LastDudeALiveSure, I was just explaining why Sony and Microsoft charge for PSN and Xbox Live, while you don't have a similar practice on PC.

To make money, yes. It used to be split with a free tier and paid tier. No reason they can't do that other than simple greed. Instead of charging another $100-200 on the machine they'd rather make $400 off a subscription.

Tek-CheckBecause most information he receives is generally predictive of how products would look like. Pretty simple.


Dude, it sounds like a nasty conspiracy. Nobody in the industry offers what AMD can offer at the moment, and therefore Sony and Microsoft buy gaming APUs from them. Pretty simple stuff. No need to involve a "deep state" reasoning into console gaming.


If Nvidia had had anything interesting on offer, Sony and Microsoft would have chosen it. Pretty simple stuff. Don't complicate reality.


Hundreds of millions of users and families around the world play on consoles. Tell it to them, that their devices are nonsense.

If they were told they could have a family computer again and save money on their kids' gaming, I'm sure they would be more than happy not to buy a console. Microsoft makes a console though so people will never hear about it unless it's from Valve. SteamOS is a perfect opportunity to bring back the Steam Machine.

Ruined MindI would never buy a console, so I agree with you regarding your main idea, but you haven't considered how a regular person is. A regular person may not understand how to maintain a computer. Even installing a store like "Steam" may be confusing, and worrying about system requirements would cause frustration. Plus, imagine a problem affecting a driver, and a different version having the solution. A regular person doesn't understand how to update (or rollback) a driver, and won't visit a forum to ask people about it. Such a situation may cause a belief about the computer, or the game, being broken beyond repair.

Every copy of a console has the same hardware, and a game was designed to work on that console. It won't be as smooth as the version for a computer, because we could modify settings to reduce the load, to reach our desired frame-rate. A console doesn't allow that, because the "Performance" modes of consoles still aren't stable, but regular people seem to not be bothered by a low frame-rate. The console WILL allow the game to function. That's enough.

You are absolutely right about a computer being better, but you must consider how a regular person is.

With the way everything is digital now I think most of those people could figure it out if it means they save money. Money will drive most people to figure anything out. Kids are generally savvy enough to figure it out. People dont give others enough credit. GFE will set recommend settings automatically and update drivers automatically. I've had maybe 2 problems related to drivers in the past 15 years.
People aren't dumb, they might be impatient but they aren't incapable.

ARFSony is on the wrong path. The PlayStation 3 with its Cell Broadband Engine (Cell/B.E.), a 64-bit reduced instruction set computer (RISC) multi-core processor and microarchitecture developed by Sony, Toshiba, and IBM was a state-of-the-art power house for many many years after its release back in 2006.
What can AMD offer? A turd, a potato? Why do they sacrifice performance and power efficiency for some illogical ideologies which make no sense, at all?

If IBM’s Cell architecture was so great, how come IBM stopped making it and ZERO companies copied them?

You would know what AMD has to offer if you looked at their Wikipedia page. Might as well, since 60% of your comment is the first sentences from the Wikipedia entry on the Cell architecture

UpgrayeddStill a bad deal for the consumer. It's an APU, it will always perform like an APU, mediocre at best. APUs aren't expensive either, that's why they'rein consoles. The only people i could hardly even recommend a console to are people that only play free to play games but even then it would just be better to get a budget pc with a dedicated CPU and GPU.
You can find all sorts of ways to justify it from a business point but from a consumer point its nonsense to pay for a console.

Is it a bad deal? On the contrary, Sony is saving at minimum $200 in BoM by using an APU with unified memory. I mean, do you want a 500W console that is over $1000? Sony doesn't.

Of course, there are power advantages in having discrete chips (105W CPU + 350W GPU), but now you're doubling everything: power phases, copper traces, physical chips (CPU and GPU), non-unified RAM - CPU and GPU, etc. Essentially, that's a PC.

Consoles are meant to be priced accessibly and they're meant to be easy. You power it on and play games.

Sony's APU is a semi-custom design, and we'll never know the actual price of it unless that leaks. But, given that Sony sells millions of Playstations, I'm betting it's not cheap in the first 3 years of sale. PS5's original 7nm chip actually had very poor yields somewhere around 55%, so Sony was losing tons of money just on actual silicon wafers, as 45% of the etched silicon was defective.

I am not really interested in what APU it is going to have as much as what innovation is going to happen with interfaces.
Sony as opposed to Microsoft is leading innovation in this regard with Dualsense and PSVR, I hope they keep pushing in this direction. I am tired of only thing that Xbox is able to release are different skins for their controller and acting like Kinect never happened.

PunkenjoyMain reason why AMD is getting again the console refresh is it been reported that AMD is a really great partner to work with. As simple as that.

Microsoft and Sony aren't shopping for a one time deal like us buying a CPU or a GPU. They want a partner that can help them for years and is willing to get them what they want.

That relationship started with PS4 on Sony Side and XBOX 360 on Microsoft side and both don't see why they should break it.

True. PSx and XBox APU's are semicustom. If my memory serves me well, both companies chose AMD because they could make them what they wanted.

APU is a great thing fo consoles, even more so if RAM was part of the APU. HBM would be nice, like Fury, but the cost could be prohibitive.

dyonoctisCELL wasn't a godsent for the PS3, on the contrary. It was expensive, and hard to optimize for. Depstite everyting, the very simple IBM powerPC used in the xbox360 was not just keeping up, it became a key advantage. The one time Xbox gae Playstation a run for their money. AMD can offer a top to bottom SOC solution, for the living room and handheld console, along with great upscaling technologies to optimize performance, especially in low power mode.

keeping x86 will also make backward compatibility less of a pain. (And I'm guessing an easier transition gen to gen fro the devs)

He's simply an NVIDIA fanboy trying to discredit x86 just because his beloved company can't offer that solution.

jc65859It was such a state of the art chip that it was a nightmare to develop for and two gens later, we still don't have native backwards compatibility with games developed for the PS3.

Tbf this is on Sony, the base PS5 is more than fast enough to run RPCS3. They just want to sell you remasters of the games you already own instead.

cucolHe's simply an NVIDIA fanboy trying to discredit x86 just because his beloved company can't offer that solution.

Nah, that's not the case with that dude. He just makes these absurd statements and then pouts when told no, no particular allegiance there

ARM is better at 15-28w, which suits handhelds and thin laptops.

Each x86 generation only improves ~5% at 15w, versus 10-20% at 35w+.

AMD has made an ARM architecture with RDNA 3.5 recently (AMD SoundWave). They can test it directly with a similar x86 APU and see which is best at 15w, but we'll never know until one day there's an AMD ARM APU outperforming everything, or the same x86 APU but better at 15w.

Dr. DroTbf this is on Sony, the base PS5 is more than fast enough to run RPCS3. They just want to sell you remasters of the games you already own instead.

Not really, the 3700X (which is essentially what the PS5 has) only gets ~22fps in Red Dead Redemption in RPCS3. That's lower than what you'd get on the PS3 itself. A PS6 with AVX-512 and 8 or 12 cores should have no problem, though.

LastDudeALiveNot really, the 3700X (which is essentially what the PS5 has) only gets ~22fps in Red Dead Redemption in RPCS3. That's lower than what you'd get on the PS3 itself. A PS6 with AVX-512 and 8 or 12 cores should have no problem, though.

Did something change? Could have sworn it ran better than that

So... again, budget AMD PC in a custom chassis with a Sony logo slapped on it? Got it! This is the third gen they (Microsoft AND Sony, 99.99% assumption Microsoft is taking the same route) are doing this. Remember dog-doodoo tier AMD's AM1 derived Jaguars (downclocked Semprons!) in PS4 and XboxOne? I do! They made first gen Intel Atoms look like titans of performance and engineering!

I still have a AM1 ITX mobo and a few Semprons and one Athlon for it. They were so dog-$hit my local Micro Center was giving away AMD's AM1 motherboards for free! As long as you purchased a CPU, ($1 for Semprons and $5 for Athlons!) So, technically you could get a AM1 mobo and Athlon cpu combo for as low as $6+tax! That's how crap they were/are. To my amazement, the quad core Sempron couldn't even run WinXP properly! The "better" Athlon I put in there few weeks later was no better. Imagine, releasing a CPU/chipset/mobo platform in 2014/2015 that can't even run a 15 year old OS at that time (WinXP). That is AMD, and that is what Sony and Microsoft have been putting into their "consoles" for over a decade now, in one form or another (downclocked neutered Ryzens replaced downclocked and neutered Semprons)...

Give me unwieldly Cell PS3 architecture over below-bottom-tier AMD crap any time of day... not gonna happen though. AMD is technically giving their stuff away for free, hence why the MBAs at Sony and Microsoft just can't say no... For what it's worth, at least PS3 hardware had some engineering and thought put into it....

Dr. DroDid something change? Could have sworn it ran better than that

I'm just pulling that number from the 7600X CPU review. Nothing except the 13900K and Zen 5 CPUs get over ~45fps.

PrettyKitten800If IBM’s Cell architecture was so great, how come IBM stopped making it and ZERO companies copied them?

You would know what AMD has to offer if you looked at their Wikipedia page. Might as well, since 60% of your comment is the first sentences from the Wikipedia entry on the Cell architecture

There are many examples where a superior technology was not allowed to lead. One of the most prominent - Betamax against the crappy VHS.
Why did PlayStation 4 use the low-performance Bulldozer core when the whole market relegated it to the trash bin?

Other examples - why do we continue to burn coal and oil when we can barely stand global warming?

Many reasons:

1. Corruption;
2. Greed;
3. Cartel;
4. Monopoly;
5. Stupidity.

Why is the Windows 11 24H2 tied to the Android 15 24H2 development? Are they the same coin, but two sides? Neither has a 25H1 or 25H2 version? Coincidence?
I don't think so.

I probably will try to get a PS6 on launch day. It should finally be powerful enough to play everything with 60 fps 4k now that Sony is realizing the power of FSR4, and working with AMD to directly optimize it.

ARFThere are many examples where a superior technology was not allowed to lead. One of the most prominent - Betamax against the crappy VHS.
Why did PlayStation 4 use the low-performance Bulldozer core when the whole market relegated it to the trash bin?

Not to be that boomer, yet again, but you could even say CRT vs flat panels. People forget, as they should really, but LCDs integrated into consumer electronics have been around since the 80s, I know, I was there and used those electronics. In the early 90s I used several "laptops" (if you can call them that) that had them. They all sucked. Badly. They still sucked in the 2000s when LCD craze kicked off with cheap TN panels flooding Newegg and similar.

What ultimately killed the CRT was various anti-lead and hazardous chem rules and laws being passed across the globe in the 2000s, making CRTs quite literally illegal to manufacture in the end. That, and logistics of shipping a single unit of CRT vs 5-10-20 units of LCD at same tonnage across the seas to European and American markets. Only recently (last ten years or so) have various flat screen technologies been refined (IPS/OLED) to the point CRT can be seen as actually inferior.

Post PS3 era, consoles have and continue to be just shitty AMD PCs in a custom form factor. Really $hitty in the case of PS4/xboxone. Somehow AMD was able to fit 386 tier performance into a modern CPU arch circa mid 2010s with the Jaguar. With PS4 you were technically, at the bottom end, buying AMDs own iteration of Atom, a crappier and slower one at that. :laugh:

tommo1982True. PSx and XBox APU's are semicustom. If my memory serves me well, both companies chose AMD because they could make them what they wanted.

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner


You can find quite articles around where Sony were not happy with nvidia in the PS3 era as they felt they were sold an inferior product at a higher price. Historically nvidia have not been very accomodating in offering anything beyond their own core designs

I mean everyone is going "Oh the Switch 2 SOC is completely custom from nvidia" and i look over at the AGX 32Gb version and I go, huh looks fairly familiar
The NX-SoC in the Switch one? Nvidia shield, Pixel C, Some of the Jetson board and Nvidia Self Driving development all use the same basic core.

Where as the AMD offerings have been massively different to anything available to consumers and wildly differing at times depending on what the customer needs and to be honest I would say as PC gamers we have to thank Sony/M$/Valve for pushing AMD to make what they did as it has lead to things like Strix Point/Strix Halo and the ensuing handheld revolution that is currently occuring.

ARFThere are many examples where a superior technology was not allowed to lead. One of the most prominent - Betamax against the crappy VHS.
Why did PlayStation 4 use the low-performance Bulldozer core when the whole market relegated it to the trash bin?

Other examples - why do we continue to burn coal and oil when we can barely stand global warming?

Many reasons:

1. Corruption;
2. Greed;
3. Cartel;
4. Monopoly;
5. Stupidity.

Why is the Windows 11 24H2 tied to the Android 15 24H2 development? Are they the same coin, but two sides? Neither has a 25H1 or 25H2 version? Coincidence?
I don't think so.

You're reading too far into it and still somehow missing the point, ARF. Sometimes superiority loses to cost, practicality or even simplicity. I've always been a PS3 guy, and it's the perfect case study as to why more sometimes can be less, it was too good for its target audience, and too complex of a machine. It made development and even manufacturing the unit hell, it had to change, even though I think it could have been handled far more gracefully, especially regarding the loss of backwards compatibility on later units.

LastDudeALiveI'm just pulling that number from the 7600X CPU review. Nothing except the 13900K and Zen 5 CPUs get over ~45fps.

PS5 would actually fare worse, as it only has half-width FPU or 128b data paths, so AVX2 is a 2-cycle operation when it's only 1-cycle in 3700X with full 256b data paths. It'd be in-between the 2700X and 3700X. It is a Zen 2 FPU otherwise, but Sony didn't really need the wider FPU, as they can direct most FPU ops to the GPU.

Personally, I think they should have kept Zen 2's full 256b FPU, however, increased die area would have increased chip costs and power consumption of the CPU. Since CPU+GPU share package power, that power would be sapped from the GPU.

There's a high likelihood Sony may choose AMD's mobile AVX-512 implementation, which is essentially like Zen 4's double-pumped 256b, instead of using more complex 512b data paths.

ARFSony is on the wrong path. The PlayStation 3 with its Cell Broadband Engine (Cell/B.E.), a 64-bit reduced instruction set computer (RISC) multi-core processor and microarchitecture developed by Sony, Toshiba, and IBM was a state-of-the-art power house for many many years after its release back in 2006.
What can AMD offer? A turd, a potato? Why do they sacrifice performance and power efficiency for some illogical ideologies which make no sense, at all?

Still on "the Magic of the CELL"

UpgrayeddStill a bad deal for the consumer. It's an APU, it will always perform like an APU, mediocre at best. APUs aren't expensive either, that's why they'rein consoles. The only people i could hardly even recommend a console to are people that only play free to play games but even then it would just be better to get a budget pc with a dedicated CPU and GPU.
You can find all sorts of ways to justify it from a business point but from a consumer point its nonsense to pay for a console.

Basically what console offer is the best performance per dollar you can get it basically a pc with getting rid of all the useless pieces to make it as efficient as it can be for gaming and yes apu design isnt as expensive as a pc that the whole point of apu that a win as for apu performance like cpu and gpu it depend on the number of cu and the size of the die which you can make it as big as you want but than it will become expensive. Each platform have its up and down and each person has his own preferences and need console answer a need in a market that pc can't simple as that