Post-PS4 announcement and 8GB "surprise": Is Microsoft in time to change something?

[liolio]

Well, several people here can't do simple arithmetic. 104+68 is 98% of 176. 98% is "the same".

The GPU can render to both pools but can it do it simultaneously? I don't know how (modern as GCN) GPU behave while handling say multiple renders targets.

ROPs requires bandwidth.

The 7970 has the same number of ROPs as the 7870 (from which the Orbis GPU seems derived), but it has 72% more bandwidth (higher clocked memory and a 384 vs 256 bit bus) and it's 3dMark Vantage pixel fillrate is 66% higher (13.3 GPixel/s vs 8GPixel/s).

This means the ROPs in 7870 runs at 60% utilization compared with a 7970.

Now Orbis has 22.4 GB/s more bandwidth than a 7870, but it also shares its memory bus with a 8 core CPU.

Cheers

For those searching data on the matter, hardware.fr has interesting charts (as usual ):
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/856-7/performances-theoriques-pixels.html

It shows that the performance indeed tanks, either when using FP16 or with blending.
Still the figures is not as even as you seem to imply, may while blending the GPU could behave the same but there are other situation where the advantage should remain pretty sound (as far as ROPs are concerned).

Devs may pass on FP 16 (on both system if perfs are too low) and rely either on fp10 or a logluv /nAo32 approach.
In which case the PS4 ROPs will perform closer to their peak performances and at a significant advantage.

 

[eastmen]

These threads are so interesting. Sony themselves are saying the ps4's specs are still not finalized ... but 9 month old specs for Microsoft must be set in stone ?

You guys are also assuming that Microsoft is only now going to react to the press conference from yesterday. This assumes that MS hasn't had any idea of what sony has been planning .


The question is what changes have happened to Durango in the last 9 months or even longer and what the final specs will be. We don't know if anyting has change. For example what if the esram was greater than 32MBs but was cut to that size for yields and in the last 9 months as test chips came back from the fab they found no need to cut the esram amount down for yields ? What amount would they be cut down from ? 64MBs some other smaller number ?

What about ddr ram speed ? MS can allways up the speed of the ram without adding much to the power draw of the system. They can even go above speeds released on the pc which from what I can tell is ddr 3 2800 on the pc side.

I'm sure there are other things that they could have also done in the last 9 + months since those specs were written down.


We are getting closer to the actual announcement day for the xbox and we will know soon enough.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Honestly, people, I understand that us geeks are interested in the specs - but believing them to have any effect on the average customer is really stupid.

Even if the PS4 was twice as fast and it could run every multiplatform game at 1080p versus the new Xbox running them at 720p, it would not matter to the majority of the market. They just would not see any difference.

 

[MrFox]

It's a little late to "react". If MS has some secret technology, they will have worked on it for a long time, and will have a similar "surprise" when they announce the 720 in april. (I'm expecting something, but not a miracle that makes it zoom above the PS4)

2133 is the most expensive, top shelf speed for DDR3, for me it's already a surprise that they used it, there's nothing above that unless they go with custom memory, or untested non-standard overclocked memory (impossible to source competitively, because it's non-standard), which is suicide for a mass produced consumer electronics. That would be just wrong.

 

[eastmen]

It's a little late to "react". If MS has some secret technology, they will have worked on it for a long time, and will have a similar "surprise" when they announce the 720 in april. (I'm expecting something, but not a miracle)

2133 is the most expensive, top shelf speed for DDR3, for me it's already a surprise that they used it, there's nothing above that unless they go with custom memory, or untested non-standard overclocked memory (impossible to source competitively, because it's non-standard), which is suicide for a mass produced consumer electronics. That would be just wrong.

Looking at newegg.com you have ddr3 2400(pc3 20800) ddr 3 2666 (pc3 21300) and ddr 3 2800(pc3 22400) ddr 2133 is pc3 17000. So your looking at a decent pump in bandwidth

 

[dobwal]

<off-topic>
Because that's just the cost of the item on the market. It's like asking why BMW M5 is expensive. And no, ordering a large enough bulk order of BMW M5s will not make them cheaper than a Kia Optima.

Sony is going with the highest density and one of if not they fastest speed-bin version of GDDR5 too.
</off-topic>

Agreed. Its expensive because its dram that services a small market. Its not like there is 80 million GBs of GDDR5 in spare capacity laying around. Sony massive presence may temporarily spike gddr5 prices across the board.

The good part is that a year or three GDDr5 will probably be cheaper than if Sony had stuck to ddr3 like MS.

 

[djskribbles]

Honestly, people, I understand that us geeks are interested in the specs - but believing them to have any effect on the average customer is really stupid.

Even if the PS4 was twice as fast and it could run every multiplatform game at 1080p versus the new Xbox running them at 720p, it would not matter to the majority of the market. They just would not see any difference.

I agree somewhat, but I think you're underestimating the importance of the core market. Being the more powerful machine has its advantages. Most people that buy a console on launch or even within the first year or two are core gamers, and most core gamers do care about these things. If one machine can get a sizable lead in the first year, it will only benefit them in the long run; especially a brand like PlayStation that has a strong presence worldwide.

Regardless of what happens with specs, pricing etc., I believe that both MS and Sony will be successful yet again this generation. Maybe I'm biased, but I do feel that Sony has the edge at this point, which is of course very early and things can certainly change.

 

[eastmen]

Agreed. Its expensive because its dram that services a small market. Its not like there is 80 million GBs of GDDR5 in spare capacity laying around. Sony massive presence may temporarily spike gddr5 prices across the board.

The good part is that a year or three GDDr5 will probably be cheaper than if Sony had stuck to ddr3 like MS.

It can also just as likely be even more expensive if the ps4 is the only thing that uses it in 3 years. I don't know whats coming after gddr5 however.

 

[MrFox]

It can also just as likely be even more expensive if the ps4 is the only thing that uses it in 3 years. I don't know whats coming after gddr5 however.

They only need gddr5 until there's a better memory that cost less in two years. There will be "slim" versions in the future, and the SoC will be redesigned to save money and power. Whatever cost less will be used then. On the other hand, 720 is stuck with 68GB/s for the rest of the 10 year life span, while the PS4 will please devs with 176GB/s of unified memory.

Considering how they went with existing x86 and GCN designs, they probably saved half to a billion in silicon design compared to previous gen and even WiiU. It was clever. (or as John Carmack said, it was a wise engineering choice)

 

[eastmen]

They only need gddr5 until there's a better memory that cost less in two years. There will be "slim" versions in the future, and the SoC will be redesigned to save money and power. Whatever cost less will be used then. On the other hand, 720 is stuck with 68GB/s for the rest of the 10 year life span, while the PS4 will please devs with 176GB/s of unified memory.

Considering how they went with existing x86 and GCN designs, they probably saved half to a billion in silicon design compared to previous gen and even WiiU. It was clever. (or as John Carmack said, it was a wise engineering choice)

So they will redesign the ram controller ever design just to use better cheaper ram ?

Why is the ps3 still using xdr ram 6 years later then ?


Oh wait its magical sony, they can change things on the fly , MS can't though

 

[MrFox]

Looking at newegg.com you have ddr3 2400(pc3 20800) ddr 3 2666 (pc3 21300) and ddr 3 2800(pc3 22400) ddr 2133 is pc3 17000. So your looking at a decent pump in bandwidth

What part of "untested non-standard overclocked memory" did you not understand?

 

[MrFox]

So they will redesign the ram controller ever design just to use better cheaper ram ?

Why is the ps3 still using xdr ram 6 years later then ?


Oh wait its magical sony, they can change things on the fly , MS can't though

PS3 is using XDR because it's only 9$ on the BOM. There's no reason to redesign the controller to use something else. Did you think it was still 50$?
MS can use less expensive memory solution in the future, but they can't change the specs of 68GB/s... ever.

 

[dobwal]

It can also just as likely be even more expensive if the ps4 is the only thing that uses it in 3 years. I don't know whats coming after gddr5 however.

Doubt it once you have the production lines paid for, its just a matter of maintenance. And its more likely gddr5 will be pushed towards cheaper gpus which do higher volume in unit sales.

It doesn matter anymore we are in the PC realm where the hardware and software is the most accommodating to different configurations in terms of ram speed, core counts/speed, OS version and a host of different variables. Why do old notions of static hardware still apply. If there is anytime where manufacturers arent as pressured to maintain static hardware its now with PC hardware and x86 OSes.

 

[eastmen]

What part of "untested non-standard overclocked memory" did you not understand?

Doesn't seem to be non standard overclocked memory to me. Nor non standard untested memory. Unless you think the bigger names in memory just grab chips off the shelf and hope they run at a certain clock speed and just send them to customers.

But lets just go to one of the sources shall we ?


http://www.decryptedtech.com/news/m...hips-has-to-wait-for-jdec-for-full-production

The new memory they were working towards was not only DDR3 (up to 3200MHz) but also DDR4
Read more at http://www.decryptedtech.com/news/m...-jdec-for-full-production#Hph1K9GTdOgVXIE4.99

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/23991..._ddr4_2400_ddr4_3200_is_on_its_way/index.html


So faster "official" ram is on its way and could already be in MS's hands. DDR 3 2200 has been around since 2009 most of the producers have already moved on to new micron processes allowing faster clocks at similar or lower power consumption.

These chips run at 1.65 volts which seem to be the same as ddr 3 2133 which range from 1.5 to 1.65

 

[Strange]

<off-topic>
Sony is going with the highest density and one of if not they fastest speed-bin version of GDDR5 too.
</off-topic>

Due to the specified Bandwidth, memory type, as well as the relative high end requirement, there's basically one company with one product that can fit the bill.

Reported 176 GB/s bandwidth@8GB, so we assume 16 4Gb Chips in clamshell mode
Therefore, we divide 176 GB/s by 8 sets of 2 chips to get 22GB/s
22GB/s= 176 Gbps
Divide by 32 pins = requirement 5.5 Gbps chips.

According to Hynix's datasheets
Hynix chips are 7.0, 6.0, 5.5, 5.0, and 4.0 Gbps.
Samsung and Elpida apparantly don't have 4Gb density.

the 5.5 Gbps chips have part number H5GC4H24MFR-T3C, avaliable this year Q1. (unavailable yet I suppose)

To decode the part number here's their guide

Speeds are 2.75 Ghz
Voltages are also on the low end 1.35V/1.35V
Refresh is 32ms, density is 4Gb, organization x32, 16 banks.

 

[Rockster]

I agree somewhat, but I think you're underestimating the importance of the core market. Being the more powerful machine has its advantages. Most people that buy a console on launch or even within the first year or two are core gamers, and most core gamers do care about these things. If one machine can get a sizable lead in the first year, it will only benefit them in the long run; especially a brand like PlayStation that has a strong presence worldwide.

Regardless of what happens with specs, pricing etc., I believe that both MS and Sony will be successful yet again this generation. Maybe I'm biased, but I do feel that Sony has the edge at this point, which is of course very early and things can certainly change.

Fair post but I think you're overestimating the importance of the core market. While I agree "core" gamers are typically your early adopters as they're the only ones "devoted" enough to pay launch premiums. The reality is there just isn't enough of them to make any lead meaningful. It's definitely a new world we are living in and if you are a console platform holder (ie. Sony, MS, Nintendo) and you don't reach a mass market, you'll be out of the console business. There have been a number of dedicated hard core gaming systems (NeoGeo, 3DO, etc.) all failures. I'm not saying Playstation will fail by any stretch, as it should do decent on brand alone.

But clearly, Sony is making a significant hardware investment, both with the console itself, network infrastructure, and online services (in addition to it's worldwide studios, who continue to make great games, but have wholy underdelivered in unit sales for new IP) to BUY BACK marketshare. But the appeal of those investments, for those shown thus far, still target gamers; who would have bought the system anyway whether it had 4GB or ram or 8GB. So it's unclear to me, what exactly are they getting for that money, other than making their base happy. I mean remote play on Vita is cool, but who actually owns them? Still a core gamer feature. As is video sharing, and the like.

If rumors are true about Xbox Next OS reservations, and low power, low cost design; it should be obvious Microsoft is gunning for a much broader audience. And fiscal success breeds longevity (and lots of copy cats). But not necessarily happy core gamers unfortunately. I'm sure I'll own both just because, but I doubt that will have much influence on what everyone else here buys. As much as I'd like to think so, I'm (we) aren't really the trend setters.

Unfortunately, mass media has that honorable mantle to carry, and who knows what cool feature of which system they'll care about, fall in love with, and influence the world to not live without.

 

[gongo]

Honestly, people, I understand that us geeks are interested in the specs - but believing them to have any effect on the average customer is really stupid.

Even if the PS4 was twice as fast and it could run every multiplatform game at 1080p versus the new Xbox running them at 720p, it would not matter to the majority of the market. They just would not see any difference.

I agree...reading the post-PS4 news...i feel disgusted about all the talk about "innovation", "mobile games", "ipad" blablaha....it seems the media have made up their minds about what is considered "good" gamng....a.k.a the next gimmick....of which i am almost dead sure K2 will tickle these journalists' fancy.

 

[MrFox]

Blah blah blah....

You're linking the DDR4 specs now, but the parts you mentioned was DDR3 non-standard overclocked parts. Does durango sports a DDR3 or DDR4 controller?
I'm looking at JEDEC JESD79-3F and it stops at 2133. That's the standard for DDR3. "TweakTown" is not a standards commitee.

 

[eastmen]

You're linking the DDR4 specs now, but the parts you mentioned was DDR3 non-standard overclocked parts.
I'm looking at JEDEC JESD79-3F and it stops at 2133. That's the standard for DDR3. "TweakTown" is not a standards commitee.

JEDEC doesn't matter , what matters are the chips produced. None of the chips I linked to are overclocked (if you actually read reviews you will see that the testers were able to overclock them even further) The chips are sold by the fab to to the companys at the rated speed. They are not overclocked in the slightest. JEDEC has not updated ddr 3's specifications since 2008. What can be produced in 2013 is different than 2009. But hey , I guess real physical products don't matter to you.

 

[-tkf-]

Honestly, people, I understand that us geeks are interested in the specs - but believing them to have any effect on the average customer is really stupid.

Even if the PS4 was twice as fast and it could run every multiplatform game at 1080p versus the new Xbox running them at 720p, it would not matter to the majority of the market. They just would not see any difference.

It's important to be "strong", you know how you feel about the WII U.

When someone asks you about the PS3/360 you can say "yeah the XBOX usually looks better with 3rd party titles but the PS3 looks very good with 1st party titles", next round you can say "The PS4 looks the best with everything". The average consumer will get this story from everybody they ask that knows anything about the PS3, 360, PS4, 720. As i said i doubt Microsoft will Sony get away with that one.