1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Sony PlayStation 4 "Orbis" Kits Shipping to Developers, Powered by AMD A10 APU

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Nov 2, 2012.

  1. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,242 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,156
    I happen to have two computers worth of the same hardware for all intents and purposes.


    I should play some games at 1080P on the 27" monitors that I ordered with them and see how they do.
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  2. sergionography

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    264 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    not to mention this is assuming u use the same detail level
  3. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,673 (6.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,981
    Location:
    some AF base
    It's not kindergarten math. Your little equation has zero to do with real life. If you don't believe me play the exact same game with the exact same graphics settings at 720P and 1080P you don't get 4 times as many frames in 720P.

    Why wouldn't an APU be able to play Gran Tourismo at 1080P 60 FPS? A 6 year old G70 series card can play it at 720P. If you want to get into your silly little equation the GPU inside of an A10-5800K is 4x as fast as the old G70 series card in a PS3.
  4. BigMack70

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    Messages:
    498 (0.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    111
    OK. First grade math.

    Sure it does. You need a hardware/software solution that can produce ~4x more pixels than at 720p30.

    I never claimed it had anything to do with a specific hardware configuration, but it does have something to do with real life. We're not talking about unicorns.


    I've been over this a bunch of times now. I know this, and it's not relevant to my point at all, and I explained that all the way back at post #85 and have clarified further in recent posts.

    Seriously guys. READ before you post. :shadedshu


    I was unaware that they were just going to be re-releasing current gen games on next-gen hardware with beefed up resolution and framerate. Do you have a source suggesting that's what they're going to be doing?

    My position on this, I think, is pretty clear. My speculation is the following:
    -I take a 1080p60 + 3D claim by Sony to be a claim about either 60fps or near-60fps minimum framerates in their games.

    -I assume that next gen games are going to improve graphically from current gen games and thus be more demanding

    -I look to the hardware needed to run current gen games on the PC maxed out with 60fps minimum framerates at 1080p, and you need multi-GPU to do that.

    -I assume that next-gen games are going to be roughly as demanding as current PC games are maxed out or near-maxed out

    -I assume it's impossible to optimize an APU (or an APU + low-midrange GPU) to such a degree that it is able to do things that a 7970/680 cannot.


    Could I be wrong on some or all of those counts? Sure. But they're not inherently any more unreasonable than someone who assumes the opposite and thinks that Sony can do this. We'll know in a couple years. It would be awesome if they're able to do it, but I'm not a believer yet.
  5. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,617 (13.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,013
    I think it is time to let others chime in with their thoughts. To the few people who have been posting over and over again... It is time to give it a rest. Take your arguments elsewhere.
  6. WhiteLotus

    WhiteLotus

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532 (2.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    847
    What do people think the price of the next generation consoles will be?

    I've already heard that the WiiU will be sold at a loss...
  7. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,133 (1.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    458
    I had heard Nintendo Investors were pretty insistent that the WiiU be sold at either break even or a slight profit, to the point of basically cutting as many corners as they could get away with. As for the PS4, I know Sony has said they will not price a console as high as the PS3 was, so I'm thinking $400 and $500 models, at a slight loss. If they skimp a little on the hardware knock $50 off each package.
  8. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (5.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,615
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    Last I read about Nintendo was this ...
    As for the PS4, I have no idea as we have virtually no details on anything related to it.
  9. Rei86 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    172 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Wii U 32GB MSRP is 349.99

    I'm gonna throw this out that the PS4 and Xbox 720s will be around 399~499 price points. Can't see either hardware manufactures asking more than that. But then again they could add value features that could balloon the prices.

    Also about Nintendo, they have never sold hardware at a loss till the 3DS and the Wii U. Sony on the other hand has never sold the Playstation at a profit. Always at a loss that was recouped from the overwhelming sales figures.
  10. WhiteLotus

    WhiteLotus

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532 (2.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    847
    Damn really? Usually you get nintendo being the cheaper option, I'm hoping they will be a little bit cheaper.
  11. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,133 (1.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    458
    Well they couldn't keep using dated hardware, so they had to step up the cost. Plus those tablet controllers cost quite a bit. With the Wii Nintendo made a fortune for the first few years because they were the only company selling their consoles at positive margins, and they were selling so many more of them than Sony and MS. But once people stopped buying Wii's, they started to suffer because they had nothing for Software sales, which is where MS and Sony started making a majority of their revenue in the second half of this console cycle.

    Assuming Sony and MS stick to traditional controllers it should cut at least $50 off the launch package. I'm just assuming they have beefier hardware that will drive up the price. I expect a base model PS4 at about $400--which comes with just the system and a controller--and a premium package that comes with 1 launch title, a year of PSN+ and probably a second controller, or a bigger HDD (320GB vs. the 250GB).

    The new Xbox will probably be around the same price with similar hardware to the PS4, but I see them packaging all systems from launch with the Kinect which might bump the price up a bit.
  12. Rei86 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    172 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    The controller itself cost like 50% of that machine.

    The next Xbox is rumored to have Kinect 2 as part of the hardware and not as an accessory.
  13. sergionography

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    264 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    actualy theoretical numbers are really important
    you are forgetting that the resolution and gpu capability are kinda 2 different things
    resolution is more affected by cache and memory, as detail is affected by computation power
    i hardly think running 1080p is the problem, the issue here is details
    i am studying video game design and the biggest concern is polygons when we do modeling, the more polygons in the models the more gpu capability it takes, so being a good modeler is to get the best looking shape with the least number of polygons possible
    now the reason you dont get x4 the performance out of the hardware is because the poly count doesnt change with resolution, the rendering only changes to 1080p
    not to mention the code has alot to do offcouse aswell as the poly count like i mentioned
    some of the newer games have stunning graphcs and still run on old cards or even the consoles of today, mostly due to optimizing well with the crapload of graphics shaders available today, older games werent designed to run on 2000+ shaders so when u upscale to newer gens to run the older games they dont nessesarly do so linearly. but when u try the new optimized games for the hardware and run them on older cards then u will see the 4x weaker card running 4x weaker(when mem bandwidth and other gpu specialized features are also 4x weaker)
  14. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,133 (1.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    458
    Well the retail cost of the controllers was placed at $100-150, so not completely inaccurate.

    Yea it would make sense for them to bundle it as one system since they have been pushing Kinect so hard. I think it will have interesting applications in like 5 years when the sensors are accurate enough to actually measure fine movements (like individual finger movements).
  15. Rei86 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    172 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    If you remember Natal had the ability too, but MS was still fine tuning its software. Even all the industry insiders that was able to see Natal behind closed doors was impressed with it. The Kinect we got was a cut down version to keep cost low.

    With Kinect II if it is truly integrated into the hardware we'll see a big push for games for kinect since its already part of the system, allowing MS to market it better. Next is I'm sure we'll get a more Natal product vs Kinect.
  16. Disruptor4

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    227 (0.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    22
    I don't understand where you got your info for that. With my set up, which is single GPU, I get well above 60FPS with max graphics...
    THE_EGG and Dent1 say thanks.
  17. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,137 (2.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    906
    As much as I believe BigMack70 is a troll, on balance he said minimum 60FPS.

    In BF3 you'll get an average and maximum way above 60FPS. Minimum will be about 30-40FPS regardless of setup.

    But yes, I agree BigMack70 does often pull info out his butt.
  18. mystikl New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Messages:
    100 (0.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12
    The PS3 had a custom 7800 series GPU which was slightly slower than the regular one. Remember it was an upper midrange GPU released one year before the PS3, so if they were to do that again, they should be aiming for something with performance similar to a midrange GPU released this year namely a 7850.
    So the PS4 having a discrete card paired with the APU makes sense otherwise it wouldn't reach the performance target.
    But this is just a theory.
  19. M3T4LM4N222

    M3T4LM4N222 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    144 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    I've built a FM1 A6 3650 APU based system and FM2 A8 5600K system and they both had great integrated graphics. My guess is the PS4 would be a A10 w/ a dedicated ATI GPU in hybrid crossfire mode. It'll be more than enough for console gaming especially when you consider that the games will be 100% optimized for those specific pieces of hardware. My guess is a A10 65W w/ Passive cooler + Hybrid Crossfire GPU w/ passive cooler. Correct me if I am wrong - but I think an A10 + 6670 would be nearly equivalent to a 7750 and that would handle a decent amount of PC games @ 1920 x 1080 no problem. Now the only issue is console hardware will be holding back 2560 x 1440 from becoming more mainstream. At least you can get a 2560 x 1440 IPS panel monitor for $350 online right :D
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  20. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,162 (11.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,482

    why doesnt performance drop to 1/4, when you up the pixels by 4x?


    because its not that simple -.-
    that doesnt take into accounts the various hardware tweaks, lossless and lossy compression (hardware and software via drivers) and a million other things. you've based this argument around something you see as simple and obvious, without actually checking it yourself.


    god, this thread is really full of over-simplified arguments, just one after another after another...
    Aquinus says thanks.
  21. lyndonguitar

    lyndonguitar I play games

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,629 (1.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Location:
    Philippines


    Possible "kinect 2.0" tech in the next Xbox (Durango) . what will be Sony's move?
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2013
  22. Benetanegia

    Benetanegia New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,683 (1.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    694
    Location:
    Reaching your left retina.
    The answer to that is actually much simpler than that. It doesn't drop because when on lower resolution the GPU is not actually performing as fast as it can. The bottleneck is elsewhere in lower resolution (CPU, triangle setup...). Any GPU built in the last decade is built with higher resolutions in mind. This is why ROPs, TMUs and pixel shaders have always kept increasing to a point where they (pixel shaders) are 100x times higher than a decade ago while triangle setup and raster engines are now only 2x (AMD+ Nvidia mid-range) or 4x (Fermi/Kepler high end) higher.

    A similar question would be why is a HD7950 the slowest card here?

    [​IMG]

    Why do all cards perform nearly the same? And the answer is not anything complicated about optimization HW&SW, etc, etc.

    EDIT: Low end cards however...

    [​IMG][​IMG]

    The GTX 650 Ti for example goes from 38.5 fps to 23.7 which is actually very close to the resolution difference which is 1.77X -> 38 / 1.77 =~ 21
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  23. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,162 (11.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,482
    the answer is simple: nothing about video game performance is simple. (which is my problem with this 4x 'fact')
  24. Benetanegia

    Benetanegia New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,683 (1.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    694
    Location:
    Reaching your left retina.
    Sorry but it is simple in this case. Pixels (whether final, or fragments, or texels or whichever step in the pipeline you want to talk about) need to be calculated and rendered and this is done on processors*. 2x the pixel amount 2x the power required, either 2x the SP number or 2x clock. It really is as simple as that. It's a fact.

    Now you all guys are talking about margins. PC graphics cards have power to spare on nearly all fronts, lots and lots of it, for a long time, many years, and most definitely in the case of Pixel Shading capabilities and as such it's in this front where lower end cards have more "leeway".

    * Nowadays, I mean any game engine in the past 5 years does everything on a per-pixel basis. There's no real escape from the law. More pixels more power required. Some games, especially on consoles "avoid" this physics law by rendering some elements at lower resolutions. For example rendering the lighting pass(es) at 1/2 or 1/4 the resolution is very common. This is just a workaround and not breaking the law. If output res is increased from 720 to 1080 but everything else on the fragment data is kept the same res, resolution has not really increased by as much as stated.
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  25. MuhammedAbdo

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    32 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Sigh

    (SIGH)

    This thread is full of ignorant people making false and misguided statements all along , the only people here with brains are : Benetanegia and BigMack70 .

    First you morons need to read some facts , here they are :

    FACT 1 : Not even High-End PCs can sustain 60FPS @1080p in demanding games with maximum graphics , games like : Metro 2033 , ARMA 3 , Crysis , Dragon Age 2 and many many more , there will be drops below 60FPS and in many occasions .

    FACT 2 : Consoles include insane amount of code optimization , where every CPU/GPU cycle is utilized , they literally run on the machine code , which is the lowest language of software programming , contrary to the PC that sports many compilers and higher languages which wastes valuable cycles .

    FACT 3 : Even with these optimizations , consoles run with shitty graphics . they cant even maintain 30 FPS at 720p , they usually drop to 25 and 20 FPS , they even run at sub 1280x720 resolutions , sometimes as low as 900x600 !

    FACT 4 : Consoles cut down on graphics severely , they decrease Shadows density , Lighting Effects , Level Of Detail , Polygon Count , Alpha Effects , Texture Resolution , Texture Filtering , Anti-Aliasing , Post Processing and so many things that I can't even remember them all .

    FACT 5 : a console with the triple specs of,
    1-AMD CPU
    2-AMD APU
    3-AMD GPU (low-end/6670)

    Will barely run today games at 1080p @60 FPS with PC graphics level , all of the code optimizations will be spent on the cost of resolution increase (to 1080p) and the cost of graphics increase (to PC level) , such as shadows , lighting , textures and etc .

    If the specs has been changed and the console came with a high-end or even a medium AMD GPU , then the situation will be different .

    FACT 6 : These consoles will have to do the usual dirty business to be able to run at 1080p , cut resolution and upscale , decrease all graphics elements (lighting and shadows and textures .. etc) below the future PC level .. This happened to the previous generation too , Xbox and PS 3 stared operating at 720p just fine , then they had to cut corners to increase graphics other wise the visuals will stall .

    FACT 7 : PCs will maintain a higher visual quality and frame rates , consoles will have the graphics of a two years old PCs .

    End of Discussion .

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page