PS4 / XB1?

[Chaput87]

I don't know if for the money you would be just as well off getting a couple of PS4's or XB1's and have the same processing power for cheaper.

Edit by Mod: Post moved to this topic.

[PantherX]

Welcome to the F@H Forum Chaput87,

PS4/XBO -> While they do use hardware that is comparable to PCs, the issue is that the OS and applications installed are controlled by Sony/Microsoft so if they decide to support F@H, they would have a hand in the development and controlling of it. I have read that both concoles support "background pause" applications so maybe, while gaming, F@H can be suspended in the background and when gaming is finished, F@H can resume. Of course, this is just a very optimistic view.

[RealBigSwede]

so XboX One will not be doing folding? Please tell us MS will let us do that.....

[ChristianVirtual]

Same as Sony jumped from board ... They want to sell games, not hardware only. If you buy the folding software from MS for $99 they might do

[RealBigSwede]

can we not do anything to get Xbox One to fold it's close to a regular AMD chip.

[P5-133XL]

The issue with Xbox one and PS4 are the same: they are closed box systems. Until Microsoft or Sony allow it, it isn't going to happen.

Both systems are basically PC's that have been customized for dedicated use as consoles. There is no inherent reason that folding won't run on either other than it isn't allowed. I personally think the most likely scenario is that someone figures out how to run Linux on them and then you will have access to folding through Linux.

[CygnusXI]

can we not do anything to get Xbox One to fold it's close to a regular AMD chip.

The xbox one has already been hacked, you could probably set a dual boot option with linux. Also, Xbox iso creation is not that hard. It may be possible to load the FAH client onto a DVD and fire it up, bypassing the need to install linux. Im not sure what exactly the xbox 1 native OS can do, the client might need a port to a different arch... but it might work without. I never folded with ps3 or xbox so I cant say much further.

[bruce]

Stanford will not develop a client for a hacked OS, nor will they support someone who does. What you're suggesting may or may not be technically feasible, but it's illegal/unethical without the explicit support of Sony/Microsoft.

[bruce]

I have been asked for a prediction. There are no authoritative predictions, and Stanford won't be making one. If anything is to happen, you'll hear it first from Sony or Microsoft.

First, let me state clearly that I really don't know if a client will be developed. I have no inside information so this is strictly my guess based on what I read on the Sony/Microsoft product pages. (If there is an actual effort going on, it's a closely held secret.)

In the case of the PS3 client, Sony developed that client with some help from Stanford. Sony maintains very tight control over applications (probably to guarantee that kids don't encounter porn under the Sony name) and there's no way the client could not be developed without them doing a lot of the work. I see no reason why a PS4 client would be any different except that the hardware is no longer based on the Cell architecture of the PS3. The PlayStation 4 uses an AMD x86-64 APU which means two things: The code would be much more like the code currently in use on home computers and they'd probably dump the old PS3 code and do a full rewrite.

I know even less about the Xbox360 as a development platform. In both cases, somebody at Sony/Microsoft would have to evaluate the cost of developing a client compared to the number of additional consoles that they'd sell. Ultimately, it's mostly their decision. If you're thinking about getting a developer's license, some of Stanford's PC code is open-source, but several critical portions are not and it would certainly require signing an NDA.

From a hardware perspective, the original Xbox was less powerful than the PS3 in terms of the computer resources required to do the folding calculations so that platform was never developed. The current triple-core Xenon is PowerPC-based which means standard Intel optimizations don''t apply. (Both Macintosh and Sony have abandoned that route, but it's not a simple decision.)

Neither operating system was good at processing FAH in the background while a game was being played. Most people turn their game consoles off when they're not gaming, saving power, but also depriving FAH over overnight processing. In comparison, FAH runs on a lot of PCs which are left running overnight, but people have to disable the PC's power-saving features so that it keeps processing rather than sleeping. [It should also be noted that most people who game on their PC prefer to disable FAH while they're doing it to avoid competition for critical resources.]

I have no solid information about any of the newer game consoles (other than the comparisons I've made above) but my hunch is that clients will not be developed. You're welcome to ask the manufacturers directly. You're more likely to get a more authoritative answer than you can from our site.

[NookieBandit]

Bruce, do you happen to know the level of engineering resources Sony and Stanford devoted to creating the PS3 version of FAH in terms of engineering man-months, or some other metric? I'd like to get some level of understanding of the complexity of the development effort at that time. Since the new Sony/Microsoft console platforms are basically just modified PCs, the level of effort to port FAH to those platforms is somewhere between trivial and a full-on PS3-like development effort. I'm trying to understand the time boundaries to complete the port. Once that's known, it can be translated into a cost estimate. From that point it's simply a matter of finding the $, which shouldn't be too hard if the cost isn't stratospheric. Could potentially even be done with a Kickstarter campaign.

[bruce]

No, I do not.

I know they developed an outstanding viewer, Unlike the PC, they were able to use independent resources for folding and for viewing, but you'd expect that given the visualization technology expected on a game console. Assuming someone planned to develop for a modified PC, I don't think anybody would run the FahCore exclusively on CPU and dedicate a powerful GPU exclusively to viewing. (That's not an exact equivalent, but you get the idea).

[NookieBandit]

I agree with you on the PS3 viewer -- it was nothing short of stunning. I used to pipe the output to an LCD (at the time) display in my foyer as a form of "living" artwork. It never failed to generate a bunch of questions from guests, particularly the ladies, which was quite a nice surprise, but I digress...

I believe PG works with an outside developer, Caludron Development, if I recall correctly. What do you think it would take for them to do an engineering analysis of the time/effort/expertise to port FAH to the PS4? If we can get a reasonably accurate estimate, I'll do my best to find the $ both personally and through other means to get the port done.

[bruce]

They do work with an outside developer, but he has an extensive backlog of critical work and without even asking, I know the answer will be something equivalent to "I'll get back to you late in 2016."

[AlexF@H]

I don't understand; why isn't this client possible to be developed?

[7im]

Possible, yes.

But both Sony and Microsoft hold the key to access the system directly, and without that access, or their interest in building a native client like Sony did last time, this is a non starter. Stanford is willing, Sony/Microsoft are not.

Go ask Sony on their forum. Go ask MS on their forum.