Support NeoGAF

[Brucey]

That was about Helix and PS6...

Helix will have Microsoft directx targeted features, and PS6 will have its own specific customizations.

Not the same.

But both made by AMD so I guess if we just close our eyes and pretend we are toddlers they are?

 

[Darius87]

Because I was talking about CPU and GPU that are doing the most important calculations. You added chips that help with certain things.

PC motherboard has shit ton of tiny chips on it as well, while stuff that is inside CPU and GPU is the most important thing for games performance.

Cache scrubbers are the only truly custom thing about base PS5 GPU, but how they compare to desktop RDNA2 systems or what is inside XSX GPU? PS4 had ACE modification and PS4 Pro supported 2x FP16 calculations. Those are the differences between them and Pitcairn, Polaris and RDNA1/2. Small differences...

fact is that Consoles have APUs, you ignoring that makes unreasonable comparison why it's called APU? because it has CPU not because ASIIC, you can call nvidia AI and RT cores ASIIC because it's just rectangles of billions transistors space added near cuda cores so it's same thing but you ignoring that for consoles I told you already everything is on same die.

 

[Bojji]

Helix will have Microsoft directx targeted features, and PS6 will have its own specific customizations.

Not the same.

But both made by AMD so I guess if we just close our eyes and pretend we are toddlers they are?

So far we know nothing about customizations of PS6, we only know that it has earlier design of RDNA5 (vs. PC and Helix).

In the end, they will be 90% the same thing. Even same optimizations will work on both of them...

fact is that Consoles have APUs, you ignoring that makes unreasonable comparison why it's called APU? because it has CPU not because ASIIC, you can call nvidia AI and RT cores ASIIC because it's just rectangles of billions transistors space added near cuda cores so it's same thing but you ignoring that for consoles I told you already everything is on same die.

First console APU was in X360, and in first versions both CPU and GPU were separate. APU was designed to be much cheaper in production vs. separate chips.

 

[Brucey]

So far we know nothing about customizations of PS6, we only know that it has earlier design of RDNA5 (vs. PC and Helix).

In the end, they will be 90% the same thing. Even same optimizations will work on both of them...



First console APU was in X360, and in first versions both CPU and GPU were separate. APU was designed to be much cheaper in production vs. separate chips.

Ok so not the same. Huge breakthrough today.

 

[Bojji]

Ok so not the same. Huge breakthrough today.

So you think there will be a big difference between RDNA5 in PS6 vs. RDNA5 in Helix - other than GPU size?

"Secret sauce 2.0"

 

[Brucey]

So you think there will be a big difference between RDNA5 in PS6 vs. RDNA5 in Helix - other than GPU size?

"Secret sauce 2.0"

Never claimed "big difference". Just that there are differences.

 

[Bojji]

Never claimed "big difference". Just that there are differences.

There will be less differences between PS6 and Helix than between PS5 and XSX when it comes to architecture. And those consoles already were the closest ever.

 

[GOKUSSJ2]

Microsoft is aiming to leverage the dominance of Windows as the de facto standard gaming OS by integrating the advantages of its console OS, while streamlining the developmental process for game-makers. I think that - perhaps unfortunately - it is the end of a fully focused console environment for Xbox. It's likely the best route forward. From a developer perspective, Xbox is a PC - perhaps one that receives a limited level of specific optimisations but basically runs the exact same code as the PC build.

 

[PSFore]

DF doesn't share anything new. There was an opportunity to speak to devs at GDC, which MLID claims to have done. I think the fact that the GDK lets you develop only for Helix is significant...........even if Windows compatibility only requires a bit more effort.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

That's interesting. So you're saying that MS has to refer to Helix as a "console," or else they could not run last-gen (XSX) versions of third-party games on it via the BC chip? Am I understanding that correctly? They have to use that language, or else they could be subject to lawsuits from third-party publishers?

Years ago, i had theorized that MS might turn Xbox into an emulation layer and just merge it into Windows as an icon, as it is the easiest way to do it. But then we hear about how Play Anywhere is hitting trouble as 3rd party studios started to resist giving away their PC licenses to Xbox because they want customers to double-dip. Back then I had assumed that Play-Anywhere was going to become the default, not knowing it hit a snag. Without Play Anywhere growing the Emulation Xbox BC couldn't legally happen.

And then last year was when we first heard about the Xbox-in-a-chip that will do the BC for Helix. The chip is the expensive way to BC, but we had precedence with PS2 hardware emulation of PS1.

In the end, the legal barrier that require Helix to be called a Console can be directly assumed, because of the "Play Anywhere" game label. Any Xbox game that isn't explicitly "Play Anywhere", is by definition "Not Play Anywhere". And the place they are not suppose to be played is on PCs. QED Helix is legally called a Console by marketing.

 

[Humdinger]

Years ago, i had theorized that MS might turn Xbox into an emulation layer and just merge it into Windows as an icon, as it is the easiest way to do it. But then we hear about how Play Anywhere is hitting trouble as 3rd party studios started to resist giving away their PC licenses to Xbox because they want customers to double-dip. Back then I had assumed that Play-Anywhere was going to become the default, not knowing it hit a snag. Without Play Anywhere growing the Emulation Xbox BC couldn't legally happen.

And then last year was when we first heard about the Xbox-in-a-chip that will do the BC for Helix. The chip is the expensive way to BC, but we had precedence with PS2 hardware emulation of PS1.

In the end, the legal barrier that require Helix to be called a Console can be directly assumed, because of the "Play Anywhere" game label. Any Xbox game that isn't explicitly "Play Anywhere", is by definition "Not Play Anywhere". And the place they are not suppose to be played is on PCs. QED Helix is legally called a Console by marketing.

Hm, ok. So you're saying that the fact that some games are not "Play Anywhere" means MS must legally call Helix a "console" -- because those games' licenses only cover use on console, not PC. If they call it a "PC," that implies the game is now being played on a "PC," and so they'd be asking for trouble. Gotcha.

 

[Proelite]

Years ago, i had theorized that MS might turn Xbox into an emulation layer and just merge it into Windows as an icon, as it is the easiest way to do it. But then we hear about how Play Anywhere is hitting trouble as 3rd party studios started to resist giving away their PC licenses to Xbox because they want customers to double-dip. Back then I had assumed that Play-Anywhere was going to become the default, not knowing it hit a snag. Without Play Anywhere growing the Emulation Xbox BC couldn't legally happen.

And then last year was when we first heard about the Xbox-in-a-chip that will do the BC for Helix. The chip is the expensive way to BC, but we had precedence with PS2 hardware emulation of PS1.

In the end, the legal barrier that require Helix to be called a Console can be directly assumed, because of the "Play Anywhere" game label. Any Xbox game that isn't explicitly "Play Anywhere", is by definition "Not Play Anywhere". And the place they are not suppose to be played is on PCs. QED Helix is legally called a Console by marketing.

There is no BC chip. RDNA5 itself has the silicon for BC.

Perhaps even PS6 has Xbox BC silicon if Sony didn't ask AMD to remove them, though obviously it won't be possible to enable them.

 

[Brucey]

There is no BC chip. RDNA5 itself has the silicon for BC.

Perhaps even PS6 has Xbox BC silicon if Sony didn't ask AMD to remove them, though obviously it won't be possible to enable them.

Yes I'm sure Sony wants that included in their version of the APU going into the PS6. Because they definitely don't focus on efficiency and keeping die size down as much as possible as one of their design goals.

 

[sainraja]

Well, a PC is kinda a "console".

 

[bitbydeath]

All your Xbox belong to PC now.