PlayStation 4 (codename Orbis) technical hardware investigation (news and rumours)

Status
Not open for further replies.
My understanding previously, that the AMD's 3rd gen HSA systems would pound on the same memory addresses without penalties, thereby totally eliminating the need to copy data between memory spaces.
I believe the goal is a shared and coherent address space, where the compute elements are able to handle pages not being in physical memory.
Hitting the same addresses at any given point is likely to have penalties, much as it would for programs running on different cores. The penalties would likely be worse and side effects probably stranger, since this is crossing between two memory subsystems with very different latencies and consistency models.

AMD has promised filters that block unnecessary coherence requests, but that won't do much for cases where data is being thrashed back and forth.

Edit: The cache explanation from Dumbo made some sense to me. The caches should be accounted for when talking about coherency. So any address space that CPU works on cannot be read faster than cpu's cache writing those results back, and that can't be faster than 20GB/sec. Have I understood correctly?
The bigger question is what happens when the CPU reads GPU memory. That was the massive performance hit that Llano had. The CPU domain's ordering rules and consistency requirements meant accessing the uncached domain flushes everything and serializes accesses.
Stuff over Onion is different, and since it is on the same order as what the CPUs could be expected to pull over their interfaces, it's just bad relative to what the GPU can do on its own.

The distinction is made in the properties assigned to the memory pages. One thing I've thought about is aliasing virtual pages with different caching settings, which seems to be possible. My reading on this seems to indicate operating systems are expected to squash that due to the undefined behavior that can result, however.

Eurogamer Portugal released translated version of Richard Leadbetter's DF article [eng version is not up yet] that talks about PS4 memory. Apparently, SDK documentation says that game dev's can have guaranteed access to only 4.5GB of ram. Additional 1GB is described as "flexible".
I was wondering why the consoles weren't utilizing the modern paging capabilities of the CPUs they were using, although I sort of thought they'd have a bigger game reserve or at least a bigger pageable limit.
Without knowing what's in the OS reserve, it's difficult to say why it is so big. The obsession with avoiding paging activity is rather extreme, in my opinion. A big transition, such as between a game and a full-screen media app, should provide enough information to institute a hierarchy of latency needs that permits both sides to roll in and out automatically. Apps or their SDKs should be able to evolve in concert with the consoles, and only so much of their working sets are going to be allergic to demand paging.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now, the "4,5 GB reserved for gaming" affair, could implicate something about the CUs usage number ?

Could it be the final confirmation of the 14Cu + 4Cu theory ?

Could this memory amount avaiable for gaming be a bottleneck for the hypothetical full 18 CUs usage for graphic rendering?

So at this point, could we assume that 4CU (or more) will be reserved for OS, PSEyes, voice recogntion, audio tasks, streaming, and, in general, more useful tasks ?

Technical people out there, what do you think about it ?
 
Also you should ask if PS4 is killing bunnies? Selling drugs to kids?

14Cu + 4Cu theory has been discussed several times and nothing has changed. There are two CPU cores reserved for OS related tasks.

Only new info available is about OS reservation and it has no impact on GPU/CPU performance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also you should ask if PS4 is killing bunnies? Selling drugs to kids?

14Cu + 4Cu theory has been discussed several times and nothing has changed. There are to CPU cores reserved for OS related taskas.

Only new info available is about OS reservation and it has no impact on GPU/CPU performance.

how can that be. The OS will require CPU cycles at the very least and most likely gpu cycles. How could it not have an impact on gpu/cpu performance ?
 
Number of OS reserved CPU cores hasn't changed. Additional GPU cycles would be required only if OS/apps would display GPU intensive (tessalated??) GUI on top of working game, which is highly unlikely. There is no basis for claiming, that (stupidly) high OS reserve will have impact on in game CPU/GPU performance.
 
So almost 50% reserved for.. What!? That is just to much wasted on no gaming stuff. Microsoft can to an extent be excused. They did afterall build a everything including windows 8 machine.

Sony on the other hand is hopefully being just very conservative..
 
Also you should ask if PS4 is killing bunnies? Selling drugs to kids?

14Cu + 4Cu theory has been discussed several times and nothing has changed. There are two CPU cores reserved for OS related tasks.

Only new info available is about OS reservation and it has no impact on GPU/CPU performance.

Please, I really would like to keep the conversation on a technical level or at least on a mature level. Please, I would like you to know that I am not emotionally invested in this conversation, not at all.

As now, I am old and wise (maybe...) enough, I just want to understand the truth behind each tech, and not to be dragged by beautiful composed words and marketing schemes. Right now we have many info at our disposal, why do not use our brain to analyze them?

Unfortunately, I am not a technical expert, and for this reason I come on this forum asking if my thought could have some technical evidence or not.

So, I really suspect that the 4,5GB restriction, in combination with the limited memory bandwith of PS4 towards CPU (20 GB of PS4 vs 68 GB of Xbox One), could be an evidence that some heavy task on PS4 could be moved from CPU to CUs. Also some OS tasks, if you ask me.

This seems so out of world for you?
Why?
 
So, I really suspect that the 4,5GB restriction, in combination with the limited memory bandwith of PS4 towards CPU (20 GB of PS4 vs 68 GB of Xbox One), could be an evidence that some heavy task on PS4 could be moved from CPU to CUs. Also some OS tasks, if you ask me.

This seems so out of world for you?
Why?

4 CU OS reserve seems out of the world to me.
 
4 CU OS reserve seems out of the world to me.

Yes, 4CUs ONLY for OS tasks seem absolutely out of this world to me too, but I am confident that you know that it wasn't my point.

We have to consider that much is going on (or is planned for the future) in the back stage of PS4.
Do you not believe that 3.5 GB (or 3 + 0,5 GB as you prefer) reserved for OS and future tasks are quite telling? Do not you think so?
So 15 min video recording, remote playing, possibly instant switch between apps and games etc... and much more I believe!

Also we have to keep in count that PS4 doesn't have dedicated hardware like X1.
So, no ultra modern audio block. But I believe that at audio quality will have to increase at least at minimum from the PS3 era. I really would like next GT to have an incredible next gen audio.
Also, Cerny himself has declared that in the future 3D audio will be perform via CUs.
So, to you, future games that will perform 3d audio will have worse graphic than launch titles (as an exemple) because they will have less resources (CUs) available?
It seems logic to you? I see here prove for some form of CU reservation.

It seems also that PSeye has not dedicated hardware at all, so no voice recognition in OS or games, no motion sensing, no scanning etc.. via dedicated hardware.
If they wish to add at least speech recognition (in OS as voice search, or in games) they have to reserve ex-ante some computing resources to that task. No matter if you have PSeye or not, you have to reserve it in order to make it happend.

Moreover, as the memory bandwith for CPU in PS4 seems to be "limited" to less than 20Gb/s, I really can see them moving some heavy tasks (audio & speech recognition as an exemple) to CUs.

The extra CUs are there as general computing resources, in order to compensate, in time, the lack of dedicated hardware.

Again there are many evidences out there about 14+4cu: rumors (also on this board), leaks, Cerny interviews, logical assumption based on hardware news etc... and I hope it will be true.
 
Again there are many evidences out there about 14+4cu: rumors (also on this board), leaks, Cerny interviews, logical assumption based on hardware news etc... and I hope it will be true.

14+4 is and always has been a scenario sony was probably using to show off that you could do both compute jobs and graphics at the same time.

No where has it been suggested that, that is the split you have to do or use, infact that very notion has been debunked on these forums multi times.
 
14+4 is and always has been a scenario sony was probably using to show off that you could do both compute jobs and graphics at the same time.

No where has it been suggested that, that is the split you have to do or use, infact that very notion has been debunked on these forums multi times.

Ok, I suppose, you do not even read my post...
Ok, thank for your open mind attitude and willing to discussion!

I am not analyzing what Sony has told us...
I just would have like to analyze the reality of the hardware...
 
So, I really suspect that the 4,5GB restriction, in combination with the limited memory bandwith of PS4 towards CPU (20 GB of PS4 vs 68 GB of Xbox One), could be an evidence that some heavy task on PS4 could be moved from CPU to CUs. Also some OS tasks, if you ask me.

This seems so out of world for you?
Why?

You better check your facts, the CPU does not interface with the memory system at 68GB/s on XB1 according to the leaks it is 20GB/s over the Northbridge.
 
Again there are many evidences out there about 14+4cu: rumors (also on this board), leaks, Cerny interviews, logical assumption based on hardware news etc... and I hope it will be true.
Why do you want 4 VUs reserved for non graphics work? 18 CUs can do everything 14+4 can, but is also more flexible giving developers options.
 
You better check your facts, the CPU does not interface with the memory system at 68GB/s on XB1 according to the leaks it is 20GB/s over the Northbridge.

You are right we are both wrong:
PS4 20gb/s (10gb/s x 2)
X1 41,6gb/s (20,8 gb/s x 2)
68 gb/s is to northbridge...

Also the coherent access to GPU CPU is 10gb/s PS4 - 30gb/s X1.


PS4 has dedicate hardware.
Read this.

Well, actually in reality it seems that PS4 doesn't have a dedicated audio block. Cerny is great in PR, but he is simply referring to a compression decompression unit, similar to the one that is present on the Xbox360 but all the heavy audio task will be performed by CPU (or CU).
For istance, X1 has a huge audio block with 4/5 different Chip/CPU.
Pay a visit to the Versus Audio topic you will learn a lot there (at least I have)!!!
 
Why do you want 4 VUs reserved for non graphics work? 18 CUs can do everything 14+4 can, but is also more flexible giving developers options.

It is just a theory. I believe that in this way PS4 could be a more equilibrated and capable system.

And I like also to be realistic... there are multiple evidences that point to this.

Just as an exemple, while the majority out there were sure of the 7gb, 7,5 gb of memory reserved for gaming on PS4, I was more then sure that riservation would have been different. There were solid evidences... So today news of 4,5gb reserved x gaming has not shocked me at all.

Again the 14+4 CU is just a theory, and maybe I am wrong... We will see!!!
 
It is just a theory. I believe that in this way PS4 could be a more equilibrated and capable system.
No it won't. You gain absolutely nothing by sectioning off 4 CUs. Keeping it as 18 CUs in a standard config is simpler, and devs can choose to use 4 on audio or physics or something, or can choose to use it all for graphics.

And I like also to be realistic... there are multiple evidences that point to this.
There are two (the old leak and Cerny's strange statement about not being 100 percent round). There is more reason to think it's just 18 CUs as both supported by Sony's official documentation and the logic of not artificially sectioning off some CUs (which is as counter-intuitive as section off a couple of the CPU cores for only graphics work would be).

Just as an exemple, while the majority out there were sure of the 7gb, 7,5 gb of memory reserved for gaming on PS4, I was more then sure that riservation would have been different. There were solid evidences... So today news of 4,5gb reserved x gaming has not shocked me at all.
There was a little evidence that flied in the face of reason. However, reason proved the victim here. The 8 GBs GDDR5 was also unexpected because it didn't make a great deal of sense. Sony could have sectioned off 4 CUs, but it would be the illogical choice and thus would come as another surprise to those who (perhaps foolishly) expect people to make sensible decisions. ;)
 
If Sony's reservation is similar to MS's, which in CPU and RAM it appears to be, then they'll reserve about 2 CUs for the system. Although it may not be 2 actual CUs, it might be something nebulous like 10%.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top