AphexTwunt
Member
The comic relief from this forum is welcomed in these 'uncertain times'....
The salt and stages of grief are palpable.
The salt and stages of grief are palpable.
I know. He may be wrong, but so is your claim that RDNA was designed "before the Sony engagement". AMD may have gotten started on it before Sony got involved, but the fact that it includes specific optimizations made for Sony shows that they were very much a part of the design process.
AMD co-developer DXR 1.1 with Microsoft... basically AMD helped MS to support their RDNA 2.0 with DXR 1.1.I know. He may be wrong, but so is your claim that RDNA was designed "before the Sony engagement". AMD may have gotten started on it before Sony got involved, but the fact that it includes specific optimizations made for Sony shows that they were very much a part of the design process.
Not just API, but also includes directing hardware design bias to improve certain major 3D game engines e.g. Gears 5 is picked for XSX just like Gears 4 for X1X .This is great but doesn't contradict what i said:
MS & NVIDIA/AMD work together to shape DX and define features to include in their new architectures
MS however is not involved in the development of AMD/NVIDIA micro-architectures
They work together to define features for Turing/RDNA2 and shape DX but MS is not involved in the actual micro architecture design beyond that.
The software optimize for what the hardware have... true.
Notice "based on that hardware's own wavefront/warp width which is concealed". There's a direct relationship between software and hardware.
That's BS. AMD's RDNA 2 hardware design has to cooperate with MS's API direction and certain popular 3D game engines.AMD co-developer DXR 1.1 with Microsoft... basically AMD helped MS to support their RDNA 2.0 with DXR 1.1.
RDNA 2.0 is AMD research and development... no MS cooperation here.
So why you posted a January article that is obvious dated lol
I'm not late.
False again.That's BS. AMD's RDNA 2 hardware design has to cooperate with MS's API direction and certain popular 3D game engines.
Unrelated to your claim.The argument: ethomaz claims Microsoft has nothing to do with RDNA 2. LOL
From https://www.anandtech.com/show/14579/all-ryzen-qa-with-amd-ceo-dr-lisa-su
RDNA was designed before the Sony engagement, hence debunking pro-Sony news articles such as https://segmentnext.com/2018/06/13/amd-navi-sony-playstation-5/
RDNA changed the wave length to better fit with gaming workloads. It's a two-way street and meeting somewhere in the middle but Nvidia is dominant.The software optimize for what the hardware have... true.
DX12 is optimized to the architecture found in all vendor hardware.
That is the core goal of an API.
Weird coincidence by all new titles in Unreal Engine 4 are being announced exclusive to PS5.You missed MS's large scale game software profiling given to AMD during X1X R&D phase. Many MS 1st party games are powered by Unreal Engine 4.
Yes optimization for better efficiency.RDNA changed the wave length to better fit with gaming workloads. It's a two-way street and meeting somewhere in the middle but Nvidia is dominant.
I’m only correcting the misinformation Xbox fans mare up.Why is this thread still going? Sheesh people!
Ok then i agreeMy argument was NOT about microarchitecture design work.
This isn't unique to MS. As you said Sony has their own priorities/needs or bias that they want AMD to implement: Sony worked with AMD to incorporate platform specific features/optimizations and if some of their concepts are useful to more than just the PS5 AMD incorporates them on discrete cards.Not just API, but also includes directing hardware design bias to improve certain major 3D game engines e.g. Gears 5 is picked for XSX just like Gears 4 for X1X .
FACT Vulkan is late as of January 15, 2020 . You posted Vulkan press release around March 2020.So why you posted a January article that is obvious dated lol
False again.
AMD created RDNA 2.0.
AMD helped MS to add support to RDNA 2.0 in their DXR API.
Bullshitr are the misinformation you are trying to spread here lol
Do some research first or ask somebody that knows it.
Actually the semi-custom silicon business works that way.Ok then i agree
This isn't unique to MS. As you said Sony has their own priorities/needs or bias that they want AMD to implement: Sony worked with AMD to incorporate platform specific features/optimizations and if some of their concepts are useful to more than just the PS5 AMD incorporates them on discrete cards.
AMD is indeed late.FACT Vulkan is late as of January 15, 2020 . You posted Vulkan press release around March 2020.
AMD filled their BVH RT patent in December 2017 which is too late for March GDC 2018's DXR/RTX (BVH RT) demo.
AMD's RDNA 2 R&D has to cooperate with MS's kingmaker selection. AMD is late. Deal with it.
The real bullshit comes from you.
Changes to RDNA are influenced by NVIDIA (it's called market pressure) and the quest for lower latency stems from X1X R&D era.Yes optimization for better efficiency.
That is unrelated to APIs thought.
APIs has to update to support the changes way from RDNA.
See hardware changed and APIs receives updates to support these changes.
Not the opposite.
BTW that RDNA change is unrelated to nVidia... their architecture are way different and the workload doesn’t spread via waves like GCN and RDNA.
And nVidia changes are influenced by little Casper.Changes to RDNA are influenced by NVIDIA (it's called market pressure) and the quest for lower latency stems from X1X R&D era.
Oversimplified Graphics Rendering 101VRS changes shading resolution instead.
AMD is indeed late.
Vulkan not... they are early already supporting RT tech in GPUs to be launched yet.
Vulkan already supported nVidia RTX since release too.
You missed the conservation of resource goals. Both XSX's custom and VRS has similar goals to conserve GPU resources.Oversimplified Graphics Rendering 101
Full disclaimer, I am not a game developer I've just been around game developers and programmers, I have friends and family who are software engineers and I've been around these forums long enough to pick up a pedestrian understanding in some of these things.
Before you see a single pixel on a screen, it goes through various render stages who's order depends on what type of rendering you are doing. Deferred or Forward rendering.
Lets go with Deferred rendering.
In a deferred rending, you have various stages aka passes that give you descriptions for different things. In 1 pass, you can get information on how shiny something is, the color, depth, light. In another pass you can get
These are stored in different buffers. You have the G-buffer, Z-buffer etc. What goes in G-buffer depends on the game engine it can be any of the various information from the above. Z-buffer contains depth information and the ID-buffer is just a map that keeps track of each pixel so you can track them. It can be used for various things. This is why PS4 Pro GPU has a Sony specific hardware feature to do this with little cost.
All these stages are combined together to give you the final render which is sent out to your screen. Any of the stages above can have any resolution that is different from the final output resolution.
This is a totally different thing to variable rate shading.
My last Radeon dGPU puchase was MSI R9-290X Gaming X. I purchased GTX 980 Ti FE mostly due to superior UE4 performance and it's not late when compared to Fury X.And nVidia changes are influenced by little Casper.
I remember when Radeon was the leader in tech... they did change to Unifieds Shaders influencies by nVidia false, they not lol.
You are not interested in learning anything, you just want to argue using words that you think means something that you have't a clue what they actually mean.You missed the conservation of resource goals. Both XSX's custom and VRS has similar goals to conserve GPU resources.
VRS is changing shader resolution which lessens the render load.
X1X's version has a native resolution depth buffer with different resolution for the color buffer which lessens the render load.
Net result: both methods are not rendering at native resolution.
PS5 and 3D audio are very different cases. Sony had to explain their 3D audio system because it's something innovative, new and different compared to the previously known, more limited stuff that mostly only implemented some standard audio system like Dolby etc., so he explained what it does, that saves CPU work because it has a dedicated hardware, their approach with the user profiles, speaker types supported, etc.You mean half of the reveal talking about 3D Audio which is also present on Xbox Series X, called Spatial Audio. Xbox had Spatial Audio in Xbox One X, but it was a purely software, now they have a dedicated audio chip, also apart from their own Windows Sonic they will also support Dolby Atmos and DTS:X. And theres also Audio Ray Tracing(Sony barely mentioned it in the Wired article and Cerny Reveal) and Project Acoustics.
They promoted a feature that is more mature on the other platform.
Exactly.Of course, they will be the same, just called something different. Mesh shaders and VRS against Geomtery engine .......whatever the hell the api is called. in the Sony API, DX12 API, Vulkan API whatever Its all the same shit lol.
Do you think Vulkan / MS / Sony wont write drivers to control the AMD hardware ? some of the names are nice sounding though...its called marketing.
Exactly.
When Sony starts BS'ing with their code name stuff like "Geometry Engine" and Tempest Audio Engine" you know Sony is behind the 8-ball. They did this with PS2 as well with Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesizer, and then additional code name PR like Cell and SPE during PS3.
PS2 era was the best. Sony promotes PS2 like it's got NASA parts and Xbox comes around the next year with a Celeron cpu and more ram. Games looked much better at better frame rates. No code names at all.
When one of their systems has a clear power win (PS4 OG), notice how there's no fancy code lingo to be found. They just promote a system with the most TF and GDDR5 ram.
Geometry Engine are AMD name.Exactly.
When Sony starts BS'ing with their code name stuff like "Geometry Engine" and Tempest Audio Engine" you know Sony is behind the 8-ball. They did this with PS2 as well with Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesizer, and then additional code name PR like Cell and SPE during PS3.
PS2 era was the best. Sony promotes PS2 like it's got NASA parts and Xbox comes around the next year with a Celeron cpu and more ram. Games looked much better at better frame rates. No code names at all.
When one of their systems has a clear power win (PS4 OG), notice how there's no fancy code lingo to be found. They just promote a system with the most TF and GDDR5 ram.
Super charged PC architectureWhen one of their systems has a clear power win (PS4 OG), notice how there's no fancy code lingo to be found.
What did news articles such as https://segmentnext.com/2018/06/13/amd-navi-sony-playstation-5/ claims?I know. He may be wrong, but so is your claim that RDNA was designed "before the Sony engagement". AMD may have gotten started on it before Sony got involved, but the fact that it includes specific optimizations made for Sony shows that they were very much a part of the design process.
https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2020/03/16/xbox-series-x-glossary/PS5 and 3D audio are very different cases. Sony had to explain their 3D audio system because it's something innovative, new and different compared to the previously known, more limited stuff that mostly only implemented some standard audio system like Dolby etc., so he explained what it does, that saves CPU work because it has a dedicated hardware, their approach with the user profiles, speaker types supported, etc.
Regarding RT he just mentioned it uses the standard RDNA 2.0 hardware and features, so didn't need to explain anything because people already knows what it is and how it works. It was already a 1 hour long GDC talk so he focused on explaining devs the PS5 hardware architecture instead of making it too long with trailers.
For sure, somewhere in the future there will be another reveal(s) focusing players where you'll have your game trailers, tech demos, form factor, etc.
Project Acoustics – Incubated over a decade by Microsoft Research, Project Acoustics accurately models sound propagation physics in mixed reality and games, employed by many AAA experiences today. It is unique in simulating wave effects like diffraction in complex scene geometries without straining CPU, enabling a much more immersive and lifelike auditory experience. Plug-in support for both the Unity and Unreal game engines empower the sound designer with expressive controls to mold reality. Developers will be able to easily leverage Project Acoustics with Xbox Series X through the addition of a new custom audio hardware block.
That's gibberish. Hypocrite.You are not interested in learning anything, you just want to argue using words that you think means something that you have't a clue what they actually mean.
One plus one equals super resolution machine learning reduce depth buffer, color buffer which reduces render load.
Net result: both methods are not rendering at same resolution.
Its gibberish.
Where's your late and have weaker market power, it's hardware optimize for software.The software optimize for what the hardware have... true.
DX12 is optimized to the architecture found in all vendor hardware.
That is the core goal of an API.
So what? Their claim that AMD was developing RDNA for Sony exclusively and your claim that the design was already complete by the time Sony got involved can both be wrong. There's no contradiction there.What did news articles such as https://segmentnext.com/2018/06/13/amd-navi-sony-playstation-5/ claims?
Yes, I know. And Sega did it use an audio chip in the Mega Drive too. Who knows what it can do, let's wait and see.MS also wasted money and resources on a new custom audio hardware block for XSX. #metoo