Michellstar
Regular
Well, what was the reason of AMD pulling out "sea island"´s pdf??
Sorry don't understand?Well, what was the reason of AMD pulling out "sea island"´s pdf??
Sorry don't understand?
Sea Island is gcn2.0 though, we're talking about gcn1.1.
I would go inferring anything like that; I'm merely pointing out the capabilities of AMD's discrete GPU's and how that plays into the IP sets that are available. I'll leave others to consider how they implemented elsewhere. I think people reading the thread should also play closer consideration as to how IP's are developed and implemented as well.No technical reason for thinking this, but if Dave felt it worth us figuring out there is a hardware level difference between tier 1 and 2, I think it is probable that Durango and Orbis are different in this regard. And since it was Dave who tossed out the nugget, I tend to think that implies it is MS with the tier 2 hardware. Could be completely wrong of course.
The terms "Southern Islands", "Sea Islands", etc. do not refer to an IP level, they refer to a group of ASIC's on a roadmap that only really correlates to silicon implementation resources. While there has been close correlation to particular IP and a number of ASIC's under a roadmap family name (eg: Evergreen, Southern Islands) that's not a rule and mixed IP sets will fall under roadmap names (eg Northern Islands, Sea Islands).I though Sea Islands was just the 2013 stuff (mixture of GNC 1 and GNC 1.1) before Volcanic Islands (or whatever they are called; GNC 2) is released.
So seeing that there isn't any DirectX 11.2 hardware out yet & PS4 is using a DirectX 11.2 GPU does that mean the GPU is a future GPU that's not out yet while Xbox One is a customized GPU that is already out?
Before I thought it was going to be the other way around with the PS4 using a older GPU & customizing it while the Xbox One was using a newer GPU that haven't been tested on the market yet.
So seeing that there isn't any DirectX 11.2 hardware out yet & PS4 is using a DirectX 11.2 GPU does that mean the GPU is a future GPU that's not out yet while Xbox One is a customized GPU that is already out?
Before I thought it was going to be the other way around with the PS4 using a older GPU & customizing it while the Xbox One was using a newer GPU that haven't been tested on the market yet.
Before I thought it was going to be the other way around with the PS4 using a older GPU & customizing it while the Xbox One was using a newer GPU that haven't been tested on the market yet.
No such thing as DX 11.2 hardware. Theres only GCN1.0 and 1.1. Ostensibly 1.0 maps DX 11.2 API to tier 1 Tiled resource capability and 1.1 maps 11.2 to Tier 2.
Its all still the same ip family. There will be future derivatives of both. Not sure how to reconcile that with the inquirer article.
What would be the thought process behind (anyone) believing Sony would choose a current or older AMD architecture for PS4? Microsoft had an established relationship with AMD/ATI "console wise" since XB360 development... so one would think XB1 GPU was in the process of being developed first - "WAY BEFORE" Sony and AMD came to any agreement on working together. I would think Sony engineers would be smart enough to know/use something within AMD's roadmap that would suffice their needs beyond 2013. Sony is known for using exotic wares... except this time around, they wanted something developer friendly, but, robust enough to serve their purposes beyond 2013.
What would be the thought process behind (anyone) believing Sony would choose a current or older AMD architecture for PS4? Microsoft had an established relationship with AMD/ATI "console wise" since XB360 development... so one would think XB1 GPU was in the process of being developed first - "WAY BEFORE" Sony and AMD came to any agreement on working together. I would think Sony engineers would be smart enough to know/use something within AMD's roadmap that would suffice their needs beyond 2013. Sony is known for using exotic wares... except this time around, they wanted something developer friendly, but, robust enough to serve their purposes beyond 2013.
What would be the thought process behind (anyone) believing Sony would choose a current or older AMD architecture for PS4? Microsoft had an established relationship with AMD/ATI "console wise" since XB360 development... so one would think XB1 GPU was in the process of being developed first - "WAY BEFORE" Sony and AMD came to any agreement on working together. I would think Sony engineers would be smart enough to know/use something within AMD's roadmap that would suffice their needs beyond 2013. Sony is known for using exotic wares... except this time around, they wanted something developer friendly, but, robust enough to serve their purposes beyond 2013.
MS's relationship with AMD is probably more with ATI especially in the early days ... lots of shared work going on between MS and ATI that resulted in many famous patents of which many believe are the final XB1 architecture.
We believe its the final architecture because lots of the architects that are presenting XboxOne are the names on these patents .. and some are even on ATI patents as early as 2007 ... yes MS has special arcitects called "partner architects" , they're role is to work with partners at an architecture level ..
eg. Mark S. Grossman - partner hardware architect at MS (partners with ATI) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/mark-grossman/0/856/695
Partner could mean that his bonus is tied in with the revenue sharing, like as a law firm's partner.
So I've read comments that somehow suggested that Sony made custom design to the GPU by bumping the ACEs from 2 to 8 (?), hence the compute command queue length was increased to 64. The ACE is still AMD's IP, not Sony's. On the other hand, the X1's GPU actually have 2 compute cmd processors + 2 gfx cmd processor, and I couldn't find similar design in other Radeon products. This would suggest that this could be MSFT/AMD joint IP.
I looked at the GCN architecture pdf, and I can't find anything that suggests there are two graphics command processors, which confuses the heck out of me regarding the Xbox One. I see two compute command processors, but I assume that's just another name for the two ACEs that come with regular GCN. Microsoft renamed quite a few things on their own GPU compared to what AMD calls specific components, but 2 graphics command processors?
The command processors are on the upper left in purple (graphics) and blue (compute)
The ACEs are on the lower left in green (2 swizzle copies, 1 swizzle copy with encode, 1 swizzle copy with decode).
The ACE's(Purple/Blue) are not the Move Engines (Green), and he is indeed correct. After all ACE stands for Asynchronous Command Processor and a second note, both the PS4 and the XBONE come with 2 Graphics Command Processors, the only difference in this regard is that the PS4 has 8 Compute Command Processors whilst the XBONE has 2.
The ACEs are on the lower left in green (2 swizzle copies, 1 swizzle copy with encode, 1 swizzle copy with decode).