AMD Will Sell Modified Version PlayStation 4's APU

[exfileme]

AMD plans to sell a scaled down version of the PlayStation 4 APU sans Sony's technology.

AMD Will Sell Modified Version PlayStation 4's APU : Read more

 

[yamahahornist]

Microsoft better bring the dip to this party. The Sony PS4 is starting to draw me in ever day! Its pretty much the first console (of today) that can compare to a higher end system.

 

[chuyayala]

I think he got it backwards. AMD implemented a modified version of their upcoming chip on the PS4.

 

[bunz_of_steel]

So AMD builds a customized APU for the PS4 but can't put out an APU with some hair on it? Don't get me wrong the apu's I have experienced work great and have no issues playing HD or doing office work. However when it comes to a powerhouse workhorse... I guess APU isn't the way to go but rather the FX line. Problem there is AMD can only compete on price points not performance as the i5 eats their lunch.

 

[SneakySnake]

[citation][nom]bunz_of_steel[/nom]So AMD builds a customized APU for the PS4 but can't put out an APU with some hair on it? Don't get me wrong the apu's I have experienced work great and have no issues playing HD or doing office work. However when it comes to a powerhouse workhorse... I guess APU isn't the way to go but rather the FX line. Problem there is AMD can only compete on price points not performance as the i5 eats their lunch.[/citation]

APU's aren't bad as workhorses. They outperform Intel in threaded workloads at their price point.

 

[InvalidError]

[citation][nom]bunz_of_steel[/nom]So AMD builds a customized APU for the PS4 but can't put out an APU with some hair on it?[/citation]
Desktop APUs are generally intended for low/mid-range PCs.

The PS4 APU has a quad-channel (256bits) GDDR5 memory controller, while the FM2 socket only has dual-channel DDR3 to work with which is about 1/5th as much RAM bandwidth as the PS4.

The current APUs are already memory-constrained at 2133MT/s so AMD cannot make their IGP much faster without going for 2400+MT/s DDR4, quad-channel or eDRAM of some sort.

 

[nameon]

Wait... If The PS4's APU is the most powerful they have built to date.... What does that mean in relation to the NextBox's APU(rumored to be from AMD as well)?

 

[wannabepro]

I wonder if it'll use FM2, and if they'll release updated versions year after year. I could see this being amazing for $500 gaming systems. And you'd be able to upgrade the processor and graphics card in one go.

Spend say $300 on combined Processor and GPU. Then $50 on case, $60 on HDD, $40 on RAM, and $50 on PSU.

 

[thepowerofdonuts]

[citation][nom]nameon[/nom]Wait... If The PS4's APU is the most powerful they have built to date.... What does that mean in relation to the NextBox's APU(rumored to be from AMD as well)?[/citation]

Same thing I was wondering.

 

[jordanjkj]

[citation][nom]nameon[/nom]Wait... If The PS4's APU is the most powerful they have built to date.... What does that mean in relation to the NextBox's APU(rumored to be from AMD as well)?[/citation]
I wouldn't be surprised if its just a modified version or even the same apu that the ps4 has. If not then im stumped as well.

 

[WithoutWeakness]

[citation][nom]bunz_of_steel[/nom]So AMD builds a customized APU for the PS4 but can't put out an APU with some hair on it? Don't get me wrong the apu's I have experienced work great and have no issues playing HD or doing office work. However when it comes to a powerhouse workhorse... I guess APU isn't the way to go but rather the FX line. Problem there is AMD can only compete on price points not performance as the i5 eats their lunch.[/citation]
APU's get beaten by Intel chips on the CPU side because AMD dedicates a good portion of the die to the GPU compared to Intel, leaving less room for the CPU half of the processor. Architectural and transistor size differences aside, if Intel has more space on their die for the CPU than AMD does, Intel will have a better CPU. Once you factor in Intel's higher IPC and smaller manufacturing node AMD is forced to either significantly increase the die size, increase clock speeds, or both in order to try and catch up.

If you compare socket FM2 to socket 1155 you will see that the AMD dies are much larger. Some of AMD's FX chips have higher stock clocks than Intel chips in order to close the gap but power consumption is much higher and overclocking K-series chips gives Intel a huge per-core speed advantage again. AMD's APU's will never be able to compete with Intel's Core lineup and they were never designed for it in the first place.

tl;dr: APU's target a totally different market than i5's and will never compete with them on the CPU side.

 

[gm0n3y]

[citation][nom]yamahahornist[/nom]Microsoft better bring the dip to this party. The Sony PS4 is starting to draw me in ever day! Its pretty much the first console (of today) that can compare to a higher end system.[/citation]
Well it compares to a mid-high range system today. By the time the console is released it will be in the mid-range. This is about the same as the xb360/ps3 were when they were released. Of course for

 

[kartu]

[citation][nom]bunz_of_steel[/nom]Problem there is AMD can only compete on price points not performance as the i5 eats their lunch.[/citation]
Sony => went AMD
Microsoft => went AMD
Valve (SteamBox) => again AMDs APU

Now as far as CPU competition goes, in multithreaded apps AMDs CPUs tend to win.
How many cores is PS4 going to have? 8! Ouch. What are the chances that console ports will be able to utilize multiple cores on PCs as well? Very hich.

Now, even without this multi-threaded story, AMD's APUs wipe the floor with Intel's.
AMD is also used to smaller profit margins, than Intel. (when comparing CPU prices, don't forget to account for motherboard price difference).

 

[goodguy713]

I think its more like if AMD did put an APU out with those specs it would start to eat away at the descrete segment considering a 7850 is a fairly capable graphics card in its self.. so basically we should exspect 7850 level graphics in a few generations ? .. as far as APU's are concerned .. Im starting to think that the intel / amd processor vs graphics is kind of getting old In the end I think the person with the best graphic capablitlies @ entry level will be the winner reguardless of CPU performance a lot of home use of pc's i have seen any more either consists of gaming , media servers , and video / audio streaming. real restrictions are internet speed but sights like crunchyroll or some other places that offer 1080p streaming need a good gpu.
you really dont need a super powerful cpu / when the gpu tends to be more imporant in those uses.

 

[icemunk]

[citation][nom]bunz_of_steel[/nom]So AMD builds a customized APU for the PS4 but can't put out an APU with some hair on it? Don't get me wrong the apu's I have experienced work great and have no issues playing HD or doing office work. However when it comes to a powerhouse workhorse... I guess APU isn't the way to go but rather the FX line. Problem there is AMD can only compete on price points not performance as the i5 eats their lunch.[/citation]

AMD could make a powerhouse APU, but they make plenty of money selling discrete graphics cards. If they were to make an APU with 7850 power graphics, they might undercut their own discrete GPU market as well... I would love to see a powerhouse APU from AMD though

 

[lpedraja2002]

I hope this means better performing APU's for laptops. If it performs better than an A-10 4600m on games the I'm in favor of it.

 

[tipoo]

A cut down version? So basically the article means AMD will not suddenly cancel its plans for APUs with the next gen cores in them? "Cut down" could mean anything, and surely they won't try to put the 7850-like chip in there while limiting it with DDR3.

 

[downhill911]

So AMD is chip maker/dev. yet Sony comes in with their own tech which is even better?
And it can not be used by AMD....well maybe AMD could try a bit harder after failing last few years - numbers do not lie!

Soultion : Sony should be chip maker/dev and AMD could take a rest and think what they have done wrong.
It would be so cool to be able to say I have Sony CPU and Sony VGA. lol

 

[Guest]

Time for benchmarks:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6726/3dmark-for-windows-launches-we-test-it-with-various-laptops/2

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6508/the-new-opteron-6300-finally-tested/14

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/10/01/amds-trinity-faces-off-with-intels-ivy-bridge/

I would post more benchmarks, but just go to anandtech and see the latest benchmarks. In no way, shape, or form does AMD 'wipe the floor with Intel' in, well, ANYTHING! The only place the benchmarks are even CLOSE is when you measure an 8 core AMD CPU vs. a 4 core Intel CPU like an i3 that doesn't do hyperthreading or is painfully locked in core speed binning. Attrocious for people to try and mislead with information like that.

 

[dextermat]

The biggest problem I find with modern console is you are more looking at a movie than playing an actual game. No appeal for me

 

[pheroh]

An APU with a 7850 GPU, even if the CPU is scaled down to 6 cores or even quad, is gonna be AWESOME!

* Throws wallet at screen.

 

[deksman]

Well, if we take into account that AMD's APU's performance can be hindered due to the premise they operate on 'modules' instead of 'cores', a 4 module APU appears to be very much equivalent to a 2 core Intel i series cpu.

The Jaguar APU in PS4 however seems to utilize separate 'cores' (not modules), so I'm not sure just how much that will translate to performance increases (its possible it will affect it in a positive capacity).

I've also read some interesting news on Steamroller.
Should it deliver on what's being said (45% performance increase), then it can easily match/surpass what Intel offers across the board.

Having said that, AMD's higher end desktop APU's seem to approach/match more or less Intel's i5 entry level offerings (the ones with 4 cores/4 threads) in raw CPU power, but readily surpass it in GPU performance.
And if Steamroller delivers, then APU's based on it could produce much better results.

In multithreaded software, APU's seem to hold on their own most of the time, but I agree that Intel has them beat in numerous situations (still, keep in mind that APU's were designed to take advantage of GPGPU, whereas a lot of software doesn't do that - which tips the scales in Intels favor, whose IGP solution doesn't really thrive in OpenCL).

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]downhill911[/nom]So AMD is chip maker/dev. yet Sony comes in with their own tech which is even better?And it can not be used by AMD....well maybe AMD could try a bit harder after failing last few years - numbers do not lie!Soultion : Sony should be chip maker/dev and AMD could take a rest and think what they have done wrong.It would be so cool to be able to say I have Sony CPU and Sony VGA. lol[/citation]

The chip is an AMD chip. There is undoubtedly some proprietary Sony technology involved, but it was still an AMD chip. If AMD "took a rest", they'd stop making money and Sony would need to look elsewhere for chip design because they sure aren't going to design a modern CPU and graphics system on their own. They have little to no experience in that field.

Also, neither Sony nor AMD actually make the chips. They don't have the fabs for it, so they pay other companies such as TSMC and Global Foundries to make the chips. AMD can't afford to "take a rest". That would kill them quickly. AMD needs to keep on going, fixing mistakes and otherwise improving along the way, or else they're probably screwed.

 

[deathengine]

Reminds me of a few years ago when PS3 initially shipped with its cell processor being touted for being so much more powerful than anything else out there, while throwing out theoretical #'s that in reality it could never produce in the real world. Marketing and hype.
Though i am excited that the next gen is finally here. Now we can start to see better PC games.

 

[gilgamex]

[citation][nom]WithoutWeakness[/nom]APU's get beaten by Intel chips on the CPU side because AMD dedicates a good portion of the die to the GPU compared to Intel, leaving less room for the CPU half of the processor. Architectural and transistor size differences aside, if Intel has more space on their die for the CPU than AMD does, Intel will have a better CPU. Once you factor in Intel's higher IPC and smaller manufacturing node AMD is forced to either significantly increase the die size, increase clock speeds, or both in order to try and catch up.If you compare socket FM2 to socket 1155 you will see that the AMD dies are much larger. Some of AMD's FX chips have higher stock clocks than Intel chips in order to close the gap but power consumption is much higher and overclocking K-series chips gives Intel a huge per-core speed advantage again. AMD's APU's will never be able to compete with Intel's Core lineup and they were never designed for it in the first place.tl;dr: APU's target a totally different market than i5's and will never compete with them on the CPU side.[/citation]

When It comes to APU's theres no limitation to the die size, only the inherent disadvantages (such as power consumption & heat) that forces you to streamline and optimize the CPU & GPU architecture. So while Intel dedicates more for the CPU than GPU that only means that you have an i5 which will be its inherent size and the power and size of their gpu will make up the whole die size right?

So all AMD did was take the Athlon II architecture and originally made Lllano with 5000 series radeon cores, and then piledriver with trinity and 6000 series Radeon cores. So it doesnt matter what the size of those CPU dies are, they are put in with their full size, there isn't a limit, same goes for Intel.