Digital Foundry: next-gen PlayStation and Xbox to use AMD's 8-core CPU and Radeon HD

[Red Hawk]

Thats not true. Not to mention 8 jaguar cores are anything but low power and could easily be replaced.

It's not entirely true, as AMD probably gave them a really good deal for it. But heat was definitely a concern, so the console manufacturers wanted cooler, low-power CPUs. Jaguar may not be the coolest thing compared to ARM and Bay Trail, but it's a heck of a lot cooler than a 3 GHz quad core CPU would be.

 

[ShintaiDK]

8 Jaguar cores at 1.6GHz will have similar multi-threaded performance to a 3GHz i3, while pulling around half the power.

The important thing is the cores are not acting as a severe bottleneck, judging by this review of the A6-5200 - http://adrenaline.uol.com.br/biblioteca/analise/784/amd-a6-5200-kabini.html?pg=5

There you can see 4x2GHz is capable of matching anything else AMD has including the FX-8350 in gpu bound scenarios.

We already covered that prescripted benchmarks got no real world usage. As it was tested with a 800Mhz and 4900Mhz Haswell ingame and in the benchmark. Jaguar is simply too weak.

800Mhz Haswell scored 74FPS in the benchmark. But only 22FPS ingame.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35371206&postcount=7

So nice, try, no cigar. Jaguar isnt up to the task. It would most likely not even get past 20FPS ingame. And thats for the 2Ghz version. Something the consoles dont even have.

 

[ShintaiDK]

It's not entirely true, as AMD probably gave them a really good deal for it. But heat was definitely a concern, so the console manufacturers wanted cooler, low-power CPUs. Jaguar may not be the coolest thing compared to ARM and Bay Trail, but it's a heck of a lot cooler than a 3 GHz quad core CPU would be.

Its simply a bad design choice they made. And it keeps being reflected in the statements by MS. The GPU part alone could have been fixed by going the same path as the PS4. And only MS suffers for that. But when they cant even maintain FPS before release, and havign up up the CPU clock just to get by on a day by day basis. Then you know they did a really bad design decision. And its not gonna be any better in the future.

I doubt the reason for Jaguar cores vs Pilediver/Steamroller was TDP. It was rather the PR in 8 instead of 4. Plus the usage of 2 cores for both companies for OS.

 

[AtenRa]

We already covered that prescripted benchmarks got no real world usage. As it was tested with a 800Mhz and 4900Mhz Haswell ingame and in the benchmark. Jaguar is simply too weak.

800Mhz Haswell scored 74FPS in the benchmark. But only 22FPS ingame.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2344229

So nice, try, no cigar. Jaguar isnt up to the task. It would most likely not even get past 20FPS ingame.

The 22fps was with the HD4600 not with a discrete GPU like the GTX680.

ps: your link is wrong

 

[ShintaiDK]

The 22fps was with the HD4600 not with a discrete GPU like the GTX680.

ps: your link is wrong

Wrong.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35371206&postcount=7

It was with 7950 CF.

 

[SPBHM]

The 22fps was with the HD4600 not with a discrete GPU like the GTX680.

ps: your link is wrong

Tomb Raider with ultimate settings is definitely not playable (probably under 20fps on the bad areas) with Jaguar on the PC, the built in benchmark is not very good when it comes to showing more CPU bound areas.

BUT, with medium or low I believe it would be possible, it reduces the CPU load drastically (because of the level of detail setting).

anyway, with 8 cores and a fixed platform I think it would be a different story...
but I'm afraid they will spend a lot of time designing games with the CPU bottleneck in mind, like they spend a lot with the current gen when it comes to memory

 

[AtenRa]

Wrong.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35371206&postcount=7

It was with 7950 CF.

Ahh yes it was with CF, still not the same as a single GPU. Also, Haswell Core i5 only has 4 cores.

And one more thing,

If MS has a bottleneck with 8 Jaguar cores with a lower GPU, then why SONY doesnt have a CPU Bottleneck with higher GPU part in PS4??

 

[ShintaiDK]

Ahh yes it was with CF, still not the same as a single GPU. Also, Haswell Core i5 only has 4 cores.

And one more thing,

If MS has a bottleneck with 8 Jaguar cores with a lower GPU, then why SONY doesnt have a CPU Bottleneck with higher GPU part in PS4??

Just because Sony havent mentioned it yet, doesnt mean its not there. And you can always cut the game down enough to run if thats the goal.

 

[SPBHM]

Ahh yes it was with CF, still not the same as a single GPU. Also, Haswell Core i5 only has 4 cores.

And one more thing,

If MS has a bottleneck with 8 Jaguar cores with a lower GPU, then why SONY doesnt have a CPU Bottleneck with higher GPU part in PS4??

because they don't have many options? if the choice was AMD it was this, or some low clocked "Piledriver" derivate with possibly lower performance (worse performance per watt for a 30W CPU)?

 

[AtenRa]

Heh, you dont just add more Radeon cores when you have a CPU Bottleneck. It is a waste of resources, R&D, Time and money.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Heh, you dont just add more Radeon cores when you have a CPU Bottleneck. It is a waste of resources, R&D, Time and money.

Xbox One console got both CPU and GPU bottlenecks, from MS themselves. The PS4 most likely the same CPU bottleneck.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Just because Sony havent mentioned it yet, doesnt mean its not there. And you can always cut the game down enough to run if thats the goal.

Or maybe Microsoft just mentioned it because it seems that Sony has the better console, hardware and maybe software wise and it is preferable for Microsoft to lay the blame somewhere else.

http://www.ibtimes.com/ps4-vs-xbox-one-sony-playstation-4-50-faster-microsoft-xbone-1406064
"Our contacts have told us that memory reads on PS4 are 40-50 per cent quicker than Xbox One, and its ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit) is around 50 per cent faster. One basic example we were given suggested that without optimisation for either console, a platform-agnostic development build can run at around 30FPS in 1920×1080 on PS4, but it’ll run at “20-something” FPS in 1600×900 on Xbox One. “Xbox One is weaker and it’s a pain to use its ESRAM,” concluded one developer."
[...]
"Sony and Microsoft are each still working on the graphics drivers for each console, and Xbox One is lagging behind in this regard – Microsoft “has been late on their drivers and that has been hurting them,” said one source. Another described Xbox One’s graphics drivers less charitably as “horrible”. Both consoles’ graphics drivers will continue to improve right up to – and beyond – launch, which will even up the difference in performance a little."

Reminds me a bit of the NVIDIA complaints about TSMC 40nm node while AMD didn't say much.

 

[sniffin]

Xbox One console got both CPU and GPU bottlenecks, from MS themselves. The PS4 most likely the same CPU bottleneck.

Your entire argument is based on a quote made by a company rep from a division that is under pressure to justify their horrible design choices. Sony meanwhile seem pretty content. So please stop

 

[VulgarDisplay]

The anti AMD crowd is so sensationalist it makes me giggle. If the CPU is so horrible in the upcoming consoles how on earth have they been making games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 that are FAR slower in single threaded performance. According to you guys it shouldn't be possible to run games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 because their CPU's are too slow.

Stop making crap up.

 

[CakeMonster]

The new CPUs are vastly better but that's not the point. Games will be better looking by leaps and bounds too. But none of that makes it any less of a fact that especially the CPUs are very unimpressive by today's standards and are indeed holding the games back.

 

[rgallant]

http://thenextweb.com/asia/2013/09/...-year-ban-on-the-sale-of-video-game-consoles/
-amd gets to sell a few more chips.
if these consoles are sub par today and the market is that big , with china in the mix now could ms and or sony not release a stronger unit down the road say 2015-16 ?

 

[toyota]

http://thenextweb.com/asia/2013/09/...-year-ban-on-the-sale-of-video-game-consoles/
-amd gets to sell a few more chips.
if these consoles are sub par today and the market is that big , with china in the mix now could ms and or sony not release a stronger unit down the road say 2015-16 ?

there is zero chance of releasing faster versions. the hardware you get now is the hardware that will be there till the end of the cycle.

IMO these new consoles are going to look like more of joke half way through their life cycle then current consoles look now. hell some games are still only going to be 720 and most games that are 1080 will still be 30 fps. and within 4 or 5 years the cpus in tablets and some phones will be faster than what the consoles have.

 

[ShintaiDK]

http://thenextweb.com/asia/2013/09/...-year-ban-on-the-sale-of-video-game-consoles/
-amd gets to sell a few more chips.
if these consoles are sub par today and the market is that big , with china in the mix now could ms and or sony not release a stronger unit down the road say 2015-16 ?

Its Shanghai zone only tho. Other parts was also allowed in the zone. But its 25 million or so people, not 1.3 billion.

There wont be any stronger units. Its these consoles for the next 7-10 years.

 

[AtenRa]

There wont be any stronger units. Its these consoles for the next 7-10 years.

7-10???

Since MS and SONY will not loose money from this console gen, ill say 5 years tops. There is no way that Tablets and Phones will have that Graphics performance in 4-5 years.

 

[ShintaiDK]

7-10???

Since MS and SONY will not loose money from this console gen, ill say 5 years tops. There is no way that Tablets and Phones will have that Graphics performance in 4-5 years.

MS already gave a 10 year commitment.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/microsoft-makes-ten-year-commitment-xbox-one/58173.html

So I doubt its any less than 7-8 years.

Xbox One is looking at a more than 10-year journey

 

[StrangerGuy]

The anti AMD crowd is so sensationalist it makes me giggle. If the CPU is so horrible in the upcoming consoles how on earth have they been making games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 that are FAR slower in single threaded performance. According to you guys it shouldn't be possible to run games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 because their CPU's are too slow.

Stop making crap up.

The Intel people are just mad that AMD is forcing their favorite company to play by AMD's rules.

 

[AtenRa]

MS already gave a 10 year commitment.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/microsoft-makes-ten-year-commitment-xbox-one/58173.html

So I doubt its any less than 7-8 years.

[/I]

For us, it’s not just about the launch date. It is about the start of the journey where the console will be improved and will be adapted and changed.“[The] Xbox One is looking at a more than 10-year journey.”

For those Xbox 360 owners who are worried about being phased out, Microsoft will keep on supporting their current-gen predecessor for three more years, which puts the Xbox 360 at the eleven-year mark.

It is another thing to change the Hardware in 5-7 years and another to support it for 10 years. I doubt they will keep the same hardware for more than 5-7 years.

 

[podspi]

MS already gave a 10 year commitment.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/microsoft-makes-ten-year-commitment-xbox-one/58173.html

So I doubt its any less than 7-8 years.

[/I]

From the article you are referencing:

For those Xbox 360 owners who are worried about being phased out, Microsoft will keep on supporting their current-gen predecessor for three more years, which puts the Xbox 360 at the eleven-year mark.

Just because updated hardware is available, doesn't mean the older hardware won't be supported as well. Bonus for this, if future consoles are also x86-based, I imagine we'll see dual-system releases, where it can run on the XBone or XBone+ (with added goodies). Honestly, that's super cool.

 

[ShintaiDK]

From the article you are referencing:




Just because updated hardware is available, doesn't mean the older hardware won't be supported as well. Bonus for this, if future consoles are also x86-based, I imagine we'll see dual-system releases, where it can run on the XBone or XBone+ (with added goodies). Honestly, that's super cool.

What, an Xbox One+ in 2020 or later?

I didnt say the older hardware would be unsupported right away. But when MS says 10 years or longer. Its pretty much set in stone that we will get no new consoles before 2020 or so. Since the new Xbox One will run to 2024 or longer.

 

[Gideon]

All this talk about console hardware not changing at all, during its 5-10 year lifetime as it has been all this time ...

I'm not so certain that it's set to stone to a similar degree this time around. It's just a guess, but:

• They will soon have competitors, like SteamBox, that will have iterative updates
• Consoles are much more similar to PCs in hardware now. They even share the low-end graphics API with AMD cards. Which in turn is used to optimize run on vastly different hardware, APUs to SLI rigs.
• More and more auto-optimizing software, like Geforce Experience and the AMD equivalent, are cropping up. These will make optimizing for multiple performance targets substantially easier.
• They are even now doing the unheard of: Releasing the majority of new games on both current and next generation. And according to Michael Pachter for quite some time to come.

I can't stress the last point enough. Xbox 360 and PS3 are tablet-level performance targets with ridiculously different software stacks compared to current gen (let alone each-other). Therefore if they are supporting these for years to come, an incremental update would be easy-peasy in comparison. Basically, the cost of designing and maintaining multiple performance versions of your Console in its traditional life-cycle might not be as difficult now, as it was in the past.

Now let's consider a hypothetical scenario:

Right alongside the EOL-ing of Xbox 360 in 2-3 years, Microsoft releases "Xbox One S" which bests PS4 in performance by a considerable degree, catching the traditionally thinking Sony completely off-guard. They would of course still continue to support the old one (no biggie compared to Xbox 360) but would also regain the "hardware crown" and make some fans rebuy their console in a most "appleish" way

I'm not saying doing that is actually the best thing to do. It's just that the Console market is not doing too well, the vendors should actively be considering such ideas rather than dismissing them outright. After all, history books are full of companies failing to redesign their failing business models and being outmaneuvered by their more agile compeditors ... Along with a considerable amount of sour grapes and heartbroken fanboys