NGGP: NextGen Garbage Pile (aka: No one reads the topics or stays on topic) *spawn*

[Averagejoe]

you call it magic
I call it CPU




your fantasy become fact? when?
you nor me,know what will be used for what, so those statement are only personal assumption

Orbis has one of those to you know and is 8 cores as well,and is not rumor to have 2 separated cores for OS like Durango is rumored to.

How is what he is saying fantasy.?

Orbis has 14 CU Durango has 12CU,anything done on those extra 4CU orbis units has Durando would have to pull resources from somewhere to replicate.

What you are trying to say is that things will have cost on Orbis while on Durango everything will be magically free of penalty.

I already told you this is simple math,Orbis has more CU,double the ROP's faster memory,same CPU..

This ^^ scenario i would call it the same if it was on Durango's favor.

 

[Averagejoe]

The secret sauce is there, but it is invisible or tasteless if the reader don't appreciate it.

It was over sold as something game changing and that would close the 600Gflops gap.

It will really help Durango with bandwidth but it will not make out for the hardware disparity.

 

[TheChefO]

The business people said "What if we had released 360 in 2007 on a smaller process and saved the billion dollars?

Well they'd be facing a competitor with an entrenched support from 3rd party devs, plenty of defacto exclusives, and a 10+million lead in install base.

Ms making decisions as if they were in a vacuum I believe is part of the problem...

Perhaps they bet that Sony would be bankrupt by now? If so, whoops!

 

[patsu]

The differences will likely be noticeable -- even by laypeople -- when the developers ('specially first parties) focus on the devices' strengths. Whether the games provoke more emotion, engage the users at a deeper level, or play better is another question that is also developer related. IMHO, this is a case of the more things change, the more things stay the same. It's about the developers and their attributes as usual.

Whether people will be attracted to the new platforms ? It depends on the total package and price. I'm still waiting for my GT6 on arbitrary Internet map game.

 

[Averagejoe]

I think the point is that worst case scenario is not a factor of 400%. The idea that you would go from 1080p 60 to 720p 30 is not what the specs show. 12 cu Durango vs 18 cu, with similar cpus. A 1080p 60fps game on Orbis is more likely to run 1080p 40fps on Durango. Give or take. The whole argument that the difference will be noticeable to the general public is not well founded. You are worried about 6-8 times increase not being enough to notice yet 33% is going to make or break the system? If the Xbox 360 was 33% faster then it is right now would that actually have made a difference 8 years out? These new systems would still be 6-8 times faster then an uber super unbelievable spec'd 360 at launch! Or pretend the 360 was released in its current form in 2007. It is 2013 now.. that would still have been a 6 year life with very conservative specs for 2007.

Smaller, quieter is definitely important. No one is buying large towers anymore so there will be little forgiveness for a large bulky console. The business people said "What if we had released 360 in 2007 on a smaller process and saved the billion dollars? There is hugely diminishing returns to being at the extreme edge of the technology curve. Pretty simple I think.

That is basically the difference between the 7770 and the 7850 about 20FPS.

But i didn't want to use it as example because that is on PC,and these consoles will work differently.

 

[Pugger]

That is basically the difference between the 7770 and the 7850 about 20FPS.

But i didn't want to use it as example because that is on PC,and these consoles will work differently.

Orbis should have higher frame rates if the leaks are correct, but graphically I think they will be very similar. It will be interesting to see the differences in physics etc though

 

[anexanhume]

Orbis should have higher frame rates if the leaks are correct, but graphically I think they will be very similar. It will be interesting to see the differences in physics etc though

Do we think multi-plats will simply be frame optimized for Durango and then left on Orbis to run at a higher rate with identical visuals? Seems kind of cheap.

 

[mrcorbo]

Well honestly I don't think that you can "count" (in both cases) that way.
I don't think that either system are all the time "Bandwidth bound", you have to take in account compression and the compression ratio, etc.

I think like for the aggregate bandwidth figures in the ps3 and 360 those figures are going to be discussed for eons

I intentionally kept it simple. Mostly because complicating it would have required exceeding my own level of understanding.

The whole reason I engaged in the exercise is that I knew that you couldn't just take the 102GB/s of the EDRAM, add the 68GB/s for the DDR3 and then directly compare the 170GB/s of bandwidth available to the 176GB/s in Orbis. I did think it was possible, though, that if the bandwidth overhead of moving data between the two pools in Durango could be accounted for there might still be enough aggregate bandwidth available to service a 12 CU part. So, I used Orbis's bandwidth to compute relationship as the reference and used it to figure out how much bandwidth Durango should "need" and then figured out how that compared to the total aggregate bandwidth between Durango's two memory pools to see if there was enough bandwidth left over to reasonably allow for data to be moved without compromising the bandwidth available to the compute units. I was actually surprised to find after doing the calculations that the bandwidth difference matched so closely to the amount of data the DMEs are specced to move.

I believe that there's something to the direct relationship between these numbers. It could just be a coincidence, but it all fits so nicely. I don't believe that memory bandwidth is going to be an issue for Durango.

 

[dobwal]

Do we think multi-plats will simply be frame optimized for Durango and then left on Orbis to run at a higher rate with identical visuals? Seems kind of cheap.

Yep. However, developers and publishers love cheap. Even if the Orbis was 20X as powerful it would never regularly produced ports that would mirror that difference. There would be a very noticeable difference but outside of a few that would want to push a 20X Orbis, everyone else would use cheap and easy techniques to produce that IQ gap.

 

[(((interference)))]

from what we know, we have 14 CU on orbis for graphic balanced work and 4 for other task that could give only marginal help for graphics

No, you're getting it wrong, 4 compute CUs can do graphics tasks just as well as the 14 other CUs but have an additional scalar ALU that makes them better suited to compute tasks.

 

[pjbliverpool]

No, you're getting it wrong, 4 compute CUs can do graphics tasks just as well as the 14 other CUs but have an additional scalar ALU that makes them better suited to compute tasks.

Unless I've missed something I thought that theory was debunked by the more experienced developers/engineers here? Or at least deemed highly unlikely

 

[anexanhume]

Unless I've missed something I thought that theory was debunked by the more experienced developers/engineers here? Or at least deemed highly unlikely

The vgleaks article still claims its true. It also says "minor boost if used for rendering."

 

[Scott_Arm]

The vgleaks article still claims its true. It also says "minor boost if used for rendering."

I don't think that it does. That piece is very poorly worded.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

you call it magic
I call it CPU

You're not making any sense in your argument against counting the 4 non-GPU CUs as contributing to what Orbis puts on screen. Ignoring the crazy claim of 720p30 vs. 1080p60, which isn't at all rational as you say, you talk as if those 4 CUs bring nothing to the table and Durango can go toe-to-toe with Orbis. Orbis has more computer resources, ergo will do more work (all things being equal). Of those 4 CUs aren't used for graphics and Orbis's graphics are identical to Durango, they'll be contributing elsewhere. But I expect they'll see a lot fo use in post effects etc. where they are ideal. There's a lot of jumping to conclusions going on, with a single line in a leak or rumour being interpreted to one extreme or other.

Then again, why am I bothering to correct a misunderstanding or unrealistic line of reasoning in this thread where the basis or most reasoning is mostly fictional?

 

[(((interference)))]

Unless I've missed something I thought that theory was debunked by the more experienced developers/engineers here? Or at least deemed highly unlikely

Sorry, yes I might be wrong on that.

I was going by what Proelite said sometime ago when he commented on the DF Orbis article that the extra compute shaders were already part of the 18CUs and had additional scalar ALUs or something.

The newer vgleaks article however has Orbis 'balanced' to use 14 CUs for rendering and 4 for compute, with the 4 for compute only giving a minor boost if used for rendering.

I'm not sure why that's the case though, or even if vgleaks are interpreting the specs properly. (their recent posts have them saying that they'll leave discussion about 'special sauce' to the experts)

If it is true though, it'd explain why people are saying Orbis is only going to have slightly better visuals than Durango.

In other news, apparently two teams with ex-Bizarre devs are working on two launch titles, PGR5 for Xbox and a PGR style game for the PS4. That's going to be competitive! :smile:
http://www.stfuandplay.com/story/co...ts-next-generation-racers-leaked#.URLkzvLTzPX

It also matches with other rumours (such as the Dual Pixels one) and hints and teaser images for PGR5 that surfaced on GAF.

 

[Averagejoe]

Do we think multi-plats will simply be frame optimized for Durango and then left on Orbis to run at a higher rate with identical visuals? Seems kind of cheap.

Only first party games will really show a true difference most 3rd parties are interested in a playable version of the game,so even if Orbis is faster and stronger on multiplatform games the difference will be hard to spot,until latter the generation where the consoles start to show their age and are really push.

Aside from maybe Crytec or Epic which like to push graphics.

 

[Ruskie]

You're not making any sense in your argument against counting the 4 non-GPU CUs as contributing to what Orbis puts on screen. Ignoring the crazy claim of 720p30 vs. 1080p60, which isn't at all rational as you say, you talk as if those 4 CUs bring nothing to the table and Durango can go toe-to-toe with Orbis. Orbis has more computer resources, ergo will do more work (all things being equal). Of those 4 CUs aren't used for graphics and Orbis's graphics are identical to Durango, they'll be contributing elsewhere. But I expect they'll see a lot fo use in post effects etc. where they are ideal. There's a lot of jumping to conclusions going on, with a single line in a leak or rumour being interpreted to one extreme or other.

Then again, why am I bothering to correct a misunderstanding or unrealistic line of reasoning in this thread where the basis or most reasoning is mostly fictional?

32 ROPs also have to be accounted somewhere. I doubt Durango can match Orbis even without 4 CUs helping on graphics tasks, but it remains to be seen.

 

[patsu]

Well... we still have unaccounted compute power for Kinect 2 and PSEye Orbis.

 

[Sonic]

Sorry, yes I might be wrong on that.

I was going by what Proelite said sometime ago when he commented on the DF Orbis article that the extra compute shaders were already part of the 18CUs and had additional scalar ALUs or something.

The newer vgleaks article however has Orbis 'balanced' to use 14 CUs for rendering and 4 for compute, with the 4 for compute only giving a minor boost if used for rendering.

I'm not sure why that's the case though, or even if vgleaks are interpreting the specs properly. (their recent posts have them saying that they'll leave discussion about 'special sauce' to the experts)

If it is true though, it'd explain why people are saying Orbis is only going to have slightly better visuals than Durango.

In other news, apparently two teams with ex-Bizarre devs are working on two launch titles, PGR5 for Xbox and a PGR style game for the PS4. That's going to be competitive! :smile:
http://www.stfuandplay.com/story/co...ts-next-generation-racers-leaked#.URLkzvLTzPX

It also matches with other rumours (such as the Dual Pixels one) and hints and teaser images for PGR5 that surfaced on GAF.

In regards to the 4 CU's only giving a minor boost in graphics, it makes sense. There's more to a GPU than CU's so the impact of having those 4 CU's may not be the greatest. With that being said, it would appear that the 4 CU's are more a replacement for SPE's if anything, let's just hope they are as flexible. It will be additional resources used for computing various tasks that would be too much for the CPU's FPU to do it and thus freeing up those resources for other tasks. They may end up being used for graphical tasks in the end since devs are always finding ways to make the most out of a given (closed system) architecture.

 

[DieH@rd]

Well... we still have unaccounted compute power for Kinect 2 and PSEye Orbis.

Sony should put 28nm CELL in new [mandarory!] PSEye, connect it to PS4 with Thunderbolt, and use some of its processing power to for various PS4 applications.
/runs away