PS4 to increase performance lead over XBox One

[qubit]

By doing the same hardware unlocking trick that Microsoft did. Microsoft can't be happy.

www.geek.com/games/sony-unlocks-ps4s-7th-processing-core-for-developers-1640646

 

[64K]

MS has made quite a few mistakes with the Xbox One. Before release saying that the console would be always online didn't go over well with console gamers and then trying to force Kinect on customers and charging $100 more than the PS4. On top of that they used inferior hardware on the Xbox One. They've probably learned from their mistakes and will do better with the next Xbox but from what I've seen they will never catch up to the PS4 sales.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

The Xbox One controller was enough to get me to get one over PS4, regardless of hardware, etc. PS Dual Shock is a sorry excuse for a controller.

By doing the same hardware unlocking trick that Microsoft did. Microsoft can't be happy.

www.geek.com/games/sony-unlocks-ps4s-7th-processing-core-for-developers-1640646

Ita not really a trick. The OS has just improved so it doesn't need as much resources. Also the extra core will only help so much for both Xbox one and PS4. Amd jaguar cores are just weak.

 

[Zakin]

The Xbox One controller was enough to get me to get one over PS4, regardless of hardware, etc. PS Dual Shock is a sorry excuse for a controller.

Funny how I feel the exact opposite controller wise, I felt the Xbox One controller was a step back in many ways over the 360s. Just feels funky, not bad, just off.

Pretty much elsewise, don't expect a ton, when Microsoft did it in the past their cores meant more than these AMD cores do to be totally honest (Although still, relatively the same). PS4 has the lead, this is just sort of giving them a tiny bit more, I believe a developer already commented saying it didn't give them a whole lot more. Pretty sure they'd like more GPU to bite onto than anything.

 

[LightningJR]

Amd jaguar cores are just weak.

^this.

The fact that they both unlocked another core for use by developers is a sure sign that the 6 that's there isn't enough... The performance of the CPU is very similar to the PS3's Cell and that's old as shit..

 

[Mercennarius]

How many games even utilize more than 6 CPU cores?

 

[LightningJR]

How many games even utilize more than 6 CPU cores?

Concerning consoles I would say most of them, less in games that released in the console's early life.

 

[Ikaruga]

The only mistake MS really made was going with DDR3 for a "1080p" console, like none of the engineers had a young teenager daughter or boy who could have told them that DDR3 sucks donkey balls for graphics. It's really beyond me tbh.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

The only mistake MS really made was going with DDR3 for a "1080p" console, like none of the engineers had a young teenager daughter or boy who could have told them that DDR3 sucks donkey balls for graphics. It's really beyond me tbh.

Has to do with money I think during the development process. And we have to remember who was the head of xbox at the time the Xbox One was in its planning and development stages.

 

[Mercennarius]

DDR3 isn't whats holding the console back on graphic fidelity, that's the GPU.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

DDR3 isn't whats holding the console back on graphic fidelity, that's the GPU.

Its a combination of both. They are the 2 main weak points of the Xbox One. ~70gb/s is pretty lousy bandwidth for gaming, and nevermind the 32mb of SDRAM that can take overall bandwidth of the system to near ~200gb/s, but that 32mb is apparently too small to be useful according to some developers.

 

[Ikaruga]

DDR3 isn't whats holding the console back on graphic fidelity, that's the GPU.

That GPU could do a lot more with GDDR5.

 

[Mercennarius]

That GPU could do a lot more with GDDR5.

A better GPU would go a lot farther in gaming than switching to DDR5.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

A better GPU would go a lot farther in gaming than switching to DDR5.

I don't think so. Something better would just be bottlenecked more by the bandwidth. Hell if the GPU was closer or better than PS4s, they would have to use something better then DDR3.

 

[erocker]

We can all only hope that MS and Sony have a new console ready by the end of next year. 3 years is long enough for these obsolete things.

 

[Steevo]

Since both are using X86-64 I am fairly certain that a process node shrink, slightly updated architecture, and more memory would and could do wonders for an upgrade in a couple more years, but I think this is the upgrade they are going to get. Hell, a die shrink and increased frequency and creating a Xbox 1.1 for more better frames would sell well, and I am going to guess they hardware has become a profit center as opposed to the loss leader the old consoles used to be.


No doubt the CPU cores are weak on performance, But considering they are 3 years old now, and the design stage was at least a year or two before that, and we aren't even to the point where devs really squeeze the system for performance hard like they have had to do with older consoles.... I doubt we will see anything for another two years.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Enabling another core isn't going to have any impact on games already out. Games are predominantly GPU bottlenecked anyway so it really isn't going to make any difference for future titles either.

 

[qubit]

Enabling another core isn't going to have any impact on games already out. Games are predominantly GPU bottlenecked anyway so it really isn't going to make any difference for future titles either.

Indeed, the article explained that it's for developers to take advantage of for future games. I guess there's no technical stopping a current game from being patched to take advantage of it if the developer thinks it's worth their while to do so however.

 

[cdawall]

Out of curiosity why is everyone considering the jaguar cores to be so weak? 8 jaguar cores would compete clock for clock with intel in IPC... They almost double performance per clock with phenom II not to mention have the ability to multithread as well as a 6th gen i7 or BD/PD.

The only thing the jaguar cores need to improve performance is more clockspeed. At the end of the day the "7870" under the hood is going to hold performance back more than a low wattage 8 core CPU with good IPC and excellent MPC.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Out of curiosity why is everyone considering the jaguar cores to be so weak? 8 jaguar cores would compete clock for clock with intel in IPC... They almost double performance per clock with phenom II not to mention have the ability to multithread as well as a 6th gen i7 or BD/PD.

The only thing the jaguar cores need to improve performance is more clockspeed. At the end of the day the "7870" under the hood is going to hold performance back more than a low wattage 8 core CPU with good IPC and excellent MPC.

Show some proof of your statement, then you have my attention.

 

[LightningJR]

Out of curiosity why is everyone considering the jaguar cores to be so weak? 8 jaguar cores would compete clock for clock with intel in IPC... They almost double performance per clock with phenom II not to mention have the ability to multithread as well as a 6th gen i7 or BD/PD.

The only thing the jaguar cores need to improve performance is more clockspeed. At the end of the day the "7870" under the hood is going to hold performance back more than a low wattage 8 core CPU with good IPC and excellent MPC.

If the architecture is good then that's great but at 1.6Ghz they're weak. I consider it weak because of what it is, I don't consider it's potential if clocked higher because that's not the reality..

Show some proof of your statement, then you have my attention.

Yes, I would love to see the links.

 

[qubit]

Out of curiosity why is everyone considering the jaguar cores to be so weak? 8 jaguar cores would compete clock for clock with intel in IPC... They almost double performance per clock with phenom II not to mention have the ability to multithread as well as a 6th gen i7 or BD/PD.

The only thing the jaguar cores need to improve performance is more clockspeed. At the end of the day the "7870" under the hood is going to hold performance back more than a low wattage 8 core CPU with good IPC and excellent MPC.

I have to agree with the others here, show us where you're getting this from. I can't see you supplying us with a credible source though of course, because...

Since Bulldozer, AMD's processors have been well documented as a trainwreck of performance, with IPC significantly worse than Intel and power use is pretty high too, so saying that just a bit more clockspeed is needed is just living in denial. Those Jaguar cores are puny.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

AMD Jaguar is meant to compete with Intel Atom processors. Skylake doesn't just crush Jaguar, it black holes it.
SuperPi Core i7-6700K: 8.643 seconds
SuperPi Athlon 5150: 31.606 seconds

PS4 basically has two of those 5150 chips so assuming it scales linearly (which it doesn't) let's halve the number of seconds: 15.803 seconds compared to 8.643 seconds (82.8% difference, 8 cores versus 4 cores, 1.6 GHz versus 4.0 GHz, DDR3 versus DDR4).

 

[qubit]

@FordGT90Concept Great post. All I can do is totally at the comparison. I knew Skylake would be waay better, but to totally blackhole AMD like this and on just one core is the most embarrasing thing I've seen come AMD's way in some time.

Yeah, it black holes it all right.

I'm sure Microsoft and Sony are going to go Intel (and hopefully NVIDIA) for their next gens.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I edited because Bobcat is not as efficient as Jaguar and dual core (E-350) versus 8 core (two Athlon 5150). I wish I could find more benchmarks for the Athlon 5150.

Microsoft and Sony won't go Intel because Intel wants too much money and can't provide a good GPU.


Edit: PC Mark 8 Home (not a CPU intensive test)
i7-6700K: 4032
Athlon 5150: 1483 * 2 for PS4 (maybe)