• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

VGLeaks Durango specs: x64 8-core CPU @1.6GHz, 8GB DDR3 + 32MB ESRAM, 50GB 6x BD...

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
I'm going to look genuinely stupid now... but oh well.

Why is bandwidth so important given the relatively small size of the ESRAM? Surely you'd be limited by the size of the memory before you'd be limited by your ability to ship data to / from it.

Not necessarily with ROPs, where you have a lot of bandwidth consumption mapping to relatively small areas of memory. Well, we thought that ROPs in Durango would be relatively unconstrained by bandwidth as they were in Xenos (256GB/s). And that this would give it the same relative advantages and allow it to excel in some cases, where you were bound by buffer bandwidth or buffer processing.

But now it looks like you have 170GB/s of bandwidth to use, where 102GB/s is shuffling to and from 32MB and 65GB/s to the rest.

It is 'worse' than I thought before...before I saw strengths and weaknesses vs Orbis, now I see weakness and added complexity for the sake of main memory capacity.
 
rtaUbu1.png

That's a sarcastic tag, if I am correct.
 
So the people on GAF that are privy to next-gen specs and insider info, have you heard more about Durango or Orbis? Because it seems like the former, but I'm curious.

From the sound of it, third party devs have been much more excited to talk about the next Xbox. This could possibly just be because Sony has been slack in getting them dev hardware/tools.
 

aegies

Member
I was informed it would be in the system.

I can only second this by saying they are internally very positive that backwards compatibility is very important for the first iteration or two of the hardware. So I'm guessing that means they'll pin it to specific hardware that can be eliminated to reduce cost as time goes on.
 

Gorillaz

Member
So the people on GAF that are privy to next-gen specs and insider info, have you heard more about Durango or Orbis? Because it seems like the former, but I'm curious.
Most people on here seem to have had a good amount on MS and little on Sony..Until a month ago for some reason which confused me alot since since I remember alot of them saying they wouldnt get info anytime soon(paraphasing)
 

Karak

Member

Only if Orbis doesn't have it. But I was informed AGAIN, on Friday,that it was in for Durango, and it was the same time I got much of the other information. A good deal about just game stuff and other random things.
 

androvsky

Member
Not necessarily with ROPs, where you have a lot of bandwidth consumption mapping to relatively small areas of memory. Well, we thought that ROPs in Durango would be relatively unconstrained by bandwidth as they were in Xenos (256GB/s). And that this would give it the same relative advantages and allow it to excel in some cases, where you were bound by buffer bandwidth or buffer processing.

But now it looks like you have 170GB/s of bandwidth to use, where 102GB/s is shuffling to and from 32MB and 65GB/s to the rest.

It is 'worse' than I thought before...before I saw strengths and weaknesses vs Orbis, now I see weakness and added complexity for the sake of main memory capacity.

The scary thing is even if you add up the ESRAM and DDR3 it's still slower than the rumored main memory of the Orbis, which makes me feel like I'm missing something important.
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
BTW, on those data move engines, I'm wondering if they're there to help coordinate different threads and signal data between cpu and gpu also, to reduce latency in those communications. Like maybe using hardware data queue control. It's stuff you can do in sw with relevant api access to the gpu etc. but it might be nice to have an independent hardware support for that.

(I'm guessing about this based on a little patent googling...)
 
I think Sony should not include stuff like HDMI in right now which will only increase costs. Keep the price low and see how the market reacts. If there is a demand for this then they can always add that functionality in the future units right?

HDMI in is going to be a feature that very few people will care about. It will also increase the price of the console. I honestly believe most people simply want to play games with their friends. I also think the inclusion of Kinect 2.0 is going to make the console pricier as well. It wouldn't shock me if this thing ends up more expensive than the PS4.
 
A couple of things.
  • I am VERY glad that a hard drive is standard on all consoles. But it sucks that it will only be SATA 2.0 and not 3.0. I would have liked to have the option of buying an SSD.
  • While I certainly like the amount of RAM I just hope the fact that it is DDR3 doesn't overly limit it in high-end games.
  • GIGABIT Ethernet, this makes me happy.
  • Does anyone know/think that Durango's Wireless N WiFi will be dual-band as well?
  • HDMI In? Okay, this console has some software secrets that I am fully ready to be unveiled.

Overall I am excited for the new generation and I eagerly await what the PS4 has. While the rumors so far are probably true, Sony has the chance to potentially offer some very impressive hardware (comparatively).
 

Karak

Member
Hey Karak, what about the post you promised? are you going to post it?

Much of it was this. Hence all my confusion.

I have some bits I will throw in here. I will just separate it from my many hours of Guessing what the hell any custom hardware did or does.

A couple of things.

HDMI In? Okay, this console has some software secrets that I am fully ready to be unveiled.

The main thing I am excited for ahahahaha
 

Jadedx

Banned
Not necessarily with ROPs, where you have a lot of bandwidth consumption mapping to relatively small areas of memory. Well, we thought that ROPs in Durango would be relatively unconstrained by bandwidth as they were in Xenos (256GB/s). And that this would give it the same relative advantages and allow it to excel in some cases, where you were bound by buffer bandwidth or buffer processing.

But now it looks like you have 170GB/s of bandwidth to use, where 102GB/s is shuffling to and from 32MB and 65GB/s to the rest.

It is 'worse' than I thought before...before I saw strengths and weaknesses vs Orbis, now I see weakness and added complexity for the sake of main memory capacity.

Well one of the DMEs are supposed to help with that and the devs are supposed to be very happy with it. What's the problem?
 

StevieP

Banned
I really don't think you should wish that, you would come off as rather foolish in earlier RAM discussions.

As I stated earlier in this thread, I wasn't expecting 2 of the 3 8th generation consoles to be using DDR3 as a base. Nor were most.

Things change when you see the sheets.

I think mods ought to change your tag. Because you were pretty much spot on with most things lol.

I've grown to like my tag. It allows me to say whatever I want :D
lol
 

Proelite

Member
BTW, on those data move engines, I'm wondering if they're there to help coordinate different threads and signal data between cpu and gpu also, to reduce latency in those communications. Like maybe using hardware data queue control. It's stuff you can do in sw with relevant api access to the gpu etc. but it might be nice to have an independent hardware support for that.

(I'm guessing about this based on a little patent googling...)

Nope. I suggest you to stop trying.
 

Ashes

Banned
Once again there was a big gulf in terms of alpha kits and beta kits for Durango on paper. The Alpha kits were needed to emulate the final performance of the combined silicon.

Alpha kits were

8 core 16 thread intel CPUs, probably running at 1.6 ghz
12GB of Ram
High end AMD 7000 series >2.5 teraflop GPU

7000? not 6000?

Intel 8 core? xeon?
 
So the people on GAF that are privy to next-gen specs and insider info, have you heard more about Durango or Orbis? Because it seems like the former, but I'm curious.

I'm not claiming to be an insider if insider means I work in the games publishing or development industry. (or media for that matter)

I think it is fair to say that is way more info on Durango out there than Orbis.

However, I think there has been more confusion about Durango than Orbis. Orbis info seems to be generally more accurate / less confused.

I don't think you need to be an insider to see this however, you need only have been paying close attention.
 

TheOddOne

Member
Once again there was a big gulf in terms of alpha kits and beta kits for Durango on paper. The Alpha kits were needed to emulate the final performance of the combined silicon.

Alpha kits were

8 core 16 thread intel CPUs, probably running at 1.6 ghz
12GB of Ram
High end AMD 7000 series >2.5 teraflop GPU
What the what.
 
HDMI in is going to be a feature that very few people will care about. It will also increase the price of the console. I honestly believe most people simply want to play games with their friends. I also think the inclusion of Kinect 2.0 is going to make the console pricier as well. It wouldn't shock me if this thing ends up more expensive than the PS4.

Eh. Having a port doesn't increase the price of console in any way. In fact, it'll make Microsoft more money as they can sell accessories like Cable box or other devices that are directly compatible with Durango, especially when HDMI devices can be controlled and communicate with each other.
 

Desty

Banned
It means a dev could theoretically put some frequently accessed (small) assets into eSRAM and read from them there rather than from DDR3. You couldn't do this on Xenos.

It also means you could keep a buffer or two on eSRAM for sampling in subsequent render passes rather than copying out to DDR3 and waiting.

But there's compromises here too. It's really interesting that they did this.

Yes, this sounds promising. You could put things like hair on a head or grass blades on a hill which get transformed a bazillion times. Instead of reaching out to ram to fetch textures, etc. Just put it all in there. Definitely needed for some next genny characters.
 

Kagari

Crystal Bearer
I can only second this by saying they are internally very positive that backwards compatibility is very important for the first iteration or two of the hardware. So I'm guessing that means they'll pin it to specific hardware that can be eliminated to reduce cost as time goes on.

So like the PS3?
I wonder if Sony will do the same with some sort of Cell/RSX in the early PS4 models.
 

Quazar

Member
Karak have you heard what direction they're going for games? Why does it seem their is always something missing from these specs? It's as if they're going a new route rather than just an upgrade in graphics. Maybe their own Rift?
 

Karak

Member
Are there any controller rumors for Durango?

For me...none.
That is odd. But none. They will have one. Its NOT Kinect only. But no solid info at all.

Karak have you heard what direction they're going for games?
Sure. It was reiterated to me that MS was fully behind doing everything the same like they did in the first few years of the Xbox 360 and that MS knows that is what got them a good deal of backing when the system first came out. That is the 4th or 5th time I was informed that.
I was told there is a very even split between new IP's and faithful IP's. And 3-4 big surprises.
 

aegies

Member
BTW, on those data move engines, I'm wondering if they're there to help coordinate different threads and signal data between cpu and gpu also, to reduce latency in those communications. Like maybe using hardware data queue control. It's stuff you can do in sw with relevant api access to the gpu etc. but it might be nice to have an independent hardware support for that.

(I'm guessing about this based on a little patent googling...)

That's not what the move engines are for.
 

Thraktor

Member
I can only second this by saying they are internally very positive that backwards compatibility is very important for the first iteration or two of the hardware. So I'm guessing that means they'll pin it to specific hardware that can be eliminated to reduce cost as time goes on.

I wouldn't be surprised if they have two versions of the console; a cheaper one with no BC and a more expensive one with a 360 CPU/GPU chip incorporated to provide full BC. Doing full hardware BC a-la first-gen PS3s seems like an excessive cost to include in every console, as not every player will actually use it.
 
For the life of me, I have never understood why people like backwards compatibility so much. I had an 80 GB Metal Gears Solid 4 PS3 and I think played maybe two PS2 games on the system since I've owned it. I buy new consoles to play new games.
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
The scary thing is even if you add up the ESRAM and DDR3 it's still slower than the rumored main memory of the Orbis, which makes me feel like I'm missing something important.

Capacity at an affordable cost.

Messy, but this would appear to have been their priority.

That's not what the move engines are for.


Thanks. I'm as curious to find out what they do as anyone...do they have anything to do with the relatively large amount of CPU cache?
 

derFeef

Member
For the life of me, I have never understood why people like backwards compatibility so much. I had an 80 GB Metal Gears Solid 4 PS3 and I think played maybe two PS2 games on the system since I've owned it. I buy new consoles to play new games.

With PSN and XBLA, it's a bit different I guess.
 
Top Bottom