if true i like it even though i dont know what it means other than being a higher number. as long as it is something that suppose to make the ps4 better im all for it. from what i saw at the ps4 announcement im very excited and amazed so being a better system will enable this system to even push technological boundaries more.
the ps4 displayed better tech ive seen in crysis 3 on pc at very high settings so getting higher specs after what weve seen on lower spec is awesome. ps4 first day
2GHz is a fairly low clock speed. My PC from four years ago runs 1000MHz faster. Although it only has 4 cores, and not 8. So the PS4 is going for more cores at lower clock speeds which would only result in more performance if a game is optimized to use all 8 cores.
Why is every article you compare high end pc to a new console?? Have you not been gaming the last 7 years?? Same crap happens every time.
Why didn't you copy and paste this part of the article??
"Just to clarify, I’m not at all suggesting the PS4 will out-pace gaming PCs.
PCs will still be better machines in the end, especially if you are willing to pay. And yes, as I say below, the PC will be more future proof as well." http://www.forbes.com/sites...
I love what I see with ps4 and it's a day 1 buy for me. It will be a hardcore system for sure. I will most likely buy anything Naughty Dog makes.
But I like pc also and pc has games despite people saying they are only for multiplats.. And it's not all about graphics I have seen people with gtx 680s play the sh!t out of minecraft and then play BF3.
I like torchlight 2 more than diablo and I think sony games would want this more than diablo 3!
@shutup - The point is, Diablo will be on the system, and that is enough for Sony because they have a game in their portfolio that will appeal to a different type of gamer. In addition to this, if it does well, Torchlight developers may see an opportunity and release a game on PS4 as well.
There are 2GHZ processors that can outrun a 3GHZ with the same number of cores. The number alone does not equal overall power. It is just clock speed. There are a number of other bottlenecks that could come into play reducing a processor with a higher clock to run slower than a processor with a lower clock. The original rumors pegged PS4 as 1.6 to 1.8 GHZ, and we've all seen what the thing can do, so I wouldn't be trashing the CPU just because your desktop or laptop has a faster clock speed. This system is obviously very well balanced, so let's let them show us what it can do.
"2GHz is a fairly low clock speed. My PC from four years ago runs 1000MHz faster. Although it only has 4 cores, and not 8. So the PS4 is going for more cores at lower clock speeds which would only result in more performance if a game is optimized to use all 8 cores."
These speeds don't matter that much anymore. A 2GHz CPU was slow for a while but then they stopped going up and we started getting multicore CPUs. If you have eight cores running at 2GHz though that's pretty fast. But there's so much more to look at now than just the speed. It would only matter if Microsoft's CPU was running a lot slower.
In response to some of the other replies to your post, I feel like I need to clear up something about clock speed: the clock speed of a processor doesn't necessarily reflect the performance of the CPU.
The clock speed of a CPU tells you the rate at which it can execute instructions. So a clock at 1 MHz will fire 1 million times per second.
In terms of a CPU the clock speed is generally related to the amount of time it takes to perform instructions.
However, the reason that this isn't a good representation of the CPU speed is that different CPUs have different instructions and can do different things in different amounts of time.
So for example, let's say you have a 2 GHz Pentium 4 and a 1.5 GHz i7. And let's say the Pentium 4 takes 2 cycles to add 2 numbers (this is probably untrue, but I'm using it as an example), whereas the i7 takes 1. That means that the Pentium 4 will be slower in finishing the operation even though its clock speed is faster.
For more information about this, Google the "Megahertz myth".
AMD claim that a top Jaguar quad core is 260 percent faster than a top end Bobcat dual core http://news.softpedia.com/n... (its predecessor.) A Bobcat dual core like an E-350 is just under half the performance of a basic 2008 Intel Pentium dual core E2200. Maybe a quad core Jaguar is like an E2200.
The biggest native design is the quad core with 2mb L2 cache.
So for PS4, word is it is a pair of quad cores, with 2mb cache each, welded together.
So 8 cores, or probably 7 for games @ 2ghz if Sony reserve one.
Its a low power architecture designed for the mobile segment, although the quad core variant is really intended for netbook/nettop scale applications.
It will probably be just shy of a modern Intel Ivy Bridge Dual Core desktop x86 PC CPU or a Quad cluster AMD piledriver.
Compared to a modern Intel quad core like a Core i5 3570k for example or a 8 cluster Piledriver like an FX-8350 it will be most likely be a bit under half their performance.
Although Intel do have a totally new, Haswell architecture arriving in around June of this year which will give Piledriver (and Ivy bridge of course) a good duffing up.
"Compared to a modern Intel quad core like a Core i5 3570k for example or a 8 cluster Piledriver like an FX-8350 it will be most likely be a bit under half their performance."
Good to know, I've eyed both those cpus as they are both in a affordable price range. But, I don't need to be cutting edge unless that is where gaming is heading. Two good cpu's.. but when will gaming really take advantage of that sort of power? When it actually seems viable I will take the jump, but I have a feeling I will stay put with PS4 type of gaming power for a while..
Random question.. I read a while back that for gaming (at least to start the last generation) that the magic number for gaming performance is/was a 3 core cpu to maximize actual game play. I know 7 cores is better for multitasking and doing things besides strict gameplay. But when it comes to actual gameplay how does a 8 core cpu @ 2.0ghz, stack up against say a amd quad core @3.2ghz?
@slayerofgods "I read a while back that for gaming (at least to start the last generation) that the magic number for gaming performance is/was a 3 core cpu to maximize actual game play. ... But when it comes to actual gameplay how does a 8 core cpu @ 2.0ghz, stack up against say a amd quad core @3.2ghz?"
Games have been written for what is common out there. Thus very few games utilizes AMD Bulldozer. But with PS4 this will change - suddenly an 8 core CPU will be one of the most common...
Next question, how many cycles will each operation take? On a modern CPU most instructions execute in a single cycle. But it does not stop there, as modern processor process a set of data every cycle, as most are SIMD architectures. What is worse is that a CPU often have to wait for memory, costing hundreds of cycles. PS4 looks very balanced in this regard, PS3 was not.
Look at the latest Cyrsis 3 benchmarks to see how an AMD 8-core design (FX-8350) can rival the highest end Ivy-Bridge (3770k) in gaming performance, despite costing much less (it's also interesting to note just how little of an effect hyper-threading has in this situation). It just goes to show you that once games actually start utilizing multiple threads efficiently, we should start seeing very favorable performance gains for more cores in the old cores v.s. clocks debate.
Again, this is great news for all PC owners with multi-core processors, especially if those CPUs have higher clock speeds.
It will also be interesting to see how PS4 to PC ports will perform on a very AMD platform (GCN2.0 GPU, FX-8xxx series CPU, 8-16GB DDR3). You could see a much quicker turnaround for ports and even more impressive performance than we typically see with console ports.
It doesn't really matter that much that it's only 2GHz (even though it does have 8 cores). In terms of performance, the CPU will never be the bottleneck. The graphics and RAM are much more important for performance. As far as I'm concerned, 2GHz would be sufficient - if it is true.
A 3.5GHZ i5-3570 has far more performance than something like a 4GHZ FX-8350 in individual IPC.
Architecture is very important.
Right now in the PC games world, there are only a hand full of games that utilize more than 4 threads. Crysis 3 is probably the best example that uses 8 threads pretty well.
I'm pretty sure that all PS4 games will always utilize all 8 cores as much as they can to extract as much performance as they can.
So having 8 cores even though it is clocked low, will still be more than sufficient. Things like physics, destruction, effects etc. will be handled by the GPU.
"A 3.5GHZ i5-3570 has far more performance than something like a 4GHZ FX-8350 in individual IPC."
Thats is very true, especially with multitasking. From what I'm hearing here so far its seems like AMD actually made a really smart move by putting a 8 core cpu in the PS4. If the 720 also gets a 8 core cpu, then games will be built to take advantage of 8 cores over 4 cores with hyper-threading. That could keep AMD slightly ahead with pure gaming.
Exactly, the apu architecture allows for less heat. It also allows for the ps4 to be much more than the sum of its parts. It is strange though to change this and add 4 gb of memory to dev kits that have supposedly been available for 5 yrs. Dont get me wrong, its great for games that will be coming out in 2015 and beyond but doesnt that mean that sonys greatest launch lineup ever have been using inferior dev kiys for years. Some developer at the meeting and all of the leaks talked about 4 gb, so unless theres a mad dash, launch titles wont be using near the actual power of the ps4.
N4G should be shut down for posting garbage article like this one, sony already stated officially it will run at 1.6ghz. Never mind, Its time to move on from a site that it all about flamebait hits from trolls anyways, most are sony trolls see below for facts.
Exactly, People are just googling up completely different hardware and throwing numbers around to try and make the PS4 look like its weaker then an Iphone.
You people are pathetic. that is all.
People seriously believe Sony would make a brand new console that only has the processing power of a netbook?
Watch MS announce an AMD 8 Core also, and all these fake websites will be created instantly to write fake articles about how the 720 features a state of the art $400 CPU.
So much about sony saying a while back, the next gen console will be no more than 2 times as powerful than the ps3. Man, how times change and minds during dev cycles.
Wow, incredible, outstanding omfg!..... I don't care, I don't even know what this means, tbh. i'm not a games developer, I just play the damn things and I have been playing them since the days of the Spectrum! So long as I can plug it in switch it on and connect it to my tv and play the newest good looking games from my sofa, and of course the thing doesn't explode or something. I really couldn't give a shit! Leave all that techno cock measuring to the nerds, but take it away from me.
Because the initial rumors stated that the clock speed would be 1.8ghz on a already 8 core processor, was pretty good. Now it'll have an extra bump in speed, which is very nice. Also on a smaller chipset, it'll produce less heat and use less power.
@cleft5: Lets see if I can help you. The PS3's cell processor originally was a 90nm chip-set. When the 80gb PS3 came, the model without the PS2 B/C. its cell processor was downsized to 65nm. When the PS3 slim came, its CPU again was downsized to 45nm. By downsizing you are making the chip much more energy efficient which in turn means it produces less heat inside. If the PS4 comes out with only a 28nm cpu, that would be extremely impressive for a 1st generation PS4 console.
Its like saying, this car which by the way is hidden from your view has a turbo charged V8 super car engine in... The car could be a sleek sports car, but it could also be a garbage truck filled with set concrete.
Without knowing how many transistors it has, what voltage it runs at or how many instructions per second it can theoretically calculate, its hard to guess.
2Ghz just means that an oscillator has a set frequency of 2000000000 per second which the CPU uses to get a sync reference to compute instructions.
But the smaller die size is a plus, but could be bordering on thermal density, its been proven once you get to the 20s in nanometer design, dies start to dissipate heat less efficiently, Intel's Ivy Bridge being a good example, running at 22nm we've basically started to reach a plateau for heat dissipation vs efficiency until more new eficient silicon compounds are created
You can do a lot more (especially with the highly customized GPU that's in the PS4). Less chance of bottleneck, I'm not that tech savvy either. But a few things I do understand, I'm loving all these new finds. Because Sony really pulling the "specs are subject to change without notice" card and more and more interesting stuff is being revealed.
All in all PS4 will be a beast of a system, I curiously await to see what MS announces.
If this to be true then im pretty sure that Sony has to have a damn good cooling system inside the PlayStation 4 in order to cool off the system but if that is all that it is presumably pumping out PS4ers we have a problem. Smartphones in this generation are now clocking in at 1.8 GHz and it wont be too long that it will be bumped up to 2 so is the PS4 is going to be truly next gen they need to be a little faster than that. but i have no fear that Sony knows what they are doing.
GHz has a lot less meaning than it used to. It's all about the number of cores and this chip is 64 bit - not sure what cellphones are - 32 bit? It's also about the synergy between components - I don't think the PS4 has to worry about cell phones eclipsing it's power in it's lifetime.
The day a cellphone can run games that look like Killzone and Deep Down will be a long time from now - if ever.
Considering the leaked specs had the PS4 at 8 core 1.6GHz - this is good news for the PS4.
Sadly I highly doubt that at the rate cell phones and tablets are developing. It's sad when tablets and cell phones are the fastest developing pieces of tech we have around now.
Trust me I am not a fan of it all or even want to accept the reality but the fact they are already putting 8 core processors with GPU's in phones or even just 4 cores is ridiculous enough.
When a phone can actually use all 8 cores it will be even more ridiculous and sure there is no way it will perform better than PC of the same specs or the PS4 gaming wise but I know they will get fucking close is the sad fact probably very close.
Some games are already very close to console quality on phones and by the end of the year I know they only will be even more ridiculous at the rate they keep making them.
I mean I don't know why people can't see that just knowing the PS4 will be locked down for years at least before wee see the PS5, knowing that just think all the new fancy phones and tablet tech that will come out in between that time, they are only getting better and better and sadly aren't locked down as long like the PS4 for cycles, they spit those phones out every couple months each greatly surpassing the last in terms of technology.
I mean phones are already running full 1080p HD now at 1920x1080 resolution, it is very very possible in maybe even a year or even just two we will see phones that are beyond ridiculous and very much comparable to console and PC gaming.
Consoles just aren't upgraded quick enough to compete with everything around it even PC's with no telling the new CPU's and GPU's that will be released for it will surpass anything the PS4 can do which they already can now.
I am not dissing the PS4 it will probably be the most powerful console but times have changed greatly and technology is advancing faster than ever before so knowing that the PS4 just won't last too long at being so powerful but I think the PS4 should only be compared to consoles anyway.
It isn't a phone, tablet or PC so even if phone and tablets do become more powerful in a technical aspect what will it matter when the PS4 very well could be the most powerful console, that is all that should matter to those who are buying one if they are looking for something of that nature.
I know everyone will hate this comment but it's the sad truth like I said I would rather not see tablets and phones advancing faster than anything else myself but that is what is trendy now so of course technology is focused where the money is at.
Even though cell tech is advancing at a ridiculous clip, I don't think any developer or publisher will throw 10-20+ million dollars to create cell/tablet games like they do for console and PC. AAA gaming will remain a console/PC thing - thank goodness.
Especially since the "Apps" would only sell if they are priced between $.99 - $5.
I Guess it's the inherent stability that consoles offer that people like. Staying true to a single phone is like trying to stand strong against the flow of water all the while fresh fish (new models) are being thrown at your way.
It's anoyying that phones are still being called by their given namesake. The touchscreen phone... one of the most overqualified pieces of tech available. Talking is the least can you do with one. What are flip phones? a dying breed. lol
That's what Mark Cerny meant and showed during their conference that one can use the GPU to assist the CPU (in simple terms). They know what their doing and designing, I'm happy about the specs to be honest.
how will it be a bottleneck? i mean if you're looking at just the number and ignoring all the other details then i guess i can see why you see a bottleneck. But just remember even though its using primarily pc parts this isnt a typical off the shelf pc. Everything is customized and optimized.
Like the wii u the ps4 is going to be a gpu based system it doesn't need a huge cpu as some of it's processing on the gpu, so the cpu (which is 8 cores) really doesn't need to do as much work as they used to. Albeit the ps4 has far better memory/cpu/gpu.
To everyone disagreeing with nlvwithgms, there is a reason Sony is paying AMD to make their chips instead of making their own. Sony isn't good at making processors, never have been. This is a good move for Sony.
If the Deep Down demo is indicative of what we can expect from full fledged games on the PS4, then specs don't matter other than as discussion points.
That Deep Down demo is better than anything I have ever seen in gaming. How could it get better looking than that? Throw in all the physics, particle effects and wow, I'm more than satisfied on the graphics front.
Of course assuming that is really what some games will look like.
It looks amazing but I have to be a bit reserved about it. I need to see gameplay, not CGI. However, if an console is going to reach that level of detail, it will be the PS4 not 720.
Pretty sure it wasn't pre-rendered, however doing that kind of graphical fidelity in let's say an open area probably isn't really possible on the ps4, not right now anyway!
I'm not. once the design changes are final it doesnt take long to make a shit ton of units. hell neither the PS4 or nextbox chips are done yet. small tweeks need to be made but other wise are running.
Fab 8 isn't even close to 100% yet. Production levels are low so it really does take a long time to produce enough units for a launch. Sorry to tell you both MS and Sony specs are finalized.
What I can tell you is that the major difference is that any AMD chip is going to be more 'mainstream' in terms of familiarity. AMD makes lots of CPU for pcs just like nVidia and such.
The Cell was specially developed for the PS3, by IBM, funded by SONY, and is anything but familiar. It carries with it a lot of different rules so to speak. Devs cannot use the coding they were familiar with.
I will leave the more techinal stuff to those who know. Basically, the fact that PS4 has a more standard architecture means that developers will flock toward it and the gamers get more games, less crappy ports, and everyone is happy.......except for PC gamers, because their rig is still supreme and their metal legs are on the way.
@blackbirdi "can somebody tell me the difference between the cell and the jaguar ? and why the jaguar is more powerful then the cell"
sure, in one very narrow area the Cell may out pace this cpu like for instance the Cell CPU HAS A EIB token ring bus rated @ max 204 GB/sec which can atain on avg. 194 GB/sec pretty good so far right?
but here is the Big problem the IO/ output to other parts of the chip to say the GPU is reduced, by quite a bit to 35 GB/sec or 25 GB/sec while in the PS4 that is not the case its 176 GB/sec through put to any part of the IO! THAT IS JUST THE SPEED GAP!
that does not include memory which is 16 times that of the PS3
thanks for clarifying that's mean there no big difference in terms of power between this two CPU but the major factor are the other component to work with
@blackbirdi "thanks for clarifying that's mean there no big difference in terms of power between this two CPU but the major factor are the other component to work with "
Well there is a big Gap that was just on speed of each processor's bandwidth. I have yet to see the xray of the processor which well we will not get to see that until a company like chipworks or another like company like them get's a hold of the new PS4. What i can say though is just by speed alone in bandwidth its a very size able upgrade over the PS3.
for example your PC need to run a large OS and a game at the same time. while consoles do not. they have a light OS.
Consoles you can also optimize. Developers know every PS4 (edit, so use to typing ps3) will have 8 cores and they can write code that takes advantage of that.
PC on the other hand can have 1-16 cores with speeds from 1ghz to 4.8ghz....
You're an idiot in the nicest way of saying. An OS only runs a total of 526 mb of Ram, and that's including all of the arrays that start up. The programs run separately, and thus add to the overall ram and the overall amount of power it takes. A person like you doesn't understand that the PS4 is running it's own type of OS, which is the XMB, and the way that it emulates games from the blue-ray is simply the same way that PCSX2 runs games from the CD-Drive.
Also, no on your second part as well. Each core is supposed to have the same amount of ghz, if the CPU states that there is about 3.4 ghz of ram, then each core is measured upon the 3.4. None of the cores are less or more, and if they were, that would mean that you're CPU is broken somewhere and that goes against computer design. In addition, who the hell says that 8 cores makes it easier to code. The point of coding is to be good at it and make it efficient rather than have over 3, 000 lines of code that runs over 3000 times doing 3000 useless stuff. Before you start spewing information, take a Computer Science class and understand what you are talking about before you do so.
PS3 had alien-like architecture and some creative dudes managed to have it run some great kickass games. -W/ this more conventional setup of PS4, I'm quite sure it will run games even better and all PS4 owners will gladly be embracing the change, along with said developers.
SolidSystem, now since PS4 and Nextbox is more PC like I would assume that the PC will be the lead for development of games. It was similar to why the Xbox 360 multis were better than the PS3 version for the most part. Devs didn't take full advantage of the spus. Now since the majority of PCs are quad core, I would think that majority of 3rd party devs will only use 4 cores. At least in the beginning.
You really found a CPU which was bad for gaming when barely any games are CPU heavy?! AMD has made lots of high end CPUs which can run any game at any settings, if you buy budget models that's your problem. I've mostly had AMDs along the years, and they were always satisfying, my latest though is an Sandy Bridge from intel (i7), it's also great.
My AMD processor can run anything I throw at it way way above 1080p/60 no problem. Sure, it's clocked at 3.8ghz...but still. AMD makes great processors. Not as fast as Intel, but noone needs that much speed, or costs.
Even though PC's will obviously always be more powerful than game consoles consoles will have the better games. Consoles are dedicated gaming machines so they focus on that. People always argue that you can do so many things with PC's, and they are right, but I find a much much better selection of games on consoles than on PC; and there is also so much less of a hassle. When you buy a console game there are no worries whether the system will play it or not, it just plays the game, but PC's with their videocard compatibility nonsense, whether it's powerful enough to run it, how much RAM it has, that's a hassle.
I don't believe the specs of the PS4 are finalized just yet.
That said, I believe Sony is trying to throw Microsoft off by releasing false specification of the ps4 to the public.
They tricked Microsoft once with the RAM(4g to 8g) and they'll do it again.
This war isn't over guys. I believe the CPU GHz will be bumped up even more, maybe between 2.5ghz to 3.0ghz considering that the PS4's CPU will be built using 28nm process.
28nm process should allow to beyond the 2ghz clock speed.
No one tricked anybody, what are you talking about? Lmao Sony put 8 gigs of ram into the PS4 because that is what developers were asking for. All this talk about how Sony is tricking or making Microsoft look bad is just dumb talk. I'm as big a Sony fan as anybody, but I know better than to underestimate a company as big as Microsoft. I'll be an intelligent individual and wait until Microsoft unveils their new console before blindly attacking them.
"I'll be an intelligent individual and wait until Microsoft unveils their new console before blindly attacking them." So what you are saying is you are gonna blindly attack them after they announce the next xbox lol, im kidding of course but thats how it reads.
Hahaha, well what I should have said is I'll wait until I see what Microsoft unveils and if there is something I don't like, then criticism can be validated.
nx gen games will more than likely be gpu heavy & mostly all run at 30fps if using the new engines.. I dont think the 1.6-2ghz will be all that bad.. we will see soon enough but it really doesnt matter.. The latest n greatest titles will be on PS4, low clock speeds or not.. Gotta deal with it & theres nothing that can be done to change it
Well dudes, I play CoD on my laptop, I tweak my i7 to 1,4Ghz and it still runs well. For BF3 I put it at 2,1Ghz. And I have like the worse Core i7 in the world.
you need to remember that these are not 4 cores and 4 threads (Intel doesn't even make CPU's with more than 4 cores) meanwhile the APU on the PS4 will have 8 physical cores. And the higher the core count and its clock-speed the more heat is gonna generate so they can't make it be too fast because then it's gonna overheat. This is the reason why GPU's have much more lower clock-speeds than CPU's, because they have thousands of cores.
So my point is that the math is completely different when you compare 2 physical cores to one core with hyper threading. The 2 physical cores will give you much more higher performance.
To a ps fanboy thats great but ive had my i7 940 for about 2 years or more and with a bit of tweaking I overclocked above that and thats with tech that was out more then 3 years ago. 2ghz for ps4 is lame for a console thats not even out yet, its already old and not even out yet. Lool!!!
Lol they've been able to clock PC CPUs higher than for 10 years, as already stated though clock speed doesn't have to mean anything. My SB i7 2600k at 3,5 Ghz would perform better than yours at the same clock speed... You really are stupid or something
10°
40°
10°
10°
Ad 
0°
the ps4 displayed better tech ive seen in crysis 3 on pc at very high settings so getting higher specs after what weve seen on lower spec is awesome. ps4 first day
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
i useto be amazed by project cars and crysis 3 and even upgraded my pc to run them but ps4 makes it all seem worthless or unnecessary for my needs.
Lol I love your honesty. Are you same person that was so "enlightening" on this article?
http://n4g.com/news/1181637...
Why didn't you copy and paste this part of the article??
"Just to clarify, I’m not at all suggesting the PS4 will out-pace gaming PCs.
PCs will still be better machines in the end, especially if you are willing to pay. And yes, as I say below, the PC will be more future proof as well."
http://www.forbes.com/sites...
I love what I see with ps4 and it's a day 1 buy for me. It will be a hardcore system for sure.
I will most likely buy anything Naughty Dog makes.
But I like pc also and pc has games despite people saying they are only for multiplats..
And it's not all about graphics I have seen people with gtx 680s play the sh!t out of minecraft and then play BF3.
I like torchlight 2 more than diablo and I think sony games would want this more than diablo 3!
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Coming this year.
Why is praising more than one platform a sin??
On topic:
2gz is low. Most cpus now of days are around 2.6ghz - 3.2ghz.
Mobile cpus are never clocked high because is for mobile devices that need to save energy and longer battery life..
Remember console have to be low wattage.
Where as on pc you can over clock the cpu to 4ghz+.
Also I hear ps4 only has one shared l3 cache for all 8 cores.
These speeds don't matter that much anymore. A 2GHz CPU was slow for a while but then they stopped going up and we started getting multicore CPUs. If you have eight cores running at 2GHz though that's pretty fast. But there's so much more to look at now than just the speed. It would only matter if Microsoft's CPU was running a lot slower.
The clock speed of a CPU tells you the rate at which it can execute instructions. So a clock at 1 MHz will fire 1 million times per second.
In terms of a CPU the clock speed is generally related to the amount of time it takes to perform instructions.
However, the reason that this isn't a good representation of the CPU speed is that different CPUs have different instructions and can do different things in different amounts of time.
So for example, let's say you have a 2 GHz Pentium 4 and a 1.5 GHz i7. And let's say the Pentium 4 takes 2 cycles to add 2 numbers (this is probably untrue, but I'm using it as an example), whereas the i7 takes 1. That means that the Pentium 4 will be slower in finishing the operation even though its clock speed is faster.
For more information about this, Google the "Megahertz myth".
The biggest native design is the quad core with 2mb L2 cache.
So for PS4, word is it is a pair of quad cores, with 2mb cache each, welded together.
So 8 cores, or probably 7 for games @ 2ghz if Sony reserve one.
Its a low power architecture designed for the mobile segment, although the quad core variant is really intended for netbook/nettop scale applications.
It will probably be just shy of a modern Intel Ivy Bridge Dual Core desktop x86 PC CPU or a Quad cluster AMD piledriver.
Compared to a modern Intel quad core like a Core i5 3570k for example or a 8 cluster Piledriver like an FX-8350 it will be most likely be a bit under half their performance.
Although Intel do have a totally new, Haswell architecture arriving in around June of this year which will give Piledriver (and Ivy bridge of course) a good duffing up.
Good to know, I've eyed both those cpus as they are both in a affordable price range. But, I don't need to be cutting edge unless that is where gaming is heading. Two good cpu's.. but when will gaming really take advantage of that sort of power? When it actually seems viable I will take the jump, but I have a feeling I will stay put with PS4 type of gaming power for a while..
Random question..
I read a while back that for gaming (at least to start the last generation) that the magic number for gaming performance is/was a 3 core cpu to maximize actual game play. I know 7 cores is better for multitasking and doing things besides strict gameplay. But when it comes to actual gameplay how does a 8 core cpu @ 2.0ghz, stack up against say a amd quad core @3.2ghz?
Thats a quote directly from the article... apparently you didn't read it just like all PC fanboys.
Games have been written for what is common out there. Thus very few games utilizes AMD Bulldozer. But with PS4 this will change - suddenly an 8 core CPU will be one of the most common...
Counting raw cycles
AMD Quad 4*3.2 = 12.8
AMD PS4 8*2.0 = 16.0
PS3 SPE 6*3.2 = 19.2
Next question, how many cycles will each operation take? On a modern CPU most instructions execute in a single cycle. But it does not stop there, as modern processor process a set of data every cycle, as most are SIMD architectures. What is worse is that a CPU often have to wait for memory, costing hundreds of cycles. PS4 looks very balanced in this regard, PS3 was not.
Again, this is great news for all PC owners with multi-core processors, especially if those CPUs have higher clock speeds.
It will also be interesting to see how PS4 to PC ports will perform on a very AMD platform (GCN2.0 GPU, FX-8xxx series CPU, 8-16GB DDR3). You could see a much quicker turnaround for ports and even more impressive performance than we typically see with console ports.
A 3.5GHZ i5-3570 has far more performance than something like a 4GHZ FX-8350 in individual IPC.
Architecture is very important.
Right now in the PC games world, there are only a hand full of games that utilize more than 4 threads. Crysis 3 is probably the best example that uses 8 threads pretty well.
I'm pretty sure that all PS4 games will always utilize all 8 cores as much as they can to extract as much performance as they can.
So having 8 cores even though it is clocked low, will still be more than sufficient. Things like physics, destruction, effects etc. will be handled by the GPU.
Thats is very true, especially with multitasking. From what I'm hearing here so far its seems like AMD actually made a really smart move by putting a 8 core cpu in the PS4. If the 720 also gets a 8 core cpu, then games will be built to take advantage of 8 cores over 4 cores with hyper-threading. That could keep AMD slightly ahead with pure gaming.
Even then the dev kits are updated throughout the console life cycle, like when Sony reduced the OS over heads to allow the devs more resources :)
Wonder how long this site has been around...
"Single-chip custom processor
CPU : x86-64 AMD “Jaguar”, 8 cores"
They, just said how many cores and the x86 CPU and the 8gig of unified memory.
You people are pathetic. that is all.
People seriously believe Sony would make a brand new console that only has the processing power of a netbook?
Watch MS announce an AMD 8 Core also, and all these fake websites will be created instantly to write fake articles about how the 720 features a state of the art $400 CPU.
Calling it now.
"Sony never actually realeased the clock speed of the cpu they just stated that its a:
"Single-chip custom processor
CPU : x86-64 AMD “Jaguar”, 8 cores""
100% agreement the Official PDF for the spec's does not mention the clock speed
https://secure.webassets.sc...
It's the Talent/Art race NEXTGEN.
Add to this, 8 GB DDR5 unified
8GB unified DDR5
+ 18CU GPU and CGN 2 0 :)
Free OS SON!!!
2GHz --> 4GHz with AMD TurboCore I believe, so for general computing tasks it's better than Cell.
Lets see if I can help you. The PS3's cell processor originally was a 90nm chip-set. When the 80gb PS3 came, the model without the PS2 B/C. its cell processor was downsized to 65nm. When the PS3 slim came, its CPU again was downsized to 45nm. By downsizing you are making the chip much more energy efficient which in turn means it produces less heat inside. If the PS4 comes out with only a 28nm cpu, that would be extremely impressive for a 1st generation PS4 console.
Its like saying, this car which by the way is hidden from your view has a turbo charged V8 super car engine in... The car could be a sleek sports car, but it could also be a garbage truck filled with set concrete.
Without knowing how many transistors it has, what voltage it runs at or how many instructions per second it can theoretically calculate, its hard to guess.
2Ghz just means that an oscillator has a set frequency of 2000000000 per second which the CPU uses to get a sync reference to compute instructions.
But the smaller die size is a plus, but could be bordering on thermal density, its been proven once you get to the 20s in nanometer design, dies start to dissipate heat less efficiently, Intel's Ivy Bridge being a good example, running at 22nm we've basically started to reach a plateau for heat dissipation vs efficiency until more new eficient silicon compounds are created
great post!
you also an engineer?
because that was freaking spot on!
Seems plausible and very promising on an 8 core chip.
This Holiday cant come soon enough.
Less chance of bottleneck, I'm not that tech savvy either.
But a few things I do understand, I'm loving all these new finds.
Because Sony really pulling the "specs are subject to change without notice" card and more and more interesting stuff is being revealed.
All in all PS4 will be a beast of a system, I curiously await to see what MS announces.
The day a cellphone can run games that look like Killzone and Deep Down will be a long time from now - if ever.
Considering the leaked specs had the PS4 at 8 core 1.6GHz - this is good news for the PS4.
Trust me I am not a fan of it all or even want to accept the reality but the fact they are already putting 8 core processors with GPU's in phones or even just 4 cores is ridiculous enough.
When a phone can actually use all 8 cores it will be even more ridiculous and sure there is no way it will perform better than PC of the same specs or the PS4 gaming wise but I know they will get fucking close is the sad fact probably very close.
Some games are already very close to console quality on phones and by the end of the year I know they only will be even more ridiculous at the rate they keep making them.
I mean I don't know why people can't see that just knowing the PS4 will be locked down for years at least before wee see the PS5, knowing that just think all the new fancy phones and tablet tech that will come out in between that time, they are only getting better and better and sadly aren't locked down as long like the PS4 for cycles, they spit those phones out every couple months each greatly surpassing the last in terms of technology.
I mean phones are already running full 1080p HD now at 1920x1080 resolution, it is very very possible in maybe even a year or even just two we will see phones that are beyond ridiculous and very much comparable to console and PC gaming.
Consoles just aren't upgraded quick enough to compete with everything around it even PC's with no telling the new CPU's and GPU's that will be released for it will surpass anything the PS4 can do which they already can now.
I am not dissing the PS4 it will probably be the most powerful console but times have changed greatly and technology is advancing faster than ever before so knowing that the PS4 just won't last too long at being so powerful but I think the PS4 should only be compared to consoles anyway.
It isn't a phone, tablet or PC so even if phone and tablets do become more powerful in a technical aspect what will it matter when the PS4 very well could be the most powerful console, that is all that should matter to those who are buying one if they are looking for something of that nature.
I know everyone will hate this comment but it's the sad truth like I said I would rather not see tablets and phones advancing faster than anything else myself but that is what is trendy now so of course technology is focused where the money is at.
I feel your pain man!
Even though cell tech is advancing at a ridiculous clip, I don't think any developer or publisher will throw 10-20+ million dollars to create cell/tablet games like they do for console and PC. AAA gaming will remain a console/PC thing - thank goodness.
Especially since the "Apps" would only sell if they are priced between $.99 - $5.
Staying true to a single phone is like trying to stand strong against the flow of water all the while fresh fish (new models) are being thrown at your way.
It's anoyying that phones are still being called by their given namesake. The touchscreen phone... one of the most overqualified pieces of tech available. Talking is the least can you do with one. What are flip phones? a dying breed. lol
Related video
They know what their doing and designing, I'm happy about the specs to be honest.
Sony isn't good at making processors, never have been.
This is a good move for Sony.
That Deep Down demo is better than anything I have ever seen in gaming. How could it get better looking than that? Throw in all the physics, particle effects and wow, I'm more than satisfied on the graphics front.
Of course assuming that is really what some games will look like.
The Cell was specially developed for the PS3, by IBM, funded by SONY, and is anything but familiar. It carries with it a lot of different rules so to speak.
Devs cannot use the coding they were familiar with.
I will leave the more techinal stuff to those who know. Basically, the fact that PS4 has a more standard architecture means that developers will flock toward it and the gamers get more games, less crappy ports, and everyone is happy.......except for PC gamers, because their rig is still supreme and their metal legs are on the way.
It's definately looking like Sony has been paying attention from all sides! The Developers, the Competition, and most importantly the Gamers!
"can somebody tell me the difference between the cell and the jaguar ? and why the jaguar is more powerful then the cell"
sure, in one very narrow area the Cell may out pace this cpu like for instance the Cell CPU HAS A EIB token ring bus rated @ max 204 GB/sec which can atain on avg. 194 GB/sec pretty good so far right?
but here is the Big problem the IO/ output to other parts of the chip to say the GPU is reduced, by quite a bit to 35 GB/sec or 25 GB/sec while in the PS4 that is not the case its 176 GB/sec through put to any part of the IO! THAT IS JUST THE SPEED GAP!
that does not include memory which is 16 times that of the PS3
"thanks for clarifying that's mean there no big difference in terms of power between this two CPU but the major factor are the other component to work with "
Well there is a big Gap that was just on speed of each processor's bandwidth. I have yet to see the xray of the processor which well we will not get to see that until a company like chipworks or another like company like them get's a hold of the new PS4. What i can say though is just by speed alone in bandwidth its a very size able upgrade over the PS3.
for example your PC need to run a large OS and a game at the same time. while consoles do not. they have a light OS.
Consoles you can also optimize. Developers know every PS4 (edit, so use to typing ps3) will have 8 cores and they can write code that takes advantage of that.
PC on the other hand can have 1-16 cores with speeds from 1ghz to 4.8ghz....
Also, no on your second part as well. Each core is supposed to have the same amount of ghz, if the CPU states that there is about 3.4 ghz of ram, then each core is measured upon the 3.4. None of the cores are less or more, and if they were, that would mean that you're CPU is broken somewhere and that goes against computer design. In addition, who the hell says that 8 cores makes it easier to code. The point of coding is to be good at it and make it efficient rather than have over 3, 000 lines of code that runs over 3000 times doing 3000 useless stuff. Before you start spewing information, take a Computer Science class and understand what you are talking about before you do so.
really? Might want to upgrade from WinXP
PS3 had alien-like architecture and some creative dudes managed to have it run some great kickass games.
-W/ this more conventional setup of PS4, I'm quite sure it will run games even better and all PS4 owners will gladly be embracing the change, along with said developers.
Wait till E3 2013 :)
Sure, it's clocked at 3.8ghz...but still.
AMD makes great processors. Not as fast as Intel, but noone needs that much speed, or costs.
That said, I believe Sony is trying to throw Microsoft off by releasing false specification of the ps4 to the public.
They tricked Microsoft once with the RAM(4g to 8g) and they'll do it again.
This war isn't over guys. I believe the CPU GHz will be bumped up even more, maybe between 2.5ghz to 3.0ghz considering that the PS4's CPU will be built using 28nm process.
28nm process should allow to beyond the 2ghz clock speed.
So my point is that the math is completely different when you compare 2 physical cores to one core with hyper threading. The 2 physical cores will give you much more higher performance.
My SB i7 2600k at 3,5 Ghz would perform better than yours at the same clock speed... You really are stupid or something