Why did MS use over 40% of their silicon realestate on eSRAM if it has no bearing on GPU performance?
They should of just made the GPU the size of a Titan and called it a day. /s
Your GPU bottlenecks are often caused by not enough available throughput in RAM, especially at 4K.
We get it, you like to hate on the Scorpio.
It is so easy to understand...
- 63 GB/s to a 1.3TFs GPU is not enough = MS worked in that bottleneck adding a big and fast cache (eSRAM)... 1.3TFs GPU is not enough to reach 1080p in mid to high graphic quality.
- 320GB/s is more than enough to a 6TFs GPU... there is no RAM bottleneck here... no need cache... 6TFs GPU is not enough to 4k mid to high graphic quality.
If MS was smarter when projected XB1 they could chose a better RAM bandwidth (GDDR5?) and not use eSRAM... so make a chip with more GPU power, more ram bandwidth and optional mid to high 1080p power... ohhhh Sony did that.
About your Titan comment... no console has a price and some drawn power limits... a bigger chip than ~320mm2 is really something Sony and MS wants to avoid at all costs at the point both put what they could in side this chip at launch and Sony put at could in the Pro chip right now.
"Your GPU bottlenecks are often caused by not enough available throughput in RAM, especially at 4K" what you described here is RAM bootleneck and has nothing to do with GPU bottleneck... GPU bottleneck is when the GPU holds the render to reach a high level... in this case the 6TFs GPU holds the render to reach 4k in mid to high quality while there is RAM bandwidth enough for GPU and CPU (320GB/s... it is indeed overkill for 4k).
If I hate or not Scorpop won't change the actual delivery of it specs.
I'm surprise how your posts is full of crazy claims without any technical base.