GDDR5 RAM vs On-Package Cache RAM to improve IGP performance?

[Fjodor2001]

The top PS3 was 599$.

The top PS4 will sell at 40000 yen. or around 400$.

Could you buy a cheaper PS3? Yes. Can you also buy a cheaper PS4? Yes.

The cheapest PS3 could be had for $399 at launch. The cheapest PS4 will not be much cheaper than that, we're talking perhaps $50-100 max.

Also, even the cheapest PS4 will have 8 GB GDDR5 too, which is the main point.

 

[ShintaiDK]

What "facts" is it that you have "corrected"? Like when you incorrectly claimed that the launch price of the PS was 2x$400=$800 here?

If you wanna play the facts game with him. Get your own facts straight first. Top PS3 was 599$ at launch.

 

[Fjodor2001]

All his threads tends to go this way.

Why don't you start your own threads then and move over there?

 

[ShintaiDK]

The cheapest PS3 could be had for $399 at launch. The cheapest PS4 will not be much cheaper than that, we're talking perhaps $50-100 max.

Also, the cheapest PS4 will have 8 GB GDDR5 too, which is the main point.

Its still heavily subsidized.

You could get a PS3 20GB for 399$ too. Did it make the hardware any cheaper? Not at all.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Why don't you start your own threads then and move over there?

Why dont you stop making threads you dont wish to have any discussion not going your way in?

 

[Fjodor2001]

If you wanna play the facts game with him. Get your own facts straight first. Top PS3 was 599$ at launch.

Who said we were talking about the top PS3 model? That's something you added afterwards when your facts proved to be incorrect.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Why dont you stop making threads you dont wish to have any discussion not going your way in?

The discussion was was going perfectly well with a multitude of opinions being expressed before you and your buddy destroyed it by turning it into an argument. And I'm not about differences of opinion.

 

[Phynaz]

You obviously don't get it.

You're correct. Mind explaining it?

 

[Fjodor2001]

Its still heavily subsidized.

You could get a PS3 20GB for 399$ too. Did it make the hardware any cheaper? Not at all.

That's not the point. The point is that the PS4 is much less subsidized. I.e. its sales price is a better estimate of what the actual PS4 hardware costs to manufacture. With the PS3 it was less so.

 

[Phynaz]

Why dont you stop making threads you dont wish to have any discussion not going your way in?

I think he just wants to be argumentative. Notice that he clammed up as soon as I asked him to explain what it is I'm not getting?

Or how that he never answers a question, such as if Intel couldn't make a market for RDRAM, how could AMD make a market for GDDR5.

 

[Gideon]

I can't believe they would be so stupid to really sell these games for 70$. That's would be just downright moronic. There have also been comments indicating otherwise:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/ps4-xbox-720-games-to-cost-70-says-analyst-6405099

Last month, SCEA CEO Jack Tretton in a TV interview said that PlayStation 4 titles will max out at $60, putting to rest any speculation that games for Sony's future platform may cost $10 more than PlayStation 3 titles.

The top PS3 was 599$.

The top PS4 will sell at 40000 yen. or around 400$.

Could you buy a cheaper PS3? Yes. Can you also buy a cheaper PS4? Yes.

Not exactly. Japanese newspaper reported it will cost at east YEN40,000. It might very well be 499$ or (more likely) 450$.

Rumors said that at the time of release PS3 cost sony up to 900$. Do you honestly think that PS4 would cost Sony in the range of 750$ to make ?

 

[ShintaiDK]

That's not the point. The point is that the PS4 is much less subsidized. I.e. its sales price is a better estimate of what the actual PS4 hardware costs to manufacture. With the PS3 it was less so.

It is? Can you show me the BOM for PS4?

 

[Piroko]

It is? Can you show me the BOM for PS4?

Can you?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Rumors said that at the time of release PS3 cost sony up to 900$. Do you honestly think that PS4 would cost Sony in the range of 750$ to make ?

The 60$ PS3 was around 840$. Do I think the PS4 will cost up around 640$? Yes.

The CPU+GPU+Memory in the PS3 accounted for ~260$. Seem it will cost around 160$ in the PS4.

 

[Gideon]

The 60$ PS3 was around 840$. Do I think the PS4 will cost up around 640$? Yes.

The CPU+GPU+Memory in the PS3 accounted for ~260$. Seem it will cost around 160$ in the PS4.

You still missed the point that launch price is not actually set to stone. It might very well creep closer to 500$

 

[Phynaz]

BD drives are a LOT less than they used to be.

 

[Phynaz]

You still missed the point that launch price is not actually set to stone. It might very well creep closer to 500$

Didn't they say they were targeting $299?

Edit: No that was an analyst saying that's what Sony should sell it for.

 

[jpiniero]

$349 is the rumored price for the cheapest model. A BOM close to that seems doable.

 

[wlee15]

Consoles aren't PC's. Console are subsidized, PC's aren't. This shouldn't need explaining again.

That historically wasn't the case though, and it's not clear that it will be true for this generation of consoles.

 

[NTMBK]

The CPU + GPU + RAM are a lot cheaper than last time. The optical drive is a lot cheaper than last time. The hard drive will probably be cheaper than last time. The backwards compatibility hardware will be cheaper than last time... because there isn't any.

 

[Piroko]

Add that the cooling solution (one chip only to cool) and power supply will probably be cheaper.

 

[StrangerGuy]

The CPU + GPU + RAM are a lot cheaper than last time. The optical drive is a lot cheaper than last time. The hard drive will probably be cheaper than last time. The backwards compatibility hardware will be cheaper than last time... because there isn't any.

Other than the 8 GB GDDR5 there is nothing inside there that cost a lot. Non-chip stuff like motherboard, power supply, wifi, casing etc costs next to nothing.

In comparison, the Samsung Galaxy S4 BOM with an 1080p AMOLED, high-end Qualcomm chips, LTE, an insane amount of sensors and a high-cap battery is only ~$250. It cracks me up when clueless people say the PS4 gonna be a loss leader even at $500+. C'mon, the Chinese can already sell you a full MP3 player with a color screen shipped for $10, you think making electronics is THAT expensive?

Sony can easily sell it at $299 for a profit if they wanted to.

Edit: whoops typo.

 

[Ajay]

I am coder too and must admit I dont see the big difference! Java is not being compiled by a JIT! .. JIT is a feature of the JVM that does excatly whats advertised, it compiles JustInTime. Here's the run down of how Java (and .net) behaves

-SourceCode compiles to ByteCode (bytecode can be reversed easily to the original source, its just more compact here and none of the abbreviations of the source)
-ByteCode is run in the JVM. The JVM will JIT bytecode it has not executed before, this is why with some java/.net programs you will see an inital lag upon execution, shit is getting native here.(and the big advantage of the VM, cause it has the potential to translate the bytecode into your specific architecture with whatever isa's available, avx, avx2 etc.)

When you say PTX I am thinking its analog to Bytecode. Is that right?

Well, it'll be eating some crow, looks like NVCC compiles 'CUDA C' code into the PTX IL, which is supposedly executed by a VM on ? [Maybe on the GPU - I just took a quick look and documentation on the VM was light]

And yes, Byte-code is a type of IL, like PTX or MSIL (used byte .NET)

There's more here: http://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/pdf/ptx_isa_3.1.pdf

I haven't run into it yet because I haven't used the debugger because I haven't run into any non-obvious problems yet.

 

[podspi]

I think he just wants to be argumentative. Notice that he clammed up as soon as I asked him to explain what it is I'm not getting?

Or how that he never answers a question, such as if Intel couldn't make a market for RDRAM, how could AMD make a market for GDDR5.

Isn't there already a market for GDDR5? Assuming these are laptops with memory soldered in (which unfortunately already happens with some models with DDR3), I'm going to go out on a limb and say the OEMs will be able to find some. I agree with you though, there is almost zero chance of GDDR5 DIMMs seeing the light of day, but is that what we're talking about happening here?

Other than the 8 GB GDDR5 there is nothing inside there that cost a lot. Non-chip stuff like motherboard, power supply, wifi, casing etc costs next to nothing.

In comparison, the Samsung Galaxy S4 BOM with an 1080p AMOLED, high-end Qualcomm chips, LTE, an insane amount of sensors and a high-cap battery is only ~$250. It cracks me up when clueless people say the PS3 gonna be a loss leader at $500+. C'mon, the Chinese can already sell you a full MP3 player with a color screen shipped for $10, you think making electronics is THAT expensive?


Sony can easily sell it at $299 for a profit if they wanted to.

Yeah, my impression is that both Sony and Microsoft spent a ton of money rolling their own last time, which is why both are going for more or less off the shelf parts this time around. BoM should be much lower this gen.

 

[Cerb]

Yeah, my impression is that both Sony and Microsoft spent a ton of money rolling their own last time, which is why both are going for more or less off the shelf parts this time around. BoM should be much lower this gen.

They're still using custom parts, and that will kill the early BoM, just like always, though probably less this gen than last. AMD probably gave them great deals, compared to getting something else made, like a SMP PPC470 SoC. IBM (and LSI?) are fat and full, while AMD is hungry for cash flow.

The real problem last time was that they used old methods and ideas, which were already patently bad, from the millenium-era resurgence of, "stupid simple hardware can go fast, you guys, so let's make all stupid simple hardware!" that plagued crappy RISCs. They were bad ideas from the start, their failures in implementation were well-predicted, and their supposed appearance in high-performance hardware was as a means to an end (neither MIPS nor Alpha, way back when, suffered from treating RISC/simplicity as a religion; it just happened to be one of the many ways they were able to improve performance, back then, with much more limited xtor technology at their disposal).

MS did a better job of it, overall, but neither had a CPU that was well-prepared for the memory wall, like our desktop and laptop CPUs were, and MS ended up using too little eDRAM to make the most of it (probably too costly to have 20+MB, at the time). The Cell needed a more powerful main CPU, a larger cache, and larger local stores, and MS' needed a larger cache, and eDRAM that was of greater capacity, and more flexible. With the long time between generations, not looking at it anew, and having cloistered server guys, and real-time embedded guys, helping the design, IBM/Sony/Toshiba made just the wrong decisions for the halo implementation. That left MS stuck with poor CPU core options, but they made what good they could out of it.

They don't just get a lower BoM by not going custom from the CPU on up, they also get accumulated wisdom from engineers who've worked on practical general-purpose CPUs, which the Cell, and thus Xenon's core, very much lacked. Either of them could afford the money for a custom CPU, but neither would have the capability to determine who would be good at managing such a project, without trying to poach a known quantity from their current employer .