How the PlayStation 4 is better than a PC

[Cerb]

^^ Bold from mine.

Thus substituting the DX API by some low-level API (a la libCGM) or eliminating the API completely and the same GPU will give more performance. This is basically what I did mean when said that some cpu draw calls can affect gpu performance on PCs.

Not really:

There are gpu draw calls, there are cpu draw calls, and there are cpu draw calls that affect gpu performance.

The first category there...isn't. A GPU draw call is a call made by the CPU. IE, it is your third category, and that category is either a bit wrong, or poorly described. The CPU would be best put to use doing other things during the time of the call, in which it has to switch contexts, and may or may not have to wait on the GPU to do something (I'd bet nV and AMD have optimizations that involve lying in the callbacks ). DX10 reduced the need to go to the GPU as much, and as part of WDDM, moved a great deal of the graphics code into userspace, enabling the API calls to not need to have so many context switches, thus removing most of the badness from the API.

Bare metal is expensive. Too expensive, already, today. Being able to access it for occasional hand optimization is important, since console players won't get faster hardware next year. But it's not the way they are going to be programming their game, unless they intend to spend 10+ years producing it. The ideal is to have an API, including abstract VM IRs for streamy stuff like shaders, that can be translated to machine code that spends most of its time doing the work, rather than waiting on slow memory and buses, and/or call prologues and epilogues.

 

[Bean7]

i love Sony and PlayStation too, but no one can be better than PC, that's "the impossible project"

 

[Cerb]

i love Sony and PlayStation too, but no one can be better than PC, that's "the impossible project"

Close, but not quite. If Sony hires AMD's PowerPoint guy, part-time, it will be game over for the PC as we know it. ^_^

 

[Erenhardt]

This thread is like the monster in a horror movie.

No matter how many times you think it is dead, it just keeps coming back, looking just like it did before.

31 pages now of speculation about a piece of hardware that is not even on the market.

Yea... we should speculate about the GTX580 or HD5970!
On topic:
Consoles are for the masses - for average Joe. It needs average performance of tomorrow, which is not equal "better than SLI titan rig". Of course "PC" will be better than PS4.
PCs are flexible, there are ways to outpower a console, by trowing money at your computer. You can always build 3xTitan or 2xi7. But one sane person should ask himself: "For what cost?"
Overthetop consoles (360/ps3) failed. Developing const was so high that the lifespan of a console had to be so long... They came up with innovating GPU in 360 which was than imported to desktop market. Which ended badly for consoles due to higher (no?) power draw limitations in PC hardware.

 

[Melina42]

Convenience is the thing. Don't make it a giant barbecue grill or a box that dies 30% of the time with a massive external power supply and batteries needing frequent replacing, and you've taken a huge step forward from the current generation.

I dunno, I think the market for console games is dying rapidly anyways. Fewer people could therefore give a damn. As long as it plays movies and streams Amazon for home shopping and costs under $200, everyone will be fine with it.

 

[galego]

I didn't even have to read past the first paragraph to spot sensationalism.

Not true. The memory bus in many of the higher-end graphics cards (especially from AMD) are definitely faster than the PS4's combined memory bus.

You make a moot point because the article clearly says that ordinary PCs have faster GDDR5 on the graphic cards. That was not the point.

Moreover, if by bolding "combined" do you pretend that there is some significant loss of performance, the answer is no. Because the PS4 memory subsystem has been designed to allow access to same data.

You seem to miss that the PS4 is not a CPU+GPU, it is not even an ordinary APU (as Trinity/Richland), it is an APU-HSA and eliminating slow RAM and PCI was a must.

You repeat the article very obvious point, but then you omit the not so obvious point made in the same paragraph:

you end up having to buy a PC that would be considerably more expensive than a PS4 will likely be in order to get the same level of performance

 

[galego]

I didn't "add" anything. That stipulation has always existed. I simply mentioned it this time around because it became clear that you are too dense to apply any sort of reasoning to this debate so I had to lay out the obvious.

There are two factors at play here. One is your comprehension, the other is your PS4/AMD/APU delusions of grandeur. Both of these factors are off the charts in opposite directions. It's important you not confuse one with the other which you appear to be doing here.

What do you hope to accomplish here? This thread is going EXACTLY like the last one where you proved nothing and everyone else was telling you the same thing they are here. You eventually exited the thread. What makes you think saying the same things to the same people in a different thread is going to be any different? That one went for what, a dozen pages? This one going on 3 dozen. Do you not see a pattern?

It's clear you don't actually know what you're talking about, this is very evident by your draw call debate with Cerb where he's giving you a general technical description on how it works and you pulled up a Google search results as your comeback. This becomes quite obvious that he knows what he's talking about, and you don't. It's as if you expected him to say "oh crap, there are results with the words GPU draw call" perhaps if he only knew as much as you did, it would be enough to put him where you think his place should be. But it didn't quite work out that favorably for you.

Are you trying to fool yourself? Because it doesn't look like you're fooling anyone else.

Relax. This massive amount of misreading/misunderstanding plus your occasional ad hominen is not going to make your points valid.

 

[galego]

It's called a cpu bottleneck, in PCs.

I am going to complete it for you. A cpu bottleneck that affects GPU performance...

 

[galego]

Honestly you have no idea what are you talking about.There was a time when assembly was the king and people believed that you can achieve peak performance only by hand written assembly code.Then came C\C++ which showed that if you have a good compiler and a strong language the difference is mostly academic.Yes there are still couple of cases where assembly wins but they are few and far between.If there is no API it will be a nightmare for developers, I don't care who said this but it is stupid.

I note that you avoided to answer my question. Why game developers asked Sony to provide ways to avoid the API? And why they were pleasured when Sony did? If you are suggesting that they did so because them are "stupid", then I don't need to read more from you.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I am going to complete it for you. A cpu bottleneck that affects GPU performance...

After looking at your post history I'm not even sure it warrants a reply at this point.

However it's good consoles have less draw call overhead, because that tablet cpu wouldn't cut the mustard in a PC.

I'll let you know if my Haswell cpu bottlenecks my 7950 CF overclocked ~50% per card higher than the peak theoretical performance of the PS4, you might have a point then.

 

[Jaydip]

I note that you avoided to answer my question. Why game developers asked Sony to provide ways to avoid the API? And why they were pleasured when Sony did? If you are suggesting that they did so because them are "stupid", then I don't need to read more from you.

You can't avoid the API period.Honestly you should learn a thing or two before posting.You are making a fool of yourself.

 

[Atreidin]

You can't avoid the API period.Honestly you should learn a thing or two before posting.You are making a fool of yourself.

I think his strategy is to keep posting until everyone gets so tired of responding to his nonsense that they just stop, at which point he will declare himself the winner.

 

[itsmydamnation]

its not that API, its the general purpose multitasking, multiple run time spaces environment that is general computing on windows that is the overhead. the vast majority of which is gone in a console.

How will the PS4 be better then a PC? It will be powered by the tears of anandtech forum poster who cant look at the question from a holistic point of view :whiste:.

 

[Rakehellion]

Nope. They use the CPU's memory. With newer Intel HDs, they even share the CPU's cache.

Wrong. The GPU still has its own memory space separate from what the CPU uses. An integrated GPU can't access the CPU's memory or vice versa, even if they reside on the same chip.

 

[galego]

Here is some info about how developers want to bypass the API and program direct-to-the-metal for maximum performance and full control

http://www.geeks3d.com/20110317/low-level-gpu-programming-the-future-of-game-development-on-pc/

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/2

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/3

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Editor...-Graphics-Ray-Tracing-Voxels-and-more/Intervi

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multim...Endorses_Sony_PlayStation_4_Architecture.html

The PS4 provides three different ways to control hardware (from more overhead to less):

• high-level API (DX11.1+)
• low-level API
• direct-to-the-metal (API-free)

 

[Olikan]

i have to say... i expected more about the consoles in this generation...

PS3 and XBOX 360 both had some awesome hardware inside, very disruptive ideas inside CELL and XENOS... PS4 isn't any close to be called "new"... just a step forward in the APU tech

 

[Erenhardt]

i have to say... i expected more about the consoles in this generation...

PS3 and XBOX 360 both had some awesome hardware inside, very disruptive ideas inside CELL and XENOS... PS4 isn't any close to be called "new"... just a step forward in the APU tech

You can say the same about Xenos... just a step forward in gpu tech - nothing new...

 

[Aikouka]

You make a moot point because the article clearly says that ordinary PCs have faster GDDR5 on the graphic cards. That was not the point.

No, it isn't a moot point. The first half of that article is about trying to put forth that since GDDR5 > DDR3 and the PS4 uses GDDR5 for the CPU and GPU, it's superior to a PC that uses "slow memory" for the CPU. This is one of those terrible arguments that you'd see a fanboy make because while it is based on the truth, it makes a poor assumption. CPUs do not require tons of bandwidth because most of their activities don't require it.

I said this the first time, but the article also ignores that most high-end graphics cards also have higher bandwidth to their GDDR5 memory.

According to the Wikipeida entry, AMD's own 7970 Ghz Edition has 288 GB/s of bandwidth to the GDDR5 memory compared to the PS4's 176 GB/s

Moreover, if by bolding "combined" do you pretend that there is some significant loss of performance, the answer is no. Because the PS4 memory subsystem has been designed to allow access to same data.

Ugh, I don't get why you keep trying to push these same, tired points... especially when that's not even what I'm talking about! I used "combined" because you would assume that the CPU and GPU will have to compete for access to the memory controller. Unfortunately, I can't be certain, because AMD's slides on hUMA are really basic and don't go into specifics (APU layout diagrams, etc.).

Now, unlike the articles that you tend to post which try to turn speculative claims into solid fact, I'm not saying that it definitely will be an issue, but it is something to consider.

You seem to miss that the PS4 is not a CPU+GPU, it is not even an ordinary APU (as Trinity/Richland), it is an APU-HSA and eliminating slow RAM and PCI was a must.

No... I haven't missed that at all. I'm also not saying that using GDDR5 is a bad thing. I'm simply trying to kibosh an article that's trying to use an incomplete set of facts to back their speculative conclusion. What they do is essentially say, "Well, A = B, and C = D, so therefore, A = D!" They're missing supporting evidence, because there is no evidence to back their claims.

You repeat the article very obvious point, but then you omit the not so obvious point made in the same paragraph:

Umm... given the obvious statement that I mentioned, your supposed "not-so-obvious point" is arguably fairly inherent. Also, I'm not sure if anyone here is trying to argue that a competent gaming PC is going to be priced similar to a PS4. Although, when we're talking about pricing, I think it's important to keep in mind that consoles are rather specialized pieces of hardware. They aren't nearly as generic as your standard PC, and that's for a very good reason. You won't see me give up my PC for a console, and I won't give up PC gaming because I won't use a controller for FPS or strategy games (the latter usually doesn't come out on consoles anyway).

 

[Olikan]

You can say the same about Xenos... just a step forward in gpu tech - nothing new...

not sure, it took a LONG time to eDRAM be used in gpus... and ironically by intel

 

[blckgrffn]

i have to say... i expected more about the consoles in this generation...

PS3 and XBOX 360 both had some awesome hardware inside, very disruptive ideas inside CELL and XENOS... PS4 isn't any close to be called "new"... just a step forward in the APU tech

Disruptive ideas that sucked in practice.

PS4 will be much easier to get good performance out of. Easier performance means less expenses. Making the development cheaper means lower barriers to entry for people who have good ideas (and lets face it, bad ideas). More games should be be an exciting thing for gamers.

That's not to say that AAA title costs won't continue to escalate, but games don't need to be AAA to be fun.

We buy these things to play games, right?

The PS4 is a huge step up from the PS3.

 

[Erenhardt]

not sure, it took a LONG time to eDRAM be used in gpus... and ironically by intel

I mean unified shaders.

 

[Atreidin]

Disruptive ideas that sucked in practice.

PS4 will be much easier to get good performance out of. Easier performance means less expenses. Making the development cheaper means lower barriers to entry for people who have good ideas (and lets face it, bad ideas). More games should be be an exciting thing for gamers.

That's not to say that AAA title costs won't continue to escalate, but games don't need to be AAA to be fun.

We buy these things to play games, right?

The PS4 is a huge step up from the PS3.

Yes, it is easy to call some "disruptive ideas" awesome when the only numbers used for comparison are theoretical numbers and synthetic benchmark numbers that are rarely if ever approached in real programs. That also made it much easier for console fans to imagine that their consoles could ever run games better than high-end PCs.

 

[galego]

No, it isn't a moot point. The first half of that article is about trying to put forth that since GDDR5 > DDR3 and the PS4 uses GDDR5 for the CPU and GPU, it's superior to a PC that uses "slow memory" for the CPU. This is one of those terrible arguments that you'd see a fanboy make because while it is based on the truth, it makes a poor assumption. CPUs do not require tons of bandwidth because most of their activities don't require it.

No. Definitively it is superior from a hardware point of view. As stated before Sony had an asynchronous compute vision for the next gen games and they found that such games could not be delivered using a traditional PC architecture due to its bottlenecks and limitations. Then they designed what they call supercharged PC architecture.

I said this the first time, but the article also ignores that most high-end graphics cards also have higher bandwidth to their GDDR5 memory.

According to the Wikipeida entry, AMD's own 7970 Ghz Edition has 288 GB/s of bandwidth to the GDDR5 memory compared to the PS4's 176 GB/s

Right, but you are only considering GPU <--> VRAM. If you consider also GPU <--> RAM, then the overall bandwidth is superior on the PS4.

 

[Cerb]

Wrong. The GPU still has its own memory space separate from what the CPU uses. An integrated GPU can't access the CPU's memory or vice versa, even if they reside on the same chip.

They still have memory for the CPU and GPU separated by a slow bus.

Change goalposts much? Intel beat AMD to removing the bus. AMD removed the bus later that year. The UMA is new, but that's not what I was replying to. It is very much correct that we have had PC CPUs, for about 2 years now, without a bus bottleneck to the GPU.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Then they designed what they call supercharged PC architecture.

Fits your agenda I guess.

The rest of us call it a table cpu, then they doubled it (D3) and a mid-range gpu.