Why did IBM abandon Cell? It was way ahead of its time. I mean

>>56079604
Cell was shit when it was new, and it's still shit today

>>56079604
Because x86 is cheaper now

>>56080102
cell was powerful at its time. it had an original concept that mainly focused on huge data processing.

File: 1464506993299.png (226KB, 506x556px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 506x556px

>>56079604
>Now you see PS4 hardware quickly became deprecated in one year due to bloated x86 shit.
>due to bloated x86 shit.
No, it's because consoles have always been outdated pieces of shit but with the new games it really shows

IBM abandoned the Cell because people simply weren't interested in it. Sure, it had good floating point maths performance and all, but GPGPU clusters were coming in around that time and pretty much killed Cell setups in floating point performance and did so without the vendor lock-in.

Sorry to break it to you, but big mainframe style hardware is no longer the way to go in scientific computing. Sure, they still have their uses in things like super high speed transaction processing, but commodity or commodity derived hardware has taken over most of the specialized hardware markets.

>>56079604
Sony sold the PS3 at a huge loss at the beginning, I bet they are making big profits with selling the PS4 hardware now

>>56079604
The reason PS4 became outdated so fast is because Sony didn't want a repeat of the PS3.

When the PS3 first came out Sony was losing money on each console sold and hoping to make it back on game licensing. This didn't pan out and Sony wanted to avoid this on the PS4. So they opted to use shit hardware to try and profit on each console sold.

>>56079604
GPGPUs

Cell couldn't compete with much cheaper GPUs from Nvidia and AMD.

>>56079604
I think the uncharted devs made really good use of it

It failed because it had no hardware mutex locks to synchronize memory across cores. The major pain area for libraries like mpi is that it requires explicit communication between cores/clusters. People were writing mutexes in software which is ungodly slow.

With only 8 cores, something shared cache can support easily, it has little to offer. There are plenty of processors and clusters that have high-speed communication without shared memory that spanked cell even when it was new.

>Tldr: cell is shit now and was shit then.

>>56080218
Isn't the Cell CPU close as powerful as the PS4 Jaguar too?

>>56080256
haha
no

>>56080256
Cell only had one CPU.

The 8 other cores were SPEs (SPE is kinda like a gimped CPU that can only do floating-point math).

x86 and desktop hardware is a competitive scene where even the highest-end hardware could be totally deprecated and replaced the next year. PS4 hardware is born dead due to that. They should have gone with some specialized hardware, focused solely on game programming. Well it's their decision if they want to release tons of revisions for PS hardware.


>>56080248
SPE cores had no branch predictors that's one of the hugest pain in the ass. Just like shader programming, your game work load had to be as branchless as possible.

Cell does not = Gaming
It's good for servers and shit, that is why the 3 PowerPC Xbox 360 cores were better.
When they managed to master the cell though they came out with some amazing games like The Last of Us.

>>56080247
>Naughty Dog

No surprises there, they've always been at the top of trying to squeeze performance out of consoles.

>>56079604
the SPEs on cell were watered down weakshit, half-assed and can't do anything well on its own and hard to utilise because of the extreme verbosity required to use them.

They're less capable than a full cpu core, and less abundant than programmable gpu compute hardware (which had just made its first real entry in the form of ATi's Xenos Xbox 360 GPU, then later on PC's in nVidia's Tesla GPU and ATi's own Terascale)

who gives a fuck i've got 11 teraflops of theoretical performance.

and we still can't emulate ps2 games perfectly.

call me when 20-30 teraflop cards are in stock and a console breaks 5.

>>56080319
>no branch predictors

Does any GPGPU have branch predictor?

Or, do you have to use Xeon Phi if you want something like that?

>>56080322
>It's good for servers and shit

nope

>>56080325
Even on ps2 they had great success for performance

>>56080293
Not even in specific tasks?

>>56080341
http://all-things-andy-gavin.com/2011/02/02/making-crash-bandicoot-part-1/

Very interesting read.

>>56080319
>SPE cores had no branch predictors that's one of the hugest pain in the ass. Just like shader programming, your game work load had to be as branchless as possible.

I didn't know that. That's fucking hilarious. I mean I guess that's okay for games and streams where you expect to not take a branch as little as possible... But holy fuck. Branch predication has been around solidly since the 90s.

>>56080356
No idea, but it doesn't matter anyway since the system memory was only 256MB in total, which is ridiculous. Also the GPU in the PS3 was crap.

>>56080333
pcsx2 perfectly emulates software rendering. HW rendering is another matter, they are trying to create a scalable emulation that works on GPU. Which means you are "theoretically" able to run metal gear solid 3 on 4k @ 60fps.

>>56080325
>>56080341
and metal gear games of course. they squeezed the performance on ps2 and ps3.

>>56080367
let's say the branch predictor was weak, because of the pipelining. flushing SPE pipeline is a HUUUUGE hit.

>>56080329
I'm amazed just how powerful the Xbox 360 was

>>56080337
Branch prediction is incredibly cheap and lightweight to do. It's literally just keeping tabs on how many times you branched at a certain instruction and lazily clearing the pipeline if you guessed wrong.

>>56080387
How long was the spe pipeline? It's designed as a stream processor, so I'd assume pretty short.

File: ubisoft-cloth-simulation-ps4-vs-ps3.jpg (188KB, 946x494px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 946x494px

>>56080386
It seems like the Cell is able to do some things better than the Jaguar on the PS4.
But the higher clocked same Jaguar on the Xbone is a bit stronger.

>>56080408
Yeah, but it's significant if it happens enough.

>>56080387
Pcsx2 is software renderer is definitely not perfect.

>>56080312
The funny thing is that the the Xbox 360 has 3 Cell general purpose cores but with improved floating point.

Ironically, Sony helped to fund the development of the Cell CPU but Microsoft arguably got a better gaming console CPU out of it.

File: pepehawking.png (85KB, 480x377px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 480x377px

>>56080408
I don't know but as far as I know SPEs could only access 256KB size of memory (that includes both instructions and data). Cell had two parallel pipelines, probably one for consuming data and calculations, other should be memory fetching etc. It's still amazing how Last of Us or MGS4 were able to work with such a minimalistic hardware.

>>56080455
It's the most accurate emulation, slow but everything works natively as it was supposed to be shown in PS2.

>>56080443
Again, stream processor. It expects to do the same shit all day long. However, branch predictors are incredibly low footprint in gate complexity. They could've shoe-horned one in at the last minute and no one would've cared.

File: suicide2.png (17KB, 882x758px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 882x758px

>tfw it's been too long to see a thread doesn't get derailed by GPU fanboys, desktop posters, "guys should i buy it", gaymers. Instead something is actually being discussed.

Devs did not whine about multithreading, op, but because it was a really difficult arch to dev for.

it was a pain to program properly compared to x86
the ppu had to send pointers to the spes and the spes had to read data through DMA transfers into a small 256KB local memory. the ppu and the spes communicate though slow 32bit mailboxes.
it was very difficult to properly design the memory access patterns and videogames are pretty random and varied in their access and computations patterns
it is very difficult to make 8 high throughput FPUs that have little memory and no branch prediction to run a video game efficiently

>>56080558
Because it discusses something with shit GPU, no desktop and definitely shouldn't be bought nowadays?

>>56080583
why did sony literally waste $400M by funding the development of this shit? couldn't they foresee this, I mean they have been in the game development industry for many years, how could they see how this fits to game programming?

>>56080643
They probably realized it at the $200 million point and after having designed a console around.

In retrospect they should have pulled a Microsoft and asked for more PPEs.

>>56080643
honestly I don't know
maybe the (potential) price/performance was too good for Sony to turn down

>>56080471
>Xbox 360 has 3 Cell
No.

>>56080736
>Xbox 360 has 3 Cell general purpose cores
>core

Jesus Christ, learn to read.

the difficulty of developing games on cell scared many small developers away

>>56080312
No. The SPEs weren't limited to floating point at all.

>>56080753
>tfw PlayStation SDK is still locked up behind 7 layers of NDAs, and you have to e-mail someone at SCEA to get a phone call to discuss how much money they want you to pay before they even give you the NDA papers to sign

>>56080749
It has no Cell anything, they're just PPC.

>>56080749
360 is not cell
it does however share the powerpc architecture with cell but it is not cell
it's amd

>>56080356
In specific tasks it might be a little faster. In most code the Jaguar will be multiple times faster, and that's taking into account the heavy optimization required to get decent perf out of the ppe/spes.

>people saying that ps2 had a 128-bit cpu just because it had 128-bit simd registers
that was bad, I didn't like it

>>56080809
>>56080810
Holy shit, you people are retarded.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Processing_Element

>>56080810
>it's amd
you especially

>>56080491
>but everything works natively as it was supposed to be shown in PS2.

No, the software renderer has problems too

>>56080810
>amd

wut? it's still IBM, they literally waited until cell is developed and picked the good parts out of it. It's PPC with general purpose cores.

>>56080839
wrong article
again it shared elements with cell but it is not a cell processor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon_(processor)

this is the xbox 360 processor and it is not cell

please point on the doll where it says cell

>>56080839
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Processing_Element
And yet, it is still not Cell.

>>56080864
>big endian

trash it goes

>>56080839
And if you could read and/or had eyes in your skull you'd see it does not list Xenon as a Cell and nowehere on the Xenon article does it have any Cell architecture mentioned let alone the word Cell

>>56080864
They Xenon is a triple cored PPE with improved floating point.

The PPE was developed for the Cell.

The PPE is the general purpose core of the Cell.

Which part of this do you not understand?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_%28microprocessor%29#Xenon_in_Xbox_360

>>56080839
the article you linked only backs up what everyone else is saying, they share power architecture but xenon is not cell which was made between sony and ibm

>>56080894
>nowehere on the Xenon article does it have any Cell architecture mentioned let alone the word Cell

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon_%28processor%29
>These cores are slightly modified versions of the PPE in the Cell processor used on the PlayStation 3.

Read the article before you talk shit.

>>56080922
No one said it was a Cell, just that it has the Cell general processor unit, the PPE, in it.

Microsoft saw what a steaming pile of shit the Cell was and only wanted the PPE.

>>56080909
>the ppe was designed for cell
meaning ppe would become cell
>the ppe was then put into xenon
meaning it branched into xenon before it went on to become cell

what do YOU not understand?
if ppe is charizard, and cell is charizard x and xenon is charizard y, does that help you understand?

Fuck the Cell

because of it we will never have PS3 emulation

>>56080961
No one is say that the Xenon is a cell CPU. My point in the original post was that Microsoft poached the PPE after Sony had paid IBM to develop it.

>>56080935
>No one said it was a Cell

>>56080471
Xbox 360 has 3 Cell

Did you just arrive in the discussion or what, this is the post that started the whole debate, wrongly stating 360 is Cell

>>56080975
We already have

>>56080981
>has 3 Cell general purpose cores but with improved floating point.

which it fucking does, the PPE is the general purpose core of the Cell.

>>56080102
The PS3's chipset is nearly as powerful as the PS4's. The PS4/ XBone just have more RAM.

>>56080975
There's already one under active development
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6vysVDQJjQ

There's an xbox 360 emulator as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V8Uy_d6jzA

>>56080339
Yes it is you idiot. Why do you think the U.S made a super computer made from a PS3 cluster?

>>56079604
i see few things that were wrong with cell
1.
RAMBUS™ for cell and GDDR3 for RSX meaning that that data would need to be reencapsulated when copying from
CELL <--> RSX
2.
Separate adress spaces for both RSX, CELL
3.
Only 512Mb of RAM
4.
Weird master-slave (client-server (?) ) architecture
5.
256Kb of L2 cache
6.
Only two instructions per cycle

>>56081049
>only used for sat image processing

Cell was only good at very certain, specific workloads where the task could be coupled tightly to the design of the chip.

It was pretty shit as a general purpose processor.

>>56080491
>It's the most accurate emulation, slow but everything works natively as it was supposed to be shown in PS2.
Wtf, what games have you been playing? Games I wanna play have serious issues, especially burnout 3.

>>56081197
It was shit, but they really managed to get a hold of the power of the chip.

>>56081197
As a gaming console, this is a good thing
It's processor was great at doing one thing

>>56081337

Get a load of this fucking idiot

>>56080643
well..
remember how many people bought PS2s in part because it was a DVD player (there wasn't ultra cheap standalone dvd players from china back then)?
sony wanted to make the PS3 the ultimate entertainment center, having people's consoles hooked up in vast networks to share the load (cell "broadband" engine) and so on

it would be the heart of your home, so sony thought it was worth taking a loss on every console sold in order to gain that presence

it was to be more than just a simple game console

>>56080824
Except it was a 128bit cpu in practice, unlike, say, the n64

>>56081049

Because the PS3 was heavily subsidised. It was not a particularly good design, it just had a good price:performance ratio thanks to Sony spending so much money on it.

>>56081002
lel

>>56082091
so your desktop cpu is 256-bit, because it supports 256-bit avx instructions

>>56081337
you can't create a cpu specialized for running games
depending on the game the cpu would need:
- multiple cores
- good branch prediction (game logic, AI, scripting)
- good cache to help memory access patterns
- good compute performance performance (physics, matrix computations)
- large amounts of memory
- good I/O performance

also it would need to run the underlying operating system which is exactly what a general purpose cpu is good for

many game optimization for the CPU code are just heuristics because no one can predict all the possible scenarios a game may run into or what kind of memory access patterns will take place

a cpu specialized for games is just a good general purpose cpu

>>56082182
You can take out the AI bit, no one programs that shit anymore.

>>56079604
>Why did IBM abandon Cell?
Because it's crap.
>And it had a pretty strong 8 cores
lolno. It's one PPE core was weaker than a Pentium III clock for clock, and the SPEs were much much weaker than it.

>>56080491
>but everything works natively as it was supposed to be shown in PS2.
Ratchet and clank would like to have a few words with you. Those words may include mipmapping.

>>56079604
Jesus, I forgot all about that shit. Why did you have to remind me OP.

>>56082268

Mipmapping and Ratchet and Clank works properly with the software renderer.

>>56082317
Does it? Last I checked it still messed up the textures somewhat horribly.

>>56082405

That was only the hardware renderer. GSDX in hardware mode still fucks up custom mipmaps and will always fuck up custom mipmaps, but the slow software renderer works fine.

>>56082179
Maybe, but unlike avx, 128bit simd instructions were used constantly on the ps2

>>56082405
Lol, it's always worked perfectly in software

>>56082405
it's perfect in software mode, you just need a cpu with retarded single threaded performance to run it at full speed

>restricted to in order exercution

>>56082431
>>56082555
>>56082648
Last time I tried I was getting some messed up textures but I'll have to try it again then. Yes, I'm reasonably certain that I used software rendering.

>>56079604
IBM shopped the XBOX 360 CPU to Sony, but they wanted IBM to partner with Toshiba to come up with the CELL instead. The end result was 1 super anemic PPC core and 8 Toshiba SPU cores. They aren't even the same instruction set. There's a reason why Intel doesn't combine x86 cores with arm cores, even though they could. It's a retarded idea, and it needlessly over complicates things.

>>56082648
>you just need a cpu with retarded single threaded performance to run it at full speed
And lots of cores/hyperthreading. I drop down to ~40fps in areas on an OCed 6600k on R&C1 in SW mode.

>>56082182
https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/noise/2016/000699.html

CPUs are optimized for video games. Video games are a huge market---a
market where people pay close attention to performance and adjust their
purchasing decisions accordingly.

Yes, yes, some buyers pay attention to CPU performance for weather
prediction, or movie rendering, or various other important applications.
But most of these applications have the same basic bottlenecks as video
games: most importantly, low-precision multiplications and additions.

Do CPU designers spend area on niche operations such as _binary-field_
multiplication? Sometimes, yes, but not much area. Given how CPUs are
actually used, CPU designers see vastly more benefit to spending area
on, e.g., vectorized floating-point multipliers.

>>56080924
You have that backwards. PPC came before CELL. The XBOX360 doesn't have CELL cores. It has PPC cores. I'm sure Sony played it as though XBOX 360 had modified CELL cores, but PPE is Sony market speak.

>>56082954
The PPE was developed for the Cell project. You're confusing PPE and PPC. PPE uses PowerPC as it's instruction set.

Sony never really brought up the fact that Microsoft poached the technology that they'd paid to develop. Probably too ashamed to admit it.

>>56082770
It ultimately fucked over all three of them, making them invest resource in a dead-end product.

Toshiba's out of the CPU market entirely, IBM only has mainframe/enterprise server CPUs left, and Sony got fucked with loss-making console.

>tfw xbox 360 was a god tier beast at release

i'm pretty sure the release games like oblivion ran at better settings on the 360 than the highest end gpu at the time. games just kept getting better and better on the 360.

the ps3 was utter garbage throughout its life.

>>56083050
IBM took the PPC970 and stripped it down. The technology was already there until Sony decided Toshiba should get involved. IBM had a quality product which they had produced for Sony, and was summarily rejected so they sold it to Microsoft.

>>56083146
Sony's PlayStation was being run by a famous retard back then.

He was fired only after PS3 started bleeding money.

>>56083318
the same people who were in charge of designing the ps4 designed the ps3.

Cell only has 1 PPE core and 8 SPUs

It does not have 8 cores

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_(microprocessor)

>In a simple analysis, the Cell processor can be split into four components: external input and output structures, the main processor called the Power Processing Element (PPE) (a two-way simultaneous multithreaded Power ISA v.2.03 compliant core), eight fully functional co-processors called the Synergistic Processing Elements, or SPEs, and a specialized high-bandwidth circular data bus connecting the PPE, input/output elements and the SPEs, called the Element Interconnect Bus or EIB.

>>56083355
Looking at the design of the PS4 and Xbox One makes me think AMD designed both.

They're basically the same thing but Sony went with the JaguarX instead of just the regular Jaguar.

>>56083318
I know. The CPU in the 360 was meant for the PS3. Microsoft didn't poach anything. Ken Kutaragi probably thought he could get free handjobs in the sauna from Toshiba executives if he brought them into the mix. I can imagine people at IBM rolling their eyes, mouths slack jawed at the neutering of their baby. Cell didn't even have Altivec/VMX SIMD in the PPE.

>>56083433
i'm pretty sure the jaguar in the xbox one is slightly superior due to the overclock. in cpu bottlenecked titles the xbox closes the gap to the ps4 even though it's gpu is shit tier and 40% slower.

>>56079604
Because GPGPUs quickly bridged the gap between Cell and conventional CPU designs. It was a good design that came out at the wrong time.

>>56083433

AMD did design both - unlike the ps3/360 internal gubbins which were entirely custom the ps4 and xbone internals are merely semi-custom and both based off of AMD's existing APU designs they have been selling for years.

>>56082954
Let me run things down for you
>PowerPC (PPC) already a thing
>IBM designs a PowerPC core intended to be the Power Processing Element (PPE) for Cell
>Microsoft wants a PowerPC processor for the 360
>IBM takes the Cell's PowerPC core and creates a triple core CPU based on it without the Synergistic Processing Elements (SPEs)

>>56083578
IBM designed Xenon for Sony.
Sony wanted Toshiba to work with Sony.
Sony gutted Xenon and created CELL.
IBM sold Xenon to Microsoft.

>>56083619
That's not it at all, Cell came first. Xenon is three Cell PowerPC cores.

>>56083644
It is. It was pure hubris on Ken Kutaragi's part thinking the Japanese could design something better than IBM. IBM would have never had Toshiba involved. IBM would have never had 2 instruction sets in one CPU. IBM would have never not included VMX. They created Cell for Sony because their money was green.

>>56083733
In the end, IBM lost too since all the engineers who could have been used to refine PPC 970 were devoted to Sony's shitshow instead.

Perhaps IBM would have been able to get a mobile PPC 970 out in time and not lose Apple to Intel if they weren't devoting so much resource to Cell.

>>56083775
>Perhaps IBM would have been able to get a mobile PPC 970 out in time and not lose Apple to Intel if they weren't devoting so much resource to Cell.
IBM never wanted to make a mobile PPC 970, they left Apple to rot and Apple got a solution from PASemi, IBM was already discontinuing the PPC's, the G5 retarded thermals was a good proof of this
Then Apple fucked PASemi with the Intel migration, and bought them to get their own SoC's

you guys know a lot about the cell

>>56084113
It's almost like this is a board for technology enthusiasts or something

>>56084113
ps3 fanboys

>>56084131
Ikr.

I can understand why Microsoft went x86 for xbox, but did Sony just do it to increase profit and make it easier for devs?

File: 1419206769559.jpg (328KB, 810x587px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 810x587px

>>56084131

>board for technology enthusiasts

This is the first i'm hearing about this.

>>56084163
This is so stupid.

>>56084163
I've never seen a more autistic image in my life

>>56080471
The Xbox 360 is a tri-core Power Mac, not the same.

>>56080312
It had to real cores and 6 spe.

Though one spe was locked off most of the time.

Why no one mention ps3 super computer?

>>56084403
Because it wasn't really super.

>>56084427
But was it a computer?

>>56084403
because it was expensive hot garbage which was surpassed by the significantly cheaper xbox 360. it was literally the most irrelevant console ever made. why would anyone talk about things that are irrelevant?

>>56084512
You fail at life my brother

>upscale 900p to make it look like 1080p

How cucked are sonnyggers at this point?

>>56084611
very. both consoles are shit. at least microsoft are trying to make up for it by using zen + vega in their new refresh console. the ps4 neo is using the same shit jaguar cpu with an underclocked 480. sony are actively trying to rip all console owners off with the neo.

>>56084647
At least consoles from now on will have 2 tiers instead of being stuck their entire cycle in one shitty cheap console.

>>56084512
If the 360 is so much better, where are the Xbox 360 supercomputers?

>>56084163
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>56084131
/g/ - /g/pus

>>56080174
This so hard.
Nvidia is naking a shitton of money by selling GPGPU's for scientific calculations with good double precision. The last good card with it was the 7970 with 1Tflops. It got beaten by the K20 in some points but 200$ vs 2000$ is something. Now you pay premium.

>>56084740
the only reason ps3 supercomputer was a thing was because you could install linux

>>56083871
Why did IBM act so retarded back then?

Did they not realize Apple even at that point had nearly unlimited resource with insane iPod profit margins and could push Mac lines harder with that money?

File: 1470778749984.png (738KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

738KB, 1024x576px

>>56080421
5MS OF CPU TIME = 600 CLOTH DDANCERS

>>56084163
holy shit! This image is /g/ For the last 6 years this has been /g/

>>56083871
>PASemi

based jim keller

>>56079604
>Why did IBM abandon Cell?
Same reason that Apple ditched the PPC.
IBM couldn't be bothered to faster versions.
The Cell and the PPC were very closely related and Apple hoped that would mean faster PPCs.

>>56085250
Why didn't IBM use the cell?

>>56085157
>ay senpai how many pci-e power connectors you want
>all of them
>say no more

>>56084740
Xbox had three general, easy to program cores (and a better GPU). Sony had Cell which was obnoxious best on the level of GPGPU programming if you wanted to use the SPEs. If you gave up on them, you had just one slow core.

That's why 360 was a better gaming machine. Better suited to its role. The next generation has shown that MS's conception was more viable.

File: 1426637198903.png (218KB, 343x477px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 343x477px

>>56079604
>Why did IBM abandon Cell?
The same reason everybody abandoned the Itanium: smart compilers will never be a thing. Devs don't have years to fudge assembly to try to exploit some mess an arrogant prick shit out into Verilog.

>>56083318
Ken Kutaragi's justification is hilarious in retrospect
>we're force to devs to work with this weird hardware!
>it will produce magic in the long run!
Sometimes weird hardware is just weird hardware.

File: 1464215500622.gif (3MB, 280x158px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 280x158px

>>56085574
Obnoxious beast, I mean. Well, not all keyboard slips are meaningful, it turns out.

>>56081002
Are you retarded on purpose?

>>56084131
we mostly see babbies on /g/ discussing "my gpu is better xDD", "wow build me a pc that can play games!!" threads. so I am impressed with this thread.

>>56084150
yeah that was the whole idea behind the PS4 funny enough developers still struggle to get the best of it

>>56088000
But why? Isn't it just Hd 7850 with 2 laptop processors?
That should be easily capable of 1080p 60fps

>>56080167
>No, it's because consoles have always been outdated pieces of shit
Wrong

>>56088018
You can't really get a coherent answer out of it. There is many factors that affect performance in games and unlike PC's consoles don't have settings and all that stuff to fix those performance issues. Anyway most people agree it's because of optimization. They are capable of achieving stable fps and 1080p but developers just don't have the time to optimize. It doesn't help that some go the way of ''we will fix it with patches''

>>56088145
>''we will fix it with patches''

motherfuckers I just wish consoles never had internet just for this reason. fucking lazy millennial developers. "waah I don't have time to write optimized code ;(", then you totally deserve to get fired. writing the code is the only job you have there, you don't even involve in game design, arts, sounds, scenes etc. just the fucking code.

but "waaah"

>>56088171
Well a lot of times that's the publisher saying "We're releasing on X, no matter what state it's in"

and you /v/ kids keep coughing up money for pre-orders and big launches instead of holding off and waiting a month. So the publisher makes all their money right off the bat regardless of whether they deliver a good product or not, and the devs take the blame if it sucks.

>>56088145
But don't they use a low level API for consoles?

it wasn't just "multicore programming concepts", cell isn't like programming for a multicore x86.

>ps4 hardware became deprecated due to bloated x86
you are literally retarded and shouldn't talk about these things.

IBM discontinued Cell because the market didn't want it. What is the point of a really cool Cell BE that can perform x amount of work for $100, when you can get an x86 that will perform x/2 units of work for $40. You see how this would scale? Even though cell is supposedly more performant, you get more performance *for cheaper* by having a higher amount of less costly x86 processors.

Not to mention the value found in the ubiquity of x86, you don't need to scrounge up another server with a cell processor, you just dump a few off the shelf x86 servers in.

The value of Cell and POWER is in HPC, where cost is a secondary factor to compute density, thermal efficiency, etc. Not in consumer or business grade electronics.

>>56084223
>>56080809
That anon was right, Sony literally funded the development of the Xenon CPU.

>In late 2002, Microsoft approached IBM about making the chip for Microsoft's rival game console, the (as yet unnamed) Xbox 360. In 2003, IBM's Adam Bennett showed Microsoft specs for the still-in-development Cell core. Microsoft was interested and contracted with IBM for their own chip, to be built around the core that IBM was still building with Sony.

>Mr. Shippy and Ms. Phipps detail the resulting absurdity: IBM employees hiding their work from Sony and Toshiba engineers in the cubicles next to them; the Xbox chip being tested a few floors above the Cell design teams. Mr. Shippy says that he felt "contaminated" as he sat down with the Microsoft engineers, helping them to sketch out their architectural requirements with lessons learned from his earlier work on Playstation.

>The deal only got worse for Sony. Both designs were delivered on time to IBM's manufacturing division, but there was a problem with the first chip run. Microsoft had had the foresight to order backup manufacturing capacity from a third party. Sony did not and had to wait another six weeks to get their first chips. So Microsoft actually got the chip that Sony helped design before Sony did. In the end, Microsoft's Xbox 360 hit its target launch in November 2005, becoming its own success. Because of various delays, the Playstation 3 was pushed back a full year.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123069467545545011

>>56089320
I'd love to know how they got away with that without Sony suing the everliving shit out of both IBM and Microsoft.

Surely the work contract with IBM would have covered not giving out trade "secrets" to a competitor?

>>56089320
lmao what a bunch of fucking cucks

>>56089320
leeel sony literally got cucked. MS is a greedy bitch. They all played a risky game and MS won without investing even single digit money.

during ps3 lifetime sony was making the sdk better, right?
I'd love to see speed difference between code compiled with first release of sdk, and the last one. Did they improve compiler much?

File: 1454434128978.jpg (756KB, 945x1440px) Image search: [Google]

756KB, 945x1440px

What is stopping Sony to shrink the Cell and RSX to 28 nm or lower and put them in a SoC like Microsoft did with the Xbox 360? Is that too difficult to accomplish?

>>56089620
PS3 cost lots of money to Sony. I don't think they want to hear one more thing about PS3 anymore. They waited a very long time for break-even.

File: xfx-8800gtx-front[1].jpg (166KB, 1470x1536px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1470x1536px

All this bickering about which architecture was better when they were both outclassed by the end of 2006.

>>56080167

The current gen is the first to be outdated as fuck at launch.

>>56085409
They sold it to some poor bastards in server form. There are a few Cell Blades on eBay.

>>56090166
intersting. is there any software for it?

>>56090040
it was single handedly more expensive than the sum of both consoles.

>>56090526
The MSRP was $599 at launch.

$599, where have I heard that figure before?

>>56080363
> Be based PS1 Dev.
> Everyone thinks you are cheating somehow.

>>56090915

The game does destroy your cd drive though.

>>56084693
Wasn't that the very reason of getting a console though? Play lesser graphically versions of new games for 6 years without paying anything more for hardware?

>>56084113
Yeah, people know how to use a search engine and read Wikipedia articles.

>>56090357
PPC Linux should work, but no software actually utilises the SPUs.

>>56090753
iPhone launch price?

>>56081002
>Ps3s top of the line CPU is as powerful as Ps4s budget laptop APU

so, it actually was shit.

>>56091102

>2007 is the same as 2014

>>56091146
>2007
C2D
>2014
Notebook APU

do you think they are that different?

>>56080471
you've got that backwards, the PPU design on the Cell was superior but there was only 1 of them

>>56080256
if you just compare the 8 Jaguar cores to the Cell sure they're close in terms of FP but the PS3's GPU was so weak that developers were always doing shit like MLAA on the CPU.

For int though the PS4 CPU still destroys the PS3 CPU

>>56079604
GPGPU makes them obsolete, and they were about on par with a P4 for most tasks.
PS4 is shit cause they chose to go with AMD and make it as cheap as possible.

>>56091356

> PS3's GPU was so weak

Its why Nvidia will never, ever get another console contract from sony again. Nvidia woefully under delivered on what they promised sony.

>>56091636
What did they promise them?
As I recall, the RSX was apparently something of an 11th hour addition when it was becoming clear that Cell would not cut it by itself.

>>56091636
>let's put 2 cells inside ps3
>we don't need to put a gpu in our new console!
>oh shit, we actually need a gpu

>>56091847

pretty sure no one at sony ever thought that the cell would cut it by itself you retard.

they simply delivered a shitty underpowered gpu that couldn't even handle the fastass xdr memory

>>56091886
>source: your ass

>>56091871
they thought that those SPEs would /be/ the gpu. it wasnt powerful enough

>>56091847

Basically Nvidia promised the full fat chip but delivered a cut down version. This rocky relationship with sony is why Nvidia got butthurt when the ps4 went to AMD (they even released a statement that was basically "w-w-well we never wanted the contract anyway!).

>>56085581
>we're force to devs to work with this weird hardware!
>it will produce magic in the long run!
Having Sega Saturn feels right there

save us IBM

>>56079604
Cell was a one-off thing, now we have GPU processing.

>>56088078
>>56090075
SNES/n64/gamecube games looked like shit compared to PC games

>>56091886
>pretty sure no one at sony ever thought that the cell would cut it by itself you retard.
http://www.ps3hax.net/2013/10/ps3-creators-wanted-to-release-console-without-gpu-trusting-too-much-in-cell/

>>56090998
You will still pay less and games will be optimized for both consoles.

>>56091927
Xbone/ps4 want with amd because they offered the lowest price, retard. AMD can just shit cheap APU while going the nvidia route both sony and ms had to use either IBM cpu or intel/amd. ATi was independant company when ps3/360 were developed, so no such option.

>>56089620
The fact that they already just launched a console that they've committed to supporting for ten years. Microsoft and Sony should have just focused on making the Cell architecture easier to develop instead of throwing the whole thing out the window for normie-tier PC hardware

Mark Cerny explains why

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHXrBnipHyA

The short is that Cell was very hard to program for, they decided that instead of giving developers tools that were powerful but very hard to use/learn they would give developers tools that on paper might not be as powerful but be much easier to program for.

>>56094838
I'd dare to say the early 6th gen console games look ahead of their time

>>56097309

Sony ended the arms race they began. The ps1 marked sony throwing their weight around engineering wise. The ps2 and 3 are the same deal - sony making custom hardware because they had pockets deep enough to fund it and the talent to design it. Downside is costs started spiralling and with MS entering the picture they were the only other company who had the money to keep up - Nintendo simply could not afford it.

With the trends changing (especially how important the wii was for the market) these crazy custom jobs were ditched and both sony and MS went looking for a product (or products) they could more or less take off the shelf, hit with a wrench a few times and call it good. For a one-stop shop the only options are Nvidia (due to their ARM based chips) or AMD (x86). Now given we are talking a home console that will typically have a form factor enabling TDP to be well over 100w ARM makes no sense as any gpu would be severely throttled by the potato cpu so its not surprising AMD's apus got the job as they basically were exactly what sony and MS were looking for.

Other options don't look too great as Intel wants loads of shekels, IBM has ragequit their fabs and nobody else has the required technology to base to build what was desired.

Though I do wonder what could've been had sony/MS approached Via and thrown money at them for a cpu and sourced a discrete gpu elsewhere (probably AMD again, but whatever).

>>56079604
No one wants PPC based gear anymore.

>>56098072
Lies

>>56098277
*no one relevant

>>56080256
total theoretical fp32 perf of the ps4 cell was 200 mflops.
ps4 x86 chip is 100 mflops.

game programmers just cant program for shit

It's IBM. That's all you need to know.

IBM as a company simply cannot compete because they are...were a monolithic mess.
Apple dropped them as well when Power wasn't going anywhere while x86, a factually shitter architecture, caught up despite its awfulness.

If Power was in literally any other processor manufacturers hands, it would still be around.
Cell might have actually went somewhere, similar to current GPGPUs and been another competitor to ARM on mobile. (Mobile-Cell was on their roadmap for thd future)

Cell did have some drawbacks, like the much-mentioned lack of branch prediction.
But with some unrolling here and restrucuring there, it generally worked out far faster.
Eventually the octopiler had support for automating some of this a couple years in, which is when all the smaller companies got on board.

SPEs in PS3 were horribly gimped though. They needed at least 512 to be of any worth.
Bandwidth in-consold wasn't great either, everything outside the Cell was a bottleneck despit gimped SPEs...

>>56099003
POWER is still around.
PPC is not.
Implying in anyway that PPC was superior to X86 is ridiculous.

Learn the difference.

>>56099033
Both POWER and PowerPC are still around and both are superior to x86.

>>56099041
No.
IBM killed off the PPC line, development halted a very long time ago. Companies like Nintendo who license out the defunct arch does not mean its still being internally developed.

The POWER family is designed for extremely well threaded workloads that are primarily FPU bound. The arch can't compete with modern Xeons in anything more integer bound. In fact POWER8 is slightly behind AMD's Vishera when it comes to single threaded integer performance.

X86 didn't become king just because of intel Jewing the world into submission. X86 continually rapes POWER and SPARC64 because its better.

>>56098050
Pretty sure a pair of helio x10s would outperform the laptop cpu in the ps4

>>56079604
dude, cell was a programing nightmare, couple that with sony refusing to give well documented shit because "They wanted programmers to get better and make better looking games gradually" and you have everything you need for a disaster.

ps3 required specific programming and specific paths for shit to execute, something that the 360 or pc had no issue with, so you see it time and time again, ps3 games ported to other systems were pretty good, if not better then the ps3 version, while things ported to it suffered every fucking time.

>>56080196
ps3 was a loss to make bluray a thing,

>>56079604
>>56099152

oh also because i forgot, the ps4/one is showing age due to the gpu not the cpu.

>>56080141
>AMD floods the market with shit to the point where even game consoles use it
I want to get off this planet.

>>56099139
No, PowerPC is still a thing, you dumbass.
>x86 is better blah blah blah
Intel's got heaps of money that they pour into polishing their turd. It may be shiny, in fact shinier than some non-turd alternatives, but in the end it's still a turd.

File: CAcEAiK.jpg (134KB, 548x629px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 548x629px

>>56099167
But why? The ps4 gpu is a cut down hd7850, isn't it?

That should be capable of 60fps 1080p on medium settings, easily.

>>56099150
>helio x10
Cortex A72 cores do have higher perf/clock than AMD's Jaguar, they're massively larger cores. A57 is roughly equal to Jaguar in total performance.

>>56099216
Name the newest PPC core. Go on.
IBM actively only develops the POWER line, POWER9 being detailed at HotChips this year, and its their swansong.
OpenPower is a joke at this point. A pet project for ambitious university projects.

>>56099412
>Name the newest PPC core. Go on.
I don't know it off the top of my head but probably something from Freescale. PowerPC is still very much a thing in embedded devices. Hell just a month or two ago Android was ported to PowerPC for some board used in aviation. IBM may not develop it, but IBM was never the only PowerPC developer.

>>56099412
They may be larger cores, but they also consume one fifth the power thanks to being limited to mobile devices

>>56099502
PPC was exactly like ARM is today. There was stock IP, and companies who leveraged that IP altering implementation, and making architectural changes as they saw fit.
PPC is dead. Completely dead. IBM does not develop PPC any more.

>>56099412
Believe it or not, PowerPC is still used in higher end embedded stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC_e6500
They have newer radiation hardened stuff for NASA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAD5500

>>56079604
>And it had a pretty strong 8 cores
It had 1 or 2 cores (depending on the model) and 8 Vector co-processors (think SSE, or GPU stream processors dedicated to compute)

I still like Cell for its novelty, and otherwise I agree.

>>56099669
Look at what those are derivative of.
That RAD5500 isn't even remotely new by the way.

>>56099705
So Apple's G5 PPC970 used the Power ISA v.2.03.
These are based off Power ISA v.2.06. Radiation hardened processors are never based off of something new. The Mars Rovers used essentially a radiation hardened PowerPC G3.

>>56099409

> The ps4 gpu is a cut down hd7850, isn't it?


There is no direct equivalent to the ps4's gpu due to its low shader count but 8 ACE (something only found in hawaii and newer).

>>56100044
Whatever it is, it's better than a hd7790 which is easily capable of 1080p 60fps on reduced settings

>>56100097

The majority of games that are on consoles and pc run at the equivalent of low (with a few things set to medium) when compared to their pc counterpart. The exceptions are few and far between.

>>56100210
But why can't they do fhd?

>>56100232

For the most part they do. Some games run at lower resolutions simply so the devs can crank up the eye candy.

File: PS4-Architecural-Diagram.jpg (145KB, 1003x824px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1003x824px

>>56098050
>Sony ended the arms race they began.

Why only mention Sony.

Seems like both MS and Sony came to the same conclusion here, and went with x86
Why be the odd-man out and run on some custom stuff ? With this generation of consoles now everything is x86.

>>56100232
That seems to be up to the developer, they seem to aim more for steady FPS than high res and of course hardware limitations.


http://www.gamespot.com/articles/shadow-warrior-reboot-is-1080p-on-ps4-and-900p-on-xbox-one/1100-6419962/
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Shadow-Warrior-Dev-Explains-Xbox-One-900p-Resolution-Limitation-64868.html
>It looks like eSRAM does have its benefits, after all it has a very high bandwidth of 204 GB/s but as usual it will take time for developers to master it.
And this ties in to Cernys presentation..sure they could throw in some custom SuperCell proccessor, but it would take time and be difficult to master it.

>>56100348

>Why only mention Sony.

Mostly because it was sony that started throwing around mega money on entirely custom setups. MS with the xbone most likely just wanted something cheap and reliable that has performance parity with whatever sony was doing given the enormous money pit the xbox brand has been (even if it has achieved its goal of market saturation).

Its take a behemoth like MS a decade to get to the position where they can butt heads with sony after sega imploded itself fighting nintendo. If sega hadn't imploded so expertly things might'veb een a bit more sane in the last 20 years as nobody can fight on all those fronts.

>>56100304
Correct it if I'm wrong, but aren't most Modern consoles running at 720p or 900p upscaled to 1080p?

>>56100484
depends on the game,

http://ca.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates

>>56100484

The ps4's library is mostly 1080p native. I'm not too sure on the xbone since it has more 900p upscaled games and naturally the wiiu is barely 720p.

>>56096946
You're forgetting the most important thing: having an APU instead of a dGPU+CPU cuts down costs significantly. That's an entire IC you don't need to payfor.

>>56091927
Nvidia has always been a horrible partner to consoles makers.
First they wanted to jew Microsoft with the GPU in the Xbox and basically they had to pay for every modification they had to do, that's why the Xbox doesn't have a Slim edition and it was really short lived.
Then the fiasco with Sony and the RSX, like you said.
Also the 3DS was going to have a Tegra SoC (Maybe a modified Tegra 3?) but they weren't convinced because the SoCs were thermally inefficient, so Nintendo had to hire a literally who company to design them a new GPU (the PICA200) at the last moment.

>>56099041
>and both are superior to x86.
And why is that? Could you even answer such a question beyond RISC vs. CISC talking points someone regurgitated at you from a 20 year old magazine? /g/ needs to stop collectively jerking off to pure RISC because they delivered great SPECfp scores in 1992, that shit was a dead end and modern "RISC" chips are no less "bloated" and shitty than their x86 counterparts.

PPC chips were great in 1995 when Intel was barely tapping into the upper low-end with the Pentium Pro, but in 2005 they were hopelessly outclassed in both performance and features, they delivered the performance their users expected but they surely didn't go above and beyond.

Main-line POWER is definitely a different story, but as that other guy stated, not objectively better in every way possible. They're great for virtualization, high-availability systems, or HPC jobs that are heavy on floating-point calculations, but like any other high-performance RISC, dreadful for integer math that makes up the bulk of everyday computing, and they're bulky and hot.

>>56099139
There are plenty of PPC chips for embedded applications still in production, calling it dead just because IBM doesn't make them anymore is like saying ARM died with Acorn, absolutely ludicrous.

Most "mainstream" PPC chips were designed and manufactured by Motorola and Freescale, anyway.

>>56079604
>Now you see PS4 hardware quickly became deprecated in one year due to bloated x86 shi

That has nothing to do with Cell or x86. It's more to do with Sony wanting to keep a profit. That's why they pick AMD, and why PS4 isn't top of the line at launch.They don't really need to be top of the line anyway because Sony developed low level api(which according to most developers is faster then PC low level api). In fact PS3 had low level api before mantle ever existed. Sony was developing the PS4 to get the kind of gains that you see AMD pc gpu get with DX12.

>>56100435
>after sega imploded itself fighting nintendo
Sega killed itself because the japs didn't want to accept that their western division was better at designing hardware.

>>56098050
The PS1 was a really shitty design.

>>56097309
That's wrong though, in addition to be hard to program for the Cell was a shitty processor.

>>56099409
>fury x crossfire performs worse than single fury x
kek

>>56102951
And yet it was the best hardware of its generation.

>>56103908
>And yet it was the best hardware of its generation.

But it wasnt

N64 was superior by quite a stretch, its just that nintendo were cunts with the microcode

The saturn was also better than the ps1 in a lot of areas

>>56104838
Didn't nintendo fuck the n64 with flash karts?

>>56104838
>n64

literally fuck off. n64 was less capable and harder to adapt to. you can see the huge differences between the same games on both ps1 and n64. PS1 was not great but it was more open to do coding hacks and tricks due to the bus. It was also a CD player for those who wanted.

>>56103908
>>56104838
Pretty much all the consoles from that generation had retarded hardware decisions.

Saturn had a billion different CPUs thrown into it that made developing for it a shitshow. This is also why it's hard to emulate. The PS2 also had this problem but less severely.

PS1 was very weak but incredibly easy to develop for. It's got one CPU and one GPU and dedicated memory for both.

N64 uses cartridges. It's memory bus was also very small and it used unified memory making the problem even worst. Even if the N64 used CDs it'd have serious bottlenecks because of this.

>>56091092
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOHqG1nc_tw

>>56081531
>sony wanted to make the PS3 the ultimate entertainment center
Sony wanted to make the PS3 the ultimate Personal Computer, that's the reason they released the OtherOS feature. But then, they removed it thanks to piracy concerns.

>>56104838
>n64
>superior to anything
Thanks I had a good laugh

>>56106296
It was tho.
Held back by no cd

The only argument against the cell anyone needs is

>8 cores

>>56106308
Cd only means music nothing else. Games don't weight more on cd if you stop sounds

>>56106308
The lack of cd was the least of n64 problems. Read about its retarded architecture.

>>56106320
And tons of pre-rendered backgrounds, and FMVs.

>>56106311
>8 cores
But that's wrong. The Cell has 1 main core plus 8 auxiliar pseudo-cores.

>>56106320
Not it doesn't you wally. Mario 64 literally had to constantly (and strategically) use the same textures and objects over and over and over because of limited cartridge space.

>>56102901
When the dreamcast came out, they has concurrently across the world 7 consoles being produced, a lack of unified hardware across the globe fucked them hard.

you then have retarded systems like Sega Saturn that actively made devs slit their wrists.

then you had ps2, which was a VAST majority of people's first dvd player, which had ps1 backwards compatibility, coming out shortly after the us release which soured many people off getting it.

it may have been a console with many games i loved, but it died because sega was retarded.

>>56099409
the game may play great at low-medium settings, it may even get 60fps, but devs target 30fps and higher settings, or even lower the resolution and try for max settings.

>>56079604
Remember the consoles before the PS3

They were all HUGELY inferior to PCs.

PS2 was doing fucken NTSC graphics while people were playing video games at 1600×1200 with their GeForce4 Ti 4800 and Athlon 2800+

It's always been like this.

>>56106434
PS2 came out in 2000 and was capable of 1080i.

>>56106547
Voodoo3 came out in 99 and was capable of 2046 x 1536 native

while PS2 could upscale to 1080i, amazing.

>>56106547
Wow it could do 1080i

and how many games ran at that?

Because you could play shit at 2046 x 1536 in 1999 on the PC. Shit like Red Alert 2.

>>56106712
I mean Red Alert 1 sorry.

>>56106595
But it sure as fuck wasn't going to be doing anything beyond 2D work at that resolution.

>>56106735
Yes and the PS2 did what exactly at 1080i?

You think it did it native?

I can upscale my dick to 4K and it's not gonna be any different then in 1080p

>>56106742

> PS2 did what exactly at 1080i?

Play god of war...2 iirc (ntsc version only).

Did u know. That consoles are dead. And that PS4 and XBONE. Are poor people PC's? I did not, but now I do.

>>56106742
I'm not really arguing for the PS2 here since I never owned one, just dropping in to point out that your notion that shitbox PCs with limp-dick 3dfx cards were playing games at resolutions unheard of in the under $4000 bracket is fucking ludicrous.

>>56106758
God of War and God of War 2 were not 1080i. Fetch something more intelligent our of your partners anus.

>>56082115
>>56085626
Not him, but what do you guys think gimped the PS3? The GPU had 256MB of GDDR3 and the system had 256MB of XDR.

>>56106712
Yeah but you also got viruses to deal with

>>56081002
>>56106833
The CPU? Maybe, and only compared to single thread performance. The GPU? No way, if the GPU is slow it won't became fast no matter how much RAM you add.

>>56080167
Underaged nu-male spotted

File: 1468292657646.jpg (23KB, 283x350px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 283x350px

>>56106893

>>56106912
Wow xD! You know a lot of buzzwords, friend ;)

>>56106815
There were some PS2 and Xbox games that allowed you to output at HDTV resolutions. I don't any of them rendered natively at that res, but it was certainly higher than 480p.

>>56107334
Gran Turismo did.

>>56106332
Most advanced system at the time

>>56108358
Not even close, it had a lot of flaws.

oh this thread is still up?

>>56111631
Seems like it.

>>56085157
>1075w input power

>>56112675
I hope it'd be enough and the card won't fry your pcie.

>>56112675
>>56112714
>p-pls AMD, I beg you, I gave you all the power you wanted, please don't fry my pci-e. I GAVE YOU WHAT YOU WANTED