MadeInBeats
Banned
So it's true? I swear I thought it was a joke when someone told me Jesus was working with Sony and MS... I swear... I didn't mean to betray the source.
-
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.
DF/Eurogamer: First Xbox 3 Devkit leaks, 8 Core Intel CPU, nvidia GPU, 8-12GB RAM
- Thread starter Horse Armour
- Start date
So it's true? I swear I thought it was a joke when someone told me Jesus was working with Sony and MS... I swear... I didn't mean to betray the source.
What if NextBox is a pure, software locked, Windows 8 machine that can change between x86 and DirectX architectures, with yearly updates paths ala iOS devices?
bgassassin
Member
Haha. All this time and I never paid that any attention.
He's joking, haha.
I can't take credit for the Jaguar info, but the reason I felt it was likely was the person who it came from talked about MS going with AMD not long (I believe) after the we heard about the switch as well.
What if NextBox is a pure, software locked, Windows 8 machine that can change between x86 and DirectX architectures, with yearly updates paths ala iOS devices?
That would...well...I got nothing. XD
lostinblue
Banned
Will it? I find it hard to conjecture that. But I'm not microsoft, if there's someone crazy enough to do that it's them.
Still doesn't change that means lots of memory chips in there even if it's all made of GDDR3 that ammounts for 16 chips. Console's RAM budget is limited by price, heat dissipation capacity and form factor; not just price; so overshooting it to 8 GB really makes no sense when rumors say Sony isn't really trying to match something like 8 GB, because they can't (probably even 4 GB). The capacity to decrease price is important too, and the more memory chips you have in there the worse.
On top of it all, you have to see console's as a balancing act. For instance DVD's were fine for 128 bit console's but they weren't for X360 and it acted as a bottleneck for it, because suddenly textures took a lot more space if they were meant to look good, it's too soon to speculate, but will 25 GB be just right for this generation or short?
Suppose it's just right for the wii U and Sony Orbis with RAM pools of 2 GB, then adding more detail for 4 GB or even 8 GB on MS Durango means developers would have to step into the next disc capacity, the 50 GB barrier, and it's unlikely a lot of publishers will like that move as it's more expensive to tape-out, meaning you'll probably end up having games looking the same or not all that different instead of tapping that memory size difference.
Having more memory might just act as developers treating it as a glorified devkit, with that extra ram pool that runs unoptimized code more easily, or it might mean more expensive development costs if they plan on tapping that.
Either way, one has to question if there's a RAM amount that is really too much to have for development this gen; data transfer rate as always plays a part, and you can't really have the same transfer rate for a console with 2 GB of RAM and one with 4/8 GB of it as it will mean the 4/8 GB console will take 2 or 4 times more to load something that fills the whole RAM bank. Like how bluray transfer rate didn't really help Sony with the PS3 (as it was slower than X360's DVD drive), despite the fact that the ram amount was the same. It meant slower loadings and made it so that some developers in order to not compromise demanded installs or decreased texture quality. In this case they could stray away from improving them if the tradeoff is big loadings.
My point being that if you increase memory you can also have to increase data transfer and waste more money on that; if a better transfer rate amount is possible, that is; otherwise you'll be stuck with loadings.
You could also conjecture a ratio of RAM capacity versus Disc capacity:
512x16=8GB (DVD dual layer = 7.9 GB)
4096x6=24.6GB (Bluray Single Layer = 25 GB)
4096x12=49.1 GB (Bluray Dual Layer = 50 GB)
It's a gross way to put things into perspective as there's repeated data and data that get's generated on the console (and audio stream data is staying on the same ballpark, probably), but still, the ratio for a game that fills 4 GB of RAM and is stored on a 25-50 GB disc seems off to even the DVD. And that could have an impact on the variety and scope you can have without starting to compromise. I won't even do the 8GB calculation as it would be half of something I already thing is lacking; and like I mentioned a pain in the ass to stream, unless they want to use roughly half of it as a means to do pre-emptive caching.
To top it all out, we all know that if a less expensive console does everything the more expensive one does with slightly worse textures chances are the consumer doesn't really care. Like I said going over 4 GB (specifically into the 8 GB realm) seems like running into a house on fire; no way they can compete with miniaturization and pricedrops later on.
Probably a bad idea as Microsoft software is never as polished as Apple one is. And I think straying away from the windows has actually helped Xbox brand.What if NextBox is a pure, software locked, Windows 8 machine that can change between x86 and DirectX architectures, with yearly updates paths ala iOS devices?
The real marketable value of a chronically glitchy OS with hit and miss releases and stability has to be put into question, the name certainly didn't help windows phone sales for instance, or Microsoft Kin.
Banned for making a joke? wut
People like treating juniors like second-class people just because they are juniors. Contrary to popular belief, many juniors present intelligent discussion, which is why I don't get the constant dehumanizing of them. Personally, I treat them as any other. If they seem capable of intelligent conversation, I'll treat them as such. If not, then BEGONE! Same goes for non-juniors.
Loghorn150
Banned
Agreed. Everyone needs to be treated equally, whatever we're juniors or not.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Actually, those type of way over-exaggerated 'jokes' Nintendo fans like to post add nothing to the discussion and just come off bitter, despite them wanting them to come off as 'jokes'.
This isn't funny, it comes off as bitter. Seen it so many times in these threads.
Ravensmash
Member
Not really their decision ultimately is it?
Sure they could aim to make it difficult for everyone else, but then that puts publishers/devs in the position to say 'no'.
A first party wants to be on favour with the third parties out there, as multiplatforms make up the bulk of any consoles library - it'd be pointless to purposefully cause a division amongst that.
Are you saying too much ram is a bad thing?
MadeInBeats
Banned
YEAH .. Horse Armour .. poo poo head *scurries behind Ryoku's legs*
My brain melted slightly when I read this.
lostinblue
Banned
I know, but that doesn't make them good cpu's for general purpose. Going to Atom is not really an improvement; I did the math, on a per-core basis it's worse than Xenos per-core performance; it has more DMIPS per MHz, but less clockrate, topping out at 2133 MHz; it's simply not enough to match it (and that's hardly this gens developer's wet dream when it comes to next gen consoles), you'd be juggling even to adapt a current gen port to work on that. I mentioned in-order-execution due to that, since it has the same downfalls they'd have to resort to the same parallelization tricks on less powerful cores; out-of-order could help in that unlikely case.
If they were to use Atom they might as well go for ARM which matches the performance and has less power draw.
I believe your math about power consumption is wrong, current gen dualcore atom cores @ 2 GHz are probably in the 8 watt area, not for a 4 core solution; even because such configuration doesn't exist on silicon. (doesn't really make sense to exist IMO too)
Thank you. I didn't read the whole thread; searched ctrl+f in the first 4/5 pages or so to check if someone was putting that to the check and didn't find any results so I jumped into the conclusion that it wasn't being talked enough about.
Good to know more people noticed the Atom thing.
Current ones have 4 chips, I actually tried to double check really fast while writing the post but probably found a falcon/jasper motherboard on the internet (looked it up on ifixit).
The math for how many memory chips a launch Durango would have to have to have 8 GB are right though, as I confirmed the max chip capacity in production for both GDDR3/DDR3 and GDDR5 ram types; it's at most 512 MB chips, which puts it at 16 chips minimum for a DDR3 8GB configuration; double that for GDDR5.
8 GB can happen though, yes (and I'm not into the business of saying never); I just don't think it's wise to do for reasons detailed above in my last post; disc capacity and transfer rate playing a factor in the way the bigger the RAM pool gets to be used.
Note how I wasn't condoning or condemning his comment. Also, I wouldn't direct it solely to Nintendo fans, even if they may (or may not) be the biggest offenders of this. You're bringing in your own subjectivity to an already off-topic discussion, which may end up derailing the thread entirely.
shinobi602
Member
Intelligent discussion? All I saw was sarcasm in that post.
Xbox Durango and Playstation Orbis have both changed recently...
Durango -> "I don't know the name"
4 Power7 cores + 2 ARM cores(2010) -> 4 AMD Jaguar cores(2012)
48+16 VLIW4 SPs(2010) -> 192 GCN SPs(2012)
Orbis -> Thebe-Jaguar
4 AMD Steamroller cores(2011) -> 4 AMD Jaguar cores(2012)
128 GCN SPs(2011) -> 192 GCN SPs(2012)
(year) is the date it was changed to...
Sony's version will be optimized for SonyGL 3.0/OpenGL 4.2
Microsoft's version will be optimized for DirectX 11.1
The Jaguar SoC for both consoles will not be the same as the Jaguar SoC for consumers.
AMD Jaguar vs Sony/Microsoft Jaguar
H1 2013 vs H1 2014
LP-DDR3/DDR3 vs DDR4(estimated clock is 2133 MHz 10-10-10-20 1.2v)
For x86 consumer markets vs specialized versions tweaked for each company
HSA 3/4ths vs HSA Complete
Jaguar 4c SoC: ~$50
2 Sticks of DDR4: ~$100
Raytracer: ~$150
Design packaging: $50
~$450 isn't bad...
________________________________________________________
I like the fact that it says something about a Raytracer
I don't get the obsession with disc space. The main limiting factor in graphical fidelity is still the system itself.
There are only a few exception to this, Rage for instance, but that game apparently would have needed well over 100GBs of storage space for the highest resolution textures.
Even if you had a storage medium that could fit an insane amount of data, you would still have to load it into (presumably) less than 8GBs of memory. That and you'd need to stream 50 gigs off the disk....
Looking at the PS3, most games have trouble using the 25gb of a single layer disk, even with lossless audio, multiple languages, large uncompressed prerendered movies to disguise background loading, and generous disk padding to improve load times.
It doesn't seem to me that DVD was that much of a limiting factor this gen, though I don't doubt that it will be useful in the next.
There are only a few exception to this, Rage for instance, but that game apparently would have needed well over 100GBs of storage space for the highest resolution textures.
Even if you had a storage medium that could fit an insane amount of data, you would still have to load it into (presumably) less than 8GBs of memory. That and you'd need to stream 50 gigs off the disk....
Looking at the PS3, most games have trouble using the 25gb of a single layer disk, even with lossless audio, multiple languages, large uncompressed prerendered movies to disguise background loading, and generous disk padding to improve load times.
It doesn't seem to me that DVD was that much of a limiting factor this gen, though I don't doubt that it will be useful in the next.
I was referring not to his comment, but rather the stigma that comes with being a junior. Anyways, I'm off of this little topic we've been having here. Best let this thread resume normal operation. It's really my fault for bringing it to this point in the first place.
Lagspike_exe
Member
Xbox Durango and Playstation Orbis have both changed recently...
Durango -> "I don't know the name"
4 Power7 cores + 2 ARM cores(2010) -> 4 AMD Jaguar cores(2012)
48+16 VLIW4 SPs(2010) -> 192 GCN SPs(2012)
Orbis -> Thebe-Jaguar
4 AMD Steamroller cores(2011) -> 4 AMD Jaguar cores(2012)
128 GCN SPs(2011) -> 192 GCN SPs(2012)
(year) is the date it was changed to...
Sony's version will be optimized for SonyGL 3.0/OpenGL 4.2
Microsoft's version will be optimized for DirectX 11.1
The Jaguar SoC for both consoles will not be the same as the Jaguar SoC for consumers.
AMD Jaguar vs Sony/Microsoft Jaguar
H1 2013 vs H1 2014
LP-DDR3/DDR3 vs DDR4(estimated clock is 2133 MHz 10-10-10-20 1.2v)
For x86 consumer markets vs specialized versions tweaked for each company
HSA 3/4ths vs HSA Complete
Jaguar 4c SoC: ~$50
2 Sticks of DDR4: ~$100
Raytracer: ~$150
Design packaging: $50
~$450 isn't bad...
________________________________________________________
I like the fact that it says something about a Raytracer
So, if this is true, Sony jacked up the GPU by 50% compared to last year plans.
That's freaking amazing.
shinra-bansho
Member
How legit is this rumor... and what does it mean...?
GTFO. The compressed to hell videos in game are nothing but proof of this.
Giant Panda
Member
Can you explain this in more detail?
Isn't 50% not really that much?.
MadeInBeats
Banned
Ohhh come on, let's cut the shit. It's obvious I'm a Nintendo fanboy because I'm not looking for powwwar in a video games console to make up for my lack of sense of humour! $500 for a $3000 gaming PC... You better believe I'm bitter.. I'm shaking my fist at a picture of Donald Trump right now, because I've always hated him.
See, I thought you couldn't tell a good joke if you tried.. just goes to show how wrong I was ;p
Glorified G
Member
Nah, you're just trying too hard.
Forget the 50% added to the PS4 GPU he is talking about a Ray-Tracing Chip being in the consoles that would mean that the GPU is freed up of a lot of work because the lighten & other stuff could be done with Ray-tracing
but on a side note this was posted in a thread about the Xbox 720 being $100 so yeah lets not get our hopes up.
Lagspike_exe
Member
No? If PS3 or Xbox 360 were 50% more powerful we could get today's games at higher resolution, with more AA and better AF. Or they could simply look much better if designed from the ground up for the refreshed hardware. 50% is a lot, actually.
Than why did people freak out last year when the Wii U was rumored to be 50% more powerful than the PS3/360?.
lostinblue
Banned
No, I'm saying there's no point in having, say, 1 GB of RAM on a console system who feeds off a 1x CD-ROM drive.
Consider this; you have 8 GB of RAM to fill with... a state of art 12x speed bluray drive, that sits nicely at 54 MB/s.
At 54 MB/s you'd take 150 seconds to stream 8 GB. That's 2 minutes and a half.
If the ram pool was 2 GB though, this would be a 40 second job.
Trying to put things into perspective; streaming 512 MB @ 9 MB/s on the PS3 took 57 seconds and streaming 512 MB out of a X360 DVD @ 16 MB/s took 32 seconds.
There's data that get's repeated (character models and textures), streamed (audio, geometry, sometimes better textures as you approach things) and all that, but when changing areas you can't avoid the regular huge ass loading that is meant to charge the existing level and software onto the existing RAM pool (and it never really settles for using a small portion of that) so 2 minutes and a half makes it so that 8 GB is probably too much of a RAM to properly exploit out of a optical drive this generation.
Console's are not PC's, they're basically running software out of discs, so the transfer rate matters a lot, balancing between the RAM bank and available disc space too; probably one of the reasons scope/game lenght was compromised this generation was that 8 GB's of storage were too little for 512 MB of RAM @ 720p.
Lagspike_exe
Member
I thought he was just joking with the RT thing and he meant the GPU.
Raytracer?!?!
I think it was EatChildren (mod) who gave him his tag. It was in one of the many Wii-U speculation threads where he was spreading nonsense, no clue which one.
Maybe EC remembers
bgassassin
Member
I noticed that too. It also seems to be suggesting that PS4 switched to DDR4. Unless they decided to go split pool after all, I'd be shocked to see that. It would be funny if the memory is the "only true" difference between PS4 and Xbox 3.
And I want to know how that poster is defining a GCN SP since a compute unit has 64 ALUs.
installs?
They have big PS3 exclusives scheduled in the middle of next year whereas the 360's release calendar dries up after the holiday. I can see the next Xbox coming early fall next year and the PS4 coming early 2014.
Yeah, wouldn't 196 make it several times bigger than the 7970? Which has 32 GCN Compute Unites.
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
Yeah. That, or it's tiny and barely better than the IGP-level 7470.
Death Dealer
Member
I can see them releasing some big PS3 exclusives during the year, and releasing PS4 around the holidays. I don't think they are mutually exclusive events. It's not like every PS3 owner will immediately upgrade to PS4 and never buy a PS3 game again.
Also, aren't most consoles games sales pretty front loaded anyways ?
you are full of it. but then that's what internet forums are for...
Hiro_Kunimi_80
Member
1) Installation
2) Digital Delivery
3) Wait 2.5 minutes
4) Hidden stream of data( cutscene, menu, in game streaming, etc )
5) flash memory support for gaming
6) different optic support (and transfer rate ) for gaming purpose than a conventional BR disk
i'd like to have a 8 GB of ram to "fill" and make a 10 minutes installation than NOT have 8 GB ram and get stuck with only 2GB for an entire gen
Death Dealer
Member
I think average transfer speed is more relevant than peak read speeds in his example. But I get what he was trying to say.
I Stalk Alone
Member
So how much do people expect the retail unit to cost?
bgassassin
Member
It would most likely depend on how wide the SP is if this is true. Each SIMD in GCN is 16-wide, but that would mean more ALUs than a 7970. The cost and size wouldn't suggest that is the case.
dragonelite
Member
Its not like you can first stream in enough data to keep the player playing for like 30 sec and keep in streaming data you have 8 cores if we can believe the rumors.
lostinblue
Banned
If there's a system with 8 GB of RAM and that RAM pool gets tapped (and not, say, using half the amount to cache the next area) then I don't see other way specially seeing textures already have compression; I don't know how're the roadmaps for optical drive's, but they're too slow to feed a 8 GB of RAM machine in a consistent way right now.
If mandatory installs are prohibited (or the HDD isn't standard) then they might do two paths to run the game, one with install and the other without it; with one loading lesser quality textures than the other; this not being good for the end user experience. (and adding development time on a feature that will get criticized for it's implementation anyway)
But there are too many unpredictable factors at play; one of them is the fact that texture resolution/detail costs money so if there's only one console this generation with a ram pool that big they might not deem it necessary to invest that extra money on assets; instead throwing better available textures here and there and where it generally makes a difference and such asset had to be downgraded to fit on *insert console name* ram pool in the final tuning phase; they might also opt for bigger, albeit more compressed resolution textures trying to counter slow transfer rates but still maintaining high resolution textures, or they can attempt to texture swap preliminary low res textures by higher resolution samples as you get closer to them, although that's typically a way to juggle with the fact you have little RAM, not because your transfer rate is so slow that you want to get the level running before you had everything with those pristine clear textures loaded.
Then you have other problems, Imagine you have a PS4/Wii U game sitting at 25 GB, say, a game with scope like Final Fantasy; if it sits at 25 GB in console's with a smaller RAM pool then chances are you can't really improve on it significantly without going for the next big thing, 50 GB.
Now, this might seem like a small factor, but publishers are usually very stingy at multiple layered solutions, as seen on PS2 and wii. Some early PS2 games shipped on CD's because "damn these DVD discs are expensive!" and not many developers wanted to bite the dual layer bullet with urban legends saying square-enix did everything for Kingdom Hearts 2 not to ship in dual layer because of the added cost involved; nonetheless everyone strayed from it because it eroded from their profit margin. cross platform games being 50 GB discs on Xbox next and 25 GB on PS4/Wii U is not really attractive, so the question is wether regular games will be in confortabily in the 10/15 GB margin for 2/4 GB ram pool hardware or topping out that 25 GB capacity.
The trade-off for even 4GB can be severe seeing optical drives are really lacking in transfer rates, so a lot of developers might really opt in a linear navigation game to pre-fetch load the next area into the RAM as a background task as a means to shave off time before you reach the loading point. Metroid Prime style.