%s strikes yet again!Man these last few pages
If you want some lulz go here when this came up originally.
(Yes, I shamefully, drunkenly, couldn't figure out what was happening, either.)
%s strikes yet again!Man these last few pages
You're giving the gaming press way too much credit tho. They won't decide which console the average consumer will be buying.
Also, at this point I can't see the box selling ANYWHERE but NA, and not for the gaming parts. It's almost funny, if it wasn't so sad, how badly the Xbox One has been received in Europe. MS will face harsh problems here down the road anyway, due to Kinectspionage 2.0. The German consumer protection minister upfront demanded FULL INFORMATION about everything kinect does, which information will be recorded and how the data is used / shared. It received bad news in the mainstream media as well. And I don't have to tell you how interested europeans are in US TV, NFL, NBA and co do I?^^
Humans are bad at intuiting stats. But I'm not sure that what I've been reading these last few pages is a math issue.%s strikes yet again!Man these last few pages
Seems anandtech doesn't entirely disagree with my disdain for math. Agree to disagree, the math works both ways.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6972/xbox-one-hardware-compared-to-playstation-4/2
Sony gave the PS4 50% more raw shader performance, plain and simple (768 SPs @ 800MHz vs. 1152 SPs & 800MHz). Unlike last generation, you don't need to be some sort of Jedi to extract the PS4's potential here. The Xbox One and PS4 architectures are quite similar, Sony just has more hardware under the hood. Well have to wait and see how this hardware delta gets exposed in games over time, but the gap is definitely there. The funny thing about game consoles is that its usually the lowest common denominator that determines the bulk of the experience across all platforms.
SenjustsuSage was the guy arguing for the 8GB DDR3 + esRam combo versus unified 8GB GDDR5, saying something about latency being a big advantage for the former.
So in short - I don't have any confidence in anything he is saying.
You do remember this bit though:
From the same article, btw, just a few pages down: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6972/xbox-one-hardware-compared-to-playstation-4/5
anandtech is just using more and less whenever they refer to each system by name. So, if the sentence (or reference) starts with PS4 they say "more" and if the sentence starts with X1 they say "less." In this case the article itself is talking about X1, so they say "33% reduction in compute power."
Nonsense and bullshit. Both are perfectly accurate given correct context. There is no "accepting one over the other." To do so is idiocy.You can call it accurate either way, because the math does indeed work out both ways. I acknowledge that going from lower to higher gives you 50%, but people seem to not be interested in acknowledging the opposite as valid in anyway, which gives you 33%. You just choose to accept one over the other, as I choose to accept one over the other.
What you've been incessantly trying to do is convince everyone that one phrasing is "more accurate/correct." It is not.In conclusion, the math works both ways, as I've said, and have been saying the entire time. Glad we could put this issue to rest lol.
Yup. And that cap was probably a result of proactively addressing yield issues to insure enough supply.
Even if this is 100% true, it doesn't make it impossible for the Xbone to have games that will impress consumers enough to get them to buy the box, it just widens the performance gap of the two machines that we already knew about a bit more.
It's not worth telling juniors to go to hell or making ban bets over. Nor is it immediately going to make PS4 games have double the resolution/framerate of their Xbone counterparts.
Not certain of this. Given the current 'long generation', I suspect that a worldwide launch delay longer than a couple weeks will cause terrible losses. MS would be better served to simply abandon Japan and accept defeat across Europe (including UK) to concentrate where its console's particular features would work best, namely the USA.
In conclusion, the math works both ways, as I've said, and have been saying the entire time. Glad we could put this issue to rest lol.
Yup. And that cap was probably a result of proactively addressing yield issues to insure enough supply.
Even if this is 100% true, it doesn't make it impossible for the Xbone to have games that will impress consumers enough to get them to buy the box, it just widens the performance gap of the two machines that we already knew about a bit more.
It's not worth telling juniors to go to hell or making ban bets over. Nor is it immediately going to make PS4 games have double the resolution/framerate of their Xbone counterparts.
Dudes re-writing the rules of maths now.
Impressive stuff.
a downgrade of the bus speed is one thing, a downclock of the actual GPU is something else.
You mean even if it's 0% less than true.
What the hell kind of engineering nightmare have they created? Weaker, more expensive and more difficult to produce than the PS4. Is there a precedent for this kind of thing? I guess the GeForce FX line back in the day?
I doubt that's how it works. MS didn't reserve a set number of "flops". That's impossible. They most likely reserved a portion of a CU, or a whole CU unit. Giving XBone 11 out of 12 CUs for games.Hmmmm
Currently we know that 10% of GPU resources are dedicated to the OS for the Xbox One. Even with a GPU down clock I can't see MS reducing the number of GPU FLOPS dedicated to the OS so I think its reasonable to expect that the # of FLOPS dedicated to the OS would stay fixed regardless of a down clock.
10% of 1.229TFLOPS = 0.123TFLOPS dedicated to the OS.
A 100-200MHz reduction in the GPU clock speed would bring it down to 0.922-1.075TFLOPS.
Subtract that from 0.123TFLOPS and you got 0.799-0.952TFLOPS left for games.
Could someone explain what a "yield problem" is? I'm lost on the subject.
Could someone explain what a "yield problem" is? I'm lost on the subject.
Let say you bake 100 cakes.
You expected 60 cakes to be good enough.
But it seems only 30 cakes are good enough.
You have a problem![]()
Early production yield issues were a near certainty with such a complex chip. Though my take is that it would be better for MS to simply accept restricted initial supply than to downgrade the console's capabilities (aiming for process maturation leading to better yields). Having the early buzz about their console be "It's really weak and it sucks!" is worse than not having enough consoles to sell everywhere.If the yield problem is deeper than suggested and the downclocking is only a bandaid, a delay of a few months will probably cost less than a repeat of the RROD disaster (now with downclocking!).
It took me a while to process this before I spit coffee on my keyboard, asshole.![]()
Let say you bake 100 cakes.
You expected 60 cakes to be good enough.
But it sees only 30 cakes are good enough.
You have a problem![]()
Let say you bake 100 cakes.
You expected 60 cakes to be good enough.
But it seems only 30 cakes are good enough.
You have a problem![]()
Are those 30 cakes 50% less powerful than some other cakes?
Apple came out of nowhere and scared them shitless, thats what happened, and scared MS is stupid MS.
They're a company in turmoil, scrabbling around for a niche that Apple or Google can't knock them out of, the presumed chance to get in every american home with a TV must seem like the greatest thing imaginable for them.
The core means nothing. Wii proved that going for the mass-market can get you the glory.
Can get.
I've posted cites that the PS4 would be using Stacked DDR3. This turned out to be wrong in the short term because it's not ready. Everyone is expecting Sony to move to Stacked DDR3 at the first refresh and that will reduce power and cost.Not really. MS went with cheap ddr 3 ram and a larger die for edram. As the die size decreases with each micron drop they are able to fit more chips on a wafer .
While sony's die will also get smaller their ram GDDR wont go down in price as quickly since its mostly used in video cards and the ps4 itself will be the main driver of cost reduction. Lets also not forget that they are using a cutting edge density.
Sony is most likely going to be stuck with the same amount of gddr chips for the majority of this generation.
Those cakes have sufficient secret sauce sprinkled on them, the others do not.
Man, what happened to "Devs have more confidence in MS, are unclear about PS4" and "It'll be a wash"?
So the APU-die is created within too low margins, so too many aren't useable? And a solution to that is down-clocking, since heat is the issue? Or otherwise more chips can be used?
Those cakes have sufficient secret sauce sprinkled on them, the others do not.
Man, what happened to "Devs have more confidence in MS, are unclear about PS4" and "It'll be a wash"?
^OooooohoooOh.
IF BruceLeeRoy and Thuway are saying this, I'm on board.
I've heard the exact same thing as Thuway.
GPU is getting DC from 2 different sources. One that told me several weeks ago and the other that reconfirmed yesterday.
Could someone explain what a "yield problem" is? I'm lost on the subject.
Really hoping they don't go through with this in the final units. Really hoping this isnt true, and I don't even plan on buying an XBone. This will hurt multi platform games and therefor PS4 as well. Most developers will program to the lowest common denominator. I see this being REALLY bad for multiplatform games, which is what 75% of people play.I've heard the exact same thing as Thuway.
GPU is getting DC from 2 different sources. One that told me several weeks ago and the other that reconfirmed yesterday.
Only poster I saw say that was Arthur Gies
Everything about the PS4 screams AMD 2014 design released a year early with compromises.
MS made a terrible mistake with DDR3.
Are those 30 cakes 50% less powerful than some other cakes?
Are those 30 cakes 50% less powerful than some other cakes?
I've heard the exact same thing as Thuway.
GPU is getting DC from 2 different sources. One that told me several weeks ago and the other that reconfirmed yesterday.
Whoever called this guy Reiko 2.0 was bang on.
Also they contain 50% more raisins, creating a rift for the target customers.
No way bro, Xbone would only be 50% less powerful.Sony will end up with a 100% more powerful console with the same silicon budget.
Early production yield issues were a near certainty with such a complex chip. Though my take is that it would be better for MS to simply accept restricted initial supply than to downgrade the console's capabilities (aiming for process maturation leading to better yields). Having the early buzz about their console be "It's really weak and it sucks!" is worse than not having enough consoles to sell everywhere.
Yep. The whole thing looks like a big mistake and it started from the planning and design stages. The whole foundation is flawed. You can pretty much nail the blame on the "media all in ONE console" vision. They prioritized this and it cost them big time. All this bullshit that's distracted from what this thing should of focused on, GAMES. With out all this TV bullshit, they would of never mandated 8GB of RAM back in 2010, forcing them to come up with this ridiculous esRAM solution.This entire project is starting to look like a colossal failure from a design standpoint. If this is true, Sony will end up with a 100% more powerful console with the same silicon budget. MS made a terrible mistake with DDR3.
This. Taken with Matt's comment, seems pretty solid.ill go with leeroy for now
Damn. I am torn between these cakes. I think they should retire and rethink the cake production. Don't want to jump into the next-generation half baked now.
Not if your goal was always to beat Google and Apple to the punch addressing the TV audience at-large, rather than competing head-to-head with Sony for core gamers. This has always been about establishing a beachhead vs. Google and Apple--the sooner, the bigger, the better, esp. in terms of marketshare--and they're clearly more powerful than anything those guys have brought to market.
Like I've said in the past many times, while Microsoft was making core gamers happy and selling "just" 80M units in the process, Apple and Google sold ONE BILLION of their devices that people are using as "second screens," which are competing for consumers' attention in the TV room right now. Microsoft's shareholders see that as the biggest threat to everything Microsoft has done thus far, spending the last 15 years and billions of dollars establishing the brand in the living room. Microsoft isn't in the business of selling 80-100M units when the other guys are selling over a billion combined. That doesn't interest them. The "core gamer" space has proven too small.
I don't understand, authur posted here in the past, before he lost a bet and wouldn"t pay up.Nope - it was lherre afaik. (the wash part at least)
I've heard the exact same thing as Thuway.
GPU is getting DC from 2 different sources. One that told me several weeks ago and the other that reconfirmed yesterday.