- Joined
- Mar 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,763 (1.77/day)
- Location
- 04578
| System Name | Old reliable |
|---|---|
| Processor | Intel 8700K @ 4.8 GHz |
| Motherboard | MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC |
| Cooling | Custom Water |
| Memory | 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3666 MHz |
| Video Card(s) | MSI GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X |
| Storage | 3x SSDs 2x HDDs |
| Display(s) | Dell U2412M + Samsung TA350 |
| Case | Thermaltake Core P3 TG |
| Audio Device(s) | Samson Meteor Mic / Generic 2.1 / KRK KNS 6400 headset |
| Power Supply | Zalman EBT-1000 |
| Mouse | Mionix NAOS 7000 |
| Keyboard | Mionix |
dont need to gpus people fail to understand the efficiency gains consoles have
again 3.2ghz triple core that is slower in x86 work then a typical dual core cpu today.
256mb essentially 7800gt
compare consoles graphics with Unreal Engine 3 vs PC we get higher res and AA in most UE3 games but not much else maybe slightly higher texture resolutions and of course higher frame rate
now roughly said a 7800gt performance wise = 8600gt = 9500gt think on that for a second
8600gt is only 32shaders
2600xt is 120 shaders
so for AMD / Nvidia it would take a 32 shader Nvidia gpu or 120 shader AMD gpu to equal the performance of a console aka todays gen if at the SAME efficiency
APU from AMD current have 4 cores + 400 shaders
Below is an example of what i mean from the Game FEAR
Current consoles are at 8600 / 2600 performance 400shaders in the APU = 2900 / 8800 series performance now do you people get the damn picture
the new IGPs built into AMDs cpus coming out in JUNE 2011 aka 1 month from now will offer a quadcore with a gpu on par to a 2900 / 8800 gpu going by the fact fear runs at 30fps on console at a resolution of 1000x600 or 1280x720p roughly it means a 2600 / 8600 is already faster with the 2900 / 8800 offering nearly 4x that performance that means in a High efficiency situation as in a console where 80-95% is the norm vs 40% of a PC would mean the gain would be more then that,
new consoles arent expected till 2014 now if in 2011 again we can get 4cores 400 shaders roughly equal to a Phenom II 955 + 8800gt /9800gt / gt 240 / gt 440 or 2900 / 3800 / 4850 / 5670
all you have to do is look at the tick tock cycle
2012 would bring an update of maybe 4 cores 600shaders 2013 would be the next drop in manufacturing for amd which would end up resulting in 8 cores from bulldozer + 800-1000shaders
that would mean by the time a consoles design is finalized and SOC chip with the power needed would be viable,
a good way to think about this is look at Dragon Age origins performance across ATi / AMD hardware the game only used 700 shaders out of 800 on a 4870, more lost performance on newer cards but performance still scaled. so even at a disadvantage in terms of coding efficiency etc the cards continue to offer better performance, this would mean on a console front where they squeeze every bit they can get you could essential expect a 5830/5850 or GTX 460 / 470 performance + a quadcore chip to be feasible on a console. as even at 1080P non 3D games only need 30fps solid again the chart below demonstrates my point. since FEAR was ported to consoles it gives an idea of whats to come. At the launch of the PS3 the 8800 launch was just around the corner consoles were only on par with PC tech for around 6months before new technology resulted in double the performance. Its also well known that most modern gpus are limited by cpu or other system components at low resolution. so an SOC quadcore thats used to the maximum capacity vs a quadcore today that only has 2 cores used would mean the consoles again would win out with efficiency bonuses. Not hard to connect the dots really.
I included PREY another console title below to demonstrate the performance gap
now again fact is imagine if developers had in every system a GTX 460 or 5850 with 512mb of gpu memory dedicated, most console games right now are 30fps at 600p now looking at efficiency and pc performance charts at the same settings it would be around 130-160fps at 600p meaning from resolution scaling you could hit 1200p and 75-80fps so by the time new consoles are finalized, an SOC chip would easily be doable at low power and cheap cost
because the fact is we have hit a wall in advancing graphics for every 5-10% we gain in image quality it takes another 50% more power, this is why the current generous of consoles are getting dragged out, the next set of consoles should actually be SOC now that i think about it
look at a 5850 today and realize the game its running isnt optimized imagine a 5850 / gtx 460 at 80-95% efficiency in terms of a PC gpu that would put a 5850 / GTX 460 up around 6970 / GTX 570 performance lvls, all on a tiny chip by itself because it dosent NEED to be as powerful as a desktop part do to a far greater efficiency in the use of said hardware.
again 3.2ghz triple core that is slower in x86 work then a typical dual core cpu today.
256mb essentially 7800gt
compare consoles graphics with Unreal Engine 3 vs PC we get higher res and AA in most UE3 games but not much else maybe slightly higher texture resolutions and of course higher frame rate
now roughly said a 7800gt performance wise = 8600gt = 9500gt think on that for a second
8600gt is only 32shaders
2600xt is 120 shaders
so for AMD / Nvidia it would take a 32 shader Nvidia gpu or 120 shader AMD gpu to equal the performance of a console aka todays gen if at the SAME efficiency
APU from AMD current have 4 cores + 400 shaders
Below is an example of what i mean from the Game FEAR
Current consoles are at 8600 / 2600 performance 400shaders in the APU = 2900 / 8800 series performance now do you people get the damn picture
the new IGPs built into AMDs cpus coming out in JUNE 2011 aka 1 month from now will offer a quadcore with a gpu on par to a 2900 / 8800 gpu going by the fact fear runs at 30fps on console at a resolution of 1000x600 or 1280x720p roughly it means a 2600 / 8600 is already faster with the 2900 / 8800 offering nearly 4x that performance that means in a High efficiency situation as in a console where 80-95% is the norm vs 40% of a PC would mean the gain would be more then that,
new consoles arent expected till 2014 now if in 2011 again we can get 4cores 400 shaders roughly equal to a Phenom II 955 + 8800gt /9800gt / gt 240 / gt 440 or 2900 / 3800 / 4850 / 5670
all you have to do is look at the tick tock cycle
2012 would bring an update of maybe 4 cores 600shaders 2013 would be the next drop in manufacturing for amd which would end up resulting in 8 cores from bulldozer + 800-1000shaders
that would mean by the time a consoles design is finalized and SOC chip with the power needed would be viable,
a good way to think about this is look at Dragon Age origins performance across ATi / AMD hardware the game only used 700 shaders out of 800 on a 4870, more lost performance on newer cards but performance still scaled. so even at a disadvantage in terms of coding efficiency etc the cards continue to offer better performance, this would mean on a console front where they squeeze every bit they can get you could essential expect a 5830/5850 or GTX 460 / 470 performance + a quadcore chip to be feasible on a console. as even at 1080P non 3D games only need 30fps solid again the chart below demonstrates my point. since FEAR was ported to consoles it gives an idea of whats to come. At the launch of the PS3 the 8800 launch was just around the corner consoles were only on par with PC tech for around 6months before new technology resulted in double the performance. Its also well known that most modern gpus are limited by cpu or other system components at low resolution. so an SOC quadcore thats used to the maximum capacity vs a quadcore today that only has 2 cores used would mean the consoles again would win out with efficiency bonuses. Not hard to connect the dots really.
I included PREY another console title below to demonstrate the performance gap
now again fact is imagine if developers had in every system a GTX 460 or 5850 with 512mb of gpu memory dedicated, most console games right now are 30fps at 600p now looking at efficiency and pc performance charts at the same settings it would be around 130-160fps at 600p meaning from resolution scaling you could hit 1200p and 75-80fps so by the time new consoles are finalized, an SOC chip would easily be doable at low power and cheap cost
because the fact is we have hit a wall in advancing graphics for every 5-10% we gain in image quality it takes another 50% more power, this is why the current generous of consoles are getting dragged out, the next set of consoles should actually be SOC now that i think about it
look at a 5850 today and realize the game its running isnt optimized imagine a 5850 / gtx 460 at 80-95% efficiency in terms of a PC gpu that would put a 5850 / GTX 460 up around 6970 / GTX 570 performance lvls, all on a tiny chip by itself because it dosent NEED to be as powerful as a desktop part do to a far greater efficiency in the use of said hardware.
Last edited:
). We need far more tesselation/geometry and instead of being used for simple smoothness and LOD, it must be used for real displacement effects. And it's doable, it's very doable. IMO Nvidia did it far better in that front, adding tesselators does not take much die space and can add a lot more detail that is not currently used by any demo/game except Nvidia's own ones which use 10x more geometric detail than Heaven without sacrificing ANY performance in comparison. Don't make mistake, for Nvidia cards, Heaven benchmark and Stonegiant demo and pretty much all the rest are heavily bottlenecked in the hull and domain stages which are dependant on shaders and not the fixed function stages. So you can add far more detail without sacrificing performance, pretty much in the way you can add much more Anti-Aliasing levels nowadays. Also adding so many geometry powerhouse did not make the well balanced Nvidia chips like GF104 and GF114* much worse than Cayman in the performance per die area front and it has 4x the tesselation capabilities (and also have better GPGPU). The point is that geometry computing (fixed function units) can be increased a lot, i.e 10 fold without increasing die space/power consumption a lot, if at all comparatively speaking, something that cannot be said about shaders.