CD Projekt dev switching lead platform from PC to console *spawn

[Cyan]

They are PCs in architecture regarding how developers will address them.

AMD APU based PCs don't have VRAM. They work from DDR3. They have SRAM caches.

A laptop with a 4 core AMD APU at 1.4 GHz and 6 GBs DDR3 shared memory, and a desktop with a quad core i7 and 16 GBs DDR3 and dual nVidia GTX 680s with 4 GBs GDDR5 each, and a nettop with dual core i3 and integrated graphics, and an Intel Mac, and a Linux media box, are all the same from the POV of the developer in how they design their games. You have CPU work, GPU work, all processors running the same code and working the same way in how they deal with threads, accessing memory the same general way. Okay, Durango's memory architecture is going to add a little more complexity, but 'same' can be measured by degree, and when you compare this gen to previous consoles, clearly they aren't anything like as removed from PC as PS1, 2, and 3 and their peers have been. When can argue specifics and perhaps whether a 5-10% variation in system design constitutes a different architecture or not, but the generalisation willardjuice made will still stand. You can write x86 CPU code for PC and it'll port straight over to consoles. You can write GPU code and it'll port straight over to consoles. There are no obvious barriers between developing on console and porting to PC or vice versa.

Fair enough Shifty, thanks for the explanation. In some ways I have to say you hit it dead on, it sounds right to me.

I understand most of what you are saying and wrap my head around the techie-speak hoping I am able to simplify it.

Still I don't think programming a true parallel processed, multi threaded game is extremely easy to do because of the massive amount of varying system configurations on PC.

In the case of a console you have a proprietary system with multiple cores in its CPU that you can code to without needing overweight APIs or bloated OSs, it increases your performance from the same type of hardware immensely.

If Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo wanted to they could do much more specialized things with the hardware, the only problem is that they don't seem to see it as financially viable because as years go on, some solutions are standardized and become more efficient than anything else.

The hardware moves around the PC market now and I don't blame them for using such solutions, in fact I like AMD a lot and I am happy with the fact that the new consoles feature AMD hardware in their innards, but even so, the famous blitter talk and stuff wasn't in vain, and now we have a very different setup in both consoles than your typical PC even if the basis of the hardware is the standard PC CPU and GPU to some extent.

The new consoles have similar amounts of memory than a high-end PC and it means that taking into account their extremely smart hardware design, PC games aren't being held back in the future.

I only can foresee some extra resolution and maybe AA favouring the PC in the future but other than that consoles will hold their ground pretty decently, smartly designed as they are.

@Dr. Evil, ah okay.... good point. I forgot to mention that, even so, it means that Durango is going to exceed the hardware capability of a 7770 AMD GPU by a long shot, as expected.:smile:

 

[pjbliverpool]

I'd just like to pick up on a few key points if I may.

The fact that they have x86 technology doesn't mean the new consoles are the PCs you want to make them out to be. It's not the same hardware set by any means of the imagination.

This is the thing, it is the same hardware set. The consoles don't just use x86. They specifically use standard Jaguar modules. 2 of them to be precise. The same Jaguar modules are available off the shelf in AMD based APU's for PC's. The APU's in the consoles also use GCN graphics cores. More or less the exact same GCN cores that have been shipping in discrete GPU's for around a year and are just now starting to ship in APU's very much like those found in the new consoles (albeit in larger configurations).

Take Kaveri for example launching at the end of this year. It sports 4-6 x86 cores and 10 GCN CU's on a single HSA APU that utilises a unified GDDR5 memory bus of (presumably) up to 8GB. Orbis sports 8 x86 cores and 18 GCN CU's on a single HSA APU that utilises a unified GDDR5 memory bus of to 8GB. See the similarities? The only major differences between these 2 APU's are the type of x86 cores - Kaveri uses Steamroller and Orbis Jaguar, the number of CU's (although Kaveri's probably run at a higher clock rate) and the speed of the GDDR5 memory but which will be much fasfter in Orbis.

Durango for instance has been designed around parallel processing, how does it compare to a PC? A new development strategy has to be thought up in order to take advantage of the console.

This statement has very little meaning. How do you define parallel processing? There are many CPU's available in the PC space today sporting 8 or more threads which is what Durango offers. Or if you'r talking parallelism on the GPU, Durango has 12 CU's while high end PC's can sport up to 32.

On PS4 or Durango you may get 60 fps and the smoothest gameplay you have ever experienced on the system, and on the PC you could get 1 fps because some CPU thread is lagging behind.

This probably makes less sense than the previous statement. It's a completely arbitrary scenario that could just as easily occur the other way around. In fact, it much more often does occur the other way around if your point is to focus on which system offers 60fps more regularly.

On a console everything is the same, you are programming for one machine and that's all that there is to it.

So you can't really compare a 1.6GHz 8 core x86 CPU in a console to say the same thing in a PC.

Of course you can. If it's the same processor then it's the same processor full stop. In the PC it will suffer from additional overheads and a lesser level of optimisation but that doesn't somehow make it a different processor.

In the case of a console you have a proprietary system with multiple cores in its CPU that you can code to without needing overweight APIs or bloated OSs, it increases your performance from the same type of hardware immensely.

It helps somewhat. Lets not exagerate on the "immensity" Also, lets not diminish the role of the OS and API by using negative terms like bloated and overweight. Both Windows 8 and DX11 are actually pretty efficient and serve very useful purposes. Clearly the new consoles are going down a similar path given the rather high proportion of system resources assigned to the operating systems and non gaming functions. Perhaps it's no longer appropriate to talk about PC's having to contend with the OS at all in the context of comparisons with these new systems.

ah okay.... good point. I forgot to mention that, even so, it means that Durango is going to exceed the hardware capability of a 7770 AMD GPU by a long shot, as expected.:smile:

That depends on the situation. If you're bandwidth or memory limited then likely yes it will. If however you're CPU or shader limited than Durango may well lag behind a 7770 equiped PC with a decent CPU. On balance Durango will likely produce better results on account of the the specific optimisations it will recieve but then the mid range 2012 7770 is hardly an impressive hardstick for what is in effect a 2014 games console.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

...and now we have a very different setup in both consoles than your typical PC even if the basis of the hardware is the standard PC CPU and GPU to some extent.

On a scale of differences, neither Orbis nor Durango are 'very different' from PC. PS3 was very different with a completely different CPU architecture and a need to balance two smallish pools of RAM. XB360 was very different with a different CPU architecture and eDRAM. PS2 was completely different. Durango is different and Orbis is a bit different, but in both cases the differences don't change how developers have to approach their software.