Support NeoGAF

[Red_Driver85]

Either way.. console gamers by and large aren't suddenly going to convert to PC gamers... and not have access to Sony's games when they are remotely new. Anyone willing to wait years for Playstation games and also ditch their console in general wasn't a big console gamer, or Sony fan, for that matter.

A good point of view. But if you look at it in perspective? The most annoying thing about Sony is that they are always lost and uncertain. Then Jim says that "we are for exclusives and it is useful for us", then "we decided to continue to release our games on the PC, because it does not harm us." It seems to me that he is just an arrogant, short-sighted and lying goat. What such a person can do with a corporation, we could see at the launch of XBO. Maybe it's time for him to retire after all?

 

[devilNprada]

How is it a good thing? if it was Nintendo are already releasing Mario and Zelda on PC, which they won't because they're smarter than the other morons and they see long run unlike MS and recently now Sony following slowly that "let's put all of our games that define our hardwares and brand in PC" retardation strat.

Does anyone really want to play Mario or Zelda on the PC though?
People like consoles and especially handhelds for a reason...

 

[IntentionalPun]

mark my words. In two years, every PS5 game will launch on PC simultaneously.

Eh.. seriously doubtful.

 

[onesvenus]

For now it just sounds like PS4 titles heading to PC, which I have no problem with. I’ll take issue if they start doing this with native PS5 games too, I don’t wanna see game design from their first-party studios getting influenced by having to develop for multiple different PC configurations. I wanna see exclusives that are specifically designed for that piece of hardware, that’s why you bought the damn console in the first place.

That was exactly my point

Days Gone uses UE4. Decima engine is built on PC. So those were easy ports, also last gen.

He talks in plural and in future, not just about Days Gone. I hope I'm wrong though

 

[BattleScar]

WTF Sony is doing Bruh, some people i know that were waiting for PS5 stocks to get one are already telling me they're thinking on building a PC instead.

SONY WTF UR DOIN???????!!!! Stop THE DRUGS or idk!!

Good luck building a PC at a reasonable price mate.

 

[SSfox]

On the bright side more good news




Also Ragnarok and GT7 in 2022 aren't bothering me at all, it will only make the games even better. And honestly it would've been bad idea considering the lack of PS5 stocks.

Another good news also is that if GOW2 is coming 2022 it may mean it will be PS5 only/no crossgen.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

He talks in plural and in future, not just about Days Gone. I hope I'm wrong though

He singled out PS4 games though, so yes more are coming, and no one would argue that he doesn't know what he's talking about. But so far it's PS4 as stated in the original Q&A.

 

[3liteDragon]

 

[LucasBR]

Days Gone is literally for free with PS Plus Collection forever, not sure why people are mad that PC beggars will get some PS4 leftovers.

As long as they continue giving the "leftovers" to PC I'm okay with that
I think people are afraid of having Sony's IP's day one on PC, I wouldn't be happy as well.

 

[IntentionalPun]

A good point of view. But if you look at it in perspective? The most annoying thing about Sony is that they are always lost and uncertain. Then Jim says that "we are for exclusives and it is useful for us", then "we decided to continue to release our games on the PC, because it does not harm us." It seems to me that he is just an arrogant, short-sighted and lying goat. What such a person can do with a corporation, we could see at the launch of XBO. Maybe it's time for him to retire after all?

But he actually said:

"Exclusive games are obviously one point of difference between our system and others," said Ryan during the interview. 'But I really call out the criteria of quality rather than necessarily exclusivity. And when I look at our worldwide studios, it's really the quality of the work that they produce that counts."

Sony's Jim Ryan Opens Up On Recent PS5 Reveal, Exclusives "Quality Over Quantity"

Less is sometimes more and that's exactly what Sony's Jim Ryan mentioned when talking about the PlayStation 5 and its future.

primagames.com

All he said was exclusives are a differentiator.. then actually hinted it's quality that matters more (AKA exclusivity isn't as important to them.) All of Sony's statements if you read between the lines over the last year have hinted "we will be doing more PC releases", including the Jim Ryan quote you alluded to.

And they are still a differentiator. There are still loads of PS exclusives, and more to come.. will they some day be ported? Maybe some, maybe all.. maybe eventually Sony will stop.

People will still buy Playstations.. hell as a PC Gamer I'll still continue to buy games on PS5.. then might double dip on PC. Planning to with Days Gone, and have no regret that I played the game on PS4 Pro and some on PS5.

Sony will continue to be careful not to dilute the Playstation brand too much.

But here's my wild prediction:

Epic is going to sell a good chunk of their company to Sony, pre-IPO or as part of their IPO. Sony will then launch their games exclusively on EGS, and not on any other PC storefront. This will grow EGS, and thus Epic. Sony then starts making money from other PC games selling on EGS, assuming it actually takes off. This will continue to involve long timed exclusivity on Playstation for most games.

 

[mitchman]

they were loaded questions. Dont pretend you dont know what you were doing.

You were probably one of those people who gave me a hard time for saying that Horizon coming to PC means more games will follow. Now you are trying to wiggle your way out on a technicality even though Sony literally just said that more games will follow Days Gone.

That's some hefty mental gymnastics you got going there. Dealing with facts and questions still seems to be an issue for you. Why do you feel you cannot answer simple questions when you have no qualms claiming named people are lying? That's a pretty hefty accusation you got going here, so I wanted to clarify that you really meant that. It appears from your response that you actually did and is not willing or able to defend you accusations. That says all I need to know about you as as person and your name is fitting.

 

[BattleScar]

A good point of view. But if you look at it in perspective? The most annoying thing about Sony is that they are always lost and uncertain. Then Jim says that "we are for exclusives and it is useful for us", then "we decided to continue to release our games on the PC, because it does not harm us." It seems to me that he is just an arrogant, short-sighted and lying goat. What such a person can do with a corporation, we could see at the launch of XBO. Maybe it's time for him to retire after all?

This is extraordinarily hyperbolic.

What about the strategy is lost and uncertain? The end result of this approach remains to be seen, and won't be visible for years from now. The PlayStation brand is stronger than ever, and building a PC is more expensive than ever and with silicon shortages affecting industries as far and wide as automotives, its going to get harder to acquire the parts needed to play on PC for at least 3-5 years (or longer depending on how long it takes to spin up additional foundries). So opening up your games to be sold to a playerbase that otherwise may never have bought the game sounds pretty reasonable to me. The market environment is such that its probably the best time to go ahead with this strategy.

Also, where is the arrogance? What is arrogant about this approach? What is short-sighted about it? Where are the lies?
Does your PS5 lose value because someone who owns a PC that likely costs at least twice as much, can now play the games you could? Is it arrogance to give those players the opportunity to play your games? I've just explained at length why I don't think this move is at all short-sighted. People who primarily game on PC are the least likely to go out and buy a PS5 just to play a handful of games, so why not release a couple of old games on the PC to make some extra money, and perhaps get them interested in PlayStation franchises enough to consider the switch (irrespective of how unlikely it is, but....given the price of CPUs/GPUs these days who knows...).

 

[Lysandros]

Do not try to undersell XSX version's advantage DF, why to use the humble "significant" instead of the usual "immense"?

 

[Loxus]

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.

I don't quite understand everything he's saying exactly, but it sounds like.
1) Sony still maintained the RDNA1 as the primary skeleton,
2) MS engineers also claimed that Xbox was 100% RDNA2 because it puts the CU unit from RDNA2 as a sign,
3) The PS5 was based on RDNA2 because of VRS and mesh shaders,
4) In addition to not supporting RDNA2 at the ISA level as a feature level, there was nothing wrong with supporting RDNA2 in the micro-architecture design.

This part is really interesting.
1) ESRAM, Cache Scrubber and Infinity Cache has the same purpose through different methods.
2) ESRAM is a kind of scratchpad (manual cache) concept, so unlike traditional EDRAM, it is not automation-based, but rather difficult to develop, so in the early days of ex1, ESRAM skips and DDR3 only uses 720p to support terrible resolutions such as 720p.
3) Cache Scrubber is also a scratch pad method, but it still has differences from ex1 ESRAM. If the automation is closer to the advanced side, the initials are rather well performing, but the cache scrubber is only used if the GPU minimizes the cache miss when during a high clock, rather than ddr3 being a bandwidth answer to the ESRAM, but the bandwidth is already sufficient for GDDR6. In this situation, it is possible to be present at the same time as ESRAM, because it is not necessarily a case of assisting.
4) The infinity cache is also closer to the evolution of GameCube/Wii's 1T-SRAM rather than manual cache methods such as ESRAM/Cache Scrubber, even though Nintendo has high bandwidth in the past.
5) Infinity Cache on RDNA2 and Cache Scrubbers in RDNA3.

Some shit I don't understand, maybe someone can help.
"On the other hand, Microsoft is going completely the opposite of Sony, but if Sony is caught in the sub-incompatibility and has to go to the lower end, Microsoft, on the contrary, has to maintain a similarity to the server side, so it can only be limited to wide. One of the most important factors on the server side is the concept of the same electricity ratio is never going to work. So the dependence on compute shaders is higher than the PS5."

And I'm going to end it with this, to much tweets to go through.
1) Cache scrubber = minimize cache hit
2) Build at ultra-fast I/O throughput = SSD performance is also performance, but GPU data transfer speed is also built at high speed
3) If you're prototyping Sony's own custom RDNA3 in combination,

4) MICROSOFT has a filler that goes in the opposite direction, and it's a CU unit custom that goes towards CDNA. I customized it on the INT4, INT8 side and it's even better than PC RDNA2 in this direction, which is the direction... It is currently an AMD server-side GPU.
5) The design of the CDNA prototype is also the same as the PS5, so if there is a difference between the AMD future architecture, if the PS5 follows the RDNA branched as the "gaming" architecture, MICROSOFT will follow the CDNA branded as the "server" architecture. He is Vega's immediate successor.

P.S.
I don't know who the guy is and don't take any of this as fact.
I'm posting this as it an very interesting piece of information.

Edit: adding his bit about the PS5's CPU.
1) So once I was able to do it with a high clock, I had to keep it with a minimum area, so the first thing I had to do was use the CPU, and I had to knife the AVX256 unit in Nnoa by 128 bits, and fadd.
2) The native architecture level is said to have been eaten at a level of FPU that would only be "further expanded re-regulation MUL+ADD". The cutoff was made after keeping the minimum sub-exchange level, but the Zen2 base didn't go anywhere, so the CPU is generally too weak in the older generation, so you have to want a GPGPU 100%.

 

[saintjules]

Well... shit.

That chain is hilarious

 

[LucasBR]

I think other thing we have to take into consideration is the fact that Sony use different API to make most of its games, they should do something for those games to be played on DX12, no?

 

[Great Hair]

Does this mean PS Plus + Funimation subscription?

no idea. sry

 

[DeepEnigma]

I think other thing we have to take into consideration is the fact that Sony use different API to make most of its games, they should do something for those games to be played on DX12, no?

Sony hasn't been porting these games in-house, so it's something the developers who do the ports have to worry about and recompile.

 

[IntentionalPun]

I think other thing we have to take into consideration is the fact that Sony use different API to make most of its games, they should do something for those games to be played on DX12, no?

They don't need to support DX12. There's Vulcan.

And they don't need to do anything in particular in how they design games for PS5; just build a different rendering pipeline for PC, and of course handle audio differently.

 

[icerock]

Holy hyperbole!

Sony aren't run by idiots, they are not going to sabotage their billion dollar PlayStation business by chasing $50m revenue per PC port. They are trying to thread the needle, keep hold of console userbase, while growing the revenue on software which have exhausted sales on their platform by porting onto another. They haven't devoted even 5% of their resources behind marketing for PC ports, and for good reason. They recognize how tricky it could become.

Long-term, I don't see it hurting them. People buy consoles, because a) They are cheap b) Ease of access, you don't have fiddle around with hardware to make games run. c) Friends and family own it. None of that is going to change, look up cost of a moderately capable GPU, 99% of buyers would just run away from that. Even, when costs will normalize, you aren't building a PC for $500.

Also, day and date release is not something I can see happening this gen. They aren't morons for paying $100m to secure timed exclusivity for 3rd party games, only to release theirs day one alongside PC.

 

[Setsuna Mudou]

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.

It literally says on the non red part of your quote. These games will never been day and date released on PC. And so far that's true. The slippery slope argument holds no water since we all know games will release on pc on a case by case basis years down the line.

Btw, this game was already free on ps plus, so relax

 

[Loxus]

I don't quite understand everything he's saying exactly, but it sounds like.
1) Sony still maintained the RDNA1 as the primary skeleton,
2) MS engineers also claimed that Xbox was 100% RDNA2 because it puts the CU unit from RDNA2 as a sign,
3) The PS5 was based on RDNA2 because of VRS and mesh shaders,
4) In addition to not supporting RDNA2 at the ISA level as a feature level, there was nothing wrong with supporting RDNA2 in the micro-architecture design.

This part is really interesting.
1) ESRAM, Cache Scrubber and Infinity Cache has the same purpose through different methods.
2) ESRAM is a kind of scratchpad (manual cache) concept, so unlike traditional EDRAM, it is not automation-based, but rather difficult to develop, so in the early days of ex1, ESRAM skips and DDR3 only uses 720p to support terrible resolutions such as 720p.
3) Cache Scrubber is also a scratch pad method, but it still has differences from ex1 ESRAM. If the automation is closer to the advanced side, the initials are rather well performing, but the cache scrubber is only used if the GPU minimizes the cache miss when during a high clock, rather than ddr3 being a bandwidth answer to the ESRAM, but the bandwidth is already sufficient for GDDR6.
4) In this situation, it is possible to be present at the same time as ESRAM, because it is not necessarily a case of assisting. The infinity cache is also closer to the evolution of GameCube/Wii's 1T-SRAM rather than manual cache methods such as ESRAM/Cache Scrubber, even though Nintendo has high bandwidth in the past.
5) Infinity Cache on RDNA2 and Cache Scrubbers in RDNA3.

Some shit I don't understand, maybe someone can help.
"On the other hand, Microsoft is going completely the opposite of Sony, but if Sony is caught in the sub-incompatibility and has to go to the lower end, Microsoft, on the contrary, has to maintain a similarity to the server side, so it can only be limited to wide. One of the most important factors on the server side is the concept of the same electricity ratio is never going to work. So the dependence on compute shaders is higher than the PS5."

And I'm going to end it with this, to much tweets to go through.
1) Cache scrubber = minimize cache hit
2) Build at ultra-fast I/O throughput = SSD performance is also performance, but GPU data transfer speed is also built at high speed
3) If you're prototyping Sony's own custom RDNA3 in combination,

4) MICROSOFT has a filler that goes in the opposite direction, and it's a CU unit custom that goes towards CDNA. I customized it on the INT4, INT8 side and it's even better than PC RDNA2 in this direction, which is the direction... It is currently an AMD server-side GPU.
5) The design of the CDNA prototype is also the same as the PS5, so if there is a difference between the AMD future architecture, if the PS5 follows the RDNA branched as the "gaming" architecture, MICROSOFT will follow the CDNA branded as the "server" architecture. He is Vega's immediate successor.

P.S.
I don't know who the guy is and don't take any of this as fact.
I'm posting this as it an very interesting piece of information.

So according to this guy, if Infinity Cache and Cache Scrubbers are two different method trying to achieve the same result, technically the same.
If all this turns out to be true, that would mean technically RGT and Moore's Law was right and they fell out with each other for nothing.

 

[Red_Driver85]

But he actually said:

He said other things, too. He talks too much in general.

Also, where is the arrogance? What is arrogant about this approach? What is short-sighted about it? Where are the lies?
Does your PS5 lose value because someone who owns a PC that likely costs at least twice as much, can now play the games you could? Is it arrogance to give those players the opportunity to play your games? I've just explained at length why I don't think this move is at all short-sighted. People who primarily game on PC are the least likely to go out and buy a PS5 just to play a handful of games, so why not release a couple of old games on the PC to make some extra money, and perhaps get them interested in PlayStation franchises enough to consider the switch (irrespective of how unlikely it is, but....given the price of CPUs/GPUs these days who knows...).

I repeat once again that I don't care about the actual release of games on PC. But this will certainly affect the fact that games will be taken into account in the development as "it should work on the PC as well" and will definitely slow down the PS5's ability of streaming data in games - its main advantage over all platforms. This is where shit begin. Many interesting ways, quite specific, can simply stop using in playstation "exclusives", and this is a burden on developers in general. And, instead of polishing or developing their next games, they will be drawn into the age-old PC problems of "game not working or slowing down or crashing". This is my opinion and I don't like what Sony is doing now. You can disagree with me, but I do not want to argue.

 

[LiquidRex]

Here we go again people... What can we see that's hidden in plain sight again this time.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Here we go again people... What can we see that's hidden in plain sight again this time.

Hubris?

 

[chilichote]

Here we go again people... What can we see that's hidden in plain sight again this time.

Gamepass is coming to Switch^^

 

[skit_data]

I have zero issues with lastgen Playstation games getting released on PC.
They really cant be so stupid that they would build a console with those kind of SSD and I/O customizations only to develop games that can be run on a HDD or a regular off the shelf SSD.

My bet is them only releasing lastgen games. Maybe some games that primarily dont depend on heavy streaming of assets.

Sad about the GT7 delay, i was really looking forward to it releasing this year.

 

[Red_Driver85]

My bet is them only releasing lastgen games. Maybe some games that primarily dont depend on heavy streaming of assets.

I think so too. They release games that are easy to outsource for porting, for example, and that will run on any average PC. Although remembering HZD ... And the embarrassed face of Alex Battaglia ...

 

[saintjules]

Gamepass is coming to Switch^^

Kojima's Ludens1 also in the background...

 

[DeepEnigma]

Kojima's Ludens1 also in the background...

Because it's on the PC, something MS is trying so hard to normalize as an "Xbox" now.

 

[IntentionalPun]

I have zero issues with lastgen Playstation games getting released on PC.
They really cant be so stupid that they would build a console with those kind of SSD and I/O customizations only to develop games that can be run on a HDD or a regular off the shelf SSD.

My bet is them only releasing lastgen games. Maybe some games that primarily dont depend on heavy streaming of assets.

Sad about the GT7 delay, i was really looking forward to it releasing this year.

Well their strategy is clearly currently to wait years anyways... and probably won't port some games.

They also are supporting off the shelf SSD's soon..

 

[THEAP99]

This is probably going to be the most boring generation ever now without exclusives to push gaming forward.

 

[skit_data]

Well their strategy is clearly currently to wait years anyways... and probably won't port some games.

They also are supporting off the shelf SSD's soon..

I like this strategy, it makes sense business wise. As long as it doesnt negatively impact the initial game development by relying on a simultaneous PC release.

Yes, but those SSDs are required to be even faster than the one in the PS5 and will still rely on its dedicated hardware decompression. It will take a while before anything close to it will find its way onto the average PC.

 

[Defrop]

Kojima Productions Ludens

 

[jroc74]

Well... shit.

Kratos with the toll face, lmao!!

I don't quite understand everything he's saying exactly, but it sounds like.
1) Sony still maintained the RDNA1 as the primary skeleton,
2) MS engineers also claimed that Xbox was 100% RDNA2 because it puts the CU unit from RDNA2 as a sign,
3) The PS5 was based on RDNA2 because of VRS and mesh shaders,
4) In addition to not supporting RDNA2 at the ISA level as a feature level, there was nothing wrong with supporting RDNA2 in the micro-architecture design.

This part is really interesting.
1) ESRAM, Cache Scrubber and Infinity Cache has the same purpose through different methods.
2) ESRAM is a kind of scratchpad (manual cache) concept, so unlike traditional EDRAM, it is not automation-based, but rather difficult to develop, so in the early days of ex1, ESRAM skips and DDR3 only uses 720p to support terrible resolutions such as 720p.
3) Cache Scrubber is also a scratch pad method, but it still has differences from ex1 ESRAM. If the automation is closer to the advanced side, the initials are rather well performing, but the cache scrubber is only used if the GPU minimizes the cache miss when during a high clock, rather than ddr3 being a bandwidth answer to the ESRAM, but the bandwidth is already sufficient for GDDR6.
4) In this situation, it is possible to be present at the same time as ESRAM, because it is not necessarily a case of assisting. The infinity cache is also closer to the evolution of GameCube/Wii's 1T-SRAM rather than manual cache methods such as ESRAM/Cache Scrubber, even though Nintendo has high bandwidth in the past.
5) Infinity Cache on RDNA2 and Cache Scrubbers in RDNA3.

Some shit I don't understand, maybe someone can help.
"On the other hand, Microsoft is going completely the opposite of Sony, but if Sony is caught in the sub-incompatibility and has to go to the lower end, Microsoft, on the contrary, has to maintain a similarity to the server side, so it can only be limited to wide. One of the most important factors on the server side is the concept of the same electricity ratio is never going to work. So the dependence on compute shaders is higher than the PS5."

And I'm going to end it with this, to much tweets to go through.
1) Cache scrubber = minimize cache hit
2) Build at ultra-fast I/O throughput = SSD performance is also performance, but GPU data transfer speed is also built at high speed
3) If you're prototyping Sony's own custom RDNA3 in combination,

4) MICROSOFT has a filler that goes in the opposite direction, and it's a CU unit custom that goes towards CDNA. I customized it on the INT4, INT8 side and it's even better than PC RDNA2 in this direction, which is the direction... It is currently an AMD server-side GPU.
5) The design of the CDNA prototype is also the same as the PS5, so if there is a difference between the AMD future architecture, if the PS5 follows the RDNA branched as the "gaming" architecture, MICROSOFT will follow the CDNA branded as the "server" architecture. He is Vega's immediate successor.

P.S.
I don't know who the guy is and don't take any of this as fact.
I'm posting this as it an very interesting piece of information.

Interesting info. Thanks for the post.

" 4) In addition to not supporting RDNA2 at the ISA level as a feature level, there was nothing wrong with supporting RDNA2 in the micro-architecture design."

Why some ppl try to make this such a big deal is amazing.

Also, the info about CDNA, server side of things is really interesting. Different design goals, like many of us has said since day one.

So according to this guy, if Infinity Cache and Cache Scrubbers are two different method trying to achieve the same result, technically the same.
If all this turns out to be true, that would mean technically RGT and Moore's Law was right and they fell out with each other for nothing.

Thought about this too, I wonder how this will play out if this is true, lol.

 

[Red_Driver85]

They also are supporting off the shelf SSD's soon..

It doesn't really mean anything. After all, off the shelf SSD being in PS5 will work as a PS5 SSD, and not as in a PC.

 

[DeepEnigma]

This is probably going to be the most boring generation ever now without exclusives to push gaming forward.

Stick to Twitter with these baited "concern" hottakes.

 

[Loxus]

Kratos with the toll face, lmao!!



Interesting info. Thanks for the post.

" 4) In addition to not supporting RDNA2 at the ISA level as a feature level, there was nothing wrong with supporting RDNA2 in the micro-architecture design."

Why some ppl try to make this such a big deal is amazing.

Also, the info about CDNA, server side of things is really interesting. Different design goals, like many of us has said since day one.




Thought about this too, I wonder how this will play out if this is true, lol.

Yea, the CDNA part is what Moore's Law was always saying.
RGT was also saying Cache Scrubbers were incorporate into RDNA 3.

The guy also went into talking about the PS5's CPU, that it's still 256 bit like many are now starting to realize.

 

[Dabaus]

Kojima Productions Ludens

Wouldn’t be shocked at all if death stranding came to Xbox. (Yes I know Sony is the publisher.) Maybe some trade off for Bethesda games.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

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.

Errr... there ARE caches on NVidia GPUs! The very reason they outperformed AMD by such a margin prior to the release of RDNA was BECAUSE of the more advanced GPU cache structure NVidia GPUs boasted.

All cache throughout the hierarchy acts as a buffer to limit the latency hit of having to pull data in from a higher level cache in the sam hierarchy, and at the lowest level, your L0/1 cache exists to limit the latency hit of not having enough space in the processor registers.

In an idealised world, you'd have GBs of register space. In reality, that's impossible. So you setup a hierarchy of caches and external memory (and finally the mass storage device) to minimise the overall latency hit of having to pull in data when the execution cores are looking for data not present in the working set of data.

In which case, all cache is beneficial... but it doesn't come without a cost. Which in real terms is the huge impact in die area that SRAM cell arrays impose. NVidia GPU dies sizes are already HUGE... like 700+sqmm which are pushing against the reticule limits of the semi-conductor process technology. So it's no reason they went with a slightly wider bus than more higher level cache.

AMD GPUs run at higher clocks, increasing cache bandwidth, so they can get away with less cache and a smaller die.

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.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what cache does and how having more cache benefits a system.

The point where more cache no longer benefits a system is the point in which all the data the GPU/CPU/execution cores could ever want to touch can exist in the cache... i.e. 100GBs of cache... or a similarly unrealistic hypothetical design where you have limited cache capacity but near infinite bandwidth, reducing the latency hit of a cache miss to it's theoretical minimum.

Since this is a ridiculously idealized scenario, any increase in cache amount benefits a system by reducing the latency hit of a cache miss, thus improving greatly overall GPU utilization through the reduction of stalls. Every time your GPU is sitting around waiting for data it's doing no useful work. More cache means less chances of this event occurring. It's really as simple as that.

The step change in latency between caches and RAM being an order of magnitude, means that the moment requisite data isn't found in any of the caches within the hierarchy, all of a sudden the latency hit jumps up from tens of cycles of latency to hundreds or even thousands of processor cycles where the GPU is doing nothing useful waiting for data. Therefore, adding cache ALWAYS has a much bigger impact to performance than increasing bandwidth to external memory.

This isn't even debatable.

 

[Loxus]

Kojima Productions Ludens

Why does Phil Spencer play these childish games as the head of an Organization's Division.
It was good the first couple of times.
Just come out and say it like with Bethesda.

 

[SlimySnake]

Holy hyperbole!

Sony aren't run by idiots, they are not going to sabotage their billion dollar PlayStation business by chasing $50m revenue per PC port. They are trying to thread the needle, keep hold of console userbase, while growing the revenue on software which have exhausted sales on their platform by porting onto another. They haven't devoted even 5% of their resources behind marketing for PC ports, and for good reason. They recognize how tricky it could become.

Long-term, I don't see it hurting them. People buy consoles, because a) They are cheap b) Ease of access, you don't have fiddle around with hardware to make games run. c) Friends and family own it. None of that is going to change, look up cost of a moderately capable GPU, 99% of buyers would just run away from that. Even, when costs will normalize, you aren't building a PC for $500.

Also, day and date release is not something I can see happening this gen. They aren't morons for paying $100m to secure timed exclusivity for 3rd party games, only to release theirs day one alongside PC.

Several of their third party exclusive games are releasing alongside PC if not within 3 months. Deathloop, Tokyo Ghostwire, FFX16 all had PC release dates either at launch or only a few months after launch. So it's already happening.

I dont think Sony is run by idiots but you are giving these suits too much credit. They chase money and short term profits over everything. They only care about short term profits because it helps their bonuses. The Sony of old is now gone. All those guys who came up with PS1 (Shawn Layden, Shu, Jack Tretton, Andrew House and Kaz) are all gone. Whats left is Jim and a bunch of other newer execs who clearly dont understand why exclusives are what made Sony so successful. It was GTA3, MGS2, FFX in the PS2 era and first party games like Uncharted, GoW and TLOU in the PS3 and PS4 era. We all knew this which is why we shit on Microsoft all the time. Because MS clearly doesnt understand why exclusives are so important.

You can look at Xbox One's lifetime sales and see how they took a nose dive after they announced everything will come to PC. Even the best most powerful mid gen console's launch didnt stop the complete crash of their sales. PC gaming on the other hand became bigger and more popular than ever.

You are right, there are plenty of reason why people buy consoles but its bad business to give people fewer reasons to own consoles. And thats what both Sony and MS are doing. I dont know about you but I did not buy an xsx because my rtx 2080 will basically play everything at xsx settings. MS lost a sale there. I know many Sony fans here said the same thing. Nioh 2 just got a DLSS 2.0 patch and you are literally getting 50 more frames per second with the same IQ. Why would I buy Horizon on consoles now? Especially in the future once im able to secure a 3080 and run everything at not just double but quadruple the framerate? Because of ease of access or because my family owns a PS5?

People like me and you are the whales. We spend more than the casuals and we are gonna go to PC. Andrew House knew this and him making the Pro was primarily driven by his fear that people like us would go to PC mid gen. Jim knows this too and couldnt care less.

 

[SlimySnake]

Here we go again people... What can we see that's hidden in plain sight again this time.

Just noticed KojiPro studio astronaut. Jesus Christ. This is literally the worst day ever. lmao.

 

[Mr Moose]

Kojima Productions Ludens

Ubisoft skull and a Switch, too! Jesus, he must be stopped!

Wouldn’t be shocked at all if death stranding came to Xbox. (Yes I know Sony is the publisher.) Maybe some trade off for Bethesda games.

I think they own the IP.

 

[M1chl]

Errr... there ARE caches on NVidia GPUs! The very reason they outperformed AMD by such a margin prior to the release of RDNA was BECAUSE of the more advanced GPU cache structure NVidia GPUs boasted.

All cache throughout the hierarchy acts as a buffer to limit the latency hit of having to pull data in from a higher level cache in the sam hierarchy, and at the lowest level, your L0/1 cache exists to limit the latency hit of not having enough space in the processor registers.

In an idealised world, you'd have GBs of register space. In reality, that's impossible. So you setup a hierarchy of caches and external memory (and finally the mass storage device) to minimise the overall latency hit of having to pull in data when the execution cores are looking for data not present in the working set of data.

In which case, all cache is beneficial... but it doesn't come without a cost. Which in real terms is the huge impact in die area that SRAM cell arrays impose. NVidia GPU dies sizes are already HUGE... like 700+sqmm which are pushing against the reticule limits of the semi-conductor process technology. So it's no reason they went with a slightly wider bus than more higher level cache.

AMD GPUs run at higher clocks, increasing cache bandwidth, so they can get away with less cache and a smaller die.



This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what cache does and how having more cache benefits a system.

The point where more cache no longer benefits a system is the point in which all the data the GPU/CPU/execution cores could ever want to touch can exist in the cache... i.e. 100GBs of cache... or a similarly unrealistic hypothetical design where you have limited cache capacity but near infinite bandwidth, reducing the latency hit of a cache miss to it's theoretical minimum.

Since this is a ridiculously idealized scenario, any increase in cache amount benefits a system by reducing the latency hit of a cache miss, thus improving greatly overall GPU utilization through the reduction of stalls. Every time your GPU is sitting around waiting for data it's doing no useful work. More cache means less chances of this event occurring. It's really as simple as that.

The step change in latency between caches and RAM being an order of magnitude, means that the moment requisite data isn't found in any of the caches within the hierarchy, all of a sudden the latency hit jumps up from tens of cycles of latency to hundreds or even thousands of processor cycles where the GPU is doing nothing useful waiting for data. Therefore, adding cache ALWAYS has a much bigger impact to performance than increasing bandwidth to external memory.

This isn't even debatable.

Well very good points being brough in here, however this whole thing was concerning L3 cache, for taking advantage of cache, you have to very tightly build architecture around it and as soon it's not integral part you never going to get architecture which can offload smaller operation to cache and large to system memory efficiently, you are going to get wasted cycles, which results in worse performance. Sure L2 caches cannot get enough size, L3 caches has to be thoughtout what is worth and what isn't, there is a ton of complexition regarding this issue and just because you can drop cache there, does not mean you should, especially if you have to designed chip around size, which memory sadly take a lot. For example if Zen 2 would have some massive cache does not mean it would performed that much better and also shared cache is not always win, as seen on Zen 3 sometimes. Like for example in mining drop of performance from 3900x to 5900x can be seen in RandomX and Verushash algorythms. With GPU, L3 cache is less important, because it's mostly bandwidth bound, not latency bound. And if you add cache there you are wasting cycles unless you can be sure your operation can be fitted into cache itself. eg. Cycles to write on cache, cycles to write on V/RAM

I don't particulary disagree on anything what you've said, it's just not the whole story.

For the record, if you could do 8GB on chip, you would have a winner, but we are not there sadly.

 

[Krisprolls]

mark my words. In two years, every PS5 game will launch on PC simultaneously.

Thats how long it took for Xbox games to launch on PC after the first game was ported to PC.

Nah, that's not what they're trying to do. The very reason why Sony exclusives look better and are more polished than the competition is because they develop them for a single known platform (well, with slight differences like PS4 Pro + base PS4). It's also due to talent and budget sure, but working on a single platform helps a lot.

They will never make their games both PS5 and PC day one, because it would make them look less impressive and devalue them. They would have to make compromises to make it work on every PC. Porting a game to PC properly is a huge task.

On the other hand, it makes sense porting them to PC later to create a new audience for Playstation games. I like that move.

 

[Putonahappyface]

I'm ecstatic for psvr2. I had a go on my friends psvr and I was very impressed but the graphics wasn't quite up to scratch, which was the only thing stopping me buying the headset. I was very impressed with how emersive Ocean of Descent was though, so psvr2 is a day one from me!

 

[Rossco EZ]

Holy hyperbole!

Sony aren't run by idiots, they are not going to sabotage their billion dollar PlayStation business by chasing $50m revenue per PC port. They are trying to thread the needle, keep hold of console userbase, while growing the revenue on software which have exhausted sales on their platform by porting onto another. They haven't devoted even 5% of their resources behind marketing for PC ports, and for good reason. They recognize how tricky it could become.

Long-term, I don't see it hurting them. People buy consoles, because a) They are cheap b) Ease of access, you don't have fiddle around with hardware to make games run. c) Friends and family own it. None of that is going to change, look up cost of a moderately capable GPU, 99% of buyers would just run away from that. Even, when costs will normalize, you aren't building a PC for $500.

Also, day and date release is not something I can see happening this gen. They aren't morons for paying $100m to secure timed exclusivity for 3rd party games, only to release theirs day one alongside PC.

exactly, seen a few posts of people saying just get a pc etc but it’s not always that simple. don’t get me wrong, i’d game on pc if i could but right now i can’t. main reason being that i simply don’t have enough room where i’m at to have a desk set up. probably sounds silly to some but yeah, also a lot of people buy a console simply for the convenience of say coming home and sitting on your sofa and just playing a game. i don’t even think i’d want to sit at a desk everyday playing games.

 

[kyliethicc]

Couldn't agree more, it's pretty obvious since Layden got the boot and there was a change in leadership. The thinking at the top changed. Folks just continued to do mental gymnastics when evidence was starting them in their face. I remember after the Horizon PC news first broke, once folks had their meltdown, Schreier mentioned about more PC ports being in the works. As time went on, these people latched onto Horizon port not selling well on PC... and that Sony were done with them.

Sony obviously don't care, that's why they are porting loads of games. You couldn't make this stuff up. Their exclusives are still generating additional revenue on PC, and I see them porting most of their games over time. It's about maximizing profits, only long-term we'll get to see if it affects their console business (Hint: It won't, most people buy consoles over PC for ease of access). For the hardcore, the question becomes, do you care about their games so deeply that you're willing to buy a hardware? Because I doubt they'll reduce the price of the software on PC ports, they'll still cost $70.

It's time to let go of exclusives unless you're a Nintendo fan.

I think its now obvious Sony are porting over their big PS4 games to PC, but they are still clearly focused on the idea of console exclusives. It works for some, like myself. I'm not interested in PC gaming, so the idea of these games are not on Xbox or PlayStation does have impact my hardware purchase.

I agree that most console buyers will not switch over to PC, etc. Thats me lol. But it is a bit risky longterm, because they are giving lots of PC users a reason to NOT buy their system or use their services.

Its no surprise they're beginning the PC ports of PS4 games as the PS4 lifecycle dies. They are chasing the money.

The real question is when will Sony begin their PC ports of their new PS5 games? Or even PS4/5?
Like how long until Horizon Forbidden West is on PC? I'd guess that game will be on PC in 2022, cuz its on PS4.
But what about PS5 only? Returnal and new Ratchet? Do they end up on PC by like 2023? I kinda still doubt it.

My bet is God of War (2018) goes to PC this year. Cory Barlog himself has said he wants it on PC.
And fuck fuck fuck on GT7 being delayed. Sad times.

 

[ethomaz]

Days Gone is literally for free with PS Plus Collection forever, not sure why people are mad that PC beggars will get some PS4 leftovers.

That is a nice catch.
Maybe the next PS4 to PC release is in the PS collection list.