AMD: Fusion Makes Sense For Next-Gen Consoles

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
For drawing a finer line between PC and console would be good only if they could achieve unification.

A single disk or download that is usable on both the PC or the console, for example if I buy "Gears Of War 4" for my Xbox 720, I should be able to log into my XBL account on the PC and play it there too.

I cannot be that hard to figure this stuff out, if Steam has a way to play a game on a Mac and a PC, this should be a piece of cake.

If Nintendo wants to destroy the console market and get dominance it should do a deal with Steam for the Wii 2 and is the obvious choice as Sony is just tunnel vision in distribution of it's own content and Microsoft will never drop XBL or GFW, unless MS buys Steam of course...
 
This could do considerably well for a Company like Nintendo on their next console release. Seeing as it can stay within Nintendo's cheaper prices while also staying within the performance of their competitions consoles.
 
[citation][nom]gamerk316[/nom]You will NEVER see a console use an X86 based processor.X86 is NOT an efficent architecture, at all, and makes no sense for any device that needs a high degree of performance...[/citation]

Good thing x86 isn't an architecture then.
And next get consoles being slated for 2015 says they'd use x64 anyways.
 
If consoles are intended to have life cycles of upwards 10 years like PS3/XB360 appears to be, then some kind of expandability is needed. Just like you can stick a new GPU into the computer it should be possible to upgrade the GPU unit on the console. I'm just not sure how well this rubs with the proposed Fusion architecture where the CPU and GPU are integrated within the same chip.
 
Has somebody thouht about the potential of Apple with that? They are practically a console! they have closed hardware options and specific software for it, If they had a solid developer comunity (app store, ehem) they would bring lots of people for that, specially young people, the best mix between general computers and consoles, I'm not saying that it wouldn't come with its potential downsides, Apple being so closed and expensive, but still I mean, Apple running AMD on steroids to play games and still being capable to do general computer stuff? I think is a Win-win
 
@computerstufflovingfan

smurf village in glorious 3D......... im ready to be put down now
 
my console can split screen can yours? my whole family can sit on the couch and play together can your pc do that? its not always about the graphics (i got a xbox not ps3) and as i recall usually when consoles first come out arent they 1 to two generations ahead of pc? i can complain that at first pcs' were holding back consoles but that makes no cense just like if i said the nintendo is holding back the mobile game market
 
[citation][nom]gamerk316[/nom]You will NEVER see a console use an X86 based processor.X86 is NOT an efficent architecture, at all, and makes no sense for any device that needs a high degree of performance...[/citation]

The original XBOX was an x86 processor. A celeron running at about 700mhz I believe. I recall that console did pretty well in its day.
 
[citation][nom]wawa sxm[/nom]my console can split screen can yours? my whole family can sit on the couch and play together can your pc do that? its not always about the graphics (i got a xbox not ps3) and as i recall usually when consoles first come out arent they 1 to two generations ahead of pc? i can complain that at first pcs' were holding back consoles but that makes no cense just like if i said the nintendo is holding back the mobile game market[/citation]


Its not your problem.Console kids have "dumbed down" expectations.Graphics is a part of gameplay..Thats the reason why the consoles are not 8-bit like the old days
 
I really want the next-gen systems to get here soon. The current gen just doesn't have the horsepower to max out HDTVs and have large mp online gaming without sacrificing detail. Cloud base gaming won't happen as networking is not fast enough, the US is ranked 39th I think in the world, pretty sad really. I just want the next-gen to give me 1080/60p native with capacity to go 4k2k, have online mp with 50 vs 50 players, get rid of disc media, maybe use flash or SD cards instead (would be cool just to go to your B&M store, plug in your card and transfer the new game to it, would cut out all the loading times, downloading would just take too long (see previous reason on network), and please for the love of gaming gods, stop the porting hack job crap the developers keep pumping out. I used to love gaming on the PC (yeah it has the best HP and all), but I just couldn't take all the cheaters with their mods ruining the games.
 
[citation][nom]neblogai[/nom]Doesn't make much sense. Consoles need either great GPU, or innovation in other respect- like Wii controls were. Yet, such innovations do not come often, and even less often they have success in the market. Anyway, the options currently are:a) the usual, "power" approach- great GPU and CPU, great graphics upon launch, long product life. Fusion doesn't fit here- either chip would be too big to manufacture, or it's graphics too weak for a new console; as for the current consoles- AMD has already sold the technology and is no longer needed in "fussing" GPU and CPU chips.b) Cloud gaming: console is not necessary- it could all run of a PC.c) 3D gaming- double GPU power needed, which means a discrete powerful GPU.The next gaming consoles might very well be PCs with gaming docks for cloud gaming. So AMD does not need to sell Fusion to consoles- but to create their own gaming markets off PCs.[/citation]


no the next generation of consoles wil not be cloud based, most the market is too far away from having the apropriate bandwidth to stream games at 1080p. keep in midn consoels also sell to the majority crowd those mostly being the people thet DONT have huge wads of cash to shell out on expensive "super" bandwith monthly rates. they do however make enouhg money to save up for a single console.

the next generation of consoles , need the following things tio really be worth any one's time and money

1. 1080p rendering (possible even with 4X AA)
2. DX 11 technologies (or dx 12 if it hits before the next gen does)
3. loose all plans of basing control off goofy gimicky control schemes, nintendo need to go back to a basic contorler as thier main and MS and sony need to keep thier curent controller designs (maybe even make the systems accept the controllers from last gen so they can sell reduced cost systems that have no controllers).
4. very very small chip die sizes , definitely need to aim for 32 nm or less to reduce any heat issues
5. serious heat sinks (aka heat pipes since i doubt many console gamers want to feed a water cooled system it's water regularly)
6. Better production value. seriously , MS and sony both have massve disc drive failures on thier current generation, MS the worse given their drives didnt even have a rubber washer that reduces disc wobble , which elad to many peopel gettign useless coasters if they accidently moved or bumped thier system while a disc is reading.
7. reduced version variation, seriously , the number of differnt versions for both xbx 360 and ps3 was rediculous ps3 released a 20 gig , a 60 gig and a 80 gig originally , later cut that to a 40 , gig , then an 80 gig then a 120 gig model , confusing as hell , and that's just the ps3 not countign the slim version that came later.
8 Reduced price , this kinda of goes hadn in hand with the above point. i think both companies should relaese only two model variants intially a high end one then a low end one , the low end one definitely needs to release at 250 or less ! back when xbox 360 came out they ahd two mdodels which as great , but thier low end moden was 300 bucks while the high end was 400. the ps 3 intially released with 3 models , a low end a middle end and high end , each costing, 350, 500 , 600 respectfully. i cant emphasize enough how important it is that both MS and Sony release a model that is 250 or less from day one of launch , especaily when many of us , can build a decent gaming PC for 500-600 bucks now. grante console prices do come down quickly in time and with competition but we do not need to see inflated launch prices hitting around 700-800 bucks because if you give me that much money i could built a PC that would blast any console away, as im sure msot of us here could.
 
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]For drawing a finer line between PC and console would be good only if they could achieve unification.A single disk or download that is usable on both the PC or the console, for example if I buy "Gears Of War 4" for my Xbox 720, I should be able to log into my XBL account on the PC and play it there too.I cannot be that hard to figure this stuff out, if Steam has a way to play a game on a Mac and a PC, this should be a piece of cake.If Nintendo wants to destroy the console market and get dominance it should do a deal with Steam for the Wii 2 and is the obvious choice as Sony is just tunnel vision in distribution of it's own content and Microsoft will never drop XBL or GFW, unless MS buys Steam of course...[/citation]


first off i'd say it is safe to say steam is not going to be in any financial troubles any time soon , so i highly doubt any one will be buying them any time soon.
as for thier mac games , in most case these are the valve made games only, and even tehse have to be recoded , (valve keeps them selves busy adding new titles to thier mac list) not all steam games will run on macs not even all of valve's games do(yet).

we are along way of being able to pop on version ofa software into any format as you suggest , but the first step would deifnitely be to have all platforms using the same code base, for this to happen consoels would have to use x86-64 based artchitectures, soemthign that might not be an issue with MS or nintendo sence they have made ssytems in teh past using PC chips, but i jsut don't see sony doing this not after all the loads of money they sunk into the cell artchitecture., PSA 4 will likely used a much beefier version of Cell , which is definitely not x86-64 based.
 
Just use Intel's P54C Pentium processors for a so-called Fusion design. When it comes to graphics and video editing Intel's Pentium processors give the very best performance available. Larrabee was one of the best processors of its kind. Discontinuing it was a very bad move.
 
[citation][nom]techguy378[/nom]Just use Intel's P54C Pentium processors for a so-called Fusion design. When it comes to graphics and video editing Intel's Pentium processors give the very best performance available. Larrabee was one of the best processors of its kind. Discontinuing it was a very bad move.[/citation]

/cue laughter

Sorry, buddy. As far as a lot of people are concerened Intel hasn't ever made a single chip with decent graphics and the HD3000 release was yet another disappointment, albeit a step in the right direction. I do think they can further what they've accomplished and up their standards and get significantly more performance than what we currently see. Bear in mind that they have to compete with nvidia and AMD in this department, and in this case it's Intel that's the small fish in the same tank with the 2 bigger fish.
 
If the console manufacturers decide to use fusion than it probably won't be Llano since its a mid range product. The next generation fusion thats due next year is a much better choice. Its actually based on a Bulldozer module architecture which is up to 50% faster in gaming than the Phenom II core thats used in Llano and combined with AMD 7series graphics this thing will be a monster. (The second generation Fusion and the second Generation Bulldozer are THE SAME THING)
 


With the idea of cloud gaming not being possible as mainstream, we are talking around 4 years from now. Although in most cases you're probably correct, we don't know how quickly things may change by 2015.
With the introduction of an exclusive CPU/GPU(APU) for consoles, this could be a great thing. Hopefully by the time that next gen consoles come out AMD fine tune their APU design and Nvidia manages to get something out on the console as well. From launch it's surprising enough to see how a lower end APU can still play games like left4dead2 at 1280x720 nearly maxed out, as well as the dx11 support. I would root for discrete graphics, but launching prices at a possible 600-750$ to support the highest end GPU could cripple console Companies into an even farther product in the future.
 
[citation][nom]pelov[/nom]/cue laughterSorry, buddy. As far as a lot of people are concerened Intel hasn't ever made a single chip with decent graphics and the HD3000 release was yet another disappointment, albeit a step in the right direction. I do think they can further what they've accomplished and up their standards and get significantly more performance than what we currently see. Bear in mind that they have to compete with nvidia and AMD in this department, and in this case it's Intel that's the small fish in the same tank with the 2 bigger fish.[/citation]
The higher end Sandy Bridge integrated graphics found in the unlocked CPU's are just as powerful as the discrete budget AMD graphics found in many mid range laptops. One specific example is the AMD Mobility Radeon HD 6370 GPU. Intel's Sandy Bridge graphics are nearly equal in performance and Sandy Bridge gets a much, much better score on the Silicon Optix DVD benchmark than the previously mentioned AMD chip. My laptop doesn't have a Blu-Ray drive so I've been unable to test HD video.
 
What AMD has in the graphics department where a chip is included is currently limited to their e350 fusion mini-itx combos, where it performs roughly the same as the atom in work related benchmarks but easily surpasses it in video with equal and lower power consumption. Bear in mind AMD hasn't released an APU chip but has released that video comparing their mobile APU chip with the i7 sandy bridge mobile chip and even if you think the video was heavily leaning towards AMD because AMD made it, it's not hard to believe that in the end it will outperform SB in terms of video.
 
[citation][nom]wawa sxm[/nom]my console can split screen can yours? my whole family can sit on the couch and play together can your pc do that? its not always about the graphics (i got a xbox not ps3) and as i recall usually when consoles first come out arent they 1 to two generations ahead of pc? i can complain that at first pcs' were holding back consoles but that makes no cense just like if i said the nintendo is holding back the mobile game market[/citation]
Someone finally mentions a positive side of console gaming. As much as I enjoy solo/networked gaming on the PC, it is much easier to share a multiplayer console during parties. The games are sometimes easier to teach to newbies and little kids too.
[citation][nom]hardcore_gamer[/nom]Its not your problem.Console kids have "dumbed down" expectations.Graphics is a part of gameplay..Thats the reason why the consoles are not 8-bit like the old days[/citation]
I agree that graphics expectations on consoles are "dumbed down", but not all games require hardcore graphics. One thing I have always loved about Nintendo are their games designed for kids.
 
[citation][nom]mustbhacks[/nom]Good thing x86 isn't an architecture then.And next get consoles being slated for 2015 says they'd use x64 anyways.[/citation]
we have to say goodbye forever to the old school x86
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom