AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[Cazalan]

FTC wouldn't let it happen. As it stands Intel is dangerously close to being forcibly broken up with how large they've become market wise. Them attempting to consolidate the entire consumer and commodity server industry into their company pretty much screams *monopoly*.

Intel is a big company but not THAT big. Their stock has taken a big hit due to declining PC sales. On the global scale there are much larger corporations. They may have a near monopoly on x86 but that advantage dwindles by the day as there are now 1.5 million Android (ARM) activations per day and rising. That's 50% more than PC sales.

IBM is twice the size of Intel and that is after selling off their commodity PC division to Lenovo. They aren't seen as a direct competitor to Intel but their services are heavily leveraged by their own mainframe, servers and storage divisions.

A similar situation for Oracle leveraged on their massive Sparc servers. A Sparc T5-8 server is nearly a billion dollars.

Both Google and Facebook and other "cloud" enterprises are building up infrastructure with ARM servers. HP/Dell and even AMD (soon) rolling out arrays of ARM servers.

Apple is expected to drop Intel for their own custom ARM chips.

All the growth is going to the ARM world not Intel world.

That said, these rumors happen a few times a year and I don't think Intel wants or needs AMD. They're happy at their own pace for improving PC graphics. 3X!! in 1 generation! lol. And they have Phi for compute.

 

[jdwii]

I remember when i first got into all of this i was reading console vs PC articles and Desktop is dieing and Intel will buy Amd or Amd is doomed articles all the time and this was over 7 years ago now i'm reading them again. Lol Maybe technology changes but the Questionable writers don't.

 

[sarinaide]

Haswell requires new power supply

"With low power comes burnt out Power Supplies" Nice on Intel to actually be playing ball with everyone. Its so gracious of Corsair to be playing along, probably want to make a buck or two off Intel. They should be punished and vendors leave this until they design new powersupplies some year later, let people run systems with no sleep state running up power bills. Its also a slap on the wrist of Motherboard vendors "disable Cstate in BIOS" so now the vendor must disable it and later enable it with BIOS updates. Now Gigabyte and co. have to figure out how to make this work.

Wonderful consume conscious awareness. I am sure this will make us end users thrilled to bits.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Mustve been a slow news day eh?

As to our Iris's being opened to Intel gfx solution, remember, theres a 50$ bump for their highend alone, that leaves AMD more monies and wriggle room to do the same perf for less money, yet leaving higher margins, thanx Intel

 

[mayankleoboy1]

would anyone like to guess which solution will have a better perf/watt rating : GT3/GT3e or Richland ?

 

[cowboy44mag]

so, is this the real reason amd's stocks are up suddenly?
"Intel Could Buy AMD as x86 Microprocessors Lose Share to ARM – Analysts.
AMD’s Shares Are Up on Intel Buyout Rumour"
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20130501223936_Intel_Could_Buy_AMD_as_x86_Microprocessors_Lose_Share_to_ARM_Analysts.html
i was wondering whom RR was polishing amd up for....

AMD Establishes Semi-Custom Business Unit to Create Tailored Products with Customer-Specific IP.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/20130501231534_AMD_Establishes_Semi_Custom_Business_Unit_to_Create_Tailored_Products_with_Customer_Specific_IP.html

*picks up a bowl of popcorn and waits for amd fanboys to implode*

edit: personally, i think intel should buy nvidia and appoint the ceo to it's gfx (consumer, server and professional) division as some kind of cto. but i guess amd is much cheaper and they don't have to pay glofo (timing is near-perfect).... :lol:

That is what I love about a true "fanboy" they can't admit the other side can do anything right, and are always counting down the days until the competition dies. I'm not really an AMD fanboy, i just hate Intel plain and simple because years ago an Intel rep using a couple bs benchmark tests was able to convince me to buy an expensive first gen dual core Intel CPU over AMD. At that time AMD was cheaper and better than Intel, I don't like being lied to or conned, and Intel will never get another dime out of me.

Being an Anit-Intel fanboy I still have to give the devil his due. Intel pulled their act together and Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge are a fine line of CPUs. Intel's CORE series have been very, very impressive. The thing I can't stand about Intel fanboys is they can't do the same, they can't give AMD any credit for anything they do.

Piledriver was a huge improvement over Bulldozer (much bigger than the improvement from Sandy to Ivy btw), but an Intel fanboy will just point out that Ivy still posts better benchmarks than Piledriver, using software custom made for Intel architecture. But the biggest triumph AMD has made this year no Intel fanboy wants to address. All the new high end console systems will run AMD processors. Put simply AMD will outproduce and outsell Intel processor for processor in the non server market. Desktop PC sales are down, but how many console systems are in the USA alone? If you look at 10 houses I would say at least 7 of them have either a PS3 or Xbox 360 somewhere. Forget the "console war" this year AMD wins if you buy PS4 or Xbox. Even if AMD gave Sony and Microsoft good "bulk deals" they aren't giving the processors away and are therefore making profit. Yet here we go again with Intel is just going to buy AMD and AMDs days are numbered... something Intel and there fanboys have been saying ever since the company emerged.

It doesn't matter how good Steamroller will be as long as the software doesn't favor them. AMD is familiar with this position as they have been there for quite some time. In real world tasks Piledriver is much closer to Ivy Bridge than the benchmark software (written for Intel architecture) shows. I wonder how Intel is going to handle it when the software tables are turned? New games will be written for AMD architecture there is no way around that. If software is expressly written for AMD architecture Intel isn't going to have their usual benchmark superiority in the video gaming world.

A year ago there were many posts about how was AMD going to compete with Intel architecture, and I think that they have answered that. its not "if you can't beat them...." they answered by changing the game, by forcing software studios to build around their architecture which means no more single or dual core gaming, but the new world of truly multi threaded gaming is upon us. Intel has been focused on single core execution for a long time now while AMD has been sitting in the background focusing on mulit thread execution. All current games, and a good deal of software still is written around single core execution (hence the lop sided benchmark software). The "rope-a-dope" is Intel is still building for last years software and not paying attention to what next years software will be. Most people won't care about how fast a Haswell CPU can compute Pi if its being out gamed by Steamroller. Just my two cents, but something to think about.

 

[mayankleoboy1]

For every PS4 and XbawX 720 sold, how many notebooks, office PC's and server chips are sold ?

 

[de5_Roy]

Spoiler

That is what I love about a true "fanboy" they can't admit the other side can do anything right, and are always counting down the days until the competition dies. I'm not really an AMD fanboy, i just hate Intel plain and simple because years ago an Intel rep using a couple bs benchmark tests was able to convince me to buy an expensive first gen dual core Intel CPU over AMD. At that time AMD was cheaper and better than Intel, I don't like being lied to or conned, and Intel will never get another dime out of me.

Being an Anit-Intel fanboy I still have to give the devil his due. Intel pulled their act together and Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge are a fine line of CPUs. Intel's CORE series have been very, very impressive. The thing I can't stand about Intel fanboys is they can't do the same, they can't give AMD any credit for anything they do.

Piledriver was a huge improvement over Bulldozer (much bigger than the improvement from Sandy to Ivy btw), but an Intel fanboy will just point out that Ivy still posts better benchmarks than Piledriver, using software custom made for Intel architecture. But the biggest triumph AMD has made this year no Intel fanboy wants to address. All the new high end console systems will run AMD processors. Put simply AMD will outproduce and outsell Intel processor for processor in the non server market. Desktop PC sales are down, but how many console systems are in the USA alone? If you look at 10 houses I would say at least 7 of them have either a PS3 or Xbox 360 somewhere. Forget the "console war" this year AMD wins if you buy PS4 or Xbox. Even if AMD gave Sony and Microsoft good "bulk deals" they aren't giving the processors away and are therefore making profit. Yet here we go again with Intel is just going to buy AMD and AMDs days are numbered... something Intel and there fanboys have been saying ever since the company emerged.

It doesn't matter how good Steamroller will be as long as the software doesn't favor them. AMD is familiar with this position as they have been there for quite some time. In real world tasks Piledriver is much closer to Ivy Bridge than the benchmark software (written for Intel architecture) shows. I wonder how Intel is going to handle it when the software tables are turned? New games will be written for AMD architecture there is no way around that. If software is expressly written for AMD architecture Intel isn't going to have their usual benchmark superiority in the video gaming world.

A year ago there were many posts about how was AMD going to compete with Intel architecture, and I think that they have answered that. its not "if you can't beat them...." they answered by changing the game, by forcing software studios to build around their architecture which means no more single or dual core gaming, but the new world of truly multi threaded gaming is upon us. Intel has been focused on single core execution for a long time now while AMD has been sitting in the background focusing on mulit thread execution. All current games, and a good deal of software still is written around single core execution (hence the lop sided benchmark software). The "rope-a-dope" is Intel is still building for last years software and not paying attention to what next years software will be. Most people won't care about how fast a Haswell CPU can compute Pi if its being out gamed by Steamroller. Just my two cents, but something to think about.

since you're using my post in the reply, i kindly point you towards an earlier post (and a few others) in this thread where i explain, in detail (with examples), how to champion your favorite amd cpus - lots of tips and tricks. the m.i.l.f. have no chance.
do you know why sony turned to amd instead of others? it wasn't 'forcing to change the game', it was simply because amd had a complete x86 cpu+gpu solution and they were so near broke that they could not refuse sony's offer. amd could have gotten a better deal, such as customized kaveri(pricier but much more powerful) instead of significantly cheaper jaguars. most of the copyright from ps4 is still sony's - they get lion's share of the revenues. let's not even count the number of consoles sold in their entire lifecycle vs number of pcs sold in a quarter or two...let alone tablets. just producing the opposite side of the argument. :lol:
edit: m.i.l.f. - mindless intel loving fanboys, as opposed to r.a.l.f. raging amd (or something starting with a...) loving fanboys. just in case you were wondering.

 

[sarinaide]

Mustve been a slow news day eh?

As to our Iris's being opened to Intel gfx solution, remember, theres a 50$ bump for their highend alone, that leaves AMD more monies and wriggle room to do the same perf for less money, yet leaving higher margins, thanx Intel

I heard the A10 6800K will be priced at $130 which is what the 5800K is priced at, I would think maybe AMD should bump it up by $10-15 as GT3 is only competitive with the now ancient VLIW based Trinity. Richland as some closed mouth testers have said to me is just simply wow on what appears to be nothing different.

would anyone like to guess which solution will have a better perf/watt rating : GT3/GT3e or Richland ?

Probably the Intel part, but done at a rediculous price point. Also Intel is pulling an AMD with the iGPU, ramping clocks up to try bring parity while a 800mhz Trinity is able to beat a 1300mhz Iris.

For every PS4 and XbawX 720 sold, how many notebooks, office PC's and server chips are sold ?

As a respected reviewer told me recently, technology has come on leaps and bounds, the potential of the APU is astounding and the new generation consoles are largely untapped in its true performance. We are at the point where hardware to hardware is not the defining feature but how now software interlinks. Software writers are 10 years behind, while some are deciding to change it is now software playing catch up.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just for the team green crowd

https://amd.box.com/3dmark

 

[mayankleoboy1]

Probably the Intel part, but done at a rediculous price point. Also Intel is pulling an AMD with the iGPU, ramping clocks up to try bring parity while a 800mhz Trinity is able to beat a 1300mhz Iris.

Isnt ramping up the clocks is the last-ditch stab to boost performance ? Mainly because power usage and hence heat always take a hit.

Richland as some closed mouth testers have said to me is just simply wow on what appears to be nothing different.

I have poor memory. IIRC, the perf improvement of Richland GPU is ,what, 15% over Trinity ?
Which means GT3e is ~60% the perf of Richland.

 

[de5_Roy]

^^ iirc rumored 'graphics' performance improvement in 'applications' were around 40%.
btw, intel may have perf/watt advantage but they won't have perf/price/watt advantage... although it remains to be seen how lower intel is willing to go with hd5000 down the cpu line. so far i know of only one core i3 sku with hd5000, no mention of price.

 

[gamerk316]

so, is this the real reason amd's stocks are up suddenly?
"Intel Could Buy AMD as x86 Microprocessors Lose Share to ARM – Analysts.
AMD’s Shares Are Up on Intel Buyout Rumour"
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20130501223936_Intel_Could_Buy_AMD_as_x86_Microprocessors_Lose_Share_to_ARM_Analysts.html
i was wondering whom RR was polishing amd up for....

AMD Establishes Semi-Custom Business Unit to Create Tailored Products with Customer-Specific IP.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/20130501231534_AMD_Establishes_Semi_Custom_Business_Unit_to_Create_Tailored_Products_with_Customer_Specific_IP.html

*picks up a bowl of popcorn and waits for amd fanboys to implode*

edit: personally, i think intel should buy nvidia and appoint the ceo to it's gfx (consumer, server and professional) division as some kind of cto. but i guess amd is much cheaper and they don't have to pay glofo (timing is near-perfect).... :lol:

FTC wouldn't let it happen. As it stands Intel is dangerously close to being forcibly broken up with how large they've become market wise. Them attempting to consolidate the entire consumer and commodity server industry into their company pretty much screams *monopoly*.

Even if Intel brought AMD, the CPU market would be far more competitive then the GPU market was (is) after NVIDIA brought 3dfx. Between ARM, SPARC, PPC, and other architectures, there are plenty of options.

Now, that face few OS's happen to support alternate architectures is a totally different problem to solve, though at least MSFT is kicking the tires on ARM. [Anyone remember when NT 5 supported PPC and SPARC?]

 

[gamerk316]

As a respected reviewer told me recently, technology has come on leaps and bounds, the potential of the APU is astounding and the new generation consoles are largely untapped in its true performance. We are at the point where hardware to hardware is not the defining feature but how now software interlinks. Software writers are 10 years behind, while some are deciding to change it is now software playing catch up.

Says someone who's never written software before.

 

[sarinaide]

Probably the Intel part, but done at a rediculous price point. Also Intel is pulling an AMD with the iGPU, ramping clocks up to try bring parity while a 800mhz Trinity is able to beat a 1300mhz Iris.

Isnt ramping up the clocks is the last-ditch stab to boost performance ? Mainly because power usage and hence heat always take a hit.

Richland as some closed mouth testers have said to me is just simply wow on what appears to be nothing different.

I have poor memory. IIRC, the perf improvement of Richland GPU is ,what, 15% over Trinity ?
Which means GT3e is ~60% the perf of Richland.

It is actually hard to say how GT3 is placed, I would imagine better than expected but the issue is cost involved. AMD does now have a good helping of interim HSA applications, its already eyefinity ready and are condusive to workstation usage. While power is higher and thats not disputed the performance is really good, I am starting to like this AMD Steady Stream technology, find my video playback is crisp.

^^ iirc rumored 'graphics' performance improvement in 'applications' were around 40%.
btw, intel may have perf/watt advantage but they won't have perf/price/watt advantage... although it remains to be seen how lower intel is willing to go with hd5000 down the cpu line. so far i know of only one core i3 sku with hd5000, no mention of price.

I think the touted iGPU improvements were 22-40% quoted from AMD themselves and this varies on the type of application, overall I think 10-15% over trinity at the same cost which is a very good deal. I personally don't think I will get Richland due to the proximity to Kaveri, but you never know, one may accidentally end in my build.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Its been said, the edram solution will cost 50$ over a plain Jane without any Iris

Watch for cube
Too many other consortiums for Intel to keep up with, moving in too many directions
Its possible Intel may have to focus in a few directions like AMD has, to hold margins and break into new markets.

 

[gamerk316]

Does anyone understand the main reason they have this many cores is for background tasks? I even heard a rumor that PS4 and the 720 will use 2 cores just for the OS.

I could see it for the Infinity; Windows itself would need a core, and it looks like the CPU that manages the Kinnect interface has moved off the Kinnect proper and onto the main console, so that would require a separate CPU due to all the I/O the Kinnect would be pumping out. Also remember the Infinity supports multiple apps at once, so that also could eat CPU cores. I REALLY want to know how much the console is GUARANTEED for developer use for a single app at any one time due to these issues. I honestly wouldn't be shocked if you can only guarantee 4-5 cores for the main foreground application.

For the PS4, if Sony keeps a slim OS like it has now, one core is plenty. I really don't see them implementing a heavy OS...

 

[gamerk316]

Normally yes. But given how the arch is now X86 AND grossly overpowered, I suspect you won't see devs as willing to go down to that level. For the PS3, you had to (mainly because keeping the SPE's busy was such a chore), and the older single-core consoles REALLY benefited from making sure threads got assigned in some set order. But for PC's, you don't care, because the OS does it for you.

In short, I'm arguing that by making the specs TOO good, you are going to get much less efficient code, and thus lower performance then expected. I'm worried you are going to see PC code for console games, and a general loss of performance as a result.

Honestly, of all the arguments presented, your argument about laziness from PC ports to consoles makes some sense. I doubt that the console ports will experience similar tribulations because console developers are typically used to coding to that low level of hardware.

In the PC industry though, your argument holds some water...companies that don't design mostly console games could fall into that rut.

I wasn't even talking about ports, which IMO is overblown since most versions are typically coded at the same time...

The issue is this: The PS3 especially (less so for the 360) needed to be coded at a VERY low level to get any real performance and keep the memory footprint around ~200kb or so. So you have games with a lot of hardcoded thread logic, memory management, and the like. This makes it hard to reuse code for the PC version, driving up costs and delaying development (since you need ot basically re-write your memory and GPU interfaces, just for starters).

This gen, boom, you have more hardware then you know what to do with. And its a PC like architecture. The result is likely to be that all those optimizations on consoles to get the most out of them will stop being used in order to make it trivial to re-use large parts of the code base between both consoles and the PC. So over the long term, you won't see as much advancement this console generation, as most of the hardware won't be used at max capacity. This will, also over the long term, stagnate the PC, as you will see the consoles bloated specs actually hold back the PC.

In short: I argue the PC like hardware on consoles is going to stagnate PC development for the next decade, because there will be no incentive to spend the time and money to really get the most out of the new consoles.

 

[sarinaide]

As a respected reviewer told me recently, technology has come on leaps and bounds, the potential of the APU is astounding and the new generation consoles are largely untapped in its true performance. We are at the point where hardware to hardware is not the defining feature but how now software interlinks. Software writers are 10 years behind, while some are deciding to change it is now software playing catch up.

Says someone who's never written software before.

So technology that opens up avenues into more efficient codes and software implementation, and to be frank this technology is screaming at you writers to untap plenty potential. There have been a number of reports from AMD and game writers which are of the opinion that AMD's open path to HSA is simple to code in terms of not being foreign but exciting going forward. I don't understand why you continually seem to reject this idea.

We are now moving on to new Unreal engines and Frostbite engines that are legitimately using 4-8 cores effectively and the scaling is showing. Cryteks own engine was capable of using more than 4 cores effectively and this leveraged performance with the 8350 capable of drawing upto the 3770. While gaming is arguably the least relavent but easiest to illustrate, HSA is what most are interested in, the very limited applications that support this already show AMD opening up gaps on top end x86 processors. It is something new and the tech is there all it needs is the software writes for them to unleash new levels of performance.

 

[cowboy44mag]

For every PS4 and XbawX 720 sold, how many notebooks, office PC's and server chips are sold ?

Intel is not selling ALL of those notebooks, office PCs and server chips. Android is going to take some of those notebook sales as people opt for a Jelly Bean tablet, and AMD is still selling notebooks, office PCs and server chips too. A part of those sales are still going to be going to AMD. ALL the PS4 and Xbox processor profits are going to be going to AMD. Even if AMD had to take a lesser deal and aren't going to make a large profit per console they are still going to make a good profit (maybe not as much as they would like, but there will still be a good profit margin) and there are millions of consoles that sell in the US alone, let alone the world market. Sony and Microsoft are also not as concerned with the profit they get from the console sales as they make the vast majority of their profit trough software sales. The Xbox 360 and PS3 console sales didn't even make a profit till the consoles were on the market for over three years (but the hardware suppliers still made good profits). The very first day of release there will be millions of PS4 and Xboxs sold. I know PC lovers don't like to admit it, but console sales far outweigh gamer PC sales, which is why studios produce games for console systems and port them for PC, not the other way around. AMD will lead the sales of the gaming industry, which is no small niche, and will be a large contributing factor as to why there aren't going to be bought up by Intel or just go belly up.

As to if the Sony and Microsoft contracts were a bitter pill to swallow because AMD didn't have a choice, or if it was strategy is irrelevant as it means the same thing in the end. Game studios will still have to contend with AMD processors and will therefore have to produce mulit-threaded games (utilizing 4-6 cores) that will on the software end favor AMD. I'm sure Intel will still have a slew of benchmark software that shows them way way way out in front of AMD, but if your pricey Haswell isn't gaming better or as well as a less expensive Steamroller alternative I can see a lot of Intel fans getting really mad.

 

[de5_Roy]

since there's no hd7k thread and this doesn't belong to hd8k thread either and this has been a slow amd news day drowned by iris...

"AMD says frame pacing beta driver due in June/July timeframe"
http://techreport.com/news/24748/amd-says-frame-pacing-beta-driver-due-in-june-july-timeframe
much better than october. \o/

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Dev costs have skyrocketed, on the old systems
Thats going to change.
They eked out about as much as they could on the old systems, which even today, some games bring PCs to their knees.
They have 8x available on the new consoles, plus ease of dev costs.


I think therell be abuse and laziness racing to release of newer titles/games, but thats just it isnt it?
Everyone will be able to do this, its just, I have a feeling everyone wont

 

[Cazalan]

I don't quite get the baseline those slides were refering to, they failed to give scores which is odd in its own right but despite that at least Intel has a iGPU solution albeit only at the Iris level. Its nearly a year now since Trinity and Intel have been targeting it as the criterion to beat, AMD have themselves stated that its not a very high benchmark as they term Trinity as a infant in iGPU performance. The real question with Iris and the rumors I am hearing as to costing is that a buyer of any GT3 part will need to make very certain that integrated is the way they are going as the pricing is not very cheap, compared to the 4770K its a bit of a gut check.

TH showed 3DMark 11 Graphic score of 652 for the HD 4000 in the i7-3770k. That would put the i7-4770R at 1956.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-benchmark-core-i7-3770k,3181-4.html

The A10-5800K gets a score of 1183.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-a8-5600k-a6-5400k,3224-8.html

That would give a 65% advantage to the GT3e. Of course that is just a synthetic benchmark and may have vastly different results in a real game. However that one of the same benchmark AMD cites to talk about performance gains.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I would be wary of bungholio marks, as the stress is unknown on these new chips, which all have turbo, especially for mobile

 

[mayankleoboy1]

For every PS4 and XbawX 720 sold, how many notebooks, office PC's and server chips are sold ?

Spoiler

Intel is not selling ALL of those notebooks, office PCs and server chips. Android is going to take some of those notebook sales as people opt for a Jelly Bean tablet, and AMD is still selling notebooks, office PCs and server chips too. A part of those sales are still going to be going to AMD. ALL the PS4 and Xbox processor profits are going to be going to AMD. Even if AMD had to take a lesser deal and aren't going to make a large profit per console they are still going to make a good profit (maybe not as much as they would like, but there will still be a good profit margin) and there are millions of consoles that sell in the US alone, let alone the world market. Sony and Microsoft are also not as concerned with the profit they get from the console sales as they make the vast majority of their profit trough software sales. The Xbox 360 and PS3 console sales didn't even make a profit till the consoles were on the market for over three years (but the hardware suppliers still made good profits). The very first day of release there will be millions of PS4 and Xboxs sold.

..

Compare the profit margin of selling a server chip, and the associated maintainance contract, to the tiny, one-off payment per chip for consoles for AMD.
AFAIU from the interview of PS4 designer, AMD was more like a IP provider. They provided the Jguar cores and the HD8000 cores. It is the Sony engineers who conceptualised the hUMA thingy.

I know PC lovers don't like to admit it, but console sales far outweigh gamer PC sales, which is why studios produce games for console systems and port them for PC, not the other way around. AMD will lead the sales of the gaming industry, which is no small niche, and will be a large contributing factor as to why there aren't going to be bought up by Intel or just go belly up

Who said anything about gaming PC ? They are about 1% of the non-server x86 market. I am talking about the bulk, cheap notebooks and desktops that mom-and-pop buy.
How will "AMD leading the game industry" help AMD ?

As to if the Sony and Microsoft contracts were a bitter pill to swallow because AMD didn't have a choice, or if it was strategy is irrelevant as it means the same thing in the end. Game studios will still have to contend with AMD processors and will therefore have to produce mulit-threaded games (utilizing 4-6 cores) that will on the software end favor AMD. I'm sure Intel will still have a slew of benchmark software that shows them way way way out in front of AMD, but if your pricey Haswell isn't gaming better or as well as a less expensive Steamroller alternative I can see a lot of Intel fans getting really mad

If you are talking about CPU performance for games, then Intel has 4 and 4+4 core variants as well. And those perform better than 8 core PD in most games. And Haswell will do better than a SR chip.

 

[cowboy44mag]

Normally yes. But given how the arch is now X86 AND grossly overpowered, I suspect you won't see devs as willing to go down to that level. For the PS3, you had to (mainly because keeping the SPE's busy was such a chore), and the older single-core consoles REALLY benefited from making sure threads got assigned in some set order. But for PC's, you don't care, because the OS does it for you.

In short, I'm arguing that by making the specs TOO good, you are going to get much less efficient code, and thus lower performance then expected. I'm worried you are going to see PC code for console games, and a general loss of performance as a result.

Honestly, of all the arguments presented, your argument about laziness from PC ports to consoles makes some sense. I doubt that the console ports will experience similar tribulations because console developers are typically used to coding to that low level of hardware.

In the PC industry though, your argument holds some water...companies that don't design mostly console games could fall into that rut.

I wasn't even talking about ports, which IMO is overblown since most versions are typically coded at the same time...

The issue is this: The PS3 especially (less so for the 360) needed to be coded at a VERY low level to get any real performance and keep the memory footprint around ~200kb or so. So you have games with a lot of hardcoded thread logic, memory management, and the like. This makes it hard to reuse code for the PC version, driving up costs and delaying development (since you need ot basically re-write your memory and GPU interfaces, just for starters).

This gen, boom, you have more hardware then you know what to do with. And its a PC like architecture. The result is likely to be that all those optimizations on consoles to get the most out of them will stop being used in order to make it trivial to re-use large parts of the code base between both consoles and the PC. So over the long term, you won't see as much advancement this console generation, as most of the hardware won't be used at max capacity. This will, also over the long term, stagnate the PC, as you will see the consoles bloated specs actually hold back the PC.

In short: I argue the PC like hardware on consoles is going to stagnate PC development for the next decade, because there will be no incentive to spend the time and money to really get the most out of the new consoles.

I can see where you are going with this, and a lot of it I can agree with. Game studios are lazy and if they can make a buck for producing crap they surely will. I have seen several games in this last generation that you can go through in 2 or 3 hours with sloppy graphics. That is just lazy and should be unacceptable. However for the first time in history Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox are going to be using the same architecture. Maybe not the same exact processor but the same architecture and will therefore be trying to one up each other.

The consoles themselves won't be very different this time and should be able to do all the same things (ie Xbox 360 couldn't play Blu Rays but the next gen can). Sony is usually priced a good deal higher than Microsoft consoles so they will have to justify the extra cost with premium exclusive titles. Both Sony and Microsoft outright own several game studios and that is where the "battleground" will be. In an effort to produce games bigger and badder than the other's exclusive studios they will both be trying to tap the full power of their respective consoles. Other studios will have to evolve with Sony studios vs Microsoft studios or their games won't be desirable in comparison. If anything both companies utilizing the same PC architecture should make them push that architecture past its full potential as two huge companies battle for the title of BEST console. They may not push the consoles past their full potential for a couple years (like we saw last time) but they will still be trying to get as much as they can out of the hardware.