Foghorn Leghorn
Unconfirmed Member
Seriously? Then Why aren't Nvidia and AMD sticking a few GB of ddr3 and 32MB of esam on their cards for some monster bandwidth?
EDGE: "Power struggle: the real differences between PS4 and Xbox One performance"
- Thread starter Musiol
- Start date
Seriously? Then Why aren't Nvidia and AMD sticking a few GB of ddr3 and 32MB of esam on their cards for some monster bandwidth?
boredandlazy
Member
Amazing! It almost sounds too good to be true.
lmao....
You do realize that they won't surpass the PS4 bandwidth in real-life (AAA games) performance? Around 140GB/s is what they will get.
edit.
I can't believe some people are still spouting off this nonsense.
Primedoughnut
Banned
Yes!, it's almost like the PS4 is super unbalanced and the XB1 the prefect console...(/s)
As you can see..... Microsoft PR and Leadbetter (DF) did a great job....
OldSchoolNerd
Banned
It's been measured, real life, real games at 200GB/s. That the average. There is a good discussion on the subject here http://beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=62867&page=266
It goes on for a while, and it's technical. It appears to come to the conclusion that the x1 is a bandwidth monster.
It goes on for a while, and it's technical. It appears to come to the conclusion that the x1 is a bandwidth monster.
As we know, most of them Studios have 2 teams, the one that made unchartered 3 (Different to TLoU team) for example are working on something.
Quantic Dream have already said in a recent interview about Beyond two souls, that they have already started working on a Next-Gen title for PS4... There are many studio teams unaccounted for.
OldSchoolNerd
Banned
So are you saying those MS techies were lying in some way? Knowing that they would inevitably be caught out? Seriously?
?????
Where have you been? Is this your first time on Neogaf/the internet?
Check this thread here from page 1 to ....here.
They have been "cought out" several times since the XBone reveal.
Are you forgetting this is the same company that has been going on about the cloud improving graphics?
bandwidth for what a 32mb frame buffer to enable at the minute 900p? (forza at 1080?) or at BEST a Tiled resource target file. Its still beyond me how people are still arguing 32mb eSram + DDR3 vs GDDR5 @ 8GB pool. That 32mb buffer isnt exactly going to hold massive amounts of top quality textures/other game data. The majority of the game will be using the DDR3. The bandwidth has to go somewhere and thats the CPU/GPU.
Regardless the bandwidth of both consoles are feeding the Rops and GCN Cores/Shader units of which 1 has the clear advantage.
OldSchoolNerd
Banned
Because the eSram is on die and extremely low latency. They are able to push those CUs up to a higher utilisation.
Lower than L1? Lower than L2?
OldSchoolNerd
Banned
Sorry. I was talking about the DF article, I haven't seen them caught out about anything in there. Like anyone proving their bandwidth measurements were made up.
OldSchoolNerd
Banned
None of the latency figures have been published, but it's safe to say the eSram latency will be lower than going off die to system memory.
DF article is crap, too.
Thanks to the small clock boost, etc.... and speaking about AAA games -->around ~140GB/s is what the XBone will achieve, if everthing goes as it should.
PS4 is currently at ~172GB/s.
edit.
Neither L1 nor L2 are system memory, and their latency is in the 100s of cycles. Is that "extremely low"?
Oh come on. This bullshit has been called out countless time on this very thread. Are we gonna go all over it again?
Bandwidth doesn't add up. It doesn't. If it did, x360 would have more than x1.
Peak performance was measured at 133GB/s before the upclock. Now you can assume it's 140. And no, 3/4 of ram requests aren't coming off the eSram, and yes, everything that has to make a journey in DDR3 is limited to 68GB/sec theoretically.
We've been over this many, many times. Latency is barely even a factor for GPU tasks, bandwidth is what's important for that.
jimbobsmells
Member
Are you referring to the zupallinere post? The one where he/she quotes you, and makes the assumption the xbox one is a monster on the back of your comment? Wow.
Bandwidth is irrelevant if you assume both the X1 + Ps4's graphic cards are Saturated, we know the PS4 has double the Rops, more SU's GCN Cores so if both are saturated with data, Its all about the end product... The capability of the CPU and GPU, it boils down to what the Graphics Chips are doing.
Whats the point in having a 600BHP Car with Tyres that cant transfer the power to the ground, adding Esram bandwidth figures and expecting the X1's Graphic chip to utilise more than it needs is pointless. Bandwidth is not Storage space, thats why the GDDR5 is clearly going to be holding far superior quality textures and general data at 1 time.
What X1 needs is to utilize tiled resources on that 32mb of EsRam, use 16mb for a frame buffer and the other 16mb for a tiled resource target file that can STREAM textures from a file upwards of 10GB, but it requires developer optimization and is possibly the X1's version of the PS3 Cell, a pain in the ass, its a botch job versus the PS4 ease of use + better hardware. But its definately a help if the developer puts the effort in.
The problem with that is X1 GFX Chip only supports DX11.1 and can be upgraded by software to DX11.2 TEIR 1, which means it cannot do the same things as the PS4 Card supporting DX11.2 TEIR 2 Tiled resources potentially. (Software DX11.2 vs hardware DX11.2)
Whats the point in having a 600BHP Car with Tyres that cant transfer the power to the ground, adding Esram bandwidth figures and expecting the X1's Graphic chip to utilise more than it needs is pointless. Bandwidth is not Storage space, thats why the GDDR5 is clearly going to be holding far superior quality textures and general data at 1 time.
What X1 needs is to utilize tiled resources on that 32mb of EsRam, use 16mb for a frame buffer and the other 16mb for a tiled resource target file that can STREAM textures from a file upwards of 10GB, but it requires developer optimization and is possibly the X1's version of the PS3 Cell, a pain in the ass, its a botch job versus the PS4 ease of use + better hardware. But its definately a help if the developer puts the effort in.
The problem with that is X1 GFX Chip only supports DX11.1 and can be upgraded by software to DX11.2 TEIR 1, which means it cannot do the same things as the PS4 Card supporting DX11.2 TEIR 2 Tiled resources potentially. (Software DX11.2 vs hardware DX11.2)
The 150 GB/sec was not in a game. It was just a test. Games might get that in a very limited usage but the average is far far lower. As this thread points out; devs are getting 50% faster memory fetches with PS4. It has the better memory and if anything is the bandwidth monster.
I wonder if there's any value in comparing X1 and PS2 as far as relative dev difficulty and memory management.
If devs can manage with the input bandwidth afforded by DDR3 alone, at the top of the pipe, things might be more comparable to 360 dev. Fairly straight forward. If, though, devs aren't getting enough bandwidth out of DDR3 for the top of the pipe, they could quickly find themselves in something more comparable to PS2-ish territory.
Just food for thought when hearing about eSRAM being 'a nightmare'.
If devs can manage with the input bandwidth afforded by DDR3 alone, at the top of the pipe, things might be more comparable to 360 dev. Fairly straight forward. If, though, devs aren't getting enough bandwidth out of DDR3 for the top of the pipe, they could quickly find themselves in something more comparable to PS2-ish territory.
Just food for thought when hearing about eSRAM being 'a nightmare'.
Canis lupus
Member
Bullshit.
The real world practical bandwidth numbers will likely be:
XB1: 130-140 GB/s
PS4: 172 GB/s
The PS4 number has already been confirmed by a developer's CEO on this forum.
The esram can only provide speeds of 150gb/s maximum according to MS at the moment and that is pushing it to specifically do only certain tasks and with it being as full as possible of data for those tasks. Please don't spout Beyond3D bullshit here on GAF as that shit get's called out real fast.
EDIT: btw the xb1 number includes the DDR3 bandwidth too, the fact the Esram is not a 1024bit bus and is actually 4x 256 bit bus attached to 4 8mb sections means it will generally be operating at far lower than any of these theoretical numbers in a real world scenario.
Is this true no matter what power still the gap small ??!!
http://youtu.be/6bha54UmY0M
http://youtu.be/IQj3aMHrWAQ
http://youtu.be/6bha54UmY0M
http://youtu.be/IQj3aMHrWAQ
Foghorn Leghorn
Unconfirmed Member
killatopak
Member
Wasn't MS' NDA expire today? Any news regarding the console?
I'm interested since a lot of tech sites, blogs and tech journals kinda links their source to misterxmedia which we all know is some kind of a delusional guy.
I need confirmation so his blatant lying , despite the actual specs that we know of , is put to rest.
I'm interested since a lot of tech sites, blogs and tech journals kinda links their source to misterxmedia which we all know is some kind of a delusional guy.
I need confirmation so his blatant lying , despite the actual specs that we know of , is put to rest.
There is no NDA, the imaginary one will always be pushed back, everything you read that has anything to do with that blog is not real.
Considering how slow the GPU cache is and how long it takes to traverse the cache structure I don't see the point in keeping it very low tbh.
neodeano
Member
Delusional is being kind. Batshit insane is more appropriate.
cheezcake
Member
You can in fact add it up in the case of the X1, but the obvious limitation being you can only access 32MB of data with the ESRAM data bus at 140 GB/s and access the rest of the data in regular RAM at 62 GB/s.
In the end having a unified memory space which you can access at a flat 176 GB/s is going to be the better option
KimonoNoNo
Member
A new challenger approaches.
I swear as one guy get's swatted away, somebody new appears regular as clockwork.
And "shocking " part its always a junior.
>_> We all know the word we want to say...
Manmademan
Member
This one is so stupid i have a hard time even thinking "paid shill" over "idiot fan".
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
I'm thinking it's latter over former.
GAF will always be more accurate and reliable, because here we have a strict control and check up system where insiders etc are vetted before they're allowed to spout BS claims. After the sifting through the weed, this generally leaves a better cut of actual insiders and industry people left posting. Many of the ones who've posted in here even, despite not being insiders, still have experience in the field or fields similar, and can usually pretty quickly and astutely shoot down FUD. It's a shame so much FUD on B3D is not only propagated, but actually regurgitated and continually given traction.
The majority of secret sauce developments actually originated from B3D, that should tell you what you need to know credibility wise. Luckily they do still have a few genuine insiders and devs etc who do still post, albeit not nearly enough.
digoutyoursoul
Member
Stopped reading that misterxmedia blog after checking out the comment sections, I swear this sly git writes most of them himself. Pretty sad trying to string a few fan kids along with a bunch of goal posting shifting horse shit. He gives himself away as any posts questioning it all do not appear. Sad case
shinra-bansho
Member
...
First 6 posts, all in this thread, all about the wonders of ESRAM.
Chobel
Member
So who is tidux?