Originally Posted by sdlvx
It's all well and good that AMD (And Intel) CPUs can get a lot of gains when properly optimized, and yes, a lot of people under-estimate any CPU/APU from AMD here but the fact remains that games tend to lean towards being GPU limited more than anything. That's why I laugh when people try to make out that Intel is so much faster in gaming when outside of SC2 and a handful of other CPU limited games, you're talking a 5fps difference at real world settings.
Originally Posted by AtomicFrost
Is the performance increase just due to using AVX extensions or is it something else that AMD has done? If it's just using AVX than shouldn't both newer AMD and Intel chips see a similar performance boost seeing how both support AVX?
Both. You can optimize the source for how the CPU (Or GPU) works and recompiling the source code in a way that allows it to use the new instructions can net some pretty significant performance gains.
MS tends to make Windows a bit biased to Intel, hence the whole "Wintel" thing and why an FX-8350 goes from merely beating the i5 3570k in CPU intensive benchmarks on Windows to competing pretty well with the i7 3770k in Linux.
Originally Posted by 2010rig
I would like to know if Intel processors ( SB+ ) see any improvements as well in Gentoo?
Any CPU would, but not as much. Windows is more optimized for Intel than AMD whereas Linux tends to be more fair. Then again, this has been going on even throughout the K8 days and way before.
Originally Posted by El_Capitan
I'm excited for any optimization, but even with halving the CPU rendering time to 1:47, even a GTX 460 will still beat it using CUDA, and I'm sure an HD 7850 would even beat that using OpenCL. Even if Jaguar on Gentoo gets the rendering under a minute, it's still behind current API's being used for GPU rendering.
Obviously, because rendering is one of those types of things where GPUs scale well. The optimization applies for anything, even stuff that won't work well for GPUs but it may not be as great of an improvement.
Originally Posted by Bit_reaper
The main concerned I have about the PS4 is that it wont have the GPU grunt to push out 60FPS @ 1080p and still have enough power left for proper AA (FXAA does not count as proper AA). Of course there is still the possibility that the PS4 will have a dedicated AA chip or some other fixed function hardware that lessens the GPU load. Much is still shrouded in mystery.
Assuming memory serves, it's meant to have a chip roughly equivalent to a HD7850 in terms of hardware specs, correct? Obviously faster due to optimization and Sony getting custom parts, but still a HD7850 at stock can play a lot of recent games at max with 4x/8x AA at 1080p, the PS4 will only be faster. I expect to get 1080p and AA for some games at first, but no AA if you're using 3D.
Originally Posted by Bit_reaper
This is exactly why I want HSA and APUs to take off, even in enthusiast rigs...Have your main discrete GPU do the rendering but the iGPU do all the physics and the like, that way you still get the maximum FPS you can get and
the additional eye candy and gameplay fun that much more realistic and in depth physics give.
Originally Posted by L36
I'm pretty sure it was confirmed somewhere that PS4 will be running a heavily modified windows 7 kernel as part of its PS4 OS, not Linux.
Nope, the development kits allow you to use Windows and Visual Studio with some plugins iirc.
Do you really think MS would allow Sony unrestricted access to the Windows Source Code? Or do you really think Sony would take an OS they can't see the source code of from their main competitor? I doubt they'll use Linux though, I believe they used FreeBSD or OpenBSD in the PS3 and I think they'll stick with that.