• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Next-Gen PS5 & XSX |OT| Console tEch threaD

Status
Not open for further replies.

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
An on chip cache is surely magnitudes faster than any bus based memory
Sure, but Infinite Cache is done because even 6900XT has 256-bit wide memory bus. Especially L3 cache (which infinite cache is) is used to communicate with outside components.

We could try to remember Xbox One S with _finite cache_ for example, it's same thing.
 
Wider memory bus, so these gimmicks are not needed. When you have to start adding caches, you have bottleneck somewhere
Not saying that that XSX is bottleneck free, but still all these conspiracy theories are dumb as fuck.
Wut....!

Cache latency is orders of magnitude faster than RAM access off-die over an external bus.

Screen-Shot-2019-02-01-at-12.16.39-PM.png
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Wut....!

Cache latency is orders of magnitude faster than RAM access off-die over an external bus.

Screen-Shot-2019-02-01-at-12.16.39-PM.png
Exactly what I am talking about, you have the cache so you can more efficiently sending data to VRAM, because you have less lanes. On wider busses cache would not net as much advantage.
 

Garani

Member


Interesting tweet, a lot to translate... below an extract from the full tweet translated below.


Infinity Cache is a method that boosts the available efficient bandwidth even further by boosting the available bandwidth at resolutions up to 1440p, and the cache scrubber is a method that minimizes cache misses, so AMD also has Infinity Cache in RDNA2, and Cache Scrubber in RDNA3. I plan to go to the concept. :unsure:


Which does XsS/ XsX have?

Oh shit!

Here We Go Again GIF by memecandy


Apologies for my ignorance, but who is this man?
A korean dude/dudette. This is as far as we all dare to venture :D
 
Exactly what I am talking about, you have the cache so you can more efficiently sending data to VRAM, because you have less lanes. On wider busses cache would not net as much advantage.
Not really.

More cache always benefits effective bandwidth regardless of memory bus size.

It's not as much as a benefit for graphics rendering, provided the ROPs aren't already BW starved (like they are on consoles, including the XSX).

But for stuff like GPU compute, RT and ML, that are all becoming more and more important, greater effective bw is essential.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Not really.

More cache always benefits effective bandwidth regardless of memory bus size.

It's not as much as a benefit for graphics rendering, provided the ROPs aren't already BW starved (like they are on consoles, including the XSX).

But for stuff like GPU compute, RT and ML, that are all becoming more and more important, greater effective bw is essential.
Well in that case you would see caches on nVidia GPUs, but instead they opted for wider bus and more compute. L2, L1, register caches are important, L3 are most often due to be buffer to interconnect external interfaces. So basically I would agree with you, if this cache would be on APU between CPU and GPU, that you could ofload some code to internal caches, do some quick calculations and yeah, that would be revolutionary.

I think far bigger deal is what console utilise something akin to SAM (which is just PR name, it's function introduced to windows before AMD even have this technology, it's Resizeable BAR - https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/display/resizable-bar-support ), I mean I have the suspicion that even PS4 have it when we tried to make it run Kingdom Come: Deliverance on Xbox (OG) and failed really hard with some, lets say CPU/GPU procedure. But it surely wasn't on Xbox, now hopefully this changed.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
That is why caches are added everywhere and at all levels, and manufacturers are trying to increase them as much as possible, but they are not needed in Xbox, because it is perfect, because it has its 320-bit bus for the GPU! Well, now you can be stunned with pride.
Like maybe read, I know you try being funny, but now, caches are generally last resort, because they cost a tons of chip space and they offer no compute performance, so you are completely wrong my friend, but keep fighting that good fight.

And by the way PS5 have no such magical cache either, so you seems to be...mistaken.
 
caches are generally last resort, because they cost a tons of chip space and they offer no compute performance
Any functions to reduce memory access, such as local cache, [there should be more here], register counter, compiler optimizations are starting to become very important for data paths and computational packages used when rendering games. There is a lot of data moving around and managing this memory is expensive. Less memory also results in a manipulation operation, trying to store the corresponding pieces of data in video memory and anything that is not needed at a particular moment is sent either back to main RAM, or is completely unloaded or cached on disk. And here it is important to understand that any extra latency is a bottleneck, any cache miss is an even bigger bottleneck. If the GPU is idle at any moment for some time, even for one millisecond, then its power temporarily becomes completely useless. If the mathematical performance of the GPU surpasses the rest of the system's ability to provide it with data, then the number of teraflops doesn't matter, whether there are at least 100 teraflops, it will not affect the overall performance in the game. The memory bandwidth for the GPU XSX is not amazing, I'm sorry. Therefore, to say that it is enough is absolutely wrong.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Any functions to reduce memory access, such as local cache, [there should be more here], register counter, compiler optimizations are starting to become very important for data paths and computational packages used when rendering games. There is a lot of data moving around and managing this memory is expensive. Less memory also results in a manipulation operation, trying to store the corresponding pieces of data in video memory and anything that is not needed at a particular moment is sent either back to main RAM, or is completely unloaded or cached on disk. And here it is important to understand that any extra latency is a bottleneck, any cache miss is an even bigger bottleneck. If the GPU is idle at any moment for some time, even for one millisecond, then its power temporarily becomes completely useless. If the mathematical performance of the GPU surpasses the rest of the system's ability to provide it with data, then the number of teraflops doesn't matter, whether there are at least 100 teraflops, it will not affect the overall performance in the game. The memory bandwidth for the GPU XSX is not amazing, I'm sorry. Therefore, to say that it is enough is absolutely wrong.
Nah in IT is nothing is ever enough, enough is only in a sense where wider bus/more cache would not net any form of benefit. If you get me, I don't think that the compute part of Xbox APU would bring more from the GPU now than when it would have 512-bit bus or/and massive L3 cache (512-bit bus is unrealistic, just a nice number). Caches are only beneficial when you have some higher powered part of silicon in need to talk to some constrained part of silicon or outside component.

XSX is by no means perfect, we know that. However the need to have cache is stronger (only speculation, maybe it's enough-ly balanced) on PS5 due to narrower memory bus. Also XSX sucks on API front, PS5 has massive advantage there. My initial message, was a hot take as to what XSX needs. I don't think that neither of the consoles needs some secret sauce, especially in comparison to price tag, which in both cases is nothing short of miracle.

Latency part is very much warranted and we already see that sharing the memory bus with both CPU and GPU is constraint, for example on Alpha effect and mainly on AF, where on PC you have this neat 16x AF basically forced all the times for 20 years, on consoles is still not used today. However management of cache with CPU and GPU instruction is something challenging and it does not work in every game. Like I said example of this is SAM feature ( Resiable BAR feature ) on Windows, which shows meaningful increase on PC, however like I said, I believe this was already on PS4, because some ACE operations on PS4 was really quick, while their sucks/sucked on Xbox, some physics/detection of collision for example which many times can be computed (is that a word or my Second language is lagging...) in very small memory foot print and thus can be done in cache and directly drawn on screen. On PS4, not a problem, on Xbox, you have to get hrough hell of random APIs and still be at double time as on PS4 with faster CPU.

So this discussion is quite a complex one.

Sorry, I appreciate honest discussion, I judge you too soon.
 
Last edited:
Nah in IT is nothing is ever enough, enough is only in a sense where wider bus/more cache would not net any form of benefit. If you get me, I don't think that the compute part of Xbox APU would bring more from the GPU now than when it would have 512-bit bus or/and massive L3 cache (512-bit bus is unrealistic, just a nice number). Caches are only beneficial when you have some higher powered part of silicon in need to talk to some constrained part of silicon or outside component.

XSX is by no means perfect, we know that. However the need to have cache is stronger (only speculation, maybe it's enough-ly balanced) on PS5 due to narrower memory bus. Also XSX sucks on API front, PS5 has massive advantage there. My initial message, was a hot take as to what XSX needs. I don't think that neither of the consoles needs some secret sauce, especially in comparison to price tag, which in both cases is nothing short of miracle.

Latency part is very much warranted and we already see that sharing the memory bus with both CPU and GPU is constraint, for example on Alpha effect and mainly on AF, where on PC you have this neat 16x AF basically forced all the times for 20 years, on consoles is still not used today. However management of cache with CPU and GPU instruction is something challenging and it does not work in every game. Like I said example of this is SAM feature ( Resiable BAR feature ) on Windows, which shows meaningful increase on PC, however like I said, I believe this was already on PS4, because some ACE operations on PS4 was really quick, while their sucks/sucked on Xbox, some physics/detection of collision for example which many times can be computed (is that a word or my Second language is lagging...) in very small memory foot print and thus can be done in cache and directly drawn on screen. On PS4, not a problem, on Xbox, you have to get hrough hell of random APIs and still be at double time as on PS4 with faster CPU.

So this discussion is quite a complex one.
It's very good to read. I'm appreciate this.
 
Ryan: The last part of my talk is about innovation at PlayStation. For us, VR is a strategic opportunity and an innovative technology that we believe our fans will love, and I'd like to let you know that we are preparing the next generation VR system for PS5 as our latest initiative.
We've learned a few things with PS VR for PS4, one of which is to make it easier to connect VR devices, which used to be a hassle. One of them is that we are making the connection of VR devices to a single code to make it easier.
We will be announcing more details about the next generation VR system for PS5 in the near future.
--Just to confirm, you’re saying that releasing a new VR system that is different from the PS VR released for PS4?
Ryan: Yes, it's something completely new, designed for PS5.

Ryan: We're in the process of distributing development kits to various companies and indie studios. The software lineup itself will be decided in the future. As for the game, I don't have anything to say at this time.
https://www.famitsu.com/news/202102/23214926.html
 
Last edited:
"One in four PS5 buyers did not have a PS4, and another half of them were new to the PlayStation Network. It's great to see so many new people joining the PlayStation community."
He also gave some hints on the specifications of new VR devices. That is, "I just enjoy connecting to the PS5."

Today's VR devices, such as Facebook's "Oculus Quest" series, are increasingly operating independently without being connected to a PC or the like. However, SIE seems to adopt the form of a device that connects to a game console this time as well.

"The reason is that we believe that (cable) is a configuration that can provide the best VR gaming experience. PlayStation has done what it takes to provide the best gaming experience. So we are very happy with the new VR equipment, which makes it easy to set up the cables. "
https://www.businessinsider.jp/post-230144
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes

I think Sony is looking at this all wrong. You want to be the first to get Ready Player One graphics and you are not getting there with a 10 tflops $399 console. They can wait until 2027 when its far cheaper to build a 40 tflops system you need for that level of graphics, but i think by then it will be too late. Apple or Facebook wouldve beaten Sony to the market.

What they need to do is forget about the cost and launch the best most amazing thing out there. I dont care if its a $1000 console. 40 tflops is what you should need to get close to Ready Player One level of fidelity. Bundle in a wireless headset for free, and force everyone to buy a $10 a month sub to keep playing. no need to buy games. Everyone gets everything that gets released on the system. That's how you ensure there are always people playing in the world. Thats how you build that community we saw in Ready Player One.

People will buy it. Maybe not the masses, but the masses will follow once they see how awesome their virtual life can be. Apple has shown people are willing to pay insane prices for their products. People will pay a premium for a premium experience.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole

What about PlayStation games on PC? A whole slate of them is on the way starting with Days Gone this spring. And as for Sony’s publishing timetable for the year? Well, Covid has been up to no good again and booted Gran Turismo 7 back to 2022. Don’t worry, plans for the Uncharted movie and Last Of Us TV series are very much on track.

Days Gone on PC?

Holy shit.. think I'll wait to re-play it there.

And... "a whole slate"??? Good lawd.. I love it.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes



Days Gone on PC?

Holy shit.. think I'll wait to re-play it there.

And... "a whole slate"??? Good lawd.. I love it.
I remember when the whole of era and gaf jumped down my throat when I said Horizon coming to PC means the rest will follow. People were posting that Herman Hurst quote that said that Horizon coming to PC doesnt mean every game will come to PC. I called him a liar back then and its good to see I was proven right.

Never trust these suits.

PSB: PlayStation is no stranger to publishing titles on the PC, but Horizon: Zero Dawn is one of the largest games to make that leap. Is there anything you would say to PlayStation fans? What does it mean for the future?
HH:
Sure. I think it’s important that we stay open to new ideas of how to introduce more people to PlayStation, and show people maybe what they’ve been missing out on.

And to maybe put a few minds at ease, releasing one first-party AAA title to PC doesn’t necessarily mean that every game now will come to PC. In my mind, Horizon Zero Dawn was just a great fit in this particular instance. We don’t have plans for day and date [PC releases], and we remain 100% committed to dedicated hardware.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom