• 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.

Seller of Durango devkit says Durango info is old, compares to Orbis better

Status
Not open for further replies.
They're not unverified. Devs and sources themselves generally unanimously verify them.

And they're unanimously agreeing that the consoles are a relative wash in power. What does that tell you about the hardware? We dont have the full story. We dont know the pipline, we don't know the tools we dont know the instruction sets. We have one set of information, and it's just like 2005. The numbers all showed the PS3 trouncing the 360, developers said other wise, and look at today, most people agree the consoles are a wash.
 

nib95

Banned
And they're unanimously agreeing that the consoles are a relative wash in power. What does that tell you about the hardware? We dont have the full story. We dont know the pipline, we don't know the tools we dont know the instruction sets. We have one set of information, and it's just like 2005. The number all showed the PS3 trouncing the 360, developers said other wise, and look at today, most people agree the consoles are a wash.

They're not though. Only Lherre said that. Two others said Durango had the edge, but those two have a spotty record of reliability and are also not devs or working in game fields themselves. Far as I can remember Proelite works for Microsoft in an unrelated department and Karak has a source working for Microsoft. Not sure about Aegis, I believe he's a member of the press.

In any case, of all these sources, Lherre is really the only one with real working inside merit, which is why it's trickier that he hasn't elaborated on past posts lol. Which basically gave nothing away and were very politically correct nda speaking even to begin with.

For the record, I'm not suggesting either will or won't be more powerful than the other. I've always been of the assumption that Microsoft will not want to take it lying down, so there very well maybe more to this. They did double the ram inside the 360 fairly last minute, so anythings possible. From Sony or Microsoft.
 

nasos_333

Member
And they're unanimously agreeing that the consoles are a relative wash in power. What does that tell you about the hardware? We dont have the full story. We dont know the pipline, we don't know the tools we dont know the instruction sets. We have one set of information, and it's just like 2005. The numbers all showed the PS3 trouncing the 360, developers said other wise, and look at today, most people agree the consoles are a wash.

Indeed

Also all these leaked diagrams and small details abut Durango, seem just too much of a leak to be even remotly considered real

I dont think AMD has its chip design readilly available to so many people that cant control a leak of that magnitude
 

Quazar

Member
Indeed

Also all these leaked diagrams and small details abut Durango, seem just too much of a leak to be even remotly considered real

Or just made up shit to get a site AKA "vgleaks" hits. Wouldn't be surprised if that site is Proelites and Thuways lol
 

Pistolero

Member
Never understood the wash comment when comparing consoles, honestly. They could have different strenghts and weaknesses, but surely one must be more powerful than the other, even by a jolt. Unless both companies strike a deal to put out the same machine...
 

KidBeta

Junior Member
Or just made up shit to get a site AKA "vgleaks" hits. Wouldn't be surprised if that site is Proelites and Thuways lol

All the leaks from vgleaks are from a summit on durango last February. It stands to reason that microsoft would be giving developers a lot of information on the system.
 
They're not though. Only Lherre said that. Two others said Durango had the edge, but those two have a spotty record of reliability and are also not devs or working in game fields themselves. Far as I can remember Proelite works for Microsoft in an unrelated department and Karak has a source working for Microsoft. Not sure about Aegis, I believe he's a member of the press.

In any case, of all these sources, Lherre is really the only one with real working inside merit, which is why it's trickier that he hasn't elaborated on past posts lol. Which basically gave nothing away and were very politically correct nda speaking even to begin with.

For the record, I'm not suggesting either will or won't be more powerful than the other. I've always been of the assumption that Microsoft will not want to take it lying down, so there very well maybe more to this. They did double the ram inside the 360 fairly last minute, so anythings possible. From Sony or Microsoft.

what about the edge article which stated the orbis had a slight edge on the durango? Either way, i think if there was a clear and concise difference in power it'd have been clearly established by now.

Never understood the wash comment when comparing consoles, honestly. They could have different strenghts and weaknesses, but surely one must be more powerful than the other, even by a jolt. Unless both companies strike a deal to put out the same machine...

It all comes out in the wash, ie, if I buy you lunch one week, you buy me lunch another and over time the record of who owes who more disappears, regardless if there is a gap or not, in the end it's insignificant. So regardless, the relative strength of the consoles are even, even if one does one thing better or not.
 

nib95

Banned
Edge article says Orbis has the edge no? I have no idea if their story has any merit nor who their source is. Being Edge, I'd imagine the source is fairly reliable mind. But at this point it's anyone's guess. Only things we have to go on are musings, vague insider posts and leaked dev kit and proposed console specs. Nothing concrete, but the leaked specs are the closest thing we have to official.
 
Edge article says Orbis has the edge no? I have no idea if their story has any merit nor who their source is. Being Edge, I'd imagine the source is fairly reliable mind. But at this point it's anyone's guess. Only things we have to go on are musings, vague insider posts and leaked dev kit and proposed console specs. Nothing concrete, but the leaked specs are the closest thing we have to official.

thats what I said. But my point is that the overall concensus of people who have any tangible experience with the hardware say the consoles will have a similar output, many saying a gap smaller then this generation, and yet there are people trying to fight tooth and nail to make this gap seem as wide as possible.

People act like there's a 50% difference in performance between the two consoles because of rops and bandwith, if thats really how it worked, why wouldn't amd and nvidia just add more of these parts on consumer gpu's? Why do hardware manufactures need to change chip architecture to get similar results? people are reading way to heavily into the "raw" numbers.
 

nasos_333

Member
Or just made up shit to get a site AKA "vgleaks" hits. Wouldn't be surprised if that site is Proelites and Thuways lol

Probably, it is funny how a random site can come up with Durango design plans out of nowhere

They must have good Corel draw and Visio skills :)
 

eso76

Member
Was that a real devkit and did it give us info that match the latest rumours ? I didn't follow.
 

nasos_333

Member
Edge article says Orbis has the edge no? I have no idea if their story has any merit nor who their source is. Being Edge, I'd imagine the source is fairly reliable mind. But at this point it's anyone's guess. Only things we have to go on are musings, vague insider posts and leaked dev kit and proposed console specs. Nothing concrete, but the leaked specs are the closest thing we have to official.

The questions are

1. how much of an edge ?

PS3 had a good edge in raw power comparing to xbox 360 and see how most 3rd party game turned out

Raw power means nothing much, it is all about the bottnecks and ability to optimize

2. Does Edge really know what they are talking about and is it based on the latest 100% final Durango specs ?
 

KidBeta

Junior Member
The questions are

1. how much of an edge ?

PS3 had a good edge in raw power comparing to xbox 360 and see how most 3rd party game turned out

Raw power means nothing much, it is all about the bottnecks and ability to optimize

2. Does Edge really know what they are talking about and is it based on the latest 100% final Durango specs ?

Can we stop quoting last gen?, in reality Nvidia really messed up the FLOPS number for the PS3 over-stating it by a large amount, and also the architectures were massively different.

A direct flop-flop compassion is very valid this generation but it is not the be all to end all.

Were you at this summit?

Nope, but from what ive hard from others who would probably know, they are real.
 

nib95

Banned
The questions are

1. how much of an edge ?

PS3 had a good edge in raw power comparing to xbox 360 and see how most 3rd party game turned out

Raw power means nothing much, it is all about the bottnecks and ability to optimize

2. Does Edge really know what they are talking about and is it based on the latest 100% final Durango specs ?

Somewhat accurate, but the 360 actually had the more powerful gpu, even on paper specs. So it was a bit of a different situation. That and the PS3 had split ram architecture whilst the 360 had unified. The situation is the complete opposite with Orbis and Durango, add to that on paper Orbis has the edge on cpu and gpu despite very similar hardware. But who knows, that may or may have already changed.
 
Somewhat accurate, but the 360 actually had the more powerful gpu, even on paper specs. So it was a bit of a different situation. That and the PS3 had split ram architecture whilst the 360 had unified. The situation is the complete opposite with Orbis and Durango, add to that on paper Orbis has the edge on cpu and gpu. But who knows, that may or may have already changed.

no it didn't. The ps3 had double the flops, higher fill rate, more shader pipelines (albeit split), etc. The 360 gpu had a more advanced architecture, and better ram management.
 

nasos_333

Member
Can we stop quoting last gen?, in reality Nvidia really messed up the FLOPS number for the PS3 over-stating it by a large amount, and also the architectures were massively different.

A direct flop-flop compassion is very valid this generation but it is not the be all to end all.

Nope, but from what ive hard from others who would probably know, they are real.

Imagine what can happen with these rumored specs about next gen then !!!!

if actual real specs from Nvidia are turning out false

As i said, the leak seems to have more info on Durango than MS knows about :)
 

KidBeta

Junior Member
no it didn't.

To anyone sensible who wasnt counting FF it sure as hell did (btw, i only own a PS3).

Imagine what can happen with these rumored specs about next gen then !!!!

if actual real specs from Nvidia are turning out false

As i said, the leak seems to have more info on Durango than MS knows about :)

The validity of present rumours is in no way shape or form based on Nvidias prior bullshitting.

And I can tell you now Microsoft knows more then anyone about Durango, probably even the third party devs who are working on it.
 

nib95

Banned
no it didn't.

Actual specs it did. Flop count no, but only because Nvidia fluffed them. When we're comparing Orbis and Durango we're not limiting to flop figures, but actual hardware specifics. ROPs, CUs, bandwidth etc. It's much easier to do this time as well since both new consoles have essentially the same cpu and gpu architecture.


EDIT: Here's a full breakdown. EDIT2: Woah at horrible mobile formatting, fixed!

GPU Transistor Count
PS3 - RSX transistor count: 300.2 million transistors
Xbox 360 - Xenos transistor count: 337 million (232 million parent die+105 million EDRAM daughter die)

GPU clock
Xbox 360 - Xenos clocked at 500 Mhz
PS3 - RSX clocked at 500 MHz

GPU video memory
Xbox 360 - Xenos: 512 MB of 700 Mhz GDDR3 VRAM on a 128-bit bus
Xbox 360 - Xenos: 10 MB daughter Embedded DRAM as framebuffer (32GB/s bus, multiplied by 8 thanks to multisampling unpacking for an effective bandwidth of 256 MB/s, the internal eDRAM bandwidth)
PS3 - RSX: 256 MB GDDR3 VRAM clocked at 650 Mhz on a 128-bit bus
PS3 - RSX: 256 MB of Rambus XDR DRAM via Cell (with latency penalty)

Triangle Setup
Xbox 360 - 500 Million Triangles/sec
PS3 - 250 Million Triangles/sec

Vertex Shader Processing
Xbox 360 - 6.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 2.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 16 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 1.5 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 12 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 8 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 1.1 Billion Vertices/sec (if all 8 Vertex Pipelines remain)
PS3 - 0.825 Billion Vertices/sec (if downgraded to 6 Vertex Pipelines)

Filtered Texture Fetch
Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
PS3 - 13.2 Billion Texels/sec (if all 24 Pixel Pipelines remain)
PS3 - 11.0 Billion Texels/sec (if downgraded to 20 Pixel Pipelines)

Vertex Texture Fetch
Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
PS3 - 4.4 Billion Texels/sec (if all 8 Vertex Pipelines remain)
PS3 - 3.3 Billion Texels/sec (if downgraded to 6 Vertex Pipelines)

Pixel Shader Processing with 16 Filtered Texels Per Cycle (Pixel ALU x Clock)
Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 17.6 Billion Pixels/sec (if all 24 Pixel Pipelines remain)
PS3 - 13.2 Billion Pixels/sec (if downgraded to 20 Pixel Pipelines)

Pixel Shader Processing without Textures (Pixel ALU x Clock)
Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 26.4 Billion Pixels/sec (if all 24 Pixel Pipelines remain)
PS3 - 22.0 Billion Pixels/sec (if downgraded to 20 Pixel Pipelines)

Multisampled Fill Rate
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz)
PS3 - 8.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 500MHz)

Pixel Fill Rate with 4x Multisampled Anti-Aliasing
Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz / 4)
PS3 - 2.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 500MHz / 4)

Pixel Fill Rate without Anti-Aliasing
Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)
PS3 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)

Frame Buffer Bandwidth
Xbox 360 - 256.0 GB/sec (dedicated for frame buffer rendering)
PS3 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with other graphics data: textures and vertices)
PS3 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)
PS3 - 10.0 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)

Texture/Vertex Memory Bandwidth
Xbox 360 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with CPU)
Xbox 360 - 14.4 GB/sec (with 8.0 GB/sec subtracted for CPU)
Xbox 360 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for CPU)
PS3 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with frame buffer)
PS3 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for frame buffer)
PS3 - 10.0 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for frame buffer)
PS3 - additional 20.0 GB/sec when reading from XDR memory (with latency penalty)

Shader Model
Xbox 360 - Shader Model 3.0+ / Unified Shader Architecture
PS3 - Shader Model 3.0 / Discrete Shader Architecture
 

Vol5

Member
I don't understand why someone would say "specs are better" then not give any indication as to how or why.
 

nasos_333

Member
To anyone sensible who wasnt counting FF it sure as hell did (btw, i only own a PS3).



The validity of present rumours is in no way shape or form based on Nvidias prior bullshitting.

And I can tell you now Microsoft knows more then anyone about Durango, probably even the third party devs who are working on it.

But after that huge leak, we seem to know as much or more about their Durango design

We are now insiders too :)

In all honesty, i think these specs are just good Corel draw skills or the biggest leak in history

Usually takes years to even remotly have a clue about console architecture to that level, if ever

While this time we seem to have every little detail about Durango before it even goes to production
 

KidBeta

Junior Member
But after that huge leak, we seem to know as much or more about their Durango design

We are now insiders too :)

In all honesty, i think these specs are just good Corel draw skills or the biggest leak in history

Usually takes years to even remotly have a clue about console architecture to that level, if ever

Years?, the devs are going to get that information (if they havent already) before it launches, this is the level of detail id expect for a technical summit for developers.

vgleaks have been good in the past, they got the Wii U spot on right down to every detail practically.
 
XENOS vs. RSX in more readable form (just so it's not a block of text from nib95's post)

GPU Transistor Count
-PS3 - RSX transistor count: 300.2 million transistors
-Xbox 360 - Xenos transistor count: 337 million (232 million parent die+105 million EDRAM daughter die)

GPU clock
-Xbox 360 - Xenos clocked at 500 Mhz
-PS3 - RSX clocked at 500 MHz

GPU video memory
-Xbox 360 - Xenos: 512 MB of 700 Mhz GDDR3 VRAM on a 128-bit bus
-Xbox 360 - Xenos: 10 MB daughter Embedded DRAM as framebuffer (32GB/s bus, multiplied by 8 thanks to multisampling unpacking for an effective bandwidth of 256 MB/s, the internal eDRAM bandwidth)
-PS3 - RSX: 256 MB GDDR3 VRAM clocked at 650 Mhz on a 128-bit bus
-PS3 - RSX: 256 MB of Rambus XDR DRAM via Cell (with latency penalty)

Triangle Setup
-Xbox 360 - 500 Million Triangles/sec
-PS3 - 275 Million Triangles/sec

Vertex Shader Processing
-Xbox 360 - 6.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 2.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 16 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 1.5 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 12 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 8 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-PS3 - 1.1 Billion Vertices/sec (if all 8 Vertex Pipelines remain)
-PS3 - 0.825 Billion Vertices/sec (if downgraded to 6 Vertex Pipelines)

Filtered Texture Fetch
-Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
-PS3 - 13.2 Billion Texels/sec (if all 24 Pixel Pipelines remain)
-PS3 - 11.0 Billion Texels/sec (if downgraded to 20 Pixel Pipelines)

Vertex Texture Fetch
-Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
-PS3 - 4.4 Billion Texels/sec (if all 8 Vertex Pipelines remain)
-PS3 - 3.3 Billion Texels/sec (if downgraded to 6 Vertex Pipelines)

Pixel Shader Processing with 16 Filtered Texels Per Cycle (Pixel ALU x Clock)
-Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-PS3 - 17.6 Billion Pixels/sec (if all 24 Pixel Pipelines remain)
-PS3 - 13.2 Billion Pixels/sec (if downgraded to 20 Pixel Pipelines)

Pixel Shader Processing without Textures (Pixel ALU x Clock)
-Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
-PS3 - 26.4 Billion Pixels/sec (if all 24 Pixel Pipelines remain)
-PS3 - 22.0 Billion Pixels/sec (if downgraded to 20 Pixel Pipelines)

Multisampled Fill Rate
-Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz)
-PS3 - 8.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 500MHz)

Pixel Fill Rate with 4x Multisampled Anti-Aliasing
-Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz / 4)
-PS3 - 2.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 500MHz / 4)

Pixel Fill Rate without Anti-Aliasing
-Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)
-PS3 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)

Frame Buffer Bandwidth
-Xbox 360 - 256.0 GB/sec (dedicated for frame buffer rendering)
-PS3 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with other graphics data: textures and vertices)
-PS3 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)
-PS3 - 10.0 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)

Texture/Vertex Memory Bandwidth
-Xbox 360 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with CPU)
-Xbox 360 - 14.4 GB/sec (with 8.0 GB/sec subtracted for CPU)
-Xbox 360 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for CPU)
-PS3 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with frame buffer)
-PS3 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for frame buffer)
-PS3 - 10.0 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for frame buffer)
-PS3 - additional 20.0 GB/sec when reading from XDR memory (with latency penalty)

Shader Model
-Xbox 360 - Shader Model 3.0+ / Unified Shader Architecture
-PS3 - Shader Model 3.0 / Discrete Shader Architecture
 
Actual specs it did. Flop count no, but only because Nvidia fluffed them. When we're comparing Orbis and Durango we're not limiting to flop figures, but actual hardware specifics. ROPs, CUs, bandwidth etc. It's much easier to do this time as well since both new consoles have essentially the same cpu and gpu architecture.


EDIT: Here's a full breakdown.

its easier, but that doesn't mean its the same. This is always what I'm reminded when I read "their the same". It goes beyond just the numbers, beyond just what we see.

In addition to its other capabilities Xenos has a special instruction which is presently unique to this graphics processor and may not necessarily even be available in WGF2.0 and this is the MEMEXPORT function. In simple terms the MEMEXPORT function is a method by which Xenos can push and pull vectorised data directly to and from system RAM. This becomes very useful with vertex shader programs as with the capabilities to scatter and gather to and from system RAM the graphics processor suddenly becomes a very wide processor for general purpose floating point operations. For instance, if a shader operation could be run with the results passed out to memory and then another shader can be performed on the output of the first shader with the first shader's results becoming the input to the subsequent shader.

MEMEXPORT expands the graphics pipeline further forward and in a general purpose and programmable way. For instance, one example of its operation could be to tessellate an object as well as to skin it by applying a shader to a vertex buffer, writing the results to memory as another vertex buffer, then using that buffer run a tessellation render, then run another vertex shader on that for skinning. MEMEXPORT could potentially be used to provide input to the tessellation unit itself by running a shader that calculates the tessellation factor by transforming the edges to screen space and then calculates the tessellation factor on each of the edges dependant on its screen space and feeds those results into the tessellation unit, resulting in a dynamic, screen space based tessellation routine. Other examples for its use could be to provide image based operations such as compositing, animating particles, or even operations that can alternate between the CPU and graphics processor.

With the capability to fetch from anywhere in memory, perform arbitrary ALU operations and write the results back to memory, in conjunction with the raw floating point performance of the large shader ALU array, the MEMEXPORT facility does have the capability to achieve a wide range of fairly complex and general purpose operations; basically any operation that can be mapped to a wide SIMD array can be fairly efficiently achieved and in comparison to previous graphics pipelines it is achieved in fewer cycles and with lower latencies. For instance, this is probably the first time that general purpose physics calculation would be achievable, with a reasonable degree of success, on a graphics processor and is a big step towards the graphics processor becoming much more like a vector co-processor to the CPU.

Seeing as MEMEXPORT operates over the unified shader array the capability is also available to pixel shader programs, however the data would be represented without colour or Z information which is likely to limit its usefulness.

ATI indicate that MEMEXPORT functions can still operate in parallel with both vertex fetch and filtered texture operations.
 
whats this business abut seller of durango dev kit? Does he make them?

I scrolled down 50+ posts and there wasn't an answer to this


and now its a vs thread with no real info
 

KidBeta

Junior Member
I think we under-estimate the influence microsoft had and is having. There will be instructions that are very specific to microsoft D3D research, just like on the xenos.

I do not think so, there is not much more you could add to the already stock standard ISA that ATIAMD is providing, outside of the obvious stuff like mem instructions which are obviously going to be different.
 

nib95

Banned
its easier, but that doesn't mean its the same. This is always what I'm reminded when I read "their the same". It goes beyond just the numbers, beyond just what we see.

That's all fine and dandy and everything....but this isn't ATI vs Nvidia, two completely different customised architectures. Will each new console have it's own unique features and extra's? Sure. But the GPU's are at this point in time (going by the dev kits anyway), essentially based off of the exact same architecture. The Orbis having a CU and ROP advantage, plus the ram bandwidth. But lets see if that'll change.
 
whats this business abut seller of durango dev kit? Does he make them?

I scrolled down 50+ posts and there wasn't an answer to this


and now its a vs thread with no real info

he was a part of some forum or something were people collect dev kits and stuff.

can't remember what it was called though, sorry.

plus i do believe he is a developer.
 
That's all fine and dandy and everything....but this isn't ATI vs Nvidia, two completely different customised architectures. Will each new console have it's own unique features and extra's? Sure. But the GPU's are at this point in time (going by the dev kits anyway), essentially based off of the exact same architecture. The Orbis having a CU and ROP advantage, plus the ram bandwidth. But lets see if that'll change.

We'll see how latency plays into the bandwith advantage, i think the memory will be starved.
 

MaulerX

Member
The questions are

1. how much of an edge ?

PS3 had a good edge in raw power comparing to xbox 360 and see how most 3rd party game turned out

Raw power means nothing much, it is all about the bottnecks and ability to optimize

2. Does Edge really know what they are talking about and is it based on the latest 100% final Durango specs ?



Edge specifically said "slight" edge. TBH that falls in line with the it's a "wash" comments. Even Thuway said a dev used the Xbox vs Game Cube analogy. There is just too many people saying the same thing for it to be ignored. And what SuperDae is basically saying is that the reason Orbis looks much better is because we don't know current Durango specs, as those are from a year ago. So Durango specs are presumably better. At least better enough to make it a "wash" is what I'm getting from all this.

Now, if it's a "wash", then which company stands to benefit the most? Sony or Microsoft?
 

Perkel

Banned
What a twist.

Someone said this already but it is really weird that every time there is info about Orbis there is special souse mentioned. And now when we know most of both new consoles SuperDAE states something like that.

Special Souce --> special souce --> no no no that Durango devkit hardware is old and can't be compared"


So latest SOC is Alpha not Beta dev kit ?
I would believe it if MS would lunch their consoles in 2014 but that is hardly believable.

Something smells to me
 
Because more power definitely makes it a better system in the long run. Look at what happened to the PS3.

yes, let's look at ps3. it's home to some of the most visually stunning games of the generation on consoles.

I'd say power has a great deal to do with that. In fact, their upcoming games look so good, I worry about how they'll top them with ps4 launch titles.
 

QaaQer

Member
Now, if it's a "wash", then which company stands to benefit the most? Sony or Microsoft?

assuming same price, kinect2 is packin, ms continues with timed exclusives, and their software/os knowhow gives them the better interface, sony will be hard pressed to compete if machines are a wash in power in N.America.

In Europe, Sony is in a better position depending on how brand loyal those consumers are. But even still, if the above is true, the next xbox looks to be more competitive.
 
This is quite the soap opera..

Looking forward to the new Kotaku article as well as the 20th of course.

Btw, if Kotaku has updated Durango specs and they choose to release them on or near the 20th that would be quite err.. not quite professional. Might as well be in Microsoft's back pocket.
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
Is he suggesting there is more recent, different, spec info, or is he nudge-nudge-wink-wink-ing about 'special sauce'?

The former would be interesting, but it raises a question: isn't the Durango info published on VG Leaks recently sourced from him? Why not give updated info if that's what he's referring to?
 
I remember when I used to believe this guy back when the ebay shit was happening and the GAF insiders told me I shouldn't. So imma go with that. I hope its true though, this would boost third party games.
 
Is he suggesting there is more recent, different, spec info, or is he nudge-nudge-wink-wink-ing about 'special sauce'?

The former would be interesting, but it raises a question: isn't the Durango info published on VG Leaks recently sourced from him? Why not give updated info if that's what he's referring to?

I think he's bullshitting and a getting a laugh out of people reposting his shit across the internet.

seems pathetic to be honest. if he had genuine info, the least he could do is at least prove it or hint at what's changed instead of vague bullshitting.
 

KidBeta

Junior Member
Is he suggesting there is more recent, different, spec info, or is he nudge-nudge-wink-wink-ing about 'special sauce'?

The former would be interesting, but it raises a question: isn't the Durango info published on VG Leaks recently sourced from him? Why not give updated info if that's what he's referring to?

I wouldnt believe a word he said, he has not got much correct this generation.

But for clarity.

The vgleaks information has come from a durango last February in 2012. they got there hands on the whitepaper somehow.
 
Is he suggesting there is more recent, different, spec info, or is he nudge-nudge-wink-wink-ing about 'special sauce'?

The former would be interesting, but it raises a question: isn't the Durango info published on VG Leaks recently sourced from him? Why not give updated info if that's what he's referring to?
I thought he was the source of Kotaku's Orbis information.

In which case, on further thought, means his Orbis information is rather outdated - the specs Kotaku posted were the older "DVKT-KS000K (“Initial 1″)" devkit.
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
The vgleaks information has come from a durango last February in 2012. they got there hands on the whitepaper somehow.

I was under the impression that SuperDAE collaborated with VGLeaks. That he was giving info to them and to Kotaku. I may be wrong but I was under the impression the VGLeaks Durango info came from him, however old it is.
 
I think he's bullshitting and a getting a laugh out of people reposting his shit across the internet.

seems pathetic to be honest. if he had genuine info, the least he could do is at least prove it or hint at what's changed instead of vague bullshitting.


He said to wait for kotaku. Probably sold the story to them.
 

Norml

Member
lol at the question to this.

JAjDkH8.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom