Next gen consoles will ALL use AMD GPU

[antuk15]

Nothing that hasn't already been done a dozen times on PC.

They have to start milking it for all its worth because their only alternative is to not do it at all. Hardware is holding the developers back, not pushing them forward.

You don't need any anti-aliasing when running 1920x1200 with high resolution textures. Doesn't matter how you shake it, the consoles that are out now are crippled due to their age.

Oh of course now they're starting to reach a dead end, Although I still think PS3 has a bit more puff left in it then 360 does.

But people tend to forget just what hardware they're running, PS3's running a damn bandwdith crippled 7800GTX for crying out loud and yet look what it's producing.

And blasphamy, You ALWAYS need anti-aliasing

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Nothing that hasn't already been done a dozen times on PC. You don't need any anti-aliasing when running 1920x1200 with high resolution textures.

im sure you were pro cell and IBM at the start of this thread

 

[FordGT90Concept]

IBM POWER is damn impressive. Just do the math: 4 MCM chips per processor, 8 cores per chip, 4 threads per core. Multiply that up and you got 128 threads simutaneously executing on a single processor. Not to mention, that's on a 45nm process. It's just a matter of time before they double that to at least 256 threads on a a 28nm or less process. We also can't forget those chips are far more efficient than x86 per clock and they are pulling 4+ GHz.

I was never a fan of Cell but POWER has had my attention since at least 6 when they were pushing 5 GHz.

 

[antuk15]

IBM POWER is damn impressive. Just do the math: 4 MCM chips per processor, 8 cores per chip, 4 threads per core. Multiply that up and you got 128 threads simutaneously executing on a single processor. Not to mention, that's on a 45nm process. It's just a matter of time before they double that to at least 256 threads on a a 28nm or less process. We also can't forget those chips are far more efficient than x86 per clock and they are pulling 4+ GHz.

I was never a fan of Cell but POWER has had my attention since at least 6 when they were pushing 5 GHz.

The fact is, fewer, faster cores are often superior to many slow cores, not only from an architecture perspective but also a software perspective.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I don't doubt everyone of those cores could go toe to toe with SandyBridge cores. Those are cores--they're not SPEs.

Edit: If my maths are correct, what I described above would be 1059.84 GFLOPs--more than double SandyBridge and quadruple PS3.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I was never a fan of Cell but POWER has had my attention since at least 6 when they were pushing 5 GHz.

me 2 but im watchin them all

 

[antuk15]

I don't doubt everyone of those cores could go toe to toe with SandyBridge cores. Those are cores--they're not SPEs.

That's the point with Cell, In gernal purpose stuff it would get layed to rest by an Athlon 2 x2 let alone Sandy Bridge, But for what it's being used for in PS3 suits it very well and I dount putting Snady Bridge in place of Cell would be any better.

Personally I can see it not offering as much help to RSX in terms of off loading GPU type tasks as Cell does currently.

Cell is really the only reason why PS3 has even been able to compete with 360, Can you just imagine if developer couldn't do all the things that they're doing on Cell? PS3 graphicsally would of been in real trouble years ago. Cell has arguably bought it beyond what 360 can handle.

 

[Steevo]

Consoles just have to be and stay crapware. I hardly imagine the Catalyst-hot-fix nightmare all the households will have.....

As opposed to beta Nvidia drivers that kill their consoles?

But hey.... at least with Nvidia they can have lower performance per dollar, and less integration. APU anyone?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

That's the point with Cell, In gernal purpose stuff it would get layed to rest by an Athlon 2 x2 let alone Sandy Bridge, But for what it's being used for in PS3 suits it very well and I dount putting Snady Bridge in place of Cell would be any better.

Personally I can see it not offering as much help to RSX in terms of off loading GPU type tasks as Cell does currently.

Cell is really the only reason why PS3 has even been able to compete with 360, Can you just imagine if developer couldn't do all the things that they're doing on Cell? PS3 graphicsally would of been in real trouble years ago. Cell has arguably bought it beyond what 360 can handle.

Um, Cell was the reason why PS3 couldn't compete with Xbox360. PS3 had very few launch titles and none of them drove any excitement for the system due, in large part, to the fact it is difficult to code for compared to the Xbox360 and Wii. It wasn't until much later when MGS4 was launched, as well as the cheap price of a BD-DVD player, that drove PS3 sales.

We also can't forget that Sony blamed the Cell for the launch delays because they weren't getting the yields they wanted and ultimatedly had to settle on launching PS3s with a SPE disabled in order to meet demands. And the cost--Cell was not cheap to research and it's not exactly a cheap processor to manfuacturer because of the increased silicon real-estate.

All said, the PS3 would have been better off with a Xenon.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Cell is really the only reason why PS3 has even been able to compete with 360, Can you just imagine if developer couldn't do all the things that they're doing on Cell? PS3 graphicsally would of been in real trouble years ago. Cell has arguably bought it beyond what 360 can handle.

earlier i lied a little i did recently buy a fat ps3, just to play GT5, i forgot that fact because the whole experience was un epic and miserable, ive dirt 3 now and im feeling better though the ps3 got sold 2 mnths after buying it, mostly due to the shit gfx i got f1 2010 on pc at the same time and whod think GT5 good next to that graphically.

 

[Steevo]

IBM and AMD are buddies on manufacturing anyway, so having two teams that are already used to working together and then throwing ATI ( I still call GPU's made by AMD ATI and always will) tech in to the mix a few years ago.....well. Not unstoppable, but a hard team to beat, and with constant rumors of IBM buying AMD.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

IBM won't buy AMD unless AMD declares bankruptcy. Even then, I can't see them really wanting AMD. It would put them in direct competition with Intel in the x86 market and that's not exactly something they would want (they've had no love for x86 since the 80s when it wasn't even x86). The GPU market doesn't interest IBM much, if any.

 

[antuk15]

Um, Cell was the reason why PS3 couldn't compete with Xbox360. All said, the PS3 would have been better off with a Xenon.

For the last 12 months PS3 has been kicking 360's ass in the graphics department, And Xemon would Cripple PS3.

Bye bye FXAA, Bye bye Polygon cully, Bye bye Light rendering, Bye bye post processing.

Killzones 2 and 3's post processing effects? All done on Cell, Take Cell out and replace it with Xenon? Bye bye Killzones effects...

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Awesome news for AMD if true. There is a lot of revenue that comes from consoles. Buying ATI is the smartest thing I have seen a corporation do in a long time.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

For the last 12 months PS3 has been kicking 360's ass in the graphics department, And Xemon would Cripple PS3.

Bye bye FXAA, Bye bye Polygon cully, Bye bye Light rendering, Bye bye post processing.

Killzones 2 and 3's post processing effects? All done on Cell, Take Cell out and replace it with Xenon? Bye bye Killzones effects...

PS3 and Xbox360 look more or less the same.

Xbox360 does 4xAA standard. Polygon culling is a rendering technique not exclusive to the PS3. The same goes for light rendering and post processing. Xenon does all the above, yes.

Killzone is not available on Xbox360 and not for hardware reasons. It is developed by Guerrilla Games which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Sony; thus, PlayStation exclusive title. Try comparing apples to apples.

 

[KainXS]

the PS3's Cell was more of just simple development testing by IBM, in terms of power though the 360's gpu is better and has better support since its dx based

but I would like to know more, its rumored the wii has a r700 so what will the next 2 have.

 

[antuk15]

PS3 and Xbox360 look more or less the same.

Xbox360 does 4xAA standard. Polygon culling is a rendering technique not exclusive to the PS3. The same goes for light rendering and post processing.

Killzone is not available on Xbox360. Try comparing apples to apples.

Xenon does all the above, yes.

360 does not do 4xMSAA standard, The option is there but due to a 720p frame buffer with 4xMSAA requireing 30mb of memory developers don't use it because you can't fit it straight into 360's 10mb EDRAM, So you have to tile rendering which is not a viable option as

1. It requires an engine that's been built with tileing in mind, And because most engines are multi platform it's easier for developers to not use tiling and make porting easier.

2. Tlieing has down falls of it's own

3. The EDRAM is the reason why most 360 games run at less then 720p, It's also the reason why Halo 3 only runs at 600p because a native 720p buffer would not fit into the 10mb EDRAM. Develoers run a smaller resolution buffer which then alows them to run anti-aliasing while still being with the 10mb EDRAM limitation.

Polygone culling is not PS3 exclusive but RSX is not particually good at it, It also consumes RSX's time and Cell is better at it and has enough spare cycles to do it so why do it on RSX and waste performance and time?

Again the same with light rendering, RSX can only do so much, Any work which Cell can handle get's shifted over to Cell leaving RSX free to handle the heavier tasks. Why do you think PS3 game have got a lot better over the last 12 months? Because developers are having Cell do all the donkey work. Why have RSX doing morhological anti-aliasing and other compute heavy work loads when Cell can do it faster thus freeing up RSX do to somthing else?

And no Xenon can do fuck all in terms of rendering, You never hear any developer saying they're calculating MLLAA, global illumination, culling or anything else for that matter on Xenon, You know why? Because it just doesn't have the spare power to do it. If xenon had enough spare resources to handle and take some of the work load off Xenos leaving it free to do other things then developers would take advantage of that but they don't because Xenon can't do it.

And delveopers have stated multiple times that PS3 has the edge when it comes to CPU power so it's a good job xenon isn't inside PS3 because it would slow the whole system down.

And for the record they don't look the same, PS3 exclusive games look a hell of a lot better then 360 exclusive ones do now.

 

[antuk15]

the PS3's Cell was more of just simple development testing by IBM, in terms of power though the 360's gpu is better and has better support since its dx based

but I would like to know more, its rumored the wii has a r700 so what will the next 2 have.

Sony, Toshiba and IBM developed Cell and it wasn't just development testing

 

[FordGT90Concept]

360 does not do 4xMSAA standard, The option is there but due to a 720p frame buffer with 4xMSAA requireing 30mb of memory developers don't use it because you can't fit it straight into 360's 10mb EDRAM, So you have to tile rendering which is not a viable option as

All titles up to 2009 required 2xMSAA vertical or horizontal or 4xMSAA for both and 720p support. In 2009, Microsoft removed the MSAA requirement and allowed developers to focus on resolution.

Source: http://www.develop-online.net/blog/44/Microsofts-new-resolution

 

[antuk15]

All titles up to 2009 required 2xMSAA vertical or horizontal or 4xMSAA for both and 720p support. In 2009, Microsoft removed the MSAA requirement and allowed developers to focus on resolution.

Source: http://www.develop-online.net/blog/44/Microsofts-new-resolution

So 360 doesn't do 4xMSAA standard does it then? :shadedshu

And yes, They removed that requirement because the 10mb EDRAM made it difficult to implement anti-liasing while running at 720p

 

[FordGT90Concept]

It did until recently when Microsoft decided 720p (and higher) was more important than multisampling.

3. The EDRAM is the reason why most 360 games run at less then 720p, It's also the reason why Halo 3 only runs at 600p because a native 720p buffer would not fit into the 10mb EDRAM. Develoers run a smaller resolution buffer which then alows them to run anti-aliasing while still being with the 10mb EDRAM limitation.

Only a handful of titles on Xbox360 got the 720p requirement waived (most resulting in 1152x640 resolution). Halo was one of them.

Polygone culling is not PS3 exclusive but RSX is not particually good at it, It also consumes RSX's time and Cell is better at it and has enough spare cycles to do it so why do it on RSX and waste performance and time?

Again the same with light rendering, RSX can only do so much, Any work which Cell can handle get's shifted over to Cell leaving RSX free to handle the heavier tasks. Why do you think PS3 game have got a lot better over the last 12 months? Because developers are having Cell do all the donkey work. Why have RSX doing morhological anti-aliasing and other compute heavy work loads when Cell can do it faster thus freeing up RSX do to somthing else?

All of this, coupled with the fact that PS3 went way over budget and unit-costs were ridiculous, is testament to Xenon + Xenos was a better business decision. Virtually the same performance for substantially less costs.

And no Xenon can do fuck all in terms of rendering, You never hear any developer saying they're calculating MLLAA, global illumination, culling or anything else for that matter on Xenon, You know why? Because it just doesn't have the spare power to do it. If xenon had enough spare resources to handle and take some of the work load off Xenos leaving it free to do other things then developers would take advantage of that but they don't because Xenon can't do it.

Just because they don't talk about it doesn't mean they aren't doing it. Considering they look virtually the same, it doesn't matter. Memory is the limiting factor on both consoles and the Xbox360 has 10 MiB more.

 

[antuk15]

It did until recently.



Only a handful of titles on Xbox360 got the 720p requirement waived (most resulting in 1152x640 resolution). Halo was one of them.

2009 is not recent my friend, And even then it was no were near as manatory as that article makes out, I don't ever remember seeing 4xMSAA and 720p in all 360 games up until it was wavered.

And with MLAA now very easy to acheive on Cell more and more PS3 games will have much better anti aliasing quality then 360.

The Sabatour as an example, MLAA on PS3 gamave it the same quality as 4xMSAA, The 360 version of the games had no anti-aliasing at all.

iirc DICE are running MLAA on Bad company 3 on PS3 as well.

Naughty dog have moved to FXAA and so have the God of war guys.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

For the last 12 months PS3 has been kicking 360's ass in the graphics department, And Xemon would Cripple PS3.

Bye bye FXAA, Bye bye Polygon cully, Bye bye Light rendering, Bye bye post processing.

Killzones 2 and 3's post processing effects? All done on Cell, Take Cell out and replace it with Xenon? Bye bye Killzones effects...

What post processing? Killzone used canned lighting to try not to disappoint after sony ran around pretending cgi trailers were actual in game graphics. They had to cut from the ai too as most fluff ps3 games do in exchange for that minor graphical edge. The best ps3 games look no different than 360 games because they're from decent developers that didn't cut corners on things like ai. While the 360 and ps3 cores suck at ai, cell is notably worse, requiring more cycles to do the same job negating its increased graphical potential. The cores are just too specialized towards graphics. On this new gen they need to realize the gpu should be doing more of the work. Perhaps even a tegra approach would be best. Dedicated cores for physics, graphics, ai. Would be much nicer than trying to force graphic chips to do processing they weren't designed for.

 

[antuk15]

What post processing? Killzone used canned lighting to try not to disappoint after sony ran around pretending cgi trailers were actual in game graphics. They had to cut from the ai too as most fluff ps3 games do in exchange for that minor graphical edge. The best ps3 games look no different than 360 games because they're from decent developers that didn't cut corners on things like ai. While the 360 and ps3 cores suck at ai, cell is notably worse, requiring more cycles to do the same job negating its increased graphical potential. The cores are just too specialized towards graphics. On this new gen they need to realize the gpu should be doing more of the work. Perhaps even a tegra approach would be best. Dedicated cores for physics, graphics, ai. Would be much nicer than trying to force graphic chips to do processing they weren't designed for.

I suggest you hop onto youtube and watch the KIllzone development videos, Killzone 3 off the top of my head uses MLLA, Which is a post processing effect. There's too many to list and post processing is not just lighting

And Killzone did not use canned lighting, A very good chunk of it is fully dynamic.

Uncharted 3 and Killzone 3 look much better then anything I've seen 360 spit out.

 

[Hayder_Master]

AMD gpu's win cuz one thing= heat
only big consols problem is heat,cuz it's hard to cool down down small box have many chipsets and processores specially most chip have heat the GPU, high heat break all effecient for the hole system.