520°

PS4: Sony Earlier Thought About Slow GDDR5 + eDRAM (1088GB/s)

Mark Cerny reveals the design process behind the PS4.

Read Full Story >>
gamechup.com
iGAM3R-VIII4368d ago

well it would have been harder to code if they chose the slow GDDR5. Good move Cerny

Cueil4368d ago

I know you're excited, but slower ram doesn't make it harder to code for and eDRAM is something developers already use in the X360 so it's not something they don't have a firm grasp on

MajorLazer4368d ago Show
sibbor4368d ago (Edited 4368d ago )

He's probably referring to the eDRAM that they would've included. That would've made it harder to develop for. Also the game developers requested a unified memory pool from Sony, unlike what can be found in current-gen and Xbox One for that matter. The game developers has spoken!

"For example, if we use eDRAM (on-chip DRAM) for the main memory in addition to the external memory, the memory bandwidth will be several terabytes per second. It will be a big advance in terms of performance."

"However, in that case, we will make developers solve a puzzle, 'To realize the fastest operation, what data should be stored in which of the memories, the low-capacity eDRAM or the high-capacity external memory?'"

"We wanted to avoid such a situation. We put the highest priority on allowing developers to spend their time creating values for their games."

Source for this old quotes:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.j...

iGAM3R-VIII4368d ago

"That sounds great doesn’t it? But Cerny said that it would have been difficult to code for it in a straightforward way and developers had to come up with a separate technique to take full advantage of it."

"unified memory at a 176GB/s would have made it really easy for developers to code for and it was their philosophy to provide a simple architecture with the PS4."

My proof. It is harder to code, so I did not pull it out of my ***. Thank you @sibbor to clearify to these people about my comment

humbleopinion4368d ago

The article actually confuses Slow/Fast versus Wide/Narrow.

256-bit GDDR5 is not "faster" than 128-bit GDDR5 just like a 4 lane highway is not "faster" than 2 lane highway. It has a higher bandwidth which means you can push through more sfuff at the same time, but it's actually latency which measures to how fast the memory really is (how much time it takes for a single transfer to get from point a to point b).

dantesparda4368d ago (Edited 4368d ago )

You're right the GDDR5 would still have ran at 5.5GHz, its just the bandwidth would have been cut in half by the bus (256bit vs 128bit).

Also X1 fanboys need to realize that the X1 only has 102gb of bandwidth to 32MB! thats it! to it 8GB's of DDR3 RAM (which runs at 2.13GHz/256bit) it only has 68GBs of bandwidth, that is a huge disadavanyage to the PS4!

Cueil4368d ago

@dantesparda that 32MB is on die and Microsoft also has hardware compression/decompression on the Move Engines... and 8gigs of ram is still 8 gigs of ram... MS could let developers use page file system and that would be a big help

nveenio4368d ago

If you have two funnels, one with a one-inch spout and one with a three-inch spout, which would funnel a gallon of water faster?

Right. When it comes to volume, wider = faster. Not faster per water molecule, but faster for the gallon.

humbleopinion4364d ago

@inveni0

Wider is not faster. If one funnel allows water to go through in a shorter time then the first drop of water will get out faster. That's latency.

Higher bandwidth means that even if the latency is slower, the overall throughput can be higher because multiple drops of water can pass through simultaneously.

So it all comes down to what you require: higher throughput (particle simulation, graphics rendering) or higher speed (AI, sequential calculation etc)

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4364d ago
TrevorPhillips4368d ago

Smart move Mark! PS4 is a beast anyways and cannot wait for it to be released :)

weirdo4368d ago

sexy. i just can't imagine a console with anything less than gddr5 memory, can you? (giggles)

Fishy Fingers4368d ago

Yeah, you've probably defended one for the last 8 years.

Minato-Namikaze4368d ago

Was GDDR5 available 9-10 years ago?

wishingW3L4368d ago

the first production of GDDR5 were available in 2008 and only in 512MB modules you know. All last gen consoles used GDDR3 because that was the best in its time.

windblowsagain4368d ago

lol.

But the PS3 did have the XDR Memory running @ 3.2ghz.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4368d ago
B-radical4368d ago

1 SRAM is static while DRAM is dynamic
2. SRAM is faster compared to DRAM
3. SRAM consumes less power than DRAM
4. SRAM uses more transistors per bit of memory compared to DRAM
5. SRAM is more expensive than DRAM
6. Cheaper DRAM is used in main memory while SRAM is commonly used in cache memory

Furi174368d ago ShowReplies(1)
tarbis4368d ago

In other words Mark is preventing another PS3-esque hard to develop hardware. Good move on their part. Satisfying both developers and consumers at the same time.

Cueil4368d ago

No... it's the same idea behind the xbox 360's design... so it would have NOT been hard to program for...

mmj4368d ago

The fact is though Sony considered Microsoft's method but opted against it because they felt it it would be more difficult for developers.

With PS4 developers can just store everything conveniently in memory, with Xbone they are going to have to still juggle data.

Cueil4368d ago

a 12 oz bottle of coke is a 12 oz bottle of coke no matter how big the lid is

Show all comments (69)
390°

Mark Cerny: FSR 4 for PS5 Pro is the "next evolution of PSSR"

The RDNA 4 upscaler is the first result of AMD/Sony's Project Amethyst collaboration.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
Muigi94d ago

Excited by this news lets see how things play out.

Eonjay94d ago

They are basically working together to co-devlop the cnns and strategies for game graphics. So the research benefits borth products and they will share similar capabilities. So its not exactly FS4 that comes to PS5 but rather the models that then used by PSSR. Their long term goal together is to develop hardware that maximizes the execution of ML. This longterm goal will impact things like the PS6 but doesn't sound like it is focused on acceleration graphics only ML. This is big for AMD and will make them more competetive in the AI landscape.

Fishy Fingers94d ago

I always saw PSSR as basically a FSR4 beta.

ZycoFox93d ago

Still behind DLSS but I mean Nvidia have done a ton of research and they're still top dog in AI apps.

hennessey8693d ago

I don't understand the disagrees, the new transformer model along with ray reconstruction is on another level to the very good FSR4

Eonjay93d ago

To be fair we know that FSR4 will bring Ray Reconstruction like tech in the future. Also FSR4 beats DLSS3 and even some aspects of DLSS4. The era of Nvidia having a huge leg up in ML is over. Its not on 'another level'.

hennessey8693d ago

Show me where FS4 4 beats the new transformer model anywhere, I'll wait. It is however better than DLSS 3 like you say, DLSS 4 is on another level when it comes to detail and image stability

94d ago Replies(1)
Destiny108094d ago

that's good news for pro users, PSSR is about to get a whole lot better

94d ago Replies(3)
Show all comments (46)
180°

Mark Cerny Explains PlayStation's Focus On GPU Power Over CPU Upgrade For PS5 Pro

PlayStation lead architect Mark Cerny has offered an explanation on PlayStation's focus on GPU power over CPU upgrades for the PS5 Pro.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
andy85174d ago

Only logical really. Had this argument loads on here. "Why have they not changed the CPU". Well it's costing £700 without doing that. How much did you want it to cost exactly doing both? CPU based games are probably 1/10 to GPU games' 9/10. That's why the money should be in the GPU

Fishy Fingers174d ago (Edited 174d ago )

Its easier/cheaper to manufacture (at least one chip on the APU is the same).

And more importantly, console games are mostly GPU bound (as they have ass CPUs compared to modern PCs) so keeping it the same makes life easier on devs to build the CPU requirements for both PS5 & Pro and just scale up on the GPU side of things.

DivineHand125174d ago (Edited 174d ago )

He could have made compromises to improve not only the GPU but the CPU as well. The CPU inside the PS5 is equivalent to the Ryzen 7 3700x. If he had approached it with the same logic as a PC gamer/builder, he would have left out the wifi 7 card and used a 1 TB internal storage instead of 2. That would have reduced the total cost of the system enough for him to add a CPU that is equivalent to a Ryzen 5 5600x or better while releasing it at $700.

That would have felt like a true generational leap over the base PS5 without having to rely on PSSR.

There is a reason Digital Foundry asked that question because they too believe the CPU could have been upgraded.

Dreadbourn174d ago (Edited 174d ago )

The 3700x is perfectly fine for 60fps. A 5600x like upgrade would have been a waste of resources for what they want out of it.

DivineHand125174d ago

So let me get this straight. You are fine with getting less for your money when there was a way for you to get more for that $700?

There are some titles that struggle to reach a locked 60 fps because of this CPU limitations and some titles that looks visually worst that the base PS5 because of the developer's poor implementation of PSSR. The more power inside the PS5 pro means, less issues from devs and a better product for you the consumer.

Don't blindly defend everything from Sony.

Dreadbourn173d ago

No, divinehand, I'd rather them do what they did with the SSD than a CPU upgrade. I have a PC I built with a 3600x and a 6800xt, I can count the number of titles I've tried that are CPU bottlenecked on one hand, and none of them are on console. You wouldn't see a real measurable difference in 99% of titles going from a 3700x to a 5600x until you start getting to 100+ fps, and that territory means next to nothing for consoles.

mkis007174d ago (Edited 174d ago )

You are ignoring the fact that the cpu bound games are all countable on one hand vs the gpu ones. It isn't worth it in this case. Any upgrade wouldn't have been enough even with other cutbacks. He's been lead architect for the past 4 consoles for a reason.

DivineHand125174d ago

How would reducing the drive space from 2 TB to 1 TB and keeping Wifi6 in the PS5 pro impact the performance?

Those are expensive components and the budget of those could have gone towards a better CPU while keeping the same GPU the PS5 Pro currently has.

The_Algorithm173d ago

The Pro was never meant to be a "true generational leap over the base PS5", that's what the PS6 will be for.

richie007bond173d ago

Tell that to the folks forking out $700

Firebird360174d ago

Anybody else get the feeling after that presentation that ps6 might not be backwards compatible and almost certainly not with ps4 games.

mkis007174d ago

not at all, he even said he didn't need to butterfly ps4 pro after all. "once it's in it's in." He said something in a digital foundry interview about timings not having to line up as he once thought.

Reaper22_174d ago (Edited 174d ago )

I'm not impressed at all with what PS5 PRO brings to the table. It's not worth the price imo.

mkis007174d ago

As they bring home record revenue lol.

173d ago
xenz173d ago

Sony stock price has surged with 30% the last 6 months. Just FYI

mkis007173d ago

Don't go to you for financial advice got it. You're the kind of guy who would say something obvious about finances and then something crazy would happen just so fate could make you wrong again.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 172d ago
Show all comments (23)
60°

The big PlayStation 5 Pro tech interview with Mark Cerny and Mike Fitzgerald

The Digital Foundry PS5 Pro tech interview with Sony's Mark Cerny and Insomniac's Mike Fitzgerald, discussing PSSR and the PS5 Pro's design and development.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net