Rumour - AMD to be the GPU in all 3 next gen consoles

Broken Hope · 9 Jul 2011 at 09:49

The Game of the Year Edition had the AA code enabled for AMD graphics cards anyway, so it's not even really worth arguing about anymore.

rounddodger · 9 Jul 2011 at 11:09

Yawn. Anyway..

Cooper said:
Lol...AMD CPU and AMD GPU in the PS4...that will annoy everyone, as you can kiss goodbye to PS3 backwards compatibilty with that combo...no way would a game programmed for a Cell CPU and an Nvidia RSX ever work on a PS4, unless you want to play at 5fps...

Yep, would be a nightmare to emulate the Cell, however don't rule out Sony simply including the Cell in the PS4 for this reason, a la PS2 using the PSone 33Mhz RISC CPU as an I/O chip as well for backwards compatibility.

Although my money's on the PS4 not being backwards compatible tbh except for proper conversions available on the PSN perhaps.

Jay85 said:
I thought the ps3 didn't have a dedicated gpu and it was similiar to 8 core CPU/GPU combo but the 8th core was disabled/unstable???

That was the vector units on the Cell if I recall, it had eight but one was disabled to increase yields. The PS3 uses something like a modified 7900GTX, which would be easy to emulate/wrapper with current GPU hardware I reckon.

Klo · 9 Jul 2011 at 13:18

Rroff said:
lols wonder which mis-usage is gonna be flavor of next month.

Didn't even know if it made sense, decided to try any way

Rroff · 9 Jul 2011 at 14:38

Final8y said:
The AA worked in the Demo.
The AA works in the final game when the GPU ID is changed.

You have or anyone else has yet to come up with anything that shows any ill effect in that game & still till this day none has been shown so until otherwise the majority will stick with the conclusion they have because of the evidence that has been shown & there have been no evidence showing the opposite.

Anyone who has done much gaming knows of the issues with AA and HDR and the problems it causes when not properly implemented, at the time when this issue arose I posted several things demonstrating issues with the unreal engine + HDR and AA. No self respecting developer would release a product containing these work arounds without sufficent Q&A.

The only factual evidence present is that AA only works on nVidia cards and that AMD weren't interested in working with the developer to provide a solution - everything else is conjecture.

Final8y · 9 Jul 2011 at 14:48

Rroff said:
Anyone who has done much gaming knows of the issues with AA and HDR and the problems it causes when not properly implemented, at the time when this issue arose I posted several things demonstrating issues with the unreal engine + HDR and AA. No self respecting developer would release a product containing these work arounds without sufficent Q&A.

The only factual evidence present is that AA only works on nVidia cards and that AMD weren't interested in working with the developer to provide a solution - everything else is conjectute.

Yes the problems it can cause but in the case of that game & the way it was implemented in that game did not cause any issues & you have not posted any issues in regards to that game.

And that factual evidence is not a fact & the only fact it was only tested on NV cards & tested does not mean its a fact that it will not work on anything else, the only way to make it a fact that it will not work on anything else is to test on those other things which they did not, but the gamers did & it worked fine.

So far all your evidence is has been nothing but theoretical talk in the face of gamers who have been playing the game with the AA code with no issues.

rounddodger · 9 Jul 2011 at 14:50

Rroff there's no point trying to have a rational discussion about this with Final8y and Ejizz. They don't listen to actual facts and much prefer hearsay and conjecture.

Their minds are made up, give it up fella.

CaptainRAVE · 9 Jul 2011 at 14:53

Doesn't surprise me. AMD has offered the best bang for buck for a while now. Great news for AMD.

Final8y · 9 Jul 2011 at 15:05

rounddodger said:
Rroff there's no point trying to have a rational discussion about this with Final8y and Ejizz. They don't listen to actual facts and much prefer hearsay and conjecture.

Their minds are made up, give it up fella.

There is nothing irrational about my comments so first learn what that means before accusing me & you say facts & yet none has been presented which would put you in the hearsay & conjecture category.

I was the one who posted the threads at the time that showed how to get around the GPU ID check in the game which proved it worked fine, what evidence have you got for the contrary ? except just being able to post the word fact.

Final8y · 9 Jul 2011 at 15:30

Broken Hope said:
The Game of the Year Edition had the AA code enabled for AMD graphics cards anyway, so it's not even really worth arguing about anymore.

Indeed which just goes to prove what people already knew about the code.

Rroff · 9 Jul 2011 at 18:03

It doesn't prove anything - for all you know the AA code could have been completely re-written in the mean time or AMD finally decided to put some effort in and support its implemenation or whatever.

An Exception · 9 Jul 2011 at 18:15

Yeh, like the demo had issues? but if it makes you happy, then keep on kidding yourself...

Rroff · 9 Jul 2011 at 18:17

Demo having issues or not has no relevance, you simply can't run a business on anecdotal evidence when something has as many potential pitfalls as AA + HDR.

An Exception · 9 Jul 2011 at 18:24

I'm in disbelief, some thing don't change do they.
I'v just been reminded why I stopped entering the graphics forum, it's like banging your head against a brick wall...

Trunks9486 · 9 Jul 2011 at 20:07

Sony and MS will probably need to offer BC, content from PSN/Live neds to work, otherwise many users are gonna be annoyed, and they lose a good deal of potential users who may want to migrate to new hardware.

I expect Sony to use a variant of Cell in PS4, or at least the SPUs (which are quite small by themselves. At the very least an ISA compatible processor should be used.

Final8y · 9 Jul 2011 at 21:15

Rroff said:
It doesn't prove anything - for all you know the AA code could have been completely re-written in the mean time or AMD finally decided to put some effort in and support its implementation or whatever.

No it was not re written & your really grasping at straws & AMD had nothing to do with the AA code being available in the GOTY addition with the amount of back stabbing going on at the time with even Eidos pointing fingers at NV in the end..
AMD has nothing to gain by trying to prop up NV PhysX sponsored game at this time.

Rroff · 9 Jul 2011 at 21:22

How do you know it wasn't re-written?

There certainly was plenty of back stabbing going on... if you took off the fanboy specs for a moment you'd see that the developer, and both GPU manufacturers come out looking just as bad as each other - which is why I laugh when people only point out the supposed "nVidia disabling AA on AMD cards" - which didn't actually happen nVidia only enabled the final AA render in their code when an nVidia card was detected which is fair enough when they implemented the code themselves and customised and tested it against their GPUs - the developer would have shipped the game without AA support at all.

I still say developers would be better off just shipping the game with no AA and getting nVidia and AMD to implement AA work around at driver level even tho its less than ideal as it stops people who don't know any better pointing the finger.

Now I can't say nVidia didn't pull some dirty tricks behind the scene to make it difficult for AMD to get AA into the game... but I can say for certain they did not do:

IF (GPU_VENDOR == AMD) {
disableAA();
}

as some people like to try and make out.

Final8y · 9 Jul 2011 at 21:28

Rroff said:
How do you know it wasn't re-written?

There certainly was plenty of back stabbing going on... if you took off the fanboy specs for a moment you'd see that the developer, and both GPU manufacturers come out looking just as bad as each other - which is why I laugh when people only point out the supposed "nVidia disabling AA on AMD cards" - which didn't actually happen nVidia only enabled the final AA render in their code when an nVidia card was detected which is fair enough when they implemented the code themselves and customised and tested it against their GPUs - the developer would have shipped the game without AA support at all.

I still say developers would be better off just shipping the game with no AA and getting nVidia and AMD to implement AA work around at driver level even tho its less than ideal as it stops people who don't know any better pointing the finger.

Again accusations about me with nothing to back it, please point out the FanB parts of my comments, its a sign of a weak comment when you feel the need to even include a such a word which i never feel the need to use.

I’m surprised and pleased by authorised NVIDIA spokesperson Lars Weinand’s clarification that “Batman AA is not our property. It is owned by Eidos. It is up to Eidos to decide the fate of a feature that AMD refused to contribute too and QA for their customers, not NVIDIA.”

AMD received an email dated Sept 29th at 5:22pm from Mr. Lee Singleton General Manager at Eidos Game Studios who stated that Eidos’ legal department is preventing Eidos from allowing ATI cards to run in-game antialiasing in Batman Arkham Asylum due to NVIDIA IP ownership issues over the antialiasing code, and that they are not permitted to remove the vendor ID filter.

NVIDIA has done the right thing in bowing to public pressure to renounce anti-competitive sponsorship practices and given Eidos a clear mandate to remove the vendor ID detect code that is unfairly preventing many of Eidos’ customers from using in-game AA, as per Mr. Weinand’s comments. I would encourage Mr. Singleton at Eidos to move quickly and decisively to remove NVIDIA’s vendor ID detection.

It’s also worth noting here that AMD have made efforts both pre-release and post-release to allow Eidos to enable the in-game antialiasing code - there was no refusal on AMD’s part to enable in game AA IP in a timely manner.

I trust that you will also confirm that no similar activity will take place on any other games?

Richard Huddy, Worldwide Developer Relations Manager, AMD's GPU Division

http://www.*****.net/content/item.php?item=20991

panyan · 9 Jul 2011 at 21:33

Lightnix said:
I'm actually a little disappointed by this. Part of the fun of consoles is the weird and unique hardware they tend to have. If they're all going to be IBM CPU and AMD GPU then where's the fun in that?

for game developers, standardised hardware across the consoles and PC means that they have to do less "porting" though so that should mean better games and less shoddy ports - no?

Rroff · 9 Jul 2011 at 21:34

I didn't accuse you of anything - if you

You need to read those words in detail and anaylse them somewhat - especially the line:

"It’s also worth noting here that AMD have made efforts both pre-release and post-release to allow Eidos to enable the in-game antialiasing code - there was no refusal on AMD’s part to enable in game AA IP in a timely manner"

Is almost entirely spin and not saying what you think. Nothing in that quote can be used in any way as evidence that the code was or was not re-written for the GOTY edition - only that the vendor filter was at the least removed - its important to understand that the vendor filter did not as I mentioned above do:

IF (GPU_VENDOR == AMD) {
disableAA();
}

and closer to:

IF (GPU_VENDOR == NVIDIA) {
doAA();
}

You have to understand that the game would have shipped without AA at all if nVidia hadn't decided to lend a hand in implementing a work around which was understandably opptimised and tested against nVidia cards and not tested on any other cards, AMD or otherwise and its no suprise this code wasn't enabled on non-nVidia cards - anyone who thinks this is in some way linked to "anti-competitive practices" does not understand programming/development in general.

Final8y · 9 Jul 2011 at 21:36

Rroff said:
I didn't accuse you of anything.

You need to read those words in detail and anaylse them somewhat - especially the line:

"It’s also worth noting here that AMD have made efforts both pre-release and post-release to allow Eidos to enable the in-game antialiasing code - there was no refusal on AMD’s part to enable in game AA IP in a timely manner"

Is almost entirely spin and not saying what you think. Nothing in that quote can be used in any way as evidence that the code was or was not re-written for the GOTY edition - only that the vendor filter was at the least removed - its important to understand that the vendor filter did not as I mentioned above do:

IF (GPU_VENDOR == AMD) {
disableAA();
}

and closer to:

IF (GPU_VENDOR == NVIDIA) {
doAA();
}

if you took off the fanboy specs for a moment.

And i have seen it all before & it changes nothing of the fact that the code works & that's all that matters

No need to say anything more.