...do we want such features?
-
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.
DigitalFoundry: X1 memory performance improved for production console/ESRAM 192 GB/s)
- Thread starter ekim
- Start date
- Status
...do we want such features?
oldergamer
Member
I'll trade you for no down-clock but running at 88% efficiency, which give you what exactly?
No conclusion. Just clowns. Infinite clowns. (Otherwise known as MS PR reps)
I actually do. A console is much more than a gaming machine, nowadays.
The problem Microsoft has with the Xbox One, is that they are trying too hard to win over the 'casuals' and thus they are neglecting the 'real' gamers. These 'real' gamers will drive initial sales.
S¡mon;66998811 said:
The fuck's a "real gamer"?
Funny considering the posts i've seen in this thread that you'd say so called "X1 defenders" are the ones out for blood.
Careful what you say. We have XBONE defenders here out for some blood.
Delusibeta
Banned
People who buy consoles at $499.
Gemüsepizza;66997986 said:
Where did I make a leap in logic? I'm curious? Because you haven't even seen the hardware in person so how do you know how the console operates? Based on what the article says I only know that what takes place that gives the extra resources doesn't happen every clock clock cycle. How you and all these other people are getting things from the article to figure out that the GPU is down clocked is where there are leaps being taken.
Ah, okay. Thanks, folks.
Seriously, though. First and foremost: sorry for the confusion. With the real gamer I'm basically talking about the people who are willing to buy a new console at launch, or shortly (let's say the first year) after.
The people who are going to buy those consoles at launch, are likely to be game or electronics enthusiasts. After that first year, the 'casuals' will follow - and those casuals tend to go for the most popular, best-selling system.
Now, what I said is that Microsoft is trying to go after the 'casuals' rightaway. What they should have done was 'go for the gamer', try to get a large install base that surpasses Sony and than after a year or so go for the casuals.
Gemüsepizza
Member
So you think Microsoft "discovered" an 88% increase in memory bandwidth 3-4 months before launch? You think this is more believable than a 50MHz downclock (which was rumored before) to get to those numbers? I think that's quite a big leap.
If Microsoft has announced, or said anything about a downgrade to developers, it hasn't happened.
hokagespit
Member
they are using the established formula for calculating memory bandwith is all.... they gave enough figures to do this you just have to figure for x...
Gemüsepizza;66999861 said:
I am not taking any leaps. You are calculating things based off of assumptions. You assuming that you know how the esram and memory controllers work. You assume to know the inner workings of the system. There is wording in the article that supports my line of reasoning. Show things in the article that support a down clock.
S¡mon;66999831 said:
You think most hardcore gamers are "electronics enthusiasts"? Most people who play games don't really give a shit about what's under the hood, so long as the games are pretty to look at.
Even if that were the case, this is not exactly a WIIU we're dealing with here. I'm not seeing a huge "casual" focus in the launch line up, so why wouldn't gamers be interested in it?
The same assumption that DigitalFoundry is making in their spec analysis for the Xbox One.
Are their articles now also wrong? Because you seem to defend this specific article while casting doubt at the same methodology used by DF in an earlier article.
sleeping_dragon
Banned
So people are getting excited for a mere 40 MB of ram travelling at 192GB/s ?while the PS4 is travelling at 176GB/s with 8GB of ram on board.
The calculations that are being posted has nothing to do with what the article is saying. Spare resources does not mean always. They are doing calculations based on the assumption that the resources are there for every clock cycle. The resources aren't there for every clock cycle.
Those are articles based on old information. And I doubt MS gave information for things that they thought might be feasible. The api's are constantly in development and with the final hardware not being decided on until MS knew what the yields would be for mass production and whether or not they would make changes, they couldn't write the api's to fully take advantage of the hardware. Now that they are mass producing the system developers will see sizable improvements in performance now that all the parts in the system are finalized.
Gemüsepizza
Member
There are no indications or numbers to support this. But there are numbers which would support a downclock.
192GB/s and bi-directional throughput. Those facts are in the article. If you use them in a calculation, you can get to 750 MHz:
192GB/s / 2 (read and write) / 128 bytes = 750MHz
If the clock is 800MHz, it should be 204.8GB/s throughput. This figure doesn't even appear in the article.
So now YOU explain to me how it is possible, that Microsoft discovered 3-4 months before release that their eSRAM suddenly works in both directions, and has a bandwidth increase by 88%. You can't. Because it's bullshit.
specialguy
Banned
Bubu, those MS are lying liars (when they said over 200 GB/s)
I was actually tipped off to this in May, but I didnt necessarily believe it at the time.
That source is actually IRONCLAD lol, cause he has every detail of this perfect.
Umm, which are?
I was actually tipped off to this in May, but I didnt necessarily believe it at the time.
That source is actually IRONCLAD lol, cause he has every detail of this perfect.
Umm, which are?
I'm not surprised. Richard Leadbetter is a known Xbox fanboy who always tries to spin a lot of stuff to turn it around in Microsoft's favor & is almost always biased against other products.
Which are repeated over and over again in this thread.
Gemüsepizza
Member
So they probably meant 204.8GB/s with their "over 200GB/s" figure, and now we have an article which talks about 192GB/s instead of 204.8GB/s. Makes sense that they didn't clarify the exact number and how they got to this number back then, because they weren't sure about the final clock speeds.
Are you kidding me? It's in the same post.
It could have nothing to do with changes to the esram and could be how the memory controller handles the movement of the data. Or it could be another variable that I haven't thought of. The esram itself is only one part of the memory architecture that MS was waiting on to be finalized for mass production. Now that the parts are finalized they can exploit their quirks to get some better performance.Gemüsepizza;67001541 said:
hokagespit
Member
Gemüsepizza
Member
Suddenly discovering that you can use eSRAM in both directions (lol!) and a bandwidth increase by 88% is not "exploiting quirks".
SRTtoZ
Member
You did not read it correctly.
Because the hardware on PS4 was unfinished & because the games shown at E3 from PS4 were running off of early developer's kits with 4 GB's of GDDR5 at the time.
Most of the Xbox One games that were shown at E3 happen to ran off of higher end PC's with Nvidia GTX cards, not through XBO's hardware.
LittleJohnny
Banned
The conclusion is Xbox One will be a little better than before, and that's a good thing but we have a lot of Sony fans hard at work to debunk any positive X1 news.
Windom Earle
Member
lol. Now the only hope Cerny has left is finding equally awesome quirks in the PS4.
That is good to know. Seems like the whole video recording thing will also rely on those.
Well, bandwidth is down to 192 from 204 right? Or did it go up from 204?
don't tell anyone, but they built hentai tentacles into the drive. A protection mechanism for potential theft.
Some of the most impressive Xbox One games were shown on actual Xbox One hardware, like Forza and Ryse.
Getting excited? I see people saying it's good if true, people saying this confirms a down clock and delusional people early in the thread thinking that this brings the 180 to parity with PS4. I guess some of the downclock posters seem excited (and someone even said they hope it's true) but that's about it.
Source/link? I know lococycle was using Nvidia hardware. Who else was?
SniperHunter
Banned
is underclocking by 50 MHz a big deal?
specialguy
Banned
Gemüsepizza;67002561 said:
Umm, the "over 200 GB/s" figure was assumed to be adding ESRAM and main BW, which everybody does (except here I guess, where we pretend ESRAM doesn't exist).
That's why people like you called MS liar, cause you said they just added 30 GB/s CPU BW to the existing 68+102 calculation.
Well obviously now you've completely changed the goalposts of how you assume they calculated without missing a beat.
You can get >200 just by adding 133 (one of the ESRAM figures in the DF article, supposed realistic throughput) and 68. Bang, done, no conspiracy need. That's the most likely way MS got "over 200 GB/s"
Nobody from MS ever talked about 204.8 GB/s. Once again you're inventing things.
All that said, now I do see where you got the downclock thing. There are multiple sources including the DF article in the OP saying there is no downclock, and I've heard the same from people in contact with supposedly the highest of high level sources within Microsoft first party.
BUT, if it is a 50 mhz DC, I think that's far from the catastrophic "800-900 gflops" people like you were hoping for and assuming was true a few weeks ago (I remember almost everybody in that thread assumed the downclock was fact). I dont think an 50 mhz underclock would materially change the balance of power, it would put XB1 about ~1.1 TF but I still dont believe it.
BTW, if you dont believe I have "sources" and stuff, a guy sent me this about the ESRAM on May 28
So no, I'm far from an insider, but when I say I've heard of zero downclocks, in fact everything I've heard denies any downclocks, it does mean a little bit.
Another reason I dont believe in the downclock is something in plain site anybody can go read. Dave Baumann on B3D, who is very high up in AMD, basically said MS does not care about the APU yields. Remember the original rumor was "yields suck, so Microsoft had to downclock"
Dave hinted that due to X86 licensing, AMD is fabbing the chips not MS. As such, MS doesn't give a shit what the yields are in the first place, it's AMD's problem not their's. I assume AMD is simply contracted to deliver x chips at x clock (lets say, 800 mhz).
Note at no time did Dave say the yields were bad, he went even further and attacked the underlying assumption MS even cares what the yields are.
Who the fuck hopes this is true? Shame them Mama Robotnik style.
This. You have people saying the down clock is true or that this brings the systems to parity are crazed.
Can anyone counter what specialguy is saying?
They mentioned that the PS4 had some hardware dealing with the video recording stuff back in February, but that interview really shed light on that stuff (and the fact that other aspects of the machine have hardware devoted to it). The Xbox One opted for a software solution, which has its own advantages.
You are part of the 99.99%
Not really wont change anything, but really Microsoft should tell us next they discovered that in fact they have a titan inside(i'm sure some would belive it)
Phinal Phantasy
Banned
- Status