wtf is console using?

[potatopLays]

do they use APU, or an amd cpu and amd graphic chip?

[79wjd]

do they use APU, or an amd cpu and amd graphic chip?

AMD APU similar to an A4

[killcomic]

Yup, they have an APU which is why they use system RAM for everything.

At least Sony was smart and used DDR5 whereas MS used DD3. 

[madscientist56]

very optimized amd apus

[potatopLays]

very optimized amd apus

 

Yup, they have an APU which is why they use system RAM for everything.

At least Sony was smart and used DDR5 whereas MS used DD3. 

 

AMD APU similar to an A4

so when they said, they lose profit making consoles is a total BS?

[madscientist56]

 

so when they said, they lose profit making consoles is a total BS?

they used to loose profit, they lost a lot with the original xbox 360 and ps2 but nowadays they break even if not gaining profit

[BurgerBum]

ps3 had a (technically) off the shelf nvidia gpu.

 

but anything after that they just decided apu.

[killcomic]

so when they said, they lose profit making consoles is a total BS?

I don't think they are as willing to lose money on the hardware like they did with the last gen hardware because investors are god and you should kill puppies if it makes them happy.

[potatopLays]

I don't think they are as willing to lose money on the hardware like they did with the last gen hardware because investors are god and you should kill puppies if it makes them happy.

Heard last gen, 10% of the game money go to sony or MS to take back that loss

[Aniallation]

do they use APU, or an amd cpu and amd graphic chip?

PS4 and Xbox One are basically using 8 core versions of the Athlon 5350 (a $55 APU)

[potatopLays]

I don't think they are as willing to lose money on the hardware like they did with the last gen hardware because investors are god and you should kill puppies if it makes them happy.

 

ps3 had a (technically) off the shelf nvidia gpu.

 

but anything after that they just decided apu.

 

 

 

 

they used to loose profit, they lost a lot with the original xbox 360 and ps2 but nowadays they break even if not gaining profit

 

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fHjDmG so this is pretty much what they selling to potato farmers?

[madscientist56]

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/fHjDmG so this is pretty much what they selling to potato farmers?

kind of, yes but with smaller hdds and the apu is extremely optimized to the games it runs

 

Edit: also with more reliable psu's

[79wjd]

 

 

so when they said, they lose profit making consoles is a total BS?

 

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/20/the-ps4-costs-381-to-build-only-18-under-retail-price

[ICantThinkOfAnyGoodName]

Yup, they have an APU which is why they use system RAM for everything.

At least Sony was smart and used DDR5 whereas MS used DD3.

DDR5 doesn't exist(yet). IIRC Sony uses GDDR5 in the ps4 which performs about similarly to DDR3. I'm or sure what MS uses, but I think it also was GDDR5, but it might have also been DDR3.

[vm'N]

DDR5 doesn't exist(yet). IIRC Sony uses GDDR5 in the ps4 which performs about similarly to DDR3. I'm or sure what MS uses, but I think it also was GDDR5, but it might have also been DDR3.

GDDR5 performance very vary from DDR3.

GDDR5 is for more bandwidth.

DDR3 is for lower latency.

Microsoft did however implement a L4 cache to reduce the memory-starving (where sony obviously used GDDR5).

[connorpiper]

 

 

 

they used to loose profit, they lost a lot with the original xbox 360 and ps2 but nowadays they break even if not gaining profit

 

 

The new consoles are making a fair bit of money. Where as the PS3 (Not the PS2 as much) was $600 for a $850 console. It had a Nvidia GPU and a cell core processor of Sonys design. And Blueray. And the Main Logic of a PS2 (For emulation). With a integrated efficient PSU and a Hitachi 40 60 or 80GB 2.5" HDD. The true last good console.  

[syrupd]

I haven't used a ps4 yet, but so far my experience with the Xbox one has been mixed. The CPU does a dandy job at the multitasking, but there are other things that cause latency.

I'm not sure what the HDD is, but it seems to be part of the issue I find, because all the other specs should be able to handle what the games are throwing at it. I find d I get tearing (which I blame more on programming) and when something isn't already loaded in the flash memory, like pulling up someones gamercard, its just an unnecessary wait for it even though it should be utilizing that 8gb of flash tom on it.

[PlayModeOn]

GDDR5 performance very vary from DDR3.

GDDR5 is for more bandwidth.

DDR3 is for lower latency.

Microsoft did however implement a L4 cache to reduce the memory-starving (where sony obviously used GDDR5).

Can't we use GDDR5 for system memory?

EDIT: Is DDR4 better?

[vm'N]

GDDR5 is really just specialised DDR3 suited much better for graphics.

I wish they sell GDDR5 as system memory, I am willing to trade latency for more bandwidth for gaming.

Give us the option dammit!

But it is not.

And no, you wouldn't.

[harrynowl]

They use dual quad core ~1.6ghz jaguar CPUs with either a bonaire or pitcairn gcn 1.1 silicone, one one chip.

[PlayModeOn]

But it is not.

And no, you wouldn't.

Why not?

[GeathX]

They use dual quad core ~1.6ghz jaguar CPUs with either a bonaire or pitcairn gcn 1.1 silicone, one one chip.

 

That is probably the best starting point to explain the systems. MS and Sony (working with AMD) then both did a moderate amount of customization to the chips and general setups of the APUs.

[harrynowl]

Why not?

CPUs need fast access to the RAM, by using GDDR5 on a CPU you'll hit performance hard with all the latency.

 

That is probably the best starting point to explain the systems. MS and Sony (working with AMD) then both did a moderate amount of customization to the chips and general setups of the APUs.

PS4:

 

8 Jaguar cores 1.6GHz

1152 GCN cores (18 CUs, 2 disabled from 20 which is a full Pitcairn)

4MB L2 cache

348mm^2 die size

 

XB1:

 

8 Jaguar cores 1.85GHz

768GCN cores (12 / 14 active, full bonaire)

4MB L2

32MB L4 (esRAM). //takes up a lot of die space

363mm^2

[GeathX]

CPUs need fast access to the RAM, by using GDDR5 on a CPU you'll hit performance hard with all the latency.

 

PS4:

 

8 Jaguar cores 1.6GHz

1152 GCN cores (18 CUs, 2 disabled from 20 which is a full Pitcairn)

4MB L2 cache

348mm^2 die size

 

XB1:

 

8 Jaguar cores 1.85GHz

768GCN cores (12 / 14 active, full bonaire)

4MB L2

32MB L4 (esRAM). //takes up a lot of die space

363mm^2

 

First with that GDDR5 latency, people have done some good articles on what the latency rates of GDDR5 vs DDR3. They really not that much of a difference.

 

 

Yeah those are good starting points for the machines, though there are more subtle things put into the chips that set them apart from off the shelf hardware.

The PS4 GPU shares some features (Note: features not power ) of the 290X with how it handle compute functions and also has some of the True audio tech built in.

If you search PS4 8 ACES and PS4 True audio you'll get the links.

 

The X1, I'm not sure looking at the ESRAM on the die is quite the same as L4 cache, which I'm you're looking at it the same way as the Iris Pro EDRAM. Its a bit different though, as the with the Intel setup, both the CPU and GPU can access the EDRAM, while with the X1, only the GPU has access to the ESRAM. The CPU can only access the DDR3 directly. It also had similar work to improve its compute processing, though not to the same extent as the PS4. It also has a more advanced sound processing chip.

 

There is also more, with extra or much faster direct connections between the CPUs and GPUs being added and extra small processors on the X1 GPU to help get data out of the ESRAM as fast as possible with out impacting bandwidth. 

[harrynowl]

First with that GDDR5 latency, people have done some good articles on what the latency rates of GDDR5 vs DDR3. They really not that much of a difference.

 

 

Yeah those are good starting points for the machines, though there are more subtle things put into the chips that set them apart from off the shelf hardware.

The PS4 GPU shares some features (Note: features not power ) of the 290X with how it handle compute functions and also has some of the True audio tech built in.

If you search PS4 8 ACES and PS4 True audio you'll get the links.

 

The X1, I'm not sure looking at the ESRAM on the die is quite the same as L4 cache, which I'm you're looking at it the same way as the Iris Pro EDRAM. Its a bit different though, as the with the Intel setup, both the CPU and GPU can access the EDRAM, while with the X1, only the GPU has access to the ESRAM. The CPU can only access the DDR3 directly. It also had similar work to improve its compute processing, though not to the same extent as the PS4. It also has a more advanced sound processing chip.

 

There is also more, with extra or much faster direct connections between the CPUs and GPUs being added and extra small processors on the X1 GPU to help get data out of the ESRAM as fast as possible with out impacting bandwidth. 

Could I have some links? All the stuff I've got isn't relevant as they're just comparing CL9 vs CL7 on DDR3 in 1 game. Looking at some GDDR5 datasheets it can be as high as 16-28-26-40 or something.

 

Well I'd already mentioned they were GCN1.1, so has the trueaudio stuff.

 

True. The CPU would first need to copy it to the DDR3. It's still sort of a 4th level on die cache though.

 

I'm kind of just sticking to basics as OP really only asked if it's an APU or a CPU and dedicated GPU.

 

Anandtech probably have lots of good technical breakdowns.