• 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...

Durante

Member
Umm I call bullshit on this, someone please feel free to explain to me why I"m mistaken

360 can emulate the vast majority of popular Xbox1 games with almost ZERO planning ahead of time and VASTLY different hardware and Nvidia patent issues.

720 will be closer to 360 than 360 was to Xbox(GPU MUCH closer).........software emulation should almost certainly be VERY achievable.
360 has a CPU that is faster per-core than Xbox.
Durango has a CPU that is (at least in some aspects) significantly slower per-core than 360.
You can't realistically parallelize the realtime emulation of a single core.

And even so, 360 didn't really do emulation.
 

KageMaru

Member
I still dont get how these Data Move Engines are going to close a 50% gap.
Sounds like nothing more than a wishful thinking.

It's not a 50% gap for the whole system though. I know it's easier for people to see these systems as a sum of their parts, but things don't work that way.

Is the rumors are true wich console is more powerful?

Ps4 pr X720?

That either depends on the hour you ask or the person's allegiance. =p

I´m just disappointed with what MS is doing since 2009 and had hoped they would find the road again.

What they did makes sense with how a console life cycle plays out. Sony did the same last gen with the ps2 and it work great for them.

I know us as gamers hate hearing this, but when you're 4 years into a console's life cycle, the core gamers are not the focus of these companies. When the PS3 drops down to $200, and is viewed as having a mass market price point, you can bet they would have dropped down the core titles too and filled the gap with more Wonderbook type titles. Of course this will happen regardless now because their focus will shift over to the PS4, but hopefully you get my point.
 

Mad_Ban

Member
Of course there is.

tumblr_mb6vj1cqZP1qiqegzo1_500.gif

Huh. Clever. :p
 
I´m just disappointed with what MS is doing since 2009 and had hoped they would find the road again.

So far it seems it´s not happening (for me), and yes, i think the newest rumors are legit. I´m getting older and my time for gaming is getting sparser and sparser... so one console is enough, and i will go with the one that will give me the best versions, like i always did. I don`t care for brand loyalty and pick selfishly the machine with the best specs... and going with what we know, it´s Orbis.

And i'm not a believer of the special juice, that make the Durango so much better than the specs indicates (i see it more as viral marketing).

I feel much the same, I am much more likely to stay pc this gen with all these rumours.
 

Lord Error

Insane For Sony
I'm beginning to think this system of ["data movers" - DDR3 - eSRAM] can actually achieve more efficient bandwidth ,and by that token GPU usage, than simple GDDR5 and a more standard GPU setup even if the theoretical peak is lower. Depending on the bus speed/size of course. He might be right in that that could more than overcome the gap
I think the whole thing would make more sense if ESRAM was larger. 32MB is enough to hold 1080p buffer with MSAA and not much else as far as I can see.

From the specs, I'll conclude that Durango will have higher potential, but we'll see. More RAM over slightly more bandwidth all day, errday. Gulf between the GPUs is relatively small, though the PS4 does have an advantage in that regard.
50% is not exactly small. That could be a difference between being able to run something at 60FPS, vs. having to lock it down to 30. I kind of expect MS to upgrade GPU months before launch, just like they did with X360. There also doesn't sound like there'll be just 'slightly' more bandwidth, but that of course depends on how fast GDDR5 Sony ends up using.
 
Funny, I think I'll always have a PC with me so most powerful doesn't matter as much to me. Specs sound well rounded so far and I think now, when it comes to Durango, I want to hear about those OS features and game lineup more than anything else.
 
So the Wizard Jizz is just for making it more of a media box? I mean... Special Sauce.

Also, how do you get 170 GB/s parallel bandwidth? Simply adding the two together doesn't work that way, does it??
 
If Durango is appreciably less powerful than Orbis, will multiplatform games suffer because they're built to the lowest common denominator, or will the Orbis version look noticeably better, similar to how current PC games look miles ahead of their console counterparts?
 

Proelite

Member
So the Wizard Jizz is just for making it more of a media box? I mean... Special Sauce.

Also, how do you get 170 GB/s parallel bandwidth? Simply adding the two together doesn't work that way, does it??

I think to developers it's the same as have 8GB of ram with 170 GB/ bandwith.
 

EvB

Member
If Durango is appreciably less powerful than Orbis, will multiplatform games suffer because they're built to the lowest common denominator, or will the Orbis version look noticeably better, similar to how current PC games look miles ahead of their console counterparts?

Platform Parity.

Quite simply, neither console manufacturer will allow a game on their platform to look significantly worse than the other.
 
True. I'm just looking at the block diagram and how much silicon Microsoft is dedicating to that and the memory movers (and the audio DSP), all of which is custom to the system and expensive, and wondering why that, instead of more space dedicated to more GPU resources. They're telling developers it brings a number of advantages and frees them up to do "things," which I don't understand in an appreciable way. They spend a lot of time in their documentation talking about them.

So, this is what you were referring to when you stated that Orbis and Durango are not "GPU-centered." Sounds like it could make some things more complicated in a programmer's perspective, so it will be interesting to get more information on this topic.
 

Xenon

Member
If Durango is appreciably less powerful than Orbis, will multiplatform games suffer because they're built to the lowest common denominator, or will the Orbis version look noticeably better, similar to how current PC games look miles ahead of their console counterparts?

Extra sparks. Lots and lots of extra sparks!
 

iceatcs

Junior Member
I think there has some confusion in the forum which we have so so many questions of who has the strongest. Since that we have many rumours that MS has start developing next gen way before than Sony. And sudden the paperwork spec show Orbis has some advantage to the most of eyes, fact or not, doesnt matter.
 

Razgreez

Member
I think the whole thing would make more sense if ESRAM was larger. 32MB is enough to hold 1080p buffer with MSAA and not much else as far as I can see.

From what i can gather it wouldn't need to be larger. Theoretical peak bandwidth means nothing if your average is low. With these data move engines you could literally be pushing for 100% bandwidth efficiency at times pushing your average way up.

To pull an analogy out of my thumb - i'd rather have a salary of 10K a month consistently and easily than have one that requires bending over backwards to get to 20k with very little chance of keeping it there and ending up with an average lower than 10k in the end. Gives me time to focus on "other things" as well
 

SSM25

Member
I think to developers it's the same as have 8GB of ram with 170 GB/ bandwith.

Wouldn't that depend on how fast can data that is not on the 32 MB be moved to it? I mean 32 MB is no a lot and moving from the 8 GB or worse the Disc would slow things, no?
 

daveo42

Banned
I think to developers it's the same as have 8GB of ram with 170 GB/ bandwith.

You're still bottle necked by the size of the ESRAM no matter how fast it may be. Devs are only going to be dropping in specific stuff onto ESRAM anyway. it'd be different if they could offload more resources, but 32MB isn't all big in comparison.
 

SgtCobra

Member
Platform Parity.

Quite simply, neither console manufacturer will allow a game on their platform to look significantly worse than the other.
*Looks at PS3*

Didn't the Xbox/GameCube multiplatform games benefit of some graphical/performance improvements in comparison with the PS2 at that time?
 

Elios83

Member
I think to developers it's the same as have 8GB of ram with 170 GB/ bandwith.

Now you're just trolling the MS fans in the thread :D
Although I'd admit that the 8 cores (dual threaded) Intel CPU used to emulate the full power of the AMD Jaguar cores were a nice one too LOL.
 

THE:MILKMAN

Member
One thing that confuses me is that the insiders are saying the devs are really happy with tools and how all the chips and eSRAM and special sauces work together ect.....

Yet I was told a few days ago that no dev has any of the final hardware in the kits. So I can only conclude that the "confidence" in the Durango is entirely/mostly paper based?
 
It's the secret sauce,mang.

Officially Wizard Jizz, because a Kinect echo cancellation chip and media encoder are balls and will contribute nothing to rendering a game.

I have zero insider information and I've been saying from the start, MS is going media route. It's clear the game development path isn't right for them.

"Look our console has GTA6 AND media/DVR functions! Graphics aren't a concern for them.
 
Top Bottom