[kagemaru]

Originally Posted by Proelite

In addition, would they have a need for additional GDDR5 or Edram?

I would think so, yes. Unless they want to run into many of the same issues devs had this gen with the PS3.

[aaronspink]

Originally Posted by Proelite

Question, what is the highest density g-spec DDR3 and how would they be able to get 8GB of it into a console?

You can currently use 4gb DDR3 devices in g-spec but MS is most likely targeting 2gb x16 devices currently due to cost. g-spec is basically just a limited subspec of the normal DDR3 using only a point to point connection without connectors which allows faster transmission frequencies.

[aaronspink]

Originally Posted by XpiderMX

Is DDR3 too low for videogames?

PTP DDR3 can run upwards of 2.6 Gb/s with potential to hit 3 Gb/s. You are looking at 96 GB/s on a 256b bus.

[torque]

Originally Posted by aaronspink

PTP DDR3 can run upwards of 2.6 Gb/s with potential to hit 3 Gb/s. You are looking at 96 GB/s on a 256b bus.

So its enough?

[XpiderMX]

Originally Posted by aaronspink

PTP DDR3 can run upwards of 2.6 Gb/s with potential to hit 3 Gb/s. You are looking at 96 GB/s on a 256b bus.

Ok thanks... And GDDR3? with a bigger bus than Xbox 360?

[ninelven]

Given the fixed resolution of 1080p & the adoption of alternate AA methods, it would be workable (if somewhat disappointing). I wouldn't expect 4xMSAA on AAA titles though.

[bgassassin]

Originally Posted by Ruskie

Weren't you the one they linked saying nextbox looks to be "high end PC" in comparison with the other two? Man this is always like this when next generation is near

Yes, it was in the post I responded to. And like mentioned, that was before I saw the "rough draft".

Originally Posted by XpiderMX

I don't know if ShockingAlberto (in NeoGAF) is legit, but he said that MS is going "batshit crazy"

He's also said that he's not "tech guy".

[AlStrong]

Originally Posted by aaronspink

g-spec is basically just a limited subspec of the normal DDR3 using only a point to point connection without connectors which allows faster transmission frequencies.

Just to clarify the technology & numbering:

GDDR4/5 is derived from DDR3
GDDR3 is derived from DDR2

[XpiderMX]

Originally Posted by bgassassin

Yes, it was in the post I responded to. And like mentioned, that was before I saw the "rough draft".



He's also said that he's not "tech guy".

Good point, but Epic, "raising the ceiling" and "generational leap" must have some meaning...

[tunafish]

Originally Posted by aaronspink

4 GB is simply not viable with current GDDR5. The chips required to do it aren't currently sampling.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you use normal GDDR5 memory modules as 16-bit chips? (Clamshell mode) That way, 256-bit bus, 16 2Gbit chips makes for 4GB ram.

Of course, this is really expensive, and I would be very surprised to see this in a console. But it's possible.

[Acert93]

Back on the 8GB thought train... what would be the best way to do that? 8GB DDR3 with eDRAM for the GPU? 6GB DDR3 and 2GDDR5? And what of AMD showing off some stacked memory last year for a "future" GPU? Could we not maybe see 256MB or 512MB of stacked memory for speed and then a larger pool of slower DDR3?

[shiznit]

For the Durango, would a two chip solution such as this be feasible:

chip one: CPUs + cache/eDRAM + fixed-function GPU components + memory interface
chip two: shader processors

High speed bus between them and you can always combine to SOC later in the life cycle.

[Acert93]

So where do you exactly want to cut this architecture? And how are you going to keep up the bandwidth (internal bandwidth is very high) and the latency (which is very low--and will become very high with off chip traces)?

[shiznit]

I'm not an expert at this, what do you call the grey bar above the memory controllers?

[itsmydamnation]

my guess would be a cross bar.

my uneducated guess is you really dont want to split it there, lots of wires running really fast == make the wire distances as short as possible.

you would want to split it in the location where least amount of data moves. its the whole AFR issue all over again.

[shiznit]

Good point, I was hoping for something exotic but if they are sticking with GCN unchanged that seems unlikely. The pastebin dual-gpu rumor got me thinking and I spoke too soon

[XpiderMX]

Can the HD 6670 (from IGN rumour) be the "not-so-powerful-GPU" in the latest Durango rumours?

Is this GPU like "6X" Xenos? Can a "very powerful" CPU + HD 6670 + 4/8GB be a good next gen console?

[torque]

Originally Posted by XpiderMX

Can the HD 6670 (from IGN rumour) be the "not-so-powerful-GPU" in the latest Durango rumours?

Is this GPU like "6X" Xenos? Can a "very powerful" CPU + HD 6670 + 4/8GB be a good next gen console?

Absolutely sure that they could make some pretty major changes to that card. However, raw horsepower and some features would still be missing.

[kalelovil]

Originally Posted by XpiderMX

Can the HD 6670 (from IGN rumour) be the "not-so-powerful-GPU" in the latest Durango rumours?

Is this GPU like "6X" Xenos? Can a "very powerful" CPU + HD 6670 + 4/8GB be a good next gen console?

If that rumour has any credence, then it must have been an early prototype.
There is no reason for Microsoft to go with Turks for the final release when Cape Verde is almost a drop in replacement (roughly the same TDP and die size) and 80% faster.

[liolio]

Even in something conservative, the hd 7750 is the botton line for gpu performance at this point.
Lower would be indeed a suicidal and that's even with an APU to back up.
That's my pov at least.

[RudeCurve]

Originally Posted by liolio

Even in something conservative, the hd 7750 is the botton line for gpu performance at this point.
Lower would be indeed a suicidal and that's even with an APU to back up.
That's my pov at least.

Agreed, 7750 is only capable of 819 GFLOPS. That is something I would expect for the WiiU.

http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/DESKT...on-7750.aspx#2

[bkilian]

Originally Posted by onQ

so about 200MB for Kinect 2?


(this will be on N4G in a hour lol)

I can't speak to resource usage of rumored future products, It was just a guess based on what it currently uses and how the system works, making some simple projections based on a theoretically increased fidelity. For all I know, the skeletal team could find some revolutionary new way to store the data that actually reduced the required RAM. It all comes back to how much you spend on pre-calculation and how many degrees of freedom your model has.

[Love_In_Rio]

Originally Posted by XpiderMX

I don't know if ShockingAlberto (in NeoGAF) is legit, but he said that MS is going "batshit crazy"



EDIt: Talking about ram... What about HMC ram? can it be possible for 2014 in a next gen console?

Well, "batshit crazy" doesn´t compute with a Cape Verde GPU. If Xbox next is truly such a beast we are talking a custom pitcairn with more CUs, without DP logic... ( that match with the rumor of being a more custom design ). Forget the idea of being a beast with only a great CPU. This gen at least has shown this with Cell and precisely has been MS which has been successful for chosing a future proof GPU like Xenos.

I think MS is trolling everybody with 6670 and such rumors.

Sony better go for the most powerful possible or will be trolled by MS and many "hardcore" soniers will go with MS.

About RAM, what avoids Sony from ditching GDDR5 and put also DDR3 with enough EDRAM to fulfill the needed bandwith?. Aren´t they on time to redesign it?.

[lefizz]

I have to agree with you. I really think there is an element of misinformation going on here.

The last generation worked especially well for MS because they built a very well balanced system. The CPU while weak in many areas worked well for what was really needed. And the GPU was very advanced for its days.

Why would they go from that to a system with huge ram, huge cpu performance and weak GPU? It makes no sense at all. Betting the farm on kinect doesnt make sense when they made most money lat gen out of convincing core gamers that the 360 was the place to be for high end, visual lush fps and action games. While of corse you can go the PS3 route and use extra performance in the CPU to help out the GPU, I cant see that as a reason to cut back on hte GPU.

I can see reasons to do many things, cut general purpose power for float as per the in order many core/thread route with VMX in the first. Made a lot of sense. But this gen throwing all your transistor budget at the CPU seems illogical to me.

[Platon]

The weak GPU stuff floating around make not much sense to me either. Kinect and stuff in all its glory sure, fine. It did make MS some money, it has sold fairly well and all that stuff and I am for sure not against them trying to improve upon it, make it an even bigger part of the whole xbox experience and jadda jadda, but at what cost? It must be possible to do all that but not gimp the console as perceived by the "core" gamers.

One would think that the Wii is a lesson learned. Was it huge fully successful? yes it was. Did it sell games? yes it did. Which is selling better now? the 360. Where are the most consumer $ being spent every month? the 360. In the end when everything is said and done MS made money from the 360, and is making more and more money from the 360 and that is all because of the core gamers for the most part.

The waving around your arms controls have been done now, it is not the new thing that it was when the Wii came out. You can't count on ma and grandma to stand in cue again to upgrade to the newest wave around your arms controls, they barely know what the difference is from one console to the other and what high definition is. What you can count on are the core gamers, will stand there to buy the next new tech, but most of them would most likely not stand in que either if the tech being offered is a low range card they have in their laptops at home.

If MS goes all out betting the farm on Kinect and the non cores, well that is definitely a bet worth the name, or maybe Epic convinced them that indeed software rendering is the future...