DF: Orbis vs Durango Spec Analysis

16 ROPs is sufficient to maintain 1080p, 32 comes across as overkill, but it could be useful for addressing stereoscopic 1080p for instance, or even 4K.

People still don't believe we will see some 4K games from sony? Not AAA but maby small PSN titles.
 
People still don't believe we will see some 4K games from sony? Not AAA but maby small PSN titles.

Rendering simple games at 4k resolution doesn't require powerful hardware.

Also, what's the point of even making games that run at 4k when even 5 years from now only a very small portion of the population (many not even gamers) will even own 4k televisions?

Would there really be no other benifit to having 32 ROPs?

16x AF
 
Also, what's the point of even making games that run at 4k when even 5 years from now only a very small portion of the population (many not even gamers) will even own 4k televisions?

5yrs ago i knew very few people with 720p HD TVs. Today it's difficult to find non 1080p sets in stores and houses. And i live in a "third world"/"developing"/"BRICS" country
 
People still don't believe we will see some 4K games from sony? Not AAA but maby small PSN titles.

I don't doubt that for a second. Something like SuperStardust or a PixelJunk title maybe. But they'll be at least a year out from launch.

Tell us about the RAM, TELL US ABOUT THE RAM

You are assuming his comment is suggesting that he has new info. It could instead easily be that we've had the few leaks we have had since he was put on gardening leave.
 
So ROPs only give you better IQ? 16 ROPs vs 32ROPs isn't really that big of advantage? Why would Sony have it in the silicon budget then? Seems like it could be better put to use on other things?

Having 16 anisotropic filtering compared to none is like night and day. Do you really want the game look blurry and ugly from a few feet from your character?
 
How can you simply add bandwidth from 32 MB of RAM with 8GB from the rest?

Shouldn't it be:
EdramBandwidth*(32/8224)+Ddr3RamBandwidth*(8192/8224)
?

Maybe that formula isn't correct, but still there's only so much 32 MB can do. Otherwise...why would GPU makers use GDDR5 if they could be saving $30 on COGS with DDR3 + EDRAM?
 
So, is he permed? Was he a troll with no information all along?

No he did but for every post with genuine info he would post a few more containing lies to confuse people about the veracity of the information as we would keep on guessing which is the correct one. This got out of hand. And given his "member" status (and not junior) he was not perm'd.
 
Durango and Orbis should not have problems with AF.

So why 32 ROPs then? That's the same as a full 7970, just seems overkill. If Sony are only using 18 out of 20 CUs for yield improvement, why not remove half the ROPs and improve even further (or keep more CUs)?
 
So why 32 ROPs then? That's the same as a full 7970, just seems overkill. If Sony are only using 18 out of 20 CUs for yield improvement, why not remove half the ROPs and improve even further (or keep more CUs)?

As aforementioned by someone, 1080p3D may something to do with it plus, I would think ROPs would have more use than "just" AF.
 
Because...?

I'm guessing it's something to do with the more advanced GPUs?
AF has essentially no cost on modern PC GPUs, turning it on on even the most demanding titles has essentially no effect. You can expect 16xAF in nearly all titles next gen with a few possibly dropping down to 4x AF.
 
Maybe he lost one of his many ban bets lol

...can't wait for the kotaku article. I think we might get upgradable consoles this time every few years. I don't see these consoles lasting long unless they're doing 3d stacking with 8 gb ram and full HSA. That could last a decade until real time ray tracing is practical
 
So why 32 ROPs then? That's the same as a full 7970, just seems overkill. If Sony are only using 18 out of 20 CUs for yield improvement, why not remove half the ROPs and improve even further (or keep more CUs)?

I have no idea for the 32 ROPs. We'll see how they play out come console launch.
 
Unless things have changed more drastically than i thought, ROPs still have nothing to do with AF. Texture filtering is a function of the units responsible for fetching texels, which at least were once called texture mapping units (TMUs), and these should be either in their own cluster or part of the compute units. ROPs are responsible for taking pixel data and reading/writing to the framebuffer. Along with that is classical anti-aliasing.

Reasons for having more would be decreasing bottlenecks in cases where you're reading/writing to the framebuffer perhaps rather quickly. Blending lots of very simple particles or transparent surfaces, writing the depth buffer/ doing depth tests... Of course, the ROPs can themselves be bottlenecked by bandwidth, but I don't know the specifics here.
 
With all this tech talk lets not forget its gonna come down to the games regardless of who is more powerful.
I think Mirocsoft is really counting on Bungie's new game to sell the system. I do have more faith in them than Guerilla (gameplay wise) but we shall see.
 
50% more ALU (maths!)
50% more Text
100% more ROPs.

Little bit faster memory.

Same CPU.

Thats where we sit at the moment.

you should go work for AMD, obviously you know how to get 200% more yield out of a gpu just by adding 4 extra CU's and doubling your ROPs. (even the DF article says it amounts to no more then a 20% yield)

Why do they even bother with new architecture on cards if they can just add a couple more parts and make it twice as good? Seriously this stuff cracks me up.
 
Unless things have changed more drastically than i thought, ROPs still have nothing to do with AF. Texture filtering is a function of the units responsible for fetching texels, which at least were once called texture mapping units (TMUs), and these should be either in their own cluster or part of the compute units. ROPs are responsible for taking pixel data and reading/writing to the framebuffer. Along with that is classical anti-aliasing.

Reasons for having more would be decreasing bottlenecks in cases where you're reading/writing to the framebuffer perhaps rather quickly. Blending lots of very simple particles or transparent surfaces, writing the depth buffer/ doing depth tests... Of course, the ROPs can themselves be bottlenecked by bandwidth, but I don't know the specifics here.

This is most interesting. Thanks.
 
All this stuff on Durango seems like Band Aids made to compensate for the downsides of ddr3.....

It seems like the desire to have 8GB RAM was the primary objective and everything else was a secondary afterthought.

This large pool of RAM drove the entire design of the machine it seems

If you look at the Durango design docs they were expecting ddr4 to be available but had to settle for ddr3.
 
you should go work for AMD, obviously you know how to get 200% more yield out of a gpu just by adding 4 extra CU's and doubling your ROPs.

Why do they even bother with new architecture on cards if they can just add a couple more parts and make it twice as good? Seriously this stuff cracks me up.

Wouldn't it be 6 more CUs?

14+4 to Durango's supposed 12?
 
Is there a song called lowered expectations? I would like to play it every time AF is mentioned as a bullet point.

Should have been standard from day one last gen.

Really. What's missing on current hardware that presents console games from having good texture filtering?

Or, what's there on pc gpus that let's us have it (without compromising performance, AF is computing-free).
 
As aforementioned by someone, 1080p3D may something to do with it plus, I would think ROPs would have more use than "just" AF.

This is what I'm implying, and wondering if anyone more technical knowledge can say what that would/could be.

Texture filtering is done by the... Texture Units.

So what is the real benifit of having twice as many ROPs? It doesn't seem like a real advantage.

Unless things have changed more drastically than i thought, ROPs still have nothing to do with AF. Texture filtering is a function of the units responsible for fetching texels, which at least were once called texture mapping units (TMUs), and these should be either in their own cluster or part of the compute units. ROPs are responsible for taking pixel data and reading/writing to the framebuffer. Along with that is classical anti-aliasing.

Reasons for having more would be decreasing bottlenecks in cases where you're reading/writing to the framebuffer perhaps rather quickly. Blending lots of very simple particles or transparent surfaces, writing the depth buffer/ doing depth tests... Of course, the ROPs can themselves be bottlenecked by bandwidth, but I don't know the specifics here.

Ok thanks. This is what I was looking for. Seems like it would have more of an effect, than just "better AA/IQ"
 
If you look at the Durango design docs they were expecting ddr4 to be available but had to settle for ddr3.

That could also be why they ended up going with 8. Once they realized they couldn't get DDR4, they probably upped the ram amount a bit.
 
So why 32 ROPs then? That's the same as a full 7970, just seems overkill. If Sony are only using 18 out of 20 CUs for yield improvement, why not remove half the ROPs and improve even further (or keep more CUs)?

The entire 7800 line has the same, only the 7700 cards are cut down to 16. It might make more sense to ask 'why remove it?' instead.
 
The entire 7800 line has the same, only the 7700 cards are cut down to 16. It might make more sense to ask 'why remove it?' instead.

to add more CU's(im sure there's more possibilities)? Generally these gpu's in consoles are highly customized. Look at the Wii U GPU for example. 32 ROPs must take away from the silicon budget, and if 32 ROPs pose no real advantage, it seems like it could be used elsewhere.
 
That could also be why they ended up going with 8. Once they realized they couldn't get DDR4, they probably upped the ram amount a bit.

There are no performance difference in DDR3 and DDR4. DDR4 will be lower voltage and go up to higher clock speeds, but at the same clock speed they are the same. MS will probably drop in DDR4 in the future for energy and heat reduction.
 
There are no performance difference in DDR3 and DDR4. DDR4 will be lower voltage and go up to higher clock speeds, but at the same clock speed they are the same. MS will probably drop in DDR4 in the future for energy and heat reduction.

Ah my mistake.
 
Top Bottom