Can AMD hardware in New Consoles leverage Games toward AMD

I've seen various benchmarks and there is a trend that some games play better on Nvidia and some on ATI,i.e. they are optimized for either hardware. Both future consoles are AMD hardware i.e. 8 core AMD processor and an Ati graphics solution.
Now the Question arises, if both consoles which define the gaming industry are going AMD's way, then shouldn't all games soon(after a time) become optimized for multi-core setups and ATI cards. Because developers will definitely try to make the most of the hardware, this will definitely leave an impact on PC versions of games too. Hence in a year or two multicore processors(AMD or INTEL) will gain traction as well as all games will start playing better on ATI.
What are your ideas? post them on this thread.This thread is meant for discussion/debate on this topic, so feel free to express your any views or hypothesis, u know ur thought about it.

11 thoughts on “Can AMD hardware in New Consoles leverage Games toward AMD”

  1. hi.

    you're on to a good point there about AMD optimisation.. I think it could happen, and yes AMD gpu drivers will come on very much with all the extra info coming back to AMD, but the highest limits ..limits us. like the idea of having 200 frames a second on a 100hz monitor, it gets wasted. the limits of those consoles I feel with impact us.

    Yes your right i think that driver optimization will really improve AMD card owners experience, but I feel, in 4 years time.. the whole system might choke due to a lack of growth. only DX11 for 10 years, same hardware so devs don't get to give new experiences or share with us their art or enjoy and grow in their job. and us? look at what happened to us.. stuck with DX9 games for the most part because of the Xbox 360. .. I played Xbox for many years and enjoyed the experience as it was easier than PC gaming.. but now here.. I see how much consoles drag the PC community down.

    I think we are vender locked and don't realize it! MS has us.. and there is nothing we can do about it. they locked in publishers. they locked in us. only Valve can challenge them, and unless Valve gets some big hitter publishers. we are stuck. no way R* no way 2K no way BTh no way Activision no way any of these are going to refuse Xbox, refuse MS. I can even see our hobby dying in the next 5 years because of this and low competition from AMD to Intel.

    dunno what else to say..

  2. so i am not alone. you're right but i don't think it shall take 4 years as the new hardware of consoles is similar to PC, except a few tweaks and developers are quite comfortable with PC hardware.

  3. I've said this a few times in different threads. I think CPU wise there will not be much swaying *heavily* away from Intel as they are multicore already and most games will probably move from 1-2 core utilization to a very common 4 core utilization. I don't see 8 core's becoming the new thing even with these consoles. Now grphx wise, I'm not so sure. It was a question I pondered greatly when selling my 680 for a 7970. The Never Settle Bundle really pushed me over the edge as those were games I really really wanted and at the time would not have been able to afford. It would seem to stand to reason that yes, amd APU+ Gpu in both of the major next-gen consoles = better experience on AMD hardware, but look at history. So far there have been many titles that were supposed to be gaming evolved titles that had close development with AMD and still ran better on Nvidia.

    Nvidia is no slouch. There is a reason they are #1. Now, going forward, IF *IF* AMD can continue to improve ( i.e. drivers have really improved lately, frametimes single card are actually better then 680 ((true it's last years flagship but more relevant to a 7k series amd card)) , then yeah there is a chance for AMD to start pulling ahead via games. But if much of this simply is marketing hype to generate buzz and Nvidia is able to brute force most games, then it won't mean squat that they are “specially optimized for AMD”

    In the end, for me, it's about the games. If AMD is what provides me a better experience for my hobby, then I'm going to be donating my money to them until such time as they do not serve my purpose. I will add that I did not think I would miss 3dvision as much as I do. Awesome 120hz monitor ready for some 3d and AMD's solution is severly lacking imho.

  4. I think you are on to something too. I have always been a fan of ATI cards, back when I was young and had some money. had a 9700, 9800, and a 9600/9700 in a alienware laptop. I just recently got back into high-end computers. The only reason I have 3 nvidia cards 2 I got off craigslist for a sweet deal (the 560 ti's) and a cheapo 520 in my media computer it was part of the bundle I got from tigerdirect, that would run onboard if it didn't come with something. Also, back in the 9700 and 9800 days I ran 3rd party drivers, they were omega drivers. Not sure if they are still around.

  5. It's more likely that Pc users will be forced into windows 8.1 before too long then any thing else, as the new DX innovations will not extend to WIN7 users, just to push win8.1

  6. Things will not be different from what's going on today, regardless being AMD, Intel or nVIDIA hardware inside the consoles.
    At launch, games will be more optimized for the company – if any -, that sponsors the game and trows money at developers. Then the other company, will have a drivers update shortly after game release. That's whats happened with AMD's Never Settle Bundle games and that what's happened with nVIDIA's sponsored Borderlands 2 and Metro: Last Light, just to give the most recent examples.
    As far as game and drivers optimization are concerned, the hardware that will be running the games will be no more significant than it is today.
    That's what I think.

  7. @skupples just for info – next GPUs from AMD might be HD9XXX because HD8XXX are OEM parts. And HD 9XXX would not come out in same time frame as Maxwell, there will be a GAP b/w them.

  8. Whether games will get a slight performance slant towards AMD GPUs is IMO irrelevant. We should be really happy both consoles have x86 hardware in them making next generation porting relatively straightforward in some aspects, leaving more time for optimizing ergonomics and controls white are using that most painful part of console ports. Hopefully soon games will start utilizing 8 threads as well, it's probable thanks to the console architectures. Definitely a good time to browse a PC gamer IMO!

  9. I happen to notice nobody has mentioned multi threaded rendering which has also proven to double FPS / performance on the few games it has been implimented on read this it showwed double or more performance increase over standard single / dual threaded rendering because it doubles the call / draw throughput so it is very relevant and offers a nice increase in performance. Still till this day only a handfull of games have used multi threaded rendering the reason being till next gen games were not designed with full dx11 ability or optimizations. The reason present and past gen games didnt use dx11 full capabilities was it was not possible or feesible to do so in the game development phase between console and PC for port overs and such.

    Next gen games bring this and more including bypassing the direct X API altogether and also possibly using direct compute functions and maybe even AVX instructions so with just these alone will give a very large performance boost look at what the AVX performance on present AMD CPU's is on linux it is staggering the increase in the performance increase over the present instructions used.

    I just wanted to link this to give an idea of the raw processing power a ATI / AMD GPU has literally you compare ATI vs Nvidia at same price or performance lvl in games to the raw processing power they can yeild in say bitcoin mining and such. The ATI / AMD cards will double and sometimes tripple the performance of the Nvidia cards so if ATI / AMD raw grunt processing power is used in next gen games to do some of the processing there is a chance for some huge increases in overall performance.

    A GPU has a lot of cores (hundreds). Each core is basically able to compute one 32-bit arithmetic operation per clock cycle — as a pipeline. Indeed, GPU's work well with extreme parallelism: when there are many identical work units to perform, actually many more than actual cores (“identical” meaning “same instructions”, but not “same data”).

    GPU's achieve great performance by using heavy parallelism, with hundreds (if not thousands) of cores. This is made possible by pipelining (each individual operation takes many cycles to run, but successive operations can be launched like trucks on a highway) and sharing instruction decoding (since many cores will run the same instructions at the same time).


    The system is also set up to run graphics and computational code synchronously, without suspending one to run the other. Norden says that Sony has worked to carefully balance the two processors to provide maximum graphics power of 1.843 teraFLOPS at an 800Mhz clock speed while still leaving enough room for computational tasks. The GPU will also be able to run arbitrary code, allowing developers to run hundreds or thousands of parallelized tasks.

    Sony is building its CPU ( x86 same a

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *