ARM based Game Consoles on the way?

[LiveGamer]

Sony is currently hiring for the following position:

システムソフトウェア開発（エンタテインメントゲーム機器用OSのカーネル開発）

Tokyo, Japan

boards.greenhouse.io

Job Description(Roles & Responsibilities)
Develop systems to enable programs developed for our entertainment game consoles to run on game consoles with different architectures. Specifically, we will enable a large number of game titles developed for PlayStation to run on the new architecture system.
This system must be equipped with a mechanism to facilitate defect analysis in the event of problems.

Skills and Qualifications
Required (MUST)
Experience in program development using C/C++ language
Familiarity with recent major CPU architectures
Experience in assembly language development for one or more of these architectures
Familiarity with JIT/AOT technologies
Ability to read and discuss technical documents in English with overseas developers.

WELCOME (WANT)
Knowledge of the structure and implementation of major game engines such as Unity, UnrealEngine, etc.
Experience in game program development.
Ability to verbally discuss technical issues with English speakers.

translated by deepl

Nintendo with Nvidia is currently the only mainstream ARM based Games console. Could Sony and MS be building something similar?

Adding fuel to the fire. Microsoft is about to start a huge push with Windows on ARM this summer.

Apple has shown that ARM based SOCs can offer huge advantages in power efficiency and scalability.

What do you guys think? Is ARM up to the challenge? Is ARM able to competently play x86 games using an emulation layer?

 

[Charlietus]

If they can get parity in BC mode for current games, why not. The only way to get console level games to more customers is to start to offer them on mobile, that's how you grow the market. And you gotta start somewhere. So ARM would facilitate that.

 

[Frenetic Pony]

That being said, what CPU arch would Sony even go for on ARM (or it's all RISC V, double ) ARM's own CPU designs have been dropping off in terms of advancement lately, and neither Qualcomm's "Oryon" cores nor ARM's own are super competitive with Zen 5, and Apple isn't selling shit. Maybe it's just a cost decision now that AMD is on the up and up and doesn't feel pressured to sell at rock bottom prices

Could Sony and MS be building something similar?

MS by all accounts is already working with AMD on next gen, and it's coming soonish, thus the weird pre-announcement of "the biggest technological leap 'ever'"

 

[Lurkmass]

No, the job description sounds like they're hiring emulator developers to enable more software on their much older systems (anything before PS4) to target their most recent system (PS5) ...

Also no console vendor will currently consider ARM architecture even if they lowered their targets for their next system to only offer software BC since many recent AAA console games are now compiled with AVX/2 in mind ...

 

[Cyan]

AMD is improving and doing a great job on current consoles, and now the PS5 Pro is coming out, I see no reason to make things complicated for Sony.

Even with Arm on Windows I don't see it feasible except if that forward compatibility team do the job of their life.

No, the job description sounds like they're hiring emulator developers to enable more software on their much older systems (anything before PS4) to target their most recent system (PS5) ...

Also no console vendor will currently consider ARM architecture even if they lowered their targets for their next system to only offer software BC since many recent AAA console games are now compiled with AVX/2 in mind ...

irony is that the community make great emulators that most companies steal and then sell their old games wrapped within those emulators.

 

[Lurkmass]

irony is that the community make great emulators that most companies steal and then sell their old games wrapped within those emulators.

Most open source emulators have a GPL license that effectively prevents many businesses from attempting commercial use of said software but many authors do not have the financial capacity to challenge them in court for it. Corporations like Sony just make their own proprietary in-house emulation software and sometimes they even hire former developers from said open source emulation communities (like PCSX2) both of which is fair play ...

 

[LiveGamer]

No, the job description sounds like they're hiring emulator developers to enable more software on their much older systems (anything before PS4) to target their most recent system (PS5) ...

Also no console vendor will currently consider ARM architecture even if they lowered their targets for their next system to only offer software BC since many recent AAA console games are now compiled with AVX/2 in mind ...

So those AVX2 games won't work using the x86 translation layer on the new Windows on ARM chips?

 

[Lurkmass]

So those AVX2 games won't work in BC mode on the new Windows on ARM chips?

Microsoft's XTA layer currently doesn't support emulation of AVX/2 applications for ARM-based devices since it'd be very slow and many ARM implementations don't want to support 256-bit SVE/2 to make it efficient/fast to do this ...

Zen 5/C is going to have other "anti-emulation" features/improvements like non-microcoded PDEP/PEXT, AVX512, and bus lock trap in comparison to current Zen 2 based game consoles ...

 

[Globalisateur]

Where do they talk about ARM in there? This shouldn't be in the thread title, at all.

 

[Flappy Pannus]

Where do they talk about ARM in there? This shouldn't be in the thread title, at all.

"Experience in assembly language development for one or more of these architectures" at least gives some indication toward a differing CPU architecture.

That wouldn't necessarily be an ask if they were just switching GPU vendors, and how would they do that and keep on X86 regardless unless they abandon the APU model? Yes, ARM is an assumption, but I feel it's a pretty safe one. No need to edit the thread title.

 

[Charlietus]

I also hope they are ARM based, PS5 and series x are so safe and boring

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Where do they talk about ARM in there? This shouldn't be in the thread title, at all.

There's a question mark - this isn't an assertion.

 

[LiveGamer]

Microsoft's XTA layer currently doesn't support emulation of AVX/2 applications for ARM-based devices since it'd be very slow and many ARM implementations don't want to support 256-bit SVE/2 to make it efficient/fast to do this ...

Zen 5/C is going to have other "anti-emulation" features/improvements like non-microcoded PDEP/PEXT, AVX512, and bus lock trap in comparison to current Zen 2 based game consoles ...

Having researched this more. The reason companies don't invest in AVX is due to Intel patents. Rosetta with Apple has the same issue. AMD has access to the patents. It would be very interesting if AMD developed an ARM based processor? Would they be able to use AVX?

I see two scenarios if ARM machines become popular.

1. Developers will resist using AVX exclusively and offer fallbacks. Intel and perhaps MS would likely be against this.

2. ARM machines become big enough that Intel would be losing money if they don't offer a license.

Will be interesting to see where this all heads.

 

[Seanspeed]

I also hope they are ARM based, PS5 and series x are so safe and boring

x86 still has plenty more to offer.

And I think people who are clamoring for ARM would be disappointed by the end result and discovering that any ARM CPU in a console would just be another CPU much like any x86 CPU would be, almost certainly just using some 'off the shelf' IP just like now and not any revolutionary new super custom design or anything.

Short of Apple themselves joining the console battle, I'm afraid safe and boring is a necessary reality going forward.

Personally, I'm not thrilled with the potential for native ARM vs translated x86 vs native x86 vs translated ARM software annoyances going forward on PC. Consoles having ARM would definitely complicate things further.

 

[Lurkmass]

Having researched this more. The reason companies don't invest in AVX is due to Intel patents. Rosetta with Apple has the same issue. AMD has access to the patents. It would be very interesting if AMD developed an ARM based processor? Would they be able to use AVX?

I see two scenarios if ARM machines become popular.

1. Developers will resist using AVX exclusively and offer fallbacks. Intel and perhaps MS would likely be against this.

2. ARM machines become big enough that Intel would be losing money if they don't offer a license.

Will be interesting to see where this all heads.

There's nothing stopping ARM vendors from implementing HW to make AVX emulation faster. They just don't want spend the HW logic to have it negatively affect their performance in benchmarks due to lower clocks being result of power consumed by the larger register file ...

AVX also has an incompatible instruction encoding format in relation to ARM architectures so you'd be pretty much forced to implement a near feature complete x86 core just to get AVX supported at a HW level. At that point did you really win anything by supporting two redundant architectures all the while bloating your HW design in process ? Also would developers have any motivation left to drop AVX support in their applications when they can now use the argument "but current HW supports feature xyz so why shouldn't we use it ?!" against you ...

 

[Mitchings]

I've come round to the idea a bit more..

This might be an oversimplification (and using arbitrary numbers to convey a point), but if a ~2027/2028 Next-Gen Console ARM CPU is for eg. 2x more powerful than a ~2020 Current-Gen Console x86 CPU and those current-gen games can be emulated cleanly with >50% performance, then theoretically wouldn't BC be covered?

I also think the argument of top-end performance might not be as relevant. The PS5 implementation of Zen 2 CPU is about 75% as powerful as the top spec AMD 8-Core desktop CPU of the same time, so if they can produce by ~2027/2028 an ARM core that can give 75% of the perf of the closest Zen x86 CPU at the time while doing it cheaper, smaller and more power-efficient, perhaps it might make sense?

Again, just spit-balling, my knowledge of this area isn't great.

 

[LiveGamer]

x86 still has plenty more to offer.

And I think people who are clamoring for ARM would be disappointed by the end result and discovering that any ARM CPU in a console would just be another CPU much like any x86 CPU would be, almost certainly just using some 'off the shelf' IP just like now and not any revolutionary new super custom design or anything.

Short of Apple themselves joining the console battle, I'm afraid safe and boring is a necessary reality going forward.

Personally, I'm not thrilled with the potential for native ARM vs translated x86 vs native x86 vs translated ARM software annoyances going forward on PC. Consoles having ARM would definitely complicate things further.

Apple is of course way ahead of the curve with ARM SoCs but why do people assume noone else will be able to catchup or exceed Apple's efforts in the future?

I agree all the emulation back and forth looks to be a headache but the alternative is a monopoly on high performant software.

There's nothing stopping ARM vendors from implementing HW to make AVX emulation faster. They just don't want spend the HW logic to have it negatively affect their performance in benchmarks due to lower clocks being result of power consumed by the larger register file ...

AVX also has an incompatible instruction encoding format in relation to ARM architectures so you'd be pretty much forced to implement a near feature complete x86 core just to get AVX supported at a HW level. At that point did you really win anything by supporting two redundant architectures all the while bloating your HW design in process ? Also would developers have any motivation left to drop AVX support in their applications when they can now use the argument "but current HW supports feature xyz so why shouldn't we use it ?!" against you ...

From my research Intel owns the patents which complicates things.

The incentive for developers would be entirely new markets to sell your software to. Macs and ARM based Windows being the biggest ones at this point.

 

[Lurkmass]

From my research Intel owns the patents which complicates things.

The patents only stops you from doing a HW implementation of the said technology. There's no roadblock to implementing an alternative technology for the purposes of emulation ...

The incentive for developers would be entirely new markets to sell your software to. Macs and ARM based Windows being the biggest ones at this point.

How would that work if developers rely on Windows on ARM implementations to canonically support x86 features at a hardware level when that may not be the case for other ecosystems ? (Apple/Android/etc.)

 

[arandomguy]

x86 still has plenty more to offer.

And I think people who are clamoring for ARM would be disappointed by the end result and discovering that any ARM CPU in a console would just be another CPU much like any x86 CPU would be, almost certainly just using some 'off the shelf' IP just like now and not any revolutionary new super custom design or anything.

It's boring in the sense that although technically speaking it isn't strictly this way but in reality an x86 CPU for consoles essentially means a semi-custom AMD CPU and GPU (both using N-1/.05 uarchs). If multiple vendors go this way it also means a similar technology stack with very little differentiation (if at all).

Also personally related to the above I have some speculation on whether or not "safeguards" are in place to prevent multiple customers from basically getting the same semi-custom design (I've wondered if Microsoft not going with a more "conventional," and likely optimal to be honest, 256bit GDDR setup for 2 gens now wasn't entirely by choice).

 

[Seanspeed]

Apple is of course way ahead of the curve with ARM SoCs but why do people assume noone else will be able to catchup or exceed Apple's efforts in the future?

I agree all the emulation back and forth looks to be a headache but the alternative is a monopoly on high performant software.

A duopoly to me is superior to a messy open system. Like, remember back to the early days of 3d acceleration/graphics cards? That sucked. It didn't matter that there was loads of competition, the situation for consumers was just terrible, and was only tolerable/exciting cuz it was new and nobody knew any better. Sound cards were nearly as bad.

Standards are very useful, especially with the complexity of software today.

As for others catching up to Apple, who? It's basically Qualcomm/Nuvia or nobody. ARM isn't gonna make the mistake of giving out more architectural licenses, that's already backfired on them pretty hard. And I dont think it's completely wild to predict that Apple will always be a couple steps ahead of Qualcomm/Nuvia. Apple is a monster and will spend what it takes to have top tier engineers and chip designers, along with always being on the leading edge process. SD Elite is certainly interesting as a new ground up ARM design, but it's already pretty clear they're not matching Apple, and it'll be very different if and when they want to try and compete in the high power, consumer desktop space since cores built for lower power applications will not necessarily scale well in performance.

I'll take a 90w high performance x86 CPU over a slightly more efficient, but clearly worse performing 40w ARM CPU. I value efficiency, but even an extra 20% of CPU performance means more longevity and value(plus the immediate higher performance, obviously). Combine that with fewer software headaches and it's a no brainer to me.