iamshadowlark
Banned
How credible is this site supposed to be?Proelite said:Some new more sensible leaks from a more reliable source, MS associates.
http://s3gal3aks.wordpress.com/2011/11/15/world-exclusive-xbox-ten-spec-sheet/#comments
How credible is this site supposed to be?Proelite said:Some new more sensible leaks from a more reliable source, MS associates.
http://s3gal3aks.wordpress.com/2011/11/15/world-exclusive-xbox-ten-spec-sheet/#comments
Proelite said:But PCs have up to 8 gigs of ram, they are dirt cheap nowadays. Why can't they pack in at least four gigs or the console will be outdated in two years.
iamshadowlark said:How credible is this site supposed to be?
This credibleiamshadowlark said:How credible is this site supposed to be?
Sega Still Shooting For A $299.99 Launch Price Point
Proelite said:Some new more sensible leaks from a more reliable source, MS associates.
http://s3gal3aks.wordpress.com/2011/11/15/world-exclusive-xbox-ten-spec-sheet/#comments
2GB 512-Bit GDDR5 256GB/s (Unified Memory Architecture)
DopeyFish said:That memory bandwidth is so insane that it's more than the PCIe x16 3.0 lane and DDR3 memory bandwidth added together and multiplied by 6
Just to give you an idea
Hynix Semiconductor introduced the industry's first 1 Gib GDDR5 memory. It supports a bandwidth of 20 GB/s on a 32-bit bus, which enables memory configurations of 1 GiB at 160 GB/s with only 8 circuits on a 256-bit bus. Hynix 2 Gbit GDDR5 boasts a 7 GHz clock speed. The newly developed GDDR5 is the fastest and highest density graphics memory available in the market. It operates at 7 GHz effective clock-speed and processes up to 28 GB/s with a 32-bit I/O. 2 Gbit GDDR5 memory chips will enable graphics cards with 2 GiB or more of onboard memory with 224 GB/s or higher peak bandwidth. The memory maker claims that the new chip will be in demand in the second half of 2010.
because PC ram and console ram are not the same ramProelite said:But PCs have up to 8 gigs of ram, they are dirt cheap nowadays. Why can't they pack in at least four gigs or the console will be outdated in two years.
256 gb/s GDDR5 LOL
DieH@rd said:DopeyFish, what is the usual speed for GDDR5 in modern gpus?
claviertekky said:Power7 CPUs have a requirement to be made in the 45nm process.
That said, I don't know how credible that site just posted is.
Just seems like speculative conclusions made from the info posted yesterday.
brotkasten said:This is the first UE3 tech demo, from 2004.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m7T5ay_8DI
I don't see anything that isn't possible right now.
DopeyFish said:it's plausible. however GDDR5 doesn't exist in that speed afaik
that's operating at the same bandwidth as the EDRAM in the Xbox 360 (iirc) which would mean... this thing would absolutely slaughter PCs without blinking
Kevin said:Yeah these specs are quite disappointing. The leap between last gen and current gen was significantly higher. I don't think the advances in graphics on these systems will be that much more substantial then current stuff. I'm no expert on this though. I will say I highly doubt AMD's previous statement of "Avatar like" visuals.
Also, this would continue to hold back PC gaming as well since as we know most companies focus on consoles first and PCs second which is why PC gaming hasn't progressed much over the years. My opinion of course and I own a GTX 590 with Battlefield 3, Witcher 2, Skyrim, Crysis 2 DX11, etc. While they look great, they aren't that big of a leap considering how many years have passed.
Kevin said:Yeah these specs are quite disappointing. The leap between last gen and current gen was significantly higher. I don't think the advances in graphics on these systems will be that much more substantial then current stuff. I'm no expert on this though. I will say I highly doubt AMD's previous statement of "Avatar like" visuals.
Also, this would continue to hold back PC gaming as well since as we know most companies focus on consoles first and PCs second which is why PC gaming hasn't progressed much over the years. My opinion of course and I own a GTX 590 with Battlefield 3, Witcher 2, Skyrim, Crysis 2 DX11, etc. While they look great, they aren't that big of a leap considering how many years have passed.
DopeyFish said:Uhhhh
A console at these specs (depending on the gpus) if segaleaks is accurate (they are not) but to just give it an ounce of thought
This would be a far larger jump than Xbox->360
IMO
Kevin said:Yeah these specs are quite disappointing. The leap between last gen and current gen was significantly higher. I don't think the advances in graphics on these systems will be that much more substantial then current stuff. I'm no expert on this though. I will say I highly doubt AMD's previous statement of "Avatar like" visuals.
Also, this would continue to hold back PC gaming as well since as we know most companies focus on consoles first and PCs second which is why PC gaming hasn't progressed much over the years. My opinion of course and I own a GTX 590 with Battlefield 3, Witcher 2, Skyrim, Crysis 2 DX11, etc. While they look great, they aren't that big of a leap considering how many years have passed.
-ImaginaryInsider said:Any chance Epic could complain and we get 3gb of GDDR5? Or is that just too costly?
Kevin said:Yeah these specs are quite disappointing. The leap between last gen and current gen was significantly higher. I don't think the advances in graphics on these systems will be that much more substantial then current stuff. I'm no expert on this though. I will say I highly doubt AMD's previous statement of "Avatar like" visuals.
Also, this would continue to hold back PC gaming as well since as we know most companies focus on consoles first and PCs second which is why PC gaming hasn't progressed much over the years. My opinion of course and I own a GTX 590 with Battlefield 3, Witcher 2, Skyrim, Crysis 2 DX11, etc. While they look great, they aren't that big of a leap considering how many years have passed.
SkylineRKR said:I'm not really looking for better graphics myself. All I want is better performance. No sub-HD sub 30fps and lack of AA and other shit, but just Crysis 2 and BF3 at a locked 60fps and native 1080p resolution. And 64 guys online. If such games are launch material, i'm fine... probably.
SkylineRKR said:I think that seeing the current state of the economy its very expected that this leap won't be as big as the ones before it. With the rise of casual gaming the demand for graphics isn't what it once used to be as well. Its more about what kind of innovations the consoles actually offer. Its suicide to go all out with specs, and then fall flat on your face because of either selling for a premium price or selling at a major loss per console.
I'm not really looking for better graphics myself. All I want is better performance. No sub-HD sub 30fps and lack of AA and other shit, but just Crysis 2 and BF3 at a locked 60fps and native 1080p resolution. And 64 guys online. If such games are launch material, i'm fine... probably.
DopeyFish said:Uhhhh
A console at these specs (depending on the gpus) if segaleaks is accurate (they are not) but to just give it an ounce of thought
This would be a far larger jump than Xbox->360
IMO
guek said:because PC ram and console ram are not the same ram
We're talking about PPC architecture here though, and PPCs aren't used in user PCs although Apple formally used them before the switch to Intel chips.Gaborn said:Frankly, it's madness. I mean, 6 core isn't even PC Standard yet. Traditionally there is a lag between consoles and PC gaming. I really, really really really really doubt this. It's nice wishful thinking though.
DopeyFish said:100 MB EDRAM would ensure 1080pw/ 4xAA in basically every game
that memory bandwidth would ensure PCs wouldn't catch up in a long, long time
what makes this smell like bullshit is that the EDRAM would -not- be necessary with pipe that fast... it just doesn't make sense to me
claviertekky said:We're talking about PPC architecture here though, and PPCs aren't used in user PCs although Apple formally used them before the switch to x86 Intel chips.
Proelite said:We can always count on Segaleaks to spread the goods.
World Exclusive on a new sega console:
http://s3gal3aks.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/world-exclusive/
DopeyFish said:100 MB EDRAM would ensure 1080pw/ 4xAA in basically every game
that memory bandwidth would ensure PCs wouldn't catch up in a long, long time
what makes this smell like bullshit is that the EDRAM would -not- be necessary with pipe that fast... it just doesn't make sense to me
SkylineRKR said:The EDRAM thing is the one thing I absolutely don't believe.
guek said:In comparison, the 360 had 10mb EDRAM in its gpu. And before any numbnuts yells "10X leap is standard!!", the gamecube had 3mb EDRAM in its gpu.
DieH@rd said:At these speeds, i recon that ram is not cheap. And they need to find place for 4 additional chips on board. If they want to make that change, they need to do it NOW if the wish to hit late 2012 window.
Qualcomm expects the first Snapdragon-powered Windows 8 PC to arrive a year from now, marking the entry into a lucrative new business for the wireless chip company.
Qualcomm is already working with Microsoft to ensure that computers running on the next-generation operating system will be able to run on its chips based on ARM's technology, which sacrifice processing power for more energy efficiency and ability to always remain connected. Qualcomm CEO Paul Jacobs said he sees a majority of the Windows 8 products coming after the end of fiscal 2012, which comes in September.
Kevin said:Yeah these specs are quite disappointing. The leap between last gen and current gen was significantly higher. I don't think the advances in graphics on these systems will be that much more substantial then current stuff. I'm no expert on this though. I will say I highly doubt AMD's previous statement of "Avatar like" visuals.
Also, this would continue to hold back PC gaming as well since as we know most companies focus on consoles first and PCs second which is why PC gaming hasn't progressed much over the years. My opinion of course and I own a GTX 590 with Battlefield 3, Witcher 2, Skyrim, Crysis 2 DX11, etc. While they look great, they aren't that big of a leap considering how many years have passed.
Raistlin said:Oh lol ... I didn't notice the bandwidth numbers.
hahahahahahaha
Though many would argue MS fucked up and should have went with 16MB or so.guek said:In comparison, the 360 had 10mb EDRAM in its gpu. And before any numbnuts yells "10X leap is standard!!", the gamecube had 3mb EDRAM in its gpu.
-ImaginaryInsider said:I look forward to seeing B3D destroy these specs/rumors.
Raistlin said:Though many would argue MS fucked up and should have went with 16MB or so.
10MB simply wasn't enough to support 720p with enough effects in a single pass.
DopeyFish said:About 40 MB is the perfect sweet spot iirc
100 MB is just plain ridiculous... And once again... With 256 GB/s the EDRam would be pointless lol
DopeyFish said:it's plausible. however GDDR5 doesn't exist in that speed afaik
that's operating at the same bandwidth as the EDRAM in the Xbox 360 (iirc) which would mean... this thing would absolutely slaughter PCs without blinking
Let me explain.DieH@rd said:Second to last paragraph @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDDR5, and those are 256mbit numbers.
Raistlin said:Let me explain.
First off, I'm aware of Hynix's tech. However, who is using it at this point? Is it in large-scale production at reasonable prices? (serious question ... I thought it wasn't, but will be happy if wrong)
Regardless, my issue isn't necessarily just regarding the GDDR5. The issue is the overall architecture. If you read my previous posts, my main criticism leveled against the original 'leaked specs' wasn't just about the individual parts - it was the architecture as a whole.
In the case of the original specs, the DDR3 made little sense in the context of a system with a hex-core processor. You don't include 6 cores just for multitasking and OS functions. The assumption is that it would also contribute to actual in-game processing - stuff like AI, procedural animation, etc. Using slow-ass RAM would unnecessarily gimp performance, making the spec list suspect.
Here we see the opposite. Let's for a minute assume they will use Hynix tech. If so, explain why there is any eDRAM, let alone the insane 100MB being cited? The supposed GDDR5 actually has the same bandwidth as the eDRAM in 360's Xenos.
So think about it for a second. Why would MS use what is likely quite expensive RAM, and then at significant expense include a crazy amount of eDRAM when they already have serious bandwidth? Taken as a whole, it looks suspect. It seems redundant, and gets even crazier when you consider costs.