iamshadowlark
Banned
Didn't see a thread after I searched so please lock if old.
Nothing really new in this one but kind of puts both in perspective.
Interesting bit about "secret sauce"
Edit sorry http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-spec-analysis-durango-vs-orbis
Nothing really new in this one but kind of puts both in perspective.
Interesting bit about "secret sauce"
There's an argument that suggests that comparing Durango and Orbis on these terms is not realistic; that the platform holders have far more control over the design of the silicon than the raw specs suggest; that they can be adapted with manufacturer-specific 'secret sauce' customisations.
The raw teraflop measurements being mooted - 1.23TF for Durango and 1.84TF for Orbis - have been dismissed as meaningless, and to a certain extent that is true. However, check out AMD's specs page for all of its various GCN hardware and you'll find similar metrics based a very easy formula derived from clock speed and CU count. It's not the be-all-and-end-all of processing power of course, but these are accurate measurements used by AMD itself in giving a broad assessment of the raw computational power of the parts it creates. You'll find that the next-gen console parts slot in quite nicely with their PC equivalents - in short, the teraflop metrics aren't much use in isolation but they are effective for comparison purposes in terms of base hardware capabilities.
Edit sorry http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-spec-analysis-durango-vs-orbis