This is awesome news since Ubi has been pushing for higher specs for a while and since DICE's FB 2.0 engine will be powering all EA games next gen.
That BF4 leak is getting sweeter and sweeter if all of this pans out.
This is awesome news since Ubi has been pushing for higher specs for a while and since DICE's FB 2.0 engine will be powering all EA games next gen.
I was doubtful of 1080p/60fps with 64 players and advanced destruction but it seems like it might actually pan out. I'll be ecstatic if that happens. If we get that at launch just think of the possibities for the rest of the gen.That BF4 leak is getting sweeter and sweeter if all of this pans out.
I was doubtful of 1080p/60fps with 64 players and advanced destruction but it seems like it might actually pan out. I'll be ecstatic if that happens. If we get that at launch just think of the possibities for the rest of the gen.
The problem is CG vs xbox is different than PS3vs360. That has leading more curious around here. Otherwise could have said PS3 vs 360 v2 if it will be repeat this gen situation.
I was doubtful of 1080p/60fps with 64 players and advanced destruction but it seems like it might actually pan out. I'll be ecstatic if that happens. If we get that at launch just think of the possibities for the rest of the gen.
this***
always knew this btw, and its more than double
As a Sony fan, I really really hope this advantage PS4 has is true and will show in multiplatform games. It was a bit embarrassing for the PS3 being out a year later than 360 and yet losing in that aspect.
I always get excited for these 2 consoles, and then the realisation that both will probably lack the ability to play used games hits me.
It's depressing, and I hope it bites them in the arse.
Blame Nvidia. They royally screwed Sony on this one. They sold RSX as a tiger but delivered a domestic cat. Ok, slight exaggeration, but they fluffed the flop count stupendously. In the end it was Xenos that was more powerful, with Cell being the thing that carried the PS3 technically.
It's no wonder none of the big three went Nvidia this time. As unscrupulous as ever.
I dont think Nvidia's to blame for the 1.8TFlop figure, also dont think the RSX was sold based on that metric. Sony knew the 360's 1TFlop figure lol) had to be trounced and probably said fair game using Nvidia's funky math.Blame Nvidia. They royally screwed Sony on this one. They sold RSX as a tiger but delivered a domestic cat. Ok, slight exaggeration, but they fluffed the flop count stupendously. In the end it was Xenos that was more powerful, with Cell being the thing that carried the PS3 technically.
It's no wonder none of the big three went Nvidia this time. As unscrupulous as ever.
EDIT- Where are you going, bgassassi?
Of course ubi and dice prefer a console where there is no risk of losing revenue from 2nd hand games...
Don't you think they like money?
I came back because of the Wii U GPU die thread and being "called out" in it. I waited since they were also going to get the CPU die shot and tried to get more info on the other consoles in the mean time. Since it's so close to the PS4 reveal I figured I might as well hang around for that madness, haha. The projects I left for are about ready to ramp up again so I want to get back in the mindset of focusing on them and hopefully this time for good.
But they prefer the Orbis... So...
bgassassin's new info basically confirms what I speculated about a month ago - that the info on Durango's CPU was sketchy (with them NOT being referred to as Jaguar cores), especially since it was widely rumored that Microsoft was teaming up with AMD to design a decently powerful CPU with 8 cores for at least a year.
However, it still does not bridge the power gap. We're looking at the following breakdown:
PS4:
1.84 TFLOP GPU (400 GFLOPs possibly used for either compute or rendering)
~100 GFLOP CPU
4GB of 176 GB/s RAM
720:
1.23 TFLOP GPU
~200 GFLOP CPU
8 GB OF 68 GB/s RAM
-------------------
PS4 still has a 500 GFLOP advantage, or 35% more potential computing power. And in any scenario, whether it be compute or graphics, PS4 comes out ahead. That is, PS4 has the ability to push 300 more GLOPS devoted to compute while also having 200 more GFLOPS devoted to graphics, and on the opposite spectrum PS4 can do 1.84 GFLOPs in pure rendering while
PS4 has the power advantage and the flexibility advantage, not to mention an advantage in pure bandwidth.
I'd say the differences between system performance still look a good deal wider than PS3/360, if only because now the systems are more directly comparable.
bgassassin's new info basically confirms what I speculated about a month ago - that the info on Durango's CPU was sketchy (with them NOT being referred to as Jaguar cores), especially since it was widely rumored that Microsoft was teaming up with AMD to design a decently powerful CPU with 8 cores for at least a year.
However, it still does not bridge the power gap. We're looking at the following breakdown:
PS4:
1.84 TFLOP GPU (400 GFLOPs possibly used for either compute or rendering)
~100 GFLOP CPU
4GB of 176 GB/s RAM
720:
1.23 TFLOP GPU
~200 GFLOP CPU
8 GB OF 68 GB/s RAM
-------------------
PS4 still has a 500 GFLOP advantage, or 35% more potential computing power. And in any scenario, whether it be compute or graphics, PS4 comes out ahead. That is, PS4 has the ability to push 300 more GLOPS devoted to compute while also having 200 more GFLOPS devoted to graphics, and on the opposite spectrum PS4 can do 1.84 TFLOPs in pure rendering while 720 is limited to 1.23 TFLOPS.
PS4 has the power advantage and the flexibility advantage, not to mention an advantage in pure bandwidth.
I'd say the differences between system performance still look a good deal wider than PS3/360, if only because now the systems are more directly comparable.
Well, not to dismiss your case, but Durango has an audio chip that needs 100 gflops of CPU power to emulate. Otherwise your comparison is sound but amateurish.
Devs should begin talking around E3 time and afterwards, we'll get a better sense then of the real world comparison.
Well, not to dismiss your case, but Durango has an audio chip that needs 100 gflops of CPU power to emulate. Otherwise your comparison is sound but amateurish.
Devs should begin talking around E3 time and afterwards, we'll get a better sense then of the real world comparison.
And Orbis has a dedicated audio processor, problem solved.
Whispernet.
Are you a dev bgassassin?
Hmmmmmm...
No. After starting the first Wii U speculation thread, unexpected doors opened up that led to learning more about the other consoles. In 2011, I learned more about PS4 than Wii U, lol.
It is true though I didn't have a FLOPs number as a reference. I wasn't going to say it first though (directly), haha.
There's a sizable amount of power put into the audio in Xbox. Kinect is at least partially to blame as I understand it. See Siri-like capabilities.
Sounds like MS want to make it appear that the Durango specs are much weaker than the Orbis GPU. Then when E3 arrives, they come out with the real X720 specs that matches or exceeds the PS3's. Only time will tell
Are you an assassin?
Sounds like MS want to make it appear that the Durango specs are much weaker than the Orbis GPU. Then when E3 arrives, they come out with the real X720 specs that matches or exceeds the PS4's. Only time will tell, can't wait for E3
And Orbis has a dedicated audio processor, problem solved.
audio processing unit, ~200 concurrent MP3 streams
Well, not to dismiss your case, but Durango has an audio chip that needs 100 gflops of CPU power to emulate. Otherwise your comparison is sound but amateurish.
Devs should begin talking around E3 time and afterwards, we'll get a better sense then of the real world comparison.
While that is true. I still think there will be things that one console will be able to do while another can't do easily. And vice versa.
But like the BF3 console example stated previously, with enough talent both can be achieved on different hardware.
If vgleaks was true.
They're completely different.
Well, not to dismiss your case, but Durango has an audio chip that needs 100 gflops of CPU power to emulate. Otherwise your comparison is sound but amateurish.
Devs should begin talking around E3 time and afterwards, we'll get a better sense then of the real world comparison.
And if that audio chip is just to be used by the Kinect, I don't see much of an advantage.
And if that audio chip is just to be used by the Kinect, I don't see much of an advantage.
Actually from what aegis said, the xb3 dev kit had 2 quad core xeons, dual threaded, one quad core was to emulate the cpu performance of the final cpu while the other way to emulate the capability of its audio dsp. And given bkillian assertion on the audio capabilities on the durango, its actually more than the 100 gflops figure you just stated.
Nope. The multi channel echo cancellation chip is used by Kinect. The audio chip is purely motivated by lessons learned from 360 where developers used 50% of the 360's cores to mix audio.
What do they need all this power for in an audio chip?
Well, not to dismiss your case, but Durango has an audio chip that needs 100 gflops of CPU power to emulate. Otherwise your comparison is sound but amateurish.
Devs should begin talking around E3 time and afterwards, we'll get a better sense then of the real world comparison.
What do they need all this power for in an audio chip?
Sounds like MS want to make it appear that the Durango specs are much weaker than the Orbis GPU. Then when E3 arrives, they come out with the real X720 specs that matches or exceeds the PS4's. Only time will tell, can't wait for E3
Interesting. Did developers face such problems on the PS3?
Also in what way is the audio chip in the Durango different from the one in Orbis?
Audio DSP is the new secret sauce?
Do you mean half of a single core or half of the cores plural? Presumably the former. The latter seems ridiculous.
I guessing the work was offloaded to the SPEs on PS3, they were certainly up for the task.
I am suspecting audio work would be also done on the 4 CUs.
I guessing the work was offloaded to the SPEs on PS3, they were certainly up for the task.
I am suspecting audio work would be also done on the 4 CUs in Orbis.
If VGleaks was correct with 200 streams, that's much lower than Durangos.
So are you saying that the dedicated audio processor in Orbis is virtually useless? Or are you saying that they'll have to augment it with some portion of 4 reserved CUs? In the case of either it seems a bit brash to proclaim because we have virtually no in depth information on any of Orbis's dedicated hardware. Unless I'm mistaken.
I really hope Sony doesn't do that. A fucking waste of CUs.
So... Durango has a 100 GFLOPS audio DSP that Orbis will need to use up to 2 CUs (which would, afaia, amount to up to 200 GFLOPS of compute performance) and other dedicated audio hardware to match?It'll be 1 or 2 CUs at most.