News & Rumours: Playstation 4/ Orbis *spin*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well after watching the game previews again I well up for laying down the cash. But the hardware specs and how next gen consoles bend the fabric of space-time in order to imprint the next frame in your memory before it has been shown etc... doesn't really interest me.

I want to play games, there's a Killzone on the PS4. I like playing Killzone. I will buy a PS4 to play Killzone. Likewise, there will be a Halo on the X720. I like playing Halo... Ad infinitum.

I kind of missed seeing Insomniac at the event. There will be no Resistance on the PS4. That made me sad and I had to eat ice cream. But now I am happy and I see that GAME are already taking pre-orders for the PS4 (£20 to reserve your machine)...!
 
I would trust them with a penny for a pre order.

Best experience I had was with asda, my sister brought a 360 from there, it broke, I took it back and they just gave me a new one. No,questions asked.
 
Strange said:
2 higher res cameras with fixed distance and move lighting should allow for pretty good (and easy) tracking. Including depth.

I doubt the new PSEye would cost too much for Sony. It's two fairly cheap webcams and 4 microphones strapped together.
From a costs perspective it shouldn't cost them too much more than the Playstation Eye given how much time has passed..
Click to expand...

The new PSEye should support 120Hz at a lower resolution.
 
Looks like there will be 4k support for movies but not games. Not that I was expecting 4k for games as common, but I was hoping there would be the occasional show piece arcade title like Super Stardust that pushed resolution and framerate to the max. Outside of that, I'm wondering if this means HDMI 1.4 or 2.0? Technically, I think 1.4 can handle UHD @ 24fps. That would be enough for standard 4k movies, but not for 3D 4k correct?
 
New info: just from a poster at Arstechnica that stated last night one of his sources was going to have their NDA expire overnight. Take it with a grain or a truckload of salt according to your own predilections.

http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1193497&start=440
Poster Blacken00100
"So, a couple of random things I've learned:

-It's not stock x86; there are eight very wide vector engines and some other changes. It's not going to be completely trivial to retarget to it, but it should shut up the morons who were hyperventilating at "OMG! 1.6 JIGGAHURTZ!".

-The memory structure is unified, but weird; it's not like the GPU can just grab arbitrary memory like some people were thinking (rather, it can, but it's slow). They're incorporating another type of shader that can basically read from a ring buffer (supplied in a streaming fashion by the CPU) and write to an output buffer. I don't have all the details, but it seems interesting.

-As near as I'm aware, there's no OpenGL or GLES support on it at all; it's a lower-level library at present. I expect (no proof) this will change because I expect that they'll be trying to make a play for indie games, much as I'm pretty sure Microsoft will be, and trying to get indie developers to go turbo-nerd on low-level GPU programming does not strike me as a winner. "
 
So basically, if both rumours are true, ps4 and Durango have the modified jaguar with twice the flops

There's just no win visible for Durango.
 
DJ12 said:
So basically, if both rumours are true, ps4 and Durango have the modified jaguar with twice the flops

There's just no win visible for Durango.
Click to expand...

Does not fit. Both AMD and Sony have confirmed 'nearly 2 TF'. 1.84 TF gpu + 8xJaguar@1.6Ghz is 102GF. Doubling Jaguar would be more than 2TF so they wouldn't have claimed nearly.
 
AlphaWolf said:
Does not fit. Both AMD and Sony have confirmed 'nearly 2 TF'. 1.84 TF gpu + 8xJaguar@1.6Ghz is 102GF. Doubling Jaguar would be more than 2TF so they wouldn't have claimed nearly.
Click to expand...

The 1.84 number refers to GPU only. Is there quote that says gpu+cpu is nearly 2TF or is everybody just referencing the gpu number.

The GPU contains a unified array of 18 compute units, which collectively
generate 1.84 Teraflops of processing power that can freely be applied to graphics, simulation
tasks, or some mixture of the two.
Click to expand...

source: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/news/20130221E.pdf
 
manux said:
Source for this?
Click to expand...

http://blogs.amd.com/fusion/2013/02/21/amd/

In the case of the PS4, we leveraged the building blocks of our 2013 product roadmap – the same technologies you find in the latest AMD APUs powering PCs, ultrathin notebooks and tablets – to create a solution that incorporates our upcoming, low-power* AMD “Jaguar” CPU cores with next-generation AMD Radeon™ graphics delivering nearly 2 TFLOPS of compute performance!
Click to expand...
 
Maybe AMD/Sony were commenting on the APU (CPU+GPU) as a whole when they said "nearly 2TF". That would be inline in what we are expecting...
 
AlphaWolf said:
http://blogs.amd.com/fusion/2013/02/21/amd/
Click to expand...
Sadly that's ambiguous. It can be parsed to mean either CPU+GPU are 2 TFlops, or that they created a system with a CPU and a nearly 2 TFlop GPU. If you think the 1.84 TF GPU + 0.102 TF CPU is 1.96 TF, that's good as 2 TF as to not bother saying 'nearly' IMO. I'd call that 2 teraflops. I'd call 1.84 TF 'nearly 2 TF'.

As such, I don't think the nearly 2 TF figure conflicts with idea of extended Jaguar cores.
 
AlphaWolf said:
I don't read that as ambiguous at all.
Click to expand...
You may not read it as ambiguous, seeing only the one interpretation, but it is. ;) The subject of "2 TFLOPS" can be either the GPU (mostly recently named subject) or the 'solution'.

Unambiguous statement about total performance:
"...to create a solution - combining our upcoming, low-power* AMD “Jaguar” CPU cores with next-generation AMD Radeon™ graphics - delivering nearly 2 TFLOPS of total compute performance!"

Unambiguous statement about GPU performance:
"...to create a solution incorporating our upcoming, low-power* AMD “Jaguar” CPU cores, and next-generation AMD Radeon™ graphics that deliver nearly 2 TFLOPS of compute performance!"

What we're provided isn't 100% clear. I'd weight it with the interpretation you ascribe, but it's far from certain.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Sadly that's ambiguous. It can be parsed to mean either CPU+GPU are 2 TFlops, or that they created a system with a CPU and a nearly 2 TFlop GPU. If you think the 1.84 TF GPU + 0.102 TF CPU is 1.96 TF, that's good as 2 TF as to not bother saying 'nearly' IMO. I'd call that 2 teraflops. I'd call 1.84 TF 'nearly 2 TF'.

As such, I don't think the nearly 2 TF figure conflicts with idea of extended Jaguar cores.
Click to expand...
1.942, not 1.96. rounding to the nearest tenth would then take it to 1.9, so "nearly 2TF" would be a reasonable statement.
 
Not everything. There's a plethora of microcontrollers in computing systems these days, and even some on the same die as the CPU and GPU, but they are so far removed from being exposed to software that even marketing doesn't bother.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top