have a novel architecture, making it incredibly standard (much like the x-box)

This is ease cross platform development, which was a complaint of the previous generation. Problem was, the bobcat core generally needed more power.

Also, saying that the Jaguar core is inferior to the atom core is completely incorrect. The Bobcat core handily beat the atom, and the Jaguar is a very nice upgrade to Bobcat.

sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS

said by DataRiker:

said by sk1939:

The design and indications given by Sony and AMD (including the statement "allow the designers to effectively parallel process") means they expect programmers to code specifically for this chip, which for a multi-platform release can adversely affect performance.

This is entirely incorrect. This chip was chosen because it obviously does not have a novel architecture, making it incredibly standard (much like the x-box)

This is ease cross platform development, which was a complaint of the previous generation.

I'd dispute that, because there is quite a bit of difference between the chips, even between other AMD solutions, just because of the custom design. Yes it's a standard architecture, however utilization is key. This is a complaint among PC gamers as well (games only utilize so many cores). If the game is only set to utilize 4 cores (to allow easy porting to say, the WiiU) then having 8 would be meaningless, and cuts down significantly on available CPU power.


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

3 edits

This is where you misunderstand the significance of standard.

It can easily be configured to 8 cores with minimal revision and recompilation to go from PC to PS4 and most likely X-box. Which was not possible before.

And given that I would guess the new X-box to have 8 cores minimum, the issue is even more irrelevant.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS

said by DataRiker:

This is where you misunderstand the significance of standard.

It can easily be configured to 8 cores with minimal revision and recompilation to go from PC to PS4 and most likely X-box. Which was not possible before.

And given that I would guess the new X-box to have 8 cores minimum, the issue is even more irrelevant.

Certainly easier now than it used to be, but the question is will they, or will they be lazy (like developers sometimes are) and just code for 4, and that remains to be seen. Trivial perhaps, but irrelevant if they don't.

Perhaps, I think Microsoft is waiting to see the performance of the PS4 before announcing anything though.


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to DataRiker

Its still not enough...that processor is weak beyond weak and it matters....

Lets take the upcoming The Elder Scrolls Online...console gamers will be complaining when Bethesda either can't port the game to console (due to crappy CPU), or ports the game and it has serious issues (because of the CPU)

Early reports indicate TESO is heavily CPU bound, much like WOW....this puny 1.6 Atom type of CPU is not going to be fast enough for the challenge....thats just one of many examples..

if Zenimax is smart..they just skip the consoles all together with TESO just like blizard has WOW...the CPU just isn't enough to run that game...and the console players will whine because this will be the 1st TES since Daggerfall that wasn't on the console (Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim were)

blame Sony for putting a weak CPU in the system why it is doubtful TESO will show up on PS4...but many Sony defenders here will blame Bethesda...



Metatron2008
Premium
join:2008-09-02
united state
reply to DataRiker

said by DataRiker:

said by sk1939:

The design and indications given by Sony and AMD (including the statement "allow the designers to effectively parallel process") means they expect programmers to code specifically for this chip, which for a multi-platform release can adversely affect performance.

This is entirely incorrect. This chip was chosen because it obviously does not have a novel architecture, making it incredibly standard (much like the x-box)

This is ease cross platform development, which was a complaint of the previous generation. Problem was, the bobcat core generally needed more power.

Also, saying that the Jaguar core is inferior to the atom core is completely incorrect. The Bobcat core handily beat the atom, and the Jaguar is a very nice upgrade to Bobcat.

The chip was chosen because AMD is hurting for money and sells their chips for cheap.


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

4 edits
reply to Woody79_00

Jaguar core is nothing like the atom core. ( nor was the bobcat )

Tom's Hardware compared a bobcat with a similar atom/Ion core and the bobcat scored 326.5% better in game performance.

Jaguar will be including a fully modern instruction set up to SSE4.2 (which was first available on i7's).

Particular emphasis was placed on FPU and ALU performance gains, which conventional wisdom would suggest is very good news for gaming. ( it will be 128 bits wide as well )

And given this will be a custom 8 core version, I don't see the need for panic. It will beat the PS3 cell engine by a considerable margin.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS

said by DataRiker:

Jaguar core is nothing like the atom core. ( nor was the bobcat )

Tom's Hardware compared a bobcat with a similar atom/Ion core and the bobcat scored 326.5% better in game performance.

Jaguar will be including a fully modern instruction set up to SSE4.2 (which was first available on i7's).

Particular emphasis was placed on FPU and ALU performance gains, which conventional wisdom would suggest is very good news for gaming. ( it will be 128 bits wide as well )

And given this will be a custom 8 core version, I don't see the need for panic. It will beat the PS3 cell engine by a considerable margin.

Only because of the APU graphics, not in sheer number-crunching ability. Additionally, this is ignoring the issues of heat mentioned in the other thread.


Metatron2008
Premium
join:2008-09-02
united state
reply to DataRiker

said by DataRiker:

Jaguar core is nothing like the atom core. ( nor was the bobcat )

Tom's Hardware compared a bobcat with a similar atom/Ion core and the bobcat scored 326.5% better in game performance.

Jaguar will be including a fully modern instruction set up to SSE4.2 (which was first available on i7's).

Particular emphasis was placed on FPU and ALU performance gains, which conventional wisdom would suggest is very good news for gaming. ( it will be 128 bits wide as well )

And given this will be a custom 8 core version, I don't see the need for panic. It will beat the PS3 cell engine by a considerable margin.

Amd said the same things about bulldozer and pile driver. You really believe amd anymore?

At this point, you must take the past performance numbers and hope amd doesn't make them WORSE.