Familiar Architecture, Future-Proofed
So what does Cerny really think the console will gain from this design approach? Longevity.
Cerny is convinced that in the coming years, developers will want to use the GPU for more than pushing graphics -- and believes he has determined a flexible and powerful solution to giving that to them. "The vision is using the GPU for graphics and compute simultaneously," he said. "Our belief is that by the middle of the PlayStation 4 console lifetime, asynchronous compute is a very large and important part of games technology."
Cerny envisions "a dozen programs running simultaneously on that GPU" -- using it to "perform physics computations, to perform collision calculations, to do ray tracing for audio."
But that vision created a major challenge: "Once we have this vision of asynchronous compute in the middle of the console lifecycle, the question then becomes, 'How do we create hardware to support it?'"
One barrier to this in a traditional PC hardware environment, he said, is communication between the CPU, GPU, and RAM. The PS4 architecture is designed to address that problem.
"A typical PC GPU has two buses," said Cerny. "There’s a bus the GPU uses to access VRAM, and there is a second bus that goes over the PCI Express that the GPU uses to access system memory. But whichever bus is used, the internal caches of the GPU become a significant barrier to CPU/GPU communication -- any time the GPU wants to read information the CPU wrote, or the GPU wants to write information so that the CPU can see it, time-consuming flushes of the GPU internal caches are required."
Enabling the Vision: How Sony Modified the Hardware
The three "major modifications" Sony did to the architecture to support this vision are as follows, in Cerny's words:
- "First, we added another bus to the GPU that allows it to read directly from system memory or write directly to system memory, bypassing its own L1 and L2 caches. As a result, if the data that's being passed back and forth between CPU and GPU is small, you don't have issues with synchronization between them anymore. And by small, I just mean small in next-gen terms. We can pass almost 20 gigabytes a second down that bus. That's not very small in today’s terms -- it’s larger than the PCIe on most PCs!
- "Next, to support the case where you want to use the GPU L2 cache simultaneously for both graphics processing and asynchronous compute, we have added a bit in the tags of the cache lines, we call it the 'volatile' bit. You can then selectively mark all accesses by compute as 'volatile,' and when it's time for compute to read from system memory, it can invalidate, selectively, the lines it uses in the L2. When it comes time to write back the results, it can write back selectively the lines that it uses. This innovation allows compute to use the GPU L2 cache and perform the required operations without significantly impacting the graphics operations going on at the same time -- in other words, it radically reduces the overhead of running compute and graphics together on the GPU."
- Thirdly, said Cerny, "The original AMD GCN architecture allowed for one source of graphics commands, and two sources of compute commands. For PS4, we’ve worked with AMD to increase the limit to 64 sources of compute commands -- the idea is if you have some asynchronous compute you want to perform, you put commands in one of these 64 queues, and then there are multiple levels of arbitration in the hardware to determine what runs, how it runs, and when it runs, alongside the graphics that's in the system."
"The reason so many sources of compute work are needed is that it isn’t just game systems that will be using compute -- middleware will have a need for compute as well. And the middleware requests for work on the GPU will need to be properly blended with game requests, and then finally properly prioritized relative to the graphics on a moment-by-moment basis."
This concept grew out of the software Sony created, called SPURS, to help programmers juggle tasks on the CELL's SPUs -- but on the PS4, it's being accomplished in hardware.
The team, to put it mildly, had to think ahead. "The time frame when we were designing these features was 2009, 2010. And the timeframe in which people will use these features fully is 2015? 2017?" said Cerny.
"Our overall approach was to put in a very large number of controls about how to mix compute and graphics, and let the development community figure out which ones they want to use when they get around to the point where they're doing a lot of asynchronous compute."
Cerny expects developers to run middleware -- such as physics, for example -- on the GPU. Using the system he describes above, you can run at peak efficiency, he said.
"If you look at the portion of the GPU available to compute throughout the frame, it varies dramatically from instant to instant. For example, something like opaque shadow map rendering doesn't even use a pixel shader, it’s entirely done by vertex shaders and the rasterization hardware -- so graphics aren't using most of the 1.8 teraflops of ALU available in the CUs. Times like that during the game frame are an opportunity to say, 'Okay, all that compute you wanted to do, turn it up to 11 now.'"
Sounds great -- but how do you handle doing that? "There are some very simple controls where on the graphics side, from the graphics command buffer, you can crank up or down the compute," Cerny said. "The question becomes, looking at each phase of rendering and the load it places on the various GPU units, what amount and style of compute can be run efficiently during that phase?"

Launch and Beyond
The benefits of this powerful hardware will be seen in the PlayStation 4's launch games. But Cerny maintains that, in the future, they'll shine through in totally different ways.
"The launch lineup for PlayStation 4 -- though I unfortunately can’t give the title count -- is going to be stronger than any prior PlayStation hardware. And that's a result of that familiarity," Cerny said. But "if your timeframe is 2015, by another way of thinking, you really need to be doing that customization, because your competition will be doing that customization."
So while it takes "weeks, not months" to port a game engine from the PC to the PlayStation 4 according to Cerny, down the road, dedicated console developers can grasp the capabilities of the PlayStation 4, customize their technology, and really reap the benefits.
"There are many, many ways to control how the resources within the GPU are allocated between graphics and compute. Of course, what you can do, and what most launch titles will do, is allocate all of the resources to graphics. And that’s perfectly fine, that's great. It's just that the vision is that by the middle of the console lifecycle, that there's a bit more going on with compute."
|
However, there's an indie game revolution going on, and those games tend not to push the limits of the hardware so much as the licensing model. Sony seems to be playing their cards right on this as well, but it remains to be seen where the tiny developers end up, whether it be PC, Steambox, Ouya, PS4 or Xbox.
Installed user base will be a huge factor in deciding where the indies end up, and most of that will come down to price and the strength of their launch library. The things described in this article won't get a chance to play out unless the PS4 does well through the first couple of years.
PS move and EYE may look silly at times now, but it sure is more responsive and reliable than it's competitors by miles. IF you don't include one of the cardinal pieces, such as the EYE camera, they will have to be sold with games.
Less of these games are sold and and the publishers don't have a lot of incentive.
This is a big problem because, gaming will always stay the same way in terms of interactivity. I for one DO NOT want that.
But, I agree SONY does have to be reasonable and then some.
That is simply untrue. The Blu-ray drive mechanism was expensive at the time compared to a DVD-ROM unit but it was well established production line with low defect levels.
The bulk of the PS3's cost at launch was the silicon. Yields on the CELL were horrible, which is why the original multiple CELLs doing everything design was scrapped and a dedicated GPU was added late in the process. This wasn't the first time Sony had very expensive silicon at launch. The PS2 was intended to launch with the EE and GS produced .18 micron. The existing .25 micron chips were only for engineering samples and early developer kits. But Sony couldn't get a .18 micron production line going in time. (Intel was only starting to ship .18 micron parts at the time.) So the PS3 launch in Japan used BIG .25 micron chips that made those units very expensive for Sony. But not more expensive than it would have been to delay launching for several months and give Sega time to draw more consumers to the Dreamcast.
Blu-ray drives cost a lot less now but by far the biggest cost reduction for Sony on the PS3 is shrinking and integrating the chip set. This meant better yields, lower cost per unit aside from yield levels, and subsequently lesser power and cooling needs, which in turn allowed for more cost reduction in the later models.
I'm personally interested in how different their chip architecture will be from the new xbox, and whether the technical bells and whistles of the PS4 will attract developers to make exclusive titles for Sony.
XBOX may go with 32MB embedded eDRAM within the APU to compensate future shader bottlenecks, when it comes to graphic commands. The APU will use 8GB or more DDR3 SDRAM. PS4 also has 18 CUs where as XBOX NG is supposed to have only 12CUs. cost of the APUs may be pretty much the same.
Benefits in this approach would be two-fold.
1. Memory is abundant and cheap, box will cost considerably less
2. Windows kernels are already designed to use DDR3 addressing system.
Leaving Microsoft to make up for it by means of their strong software features and truly next gen Kinect.
As a consumer I couldn't be happier.
The hardware sounds great and powerful. It's up to the developers to exploit that potential. Unfortunately, the popularity of the console will come down to price. The PS4 will be extremely popular if it's competitively priced and not overpriced like the PS3 was at launch.
Also the Windows 8 numbers are just that, Windows 8. You don't need a new desktop or OS to do PC gaming. I think a lot of people are looking too much into this. There is probably more correlation in that people don't "need" a computer every 3 years as to why the numbers are really low with every other version of Windows...
People have been wrong for 20 years, and continue to be about the PC. With a 1 to 2 billion person installed user base, PC 's and pc gaming isnt going anywhere anytime soon.
The PC( Personal Computer ) is not going anywhere, and I'll be quite happy to say I've told you so down the line.
The PC may not exist in the same form we use today -- which is a given, my Mac as an example is way differen than the TI99 I had in the eighties, or anything I worked on in the nineties -- but even if it's a tablet I have plugged into an external monitor and keyboard/mouse( Whatever input, I use a Wacom. ) down the line, it's still a PC.
There's plenty of room for mobile devices and PCs to exist. Both platforms compliment one another at the momemnt and even if and when a convergence happens, it's only because other devices have become more like PCs.
If a day comes where the PC does go away, and you're right, it won't be because we've replaced them, it will be because the "P" in PC has been eliminated. That will be a sad day when people no longer own their device( computer ), let alone their information, as they're tied into and completely reliant on some CLOUD service with a monthly subscription; only a fool would welcome this.
Its easy to say I told you so when your argument is just a semantics game. The point is very simple and clear: very few people buy desktop computers anymore. Very few companies even make them anymore. Laptops, tablets, smartphones are the wave of the future. New hardware architectures will preclude Valve from simply declaring Steam the go to portal for all games. Yes there will always be hobbyists and people who love the latest GPU, but they won't dictate overall market trends.
Yes, when you account for less variables and live only in the now, things can be simpler and clearer.
And laptops are part of the wave of the future? Here's some semantics, this isn't the eighties, notebooks have been the now for a long time -- at least from my perspective; and even though there's crossovers, notebooks are more closely related to a desktop PC, than a tablet/smartphone; in my case, they are my primary desktop comp.
Your thinking isn't remotely new, it's only more relevant, since the technology is finally reaching a point that PCs can exist in more forms and fill in more niches, but they're still PCs. Unless whatever is trendy can truly live up to the task required, it will not replace; and mobile OSs are by no means a replacement as of yet; and locked down OSs will never be a replacement.
Anyways, good luck predicting the future with your tEh DOOM outlook on desktop PCs. Maybe generalization is they key?
Smart phones are the mediating variable towards the conventional PC's death. We've already seen the transition begin to take place with Android and iOS being featured on tablets, so to even preclude these platforms as "mobile" is deceptive.
That said, while these platforms being locked down is a topic worth thinking on, the reason it will work towards replacing PCs is that they're dramatically cheaper and more convenient than conventional PCs.
No consumer is going to buy a "Dell X3594" when they can get a say, "Script Writer" tablet, that is very cheap, and yet has software completely specialized towards the task of word processing for instance, and thus actually better at it than a trojan horse PC is capable of.
A prime example of this actually is the Amazon Kindle, and it also helps refute your concern about Android being a "locked down" platform. By branding its own hardware Amazon is able to proliferate all its digital business channels, and make more money. They're able to curate and shape Android to the liking of their brand. There's no way they could do that sort of thing with a Windows based device---because it depends on Microsoft's legacy of apps, and relationships with Intel, etc.
Now you can raise semantic hell, and tell me that in fact the Amazon Kindle is a "PC" until the cows come home. But can Valve sell Steam games on such a platform? No. Does such a platform threaten the sellability of high end graphics cards that desktop PCs rely on? Yes. The best hope for the future of "PC gaming" is that ARM architecture increases in power exponentially, and essentially resets the field.
*Incidentally the other future for PC gaming is that they create external hardware designed to interact with mobile and "smart" devices and enhance their graphics capabilities. And in this sense, the PC will just turn into what consoles already are. And the PS4 is already simulating this future by bundling in an ARM processor to perform OS functions---in other words the "Windows" like functions.
If anything is going to be threatened by mobile devices it's consoles. A few years from now people will think: "sure these consoles can do some nifty stuff, but why should I pay extra for that when my phone can already hook to the TV and let me play full HD 3D games?"
I think that for now PC is relatively safe thanks to being the content creation platform. Once that changes, PC users will need to worry. (The PC will possibly move to hardware more like the PS4 though.)
Windows 8 numbers are Windows 8 numbers. Windows Vista sucked in the eyes of many when it came out (so did its sales), and when Windows 7 rolled around, sales bounced back. Windows 8 sucks in the eyes of many people today (WHO wants to cripple the desktop with touchscreen controls that can't be used except at a very premium price? Who wants to use Metro on their desktop? Who wants another potential walled garden? Who wants to have to replace most of their expensive software libraries?), and in fact offers severe incompatibilities with some older software, especially development software. Windows 8 numbers reflect that the marketplace doesn't buy Windows 8 as a good platform and they're sticking with 7, and even XP in some cases.
Different strokes for different folks, but for me consoles provide an experience that my PC doesn't quite live up to at times.
From what Sony has announced, the Unreal engine will be bundled with the toolkit.
What's your source on that? Epic announced they were supporting it and showed the Elemental demo, but I haven't seen any announcements about Unreal being bundled with the SDK.
Got tired of my PS3 "movie" colection, I'd like to see some better games for a change.
1) What are kind/spec of chip is being used for the dedicated download (and other peripheral) CPUs? PowerPC? ARM? Is this how some bits of cross-platform/backward-compatibility will be addressed?
2) Lots of use of the word async makes me ask: Will we be getting a toolchain and library set that is C++11 native? lambdas, atomic, copy elision, etc are all things that high-performance highly-concurrent state machines and simulations will need to maximize the hardware.
3) will OpenMP be supported by the toolchain for the same reasons? A GCC 4.8-based toolchain would be awesome, but I would settle for a 4.7-based one with enhancements from Google's branches. We see ~20% better raw performance from Google's 4.7 branch versus the FSF 4.7.
4) Will mono be a first-class citizen with full C# 5.0 async/concurrency suport? Again, a necessity for allowing developers to use language-native constructs for distributing work to the CPU/GPU transparently without crazy macros that can collide and whatnot. Note that I mean mono in-general, not specifically PSM or Unity.
5) The GPU can only access the main memory at 20GB/sec? out of a total of 176GB/sec bandwidth? Why?
And 5) It seems that's the second bus on the GPU for smaller read/write system memory data transfers that bypass the GPU's L1/L2 to circumvent any synchronization issues. In all the documentation so far, the GPU's main bus memory transfer is listed at the 176GB/sec rate, but there's a degree of graphics/compute sharing to juggle.
I'm surprised they didn't use a scaled down PowerPC somewhere in there. Certainly SPU code can be dynamically recompiled on the fly for GPU/CPU, but PowerPC might be more difficult. Then again, if Microsoft was able to do dynamic recompilation+static patches for Xbox1->360 compatibility, I guess it's entirely possible.
Down the road, probably the simplest way to do an improved remake of a PS3 game that was multi-platform, would be to port from the PC version and see how much the visuals can be improved over the PS3 version without substantial investment. Actually, we might be seeing ports of a lot of PC games that never appeared on any Sony console. It could be Sony's own version of GoG.
With the above in mind, it doesn't really matter what architecture the assist chip uses. It will likely be completely reserved for the system and not accessible by app and game developers.
If the high end titles, making the most use of the hardware anyway, all use virtualized textures, that's at max a 16k buffer maybe, maybe two if you really want to get into complex materials. If a good, cheap crack free tesselation scheme can be found, you can get models down too almost a tenth the size they are now with displacement maps. Suddenly in 2015 you have a ton of ram and you don't have anything to fill it with, because you can't compute that much that fast. I can foresee the new PS and Xbox needing their own set of hacks, caching everything possible, trying to make use of those 8 gigs, kind of the opposite of this last generations struggle to get every mb to count.
At least, I can see that as a possibility.
(Of course, the Killzone demo we saw at the launch event did some distract+replace... not sure why, though.)
In another interview, Cerny gives the credit to Kaz Hirai for recognizing that Kutaragi's EE method of 'Okay, here's some hardware we designed in a windowless tower, now you software guys do whatever you do' wasn't going to be workable any more and going developer friendly for PS4 very early on.
No, PC gamers won't be impressed.
Mac's used to Motorola processor's. Yet now they use Intel procs. Are they less of a Macintosh because of the hardware change? Of course not. They still use OSX and all the other services that Apple provides.
That is what matters in the end. The OS, the programs/games, and the services that Sony and Microsoft provide for the gamers.
How many PC gamers do you know with hardware that can selectively dedicate 4-6 GB of GDDR5 solely to the GPU's needs? All those PC gamers with $1000 graphics cards in 4GB DDR5 flavors? Plus add-in PCIe DDR5 RAM modules costing $400? And with those luxury cards you still won't get close to the effective PS4 memory bandwidth with PCIe bottlenecks.
While your PC tower features gigantic power-hogging add-in cards in all of its PCIe slots.
The RAM is quite impressive on the PS4. At least you can capitalize on it in every sense for a game, unlike the bloated system overhead on PC -- not to mention the fact that few PC games are even optimized for 4GB video cards at this time.
That lovely unified memory and processor architecture should give the PS4 some solid future-proofing.
Maybe the raw spec numbers of PS4 get overshadowed (already has) by higher end PC gaming hardware, but does the PC provide as efficient/elegant of an architecture yet, for games? Not yet.
Even when AMD goes all in with a consolidated, unified board/chipset in the near future, I wonder if the PC parts industry will be ready to keep up with third-party motherboard variants, or third-party RAM (and would the board feature both DDR3 and DDR5 slots, or would DDR5 still be relegated to the realm of add-ins, and does PCIe bus speed dramatically improve?).
But sure, it's altogether possible that by 2015 or so this form of unified architecture could be widespread in mainstream computers, as we shrink down component sizes, get more efficient, consolidated, leaner and greener across our computing devices.
Do you accuse the systems in a new car of being 'computer wannabes' because they're specialized and would not lend themselves to most common PC uses?
All CPU:s today has GPU built in and AMD's Fusion platform is many way built for the same purpose as described in the article to use the GPU to perform alot of tasks instead of the CPU like physics calculations etc.
The PC have 1 big GPU for graphics. And a smaller GPU built in the CPU with shared memory.
Of course it is not exactly the same as PS4 and a bit more complexed. But the end result would probably be the same for the gamer.
They added a second BUS from GPU to sytem memory and a bunch of dedicated hardware units to real benefit.
Let's not forget the main disadvantage of such PCs. Windows OS kernels are the same for every PC. It doesn't at all take into account if the SYSTEM can do this (HSA computing).
But in the future AMD may take things further and get this tech to PC, in which case AMD and SONY still benefits enormously.
What AMD is doing with the upcoming systems is creating a true unified pool of memory in which both CPU and GPU not only have access tot he entirety of RAM but also use the same addressing scheme to reference a location. This is a big, big change over how things work now and makes using the GPU far simpler.
With all that said I really hope next gen is better than the current one has been. This gen was very pricey, unreliable (durability wise) and lacking in moderate priced software.
I have well over a hundred games on each machine. Nearly all were bought new and my average cost was between $10 and $20. Everything turns up cheap if you're patient and pay attention to the deals when they pop up.
I enjoy building PCs, especially if some whizzy new stuff is involved. But I also enjoy being able to just press a button and have the thing work every time when it comes to games. It's enjoyable to read the review of the latest GPU but when it comes time to play I'm perfectly happy to use old hardware if everything just works without a hassle.
Basic,no plus but gankai or gankai,no plus basic...basic would continue free online where plus and gankai get dedicated servers.
Basic would blend all online on non dedicated servers so kz and cod share servers.
No need for the cattle prod of xbl in addition to your isp when free,discounted and streaming games over dedicated servers is enough of a carrot to get people to subscribe...imho