My 2 cents...maybe yes if cell ps4 came with 16 spus putting everything at 1080P (extra SPUs doing a job to reprocess somethings and upscale) and 3D.
Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech
- Thread starter Acert93
- Start date
- Status
My 2 cents...maybe yes if cell ps4 came with 16 spus putting everything at 1080P (extra SPUs doing a job to reprocess somethings and upscale) and 3D.
Do you use that feature of the 360? If so, can you give an example?
Ha ha... I don't dare to dream in that direction to prevent any disappointment. I think Sony will miss their target date again if the system is too complex. I like the idea of mixing SPU and specialized GPU cores though.
Given the length of this thread (in time and posts) I am just going to ask away rather than try to dig back through at this point.
Did anyone think of approaching this from the opposite direction? Everyone is trying to guess what will be done. How about we settle on a budget in power, dollars and mm and see what people on here want? Say 200 watts and 400$. You want more RAM, you trade off X mm of GPU or CPU for it. Want eDRAM, you lose $ and CPU/GPU but gain back more heat, etc, etc. There seems to be enough knowledge here to make some educated guesses as to what you could do with a given budget. Why don't we pick a rough date and node and see what people would consider acceptable tradeoffs?
Did anyone think of approaching this from the opposite direction? Everyone is trying to guess what will be done. How about we settle on a budget in power, dollars and mm and see what people on here want? Say 200 watts and 400$. You want more RAM, you trade off X mm of GPU or CPU for it. Want eDRAM, you lose $ and CPU/GPU but gain back more heat, etc, etc. There seems to be enough knowledge here to make some educated guesses as to what you could do with a given budget. Why don't we pick a rough date and node and see what people would consider acceptable tradeoffs?
Yes. You'll have to dig back through this thread.
I think Dave or someone else said that as the chips scale up in size more power is expended moving data around to the various units than is actually used to compute the programs themselves! I think if you scale up a lot of smaller units you'll run into a data movement wall as the quantity of information needed to be shifted would scale at least linearly with the number of SGX units expecially as they would be employing tile based rendering...
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Should be something on those points in the last 5 pages
But I agree, there is no point in making some super expensive box again. I know that people here want specs to be high as possible, but when you think about it, in the long run going with lower specs might be better. Sony and MS both lost tons of money on the current consoles, that is why they want to keep this gen going on as long as possible. If next time they would launch a system with a bit lower specs but at a price point that means they lose little money, break even or maybe even make some money on the hardware from the beginning instead of aiming for a 7+ year lifecycle as the main console, we could have a new console every ~5 years because nobody has the earn back a couple of billions they trow away in the first few years.
360 is still a good powerfull balanced console, but was profitable after a year (or at least very soon)
the rrod was the source of the financial problem, but if wasn't for this it would be a perfect box, so i think that we must/can espect a console with the same budget and philosophy from microsoft
the ps3 was extremely expensive due to hight price/low yelds of the cell, and the extremely hight cost of the bluray laser diode, so i think that we must not count it because it will hardly happen again
so no sony wii or ms wii :O
the rrod was the source of the financial problem, but if wasn't for this it would be a perfect box, so i think that we must/can espect a console with the same budget and philosophy from microsoft
the ps3 was extremely expensive due to hight price/low yelds of the cell, and the extremely hight cost of the bluray laser diode, so i think that we must not count it because it will hardly happen again
so no sony wii or ms wii :O
The next gen consoles should be powerful, what is the point of new consoles if they are not going to look much better than current gen?
I want games to look like Epic's Samaritan demo, if 3D gate tech does what Intel claims it does I hope that by mid 2013 a console will come out that uses it and is at least as fast as a GTX580 (if IBM, GF, TSMC, AMD and Nvidia also catch on with the tech).
I want games to look like Epic's Samaritan demo, if 3D gate tech does what Intel claims it does I hope that by mid 2013 a console will come out that uses it and is at least as fast as a GTX580 (if IBM, GF, TSMC, AMD and Nvidia also catch on with the tech).
That's not how it works in our architecture (linear scaling of 'data' requirements with MP), and I'm not sure what TBDR has to do with it either. Can you tell me what you were thinking of specifically?
They won't before their 14nm process.
Nvidia has no foundry by the way.
Hey Rys, if you're here with your expert opinion - what do you think about the idea of SGX cores embedded in a GCPU architecture, specifically Cell with SPUs and SGX? Does that sound workable to you both as a hardware platform and a scalable architecture that'd fit different devices? What would be the negatives?
You're very wrong about the flops, but very right about what can fit in that area
I hope I am very wrong too. I really would like to see TBDR return in next gen console. The advantages is all really suitable for console. Lets hope Sony see that after NGP when they're designing PS4. Though tell me something, how does TBDR handles tesselation and displacement maps ?
I think it's a great idea, and there's nothing inherent to either Cell or an architecture like SGX that would stop you wanting to pair them on the same die other than memories and how they'd talk to each other efficiently. It'd be a very workable hardware platform (although it'd need a really good memory controller/arbiter and on-chip memories) and would scale just fine down (and up) from a fixed console-strength part.
Negatives? I'm not sure there are many, at least if you're not the hardware designer trying to integrate the two (along with everything else the chip would need). It'd be really nice from a game developer's perspective, and it should be really quite efficient (back of a napkin calcs for that, and assuming Rogue).
The hard part would be communication, and you'd really want Rogue to be able to issue commands to the SPUs.
That's a bizarre question, when the Wii demonstrated that adding motion control proved to be enough to outclass its competitors in the market place in spite of barely improving on the graphics of its predecessor at all! The Kinect accessory alone have move millions of 360s, even though the graphics obviously didn't change.
Why people look to consoles selling for a few hundred bucks for technical innovation is beyond me. Their graphics is a means to an end, and that end is entertainment, and people care about graphics quality only insofar as it improves the entertainment value. While the goal posts certainly move with time, over time the trend still cannot be other than that the minutiae of graphics rendering will become increasingly less relevant to the entertainment provided.
Technology fetishists will have to look elsewhere for their kicks.
I heard I believe from Dave that moving data for a modern ATI graphics chip was more expensive in terms of power consumption than the actual calculations themselves. I assumed that the same would apply to all graphics hardware given they seem to follow many similar basic principles.
So even if the data quantity increased linearly, maybe its the size of the chip and the distance each bit would need to be sent which would cause the power use to scale up faster?
I always wanted to see if your graphics cores would be viable in a console... I was hoping that there'd be some kind of Microsoft ARM console due to their hoping for some synergy with Windows 8...
P.S. What does Molly! mean?
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Doesn't the GPU-dedicated RAM need to increase in bandwidth as you increase the number of cores? Not theoretically of course, but practically.
You couldn't get a "high-end" version of your GPUs to "infinitely" scale linearly with increasing the number of cores without increasing memory bandwidth, right?
I have to add though, that one area where consoles can be interesting from a technical standpoint is how they can improve efficiency vs. more modular PC solutions due to the device being conceived as a whole, and by having clearly defined targets (games are the applications, with a given target resolution at that).
Efficiency and intelligent compromise can certainly be interesting - simply "adding more" is less so.
Efficiency and intelligent compromise can certainly be interesting - simply "adding more" is less so.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
