9 replies to this topic

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

According to my own estimations using PC components, the PS4 and XBox One are severely limited due to CPU per-core efficiency. BUT I have not made a game for either system to test such a thing. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the following PC could match or beat it:

Core i5 @ 3GHz
8GB DDR3-1600
Radeon 250x for the XBox One, maybe a Radeon 260 for the PS4

This is my personal opinion.

Edit: I have a Phenom II computer in the basement and I know that if you clock the quad-core down to 1.6GHz, it will bottleneck even a HD 4870 1GB, and at 1680x1050 resolution too.

Edited by Porridge, 04 October 2014 - 05:10 AM.

[Mahmoodinho98]

Xbox and PS are based on AMD A4 microprocessor, which is very low end apu. Put in fact that, Some AMD A8 based on richland architecture are bottlencking  r7 240.

 

Lets remember that they have speciallised processors. I even heard a rumor that Xbox one processor is much faster than the one in ps4 but lets remember that this is just a rumor.

 

I can confidently say that core i5 is 6-10x more powerfull than that of next gen console.

 

I hope i answered you question .

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

Xbox and PS are based on AMD A4 microprocessor, which is very low end apu. Put in fact that, Some AMD A8 based on richland architecture are bottlencking r7 240.

Lets remember that they have speciallised processors. I even heard a rumor that Xbox one processor is much faster than the one in ps4 but lets remember that this is just a rumor.

I can confidently say that core i5 is 6-10x more powerfull than that of next gen console.

I hope i answered you question .

Not so much a question as a discussion.

It's all but confirmed that the XBox One CPU is clocked at 1.8GHz and overclocked GPU while the PS4 one is clocked at 1.6GHz. The PS4 is still faster, but the CPU might be a little worse. Best case scenario, the two end up performing the same.

I think the Core i5 is about 3x faster per a core myself. And maybe 2x faster than an 8 core using all 8 cores when the Core i5 is using only 4 threads. I'm not putting the numbers down much because 8 cores can be inefficient. I would rather have a 3.2GHz quad core than a 1.6GHz Octa, it will be faster.

Edited by Porridge, 04 October 2014 - 06:14 AM.

[3Dude]

Well the clocks ARE pretty low at around 1.6-1.8 Ghz, but they get pretty good ipc, there are 8 cores but... properly using all 8 and things that dont benefit from concurrency.....they do have extremely low overhead compared to pc. But at the end of the day, it IS a tablet cpu, and gets stomped by pretty much anything midrange.

I wish they hadnt gone with amd cpu.

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

@3Dude - I don't think AMD is the problem. They should have lowered the graphics performance, gone quad core, and raised the clock speed to crazy level.

[3Dude]

@3Dude - I don't think AMD is the problem. They should have lowered the graphics performance, gone quad core, and raised the clock speed to crazy level.

AMD's not the problem, just their current product line post bulldozer snafu.

Thats not going to be easy dealing with a closed box. I can see why sony and MS rejected that path this time, looking at the abysmal failure rates of ps3's and 360's, and the electricity bills that came with them... in todays economy.

Another problem with going with 'crazy clock speeds' is the fact you need to increase cpu stages to get there. Kind of a problem, it has its pros and cons.

Jaguar already increased its cpu stages to support higher clockspeeds over bobcat, for a 10-15% performance improvement via higher clockspeeds. THat also increased branch mispredict penalties to 14 cycles wasted everytime a prediction misses. You want to beef clock speeds 3-4x, you are going to need to lengthen that cpu pipeline, and that mispredict penalty is also going to skyrocket, and soon you will be looking at up to 100 cycles lost per miss. Out of order helps, but those damn things stack up, and fast.


Oh, HERE!

Im sure you will have fun with this.

http://develop.scee....GC2013Final.pdf

Sony actually did a pretty good job bypassing most of these bottlenecks that would assuredly appear. By removing dx overhead, and using multithread rendering, theyve eliminated a lot of the bottlenecks they would normally run into. For example, they can blow draw calls out the wazoo compared to pc.

[pexpress]

The most important is not the raw power but optimization, with Windows computers are not well optimized

 

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

samsung galaxy note 4 iphone 6 pas cher

Edited by pexpress, 07 October 2014 - 09:56 AM.

[3Dude]

The most important is not the raw power but optimization, with Windows computers are not well optimized

Well yes, I posted some documentation from sony showing how they eliminated a lot of pc bottlenecks that windows and d3d come with.

But at the end of the day, it IS a tablet cpu, so its going to have trouble with code it cant accelerate through paralellization.

I would imagine things like multiple branchy ai's would give the tablet cpu fair trouble, and optimization will only go so far.

[NintendoReport]

Thought I would put this here, Ubisoft quote regarding Assassin's Creed Unity for PS4 and X1

 

 

 

"Technically we're CPU-bound," he said. "The GPUs are really powerful, obviously the graphics look pretty good, but it's the CPU [that] has to process the AI, the number of NPCs we have on screen, all these systems running in parallel."

Edited by Sorceror12, 06 October 2014 - 12:57 PM.

[3Dude]

Thought I would put this here, Ubisoft quote regarding Assassin's Creed Unity for PS4 and X1
 
 
 
"Technically we're CPU-bound," he said. "The GPUs are really powerful, obviously the graphics look pretty good, but it's the CPU [that] has to process the AI, the number of NPCs we have on screen, all these systems running in parallel."[/size]

Ah, well, there it is.