PS4.5 and NX will be max 2.5x more powerful. That's only if they use AMD Polaris tech though.
Polaris is 2.5x performance per watt. Current PS4 consumes around 115 watts.
Realistically, expect 2x the performance, which should still offer a decent boost in frame rate and visual effects.
I'm willing to bet PS4.5 will be more powerful than the NX since Nintendo likes to keep the TDP as low as possible. So, NX might only be 1.5x more powerful than XB1, or PS4.
I voted near around the first options if they use Polaris and crank it up to ps4 level watts per performance usage. This is all surriel to me that its happening lol. Sony reacting to NX here? What is MS doing was Phil just rumbling no interest in upgrading the xbox.
@howmakewood: I thought I read or heard somewhere that they will have Polaris hence the wait for launch this holiday.
Someone out of the big three will have Polaris. I would assume Nintendo would be all over that as they are big on efficiency. Just look at the Gamecube. One of the most efficient designs out there.
@ellos said:
I voted near around the first options if they use Polaris. This is all surriel to me that its happening lol. Sony reacting to NX here? What is MS doing was Phil just rumbling no interest in upgrading the xbox.
The PS4.5 is happening because the current PS4 isn't good enough for quality VR experiences.
@emgesp: That is true but boy that's very disruptive of sony or rather AMD in particular. The cost must be amaizing for sony to take this on. Probably freaked out when realize NX's cost. For sony they had to think about disrupting there current money making machine so soon. Taking on VR venture and this so soon.
@howmakewood: I thought I read or heard somewhere that they will have Polaris hence the wait for launch this holiday.
It would make most sense that they have yes, as it wouldn't be too smart to release a new console revision when a more efficient solution is just about to hit.
Question is how close to release is AMD and how much time do the console manufacturers need with those new chips and when can they get them?
With 14 nm FinFET's 2.5X preformace per watt improvements,
1. AMD could have around 7.5 TFLOPS version at around 95 watts from Mobile Tonga's improvements.
2. AMD could have around 8.5 TFLOPS version at around 87.5 watts from Fury Nano's improvements.
Polaris has improved tessellation/geometry engine performance.
Fury Nano would be the minimum for PC style 4K rendering. Improvement with Geometry processor specifically targets NVIDIA's Gimpworks BS that f*ks-up high count CU GCN ALU scaling. Console games doesn't have PC vendor specific gimping politics. Polaris' improvement has a higher effective performance boost than just straight 2X scaling CU count.
@howmakewood: from what I've known in the past....consoles tend to get these new techs early for manufacturing and testing etc.
Either way I wouldn't be surprised if Sony did in fact get early access to Polaris to make new PS4s. I don't see why AMD would have a problem with that considering they're working together.
The 360 had tech before the PC got it, so its within reason that both the NX and PS4.5 could get Polaris at the same time as PC components are out. Isn't Polaris based GPU's coming out Q3 2016?
PS4's GPU has around 100 watts budget i.e. similar to 7970M TDP limits.
For 2nd gen 28nm, AMD's mobile Tonga XT replaced 7970M as it's 100 watts flagship mobile GPU.
With 14 nm FinFET's 2.5X preformace per watt improvements,
1. AMD could have around 7.5 TFLOPS version at around 95 watts from Mobile Tonga's improvements.
2. AMD could have around 8.5 TFLOPS version at around 87.5 watts from Fury Nano's improvements.
Polaris has improved tessellation/geometry engine performance.
Wait a minute, you're saying 2nd gen 28nm performance to watt improved that much from what is in the PS4/XB1?
I thought Polaris would be 2.5x the tech we saw in the PS4/XB1. So, would it be more like 3.5x the PS4 at the same wattage?
I think AMD's 2.5x figure is compared to non fury GCN, so the basically 2x performance increase that fury nano saw + polaris would be 4x or better performance per watt. Of course the nano used hbm, which saved space on the die, and that kind of memory might not be in either the NX or PS4.5.
Not sure if the new PS4 would use polaris at all, since to retain 100% compatibility you'd just ramp up the GCN cores. I would say Nintendo has a much better chance in getting polaris, but I think Sony will want a better cpu so they might be tied on that front.
PS4's GPU has around 100 watts budget i.e. similar to 7970M TDP limits.
For 2nd gen 28nm, AMD's mobile Tonga XT replaced 7970M as it's 100 watts flagship mobile GPU.
With 14 nm FinFET's 2.5X preformace per watt improvements,
1. AMD could have around 7.5 TFLOPS version at around 95 watts from Mobile Tonga's improvements.
2. AMD could have around 8.5 TFLOPS version at around 87.5 watts from Fury Nano's improvements.
Polaris has improved tessellation/geometry engine performance.
Wait a minute, you're saying 2nd gen 28nm performance to watt improved that much from what is in the PS4/XB1?
I thought Polaris would be 2.5x the tech we saw in the PS4/XB1. So, would it be more like 3.5x the PS4 at the same wattage?
I think AMD's 2.5x figure is compared to non fury GCN, so the basically 2x performance increase that fury nano saw + polaris would be 4x or better performance per watt. Of course the nano used hbm, which saved space on the die, and that kind of memory might not be in either the NX or PS4.5.
Not sure if the new PS4 would use polaris at all, since to retain 100% compatibility you'd just ramp up the GCN cores. I would say Nintendo has a much better chance in getting polaris, but I think Sony will want a better cpu so they might be tied on that front.
Well the PS4.5 APU would need to be 14nm to fit more compute units.
@emgesp: Well like Ron said tonga is better and that's still on 28nm.
If I had to guess, i'd say it'd be 14nm, with more gcn cores, and NX would be 14nm polaris. But that doesn't mean NX would be stronger, since as you said they care about efficiency.
@emgesp: Well like Ron said tonga is better and that's still on 28nm.
If I had to guess, i'd say it'd be 14nm, with more gcn cores, and NX would be 14nm polaris. But that doesn't mean NX would be stronger, since as you said they care about efficiency.
Tonga doesn't have 8 CPU Cores on the same die, so it has room for more compute units and such. PS4's APU also had to fit in a specific size budget for the single cooling system to work efficiently. Here's the PS4's APU die for reference.
They'll be much more powerful then any of the above combinations.... Look at the jump from PS3's RSX ( 7800GTX ) to PS4's 7850..... massive jump.
As for specs it will be whatever they can fit within a 200w power consumption and thermal limits.
PS4's GPU has around 100 watts budget i.e. similar to 7970M TDP limits.
For 2nd gen 28nm, AMD's mobile Tonga XT replaced 7970M as it's 100 watts flagship mobile GPU.
With 14 nm FinFET's 2.5X preformace per watt improvements,
1. AMD could have around 7.5 TFLOPS version at around 95 watts from Mobile Tonga's improvements.
2. AMD could have around 8.5 TFLOPS version at around 87.5 watts from Fury Nano's improvements.
Polaris has improved tessellation/geometry engine performance.
Wait a minute, you're saying 2nd gen 28nm performance to watt improved that much from what is in the PS4/XB1?
I thought Polaris would be 2.5x the tech we saw in the PS4/XB1. So, would it be more like 3.5x the PS4 at the same wattage?
In terms of TDP, the GCN products within the consoles are more inline with 1st gen AMD GCN mobile parts.
Mobile Tonga XT (same parts in Apple's iMac 2015) has about 1.6X performance per watt improvement over PS4. PS4's GPU is more or less 7970M with two 2CU disabled for yield issues + 8 ACE units + modified L2 cache. Sony gave it's customers AMD's highest mobile SKU at that time.
AMD compared it's Polaris (40 watts) against NVIDIA Maxwellv2 product i.e., ~100 watts GTX 950 not against existing GCN.
In term of performance, GTX 950 ~= R9-270X which leads to 100 watt 14 nm FinFET GCN around Fury Nano ~= R9-390X level.
PS4K is possible with 14 nm FinFET with Polaris and Sony already gave it's customers the highest AMD mobile part in 2013. Sony's one of the main reasons to shift towards X86 is it's easy upgrade path.
There's would be a new 14 nm FinFET Polaris flagship to replace R9-M390X (Mobile Tonga XT) i.e. Sony is not the only customer using AMD's mobile GPU flagship e.g. Apple's iMac.
They'll be much more powerful then any of the above combinations.... Look at the jump from PS3's RSX ( 7800GTX ) to PS4's 7850..... massive jump.
As for specs it will be whatever they can fit within a 200w power consumption and thermal limits.
PS4's GPU has around 100 watts budget i.e. similar to 7970M TDP limits.
For 2nd gen 28nm, AMD's mobile Tonga XT replaced 7970M as it's 100 watts flagship mobile GPU.
With 14 nm FinFET's 2.5X preformace per watt improvements,
1. AMD could have around 7.5 TFLOPS version at around 95 watts from Mobile Tonga's improvements.
2. AMD could have around 8.5 TFLOPS version at around 87.5 watts from Fury Nano's improvements.
Polaris has improved tessellation/geometry engine performance.
Wait a minute, you're saying 2nd gen 28nm performance to watt improved that much from what is in the PS4/XB1?
I thought Polaris would be 2.5x the tech we saw in the PS4/XB1. So, would it be more like 3.5x the PS4 at the same wattage?
In terms of TDP, the GCN products within the consoles are more inline with 1st gen AMD GCN mobile parts.
Mobile Tonga XT (same parts in Apple's iMac 2015) has about 1.6X performance per watt improvement over PS4. PS4's GPU is more or less 7970M with two 2CU disabled for yield issues + 8 ACE units + modified L2 cache. Sony gave it's customers AMD's highest mobile SKU at that time.
AMD compared it's Polaris (40 watts) against NVIDIA Maxwellv2 products (e,g, ~100 watts GTX 950) not against existing GCN.
In term of performance, GTX 950 ~= R9-270X which leads to 100 watt 14 nm FinFET around Fury Nano ~= R9-390X.
WOW, if Nintendo went for Polaris they could have a pretty sweet system under 100 watts TDP.
@emgesp: Yes if Nintendo has polaris GPU it could be a real power saver when combined with ARM cpu, although I'm not completely sold on the ARM performance, but considering how weak the jaguar is, it might do more than good enough
@emgesp: Yes if Nintendo has polaris GPU it could be a real power saver when combined with ARM cpu, although I'm not completely sold on the ARM performance, but considering how weak the jaguar is, it might do more than good enough
@emgesp: Yes if Nintendo has polaris GPU it could be a real power saver when combined with ARM cpu, although I'm not completely sold on the ARM performance, but considering how weak the jaguar is, it might do more than good enough
I hear the A72 might outperform the Jaguar.
It should outperform Jaguar if the information they have released so far holds true, tho from the benches I've seen it's not quite 2-3x the power of A-15 that they were speaking of
ARM has posted some charts of the A-72 besting Intel M under certain power tresholds, this is obviously not very reliable info on actual performance
@emgesp: Yes if Nintendo has polaris GPU it could be a real power saver when combined with ARM cpu, although I'm not completely sold on the ARM performance, but considering how weak the jaguar is, it might do more than good enough
I hear the A72 might outperform the Jaguar.
It should outperform Jaguar if the information they have released so far holds true, tho from the benches I've seen it's not quite 2-3x the power of A-15 that they were speaking of
Regardless I would hope more devs would be taking advantage of GPGPU capabilities to balance out the CPU being a bottleneck.
@emgesp: Well like Ron said tonga is better and that's still on 28nm.
If I had to guess, i'd say it'd be 14nm, with more gcn cores, and NX would be 14nm polaris. But that doesn't mean NX would be stronger, since as you said they care about efficiency.
@emgesp said:
@ronvalencia said:
@emgesp said:
@ronvalencia said:
PS4's GPU has around 100 watts budget i.e. similar to 7970M TDP limits.
For 2nd gen 28nm, AMD's mobile Tonga XT replaced 7970M as it's 100 watts flagship mobile GPU.
With 14 nm FinFET's 2.5X preformace per watt improvements,
1. AMD could have around 7.5 TFLOPS version at around 95 watts from Mobile Tonga's improvements.
2. AMD could have around 8.5 TFLOPS version at around 87.5 watts from Fury Nano's improvements.
Polaris has improved tessellation/geometry engine performance.
Wait a minute, you're saying 2nd gen 28nm performance to watt improved that much from what is in the PS4/XB1?
I thought Polaris would be 2.5x the tech we saw in the PS4/XB1. So, would it be more like 3.5x the PS4 at the same wattage?
In terms of TDP, the GCN products within the consoles are more inline with 1st gen AMD GCN mobile parts.
Mobile Tonga XT (same parts in Apple's iMac 2015) has about 1.6X performance per watt improvement over PS4. PS4's GPU is more or less 7970M with two 2CU disabled for yield issues + 8 ACE units + modified L2 cache. Sony gave it's customers AMD's highest mobile SKU at that time.
AMD compared it's Polaris (40 watts) against NVIDIA Maxwellv2 products (e,g, ~100 watts GTX 950) not against existing GCN.
In term of performance, GTX 950 ~= R9-270X which leads to 100 watt 14 nm FinFET around Fury Nano ~= R9-390X.
WOW, if Nintendo went for Polaris they could have a pretty sweet system under 100 watts TDP.
Polaris is some impressive stuff man.
The problem, if Nintendo goes for Polaris 40 watts which is about R9-270X level GPU which is above R7-265 (about PS4 level GPU). Polaris 40 watts would need some of it's CU disabled for yield reasons, hence speculation for slightly above PS4 in power could be true e.g. 1.5X over PS4.
Polaris 40 watts still has high geometry/polygon pusher (for NVIDIA Gameworks).
Sony's PS4/PS4K approach is to obtain the best AMD mobile GPU at a given time period.
@emgesp: Yes if Nintendo has polaris GPU it could be a real power saver when combined with ARM cpu, although I'm not completely sold on the ARM performance, but considering how weak the jaguar is, it might do more than good enough
I hear the A72 might outperform the Jaguar.
It should outperform Jaguar if the information they have released so far holds true, tho from the benches I've seen it's not quite 2-3x the power of A-15 that they were speaking of
Pretty sure Nintendo will make an effort to getting a nice cpu, after complaints about Wii U and even their own teams hit limitations early on. It'll at least be better than jaguar, might be like a high clocked puma.
Wait a minute, you're saying 2nd gen 28nm performance to watt improved that much from what is in the PS4/XB1?
I thought Polaris would be 2.5x the tech we saw in the PS4/XB1. So, would it be more like 3.5x the PS4 at the same wattage?
In terms of TDP, the GCN products within the consoles are more inline with 1st gen AMD GCN mobile parts.
Mobile Tonga XT (same parts in Apple's iMac 2015) has about 1.6X performance per watt improvement over PS4. PS4's GPU is more or less 7970M with two 2CU disabled for yield issues + 8 ACE units + modified L2 cache. Sony gave it's customers AMD's highest mobile SKU at that time.
AMD compared it's Polaris (40 watts) against NVIDIA Maxwellv2 products (e,g, ~100 watts GTX 950) not against existing GCN.
In term of performance, GTX 950 ~= R9-270X which leads to 100 watt 14 nm FinFET around Fury Nano ~= R9-390X.
WOW, if Nintendo went for Polaris they could have a pretty sweet system under 100 watts TDP.
Polaris is some impressive stuff man.
The problem, if Nintendo goes for Polaris 40 watts which is about R9-270X level GPU which is above R7-265 (about PS4 level GPU). Polaris 40 watts would need some of it's CU disabled for yield reasons, hence speculation for slightly above PS4 in power could be true e.g. 1.5X over PS4.
Polaris 40 watts still has high geometry/polygon pusher (for NVIDIA Gameworks).
Sony's PS4/PS4K approach is to obtain the best AMD mobile GPU at a given time period.
Could you see Nintendo going as high as 60 - 70 watts? How much would that change things up?
Am I missing something here? Has it been confirmed that they are indeed putting a much more powerful gpu inside of the PS4.5 (970ish)? I assumed that it would only be a minor change from the original PS4, sorta like what happened with the launch Xbox 360 vs the newer ones (added hdmi port, etc), and not a full fledged "upgrade".
So whats the purpose of this new machine? To fragment the playerbase (only certain games work with the new system)..think New3ds, or what?
Wait a minute, you're saying 2nd gen 28nm performance to watt improved that much from what is in the PS4/XB1?
I thought Polaris would be 2.5x the tech we saw in the PS4/XB1. So, would it be more like 3.5x the PS4 at the same wattage?
In terms of TDP, the GCN products within the consoles are more inline with 1st gen AMD GCN mobile parts.
Mobile Tonga XT (same parts in Apple's iMac 2015) has about 1.6X performance per watt improvement over PS4. PS4's GPU is more or less 7970M with two 2CU disabled for yield issues + 8 ACE units + modified L2 cache. Sony gave it's customers AMD's highest mobile SKU at that time.
AMD compared it's Polaris (40 watts) against NVIDIA Maxwellv2 products (e,g, ~100 watts GTX 950) not against existing GCN.
In term of performance, GTX 950 ~= R9-270X which leads to 100 watt 14 nm FinFET around Fury Nano ~= R9-390X.
WOW, if Nintendo went for Polaris they could have a pretty sweet system under 100 watts TDP.
Polaris is some impressive stuff man.
The problem, if Nintendo goes for Polaris 40 watts which is about R9-270X level GPU which is above R7-265 (about PS4 level GPU). Polaris 40 watts would need some of it's CU disabled for yield reasons, hence speculation for slightly above PS4 in power could be true e.g. 1.5X over PS4.
Polaris 40 watts still has high geometry/polygon pusher (for NVIDIA Gameworks).
Sony's PS4/PS4K approach is to obtain the best AMD mobile GPU at a given time period.
Could you see Nintendo going as high as 60 - 70 watts? How much would that change things up?
I'm not Nintendo. Polaris 40 watts effectively replaced R9-M370X (7770 at 800Mhz, 10 CU) power consumption level with R9-270X level performance.
PS4.5 and NX will be max 2.5x more powerful. That's only if they use AMD Polaris tech though.
Polaris is 2.5x performance per watt. Current PS4 consumes around 115 watts.
Realistically, expect 2x the performance, which should still offer a decent boost in frame rate and visual effects.
I'm willing to bet PS4.5 will be more powerful than the NX since Nintendo likes to keep the TDP as low as possible. So, NX might only be 1.5x more powerful than XB1, or PS4.
Maybe, but knowing them they'll still use an APU, so the question is also what they can fit on that and still be powerful.
I'm not Nintendo. Polaris 40 watts effectively replaced R9-M370X (7770 at 800Mhz, 10 CU) power consumption level with R9-270X level performance.
I guess what I'm saying is what's the next step up from that 40 watt Polaris GPU? What is the best Nintendo can get with a TDP budget of say 70 watts if they were to use the latest AMD tech available?
PS4.5 and NX will be max 2.5x more powerful. That's only if they use AMD Polaris tech though.
Polaris is 2.5x performance per watt. Current PS4 consumes around 115 watts.
Realistically, expect 2x the performance, which should still offer a decent boost in frame rate and visual effects.
I'm willing to bet PS4.5 will be more powerful than the NX since Nintendo likes to keep the TDP as low as possible. So, NX might only be 1.5x more powerful than XB1, or PS4.
Maybe, but knowing them they'll still use an APU, so the question is also what they can fit on that and still be powerful.
I'm expecting 1.5x or something.
Looks like my numbers were way too conservative as I didn't take into consideration later 28nm improvements.
The APU in the Sony PS4 houses a full fledged 7870 GPU but with 2 Compute Units turned off for yield. It's also clocked much lower than a standard 7870 as well.
The PS4.5 and NX will likely utilize APU's on 14nm process so they will be able to cram more performance while also consuming less wattage.
Going my Ron's comments we could potentially be getting consoles with upwards of 7 Tflops of performance. I'd expect nothing lower than 3.5 Tflops.
The CU units are disabled for a reason as not every chip in the ps4's is "perfect". Say AMD manufactures new chips used in Fury X, the imperfect ones from the production get used in lower end models
I just can't see Nintendo releasing a console three years after the PS4 and only being on par with it. Like what would be the point of that? How is just being on par going to help the NX succeed? It needs to come out and wow both console enthusiasts and those who have yet bought into an 8th or in this case 9th gen system.
The NX needs to be noticeably more capable and they should have a game that really showcases the extra horsepower at launch. Imagine a Soul Calibur/Halo 1 level launch game that blows everyone away. I remember the first time playing Soul Calibur on Dreamcast and couldn't believe how great it looked. First console port that outperformed its Arcade counterpart. That game still looks great.
Jesus christ was I confused at what I was seeing at first. Looked like ancient greek to me. But honestly no matter what the console do they will always behind even it they get on point with the high end PCs.
“We have started a new design this quarter that we believe expands our base for the semi-custom business and we are very pleased with that,” said Lisa Su, chief executive officer of Advanced Micro Devices, during the company’s earnings conference call with investors and financial analysts. “The base semi-custom business is around the game consoles.”
AMD announced two new semi-custom SoC design wins back in October, 2014. Both chips will integrate AMD Radeon graphics, one will be based on ARM architecture, another one will feature x86 general-purpose cores. One of the APUs is projected to power a “beyond gaming device”. Details about another have never been disclosed, but it is possible that it is a SoC for a gaming device. The two semi-custom system-on-chips are projected to bring the company combined total lifetime revenue of approximately $1 billion over approximately three years starting 2016.
Lots of speculation about what Sony could use but there appears to be very little consideration of cost, remember they are limited to $400 per unit and that's them making zero profit, which will not happen. Sony will likely be aiming for at least $50 to $100 profit on each unit sold.
So what we need to ask is what can they build for $300 - $350 per unit.
“We have started a new design this quarter that we believe expands our base for the semi-custom business and we are very pleased with that,” said Lisa Su, chief executive officer of Advanced Micro Devices, during the company’s earnings conference call with investors and financial analysts. “The base semi-custom business is around the game consoles.”
AMD announced two new semi-custom SoC design wins back in October, 2014. Both chips will integrate AMD Radeon graphics, one will be based on ARM architecture, another one will feature x86 general-purpose cores. One of the APUs is projected to power a “beyond gaming device”. Details about another have never been disclosed, but it is possible that it is a SoC for a gaming device. The two semi-custom system-on-chips are projected to bring the company combined total lifetime revenue of approximately $1 billion over approximately three years starting 2016.
AMD's ARM+GCN SoC = Nintendo NX
AMD's X86+GCN SoC = ????? Sony ???? PS4K? VR ???
I think that's how it is, ARM+GCN SoC is definitely the NX and X86+GCN SoC could be powering both the next xbone whatever and ps4k
Log in to comment