PlayStation 4 (codename Orbis) technical hardware investigation (news and rumours)
- Thread starter Love_In_Rio
- Start date
- Status
LuckyGuess
Banned
Yeah I get it doesn't make sense. But currently, neither does the current explanation of 14 for balanced design???
Unless someone previous figured out what, such terminology is supposed to refer to?
I figured out why there is a rumor of partition of 2.2GB of VRAM. But this forum went down when I clicked the submit button. Refreshed forum for a few minutes and no pages would load. All other pages were browse-able. This forum was not. Submitted post with math explaining memory division with double video buffering, lost. X-(
Unless someone previous figured out what, such terminology is supposed to refer to?
I figured out why there is a rumor of partition of 2.2GB of VRAM. But this forum went down when I clicked the submit button. Refreshed forum for a few minutes and no pages would load. All other pages were browse-able. This forum was not. Submitted post with math explaining memory division with double video buffering, lost. X-(
Possible. They may not have all the features ready on day one too.
From the PS4 techspecs page on Sony's site
GPU:1.84TFLOPS,AMDRadeon™GraphicsCoreNextengine
Do the math....
You don't want compression artefacts on a video feed you are going to performance image analysis on. PSEye could provide uncompressed images. 1280x720 @ 60fps is about 330 megabytes a second (8 bit colour, YUV encoding can reduce that). USB3 is up to the job, as is Firewire, and Sony have a custom port so must be prepared for the high BW.
An old design? A misunderstanding? The 14:4 split seems outmoded now.
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
I think that was a bios mod in development kits to simulate final GPU and its 8 ACEs.
Yap !
PSEye is 1280 x 800 probably to track our height more adequately.
I would imagine the video encoder is not used for standard PSEye output, except when saving PSEye game footage for the latest 15 minutes, or streaming to Ustream.
It is possible that Ustream and RemotePlay don't work with PSEye apps. We don't know if RemotePlay could run with another foreground game. If we try to RemotePlay a PSEye game, it may be tricky unless Vita performs the camera analysis.
Ustream should work, but I do expect some multitasking features to be limited at first, like Vita. The PS4 OS sounds complicated. Vita crashed about 2-3 times a week for the first month until they released patches to stablize the OS. Some of the features also came slightly later.
The PSEye output possibly can be Ustream-ed by way of the display buffer.
If the Ustream capability is essentially free, as has been leaked, that means it's getting its input directly from the frame buffer* (or game display plane?), which is where the PSEye output gets to for display purposes.
This way, the Ustream output is the (compressed) final composite image of the PSEye output and the overlayed game graphics.
* I guess this uses the Radeon tipical video compression hardware block, VCE, which has typically 2-stream decode, 1-stream encode for video, and is included in the chip, not on another chip as has been suggested.
If the Ustream capability is essentially free, as has been leaked, that means it's getting its input directly from the frame buffer* (or game display plane?), which is where the PSEye output gets to for display purposes.
This way, the Ustream output is the (compressed) final composite image of the PSEye output and the overlayed game graphics.
* I guess this uses the Radeon tipical video compression hardware block, VCE, which has typically 2-stream decode, 1-stream encode for video, and is included in the chip, not on another chip as has been suggested.
Yeah that article was pretty ridiculous. It's been known since long before the the PS4 launch event that AMD had Jaguar + GCN APU's on it's roadmap. That doesn't make them mini PS4's, if anything it makes the PS4 a scaled up version of AMD's commercial netbook chips.
The article is just trying to create needless hype.
Hello Everyone,
As many of you know, I've been trying to determine what "secret sauce" the PS4 might have in addition to the 8 gigabytes of high speed GDDR5 RAM. One rumor that seems to be a bit solid is that the GPU utilizes more "ACES" to handle compute functions. However, they don't really add much to the GPU. From what I understand, they do not add any extra processing power. Any computational work simply uses some number of the 18 CUs.
However, a more interesting rumor, is that some sort of vector unit, cut down cell processor, or spurs engine might be on the chip. I've seen this hinted by various individuals on different websites.
I sort of makes sense to me.
1) Sony invested a HUGE amount of money into the CELL processor for the PS3. It makes sense for them to try to reap some kind of benefit for that investment in the PS4.
2) The CPU of the PS4 is not overly impressive by itself. However, with the boost of a chip containing a number of SPUs, the CPU could get a significant boost. By now, a CELL like chip could be made that would consume very little power.
3) The GPU of the PS3 is not top of the line. It's about one third to one half as powerful as a high end GPU like the GTX 680. Asking it to do graphics AND computational tasks seems to be unreasonable. I think that it would be logical to include a vector unit to take some of the stress off the GPU.
So what do all of you think? Do you think there could be any chance of a cell like chip in the PS4?
If so, I think it could be the PS4's second "secret sauce" that could push it's performance closer to that of a high end PC.
As many of you know, I've been trying to determine what "secret sauce" the PS4 might have in addition to the 8 gigabytes of high speed GDDR5 RAM. One rumor that seems to be a bit solid is that the GPU utilizes more "ACES" to handle compute functions. However, they don't really add much to the GPU. From what I understand, they do not add any extra processing power. Any computational work simply uses some number of the 18 CUs.
However, a more interesting rumor, is that some sort of vector unit, cut down cell processor, or spurs engine might be on the chip. I've seen this hinted by various individuals on different websites.
I sort of makes sense to me.
1) Sony invested a HUGE amount of money into the CELL processor for the PS3. It makes sense for them to try to reap some kind of benefit for that investment in the PS4.
2) The CPU of the PS4 is not overly impressive by itself. However, with the boost of a chip containing a number of SPUs, the CPU could get a significant boost. By now, a CELL like chip could be made that would consume very little power.
3) The GPU of the PS3 is not top of the line. It's about one third to one half as powerful as a high end GPU like the GTX 680. Asking it to do graphics AND computational tasks seems to be unreasonable. I think that it would be logical to include a vector unit to take some of the stress off the GPU.
So what do all of you think? Do you think there could be any chance of a cell like chip in the PS4?
If so, I think it could be the PS4's second "secret sauce" that could push it's performance closer to that of a high end PC.
No, no more than RSX could have had magical secret sauce that it never had despite some being adamant it must do. To address your points directly:
1) If Sony don't include Cell, or at least SPEs, that investment will be wasted. Just vector units doesn't take advantage from Cell's investment in any way.
2) Why does the processor need to be impressive? There are video encoders and decoders and an audio DSP and a capable GPU so the CPU doesn't have to do graphics work. Why does it need to be more powerful?
3) It's only logical if you think price is immaterial. But Sony aren't aiming for a gangbuster performer, they'll release less than top-of-the-range PC hardware. If performance really was a concern, they could add more CUs and keep the system simple. Why add another programming paradigm on top of multicore CPU and GPGPU? That's just creating headaches.
Furthermore, if they're going to add programmable vector throughput, why not just use Cell and add BC and full Cell expertise into the mix? A 28 nm Cell would be pretty titchy (30 mm^2?). Sony did not announce BC, and they said the platform was developer friendly, and they have the option to add performance in more conventional ways than another processor unit. Where's the logic in a vector processor, other than "it was a random rumour and I like the sound of more power!"
The RSX did end up having a little, tiny bit of secret sauce. The now declassified document, RSX Best Practices, is now freely available on the internet. It details how the processor had a tiny bit of extra vertex and texture cache. However, for the most part, you are absolutely right. I also don't think it is overly likely the PS4 GPU has a lot of secret sauce. However, we do know it has some due to all of the modifications made for compute. What I am hoping is there is SOMETHING significant about the PS4 that will make it competitive with high end PCs -- at least for a short time. However, I will freely admit that I don't think it is very likely, but possible.
To address your responses....
1) You're probably right. However, I bet Sony learned a LOT in their process of designing the CELL processor. Even if the vector unit was different than the CELL processor, I hope some of their knowledge about processing systems could be used in the construction of the vector unit.
2) I would rather for the CPU to be more impressive and powerful so the GPU would not be used to process compute functions as much. With only 18CUs, I hope most of them are only used for their original graphics purpose rather than something a CPU could handle. I'm hoping that most games will not use the GPU for non-graphical related tasks such as physics, animation, AI, etc.
3) Price is not immaterial. However, we live in a world where people shell out more for a cell phone or tablet than anyone EVER paid for a PS3 or XBox 360. I sincerely think a high end console product -- with cutting edge high end hardware -- could sell very well, even at a price between 500 and 1000 dollars.
a) You are right, adding more CUs would be one way of addressing the issue. Another solution would be to simply use a more powerful CPU so that there would be little reason to do compute on the GPU. However, from what I understand, Sony has a history of making non-simple architectures. I also remember that they put vector units in a number of different consoles (both desktop and handheld). Adding a vector unit to the PS4 does add complexity which seems to go against their new philosophy of simpleness. But I also don't think it would make the processor too overly complicated. It could be integrated into the system in such a way that it would not create a burden for developers.
Finally, I also agree that adding a vector unit is not the best way to increase the power of this system. If I were Sony, and I wanted to increase the power of this system, I would have simply included a GPU with more CUs, saved on the transistor budget by stripping all the compute functions out of the GPU, and including a more powerful CPU.
However, maybe Sony knows something we don't. Maybe by adding a small, low power vector unit somewhere in the system (where there might be a bottle neck they saw in a simulation) the overall system could get a boost.
To address your responses....
1) You're probably right. However, I bet Sony learned a LOT in their process of designing the CELL processor. Even if the vector unit was different than the CELL processor, I hope some of their knowledge about processing systems could be used in the construction of the vector unit.
2) I would rather for the CPU to be more impressive and powerful so the GPU would not be used to process compute functions as much. With only 18CUs, I hope most of them are only used for their original graphics purpose rather than something a CPU could handle. I'm hoping that most games will not use the GPU for non-graphical related tasks such as physics, animation, AI, etc.
3) Price is not immaterial. However, we live in a world where people shell out more for a cell phone or tablet than anyone EVER paid for a PS3 or XBox 360. I sincerely think a high end console product -- with cutting edge high end hardware -- could sell very well, even at a price between 500 and 1000 dollars.
a) You are right, adding more CUs would be one way of addressing the issue. Another solution would be to simply use a more powerful CPU so that there would be little reason to do compute on the GPU. However, from what I understand, Sony has a history of making non-simple architectures. I also remember that they put vector units in a number of different consoles (both desktop and handheld). Adding a vector unit to the PS4 does add complexity which seems to go against their new philosophy of simpleness. But I also don't think it would make the processor too overly complicated. It could be integrated into the system in such a way that it would not create a burden for developers.
Finally, I also agree that adding a vector unit is not the best way to increase the power of this system. If I were Sony, and I wanted to increase the power of this system, I would have simply included a GPU with more CUs, saved on the transistor budget by stripping all the compute functions out of the GPU, and including a more powerful CPU.
However, maybe Sony knows something we don't. Maybe by adding a small, low power vector unit somewhere in the system (where there might be a bottle neck they saw in a simulation) the overall system could get a boost.
TheWretched
Regular
So, in the conference, they talked about the "background processor" (or whatever they called it). Now, I don't think they would put a full CELL into that system. But for BC reasons (which they now say it can't really do) would it be possible to just pack in a small 6 SPE "cluster"? RSX should be easily emulated by any of todays mid end GPUs, the SPEs probably not. Though I don't know if they can even really function without the PPE.
I think there was a lot of secret sauce on the PS4, according to rumours people expected less RAM and not UMA GDDR5 RAM, which is quite an unique design.
It's a secret ingredient that makes the next PS4 the most powerful console. It doesn't mean it is a recipe for success but it certainly helps.
i.e. it helped the Xbox 1 to make a name for itself.
On the other hand we have the Wii....
Ironically, people think that it won the last generation. Big lie! Well...the Wii is the true loser of the previous generation.
It didn't sell a darn game!! and mortally wounded the Wii U giving a bad reputation to it.
The Wii is a total disgrace for Nintendo.Not to mention no one could create games for the system because the Wii wasn't capable of running PS3/X360 ports.
On the other hand, both the PS3 and the X360 flourished and sold millions and millions of consoles and software.
Last edited by a moderator:
Toshiba's SpursEngine has 4 SPEs. It was designed to be used with other CPUs.
Sony's custom Cell patent is also based on a 4 SPE set up.
Me think chance of such a SPE array in PS4 is slim to non-existing.
TheWretched
Regular
Well, it wouldn't be alone, mind you. Not that pairing X86 with IBM tech would be easy, mind you.
It's just... the SPEs themselves are tiny, they acted for OS functionality in PS3, too, and 6 of them would be enough to emulate PS3, as one was dropped for yields and the other for OS.
Sony included a full PS1 CPU for Sound in the PS2... why not do it again? Could make sense, no?
arijoytunir
Regular
Sony went with x86 only because they want ps5 to be backward compatible . So an additional vector processor is a no no with software emulation .
Can coding to the metal be emulated on a similar architecture for future ps consoles ?
Can coding to the metal be emulated on a similar architecture for future ps consoles ?
No they went with x86 because it makes the most sense from a cost/performance perspective as well as easing games development.
If there is a PS5 at all then it will almost certainly use the cloud for BC.
- Status
