NGGP: NextGen Garbage Pile (aka: No one reads the topics or stays on topic) *spawn*
- Thread starter Barso
- Start date
- Status
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
So, Sony didnt spend a dollar in customizing a byte?.
The note about supercomputer may refer to Durango's one-off customization to maximize compute power. The supercomputing folks are moving to use more mainstream GPGPUs to save $$$ these days.
Orbis was delayed for 6 months. It's also evolved since the old Steamroller and 2GB memory rumor. There was probably a Cell-based early work as well.
No TrustZone may mean another security system is in play.
The CU customization may be it. DF claimed it's separate from the regular GPU pipeline.
Orbis was delayed for 6 months. It's also evolved since the old Steamroller and 2GB memory rumor. There was probably a Cell-based early work as well.
No TrustZone may mean another security system is in play.
The CU customization may be it. DF claimed it's separate from the regular GPU pipeline.
Thanks, if there's any truth to this guy's story, it look like the Sony delay is not related to MS (could be because Sony change from steamroller to jaguar, because of steamroller cancellation). It says Orbis was already close to mass production. So maybe they shifted engineers on Durango simply because Sony's chip is practically ready. I agree it sounds like Durango had more custom stuff but we already know that, I doubt the esram is an "easy" addition
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
They wanted to put steamroller in with its super fpus and finally changed to vanilla netbook fpus based cores?.The strangest thing is they for sure knew MS was going to customize its jaguar fpus.And is not like they added cus on change because the 18 CUs were there from the beginning.So if something, apart from the 4 GB upgrade Orbis was downgraded from initial target specs.
If they have a target in mind, they will find something else to reach the target. This may be why we heard custom compute unit rumors for Orbis.
DF's compute unit comment is somewhat different from VGleaks. There may be further changes after the CPU switch.
They have been tracking people's interest. I wouldn't be surprised if they reveal more about the Durango CPU.
On Orbis side, it's probably more interesting to probe libGCM, TrustZone and the compute units.
bgassassin
Regular
Sweetvar also mentions his friend's lack of interest/knowledge in gaming, so his perspective about the hardware is going to be different than most of us would see it. They probably are looking at the overall picture to make that assessment. We OTOH tend to hone in on the CPU/GPU/memory to make our assessment.
Agree, completely. The companies certanly want to achieve their business model and make it an success. Even though they must look over their shoulder for the competitors specs/what they are planning (and adapt if needed/it is easy enough), but it is certainly not done in a fanboy war way, like some of the posters on the internet are implying.
Frankly, I think we would easier guess if these specs are correct or what is missing if we would know more about the business model and what they want to do (casual gaming, core gaming; where will you invest more? do you want to invest in AR/kinect/move (or just chug it along)? what is your main market/demographics? etc.).
One thing for sure I would love, after we have the real specs for both the Durango and the Orbis to debunk, each and every one of these false insiders in a new thread, because in many postings you can see attention "prostitutes" or really bad fanboyism...
I love these threads, only thinking about the possibilities with DVR/Tivo like stuff on the Durango or a share button on the Orbis (uploading gameplay to youtube without knowledge on capture hardware etc.) is really getting me excited, oh and getting better games helps too
. I am so glad that both Sony and MS have each other as competitors, only imagine what would be if they would ease up or only need to best Nintendos specs.Cheers...
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
The 1.84Tflop figure was there since 2011,so if the 4 special cus were there to compensate the weak fpus they still are detraining resources from the target gpu power.
I don't know. Is the Steamroller rated higher than the Jaguars in FLOP count ? They may tweak the CUs for compute efficiency rather than FLOP count. I heard the Steamrollers were not that power efficient.
For all we know, there may be extra (minor) compute resources if Sony is not using TrustZone in Jaguar (i.e., DF and VGLeaks were talking about 2 different compute setup). Something needs to run the security kernel. I'm not sure if Sony is comfortable with running their entire security framework with no hardware partitioning.
[size=-2]That Sony CTO was still dreaming and giving interview about exploring Linux on PS4.[/size]
Maybe they were originally thinking of the CPU doing a lot of heavy-lifting, but switched to DSPs and decompression blocks?
I need someone to explain to me how > 100 GFlops are going to be used for ordinary game code, seeing as the rest of the system is taking care of the graphics and audio and usual high-FP-burden code.
No no, don't put words in my mouth. I just said that there would be no documentation bearing the words "Jaguar". And it's one L, not two. I am not an irish beer
Indeed, if Apple are using the fan tech they developed for their macbooks, it's brilliant. It still won't work out at the distances required for a console. The Kinect pipeline gets around 40DB noise reduction, but takes 1/8th of a 360 core to do it. And directional mics, while they _may_ be useful on a mac mini, although I'd doubt it, would not work on a gaming machine where the field of play is something like 100 degrees wide.I guess you've never seen and not heard a MacMini? Because I have a quadcore i7 and two HDD RAID array in mine and you know what? I never hear it - including the fan. By the way, the types of mics they'd use are directional. They current mics are directional because they don't want to pick up the ambient noise around them, like from A/V equipment and the TV
Directional mics, as I pointed out above, would not work for a large playspace.
Yep, for multiple reasons. One of them being that MS always owns Dev kits, this way, if a game company goes bankrupt, MS can claim back their property without it being able to be auctioned off.
Phone mics use a simple form of noise reduction. They don't have to be amazing because your mouth is literally an inch from the mic, and it's mono. Some phones use a second mic to try remove ambient noise. I don't know how good those are, but again, the second mic is 5 times further away from your mouth as the first, but almost the same distance from ambient noises. I could probably write a filter that isolates the voice in a system with that configuration pretty easily. The Kinect stuff, on the other hand is a different ball of wax. For instance, your speakers are most likely much closer to the mics than the player, and have a lot more energy. The audio tech behind kinect is the CS equivalent of rocket science, and took a good six months of 12 hour days by a reasonable sized team, including a full time researcher, to get right. From the research page on AEC:
No. 8 1.6 GHz Jaguars would be the same max theoretical flop count as 4 3.2 GHz Steamrollers. Jaguar can issue one 128-bit FPADD and 128-bit FPMUL per cycle per core whereas Steamroller could issue 2 128-bit FPMAD per module (two cores). So in terms of flop count, both can execute 8 single precision flops per clock per core.
I think the biggest performance difference between Jaguar and Steamroller is the number of instructions that can be decoded per core in the frontend. For Jaguar it's two and for steamroller it will be four.
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
Well having FMA instructions in Steamroller automatically makes it better. Durango will be a compute monster with 8 fmas and access to ESRAM.
Last edited by a moderator:
1) You noted some possible uses of that kit, but not all. Don't pretend that you are the only person out there who fully grasps all that the machine is capable of please. At this point none of us do. Show some humility ffs man.
2) Your premise was that they built the architecture weak first and then were forced to add the extra kit to boost its performance. THAT is an assumption about the motivations behind Durango's design choices which you have yet to justify.
Cute.
You didn't actually respond to the points I raised specifically on your assumption here. You don't even know what Durango's setup is capable of at this point yet you are eager to gloss over points raised by others just to assert that whatever works well for Durango must just automatically work as well or better for Orbis? I am certain I have read ppl on this very forum lay out criticisms of exactly this assumption. Maybe they were wrong. The same counter argument was made in that article from that Spanish blog that made the rounds a week or two ago.
Did you read through this? http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=es&to=en&a=http%3A%2F%2Fjosepjroca.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F02%2F08%2Fdurango-nos-hace-coger-el-delorean%2F
The very last paragraph or so specifically is worded in a way that seems to suggest Orbis wouldn't be leveraging virtualized asset stuff as thoroughly.
Oh goodie, a tantrum.
No, my 'entire argument' is critiquing your assumptions, which is absolutely based on a premise that you've yet to justify with any evidence. According to what you said earlier the extra kit isn't there to leverage virtualized asset handling in a meaningful way, it's just there to reduce a performance gulf between Durango and a competitor's console that MS didn't even know about when these decisions were likely being made.
Quote me saying this please. Nobody is attacking you. There is no need to have a meltdown trying to defend your arguments with personal attacks and arrogant, condescending assertions left and right. You can defend your premise without that emotional baggage. It's OK to note an assumption you have made and then carry arguments based off of that through to conclusions. There is nothing wrong with starting with an axiom. Us physicists do it all the time. But pretending like it's not there isn't helpful and only misleads ppl when your posts are so bloated with arrogance.
Again, this is all moot IF you have a case to make that MS was only adding kit to reduce the performance gulf relative to a system they knew nothing about at the time.
Ooook guy. Moving on now...you clearly would rather have an emotional meltdown and feign victimhood than engage in skeptical inquiry. Yikes.
Last edited by a moderator:
I wasn't putting words in your mouth so much as making an inference from your post, which I assume is limited somewhat in what it can convey directly. If MS has never referred to the CPU as related to Jaguar directly it suggests there are some differences in how they operate and/or perform.
- Status
Similar threads
