Because this rumored clock speed is roughly the same as the Wii U's CPU clock speed, and the Wii U got killed because of it
No, it got killed because it's CPU looks to be a PPC 750 (a really old, basic CPU core) with added multi core support.
Because this rumored clock speed is roughly the same as the Wii U's CPU clock speed, and the Wii U got killed because of it
Marcan is a renowned hardware hacker who doesn't really have any vested interest in which system is the most powerful.
So 360 is SSJ Vegeta and Durango is Yamcha?
How would a 1.6 GHz quad-core Ivy Bridge i7 compare to Xenon, I wonder.
That means that Yamcha is half as powerful as SSJ Vegeta.
Its more like Durango is Mr. Popo.
How would a 1.6 GHz quad-core Ivy Bridge i7 compare to Xenon, I wonder.
How would a 1.6 GHz quad-core Ivy Bridge i7 compare to Xenon, I wonder.
Are we seriously making threads based on "some guy from twitter" now?
And why is that even relevant? Clock speed without other arch details such as number of cores, etc... is absolutely useless as a way to gauge power... this just sounds like WiiU damage control.
An 1.6Ghz i3 smokes Xenon.
I get that the real reason this is posted, is some kind of masked retaliation for all the Wii U hardware hate...
...but even if this is true, it doesn't make the Wii U CPU any less weaker. It also won't stop the haters.
I especially love his rants on how the Humble Bundle has "utterly disappointed" him because their latest THQ offering doesn't have any Linux compatible games.
Really a bastion of reason this guy is!
So it will be half as powerful as the 360?
It's over, console gaming is finished.
So it will be half as powerful as the 360?
And why is that even relevant? Clock speed without other arch details such as number of cores, etc... is absolutely useless as a way to gauge power... this just sounds like WiiU damage control.
GPGPU! Architecture! eDRAM! Short pipelines! Toasters!
3 cores with the 360 vs 16 cores with Durango.
They could be running a much slower clock speed and still be able to crush the 360s cpu performance wise.
i think the point is that the guy who leaked the "damaging" wii u cpu clock speed info is the same guy as this one. why hold these two consoles to different standards?
Espresso @ 1.24GHz = Nintendo are some cheap bastards, I swear
Durango @ 1.6GHz = whoa Microsoft made dat dere architecture sikk as fawk!!
this thread will be crow materials
16 cores? Xenon has 6 threads.3 cores with the 360 vs 16 cores with Durango.
They could be running a much slower clock speed and still be able to crush the 360s cpu performance wise.
This is not "Wii U damage control" or retaliation for negative Wii U threads, jesus grow the fuck up.
An 1.6Ghz i3 smokes Xenon.
Well that is true. 16 is a higher number than 3. But at the same time, 1.6 is a lower number than 3.2.
This is not "Wii U damage control" or retaliation for negative Wii U threads, jesus grow the fuck up.
Guys, the 1.6GHz CPU probably will be used on the XBOX TV Top Box...
http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/21/3674802/xbox-tv-set-top-box-casual-gaming-streaming-2013
...Right?
You really can't have it both ways.
It's been that way since the current gen started. John Carmak was complaining at the start of the gen how he wants one really fast cpu rather than multi-core ones but that it just isn't possible to get the performance we want without it.# of cores will be our new Ghz, rejoice!
It's pretty standard at this point though it will probably pose a few issues early on.Oh man 16 cores at 1.6Ghz. That will be developer's nightmare if they didn't like multithreaded programming.
# of cores will be our new Ghz, rejoice!
Oh man 16 cores at 1.6Ghz. That will be developer's nightmare if they didn't like multithreaded programming.
More likely 8 cores and 16 threads.
Yet that's what a lot of people seem to be wanting from this thread. I can see several people in this thread that held his information on the Wii U CPU as gospel, but are now saying that he's likely talking out of his ass.
I have no doubt that his Wii U information was spot on, but I think we can all agree that even if the Durango is clocked at 1.6ghz, it will have many more cores/threads. Low speed makes sense for this upcoming generation because lower frequency = lower voltage = less heat = smaller consoles and less likely repeats of the RRoD.
Read the relevant Wii U threads and you'll recognize most posters here - it's exactly that.
And let's not forget this "great" titbit of information doesn't seem threadworthy in the least.
This would be my bet at a guess. Way more than enough to last out another 5-10 years.
What if it just has begun?
What if Microsoft doesn't want to launch too much over 300 dollar?
What if a "smaller" leap will be better for developers in general, since they wouldn't have to deal with another "system/price shock" like they probably had to with the beginning on this gen's games development?
What if that leads to more developer confidence and better games, since they don't have to become even more cautions that they have to be now when thinking about financing a game/game concept?