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

[3dilettante]

Is there any definitive analysis on how powerful an 8 core Jaguar would be at 1.6-2Ghz?

Jaguar, in any form, isn't on the market yet.

Are we talking i5 level performance? Lower?

Which one, which metrics?

I know that, apparently, in some ways the Xenon and Cell blow it out of the water which is.. Disconcerting.

Is this something of note now, this far into the thread?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I know that, apparently, in some ways the Xenon and Cell blow it out of the water which is.. Disconcerting.

Jaguar was selected for ease of development, and if a lot of the work the CPU would have to do is being handled by custom HW or GPGPU, the need for superpowered CPUs just isn't there. In truth, for those few tasks where you can get maximum performance from last gen console CPUs, they blow every CPU out of the water in terms of performance per mm^2 including money-no-object i7s, but those tasks are few and far between, unnecessary next-gen, and come with major shortcomings that you don't want in an easy to use, general purpose CPU. Think of Cell as like a drag car - insane straight-line speed, but otherwise a useless vehicle and not a choice for a racing driver or for school runs (Cell is of course far more flexible than a drag car in comparison to its rivals, but it is heavily imbalanced towards particular workloads).

 

[patsu]

Most of Cell's work in PS3 is graphics related. They can be done by the new GPU now.

The other common stuff Cell is good at are taken up by the dedicated h/w units.

The remaining AI, physics and odd jobs will be handled by the CPU and the GPU jointly. Since they can access the same pool of memory, "we" don't have to waste time on unnecessary copying.

Overall, it should be a leap compared to what the PPU alone could achieve.

 

[Brad Grenz]

I was thinking about this when I first saw the recent Edge translated Yoshida interview with 4Gamers.net but I forgot to bring it up by the time I finished reading it. In it he mentions switching between a game and Netflix at will



I thought this was quite strange since I figured Netflix, like a game, would just simply be considered as a non-system application. Now, this could just be a mis-understanding on Yoshida's part. Based on the information we have directly from SCE so far, it safe to say a certain amount of OS level functions will be available while a full App is running. As such, OS video playback (directly from the CUX) may well be supported by using whatever reserved resources the OS has, while an active game is still in memory. Some confusion on his part may have stemmed from that.

Setting that aside, if his statement is accurate, this could imply a few things. We know some amount of memory is reserved for the OS and unavailable to running applications. Thus if Netflix, in his example, were to be treated like a regular application then launching it should boot any running game (or other app) from unreserved memory. Unless SCE is making some of the OS reserved memory available to apps that meet certain performance and size requirements (they know how much they need for system level functions, and make the rest available to qualified apps). Similarly, the originally rumored OS reservation may have been bumped up from 512MB (unsupported rumors currently at 1 GB). Instead of reserving that extra space for the OS, it acts a a separate memory space for Apps that meet certain performance requirements.

Of course, the problem with this theory is how resources outside of memory would be handled. We know the DCE can only handle 2 planes, with 1 reserved for the OS. So, as I understand it there's no hardware level combing/blending that can be done before dropping everything to the front buffer. Since there's a chance the game could be refreshing at framerate A, with the OS at B, and Netflix at C, some level of software scaling, blending, and combining would have to be done to account for this wouldn't it (to ensure a responsive user experience)? Which would likely have to be done by whatever resources are available to the OS. That's along with any additional GPU and audio (ACP) resources needed (which may very well be minimal for an App like Netflix which would rely on the UVD).

Regardless, it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. I would really like to be able to swap between a game and media applications like Netflix, Hulu, Crunchyroll, etc, but I wasn't counting on it (not on the PS4 at least). Of course, there's also the possibility that games will drop into some sort of suspended state and cache their memory state to HDD (that could be a lot of data to try and write quickly, and then read back out again). Or, something along the lines of what's done with the Vita. On the VIta, if you have a game running, and open the browser, if you try to open a page it can't currently handle, it tells you what application you need to close (typically or perhaps always the game) to free up the resources it needs.

A Netflix, or other similar streaming app doesn't require very much memory. Rokus handle the highest bitrate streams and the full interface on something like 128MB of RAM. And even if a full game can't easily be suspended to hdd/flash, any number of smaller apps definitely could, allowing for multitasking with lots of those at the same time as a game is running.

 

[patsu]

Regardless, it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. I would really like to be able to swap between a game and media applications like Netflix, Hulu, Crunchyroll, etc, but I wasn't counting on it (not on the PS4 at least). Of course, there's also the possibility that games will drop into some sort of suspended state and cache their memory state to HDD (that could be a lot of data to try and write quickly, and then read back out again). Or, something along the lines of what's done with the Vita. On the VIta, if you have a game running, and open the browser, if you try to open a page it can't currently handle, it tells you what application you need to close (typically or perhaps always the game) to free up the resources it needs.

Does Vita still do that ? I did a few tests yesterday. It seems that Vita allocates a fixed memory partition to the apps. If the web browser used up all its memory, it wouldn't ask you to quit other games or apps anymore. You'll have to close existing browser windows to free up memory. I don't know if they can add VM support for these apps.

You can "zoom out" to the LiveArea and swipe to any game or app as usual.


As for overlays, it's hard to say. iOS and Mac uses CoreAnimation layers to composite apps and OS views. These layers can be hardware accelerated, or purely rendered by software. The OS combines them on-the-fly.

In Vita's LiveArea, the foreground app will snapshot its screen to the LiveArea when the user presses the PS button. The user then swipes between these thumbnails in the LiveArea screen.

On PS4, if Sony want to present a NetFlix movie, and Knack live on the same screen, I suppose they can use the GPU to composite the frames (like CoreAnimation). The 2 scanout planes are probably the final destinations for OS and apps.

 

[tuna]

It will probably be similar to Vita, you will be able to run one game and one non-game app at the same time (you can run Gravity Rush and Skype together). The non-game app will probably only get 100 MB RAM and the rest is in the virtual memory.

 

[Gradthrawn]

Does Vita still do that ? I did a few tests yesterday. It seems that Vita allocates a fixed memory partition to the apps.

It happened a couple of days ago. So, before the upcoming update to fix stability issues, but after the 2.10 update. I had a game running, a few other system apps open/suspended (I think Friends, Messaging and something else) and then launched a browser. One page I tried to hit required the running game to close. I can't seem to replicate that now, however.

On PS4, if Sony want to present a NetFlix movie, and Knack live on the same screen, I suppose they can use the GPU to composite the frames (like CoreAnimation). The 2 scanout planes are probably the final destinations for OS and apps.

Oh, I'm sure they can, I'm more curious about how, and what has to happen (with the OS/game resources) in order for them to do it. The type of info that ultimately doesn't matter to any consumer as its the end result that counts. But the geek in me is curious.

It will probably be similar to Vita, you will be able to run one game and one non-game app at the same time (you can run Gravity Rush and Skype together). The non-game app will probably only get 100 MB RAM and the rest is in the virtual memory.

Interesting, I didn't realize something like that was already available with non-system Vita apps. Just tried it myself with that very combo (Skype + Gravity Rush) and it worked. Both apps were active (I didn't fully log into Skype though).

 

[patsu]

It happened a couple of days ago. So, before the upcoming update to fix stability issues, but after the 2.10 update. I had a game running, a few other system apps open/suspended (I think Friends, Messaging and something else) and then launched a browser. One page I tried to hit required the running game to close. I can't seem to replicate that now, however.



Oh, I'm sure they can, I'm more curious about how, and what has to happen (with the OS/game resources) in order for them to do it. The type of info that ultimately doesn't matter to any consumer as its the end result that counts. But the geek in me is curious.

There are too many possibilities. It's kinda up to the "window manager" software of the OS to overlay the app output.

They may also use the scanout engine to scale the app/game output and overlay them into the OS plane (or vice versa).

Interesting, I didn't realize something like that was already available with non-system Vita apps. Just tried it myself with that very combo (Skype + Gravity Rush) and it worked. Both apps were active (I didn't fully log into Skype though).

The music playback is another example of multi-tasking if that's what you mean. You can play local music and games at the same time (plus PSN traffic like friends notification, Near updates, party chat, etc.).

 

[Gradthrawn]

The music playback is another example of multi-tasking if that's what you mean. You can play local music and games at the same time (plus PSN traffic like friends notification, Near updates, party chat, etc.).

I would consider the default Music player a system (OS) level app and would expect it to work properly with a game as with any other modern game OS. Along with Trophies, Friends, Messaging, Browser, etc. Apps SCE has developed and can account for in the system resource reservation. Skype being 3rd party I would definitely consider outside of that (along with Netflix and the like).

 

[patsu]

The background music playback works with the Music Unlimited app too, not just the built-in Music player.

There should be a way for developers to schedule background jobs partly because of LiveArea. The LiveArea tasks seem to run as another process/thread under the OS's care rather than in the app process. It gets updated and user can interact with it even if the app has not launched yet.

This backgrounding API may or may not be private.

EDIT:
One thing that may be an off-shoot from PS Mobile is standardized UI widgets (button, scroll bar, etc.). Was told PS Mobile and Vita UI share similar/same look & feel. While this is standard affair for Apple and Microsoft, it is a huge change *if* Sony is going that way.

They kinda have 2 looks now. The Vita/PSM look, and the PS3 HTML5 app look (See PS Store, PS3 webapps, and the PS4 screen mock up).

 

[babcat]

Most of Cell's work in PS3 is graphics related. They can be done by the new GPU now.

The other common stuff Cell is good at are taken up by the dedicated h/w units.

The remaining AI, physics and odd jobs will be handled by the CPU and the GPU jointly. Since they can access the same pool of memory, "we" don't have to waste time on unnecessary copying.

Overall, it should be a leap compared to what the PPU alone could achieve.

The problem is that in the ps4 there is nothing to assist the underpowered GPU like there was in the ps3. Since the RSX was not quite top of the line, the cell could help make the graphics better. However, since the cpu in the ps4 is fairly weak, it will be able to do little to help with graphics.

 

[Bagel seed]

The problem is that in the ps4 there is nothing to assist the underpowered GPU like there was in the ps3. Since the RSX was not quite top of the line, the cell could help make the graphics better. However, since the cpu in the ps4 is fairly weak, it will be able to do little to help with graphics.

Because they don't need the CPU to have to do those things anymore. They've got enough there to handle the regular, must do CPU related tasks.

If Sony had to do it over I'm sure they'd be willing to lop off half the power of Cell which most devs ended up having to use for graphics assisting RSX anyways and put it on RSX itself. Which is basically the situation we have with PS4 now... a bigger chunk of performance shifted towards the GPU.

 

[babcat]

Because they don't need the CPU to have to do those things anymore. They've got enough there to handle the regular, must do CPU related tasks.

If Sony had to do it over I'm sure they'd be willing to lop off half the power of Cell which most devs ended up having to use for graphics assisting RSX anyways and put it on RSX itself. Which is basically the situation we have with PS4 now... a bigger chunk of performance shifted towards the GPU.

This is the problem. When the Ps3 launched the rsx was fairly high end. maybe three quarters as powerful as a 7800 gtx. However, the ps4 gpu will only be about one foutth or one fifth as powerful as a high end gpu. Basically, the current console is like getting less than half the rsx and a cpu with half the power of the cell. There is simply not going to be much ability for the cpu to help the gpu be more powerful.

 

[Bagel seed]

Well, they had to draw the line somewhere. No longer on the cutting, bleeding edge. In return we get cheaper, cooler, quieter consoles.

Look at it this way. If the PS4 we know now had come out in 2011, it'd be quite impressive no? Then look at the advancement of graphics in games on PC where all that massive power is, since then. All of it gets dumped into increasing res and AA basically. It's a standstill. We haven't really seen what ~2TF is really capable of yet on fixed res and platform. Infiltrator-ish and Deep Down level of quality will be no problem soon enough. Hard to complain at that point I think.

 

[mczak]

This is the problem. When the Ps3 launched the rsx was fairly high end. maybe three quarters as powerful as a 7800 gtx. However, the ps4 gpu will only be about one foutth or one fifth as powerful as a high end gpu. Basically, the current console is like getting less than half the rsx and a cpu with half the power of the cell. There is simply not going to be much ability for the cpu to help the gpu be more powerful.

I don't see where you're getting the one fifth of high end gpu. Right now it would be about half and I don't see anything faster coming out til it launches. Unless you're comparing to Titan-SLI or something like that.
Plus, when the PS3 finally launched, 8800GTX was actually out (barely) and I would definitely qualify RSX as less than half as powerful. Even if you discount that chip, 7900GTX was readily available (though I actually guess RSX is about 3/4 of 7900gtx).

 

[Aeoniss]

I don't see where you're getting the one fifth of high end gpu. Right now it would be about half and I don't see anything faster coming out til it launches. Unless you're comparing to Titan-SLI or something like that.
Plus, when the PS3 finally launched, 8800GTX was actually out (barely) and I would definitely qualify RSX as less than half as powerful. Even if you discount that chip, 7900GTX was readily available (though I actually guess RSX is about 3/4 of 7900gtx).

Right, people often overlook this fact. When the PS3 shipped there were GPU's out that smashed its RSX chip, yet look at what kind of games we enjoy today when it came to the "whole package" like the Uncharted, God of War, Killzone and GT series on the platform.

Pretty mind blowing.

 

[patsu]

The problem is that in the ps4 there is nothing to assist the underpowered GPU like there was in the ps3. Since the RSX was not quite top of the line, the cell could help make the graphics better. However, since the cpu in the ps4 is fairly weak, it will be able to do little to help with graphics.

That GPU in PS4 should be able to outrun Cell and other regular CPUs easily in graphics.

For future growth, I think Sony is counting on developers exploiting the custom features (via lower level optimization). The copious amount of memory should help in future apps too.

 

[Sonic]

The problem is that in the ps4 there is nothing to assist the underpowered GPU like there was in the ps3. Since the RSX was not quite top of the line, the cell could help make the graphics better. However, since the cpu in the ps4 is fairly weak, it will be able to do little to help with graphics.

I'm not sure you are correct in this regard. Chances are a few CPU cores will end up assisting in graphics where it makes sense and can be put to great use, as well as CU's compute assisting CPU where it makes sense. You may believe there aren't enough FLOPS from the CPU part of te APU to help in graphics, but there is more to graphics than just FLOPS.

 

[babcat]

I'm not sure you are correct in this regard. Chances are a few CPU cores will end up assisting in graphics where it makes sense and can be put to great use, as well as CU's compute assisting CPU where it makes sense. You may believe there aren't enough FLOPS from the CPU part of te APU to help in graphics, but there is more to graphics than just FLOPS.

My guess is that the CPU will do little to assist graphics in most games. It will probably be used for game code, animation, physics, and other non graphical tasks. Simply put, the CPU is not designed to help with graphics in the way CELL was. Basically, the only graphical power the system will have is in the fairly weak gpu -- unless there is something hidden that we dont know about which I think is less and less likely.

 

[babcat]

That GPU in PS4 should be able to outrun Cell and other regular CPUs easily in graphics.

For future growth, I think Sony is counting on developers exploiting the custom features (via lower level optimization). The copious amount of memory should help in future apps too.

But the problem is that unlike the ps3' the ps4 does not have anything to assist it significantly in graphics. What we see is what we get. We will see little more than what an ordinary 7850 or 7870 can produce. And any compute that is used will take away from graphics performance. There is nothing to really hope for in the long term.