Page 1 of 13 111 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 319
  1. #1
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!

    Xbox One's memory performance has been hugely underestimated, claim developers

    Provisional Microsoft calculations were inaccurate, according to new report

    The Xbox One Messaging Carnival continues with the discovery that Microsoft may have underestimated the new console's technical prowess, according to a report published by Digital Foundry. Citing a number of Xbox One developers, the site claims that the machine's embedded static RAM may crunch almost twice as much data a second as initially suggested.
    We were previously told that the ESRAM could handle around 102 GB a second. The real maximum figure could be as high as 192 GB a second - no inconsiderable jump. I'm going to lapse into both direct quotation and technical jargon now, so if that kind of thing rubs you the wrong way, skip to second pair of scare quotes.
    "According to sources who have been briefed by Microsoft, the original bandwidth claim derives from a pretty basic calculation - 128 bytes per block multiplied by the GPU speed of 800MHz offers up the previous max throughput of 102.4GB/s," reads the piece.
    "It's believed that this calculation remains true for separate read/write operations from and to the ESRAM. However, with near-final production silicon, Microsoft techs have found that the hardware is capable of reading and writing simultaneously. Apparently, there are spare processing cycle "holes" that can be utilised for additional operations."Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with alpha transparency blending operations (FP16 x4)."
    What could this mean in practice? More complex, higher resolution textures, for one thing. Read our mammoth Xbox One guide for more on the specs while I chase Microsoft for a comment.
    http://www.oxm.co.uk/57304/xbox-ones...im-developers/

  2. Likes Foraeli likes this post
  3. #2
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!

    Xbox One memory performance improved for production console

    Very interesting. Looks lke xbox-one will be even more powerful than we thought.
    Well-placed development sources have told Digital Foundry that the ESRAM embedded memory within the Xbox One processor is considerably more capable than Microsoft envisaged during pre-production of the console, with data throughput levels up to 88 per cent higher in the final hardware.
    Bandwidth is at a premium in the Xbox One owing to the slower DDR3 memory employed in the console, which does not compare favourably to the 8GB unified pool of GDDR5 in the PlayStation 4. The 32MB of "embedded static RAM" within the Xbox One processor aims to make up the difference, and was previously thought to sustain a peak theoretical throughput of 102GB/s - useful, but still some way behind the 176GB/s found in PlayStation 4's RAM set-up. Now that close-to-final silicon is available, Microsoft has revised its own figures upwards significantly, telling developers that 192GB/s is now theoretically possible.
    So how could Microsoft's own internal tech teams have underestimated the capabilities of its own hardware by such a wide margin? Well, according to sources who have been briefed by Microsoft, the original bandwidth claim derives from a pretty basic calculation - 128 bytes per block multiplied by the GPU speed of 800MHz offers up the previous max throughput of 102.4GB/s. It's believed that this calculation remains true for separate read/write operations from and to the ESRAM. However, with near-final production silicon, Microsoft techs have found that the hardware is capable of reading and writingsimultaneously. Apparently, there are spare processing cycle "holes" that can be utilised for additional operations. Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with alpha transparency blending operations (FP16 x4).
    The news doesn't quite square with previous rumours suggesting that fabrication issues with the ESRAM component of the Xbox One processor had actually resulted in a downclock for the GPU, reducing its overall capabilities and widening the gulf between graphical components of the Xbox One and the PlayStation 4. While none of our sources are privy to any production woes Microsoft may or may not be experiencing with its processor, they are making actual Xbox One titles and have not been informed of any hit to performance brought on by production challenges. To the best of their knowledge, 800MHz remains the clock speed of the graphics component of the processor, and the main CPU is operating at the target 1.6GHz. In both respects, this represents parity with the PlayStation 4.


    In terms of what this all means with regards multi-platform titles launching on both next-gen consoles, our information suggests that developers may be playing things rather conservatively for launch titles while dev tools are still being worked on. This is apparently more of an issue with Xbox One, where Microsoft developers are still in the process of bringing home very significant increases in performance from one release of the XDK development environment to the next. Our principal source suggests that performance targets are being set by game-makers and that the drivers should catch up with those targets sooner rather than later. Bearing in mind the stuttering performance we saw from some Xbox One titles at E3 such as Crytek's Ryse (amongst others), this is clearly good news.
    Our information suggests that Microsoft's strategy with the Xbox One operating system and supporting software is to implement all the features first and then to aggressively pursue optimisation - a process that is ongoing and will continue beyond launch. As the performance levels of both next-gen consoles are something of a moving target at the moment, differences in multi-platform games may not become evident until developers are working with more mature tools and libraries. At that point it's possible that we may see ambitious titles operating at a lower resolution on Xbox One compared to the PlayStation 4.
    However, clearly it's still early days, and right now these machines remain very much uncharted territory - even for those who've been working with prototype hardware for a long time. Microsoft tells developers that the ESRAM is designed for high-bandwidth graphics elements like shadowmaps, lightmaps, depth targets and render targets. But in a world where Killzone: Shadow Fall is utilising 800MB for render targets alone, how difficult will it be for developers to work with just 32MB of fast memory for similar functions? On the flipside, Xbox One's powerful custom audio hardware - dubbed SHAPE (Scalable Hardware Audio Processing Engine) - should do a fantastic job for HD surround, a task that sucks up lots of CPU time on current-gen console. How does PS4 compare there? And just how much impact does the GDDR5 memory - great for graphics - have on CPU tasks compared to Xbox One's lower-latency DDR3?
    While next generation of consoles finally arrive in a matter of months, the launch games will have mostly been developed on incomplete hardware - a state of affairs that was blatantly obvious from titles seen so far. On paper, Sony retains a clear specs advantage, but it was difficult to see that reflected in the quality of the games at E3. Based on what we're hearing about the approach to next-gen development, it could be quite some time before any on-paper advantage translates into an appreciably better experience on-screen.
    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...ction-hardware



    Last edited by Sub-stance1; 06-28-2013 at 16:32.

  4. #3
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    I was reading that...and here is the Digital Foundry new article:

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...ction-hardware

    Xbox One memory performance improved for production console

    Microsoft tells developers that ESRAM bandwidth is up to 88 per cent higher.

    Well-placed development sources have told Digital Foundry that the ESRAM embedded memory within the Xbox One processor is considerably more capable than Microsoft envisaged during pre-production of the console, with data throughput levels up to 88 per cent higher in the final hardware.


    Bandwidth is at a premium in the Xbox One owing to the slower DDR3 memory employed in the console, which does not compare favourably to the 8GB unified pool of GDDR5 in the PlayStation 4. The 32MB of "embedded static RAM" within the Xbox One processor aims to make up the difference, and was previously thought to sustain a peak theoretical throughput of 102GB/s - useful, but still some way behind the 176GB/s found in PlayStation 4's RAM set-up. Now that close-to-final silicon is available, Microsoft has revised its own figures upwards significantly, telling developers that 192GB/s is now theoretically possible.


    So how could Microsoft's own internal tech teams have underestimated the capabilities of its own hardware by such a wide margin? Well, according to sources who have been briefed by Microsoft, the original bandwidth claim derives from a pretty basic calculation - 128 bytes per block multiplied by the GPU speed of 800MHz offers up the previous max throughput of 102.4GB/s. It's believed that this calculation remains true for separate read/write operations from and to the ESRAM. However, with near-final production silicon, Microsoft techs have found that the hardware is capable of reading and writing simultaneously. Apparently, there are spare processing cycle "holes" that can be utilised for additional operations. Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with alpha transparency blending operations (FP16 x4).
    The news doesn't quite square with previous rumours suggesting that fabrication issues with the ESRAM component of the Xbox One processor had actually resulted in a downclock for the GPU, reducing its overall capabilities and widening the gulf between graphical components of the Xbox One and the PlayStation 4. While none of our sources are privy to any production woes Microsoft may or may not be experiencing with its processor, they are making actual Xbox One titles and have not been informed of any hit to performance brought on by production challenges. To the best of their knowledge, 800MHz remains the clock speed of the graphics component of the processor, and the main CPU is operating at the target 1.6GHz. In both respects, this represents parity with the PlayStation 4.


    "Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios, it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with certain ESRAM operations."



    Ryse: Son of Rome performance analysis, as it was displayed during the live gameplay demo at the Microsoft E3 press conference. Our information suggests that Microsoft continues to improve driver performance, so hopefully those dips beneath 30fps will be ironed out in the final game. Note that the final sequence is almost certainly pre-rendered, hence the rock-solid performance in a visually complex scene.



    In terms of what this all means with regards multi-platform titles launching on both next-gen consoles, our information suggests that developers may be playing things rather conservatively for launch titles while dev tools are still being worked on. This is apparently more of an issue with Xbox One, where Microsoft developers are still in the process of bringing home very significant increases in performance from one release of the XDK development environment to the next. Our principal source suggests that performance targets are being set by game-makers and that the drivers should catch up with those targets sooner rather than later. Bearing in mind the stuttering performance we saw from some Xbox One titles at E3 such as Crytek's Ryse (amongst others), this is clearly good news.


    Our information suggests that Microsoft's strategy with the Xbox One operating system and supporting software is to implement all the features first and then to aggressively pursue optimisation - a process that is ongoing and will continue beyond launch. As the performance levels of both next-gen consoles are something of a moving target at the moment, differences in multi-platform games may not become evident until developers are working with more mature tools and libraries. At that point it's possible that we may see ambitious titles operating at a lower resolution on Xbox One compared to the PlayStation 4.
    However, clearly it's still early days, and right now these machines remain very much uncharted territory - even for those who've been working with prototype hardware for a long time. Microsoft tells developers that the ESRAM is designed for high-bandwidth graphics elements like shadowmaps, lightmaps, depth targets and render targets. But in a world where Killzone: Shadow Fall is utilising 800MB for render targets alone, how difficult will it be for developers to work with just 32MB of fast memory for similar functions? On the flipside, Xbox One's powerful custom audio hardware - dubbed SHAPE (Scalable Hardware Audio Processing Engine) - should do a fantastic job for HD surround, a task that sucks up lots of CPU time on current-gen console. How does PS4 compare there? And just how much impact does the GDDR5 memory - great for graphics - have on CPU tasks compared to Xbox One's lower-latency DDR3?


    While next generation of consoles finally arrive in a matter of months, the launch games will have mostly been developed on incomplete hardware - a state of affairs that was blatantly obvious from titles seen so far. On paper, Sony retains a clear specs advantage, but it was difficult to see that reflected in the quality of the games at E3. Based on what we're hearing about the approach to next-gen development, it could be quite some time before any on-paper advantage translates into an appreciably better experience on-screen.

  5. #4
    Forum Sage
    The Sith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    7,567
    Rep Power
    78
    Points
    16,085 (0 Banked)
    Items Naughty DogGuerrilla GamesNvidiaMaster ChiefPS3 SlimVita360 SlimLittle Big PlanetApple

    Xbox One Memory Performance Improved for Production Console

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...ction-hardware

    What happened to all the downclock rumors?

    "The 32MB of "embedded static RAM" within the Xbox One processor aims to make up the difference, and was previously thought to sustain a peak theoretical throughput of 102GB/s - useful, but still some way behind the 176GB/s found in PlayStation 4's RAM set-up. Now that close-to-final silicon is available, Microsoft has revised its own figures upwards significantly, telling developers that 192GB/s is now theoretically possible."
    Still in the grand scheme of things, it is insignificant as most can't tell the difference!
    Well-placed development sources have told Digital Foundry that the ESRAM embedded memory within the Xbox One processor is considerably more capable than Microsoft envisaged during pre-production of the console, with

    data throughput levels up to 88 per cent higher in the final hardware
    Bandwidth is at a premium in the Xbox One owing to the slower DDR3 memory employed in the console, which does not compare favourably to the 8GB unified pool of GDDR5 in the PlayStation 4. The 32MB of "embedded static RAM" within the Xbox One processor aims to make up the difference, and was previously thought to sustain a peak theoretical throughput of 102GB/s - useful, but still some way behind the 176GB/s found in PlayStation 4's RAM set-up. Now that close-to-final silicon is available, Microsoft has revised its own figures upwards significantly, telling developers that 192GB/s is now theoretically possible.

    So how could Microsoft's own internal tech teams have underestimated the capabilities of its own hardware by such a wide margin? Well, according to sources who have been briefed by Microsoft, the original bandwidth claim derives from a pretty basic calculation - 128 bytes per block multiplied by the GPU speed of 800MHz offers up the previous max throughput of 102.4GB/s. It's believed that this calculation remains true for separate read/write operations from and to the ESRAM. However, with near-final production silicon, Microsoft techs have found that the hardware is capable of reading and writing simultaneously. Apparently, there are spare processing cycle "holes" that can be utilised for additional operations. Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with alpha transparency blending operations (FP16 x4).

    The news doesn't quite square with previous rumours suggesting that fabrication issues with the ESRAM component of the Xbox One processor had actually resulted in a downclock for the GPU, reducing its overall capabilities and widening the gulf between graphical components of the Xbox One and the PlayStation 4. While none of our sources are privy to any production woes Microsoft may or may not be experiencing with its processor, they are making actual Xbox One titles and have not been informed of any hit to performance brought on by production challenges. To the best of their knowledge, 800MHz remains the clock speed of the graphics component of the processor, and the main CPU is operating at the target 1.6GHz. In both respects, this represents parity with the PlayStation 4.

    "Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios, it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with certain ESRAM operations."

    Ryse: Son of Rome performance analysis, as it was displayed during the live gameplay demo at the Microsoft E3 press conference. Our information suggests that Microsoft continues to improve driver performance, so hopefully those dips beneath 30fps will be ironed out in the final game. Note that the final sequence is almost certainly pre-rendered, hence the rock-solid performance in a visually complex scene.
    In terms of what this all means with regards multi-platform titles launching on both next-gen consoles, our information suggests that developers may be playing things rather conservatively for launch titles while dev tools are still being worked on. This is apparently more of an issue with Xbox One, where Microsoft developers are still in the process of bringing home very significant increases in performance from one release of the XDK development environment to the next. Our principal source suggests that performance targets are being set by game-makers and that the drivers should catch up with those targets sooner rather than later. Bearing in mind the stuttering performance we saw from some Xbox One titles at E3 such as Crytek's Ryse (amongst others), this is clearly good news.

    Our information suggests that Microsoft's strategy with the Xbox One operating system and supporting software is to implement all the features first and then to aggressively pursue optimisation - a process that is ongoing and will continue beyond launch. As the performance levels of both next-gen consoles are something of a moving target at the moment, differences in multi-platform games may not become evident until developers are working with more mature tools and libraries. At that point it's possible that we may see ambitious titles operating at a lower resolution on Xbox One compared to the PlayStation 4.

    However, clearly it's still early days, and right now these machines remain very much uncharted territory - even for those who've been working with prototype hardware for a long time. Microsoft tells developers that the ESRAM is designed for high-bandwidth graphics elements like shadowmaps, lightmaps, depth targets and render targets. But in a world where Killzone: Shadow Fall is utilising 800MB for render targets alone, how difficult will it be for developers to work with just 32MB of fast memory for similar functions? On the flipside, Xbox One's powerful custom audio hardware - dubbed SHAPE (Scalable Hardware Audio Processing Engine) - should do a fantastic job for HD surround, a task that sucks up lots of CPU time on current-gen console. How does PS4 compare there? And just how much impact does the GDDR5 memory - great for graphics - have on CPU tasks compared to Xbox One's lower-latency DDR3?

    While next generation of consoles finally arrive in a matter of months, the launch games will have mostly been developed on incomplete hardware - a state of affairs that was blatantly obvious from titles seen so far. On paper, Sony retains a clear specs advantage, but it was difficult to see that reflected in the quality of the games at E3. Based on what we're hearing about the approach to next-gen development, it could be quite some time before any on-paper advantage translates into an appreciably better experience on-screen.
    Last edited by The Sith; 06-28-2013 at 17:45.

    uuummmmm...Fried Beer iis a reality.

  6. #5
    Power Member
    Vulgotha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    24
    Posts
    15,953
    Rep Power
    146
    Points
    111,037 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    If the ESRAM bandwidth by itself went from 102-->196GB\s. If so, that's a huge hike! Reading now.
    Last edited by Vulgotha; 06-28-2013 at 18:14.


  7. #6
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    I have already posted similar articles about this. It looks like Mynd was right about what he said.

  8. #7
    Super Elite
    K2D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    PSN ID
    Cathode
    Age
    27
    Posts
    2,009
    Rep Power
    71
    Points
    13,869 (0 Banked)
    Items LuluYunaDaft Punk
    What does this mean in layman terms? That devs can put in an extra effort in order to squeez out a higher performance? How does this compare to a unified memory pool?

    Wishlist: Jade Cocoon Reboot, Oni Reboot, the next JRPG, Wasteland 2 [coming soon!]
    SotC 2, Fallout 4, next Obsidian Fallout, Project Eternity, Uncharted 4, Divinity [NEW!]
    ...
    [South Park: Stick of Truth is pure gaming bliss!]

  9. #8
    Administrator
    Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    PSN ID
    rokushakubo
    Posts
    12,932
    Rep Power
    134
    Points
    6,813,331 (100,956 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Awards PSU+ Patriot
    Quote Originally Posted by K2D View Post
    What does this mean in layman terms? That devs can put in an extra effort in order to squeez out a higher performance? How does this compare to a unified memory pool?
    Cerny on unified pool.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJW5OKbh0WA#t=40m


    This is great news for multiplat parity.

  10. #9
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by K2D View Post
    What does this mean in layman terms? That devs can put in an extra effort in order to squeez out a higher performance? How does this compare to a unified memory pool?
    It means that initial specs and final hardware can have different performances. MS may have been playing slick this whole time.

  11. #10
    Power Member
    Vulgotha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    24
    Posts
    15,953
    Rep Power
    146
    Points
    111,037 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Eh...

    http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread...62867&page=165

    Alot of this is sounding like fluffy PR and massaging of numbers.

    I dunno what to make of this. Apparently in select circumstances the ESRAM has an 88% increase in bandwidth due to simultaneous read\write.. No idea how this is done.

    So yes its "true" but also "not true" at the same time from what I'm gathering. Situational.
    Last edited by Vulgotha; 06-28-2013 at 18:12.


  12. #11
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    Merged 3 similar threads.

  13. #12
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Vulgotha View Post
    Eh...

    http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread...62867&page=165

    Alot of this is sounding like fluffy PR and massaging of numbers.

    I dunno what to make of this. Apparently in select circumstances the ESRAM has an 88% increase in bandwidth due to simultaneous read\write.. No idea how this is done.

    So yes its "true" but also "not true" at the same time from what I'm gathering. Situational.
    lol...It doesn't matter. It's all about the games. Last gen was the same thing. People are debating things that they just don't know enough about.

  14. #13
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    Digital Foundry is an excellent source for these details. Luckily they have official word from Microsoft on this too.

  15. #14
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Soldier 95B View Post
    Digital Foundry is an excellent source for these details. Luckily they have official word from Microsoft on this too.
    If you watched that Major Nelson interview after the console reveal with members of the xb1 architecture team, they were hinting at what's being said now.

  16. #15
    Veteran
    MonkeyClaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    PSN ID
    Tha_MonkeyClaw
    Age
    39
    Posts
    4,976
    Rep Power
    97
    Points
    155,775 (0 Banked)
    Items Protect yourself
    Good to see they are getting more and more on level footing...now if they would put more focus on games, drop the mandatory Kinect and get the CPU up to par we would be good!

    -=[ PSN ID: Tha_MonkeyClaw ]=-

  17. #16
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyClaw View Post
    Good to see they are getting more and more on level footing...now if they would put more focus on games, drop the mandatory Kinect and get the CPU up to par we would be good!
    I think that argument is pretty much out the window now. Before E-3 everyone was saying how most of their games would probably have a kinect focus, but it turns out they were wrong. As for kinect I don't see them dropping that right now. Not until they get the units they want out there. The CPU stuff you lost me on because i thought both consoles were pretty much the same there.

  18. Likes EHY893 likes this post
  19. #17
    Extreme Poster
    mistercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Texas
    PSN ID
    mistercrow
    Posts
    25,535
    Rep Power
    167
    Points
    169,417 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Vulgotha View Post
    Eh... http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread...62867&page=165 Alot of this is sounding like fluffy PR and massaging of numbers. I dunno what to make of this. Apparently in select circumstances the ESRAM has an 88% increase in bandwidth due to simultaneous read\write.. No idea how this is done. So yes its "true" but also "not true" at the same time from what I'm gathering. Situational.
    Yeah this definitely sounds like a PR move towards damage control. ZOMG we just discovered that our hardware is suddenly more powerful than we thought! lol Sounds pretty suspect to me. Looks like the guys at Beyond are skeptical as well. Time will tell I guess.
    Last edited by mistercrow; 06-28-2013 at 19:01.

  20. #18
    Veteran
    MonkeyClaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    PSN ID
    Tha_MonkeyClaw
    Age
    39
    Posts
    4,976
    Rep Power
    97
    Points
    155,775 (0 Banked)
    Items Protect yourself
    Quote Originally Posted by Sub-stance1 View Post
    I think that argument is pretty much out the window now. Before E-3 everyone was saying how most of their games would probably have a kinect focus, but it turns out they were wrong. As for kinect I don't see them dropping that right now. Not until they get the units they want out there. The CPU stuff you lost me on because i thought both consoles were pretty much the same there.
    They don't have to drop Kinect support, just allow me to unplug the thing if I want...the CPU stuff...was a typo! I meant to say GPU, guess I need to start using my special dialing wand! Yes, the CPU's are pretty on par from what has been leaked, but it just sucks that there is such a gap still between the two systems graphical horsepower, I just hope it doesn't hinder the games later on...

    -=[ PSN ID: Tha_MonkeyClaw ]=-

  21. #19
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Sub-stance1 View Post
    I think that argument is pretty much out the window now. Before E-3 everyone was saying how most of their games would probably have a kinect focus, but it turns out they were wrong. As for kinect I don't see them dropping that right now. Not until they get the units they want out there. The CPU stuff you lost me on because i thought both consoles were pretty much the same there.
    Xbox 360, and now Xbox One....nail the games department for sure. No qualms there. Now hopefully they can address the privacy concerns with Kinect with some better PR or the ability to disconnect it.

    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyClaw View Post
    They don't have to drop Kinect support, just allow me to unplug the thing if I want...the CPU stuff...was a typo! I meant to say GPU, guess I need to start using my special dialing wand! Yes, the CPU's are pretty on par from what has been leaked, but it just sucks that there is such a gap still between the two systems graphical horsepower, I just hope it doesn't hinder the games later on...
    There is a gap, but it looks like it is getting relatively small. It will probably end up just like this gen.

  22. #20
    Veteran
    MonkeyClaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    PSN ID
    Tha_MonkeyClaw
    Age
    39
    Posts
    4,976
    Rep Power
    97
    Points
    155,775 (0 Banked)
    Items Protect yourself
    Quote Originally Posted by Soldier 95B View Post
    There is a gap, but it looks like it is getting relatively small. It will probably end up just like this gen.
    I hope so! What is bad is that I was really excited to see Microsoft embrace the home media portion into their console, I hoped they (and Sony) would just allow you to use the console(s) as a set top box/DVR instead of just being the middle man in that whole thing, I would of loved nothing more than to kick my current DVR to the curb and use a console for both gaming and recording TV, but oh well...either way I can't wait until November...let the games begin!

    -=[ PSN ID: Tha_MonkeyClaw ]=-

  23. #21
    Flaw3d Genius
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyClaw View Post
    Good to see they are getting more and more on level footing...now if they would put more focus on games, drop the mandatory Kinect and get the CPU up to par we would be good!
    Did you miss the MS E3 conference? As Francis puts it...GAMES GAMES GAMES

  24. #22
    Forum Elder
    Yungstar 2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    tyneside
    Posts
    2,971
    Rep Power
    61
    Points
    28,649 (0 Banked)
    i'd have thought the games shown at E3 and devs saying there is not a lot of difference in next gen systems would have been enough to convince anyone that Xbox ONE will be a fantastic games console and will hold it's own against any console..

    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyClaw View Post
    Good to see they are getting more and more on level footing...now if they would put more focus on games, drop the mandatory Kinect and get the CPU up to par we would be good!
    Quote Originally Posted by Flaw3d Genius View Post
    Did you miss the MS E3 conference? As Francis puts it...GAMES GAMES GAMES
    true that..

  25. #23
    Dedicated Member
    victorijapoosp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,297
    Rep Power
    48
    Points
    14,447 (0 Banked)
    Items User name style
    Dat secret wizard $#@!.
    Maths is biased! It keeps telling me the PS4 is 50% more powerful than XboxOne!
    Great song, should have more views :'(

    SHIMAASAAAANIIII!!!!!
    http://i.imgur.com/bP50xuM.png

  26. #24
    Veteran
    daLa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    24
    Posts
    4,734
    Rep Power
    76
    Points
    60,150 (0 Banked)
    This is great for them, might actually help them to at least get a bit more on par with PS4 although not equal.


  27. #25
    Supreme Veteran
    mynd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Down Under
    Age
    42
    Posts
    18,419
    Rep Power
    166
    Points
    209,281 (0 Banked)
    Items User name style
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Soldier 95B View Post
    Digital Foundry is an excellent source for these details. Luckily they have official word from Microsoft on this too.
    Honestly Leadbetter has no clue.
    He hears snippits from devs, then downplays the hell out of them.

    This is a bonus if true, but the GPU was already a formidable beast with huge optimisations.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
vBCredits II Deluxe v2.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2010-2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.