Hi, Albert, I would just kind of like an answer that doesn't beat around the bush. Like a simple answer to the question, "Will multiplatform games look better or worse on Xbox One?" You can go by what you're hearing from developers if you want.
-
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.
Albert Penello puts dGPU Xbox One rumor to rest
- Thread starter anexanhume
- Start date
- Status
Hi, Albert, I would just kind of like an answer that doesn't beat around the bush. Like a simple answer to the question, "Will multiplatform games look better or worse on Xbox One?" You can go by what you're hearing from developers if you want.
ambar_hitman
Member
Exactly. We rather behave independent devs instead of someone working for MS.
1. It won't convince me of the power difference but I'd like to know the math behind the 204 GB/s eSRAM number.
2. No, they're launch games. Everything is rushed and unoptimized compared to multiplatform games released 2+ years after launch. We won't know which console is truly the best for years.
LittleJohnny
Banned
But the GameCube and Xbox launched at the same time and Xbox was more powerful. I didn't see any ragging on Nintendo back in the day, in fact the difference between GC and Xbox is more significant than PS4 vs XB1, see my other post explaining why. GC games and Xbox games were competitive and so will PS4 and XB1.
Actually if the frame rate on one console is 30fps and other 21 which would be single digit. The difference in performance would be 40%+.
Brad Grenz
Member
Not to mention the fact that the figures being used are themselves suspect. MS have never explained how the 204GBps figure is achieved when the hardware appears to have been designed to max out at 109GBps (but they have admitted real-world, optimal usage scenarios never approach that, being closer to ~140GBps).
And straight addition of the bandwidth for both pools ignores the bandwidth overhead of having to copy data back and forth between them. If you were only using the Move Engines for that, but you're saturating it's capabilities, that's 25.6GBps right off the top.
Looking at that you might think a more accurate accounting of the aggregate would be 140 + 68 - 25 = 183GBps And that is only in the most optimistic situations where your access pattern in the ESRAM doesn't drop you another 30GBps to the "normal" rate.
Syphon Filter
Member
Puppet Shadow
Member
I second this.
BlastProcessing
Member
...Jesus.
For the TENTH time, to answer question number 1: What I personally want are numbers that don't **directly** contradict each other. Your first two bullet points are in direct, mathematical contradiction. It's logic. It's not technical, it's simple fact.
Like me? I really have no stake in this race and am just waiting to see how the systems turn out. I just like watching all the fun people have getting worked up over their console of choice.
On to your second point, while true that Sony has been giving detailed information in interviews but (according to people who know what their talking about here) not coming on message boards and spreading bad or false information. I want as much information as possible on the XBO, but bad information is not the way to go.
Personally I think having studio/company reps here is great as long as they are honest and participate in threads not just about their products.
1. We don't know what you can or can't answer, honestly. I think people raised various technical follow-up questions (i.e. clock speed increase, memory bandwidth) you apparently can not answer, since you haven't so far.
2. Will we get an apology for all the 180s Microsoft had to pull after the system was designed to be very anti-consumer and pro-industry?
SwiftDeath
Member
How this was a rumor at all boggles my mind
Who hides an extra GPU?
Seriously people not all rumors are created equal
Who hides an extra GPU?
Seriously people not all rumors are created equal
Because what we have seen so far on launch games are not miles ahead on what we have this current gen. (consoles).
You can add bandwidths in scenarios, where you can saturate the bandwidth to the ESRAM pool with meaningful read/writes of data that fits into that pool, and where you can saturate the bandwidth to main memory with meaningful read/writes as well. In a simplified rendering workflow, you could read texture data from main memory and read/write pixels from and into several pixelbuffers. Pixelbuffers generally fit into small memory pools since their size is determined by the amount of pixels in the target resolution multiplied by the amount of information (e.g. color) per pixel.
In such scenarios you can add up bandwidths because you are lucky enough that the bandwidth and pool size needs of your workflow match the architecture.
But you may be limited in flexibility if there are workflows which needs do not fit the architecture. If you need to read/write more data from or into main memory than DDR3 allows, you are bottlenecked and can't saturate the theoretical bandwidth sum. If your ESRAM pool cannot hold all of your buffers, then you are limited by that. If you constantly need to copy data (like textures) between main memory and eSRAM then you "waste" bandwidth on both paths that you would not have to waste if you had a single fast pool of memory where no copying is necessary. (The XB1 seems to have its DMEs to support such copy operations from a perspective of computation resources but the general concept still holds true: you are mitigating a problem that you don't have with a single pool).
So it depends on the scenario and the details. But you can't add up bandwidths generally as if there were no difference between a single memory pool setup and the XB1's setup.
#dead
Not to mention dreamcast launched before the ps2 and was technically much more efficient than ps2 and some thought possibly stronger in some areas,
but sony had their buzz words and "emotion engines synthesizer chiparoos" or whatever and left dreamcast to die a lonely death.
So yea, standing up for your tech is kind of a big deal
Uno Venova
Banned
Interesting, the stipulation is only for the launch third party games.
anexanhume
Member
The software expertise thing is a red herring. I don't doubt your guys are great, but are you also going to claim they're better than the ICE team?
If your solution was so great, why did you come out and announce GPU and CPU up clocks and a decision to let developers closer to the metal only after Sony said their developers had the same access?
You also know it's not as simple as a FPS difference. PS4 titles could have additional effects, FPS could be locked, etc.
To prove your points you'd actually have to post internal charts showing comparison data, which you're not willing to do I'm guessing.
thunder_snail
Member
With all the due respect Mr.Penello, the way you talk about directX feels like you're ignoring all the other engineers who work on opengl, opengl ES, psgl, cuda, opencl. They are very smart people too and no less intelligent than the people who work on directX and direct compute.
Also you have to realize as soon as you start this AMA, people will say it's biased because the engineers were hand picked by you and you are the one who will be passing along what they say.
Instead of comparing X1 to PS4 in terms of raw performance, it'd be better to promote the features on X1 that PS4 cannot do. Such as kinect, voice recognition (e.g: switch weapons like in Mass Effect 3) how useful the snap feature is going to be etc. Just the other day, people were really impressed by the game still running while out on the dash etc.
No there's quite a few of us. A lot just choose to avoid these threads.
qa_engineer
Member
At this point I don't expect a straight answer from Xbox PR. The answers we've seemingly received are disingenuous or are lacking as they don't "add up"
Its funny this board has gotten so pro-sony it gets downright beligerent when anyone suggests maybe the ps4 is not much more powerful than the One. There is a lot still to learn how esram and coprocessing will play into this gen. Im not saying its all true or lies, i don't know yet.
What i am saying is i remember the Sony hype train when the ps2 was going to be able to synthesize real human emotions. When developers in 2005 were saying a ps3 game showed more fidelity and seemed more alive with blowing leaves (ea need for speed deb i think). When a japanese dev said a ps3 game would be a gourmet dinner and a 369 game was like going to denny's.... In 2005 it was a clear cut winner which was infinitely more powerful. The one may be only 10-20% less powerful in real games.. It may be 50% less powerful. All i know is Sony has exagerated before..
... And for four years all we heard was ps3 was extremely more powerful than 360.. There are just a lot of lazy developers...
What i am saying is i remember the Sony hype train when the ps2 was going to be able to synthesize real human emotions. When developers in 2005 were saying a ps3 game showed more fidelity and seemed more alive with blowing leaves (ea need for speed deb i think). When a japanese dev said a ps3 game would be a gourmet dinner and a 369 game was like going to denny's.... In 2005 it was a clear cut winner which was infinitely more powerful. The one may be only 10-20% less powerful in real games.. It may be 50% less powerful. All i know is Sony has exagerated before..
... And for four years all we heard was ps3 was extremely more powerful than 360.. There are just a lot of lazy developers...
Hence you ... Posting in here?
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
heh lol
To albert, im not sure you can provide any information that can convince anybody here. Other than us seeing multiplatforms, which right now we wont be getting, neither do I believe you even have access to xbox multiplat media and of course not ps4.
maplelord93
Banned
CouldBeWorse
Member
The change in philosophy IS the apology and acknowledgement that mistakes were made. What more do you want for something that wasn't actually implemented?
Perhaps he should pick up the bat phone and call a sr tech fellow to help him figure out how to make that shit work right.
1) Albert, with respect, that's your job to come up with, isn't it? We're mostly made up of educated consumers here, and we're seeing significantly better specs for the PS4. The PS4 has the specs on your machine, so what can you point too--with a sound technical basis--to prove that the PS4 won't have a "huge delta in performance"?
2) Albert, for anyone to agree to this, you would need to assume that developers will actually take advantage of the PS4's power advantage, which is not at all certain.
You're still dealing with optimization, being pressed for time since you only get your dev kits at a certain time (at the feb reveal Sony's devs still didn't even know they were going from 4gb to 8gb ram) and most of the focus is still usually on the current gen consoles at that time.
It's simple history really. No matter how easy to develop the systems are the launch games are never the best you see in a console's life. People need some time and quite frankly with how Infamous is shaping up to be a mere 3 months after launch you should appreciate that results are showing a little quicker this time than most others. Even Gears of War 1 took a full year to come out.
Many 3rd party games are cross-gen during the launch window. Devs are already spread thin across 4+ platforms so shooting for parity is the best bang for your buck. You won't see many 3rd party games going full optimization mode for every platform as that is too labor/money intensive. You will also see many cross-gen games not look as good as they could be if they were just developed for next-gen only with nothing more than parity.
ie - Time is money, friend. Once when the cross-gen titles stop coming we can begin to dissect comparisons proper. Until then we won't see proper dedication to platform specific strengths. Even Dice said they could do more with BF4 but are spread thin and constrained for time.
This isn't the very first console launch, man.
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
For how many years were some people saying the devs would get used to the PS3 and multi plats would look better?
It never happened.
Agreed. This is getting me more hyped for the Xbox One at this point.
Are you dense, or just oblivious?
Spoiler: There are people who play games primarily, even exclusively, on consoles. They're going to factor in all sorts of aspects and bullet-points into which console they're going to buy and play on primarily throughout the console generation. Hardware power and potential for graphical fidelity play an important role into that decision - even if it's just a slightly more stable framerate, lower minimum framerate, that's still a factor that can go into the choice of console. That shit is important.
Please get a clue.
maplelord93
Banned
but if it is 50% you should notice quite a difference regardless
Huh? I find these threads funny and I'm excited for both systems because of the inevitable awesome onslaught of first party titles in a few years on each system.
Edit: trying to post and read physiology books is running my ability to read posts without seeing it as something else. I thought he said is he the only one getting hyped for the Xbox One.
Best analogy I can think of to explain the ram situation is this....
---
Xbox One and PS4 ram water pump analogy
Imagine the ram types on these consoles as rooms with pumps that are used to pump water (textures or whatever else) in and out of them.
The Xbox One has two rooms (DDR3 and Esram).
The DDR3 room (Room 1) is 8192 square foot in size and has a pump attached to it that is 68 cm in circumference and can only pump water in one direction at a time (read or write), in or out.
The Esram room (Room 2) is 32 square foot in size and has a pump attached to it that is 218(?) cm in circumference and can pump water in and out at the same time.
- Room 2 can pump water in and out of it's room far quicker than Room 1 can in it's room, however, Room 2 is substantially smaller than Room 1 so it has order of magnitude less water to work with at any given time.
- Both of these rooms can operate pumping at the same time (adding together bandwidth), but both are still limited to their respective room sizes.
The PS4 has one room (GDDR5).
The GDDR5 room (Room 3) is 8192 square foot in size and has a pump attached to it that is 176 cm in circumference and can pump water in and out at the same time.
The PS4's one room is both very large and very fast at the same time. With over 2.5x the water pumping speed as the Xbox One's equally sized 8192 square foot room. Whilst the Xbox One does have that secondary room with a large pump, it's still only 32 square foot in size. 256 times less space than the larger rooms.
---
I'm really tired, so there could be mistakes. Why did I even do this lol.
---
Xbox One and PS4 ram water pump analogy
Imagine the ram types on these consoles as rooms with pumps that are used to pump water (textures or whatever else) in and out of them.
The Xbox One has two rooms (DDR3 and Esram).
The DDR3 room (Room 1) is 8192 square foot in size and has a pump attached to it that is 68 cm in circumference and can only pump water in one direction at a time (read or write), in or out.
The Esram room (Room 2) is 32 square foot in size and has a pump attached to it that is 218(?) cm in circumference and can pump water in and out at the same time.
- Room 2 can pump water in and out of it's room far quicker than Room 1 can in it's room, however, Room 2 is substantially smaller than Room 1 so it has order of magnitude less water to work with at any given time.
- Both of these rooms can operate pumping at the same time (adding together bandwidth), but both are still limited to their respective room sizes.
The PS4 has one room (GDDR5).
The GDDR5 room (Room 3) is 8192 square foot in size and has a pump attached to it that is 176 cm in circumference and can pump water in and out at the same time.
The PS4's one room is both very large and very fast at the same time. With over 2.5x the water pumping speed as the Xbox One's equally sized 8192 square foot room. Whilst the Xbox One does have that secondary room with a large pump, it's still only 32 square foot in size. 256 times less space than the larger rooms.
---
I'm really tired, so there could be mistakes. Why did I even do this lol.
An honest apology. Even Apple apologises from time to time. Apple! Out of all companies!
Dead Prince
Banned
Actually if the frame rate on one console is 30fps and other 21 which would be single digit. The difference in performance would be 40%+.
math - not their strong suit
How about a better bet? Do you believe that over the life of the platforms, once devs have got to grips with the two consoles and their development tools have matured, there won't be any notable difference between consoles? If that is the case, then the entire world will own you and MS an apology.
I feel that at launch, there will be little to differentiate the two platforms, but with each passing software generation, the gulf will grow bigger and bigger.
Never? Not a single game was better on PS3 than 360?
Also trying to equate two wildly different architectures to two extremely similar architectures with one just packing more power is incredibly misleading. Seems intentional.
1. Can we get a quote from you saying that the Xbox One only has one GPU and no other GPUs. Discrete and or non discrete. Just to hush up some trolls.
2. Can you explain why the 360 has more bandwidth than the new xbox?
3. Can you completely restart your GPU and CPU percentage increase when compared to what it originally was taking into assumption that the PS4 is running at stock which was what the X1 was to being with. 1.6Ghz.
4. If there is a 1 digit increase for the X1 (which I personally doubt) and if we apologise, can we, the gaming community, get an apology for treating us like we're stupid and thinking the 1984 DRM and kinect was somehow a good idea from the get go? And could Major Nelson apologise to Angry Joe for the ignorance during the E3 interview? Would be nice.
5. How fast is the BD drive on the X1?
6. What's with the power brick? It's 2013 and you console is $100 extra yet with a power brick. Surely the "technical fellows" could design a console without a power brick? No?
7. How do gamers play more games when the poxy 500GB drive is full? Will there be official HDDs to replace it or will any old HDD work providing it's the correct physical size? And can SSDs work too?
8. What happened to the guy who's son leaked the interface video? Has he still got his job?
9. Why not just use GDDR5 instead of GDDR3? Would that have mean't another $100 in price?
10. Why is it called the Xbox One when it's the third console and has more accessoried plugged into it than a Beverly Hills broad? Serious question.
NullPointer
Member
So you can't total the bandwidths as any suitable measure generally, but you can reach that theoretical maximum at times if you're workload is optimized around it? That doesn't make the metric seem so utterly misleading as at first blush.
I take it the PS4's theoretical maximum is a lot easier to attain?
We both caught him the exact same way lolActually if the frame rate on one console is 30fps and other 21 which would be single digit. The difference in performance would be 40%+.
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
This thread. Man this thread. I wish I could spread it on some crackers and eat it.
Dude easy... lol. The guy was just making an observation... not life or death brah...
Certainly.
In addition, you always have the problem that the ESRAM pool might be to small for your needs. The 360, for instance, hit its limit in games that needed relatively big pixelbuffers for deferred rendering [1]. For instance, a buffer with 12bytes information per pixel requires more than 10MB at 720p, but the 360 only had 10MB of eDRAM.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_shading
- Status