anexanhume
Veteran
This is a Sony dev though. I know there was told of reverting to VLIW with Super SIMD but that seems far-fetched.
Next Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [pre E3 2019]
- Thread starter AlNom
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 5 bytes non sequitur
- Status
Tkumpathenurple
Veteran
Yeah, looks like Sony are going to one up Microsoft on the B/C front...
Fresh Cerny patent (May 28 2019) about Real-time adjustment of application-specific operating parameters for backwards compatibility
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-adv.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&p=1&S1=(cerny+AND+sony)&OS=cerny+AND+sony&RS=(cerny+AND+sony)
Could they uncap the default framerate on some PS4 games using the BC emulator?
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-adv.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&p=1&S1=(cerny+AND+sony)&OS=cerny+AND+sony&RS=(cerny+AND+sony)
Could they uncap the default framerate on some PS4 games using the BC emulator?
It reads to me like that patent uses Machine Learning to learn how to better process and render a legacy game.
Kind of reads like it's the other way around, that performance while running the old game will be monitored and system parameters will be modified to match the timings of the original system exactly. Maybe this could allow for higher rendering resolution/upscaling/insert your improved graphical presentation here to be patched in with an assurance you won't break anything due to timing issues.
From the quoted passage, it seems to me more about achieving compatibility by matching the old machine. Ensure IPC remains the same on the new system as the old system.
Well, then they could also uncap the framerate with a patch + the stuff in the patent the way you described it.
If the timing of frames doesn't matter than the mechanisms in the the patent aren't needed. Just let the game run as fast as it can.
Precisely. There's no need for patentable tech in running emulators above normal speeds.
Yeah, as expected this is spelled out exactly in the patent introduction...
Yeah, as expected this is spelled out exactly in the patent introduction...
This is all about forcing emulation parity to improve compatibility. It'd probably be used to fix fragile games, where games that can run full tilt are left alone to.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Not for a company like Microsoft, who have decades of experience of working with layers of abstraction to aid future legacy support but Sony have never really had to think about this so who knows what janky mess is lurking behind the PS4's interface. I reckon they have an option to disable boost mode on Pro for a reason and not just in case Pro owners want to run software a bit more shit than it otherwise would
Why they'd bother to patent such a method is anybody's guess but patenting new methods for anything is the norm nowadays.
Maybe Sony knows that porting/remastering PS3 games is kinda stupid when 360 and PC versions are going to be more straightfoward to port? Why convert VLIW code if you can run it native.......lots of big games optimized for the Terascale architectures.
I guess we'll see. But I won't be surprised if Sony add more settings than boost mode this time.
Not for a company like Microsoft, who have decades of experience of working with layers of abstraction to aid future legacy support but Sony have never really had to think about this so who knows what janky mess is lurking behind the PS4's interface. I reckon they have an option to disable boost mode on Pro for a reason and not just in case Pro owners want to run software a bit more shit than it otherwise would
Why they'd bother to patent such a method is anybody's guess but patenting new methods for anything is the norm nowadays.
So... where does the patent fit when compared to existing BC implementations? Even MS implemented a legacy/performance mode for the enchanted 360 titles running on Scorpio.
(haven't had time to read through)
The patent is about collating metrics, and not what to do with them other than to aim to get the same metrics on the target machine to ensure games run the same. I don't think it fits in any other emulator strategy. If it does, Sony won't be the first one to try this!
I'm assuming this most likely applies directly to the new AMD GPUs having SFUs while the PS4 GPU has them as runtime macros or instructions, so the runtime characteristics between the two are vastly different. Everything old is new again, Navi having SFUs just like the old VLIW5 hardware had them.
Are the new SFUs instructions identified? Any performance given on how much of a difference between SFU and the older runtime macros or instructions? Any SFU instructions useful for RealTime RayTracing, like intersection tests?
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I read it the patent overview twice and I'm unclear about what this method is doing specifically. Legacy code support is in Microsoft's DNA, Windows would never have got so widespread without it and it's difficult to imagine Microsoft designing anything new without leveraging existing methods, all of which are predicated on techniques that include legacy code support but I very much doubt that when Sony were architecting PS4's software stack that they were thinking about whether PS4 games would have to work on PS5 and when you don't think like that, making that happen x years down the line becomes much harder when things change substantially.
Someone please help me understand this particular part within this patent. I know it's PSVR (possibly PSVR 2) and motion tracking related, but the hardware or console they're describing connecting the device doesn't sound like PS4.
Attention-based rendering and fidelity
Why are they describing the vector unit as separate logic outside of the GPU? I'm pretty sure all modern day CPUs/GPUs have some form of integrated vector logic / instructions sets on handling vector arrays. Am I misreading something here? Because GCN has the vector units integrated into them (see pic below). So why is the patent referring to a decoupled vector setup? If not, wouldn't the patent embodiment simply state that GPU is handling "render related task," rather than stating that the vector unit can communicate directly to the GPU through a dedicated bus as if it was something separate? Or is the patent being pedantic on the process of moving data around within the GPU? I'm confused...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyhow, the main part of the patent if anyone is interested.
Attention-based rendering and fidelity
Why are they describing the vector unit as separate logic outside of the GPU? I'm pretty sure all modern day CPUs/GPUs have some form of integrated vector logic / instructions sets on handling vector arrays. Am I misreading something here? Because GCN has the vector units integrated into them (see pic below). So why is the patent referring to a decoupled vector setup? If not, wouldn't the patent embodiment simply state that GPU is handling "render related task," rather than stating that the vector unit can communicate directly to the GPU through a dedicated bus as if it was something separate? Or is the patent being pedantic on the process of moving data around within the GPU? I'm confused...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyhow, the main part of the patent if anyone is interested.
Last edited:
Someone please help me understand this particular part within this patent. I know it's PSVR (possibly PSVR 2) and motion tracking related, but the hardware or console they're describing connecting the device doesn't sound like PS4.
Attention-based rendering and fidelity
Why are they describing the vector unit as separate logic outside of the GPU? I'm pretty sure all modern day CPUs/GPUs have some form of integrated vector logic / instructions sets on handling vector arrays. Am I misreading something here? Because GCN has the vector units integrated into them (see pic). So why is the patent referring to a decoupled vector setup? If not, wouldn't the patent embodiment simply state that GPU is handling "render related task," rather than stating that the vector unit can communicate directly to the GPU through a dedicated bus as if it was something separate? Or is the patent being pedantic on the process of moving data around within the GPU? I'm confused...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyhow, the main part of the patent if anyone is interested.
Because it’s like an AMD chiplet design. The first drawing shows everything hooked into an I/O processor.
It should be noted that the first figure looks like an apu that communicates with the i/o processor. The cpu, gpu, vector unit and main memory communicate through a system bus that connects to an I/O processor. The gpu and vector unit has a dedicated bus between them while the cpu and main memory has a dedicated bus. The i/o processor has it own external memory pool.
It doesn’t look like any design I’ve seen from Sony. But I haven’t look at Sony patents in years.
Stripping out the uncore would allow for a smaller apu.
Someone please help me understand this particular part within this patent. I know it's PSVR (possibly PSVR 2) and motion tracking related, but the hardware or console they're describing connecting the device doesn't sound like PS4.
Attention-based rendering and fidelity
Why are they describing the vector unit as separate logic outside of the GPU? I'm pretty sure all modern day CPUs/GPUs have some form of integrated vector logic / instructions sets on handling vector arrays. Am I misreading something here? Because GCN has the vector units integrated into them (see pic). So why is the patent referring to a decoupled vector setup? If not, wouldn't the patent embodiment simply state that GPU is handling "render related task," rather than stating that the vector unit can communicate directly to the GPU through a dedicated bus as if it was something separate? Or is the patent being pedantic on the process of moving data around within the GPU? I'm confused...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyhow, the main part of the patent if anyone is interested.
Emotion engine in PSVR2. Or better yet: it's Cell. Someone hold Shifty in place before he gets too excited.
- Status
Similar threads
