Support NeoGAF

[IHaveCandy]

And I still believing the same.

Give me a Core i5 with a beefier GPU and 4GB of GDDR5 over crappy cpu and mid range GPU with 8GB GGDR5 any day of the day.

With those consoles you will fall short of power much earlier than run out of bandwidth.

My 570 GTX is only about 1.4 TF. Why would a 560 be better than a 1.8 TF PS4 GPU?

 

[Glorified G]

Please explain how you would design a better system with the same TDP.

dr. apocalipsis > cerny

deal with it

 

[IHaveCandy]

Dr apoc, this is the GTX 560 TI's specs. Explain how it is beefier than the PS4 GPU when it has 50% less flops.

http://www.gpureview.com/GeForce-GTX-560-Ti-card-641.html

 

[qa_engineer]

Please explain how you would design a better system with the same TDP.

he can't.


he's just stating that he wants a more powerful system for the same price point without considering the costs in both TDP and material. Basically he wants Sony and MS to lose even more money per console than they did this past generation, or he wants to spend 7-800 dollars on a console the size of a desktop.

 

[Kazuma Kiryu]

oh, i remember that post. good stuff.

 

[maplelord93]

Never forget dr. apocalipsis in the 8 GB GDDR5 thread....

This is messed up.

 

[beast786]

I want to know what my GTX480 tier are?

Low or Mid?

 

[phosphor112]

And I still believing the same.

Give me a Core i5 with a beefier GPU and 4GB of GDDR5 over crappy cpu and mid range GPU with 8GB GGDR5 any day of the day.

With those consoles you will fall short of power much earlier than run out of bandwidth.

Except this gen, consoles hit memory and bandwidth limitations before power limitations.

 

[qa_engineer]

Someone get this guy a shovel and help him before this hole he's digging gets deeper.

"Me want a pc for the price of a PS4 because science"

 

[dragonelite]

Dr apoc, this is the GTX 560 TI's specs. Explain how it is beefier than the PS4 GPU when it has 50% less flops.

http://www.gpureview.com/GeForce-GTX-560-Ti-card-641.html

Not the same architecture. Different memory system. Different drivers different optimization techniques and other stuff.
Not sure if it is beefier.
Flops are only usefull if all you did was run an infinite loop and increment an counter then maybe you could get 99% of the paper flops.

 

[phosphor112]

Not the same architecture. Different memory system. Different drivers different optimization techniques and other stuff.
Not sure if it is beefier.
Flops are only usefull if all you did was run an infinite loop and increment an counter then maybe you could get 99% of the paper flops.

None of that means shit if it's still a worse off card. The also don't have the benefit of shoving it into an APU.

 

[RoboPlato]

Never forget dr. apocalipsis in the 8 GB GDDR5 thread....

Ahahahahahaha. I had never seen this before.

In a hypothetcal situation where boosting the GPU was what would happen if they didn't up the RAM, that would only make graphics better. More RAM makes games better. Easy choice, especially since the GPU is pretty solid.

 

[IHaveCandy]

Not the same architecture. Different memory system. Different drivers different optimization techniques and other stuff.
Not sure if it is beefier.
Flops are only usefull if all you did was run an infinite loop and increment an counter then maybe you could get 99% of the paper flops.

So what are these supposed advantages the 560 has?

 

[phosphor112]

So what are these supposed advantages the 560 has?

It gives nVidia money.

 

[dragonelite]

So what are these supposed advantages the 560 has?

Its an gpu that has like 30% less gflops then an 7850 but still perform 90% of an 7850.
So it tells me that nvidia gpu is more efficient. God knows where the advantages comes from. Could be a better memory system or better and leaner drivers.

 

[phosphor112]

Its an gpu that has like 30% less gflops then an 7850 but still perform 90% of an 7850.
So it tells me that nvidia gpu is more efficient. God knows where the advantages comes from. Could be a better memory system or better and leaner drivers.

It still outputs more heat and has a higher TDP.

 

[IHaveCandy]

Its an gpu that has like 30% less gflops then an 7850 but still perform 90% of an 7850.
So it tells me that nvidia gpu is more efficient. God knows where the advantages comes from. Could be a better memory system or better and leaner drivers.

You cannot simply take the benchmarks of the comparable video cards. It ignores all of the benefits of the APU design.

It certainly doesn't have a better memory system than the PS4 APU.

 

[dragonelite]

It still outputs more heat and has a higher TDP.

What has that to do with GPU paper spec performance?
You buy an psu and cooling for it. Hardly something to worry about in an pc.

You cannot simply take the benchmarks of the comparable video cards. It ignores all of the benefits of the APU design.

It certainly doesn't have a better memory system than the PS4 APU.

Wut is an APU now the holy grail of computing right now or something because next gen consoles are using them.
You were asking why its beefier in the post i replied to not if its memory system is better.
And talking about gflops performance of the ps4 gpu not the complete system.

Time will tell if an APU design is better or even grow out of the low to medium end spec laptop or desktops.
I think a shared memory model with hyper cube memory where gpu and cpu can both read from is an better design in general.
At least you can upgrade the cpu and gpu which is not possible on an APU.

 

[phosphor112]

What has that to do with GPU paper spec performance?
You buy an psu and cooling for it. Hardly something to worry about in an pc.

You say it's more efficient? Maybe per flop, but not per TDP.

And no one is talking about PC. He or you (idc to check) said they'd rather have a GTX 560 in a PS4 with an i5 and call it a day. Let's ignore the fact at how stupid that would be.

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

My 570 GTX is only about 1.4 TF. Why would a 560 be better than a 1.8 TF PS4 GPU?

Dr apoc, this is the GTX 560 TI's specs. Explain how it is beefier than the PS4 GPU when it has 50% less flops.

http://www.gpureview.com/GeForce-GTX-560-Ti-card-641.html

First of all, you keep believing in Gflops like measurement of all things. You are comparing cars based in their top speed.

Second, Xbox One GPU is rumored to be capable of 1.2Gflops (or even 850 flops if we trust what some of you posted here some weeks ago). GTX560ti is capable of 1.3GFLOPs at base clock. Then One have 16 ROPs and 48 TMUs vs 32 ROPs and 64 TMUs on Nvidia card.

Yesterday I spilled some juice reading some nonsenses, today's clique is close to that. Luckily for me, I'm well versed into cleaning sticky liquids from my keyboard.

That some people at gaf actually thinks that a HD7770 with Jaguars cores can overpower a GTX560ti behind an Intel Quad, and then they demand proofs of the contrary, goes beyond hilarity.

Please explain how you would design a better system with the same TDP.

he's just stating that he wants a more powerful system for the same price point without considering the costs in both TDP and material. Basically he wants Sony and MS to lose even more money per console than they did this past generation, or he wants to spend 7-800 dollars on a console the size of a desktop.

Let's be clear on this. This is not about how much power can you insert into any given TDP, this is about how cheap it can be. And AMD won that race because of their prices.

If you actually believe that AMD can insert more power into any given TDP than Intel or Nvidia, you won't have any problems in life, because this is a pretty irrelevant subject. But you are just a fool. Do you believe that Intel is unable to pack an 80 EU iGPU along with a dual core i3 and wipe floor with that APUs using less transistors and with smaller thermal footprint? They just aren't willing to do. Build a better system that those APUs using a TDP methric is easy as fuck. Money cost, considering other companies fees and not the cost of the silicon die per se, its another subject.

Problem here is the need some people have to believe into the almightiness of console technology instead of realize that consoles are designed to be cheap. The same stupidity of Cellvangelists 7 years ago, the same stupidity of that people that refused to believe that those consoles weren't doing 1080p/60fps until some guys bothered to count pixels using digital outputs. Here, in this same thread, there are people sharply affirmating that Jaguar architecture is more powerful than Piledriver. And not only that, but others have to prove otherwise.

If you make a poll in this forum, you will find people believing that PS4 GPU is stronger than Titan because it mounts more GDDR5 on board. And I'm not talking about a simple unexplained vote, lots of them will argue that believe with all their hearts, lack of technical knowledge and GIFs library. People here want to beat top end technology with buffed budget parts, because something in their inner impels them to those futile exercises. Because there are some sort of war to win in their minds.

APU's are convenient, cheap, performers, but they aren't high end. And their CPU part is absolutely low end. Deal with it. There is nothing bad about it because they also will be sold for cheap.

Everytime I think about some people here buying gpus on malls looking for VRAM size my keyboard suffers an agression.

 

[dragonelite]

You say it's more efficient? Maybe per flop, but not per TDP.

And no one is talking about PC. He or you (idc to check) said they'd rather have a GTX 560 in a PS4 with an i5 and call it a day. Let's ignore the fact at how stupid that would be.

But then he has to communicate that better or at least quote the post he was responding too. If you talk about performance and flops how can i read its also about TDP and the complete package.

 

[BlastProcessing]

What has that to do with GPU paper spec performance?
You buy an psu and cooling for it. Hardly something to worry about in an pc.



Wut is an APU now the holy grail of computing right now or something because next gen consoles are using them.
You were asking why its beefier in the post i replied to not if its memory system is better.
And talking about gflops performance of the ps4 gpu not the complete system.

Time will tell if an APU design is better or even grow out of the low to medium end spec laptop or desktops.
I think a shared memory model with hyper cube memory where gpu and cpu can both read from is an better design in general.
At least you can upgrade the cpu and gpu which is not possible on an APU.

APU's have been interesting since Smartphone and Tablet SOC's have started to kick ass. The reason both consoles APU's are interesting is that they finally fix the main issue holding APU's back, bandwidth.

 

[Whiteshirt]

Perhaps its a language barrier but literally no one actually believes the PS4 has a more powerful GPU than the Titan because of 8gb of GDDR5. Lots of people, such as Artist, have said this but they are being utterly fatuous.

 

[TheCloser]

First of all, you keep believing in Gflops like measurement of all things. You are comparing cars based in their top speed.

Second, Xbox One GPU is rumored to be capable of 1.2Gflops (or even 850 flops if we trust what some of you posted here some weeks ago). GTX560ti is capable of 1.3GFLOPs at base clock. Then One have 16 ROPs and 48 TMUs vs 32 ROPs and 64 TMUs on Nvidia card.

Yesterday I spilled some juice reading some nonsenses, today's clique is close to that. Luckily for me, I'm well versed into cleaning sticky liquids from my keyboard.

That some people at gaf actually thinks that a HD7770 with Jaguars cores can overpower a GTX560ti behind an Intel Quad, and then they demand proofs of the contrary, goes beyond hilarity.





Let's be clear on this. This is not about how much power can you insert into any given TDP, this is about how cheap it can be. And AMD won that race because of their prices.

If you actually believe that AMD can insert more power into any given TDP than Intel or Nvidia, you won't have any problems in life, because this is a pretty irrelevant subject. But you are just a fool. Do you believe that Intel is unable to pack an 80 EU iGPU along with a dual core i3 and wipe floor with that APUs using less transistors and with smaller thermal footprint? They just aren't willing to do. Build a better system that those APUs using a TDP methric is easy as fuck. Money cost, considering other companies fees and not the cost of the silicon die per se, its another subject.

Problem here is the need some people have to believe into the almightiness of console technology instead of realize that consoles are designed to be cheap. The same stupidity of Cellvangelists 7 years ago, the same stupidity of that people that refused to believe that those consoles weren't doing 1080p/60fps until some guys bothered to count pixels using digital outputs. Here, in this same thread, there are people sharply affirmating that Jaguar architecture is more powerful than Piledriver. And not only that, but others have to prove otherwise.

If you make a poll in this forum, you will find people believing that PS4 GPU is stronger than Titan because it mounts more GDDR5 on board. And I'm not talking about a simple unexplained vote, lots of them will argue that believe with all their hearts, lack of technical knowledge and GIFs library. People here want to beat top end technology with buffed budget parts, because something in their inner impels them to those futile exercises. Because there are some sort of war to win in their minds.

APU's are convenient, cheap, performers, but they aren't high end. And their CPU part is absolutely low end. Deal with it. There is nothing bad about it because they also will be sold for cheap.

Everytime I think about some people here buying gpus on malls looking for VRAM size my keyboard suffers an agression.

Sorry but the 7870/7850 > than 560ti. This is a fact. If you were talking about a different GPU, it might be different. Get this nonsense out of here. The i5 > ps4/xbox one cpu, again this is a fact so we can all agree on that. The difference is that ps4 was designed to do a lot of cpu grunt work on the GPU. Sorry but your suggestion of an i5 and a better gpu is quite rubbish. 4gb of ram is already outdated today and you want to toss that in a console, okay. Every company has different design goals and smarter people than you designed the xbox one and ps4. I think i will trust their judgement over yours.

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

I want to know what my GTX480 tier are?

Low or Mid?

You say it's more efficient? Maybe per flop, but not per TDP.

And no one is talking about PC. He or you (idc to check) said they'd rather have a GTX 560 in a PS4 with an i5 and call it a day. Let's ignore the fact at how stupid that would be.

28nm vs 40nm, nothing to do with hardware logic.

Then, who said anything about package and old design like GTX560ti into PS4?

 

[IHaveCandy]

What has that to do with GPU paper spec performance?
You buy an psu and cooling for it. Hardly something to worry about in an pc.



Wut is an APU now the holy grail of computing right now or something because next gen consoles are using them.
You were asking why its beefier in the post i replied to not if its memory system is better.
And talking about gflops performance of the ps4 gpu not the complete system.

Time will tell if an APU design is better or even grow out of the low to medium end spec laptop or desktops.
I think a shared memory model with hyper cube memory where gpu and cpu can both read from is an better design in general.
At least you can upgrade the cpu and gpu which is not possible on an APU.

Uhh you said it might have a better memory system. That's why I said it won't....

 

[Putty]

All this talk of next gen VS pc is rather amusing, and rather silly. I can't play console exclusives on a pc regardless of how much more powerful a certain spec'd pc would be.

 

[IHaveCandy]

First of all, you keep believing in Gflops like measurement of all things. You are comparing cars based in their top speed.

Second, Xbox One GPU is rumored to be capable of 1.2Gflops (or even 850 flops if we trust what some of you posted here some weeks ago). GTX560ti is capable of 1.3GFLOPs at base clock. Then One have 16 ROPs and 48 TMUs vs 32 ROPs and 64 TMUs on Nvidia card.

Yesterday I spilled some juice reading some nonsenses, today's clique is close to that. Luckily for me, I'm well versed into cleaning sticky liquids from my keyboard.

That some people at gaf actually thinks that a HD7770 with Jaguars cores can overpower a GTX560ti behind an Intel Quad, and then they demand proofs of the contrary, goes beyond hilarity.

Why are you talking about Xbox One specs? I was clearly talking about PS4 specs.

 

[BlastProcessing]

28nm vs 40nm, nothing to do with hardware logic.

Then, who said anything about package and old design like GTX560ti into PS4?

Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! I know this one!

A lot of people will be dissapointed once the box arrive and won't be able to match a GTX560ti with 1GB GDDR5.

 

[phosphor112]

28nm vs 40nm, nothing to do with hardware logic.

Then, who said anything about package and old design like GTX560ti into PS4?

A lot of people will be dissapointed once the box arrive and won't be able to match a GTX560ti with 1GB GDDR5.

You need processing power to do Volumetric shadows, not infinite memory pool. What is a '3D texture' to begin with? Developers will be happy once they wont need to optimize their bloated stuff to fit in, gamers will have shorter load times, because there wont be any better use for so much RAM in a so weak system.

In fact, it's most than probably than raw performance will be lowered down a bit, since they will have to loose timmings on the IMC for it to be able to hold double RAM.

There is a lot of people making laugh about the 8GB GDDR5 Meme, and people actually believing this is some sort of advanced stuff. Going from 4GB to 8GB in the same PCB is as easy as double sided PCB for memory chips. Later on, as chips will double the density, Sony will be able to halve the chip count for the cheaper revision of the board.

8GB is not good for gamers. Memory is boring stuff you need to feed the beasts. We, graphic whores, need more shader units, more ROP'S and TMU's, more speed and fillrate, and a better core CPU, not that crappy Jaguar stuff that our mommies use in their shitty Acer netbooks.

8GB GDDR5 is Sony being Sony after pay for preexisting tech instead of engineer it.

So what were you suggesting with this when you posted this back then?

Hell, you're still sticking with your guns.

And I still believing the same.

Give me a Core i5 with a beefier GPU and 4GB of GDDR5 over crappy cpu and mid range GPU with 8GB GGDR5 any day of the day.

With those consoles you will fall short of power much earlier than run out of bandwidth.

What does RAM have anything to do with the silicon budget? I don't understand what you're trying to even say here. I don't think you know what you're trying to say.

 

[Raymo]

Hell, you're still sticking with your guns.



What does RAM have anything to do with the silicon budget? I don't understand what you're trying to even say here. I don't think you know what you're trying to say.

Well, I think he meant he'd rather they put more money into better cpu and gpu than on another 4GB of GDDR5. By money, I mean of the $400 it takes to make/buy the console. I don't think he was talking about a silicon budget of some sort.

 

[BrainZEROX]

Probably a stupid question but I read that the xbox one had two OSes (the game Os and the Apps OS) served by an hypervisor, the "third" OS (here for instance: http://microsoft-news.com/xbox-one-three-operating-systems-for-instant-app-switching/). I also read that the memory had an assumed 5/3GB memory split for game OS and app OS. Where does the hypervisor stand here? I guess it requires some memory too. Do we know what would be its allocation? Should we look into a 5/2.5/0.5 GB for game/app/hypervisor allocation? Or 5/2/1 GB would be more realistic?

 

[phosphor112]

Probably a stupid question but I read that the xbox one had two OSes (the game Os and the Apps OS) served by an hypervisor, the "third" OS (here for instance: http://microsoft-news.com/xbox-one-three-operating-systems-for-instant-app-switching/). I also read that the memory had an assumed 5/3GB memory split for game OS and app OS. Where does the hypervisor stand here? I guess it requires some memory too. Do we know what would be its allocation? Should we look into a 5/2.5/0.5 GB for game/app/hypervisor allocation? Or 5/2/1 GB would be more realistic?

There are no official numbers for how much RAM each "OS" takes. They are also counting the hypervisor as an "OS".

 

[BrainZEROX]

There are no official numbers for how much RAM each "OS" takes. They are also counting the hypervisor as an "OS".

Yes, I'm not really expecting official numbers anyway, just educated guesses.

 

[benny_a]

Yes, I'm not really expecting official numbers anyway, just educated guesses.

The only thing we know is that the 3GB number of reserved memory was lobbed at Marc Whitten and he didn't deny it or elaborated but nodded. (The nod would not hold up in court as admission of guilt.)

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

Why are you talking about Xbox One specs? I was clearly talking about PS4 specs.

I talked most of the time about One. It's more than obvious that HD7870 is stronger than old GTX560ti. I know most people at gaf love to argue around fallacies.

Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! I know this one!

Because in that quote I'm saying that Microsoft have to use GTX560ti into Xbox One. Yes, everyone can read that in my sentence.

Kudos for you.

So what were you suggesting with this when you posted this back then?

Hell, you're still sticking with your guns.

Maybe I'm not the best qualified person here to establish what was I saying. But I think that, maybe, I was talking something about memory vs processing power. Dunno, maybe.

What does RAM have anything to do with the silicon budget? I don't understand what you're trying to even say here. I don't think you know what you're trying to say.

It have to do both with silicon and money budget.

 

[IHaveCandy]

I talked most of the time about One. It's more than obvious that HD7870 is stronger than old GTX560ti. I know most people at gaf love to argue around fallacies.



Because in that quote I'm saying that Microsoft have to use GTX560ti into Xbox One. Yes, everyone can read that in my sentence.

Kudos for you.



Maybe I'm not the best qualified person here to establish what was I saying. But I think that, maybe, I was talking something about memory vs processing power. Dunno, maybe.



It have to do both with silicon and money budget.

You're the one that responded to my PS4 post with Xbox specs. Not my fault you decided to make an irrelevant argument.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Yes, I'm not really expecting official numbers anyway, just educated guesses.

I think it's worth pointing out that the 3GB reserve isn't just for the OS. It is for the OS and any non-game apps that might be multi-tasked. So stuff like Skype, Kinect, the TV stuff and Internet Explorer.

 

[phosphor112]

So, you're talking about how they should not put in, maybe 10-20 dollars worth of RAM to put a vastly more expensive GPU in?

Yeah, those costs are really offsetting one another. :lol

 

[ConteZero76]

Well, I think he meant he'd rather they put more money into better cpu and gpu than on another 4GB of GDDR5. By money, I mean of the $400 it takes to make/buy the console. I don't think he was talking about a silicon budget of some sort.

...and that's a common "better gpu", complete with his cooling system.

No, thanks, I'd prefer something smaller / quieter / less expensive.

 

[Can Crusher]

I don't even understand what's being debated anymore.

Is dr. doomsday actually trying to debate that 8Gb of GDDR5 isn't a big thing in comparison to 4 GB of GDDR5? Ask every goddamn developer and they will tell you RAM is at the top of their list.

Now that ESRAM and latency talk reached a dead end, the battle now is the ridiculous notion that a GTX560 with 1 GB of Gddr5.... is better than what's in the PS4? What kind of lunacy is this?

And how does that comparison do any favors to Xbox One in the first place? Comparing to PC in order to bring down the PS4 only brings even further down the Xbox. It's absolutely embarrassing to see some of the angles being taken here.

 

[fatgamecat]

Even though 8gb gddr5 is overkill for the cpu/gpu specs in the PS4, it's the best choice for a unified memory pool (unlike PC's split memory), and better than dealing with 8gb ddr3 + esram.

They made the best choice given the decision to use a unified memory pool.

 

[Perkel]

Never forget dr. apocalipsis in the 8 GB GDDR5 thread....

I am not defending dr. apocalipsis but he just said in summary that instead of memory Sony should invest in beefier GPU or CPU.

Even though 8gb gddr5 is overkill for the cpu/gpu specs in the PS4, it's the best choice for a unified memory pool (unlike PC's split memory), and better than dealing with 8gb ddr3 + esram.

They made the best choice given the decision to use a unified memory pool.

Yes and No.

Yes - because it is a lot of memory that probably won't be used as efficient as in PS3/x360 era when devs fought for every MB.
No - Because alternative is 4GB. Which is not "safe" because with OS that would leave devs ~3,5GB

 

[dr_rus]

...and that's a common "better gpu", complete with his cooling system.

No, thanks, I'd prefer something smaller / quieter / less expensive.

It is very quiet for a heavily factory O/C card. I doubt that either PS4 or XBO will have the same level of quietness.

 

[JonathanPower]

Well, I think he meant he'd rather they put more money into better cpu and gpu than on another 4GB of GDDR5. By money, I mean of the $400 it takes to make/buy the console. I don't think he was talking about a silicon budget of some sort.

Yes, but probably using 8GB of ram instead of 4GB does not add too much cost because they are using the same numer of chips, just with a higher density. And even if they wanted to use a more poweful GPU, maybe they can't due to the TDP they are aiming for.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

Never forget dr. apocalipsis in the 8 GB GDDR5 thread....

I always knew you were a power user.

 

[Cidd]

Lets all forget that Mark Cerny specifically asked devs what they wanted in the console the most, Hence why we have 8GB of RAM so saying it's not important is speaking complete and utter bs.

 

[Pistolero]

I am not defending dr. apocalipsis but he just said in summary that instead of memory Sony should invest in beefier GPU or CPU.

That dilemma exists only in his mind. In the real world, it was a one of two possible scenarios :

1- CPU-GPU combination with 4 GB GDDR5
2- Same CPU-GPU combination with 8 GB GDDR5

Given how much developers moan about RAM and God knows what portion goes to OS related tasks (anything between 1 and 2 GB, imo), Sony made the best decision there is...

 

[Respawn]

Lots of folks are still suffering after Microsoft specs were as all claimed to be it seems. The Dark Side awaits just give yourself to it.

 

[I2amza]

By the time 8GB was possible for the PS4, I am pretty sure the CPU and GPU were locked in already. It's not like they could have not gone for 8GB of RAM and instead got a better GPU/CPU.

They were able to get 8GB not because of cost, it was because new chip densities were available for mass production and devs were asking for it.