Xbox-One Revealed

Game Over

Well-Known Member
Actually it is the GPU, Game over, they are considering lowering. This is the very reason MS never confirmed the GPU clock-speed for the xbox one and are keeping quiet. The eSRAM is large with bad yields and heating issues. This is a general issue eSRAM.

It's the CPU, from what I've seen. Their design of the CPU has the eSRAM on the same chip, so problems with the eSRAM impacts the CPU directly, and vice-versa. It's a heating issue between the two, and that's why it's said they are considering lowering the CPU speed, so it reduces the heat problems somewhat, which would slightly increase their production yields.

If there are any GPU cuts added to this, that's just MORE problems to add to their list. lol
 

TokyoHeat

Member
I wouldn't say I'm reaching. There's a reason PCs don't use GDDR5, and never used any GDDR as system memory.



http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130913

We are talking about graphical power right?

These are Gaming consoles not PCs.

There are two popular games that are CPU intensive, and those are SimCity, and Skyrim. If the CPU lags behind, your powerful GPU will be insignificant. There are also balanced games like Crysis 3 and Borderlands 2, where the speed of both determine performance significantly.

Actually the CPU is becoming less relevant since most of the traditional CPU tasks used for gaming can now be done on the GPU which is far more efficient than running it on the CPU.

Please see all of my posts on this page that are in response to Raansu's question about the CPU's low clock-speed.

http://freestepdodge.com/threads/xbox-one-revealed.2850/page-7



In five years however, the 7GB might start to show its advantage over the 5GB. We don't know what we'll see in five years.. I would've never expected this gen would graphically put out things like Uncharted, Red Dead Redemption, Crysis, Assassin's Creed on such crappy hardware. So it's hard to say how much 2GB of difference will matter in the future.


Oh It will show in sandbox world games like GTA. They are always starving for more ram in that genre.
 

ScattereDreams

Well-Known Member
How much value such things like Kinect interaction will have for games remains to be seen. You also must consider, though, the factor that the multiple OS's that MS has running on the X1 allow only 5GB of memory to be available for games to run, whereas PS4 allows (estimatedly) 7GB of memory. That will likely play a SIGNIFICANT part in certain games.

But in the end, it all comes down to the choices devs make in regards to optimization on the consoles.


Console Wars: Is Microsoft Preparing to Go on the Offensive with Free Xbox Live?


^ Sounds like someone's getting desperate ...

Desperate? I call that business, their opponents which is Sony stating "players will now have to purchase/subscribe to PS+ to play online multiplayer" which is the equivalent of XBL. I'd take the annitiative as well and make XBL free. If I was microsoft, I'd create a new type of XBL; one where online is free and players don't have to pay for online multiplayer, another where players subscribe to get cool perks, discounts, maybe access to the family share library. But first MS will have to confirm this rumor.
 

shunwong

Active Member
So, for people like me who know nothing about computing how would you explain the potentcy differences between the two systems? not with big charts, only the BASIC info.

Thanks in advance :)
 

Raansu

Well-Known Member
So, for people like me who know nothing about computing how would you explain the potentcy differences between the two systems? not with big charts, only the BASIC info.

Thanks in advance :)

In the simplest of terms the xbone is slower meaning most ports most likely wont be at 60fps and if they are they will sacrifice resolution/anti-aliasing etc...
 

shunwong

Active Member
In the simplest of terms the xbone is slower meaning most ports most likely wont be at 60fps and if they are they will sacrifice resolution/anti-aliasing etc...

Thanks for the info.

I have no problem with action adventure games running at 30 fps (castlevania los is a good example)

The question is: would this afect fighting games? Or only sandbox games as mentioned earlier?

If so: fuck Xbox one.
 

akhi216

Active Member
Standard Donor
This is for all the people who thought the family plan was going to be some amazing feature and was worth being handcuffed to access it.

*article about family share games being demo only*
Yeah the guys who became blinded DRM fangals after MS' intial announcements and clarifications were clueless.
 

Matt Ponton

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Standard Donor
This should be known, PS3 was more powerful than the 360 but look how that turned out...

Anyways, I'm disappointed that in return for changing the policies Microsoft decided to remove the family share plan that allowed gamers to share their entire gaming library with up to 10 people. I don't think that's fair and it was definitely a feature that was a pro over the PS4. To me, now they're both are just gaming consoles that do the same thing as current gen consoles and the generation before that.


It's not out of the question it may return for Digital only titles. Apparently, there was no limitation to who were your 10 "Family members" other than you setting them as a family member. Would have been nice to have even if they continue to support day 1 digital download.
 

dawnbringer

Active Member
I wonder how much flexibility was supposed to be regarding adding and removing (expelling) people from family sharing group. For example, one wouldn't be able to remove family member once added. After all "You can choose your friends, but you can't choose your family".
 

TokyoHeat

Member
It's not out of the question it may return for Digital only titles. Apparently, there was no limitation to who were your 10 "Family members" other than you setting them as a family member. Would have been nice to have even if they continue to support day 1 digital download.


Why don't they keep it for digital downloads only?
 

akhi216

Active Member
Standard Donor
It's not out of the question it may return for Digital only titles. Apparently, there was no limitation to who were your 10 "Family members" other than you setting them as a family member. Would have been nice to have even if they continue to support day 1 digital download.


I wonder how much flexibility was supposed to be regarding adding and removing (expelling) people from family sharing group. For example, one wouldn't be able to remove family member once added. After all "You can choose your friends, but you can't choose your family".


Why don't they keep it for digital downloads only?
I do not think that the family share plan was worth getting excited over given the full explanation of it, which revealed the family share plan would allow people in one's 'family' to play a demo version of a game for 15 minutes to an hour, then after that they would be prompted to buy the title from Xbox Live.
 

Matt Ponton

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Standard Donor
I do not think that the family share plan was worth getting excited over given the full explanation of it, which revealed the family share plan would allow people in one's 'family' to play a demo version of a game for 15 minutes to an hour, then after that they would be prompted to buy the title from Xbox Live.
That is actually incorrect. It was going to impose the time limit, yes. However, you were playing the full game including allowing foe save data. It's hardly a demo but more just a session time limit.
 

Game Over

Well-Known Member
That is actually incorrect. It was going to impose the time limit, yes. However, you were playing the full game including allowing foe save data. It's hardly a demo but more just a session time limit.

I wonder if they would've allowed a person to reset the "session" by backing out and going back into the game, or if you would have to wait a day or something (EX: after your next online "check-in"). Some people were for this to be a boost to organizing/running tournaments.
 

Matt Ponton

Founder
Staff member
Administrator
Standard Donor
I wonder if they would've allowed a person to reset the "session" by backing out and going back into the game, or if you would have to wait a day or something (EX: after your next online "check-in"). Some people were for this to be a boost to organizing/running tournaments.


One of the devs said that it was still in discussion on if a possible number of play session limit were to be made or not.
 

ScattereDreams

Well-Known Member
Well after today i'm not so disappointed since MS wasn't straight forward about the family plan feature. Apparantly most, if not all gamers thought we would have full access to the games in our friends library but it turns out there would be an imposed time limit on the games we choose from, from our friends/family library. Some games would be 15min others would be as long as 60min which is the equivalent of full 60min demo's from PS+

http://www.gamnesia.com/news/the-xb...aign=Feed:+Gamnesia+(Gamnesia)#When:13:00:00Z
 

Julius Rage

Well-Known Member
That's insane.

20 years from now there will be time dedicated ,in marketing classes.around the country, to examining the PR follies and near catastrophe that was the original concept for xbox one.

If they had gone through with this then Microsoft would have been out of the industry within 10 years.

Mattrick, Spencer and every executive who rubber stamped those policies would have been a stuff pig on Steve Ballmers dinner table.
 

NightAntilli

Well-Known Member
The data doesn't stay in the eSRAM. It has to eventually go into the DDR3 pool and that is where the bottleneck can occur.
That simply isn't true. The eSRAM works similarly to the eDRAM of the X360, except eSRAM is faster and has a few different features. The eSRAM is connected to the GPU, to increase bandwidth for the GPU. The GPU communicates with RAM, CPU, and the eSRAM. The eSRAM mainly communicates with the GPU. Making it somehow pass through the normal RAM completely removes its purpose. Might as well not be there.

Also if Microsoft chose to solve the heat issue by down-clocking the GPU due to bad yeilds (due to eSRAM), this will lower the eSRAM's bandwidth to the point that it counter-acts adding it in the first place.
Not really. It'll lower its effectiveness, definitely, but it's still better having it than not having it. If its bandwidth is reduced from a 100GB/s to 50GB/s (random numbers), it's still 50 additional GB/s on top of the DDR3 bandwidth.

Also the eSRAM is only 32mb in size which questionable for holding HD frames (especially 1080p) with anything intensive going on.
Again, it works similarly to the eDRAM of the X360. It's not there for size, it's there for bandwidth. It mainly works as a frame buffer, where you can free up the bandwidth of the main RAM to do other things. A 32-bit 1080p frame is typically 8.3MB. With 32MB, you can have three 1080p frames of 32-bit in there. It's almost four actually, missing around 1MB, depending on how much the 32MB actually is in bits. There's more than enough there to have a stencil buffer, color buffer and depth buffer at the same time. And sometimes these are even reduced to be 24-bit (particularly the stencil buffer), allowing for more freedom inside the eSRAM. A 24-bit 1080p frame is 6.2MB.

There's a reason why 10MB still helped for the X360. Although it wasn't large enough for 'free' MSAA x4, it still added flexibility. a 32-bit 720p frame is typically 3.7MB. When they reached the 10MB limit they resorted to tiling, to still make it useful. Same thing will probably happen with the XBO and its eSRAM.

The latency disparity between gddr5 and ddr3 ram is small
Not really. GDDR5 latency is actually extremely high compared to DDR3. Basically, if the DDR3 latency is 20ns, it's 200ns for GDDR5. Doesn't seem like much, but your CPU thinks it's a lot.

and as far as graphical data rendering is concerned bandwidth > latency. latency is more important for general purpose computing which is why in the "PC" market they still use DDR3 to run the Wintel (windows/intel) environment. PS4 is a gaming console not a general purpose PC.
I said the same thing, but, I also said that even though they are not that many, there are still games that are more CPU intensive than GPU intensive. Let me give you a few links, you can verify it yourself. Note that these are either different CPU speeds, or different CPUs all together, not based on latency. However, having latency is equivalent to reducing the clock speed, since latency stalls CPUs like crazy, reducing the amount of clock cycles that are actually doing something. In a few of these examples, you can literally get double the framerate with double the cpu clock. Ten times the latency can literally kill your performance by having half the framerate, and make it unplayable, despite the great GPU.

First, what the average game looks like when the CPU doesn't matter (look at the framerate):
Battlefield 3

And now what it looks like when it does:
Skyrim
Borderlands
SimCity
Crysis 3


Video cards with both types of ram have been tested. GDDR5 always out-preforms ddr3 on same video card for PC games. Why do you think all high end desktop cards use GDDR5 and not DDR3. Only low end cards use DDR3.

You should check this page of the thread out.
Two identical video cards put to the test with one having GDDR5 and the other having DDR3.

http://freestepdodge.com/threads/xbox-one-revealed.2850/page-2

Resident evil 5 was able to achieve double the frame rate on GDDR5 over its DDR3 counter part and both have the same video card.
Nothing I don't already know.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130913

We are talking about graphical power right?

These are Gaming consoles not PCs.
Read above, why the CPU might still be important for some games. Yes, most games will benefit from GDDR5, a select few might not. Is that so hard to understand? I also mentioned why DDR3 makes sense for the XBO since MS is pushing multitasking and three OSes running at the same time and stuff... Not great for graphics maybe, but it might be good for the overall experience, IF that's your thing. Aside from that, remember the little freezes the PS4 was having with multiple games at E3? It might very well be that the CPU was stalling and causing that, since the CPU needs to feed the GPU. No feed = no picture change. Better coding will probably fix it though... I hope.

Actually the CPU is becoming less relevant since most of the traditional CPU tasks used for gaming can now be done on the GPU which is far more efficient than running it on the CPU.
Most? No.. Some. GPUs are great for parallel processing. CPUs still outdo them at serial processing. Parallel are stuff like physics. Serial is stuff like AI (nowadays anyway) and post processing. Read the first answer to the question on this page.

Please see all of my posts on this page that are in response to Raansu's question about the CPU's low clock-speed.

http://freestepdodge.com/threads/xbox-one-revealed.2850/page-7
Again, nothing I don't already know.

Oh It will show in sandbox world games like GTA. They are always starving for more ram in that genre.
No disagreement there.

I don't give my 'opinion' on something, if I don't know what I'm talking about. Why is it that people try so hard to avoid the possibility that the Xbox One might actually have an edge in some circumstances, even if it might be rare? We all know the PS4 has the advantage in general. We gain nothing by repeating that a thousand times. The interesting things are discovered when all the differences are explored, not just the ones that make the PS4 seem better.
 
ALL DOA6 DOA5 DOA4 DOA3 DOA2U DOAD
Top