RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
- Status
Only if Microsoft buys them like they bought the company that originally developed the hardware behind Kinect. But this time, they're probably in for a fight on that front, as I can easily see Apple wanting to get in on this too (there's been tons of rumors that Apple wants to finally do something real with AppleTV, and Apple has more cash to spend than any other company out there, including Microsoft). And Sony and Google could make a play, too.
And slightly related to this Cell/x86 argument, I wonder how fast of an x86 processor would it take to be able to retain backwards compatibility by running a PPC emulator on an x86 core (as opposed to putting a Cell inside the PS4, like they had to do with the Emotion Engine inside the first PS3s)? I remember them being able to do it when Macs switched from PowerPC to Intel chips with a performance penalty on the software, but the Cell is so old at this point I wonder if a low end chip would be able to run the code through the emulator without a loss in performance?
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
BC is not happening for PS4 from everything I've read. Firstly, software emulation has proven to be poor in all past consoles, and Sony is unlikely to put a Cell into the PS4 just for that function. Secondly, RSX was a fixed pixel/vertex shader pipeline GPU. It'll be a pain in the arse to get BC working with AMD's latest GPUs. Thirdly, Sony would make a lot of $ selling PS3 games digitally as HD remakes. The company needs that $ more than ever; which means BC would hurt them more since that source of revenue wouldn't exist really. Fourthly, if you really want BC, you should keep your PS3 or if you want to play the PS3 library, I am sure Sony will be happy to sell you digitally remastered versions over PSN. I would bet on it.
I don't plan on selling my PS3 anytime in the future, but with the rise of digital distribution on consoles (this is basically the first generation to really have it), there's going to be a lot of anger if there's absolutely no BC. The WiiU has already announced that it's backwards compatible, so if Microsoft were to announce that it would be (and I think I've heard that they haven't made a decision either way), then I don't see how Sony would be able to get away with not doing it. I mean, technically, the PSVita is backwards compatible with the PSP (with the actual problem being the fact that they didn't put a UMD drive on it). If they can get the right parts at the right cost, I could easily see them pulling a PS3, where the first units are sold with the parts, and then at the first redesign they take them out. Makes for an even greater rush on the first production run than there might be normally, too.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
In addition to all those excellent points.
It should be noted, sony still manufactures and sales PS2s today.
http://us.playstation.com/ps2/systems/
IIRC they raised the price on it by 50$ from when I last checked on it. (probably due to the removal of emotion engine from PS3)
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
People are always angry about lack of BC, and I never understand why:
1) To guarantee perfect BC, owners of PS3 system should just keep their PS3. Even Xbox360 had problems with some Xbox1 games.
2) Sony posts record high $5.7 billion annual loss, worst in company history
It costs a lot of $ to get software emulation to work properly. Sony isn't exactly awash with cash right now to focus on this. Their best bet is to focus on putting PS4 in the best light possible, and that means pushing 3rd party developers, and putting all their marketing effort into PS4. They can still sell PS3 for $149 or w/e as taltamir noted for those people who want to play PS3 games if their older PS3 broke.
It's not the same though. Wii U continues to use AMD GPU and PowerPC IBM multi-core CPU. Xbox 720 is most likely going to use a unified shader AMD GPU and also a PowerPC CPU just like Xbox 360 did. BC for those consoles is a walk in the park.
Sony is rumoured to switch from the Cell/PowerPC environment to x86 AMD processor and from NV graphics to AMD unified shader GPU. That's a BC nightmare right there. The fact that the Cell isn't backwards compatible with x86 CPU code tells you right there it's a nightmare to get working. I am calling limited or no BC for PS4.
The part I never get is why would anyone spend $500+ on a next generation console to play old generation games. If someone wants to play old generation games, they should keep their current system. To get BC working on the PS4 will only raise its price by making Sony waste $ on getting it to work. Sony should have ditched BC on PS3 right away and chopped off $50+ off the original PS3 (the rumoured added cost per console to get PS2 BC working due to the cost of the Emotion Engine).
Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think SNES had BC with NES, N64 didn't have it with SNES, Gamecube didn't have it with N64. I think it's fair to say the most areas which will allow a next generation console to succeed are: (1) price, (2) excellent 1st and 3rd party next generation games, (3) strong online/social gaming community and (4) innovative features that make each console unique, not BC. Even though PS3 had BC right off the bat, the $599 price tag hurt the console's penetration initially. If Sony can reduce the price of PS4 but not adding BC, I think they should do it. In this economy, it's more important to try to get your console aggressively priced because a high price may make you uncompetitive even if you have BC.
Last edited:
BlockheadBrown
Senior member
- Dec 17, 2004
- 307
- 0
- 0
Source: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=477540&page=40
jeff_rigby on NeoGAF was recently called out, so he put this up:
1) microsoft-sony.com
2) digitimes PS4 rumor
3) Microsoft Xbox 720 powerpoint and the Xbox 361 Lots of people kept copies of the file and can email on request.
4) This patent and the timing in both filing and publishing XTV game support.
5) Both ps3 and Xbox 360 refresh must have a price reduction built in to allow a price reduction when the PS4 and Xbox 720 are released. This is already possible for the Xbox 360 but the PS3 would NEED a massive redesign to put both CPU and GPU on the same silicon.
6) Sony 2010 1PPU4SPU patent
7) Elizabeth Gerhard's Projects (IBM employee) and an International project involving the Xbox 360 @ 32nm and NO design work for a PS3 refresh at 32nm
8) Oban = large blank Japanese Coin => Oban is for both the PS3 and Xbox 361 (Microsoft making the chip for Sony)
9) Both having browsers at the same time for the first time ever and both have a refresh at the same time for the first time ever
10) Sony depth camera patent (Timing, 9/2011 & again 2/2012)
11) Khronos Openmax 1.2 (Supports Gstreamer-openmax and camera, second Khronos Pdf mentioning Augmented Reality starting Sept 2012 leveraging the browser libraries
In the threads there (multiple source links associated), it's mused that BC is possible, but is still a question mark. Note that everything above is not me. It's a poster gathering information from various sources and putting it together. There's more than what's posted here though. Things touched on are 360 and PS3 refreshes and how those affect the next gen systems. It is all speculation, but it's mind-worthy laffy-taffy.
jeff_rigby on NeoGAF was recently called out, so he put this up:
1) microsoft-sony.com
2) digitimes PS4 rumor
3) Microsoft Xbox 720 powerpoint and the Xbox 361 Lots of people kept copies of the file and can email on request.
4) This patent and the timing in both filing and publishing XTV game support.
5) Both ps3 and Xbox 360 refresh must have a price reduction built in to allow a price reduction when the PS4 and Xbox 720 are released. This is already possible for the Xbox 360 but the PS3 would NEED a massive redesign to put both CPU and GPU on the same silicon.
6) Sony 2010 1PPU4SPU patent
7) Elizabeth Gerhard's Projects (IBM employee) and an International project involving the Xbox 360 @ 32nm and NO design work for a PS3 refresh at 32nm
8) Oban = large blank Japanese Coin => Oban is for both the PS3 and Xbox 361 (Microsoft making the chip for Sony)
9) Both having browsers at the same time for the first time ever and both have a refresh at the same time for the first time ever
10) Sony depth camera patent (Timing, 9/2011 & again 2/2012)
11) Khronos Openmax 1.2 (Supports Gstreamer-openmax and camera, second Khronos Pdf mentioning Augmented Reality starting Sept 2012 leveraging the browser libraries
In the threads there (multiple source links associated), it's mused that BC is possible, but is still a question mark. Note that everything above is not me. It's a poster gathering information from various sources and putting it together. There's more than what's posted here though. Things touched on are 360 and PS3 refreshes and how those affect the next gen systems. It is all speculation, but it's mind-worthy laffy-taffy.
Last edited:
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
Refresh? So what does that mean that in 3-4 years the existing PS4/720 customer base will be alienated if they don't upgrade to a more powerful PS4/720? Seems doubtful to me. It would be like the N64 expansion pack which was a failure.
BlockheadBrown
Senior member
- Dec 17, 2004
- 307
- 0
- 0
No. It's a refresh of current systems. Power considerations, lower costs, etc. PS3s and 360s will continue to sell for quite some time, even with the release of the PS4 & 720.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
Oh my bad, thanks for clarifying. That makes a lot more sense, trying to grab the budget gamers/consumers who won't be willing to spend $300+ on new consoles.
BlockheadBrown
Senior member
- Dec 17, 2004
- 307
- 0
- 0
Blitzvogel
Platinum Member
- Oct 17, 2010
- 2,012
- 23
- 81
BC in the 360 would make sense only in hardware, which means they automatically have to go with PPC, but they could still change the processor and probably translate graphics code to a GCN-architecture AMD GPU without too much trouble (though unless the Xbox 720 has eDRAM, the lack thereof could be a problem). Further more, I don't know how much trouble it would be to make 360 code run on a multi-core OoO PPC processor. Assuming it has 3 cores, with at least 2 threads per core, I would think it should work. I think the best thing for MS and it's developers would be to stick to familiar hardware ISA but give them a much more flexible and capable platform. 4 OoO Power7 cores with 4-way SMT, 256 bit VMX per core and lots of L2 or L3 would be great for getting well running code from the get go, with plenty of room to spare as the system gets older. 360 games in development could be easily ported to the new system, and continued use of DX derived APIs would make PC <=> 360 porting easy. Question is, does a new system need such wide general purpose cores?
On the Sony side, it would be smart of them to continue manufacturing the PS3, at as low a cost as possible, but with a profit, and continue to sell it for those who would've wanted BC and maybe for those looking for flexible, low power HTPC/media systems. Leaving BC out of the PS4 is beneficial to everyone, simply because it lowers the manufacturing cost, making profitability from manufacture more likely, and lower in costs for consumers (of course). Going x86 would like sticking with PPC in the Nextbox would serve to leverage a very large base of gaming programmers already highly familiar with a proven and flexible type of computing.
However, do these new systems need many wide general purpose cores in terms of general throughput + high GFLOPS since die space and use is at such a premium? Or would (for example), a dual-module Piledriver, but with split 512 bit FPUs per module (as opposed to 256) make more sense in accordance with the increasing vector and FP processing needed for modern gaming?
On the Sony side, it would be smart of them to continue manufacturing the PS3, at as low a cost as possible, but with a profit, and continue to sell it for those who would've wanted BC and maybe for those looking for flexible, low power HTPC/media systems. Leaving BC out of the PS4 is beneficial to everyone, simply because it lowers the manufacturing cost, making profitability from manufacture more likely, and lower in costs for consumers (of course). Going x86 would like sticking with PPC in the Nextbox would serve to leverage a very large base of gaming programmers already highly familiar with a proven and flexible type of computing.
However, do these new systems need many wide general purpose cores in terms of general throughput + high GFLOPS since die space and use is at such a premium? Or would (for example), a dual-module Piledriver, but with split 512 bit FPUs per module (as opposed to 256) make more sense in accordance with the increasing vector and FP processing needed for modern gaming?
bryanW1995
Lifer
- May 22, 2007
- 11,144
- 32
- 91
It is either funny or sad that I sometimes still bust out my SNES. I'm going with "sad", though last time I just downloaded an emulator for Zelda. Hmmm, I think that I need a run in Super Metroid... Does Nintendo BC go back that far, that might be enough to get me to buy a wii!
Last edited:
Reading that linked NeoGAF thread reminded me of Sony's purchasing of Gaikai, and of what they could do regarding BC if they didn't want to eat the probably $40-$50 of hardware costs by adding in PS3 software. Especially with the digital distribution that's been going on, what if they offered BC by cloud streaming? Any game that you bought over PSN, you can play on our cloud servers. And even better for their bottom line, what if they offered it as a perk of paying for PS Plus? It obviously wouldn't be ideal for many reasons, but it would be something, and I don't see why it couldn't work.
Edit: And the one thing you're forgetting with your BC examples is that this is basically only the second generation that actually stuck to using physical media for its games. Cartridge sizes changed between the NES/SNES/N64 days, making BC much harder. Once we got to the point where it was all discs, each console had some type of BC (Wii is/was backwards compatible with Gamecube games, PS2 with PS1 games, X360 with some (including most popular) Xbox games, PS3 fully BC with PS1 games and initially BC with PS2 games).
Last edited:
Blitzvogel
Platinum Member
- Oct 17, 2010
- 2,012
- 23
- 81
It is either funny or sad that I sometimes still bust out my SNES. I'm going with "sad", though last time I just downloaded an emulator for Zelda. Hmmm, I think that I need a run in Super Metroid... Does Nintendo BC go back that far, that might be enough to get me to buy a wii!
Makes me happy that the PC doesn't suffer so much from the same predicaments. Yes, things can be more complicated, but at least theoretically one could run any PC game from long ago on their computer, assuming they have the patience to work through whatever problems may pop up in terms of compatibility.
Red Hawk
Diamond Member
- Jan 1, 2011
- 3,266
- 169
- 106
It is either funny or sad that I sometimes still bust out my SNES. I'm going with "sad", though last time I just downloaded an emulator for Zelda. Hmmm, I think that I need a run in Super Metroid... Does Nintendo BC go back that far, that might be enough to get me to buy a wii!
You can buy a number of classic Nintendo games through the Wii's VirtualConsole, including Super Metroid. I don't think you can actually use your old Super Metroid cartridge with the Wii though.
Tweak155
Lifer
- Sep 23, 2003
- 11,449
- 264
- 126
It is either funny or sad that I sometimes still bust out my SNES. I'm going with "sad", though last time I just downloaded an emulator for Zelda. Hmmm, I think that I need a run in Super Metroid... Does Nintendo BC go back that far, that might be enough to get me to buy a wii!
Yes - for some games. The most popular ones are available on the Wii Store - including Super Metroid & Zelda. They are like $8 a pop or something like that.
Cerb
Elite Member
- Aug 26, 2000
- 17,484
- 33
- 86
They don't need a big fat CPU core like BD or IB, at all. The one used in the Cell and Xenon just happened to be a hard to use speed demon that, outside of FP throughput, made the Atom look alright in performance per clock. Think about all that was wrong with the P4, but take it to further extremes. Something Bobcat-ish, like a PPC470, pushed to high speeds, with a decent amount of cache, would probably be plenty; using the high speeds for throughput, and largely relying on profiling and low-level optimizations.
Having weaker CPUs with high speed to help make up for it isn't terrible, since they need to keep size/cost down, up to a point. At the time, IBM had just been getting work done on the Power 6, and the Power 6 looked very much like a big brother of the Cell and Xenon's CPU. IBM's management and engineers had GHz and magic fairy dust compilers on the brain, and it trickled down to some customers.
Also, I would have time believing they would not use eDRAM on a XB360 replacement. Bandwidth limitations are a big issue for consoles (IE, cost), and with limited near-metal and bare-metal access, eDRAM can offer massive performance improvements, due to saving main memory IOPS and bandwidth.
Blitzvogel
Platinum Member
- Oct 17, 2010
- 2,012
- 23
- 81
What has been done on Xenon by developers has been pretty impressive. I'm sure the VMX units are to thank for it, even if they are held back by the meager L2 and in-order nature of the cores. To further move my original question about core width and FPU width in reference , what I was getting at is would it be smarter/better to have for instance a 4-issue wide core with a 256 bit FPU, or in place 2x 2-issue cores each with a 128 bit FPU? Wouldn't a wider core be easier for developers?
As for eDRAM, I have a feeling it won't make an appearance on the 720. For full 1080p visuals without compromise, I'm sure it would be too expensive and limiting for future system revisions unless integrated into a full GPU (and not in the split method a la Xenos). A good load of fast, unified GDDR5 on a 128 bit wide bus with something like Cape Verde would do the job quite well while keeping the mobo simple and cheaper. I'm hoping MS sticks to the way the 360 is set up, with the Northbridge/GPU as the system hub or combine the processor and GPU to make an APU. MS needs to minimize the number of components while keeping them to a manageable size if they're to expect to sell the system for a reasonable price and still make a profit.
As for eDRAM, I have a feeling it won't make an appearance on the 720. For full 1080p visuals without compromise, I'm sure it would be too expensive and limiting for future system revisions unless integrated into a full GPU (and not in the split method a la Xenos). A good load of fast, unified GDDR5 on a 128 bit wide bus with something like Cape Verde would do the job quite well while keeping the mobo simple and cheaper. I'm hoping MS sticks to the way the 360 is set up, with the Northbridge/GPU as the system hub or combine the processor and GPU to make an APU. MS needs to minimize the number of components while keeping them to a manageable size if they're to expect to sell the system for a reasonable price and still make a profit.
Vector processing and physical simulations are what supercomputers are used for most often. Both of which are commonplace in gaming.
The Xeon systems are using Tesla for their compute, the Opteron system is using Cell. High end x86 works well as a fancy North Bridge
Cell is 64 bit, the only thing that could be remotely confusing is that you only have access to the bottom 32 in memory address space when used in the PS3(I thought Xenon was too, not certain on that one though).
eDRAM packs ~3x as dense as 'normal' transistors, for 1080p, 4x MSAA FP16 we would need to see just under 64MB, die space wise that would work out to roughly 50mm2 at 28nm- obviously all numbers very rough but that is the ballpark. For always 'free' 4x MSAA, I think you can certainly make a *very* strong argument as to going for it.
eDRAM reduces system level memory bandwidth requirements by a rather staggering amount, less traces, less layers- you will certainly have a less expensive mobo going with eDRAM versus not having it(although the chip cost will certainly be higher).
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
It is either funny or sad that I sometimes still bust out my SNES. I'm going with "sad", though last time I just downloaded an emulator for Zelda. Hmmm, I think that I need a run in Super Metroid... Does Nintendo BC go back that far, that might be enough to get me to buy a wii!
http://vimm.net/?p=vault
You should just get the Wii U for Nintendo games. I wouldn't waste $ on the Wii.
The Xeon systems are using Tesla for their compute, the Opteron system is using Cell. High end x86 works well as a fancy North Bridge
Ben, you are still beating a dead horse. Theoretical CPU performance is irrelevant for running real world games. Already shown to be 100% misdleading when comparing FX8150 vs. i5 2500K. Until you get this point, any discussion about how awesome the Cell is, is meaningless. I already told you the Cell is great at mathematical calculations such as Folding@Home, password hashing, etc. It's no wonder it's actually great for a super-computer. For games though, it's SLOW and not once has been shown to be superior to modern x86 CPUs in running modern games. It's getting ditched anyway so you have 12 more months to bask in the glory of its "theoretical" performance but once PS4 gets rid of it for good, 99.9999999999% of us will be enjoying the faster gaming performance it will bring courtesy of PowerPC, AMD or Intel multi-core CPU. Since the Cell is dirt cheap to manufacture now, if it was so great, Sony wouldn't be replacing it. It's performance/watt and absolute performance for games are clearly inferior if Sony is willing to pay more for a modern CPU architecture from other companies.
Last edited:
Blitzvogel
Platinum Member
- Oct 17, 2010
- 2,012
- 23
- 81
64 MB? Ouch, that sounds expensive
A unified system would still probably stick to 128 bit like the previous Xbox. Not sure how much cheaper DDR3 is compared to GDDR5. Considering it would be shared between both the CPU (which I would use for sound as well) and the GPU I'd make it nice and fast, at least 1000 MHz. At something like 1500 MHz (96 GB/s on 128 bit), it makes the inclusion of eDRAM I think unnecessary, even with the eDRAM's advantages. As long as it doesn't get too hot and there is plenty ventilation, go figure. Graphics eDRAM doesn't help the CPU either though I'm sure there are engineers working on designs with a boat load of eDRAM that both x86 cores and graphics can share.
Outside of MSAA and the z-buffer, what advantage does the eDRAM provide? What if a developer forgoes the use of MSAA?
Last edited:
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
Another PS4 rumour:
"There will be a Fusion processor codenamed Liverpool. The APU may have four cores and run at 3.2 GHz. the site also lists a "Tahiti" R10XX GPU that is capable of 1,843 Gflops at 800 MHz clock speed, 2 or 4 GB memory, a Blu-ray drive, HDMI 1.4 support, 16 GB Flash memory and at least 320 GB HDD space. The launch date is sometime in 2013."
Reverse engineering that 1843 Gflops = 1.84 Tflops ==> 1150 Shaders HD7000 series @ 800mhz would give you that. That's roughly between HD7850 and HD7870 level of GPU speed. Looks way better than those early HD6670 rumours.
"There will be a Fusion processor codenamed Liverpool. The APU may have four cores and run at 3.2 GHz. the site also lists a "Tahiti" R10XX GPU that is capable of 1,843 Gflops at 800 MHz clock speed, 2 or 4 GB memory, a Blu-ray drive, HDMI 1.4 support, 16 GB Flash memory and at least 320 GB HDD space. The launch date is sometime in 2013."
Reverse engineering that 1843 Gflops = 1.84 Tflops ==> 1150 Shaders HD7000 series @ 800mhz would give you that. That's roughly between HD7850 and HD7870 level of GPU speed. Looks way better than those early HD6670 rumours.
Lonbjerg
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 4,419
- 0
- 0
Where the hell have you been during ANY PhysX debate?
You might wan't to google "scripted physics".
You point is flawed...to the extreme!
General purpose compiled x86 versus assembly vector code- you don't even understand this conversation.
You should check out the links I posted. The big disadvantage Cell has is performance per developer dollar spent. *That* is its' major shortcoming. It kills x86 on perf/mm, perf/watt or perf/$ on a hardware level. Nobody that understands what they are talking about debates those points.
Framebuffer access hundreds of times faster then not having eDRAM. There are many different ways that can be of benefit, 4x MSAA for "free" is simply the easiest for people who don't know anything about technology to understand. On a PC because of the constantly moving size and structure of the framebuffer it doesn't make a lot of sense, on a fixed platform like a console it actually makes a lot of sense.
Watching retarded monkeys throw fecal matter at each other is more insightful to the workings of game code then participating in the debates about game code structures in this forum. Also, you are talking about x86 based development, you don't have a lot of choice but to use scripted physics in such a development environment(outside of PhysX and perhaps Bullet if that ever gets anywhere).
Edit- That last comment needs a bit of expanding. On this forum you have your group of AMD loyalists who bash any advancement in physics simulations without having a clue what they are talking about. You also have a group of nVidia loyalists who champion advancements in physics simulations without having a clue what they are talking about. With visuals pushing on the uncanny valley, advances in physical simulations are the best way to increase immersion at this point, no matter what kind of hardware you cheerlead. How well that is being done is another discussion entirely, but the general point is valid.
Last edited:
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 347
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter