[Benchlife] R9 480 (Polaris 10 >100w), R9

[RussianSensation]

Why is everybody assuming this is polaris on 14nm?

Simply put, a cut down 2304 Hawaii doesn't make sense from any angle and AMD has no other design on 28nm that can fit 2304 shader description with 256-bit bus, and still manage to meet the die size/power usage/cost characteristics.

3 reasons 14nm Polaris 10 makes the most sense:

1) No single GCN 1.0/1.1/1.2 GPU has a UVD block inside that supports HDMI 2.0 4K output. AMD stated themselves that the lack of HDMI 2.0 functionality cannot simply be added to Tahiti, Tonga, Hawaii or Fiji without an ASIC redesign. Last time I checked DisplayPort 1.2 wasn't widely available on most 4K TVs.

2) Die size and cost

Think about how large the current PS4 APU is. If you were to take a 2048 Tonga 365mm2 (?), it grows even more. Yet, the specs call for 2304 part so it has to be a cut-down Hawaii? But then the memory bandwidth with those GDDR5 speeds don't add up. It means you'd have to cripple its 512-bit bus in half. This would be the most inefficient design, with massive die size and still too much power usage. 14nm Polaris 256-bit solves the die size and power usage scenarios. Think about 14nm vs. 28nm. Polaris 10 brings 2-2.5X perf/watt but a shrink alone doesn't even get Sony to 2X. This once again would make shrinking old designs not as perf/watt efficient which is critical for a small console enclosure.

3) Cost. A redesigned for 14nm Polaris 256-bit is more cost effective since it was designed form the ground up for this node, and by itself is more power effecient. If would be too risky and more inefficient/costly to shrink old Hawaii to get 2304 R9 390 on 14nm. Might as well take the latest tech optimized for 14nm -- that's Polaris 10. Since AMD was already making 14nm Polaris 10 for PCs, they would eat the cost of a die shrink, NOT Sony. That means Sony wouldn't be thrilled to pay extra to shrink old Tonga/Hawaii when AMD had off the shelf Polaris 10 ready to go.

Sony also gets even better backward compatibility since GCN 4.0 would be even closer to the architecture likely found in PS5 (2019-2020). If they price this at $399, and drop the base PS4 1152 shader model to $299, many people will easily spend $100 more for a PS4K. This console could also ship standard with a 1TB HDD, and have higher trade-in value when PS5 launches. If Sony launches it at $499 though and barely drops PS4 to $329, well then it might not be that successful .

 

[railven]

Not sure if it's just me, but these new PS4 sounds obsolete, yet again.

Oh well, it will go on the shelf with the rest of the consoles. I'm glad a lot of console only games are seeing PC versions. I don't even have to connect the consoles anymore. haha.

 

[DiogoDX]

No mention on he article, but I tink that Freesync would be a huge plus in this revision.

 

[railven]

No mention on he article, but I tink that Freesync would be a huge plus in this revision.

Definitely. These consoles are plagued with tearing. It's horrific.

I'd rather take the choppy frame drops of yore than these torn frames.

 

[dzoni2k2]

Not sure if it's just me, but these new PS4 sounds obsolete, yet again.

Oh well, it will go on the shelf with the rest of the consoles. I'm glad a lot of console only games are seeing PC versions. I don't even have to connect the consoles anymore. haha.

Obsolete compared to what? Consoles have power and price budget constrains.

 

[swilli89]

Definitely. These consoles are plagued with tearing. It's horrific.

I'd rather take the choppy frame drops of yore than these torn frames.

Please don't turn this thread into a consoles vs PC conversation. We all get it, we are in the discrete Video Cards and Graphics subforum. Everyone here gets it I promise you.

Even if this upgrade winds up behind high end desktop PCs, its definitely a good thing to at least bridge the gap and move to a model where consoles receive updates every 3 years as opposed to double that.

 

[maddie]

If this PS4K die is 14nm and the specs accurate, then we have an additional insight in AMD's ability to price Polaris 10.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Did you really not read through this thread? NOTHING is being made obsolete, there is a "base" mode and "neo" mode for games. Two quality levels for two targeted hardware performance levels.

I've been saying this is the optimum solution for over a year now and a good way forward with consoles.

This is a terrible way forward for consoles. Split dev priorities, compatibility issues, frequent upgrade cycles, etc. You can argue second rate isn't obsolete, but it's still second rate, and every PS4 currently in homes and stores just became it.

 

[xthetenth]

Did you really not read through this thread? NOTHING is being made obsolete, there is a "base" mode and "neo" mode for games. Two quality levels for two targeted hardware performance levels.

I've been saying this is the optimum solution for over a year now and a good way forward with consoles.

Is it going to be a matter of a full lifespan or is this the equivalent of the time after the next generation's launch when the previous generation still gets some games? Only time will tell there.

 

[swilli89]

This is a terrible way forward for consoles. Split dev priorities, compatibility issues, frequent upgrade cycles, etc. You can argue second rate isn't obsolete, but it's still second rate, and every PS4 currently in homes and stores just became it.

We aren't on different sides of this discussion actually. I totally get what you're saying but think about it..

Split dev priorities

How many quality levels do most AAA titles have to target already with PC? Hundreds of combinations! With modern game engines utilizing more hardware is as simple as ticking up the resolution and increasing shadow/light effects and higher textures.

compatibility issues.

Devs already have to code multiple paths for DX 11, DX 12, NV hardware, AMD hardware. This upgrade is using the exact same CPU/GCN combo so there will be zero compatibility issues.

frequent upgrade cycles

Three years is frequent? People buy new phones yearly that cost twice as much as consoles. PS4 launched in 2013 and this one is rumored to be late 2016 release. That's three full years; buy a console on day 1 and be assured you have three years of your chosen platforms highest performance (much more than can be said for even ultra high end video cards). Three years down the road you have the option to upgrade to receive support for newer graphical features. If you decide not to, you still get to enjoy the latest releases for another three or so years down the road.

You can argue second rate isn't obsolete, but it's still second rate, and every PS4 currently in homes and stores just became it.

Actually can you go out and buy a better performing PS4 right now? You can't and so your statement isn't valid.

Why does anyone ever argue against more options? This is a great way for Sony to remain on top over the NX, provide backwards compatibility to its large installed base, and generate new hardware sales.

~~~~~~~~

Back on topic, Polaris 10 makes a lot of sense here as Russian laid out the main reasons why. This would be the first time in the history of the consoles that they release hardware in same season as cutting edge desktop GPUs. All the way back with Xbox original and its geforce 2 derivative, Xbox 360 and its X1900 derivative, and PS3 with its Geforce 7800 derivative, and up to current GCN chips in each major console, consoles have always been one or two full generations behind, so this fact alone has me excited. AMD should be receiving a much better margin this time around as they have more leverage in multiple areas.

 

[Kenmitch]

This is a terrible way forward for consoles. Split dev priorities, compatibility issues, frequent upgrade cycles, etc. You can argue second rate isn't obsolete, but it's still second rate, and every PS4 currently in homes and stores just became it.

It doesn't really seem to bad too me. If it really bugs a person they can just do the trade in deal when the new consoles launch. Most of the time it's a $200 trade in credit with some additional perks at time of launch even.

Kind of a weak upgrade for longevity it looks like too me.

I'd take a different approach that is more forward looking with potentially longer longevity, while keeping backwards compatibility.

I'd just shrink the APU(Polaris based) and pair it with a Polaris dGPU of similar specs and bake in mGPU support at the console level. Much better for the VR experience and most likely a much longer lifespan in the end.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Why does anyone ever argue against more options?

Because there are advantages to simplicity and stability. This really isn't the thread to continue on about this though.

 

[railven]

Obsolete compared to what? Consoles have power and price budget constrains.

Perhaps its the lack of games (console exclusives) that make the hardware feel worse.

Tell you what, when I got my 360 and played through Bioshock I was blown away. I've yet to have that feeling on these consoles. I'm hoping Uncharted will change that.

(Again, the library might be the issue. Big titles have PC versions, perhaps 50% of the current console library is "re-masters" and the ones that are visually stunning (Order 1886) are absolutely terrible in regards to what games are suppose to be - fun.)

Oh well, like I said, just put it on the the shelf with the collection.

 

[swilli89]

It doesn't really seem to bad too me. If it really bugs a person they can just do the trade in deal when the new consoles launch. Most of the time it's a $200 trade in credit with some additional perks at time of launch even.

Kind of a weak upgrade for longevity it looks like too me.

I'd take a different approach that is more forward looking with potentially longer longevity, while keeping backwards compatibility.

I'd just shrink the APU(modified of course) and pair it with a dGPU of similar specs and bake in mGPU support at the console level. Much better for the VR experience and most likely a much longer lifespan in the end.

Consoles have much lower power and thermal design limits than you may think. Since 8 Cat cores take up such a small space, it makes sense to just bundle them on to the same chip on-die as the graphics powerhouse.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/01/21/youll-never-guess-why-sony-kept-the-ps4s-power-consumption-under-250-watt/

Frankly I'm completely blown away if we get something like 2000+ Polaris cores in a revised PS4. This could be a huge improvement as a lot of rumors are pointing to the fact that each GCN 4.0 shader is double the performance of Hawaii and Fury shaders. With that kind of performance they could definitely swing 30FPS 4k play and VR play.

 

[Hitman928]

AMD moved consoel APUs to GF in late 2014 or early 2015. Use google for sources. So in this case ShintaiDK is right. And of course AMD would be stupid to not use console volume to fulfill WSA. Still, that 28 nm for current console APUs.

However it also makes sense that PS4K (or however you want to call it) will use GF 14 nm as polaris was made for that process. Maybe AMD does not have to compete with Apple directly but are dependent on GF. I'm not sure what is worse...

Besides, find it on Google, do you have any specific sources to point to? I quickly looked through the first page and didn't see anything very convincing.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

We aren't on different sides of this discussion actually. I totally get what you're saying but think about it..



How many quality levels do most AAA titles have to target already with PC? Hundreds of combinations! With modern game engines utilizing more hardware is as simple as ticking up the resolution and increasing shadow/light effects and higher textures.



Devs already have to code multiple paths for DX 11, DX 12, NV hardware, AMD hardware. This upgrade is using the exact same CPU/GCN combo so there will be zero compatibility issues.



Three years is frequent? People buy new phones yearly that cost twice as much as consoles. PS4 launched in 2013 and this one is rumored to be late 2016 release. That's three full years; buy a console on day 1 and be assured you have three years of your chosen platforms highest performance (much more than can be said for even ultra high end video cards). Three years down the road you have the option to upgrade to receive support for newer graphical features. If you decide not to, you still get to enjoy the latest releases for another three or so years down the road.



Actually can you go out and buy a better performing PS4 right now? You can't and so your statement isn't valid.

Why does anyone ever argue against more options? This is a great way for Sony to remain on top over the NX, provide backwards compatibility to its large installed base, and generate new hardware sales.

~~~~~~~~

Back on topic, Polaris 10 makes a lot of sense here as Russian laid out the main reasons why. This would be the first time in the history of the consoles that they release hardware in same season as cutting edge desktop GPUs. All the way back with Xbox original and its geforce 2 derivative, Xbox 360 and its X1900 derivative, and PS3 with its Geforce 7800 derivative, and up to current GCN chips in each major console, consoles have always been one or two full generations behind, so this fact alone has me excited. AMD should be receiving a much better margin this time around as they have more leverage in multiple areas.

This is the main thing I pick up on. Gamers are the same people paying $600 bucks every 1-2 years for the latest greatest phones.

Android and iOS scale just fine with better hardware. Console games are software just like PC games. Now that gcn and x86 are in the consoles gamedevs can make games for one platform and the game will choose settings based on the box the disc is in. Sony gets to sell their install base the latest hardware every 3 years as an added bonus. If they don't want to upgrade they don't have too.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

[maddie]

Consoles have much lower power and thermal design limits than you may think. Since 8 Cat cores take up such a small space, it makes sense to just bundle them on to the same chip on-die as the graphics powerhouse.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/01...pt-the-ps4s-power-consumption-under-250-watt/

Frankly I'm completely blown away if we get something like 2000+ Polaris cores in a revised PS4. This could be a huge improvement as a lot of rumors are pointing to the fact that each GCN 4.0 shader is double the performance of Hawaii and Fury shaders. With that kind of performance they could definitely swing 30FPS 4k play and VR play.

I haven't seen this before. What rumors?

Do you actually mean performance/watt of the total GPU?

 

[Kenmitch]

Consoles have much lower power and thermal design limits than you may think. Since 8 Cat cores take up such a small space, it makes sense to just bundle them on to the same chip on-die as the graphics powerhouse.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/01...pt-the-ps4s-power-consumption-under-250-watt/

Frankly I'm completely blown away if we get something like 2000+ Polaris cores in a revised PS4. This could be a huge improvement as a lot of rumors are pointing to the fact that each GCN 4.0 shader is double the performance of Hawaii and Fury shaders. With that kind of performance they could definitely swing 30FPS 4k play and VR play.

It's not nice to fight dreams with outdated logic.

If Polaris does bring 2x performance per watt then it would be feasible most likely even if they wanted to drop to say 200w's or so.

Besides my scenario is better for the PC master race in the end.

 

[swilli89]

I haven't seen this before. What rumors?

Do you actually mean performance/watt of the total GPU?

Polaris 10 demo showing its 2304 shades competing nicely with fury x 4096 shaders

 

[dark zero]

Bad news... The laptop version will be a rebrand and only the top tier will be Polaris...

 

[swilli89]

Bad news... The laptop version will be a rebrand and only the top tier will be Polaris...

Source?

 

[kapulek]

Source?

Propably this.

 

[tential]

I feel bad for all those PS4 XBONE owners who arent used to seeing their 400 dollar purchase become obsolete in 2 years.

Indeed it is troubling, we may see another launch like Fiji if AMD isn't careful .

This mentality needs to stop and it's the same mentality on Neogaf and other casual gaming forums that really hurts this type of stuff being released.

Just because you can pay more for improved graphics doesn't make the current console obsolete. There are HORDES of gamers crying right now that these new consoles will make their consoles obsolete and they don't want to upgrade and are very upset at these new consoles being released.

Games still are available on the original XboxOne/PS4. You just can buy high fps/resolution versions, which now FINALLY makes me interested in getting one.

 

[swilli89]

This mentality needs to stop and it's the same mentality on Neogaf and other casual gaming forums that really hurts this type of stuff being released.

Just because you can pay more for improved graphics doesn't make the current console obsolete. There are HORDES of gamers crying right now that these new consoles will make their consoles obsolete and they don't want to upgrade and are very upset at these new consoles being released.

Games still are available on the original XboxOne/PS4. You just can buy high fps/resolution versions, which now FINALLY makes me interested in getting one.

Exactly. Consumers these days.. Their experience will be EXACTLY THE SAME, yet they cry because they no longer have the best.

 

[tential]

Also do we say gtx 950/960 owners are second class citizens? In an age where games are ported to pc and handle multiple graphics cards, I'm sure they can add one more console configuration that's basically similar.

I mean if it was so hard more games would be ps4/xbone exclusives instead of cross platform