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

[MBDF]

No, that "Sony being Sony and screwing it up" move would be locking out used games. (please don't do this)

The real question is, was this a reactionary move, or was this planned from the get-go. Which came first; the souped up jaguar or the 4 CU's?


Btw, wasn't there rumours a while back of Microsoft having a teraflop CPU? I mean, how souped up could this jaguar be... Could it cover the compute deficit Durango now seemingly faces?

 

[MrFox]

I will say, the recent news of 4 CU's possibly somehow not being useful for graphics on Orbis, is imo quite the gamechanger. I dont see how it can be looked at otherwise.

It can be looked at otherwise, because it's 18CU. It's available. I don't see the split as a game changer, unless you assume the 4CU somehow disappeared.

4 CU's for compute/physics is stupid and smacks of that "sony being sony and screwing it up" move I was waiting for (I thought for example, they might downgrade back to 2GB RAM, but I kind of expected them to do something terrible).

I followed the very good discussion about it in the vgleaks thread, and it looks like these 4CU are expected to be useful for compute, but if the game doesn't need that much compute devs can use them for graphics. There's no indication they "reserved" those CU. OTOH if a Durango game needs 410GFlops of additional compute, they'll have to sacrifice 4 of the 12 CU available. So I'm not really following your conclusion about Sony.

 

[scently]

I will say, the recent news of 4 CU's possibly somehow not being useful for graphics on Orbis, is imo quite the gamechanger. I dont see how it can be looked at otherwise.

I still liked Durango's chances decently as it was, 5GB RAM and 1.2TF vs 3.5/1.8. Change it to 1.4, to me then you're looking at basically equal GPU's but one has a lot more RAM, plus Kinect, Xbox arguably better brand image in many countries, likely vastly more featured OS (if supposed dedicated resources are anything to go by), and I think you could likely chalk next gen up for Microsoft already. Certainly Nintendo wont be there.

4 CU's for compute/physics is stupid and smacks of that "sony being sony and screwing it up" move I was waiting for (I thought for example, they might downgrade back to 2GB RAM, but I kind of expected them to do something terrible).

I actually think that the 4CU stuff is a brilliant idea. It means that compute jobs will be performed on these hardware that might be specialized for it and it might force developers to use it.

On the enhancement to the durango cpu, AndyH did mention that the each of the cores have their own fp unit instead of it being shared between 2 cores. This coupled with the fact that aegis mentioned that the durango cpu is "appreciably different" from the cpu in orbis, and what bkillian insinuated a while ago, I think the durango cpu might have been designed to deal with compute jobs as opposed to running it on the gpu. Also taking into consideration that both Proelite and aegis mentioned that the cores in the durango gpu are simply referred to as "shader cores" instead of compute units might mean that its gpu has been optimized for graphic rendering as opposed to been able to perform both compute and graphic rendering job. Even the vgleak article refers to them as shader cores.

Anyway here is to hoping we get more info soon.

 

[Rangers]

Hypothetically

Orbis has stock jaguars, 4CU for compute, 3-3.5 GB of FAST GDDR5 ram, 14 CUs that's might have stalls common to PC gpus

Durango has a heftier CPU, a powerful audio / general processor, 5 - 5.5GB of DDR3 ram, 32MB esram with low latency, and 1.2 teraflops gpu that's not troubled by stalls (due to Esram + 4 x DMEs)

Suddenly it looks a lot closer.

Until the blanks are filled out, it's way too early to award any systems the performance crown.

Yes, that is why I kept fighting against the rush to judgement.

Seeing software at E3 will be great.

The only thing, I'm not sure I will "trust" that software, after what Sony pulled at E3 2005. Orbis dev kits are less final than Durango AFAIK, so Sony can probably show whatever they want in the meanwhile and say it's running on an Orbis. And they will just love to blow people out of the water with tech demos, as they have going back to PS2.

Basically I'm bracing for another possibly unwarranted wave of "WOW ORBIS CRAPS ALL OVER DURANGO" after E3...especially when even today you see people going apeshit over non interactive stuff like "Beyond". Imagine how that could look on PS4.

 

[scently]

No, that "Sony being Sony and screwing it up" move would be locking out used games. (please don't do this)

The real question is, was this a reactionary move, or was this planned from the get-go. Which came first; the souped up jaguar or the 4 CU's?

This is something I have been speculating as well.

 

[Rangers]

It can be looked at otherwise, because it's 18CU. It's available. I don't see the split as a game changer, unless you assume the 4CU somehow disappeared.

I followed the very good discussion about it in the vgleaks thread, and it looks like these 4CU are expected to be useful for compute, but if the game doesn't need that much compute devs can use them for graphics. There's no indication they "reserved" those CU. OTOH if a Durango game needs 410GFlops of additional compute, they'll have to sacrifice 4 of the 12 CU available. So I'm not really following your conclusion about Sony.

The vgleaks somehow imply the 4CU's are less useful for gfx ("minor rendering help").

It really would be boneheaded if Sony gimped 4 CU's for gfx in pursuing compute.

I wish somebody "in the know" like lherre would weigh in, if programmers even know! He probably doesnt.

I do find it odd programmers are not pointing to Orbis blowing up Durango like message boarders are. Maybe the missing 4 CU's are why. The caveat though, is that I havent seen programmers talk much at ALL about next gen consoles.

Even despite all these "insiders" who talk to developers floating around neogaf, literally nobody has ventured to make any comparative claims. I recall one recent neogaffer post even saying his source explicitly shied away from comparing the two, even as he sang Orbis praises (saying Orbis dev kits are leaps and bounds improving).

I was told it was pointless to compare as the tools and stuff are still maturing, that it would be pointless right now.

 

[kots]

4 CU's for compute/physics is stupid and smacks of that "sony being sony and screwing it up" move I was waiting for

So , one console will have good graphics and great physics and the other will have just good graphics ( but not as good as the other ) and no physics at all .
Is that what you 're saying ?

 

[Rangers]

So , one console will have good graphics and great physics and the other will have just good graphics ( but not as good as the other ) and no physics at all .
Is that what you 're saying ?

Durango will still have the 8 core CPU, especially if those cores are jacked up.

Frankly I dont care about (mondo, super duper, beyond normal) physics anyway, and I dont think anybody does hence everybody would rather see those 4 CU's used in gfx if we took a poll. Okay, 90%.

But I guess yeah, Orbis could do some physics things Durango cant maybe?

 

[Proelite]

Basically I'm bracing for another possibly unwarranted wave of "WOW ORBIS CRAPS ALL OVER DURANGO" after E3...especially when even today you see people going apeshit over non interactive stuff like "Beyond". Imagine how that could look on PS4.

I am very optimistic about Sony's ability to push the visual boundary.

 

[MrFox]

But I guess yeah, Orbis could do some physics things Durango cant maybe?

Physics "things" like realistic grass and dense foliage interaction with geometry, water interaction, dynamic smoke, generated geometry, you can also use them for post processing, or fur and feathers in The Last Guardian. And physics isn't just RBD. That's not negligible in how a game looks.

 

[Barbarian]

I do find it odd programmers are not pointing to Orbis blowing up Durango like message boarders are. Maybe the missing 4 CU's are why. The caveat though, is that I havent seen programmers talk much at ALL about next gen consoles.

That's because we're all under NDA! I'd love to tell you all about it otherwise.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Frankly I dont care about (mondo, super duper, beyond normal) physics anyway, and I dont think anybody does hence everybody would rather see those 4 CU's used in gfx if we took a poll. Okay, 90%.

But I guess yeah, Orbis could do some physics things Durango cant maybe?

As someone who purchased a 2nd hand G92 for using as a dedicated card for PhysX, I wholeheartedly disagree. Some effects are really nice and let you play the games at their fullest.
I don't agree with game developers using a non-standard API for physics calculations, but I admit it makes a very discernible difference.
Just look at the latest hawken videos with physx. Advanced particle effects really do give some more "magic" to a game.

 

[Bagel seed]

Physics "things" like realistic grass and dense foliage interaction with geometry, water interaction, dynamic smoke, generated geometry, you can also use them for post processing, or fur and feathers in The Last Guardian. And physics isn't just RBD. That's not negligible in how a game looks.

Yes, those are the kind of things that need to be standard in all games next gen. I'd also like to see better interaction with clothing on bodies. Oh, and how about some object/terrain deformation finally for gods sake?? Too much blowing up stuff but faked or no visible damage on the surroundings.

 

[Rangers]

As someone who purchased a 2nd hand G92 for using as a dedicated card for PhysX, I wholeheartedly disagree. Some effects are really nice and let you play the games at their fullest.
I don't agree with game developers using a non-standard API for physics calculations, but I admit it makes a very discernible difference.
Just look at the latest hawken videos with physx. Advanced particle effects really do give some more "magic" to a game.

so everybody uses their physics hardware to add more non-interactive gfx just a different kind...love it

 

[TheChefO]

Yes, those are the kind of things that need to be standard in all games next gen. I'd also like to see better interaction with clothing on bodies. Oh, and how about some object/terrain deformation finally for gods sake?? Too much blowing up stuff but faked or no visible damage on the surroundings.

Agreed.

I'd love to see physics which actually interact and have collision. With both machines seemingly having full access to the same address space for gpu and cpu, this should be possible.

Having said that, Orbis has the edge here in compute, render capability, and bandwidth to execute these abilities on screen.

 

[Rangers]

Agreed.

I'd love to see physics which actually interact and have collision. With both machines seemingly having full access to the same address space for gpu and cpu, this should be possible.

Having said that, Orbis has the edge here in compute, render capability, and bandwidth to execute these abilities on screen.

Are you sure?

Was recently told Durango's peak triangles and vertices rate>Orbis.

Now why would that be...I dont know but it seems pretty telling to me, that the whole GPU might be better.

 

[ERP]

so everybody uses their physics hardware to add more non-interactive gfx just a different kind...love it

It's pretty much all you practically can do with GPU physics, conventional solvers just aren't a good fit, so people use them where the performance advantage is tangible.
On of the Havok guys told me that their work on GPU physics had garnered more magazine articles than it did customers. Their intent is to utilize the GPU for things it's good at, particle systems, fluid simulation etc. Rather than things it's not, general physics solvers.

 

[Averagejoe]

Are you sure?

Was recently told Durango's peak triangles and vertices rate>Orbis.

Now why would that be...I dont know but it seems pretty telling to me, that the whole GPU might be better.

And this is the problem you want to embrace anything Durango,but you are quick to downplay anything Orbis.

I am sure the difference in both will be small.

 

[TheChefO]

Are you sure?

Was recently told Durango's peak triangles and vertices rate>Orbis.

Now why would that be...I dont know but it seems pretty telling to me, that the whole GPU might be better.

Interesting if true .. link?

 

[Rangers]

no link file under hearsay/rumor/pretend inside sources

i am sure others have mentioned it on this board in some thread or another recently. maybe even this one. i know i saw it being discussed recently.

the difference is said to be slim, but why it would be true at all given the specs and cu counts we have is an interesting question.

could it be they're both just running 8 rops? do rops even determine that?

edit: lulz at thread tags as always. but it's missing the flops capacitor...