I would be more interested to see developers explain the "it's a wash" comments, since they're the ones making them. I never said "secret sauce." I said additional hardware to help performance, which is in the diagram. Also, numerous comments and hints I made were validated by the diagram. I've never said the GPU put out more flops than Orbis's solution. I haven't even said Durango was more powerful for quite a while (which disappeared once I got flop numbers for both and the "they aren't representative" talk).
I've said repeatedly there's hardware to get around the memory bandwidth limitations, that it targets efficiency, and that developers seem to like it. None of that is disproven or declared "bullshit" by this. I feel like I've tried pretty hard not to get into the power-pissing contest. I've only gone on record as saying the systems aren't far apart (which I continue to hear), and that Durango isn't "weak" by any definition. I understand that there's a desire to lump everything every person who has had something positive to say about the system together into one meta-poster, but that's not the case.
And yeah, the diagram and specs are accurate as of last February, though it isn't the exact diagram I've seen. I don't know if VGLeaks made it themselves based on their own conjecture or not.
Edit: also, they're still not talking about the hardware display planes (there are three, one is reserved for the OS, and each can render at a different resolution), which are definitely a thing, and the move engines, which are also a thing.
