-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
"8 Cores, 16 Thread CPU, Zen/Ryzen" etc mean nothing to me. What kind of graphics can we expect next gen?
- Thread starter SeriousGoku
- Start date
I've observed that the tech demos they show at the start of a gen end up becoming the norm for the *next* generation. The demos for the PS3 reveal, like the Killzone/FF7 demo, pretty much look like typical PS4 stuff now, so expect the PS5 to pump out stuff that feels like Deep Down or Agni's Philosophy.
Pay no attention to him. He's a cranky old guy who loves to shove PC power into people's faces hence his comment about Playstation fans not accepting reality of whatever nonsense he was spouting.
Are you still on record staying the PS5 GPU is on par with a GTX 1080 OR have you evolved your views?
Bloated Windows ? Sorry but worst case scenario, Windows takes what ? 2-5% CPU usage if you dont open anything.
Consoles though ? At launch, two cores out of 8 were reserved and unavailable for games. That's 20%. It might have been right 15 years ago. Not anymore.
Windows is a bloated OS. Idle CPU usage off a modern CPU judging just from task manager is meaningless.
" Microsoft Windows has also been criticized as being bloated – with reference to Windows Vista and discussing the new, greatly slimmed down Windows 7 core components, Microsoft engineer Eric Traut commented that "This is the core of Windows 7. This is a collection of components that we've taken out[which?]. A lot of people think of Windows as this really large, bloated operating system, and that may be a fair characterization, I have to admit. It is large. It contains a lot of stuff in it. But at its core, the kernel and the components that make up the very core of the operating system actually is pretty streamlined."[20][21] Ed Bott also expressed skepticism, noting that nearly every operating system that Microsoft has ever sold has been criticized as 'bloated' on first release, even those now regarded as the exact opposite, such as MS-DOS.[22] Quoting Paul Thurrott, Bott agreed that the bloat stems from numerous enterprise-level features included in the operating system that were largely irrelevant to the average home user. "
2 CPU cores were indeed reserved for OS functions at the launch of PS4 / Xbox One. 2 very slow CPU cores, running at very low frequencies relative to the clock frequencies that modern desktop CPUs run at, with very low IPC and hardly any cache. In fact, Jaguar processors in PS4/Xbox lack any sort of L3 cache. Not to mention the speed of the cores is comparable to an ancient Intel Atom core.
2 very slow cpu cores out of 8 is still 20% of usage. The idea that PCs have to deal with a big OS overheard while consoles have a lot of free ressources is completly wrong nowadays. It's even the opposite.
Any modern PC cpu even on the low end see a 2-5% usage at best (and keep in mind that idle, the cpu isn't even at max clocks).
On the other end, new consoles loves to eat up a shiton of available power locked away for various reasons: os, anti-piracy and such.
To the point that those new consoles end up with 20% of CPU power locked away from games and 30% of ram being locked away.
No matter how bloated you claim Windows to be... It has never been the case for a modern PC.
CPU usage has very little to do with anything relating to the point of operating system bloat ..
It has to do when that person I quoted was making that point in the sense that it's eating up available ressources.
Their point was: "Windows is bloated -> That means a high overhead -> That means less ressorces available".
You're right because console OSes might be lighter, yet the reserved ressources are far higher overall.
Heck I didn't even pick up the last line about "having to code for millions of different configurations". Wtf. No one does that. It's not how any of those things work.
What a coincidence that this video came out yesterday:
Don't take it too seriously, there's no temp/watt readings and no full spec list, other than a r5 3600 and a GTX 980.
Don't take it too seriously, there's no temp/watt readings and no full spec list, other than a r5 3600 and a GTX 980.
The easiest answer for "8 Cores, 16 Thread CPU, Zen/Ryzen etc mean nothing to me" is:
Zen2 architecture that will be used in PS5 has a little greater IPC than any Intel CPU current on the market. In desktop PC space, Intel can extract slim victories with the use of a higher frequencies [where it uses a lot of electricity]. Since console don't aim at higher clocks, PS5's Zen2 will land at ~3-3.5GHz, where it will provide same or more CPU power than any similarly clocked i7.
In effect, we are getting the best possible modern CPU tech inside new batch of consoles. The effect on games will be big.
edit -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5pHUHGZ7hU
Zen2 architecture that will be used in PS5 has a little greater IPC than any Intel CPU current on the market. In desktop PC space, Intel can extract slim victories with the use of a higher frequencies [where it uses a lot of electricity]. Since console don't aim at higher clocks, PS5's Zen2 will land at ~3-3.5GHz, where it will provide same or more CPU power than any similarly clocked i7.
In effect, we are getting the best possible modern CPU tech inside new batch of consoles. The effect on games will be big.
You can also find Derbauer low-power Zen2 tests from few months back.
edit -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5pHUHGZ7hU
I still gonna expect 30 fps from even SIE's strongest first-party studios...
Except, maybe some exceptions on multiplayer; if they have one that is.
Except, maybe some exceptions on multiplayer; if they have one that is.
Even if it's not used for gameplay, realtime cutscenes are still part of realtime graphics! Mo-cap, animation, and cut-scene tools are all improving over time. It's about building the pipeline so the animators can quickly and easily make these cut scenes.
In this generation, it took a long while before developers got used to multi-threaded. Which is fair, because PS3 was essentially a 2 core system, and PCs took years to go beyond 4 core Intel CPUs as a baseline. Look at Just Cause 3 vs Just Cause 4. Just Cause 3 preferred fewer cores clocked faster, whereas Just Cause 4 scaled to multiple cores and actually ran decently on consoles. It took Avalanche 5 years to put out a good multi-threaded engine. Multi-threading isn't trivial. Fortunately, now most engines have bridged the gap and have competent multi-threading, which will help the consoles have a running start next gen.
Xbox One uses a custom Windows 10 anyway & PS4 a custom linux build, it's really only Switch OS that is lightweight, hence why it has no features lol.
When you look at Tsushima, I notice that you're looking at lots of vegetation that's of the same species. Basically, drawing one plant hundreds of thousands of times. From a memory perspective, that's cheap because you only have a few models and materials, but used over and over. You can achieve this by batching these up by the hundreds and thousands and using LODs in the far distance. Thus, reducing the number of draw calls.
A true next gen game will go beyond this by allowing much more variety in everything all around the character, rather than just a few things done well. High quality materials are really rare this gen, usually restricted to the main characters and a few key scenes or props, with everything else falling way behind. Next gen will improve this greatly.
GhostTrick is right - Windows is pretty efficient at this point. Sony is at a deficit when it comes to OS and API engineering. The fact that PS4 games have to live inside 4.5 gigs of ram is a shame.
yep, probably a nice use of GPU instancing (cheap way to render identical meshes but with some different parameters)
Even Switch's OS reserve an entire core and 800mb of ram.
Of course there's a difference between usage and reserved.
One can be lightweight yet reserve a lot.
The only thing that matters in the end isn't the OS being light or bloated... But how much ressources are taken away from games.
It's interesting that the newer the game the better they tend to do with lots of cores/threads but poor clockspeeds. But just goes to show that CPU upgrades might not mean huge improvements in all cases.
As for reserving cores, I wish I could reserve one or two on PC if it meant that I could have fast app switching while in exclusive fullscreen. Now it's often slow and janky unless you run in windowed or borderless window mode which have their own drawbacks.
That's simply not true dude. Every single developer has PCs in house and develop with 128G of RAM, fast hardware and then port down to consoles. You don't see a single game turning off threads just because a console lacks them. The graphics engine was designed for long term use. Not for any specific console generation. Check out UE4 or Unity for examples.
User banned (3 days): Platform warring over a series of posts
And you Sony guys are wound up elitists that think every generation will yield you the best hardware on the market including the PC. Arrogant and very unknowledgable about how these gaming companies even develop games and have no idea about how hardware plays into the development of a game. I at least have that going for me.
People like to say that game devs are always gonna prioritize graphical fidelity over performance, but considering the massive impact that higher framerates have on things like responsiveness (important for VR) and specifically latency (which is the biggest challenge for streaming), I could actually see a world where platform holders mandate a minimum framerate of 50-60 in order to ensure compatibility with things like streaming and VR.
You have an old fashioned idea of Sony fans. Everybody knows Xbox one X is the best hardware this gen, and that the RTX 2080 Ti is the king of graphics cards. The one thing Sony has going for it is robust funding and support for its internal dev studios.
Oh yeah true, i was thinking of PS3 & it's optional linux support for some reason.
lol I'm not even a "Sony guy". I own a PS4 Pro, a Switch, and a gaming rig. Your self-righteous attitude does you no favors and your response just proved my post correct. You catch more flies with honey than vinegar, John Carmack.🙄
If what you say is true, this thread should have died a long time ago. While everyone knows, they aren't admitting it.
What can you tell us about PS5 hardware and fidelity for next generation games?
This. Resources aren't locked out of usage on Windows. While 2 out of 8 cores on next gen consoles will be reserved for OS related and sharing, recording tasks and such. It's essentially a 6 core Zen 2 cpu.
Why should this thread have died? For someone who clearly doesn't like Sony or consoles, you spend a strange amount of time in these threads trying to push a console vs. pc agenda.
Let me make this really easy for you: the topic is about how the 8c/16t CPU in PS5 could elevate the baseline of game development/graphics for next gen.
Do you have any valuable thoughts to add?
Pot calling kettle? I have no patience for these absurd claims about Sony hardware. You never see the Xbox gamers get into such ridiculous arguments. It's ALWAYS the people routing for Sony like some football game. And quite frankly, it doesn't matter how nice I post my comments, I 100% get rude replies, so I don't care how I come off anymore. I also don't care whether I convince anyone or not. The hardware will be released next year and despite it being inferior to PC hardware, there will inevitably be people who proclaim the games to be god's gift to the world...
I gave my thoughts. Several others have given their thoughts too. And they all get ignored or an argument starts out.
Having a faster CPU is great for everybody. 1) PCs have had better CPUs for years and years and the game developers USE these CPUs. That's a fact. 2) Games are more and more GPU dependent than CPU dependent. Thats' also a fact. Getting faster CPUs will be great for pipeline, loading, and streaming assets. It's not going to factor into better graphics or make games look like they came out of film. So the faster CPU has very little to do with the games graphics. This has been repeated over and over again with nothing but "you don't know what you are talking about", "that's not true.." etc.. How is that supposed to be a healthy conversation when people who aren't developers make up their own rules about how faster CPUs will affect graphics in a game?
I heard it described like this.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass, and then you see it. White shores, and beyond, a far green country under a swift sunrise.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass, and then you see it. White shores, and beyond, a far green country under a swift sunrise.
Yeah, I never got this idea from many posters
"PC games don't utilise the PC hardware to their fullest".
That's BS. There are CPU limited games. There are GPU limited games. Even a RTX 2080ti is GPU limited. The whole "baseline" stuff is BS. Games evolve as the techniques evolves, regardless of a baseline or not. Getting a game like DMC5 has nothing to do with developpers getting a better grasp at the hardware but getting a better grasp at the techniques available.
Windows is bloated. Most people just don't care.
For instance system responsiveness by default reserves 20-10% of your cpu at all times for certain system related tasks.
MS has added various services since xp that if they weren't there would be giving you a bit more boost in performance or drop your latency in networking. If they were better developed they would be useful like a lot of linux packages but they drag your system down and aren't complete in functionality.
Most of their defender service is bloat. What I would give to get rid of base filtering engine and make a real SIP service. The same can be said for various services which have been known to cause problems.
Cortana
Search Index
WLAN Autoconfig
Desktop window manager
Just to name a few. It's a not a claim you can google search or go through MS own tech archives for looking in to problems on how their services and stack features can cause problems.
Consoles that don't use Windows don't have windows bloat or inefficiencies either. BSD is insanely lean and more efficient even without tuning compared to windows. Not only that they aren't dpc based OS and have the problems that come with it. Claiming they take more than windows which will page several gigs at at startup vs few MBs to hundreds that bsd/linux installation could have isn't accurate either.
Last edited:
The most powerful hardware available is on PC, but that doesn't mean the software is taking full advantage of it due to games potentially being constrained to the limitations of the target hardware, such as a multi-platform game that is targeting Consoles as well as PCs.
Just look at the AMD Radeon HD 7950 and 7970 GPUs, these GPUs launched around 1 year and 9 months before the PS4 and Xbox One and were more powerful than them. As games were developed with the new hardware target of the 8th generation consoles, they were able to better utilize PC hardware, so more things have been done with the given hardware.
Software is the reason machines have been able put out more impressive visuals over the years, and that helps when you're targeting machines with higher specifications, as you have more computational power and memory to do more things.
Consoles are great at setting a benchmark for hardware that games will be built upon.
Look at the PC games from 2012-2013, now look at the PC and Console games that are available today. They far surpass them, and that's because they're targeting more powerful hardware. (Development times and resources are another thing).
PCs that have 2012-2013 hardware have also benefited from this, this is why GPUs such as the HD 7950 and it's refresh/update, the R9 280 Is putting out better visuals than ever before!
So just because the most powerful hardware is available on PC, doesn't mean that it's the end of the road, if that's what you were implying.
Sorry if I have misinterpreted your post.
On PC there is a multitude of things that consoles have been unable to do as they are too computationally expensive to use, and now that real time ray tracing is a reality on PC, the number of these things have only increased.
However, with the introduction of 9th generation machines, they will be able to do more of these things that PCs have been able to do for years should the developers choose to go that route. But overall, a new console generation will benefit both Console and PC Games.
Edit - Improved clarity and expanded post.
Last edited:
That wouldn't fix that problem, the delay when alt tabbing in exclusive mode isn't a cpu issue.
You can't make a PC game assuming all of your users have a 2080 Ti, 12 core 4 GHz CPU, 3600 MHz 32GB RAM, and a 2TB M.2 NVMe SSD. You have to make it scalable. You don't have to do that when making a console game. Not sure why this notion eludes your grasp.
Last edited:
Games are already made scalable in mind. Not sure why this notion eludes your grasp.
No.
Console games are not made this way. The devs are going to take full advantage of fast M.2 NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD data access in a way that PC game devs can't because they can't have a game completely break if it's installed on a mechanical HDD, let alone a slower cheapo Intel SSD or something.
Right, scalibility doesn't exist. Everything is coded to the metal. Squeezing all the secret sauce.