XB360 hasn't got a scaling chip?

[Truespeed]

To call this an embarrassment for Microsoft would be an understatement. Their own representatives claimed that the ANA/HANA was a hardware scaler chip in the ArsTechnica interview. They even went so far as to do a presentation for ArsTechnica and even show them the ANA chip itself. And now we learn that ANA/HANA is just a simple video output chip. All of the scaling is performed by the Xenos.

Now, either Microsoft knew this all along and hoped no one would find out or they have no idea what their hardware does because their employee's certainly didn't have any idea what the chip did. They deceived the public and the press by claiming the ANA/HANA was a hardware scalar chip and Eurogamer caught them in a lie.

 

[nAo]

It's not really a big deal to me, as long as the whole hw does what they always claimed, do we really care the scaler was implemented in Xenos or in another chip? I don't

 

[Mmmkay]

They deceived the public and the press by claiming the ANA/HANA was a hardware scalar chip

To what end? It doesn't change the functionality of the 360 by explaining the true nature of ANA/HANA. It may simply have been easier for PR to promote, to mislabel it as a scaler. You start to get too technical for the general press when you have to explain that scaling is performed on the GPU and then (H)ANA encodes it to the correct signal output. The point of their ANA presentation was to promote a feature that at the time, and kinda still is, not present in their competitor.


(Assuming Amir is correct)

 

[Truespeed]

To what end? It doesn't change the functionality of the 360 by explaining the true nature of ANA/HANA. It may simply have been easier for PR to promote, to mislabel it as a scaler. You start to get too technical for the general press when you have to explain that scaling is performed on the GPU and then (H)ANA encodes it to the correct signal output. The point of their ANA presentation was to promote a feature that at the time, and kinda still is, not present in their competitor.


(Assuming Amir is correct)

You're correct, it doesn't change the functionality of the 360 in the end, but it does bring into question the performance of the Xenos GPU when it also has to perform scaling. It's also an admission that their representatives were either ignorant of what the chip did (during their Arstechnica interview) or lied about it. They state to Arstechnica multiple times that the ANA is indeed a dedicated hardware scaler chip and even go as far as saying it's their secret weapon. They then attack the PS3 for not having no internal hardware scaler and flaunt the fact that they do.

The line about the ANA being a critical design decision was classic though.

We call it Ana. This is the scaling chip that's in the 360," he tells me.
It's odd to see it—a tiny little chip—but this may be one of the secret weapons the 360 has against the PS3. The PS3 has no internal hardware scaler, which means games that are 720p native can only be shown in 720p or 480p; there is no scaling up to 1080p or 1080i. This causes people with older HDTVs to have issues with the available resolutions, and keeps them from playing the games in anything but 480p. It's a vexing problem for a system that's supposed to be HD, and this issue is one of the most challenging that Sony faces. I ask the Microsoft guys how important it was for them to include a scaler in the 360.


"It was a critical design decision; we wanted the 360 to be high-definition, not just 1080p or some other standard. That's why we included component cables in the box; there is no HDTV that doesn't have a component in," said Greenberg.

 

[Dave Baumann]

You're correct, it doesn't change the functionality of the 360 in the end, but it does bring into question the performance of the Xenos GPU when it also has to perform scaling.

Why? Did you actually read this thread?

 

[nAo]

They then attack the PS3 for not having no internal hardware scaler and flaunt the fact that they do.

That's just FUD, most companies do that.

 

[Truespeed]

Why? Did you actually read this thread?

Are you implying that Xenos GPU scaling has no performance impact?

 

[Truespeed]

That's just FUD, most companies do that.

True, but most companies don't do what Microsoft did to Arstechnica. Seriously, it's going to be hard to gain the trust of Arstechnica after the con job they pulled in that presentation.

 

[DemoCoder]

I just find it remarkably delicious that their PR department is so friggin clueless. I don't know if it was deliberate or not, but obviously they were telling a story to the press about the hardware that was wildly inaccurate, and it went unanswered for ages, when obviously any engineer who had actually worked on the real HW and saw the press stories would have balked, and hopefully send an email up the management chain.

It could be that internally, they caught the mistake, but it was too late, over-eager promoters had already sold an inaccurate image to the public, and to come out with a correction would be both non-beneficial as well as potentially embarassing.

I'm betting the people responsible were sitting on it, meanwhile, Amir, being an engineer with a big mouth, can't resist tosssing in his two cents. I wouldn't be surprised if internally, some PR people are pissed at him.

This is right up there with the "Killzone trailer is real time" BS.

PR people should keep their mouth shut if they don't know facts, instead of answering interviewee questions with obvious confabulation.

 

[Carl B]

To what end? It doesn't change the functionality of the 360 by explaining the true nature of ANA/HANA. It may simply have been easier for PR to promote, to mislabel it as a scaler. You start to get too technical for the general press when you have to explain that scaling is performed on the GPU and then (H)ANA encodes it to the correct signal output. The point of their ANA presentation was to promote a feature that at the time, and kinda still is, not present in their competitor.

But it wasn't the general press that this was told to, it was Ars Technica. When you go to a tech site and sit down to do an interview about your 'scaler' chip, well... let's just say either the interviewee was unclear on the facts, or they purposefully blew a bunch of smoke up their ass. Because that is not a readership that should have any trouble understanding GPU-based operations.

Dave you're defending the confusion with regard to Amir vs Scott, but if that sort of out-and-out shell game took place in an interview of yours when you used to run this place, I mean... wouldn't you agree that you would feel that was uncool?

(Assuming Amir is correct)

Amir is ever a slippery eel; I think even more than his work with codecs, he was born the viral marketer. I've never seen so many attack-by-insinuation and non-denial denials type speech come out of any single living individual.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's also an admission that their representatives were either ignorant of what the chip did (during their Arstechnica interview) or lied about it.

Which isn't that uncommon. You get left hand's not knowing what right hand's do, and misunderstanding. eg. The infamous, unnameable E3 05 demo from Sony. We had different stories from different Sony spokespersons. Some people think they were deliberately lying. Some think that some spokesperson either misunderstood, or were just talking out their arse (these are human beings after all, and by the law of averages you'd expect someone to end up talking publically about something they don't really understand but perhaps think they do).

Ana isn't a scaling chip, but there's several reasons that could account for the misinformation in the Ars review. The real concern is if there's dedicated scaling hardware in Xenos so that game rendering isn't impacted on the specs we've been given, or if the scaling is handled by Xenos spending some of it's graphical powers on the task. As far as I can gather it's the former here - Xenos includes facilities to scale that aren't impacting normal operation, at least to anything but a negligable degree. Though no-one has actually come out and said 'look at this block diagram/die shot of Xenos. This bit here is the scaling logic, with a buffer of xxx kilobytes'!

 

[scooby_dooby]

These guys were not really PR, but at the same time, not Engineers either.

Scott Henson - Product Unit Manager for MS Game Technology Group
Aaron Greenberg - Group Product Manager for Xbox 360 and Xbox Live

 

[Truespeed]

I just find it remarkably delicious that their PR department is so friggin clueless. I don't know if it was deliberate or not, but obviously they were telling a story to the press about the hardware that was wildly inaccurate, and it went unanswered for ages, when obviously any engineer who had actually worked on the real HW and saw the press stories would have balked, and hopefully send an email up the management chain.

It could be that internally, they caught the mistake, but it was too late, over-eager promoters had already sold an inaccurate image to the public, and to come out with a correction would be both non-beneficial as well as potentially embarassing.

I'm betting the people responsible were sitting on it, meanwhile, Amir, being an engineer with a big mouth, can't resist tosssing in his two cents. I wouldn't be surprised if internally, some PR people are pissed at him.

This is right up there with the "Killzone trailer is real time" BS.

PR people should keep their mouth shut if they don't know facts, instead of answering interviewee questions with obvious confabulation.

Given the timely response by Microsoft when news first leaked that the PS3 may not have a internal hardware scalar I would say that this was a case of their PR department looking for a quick win without getting their facts in order. It's evident that no one knowledgeable about the 360 hardware was consulted before this salvo.

I do have to wonder what Amir thinks about this. Has he commented on this yet? Since his site was the main target of this propaganda I would think he would have something to say to Microsoft about their alleged presentation on the ANA.

 

[Tap In]

so Carl in one breath you say Scott was "lying" to Arstch in the next amir is not to be trusted. so who is correct in this story?

as has been said, it's too much detail to explain the nuances of the process when they were trying to make a simple (but true) point about the 360's abilities compared to a competitor's.

It seems to me those abilities were not lied about. Those wanting to read the short shrift version in their head and say it's the same as PS3 so "they lied" are mistaken IMO.

 

[Mmmkay]

But it wasn't the general press that this was told to, it was Ars Technica.

If I recall correctly, the same presentation was given to several sites. 1UP covered it separately, and Cnet had it a month before Ars published theirs.
http://news.com.com/2300-1043_3-6142310-1.html

 

[Carl B]

so Carl in one breath you say Scott was "lying" to Arstch in the next amir is not to be trusted. so who is correct in this story?

Oh I think Amir's right - it's just I'm making known my opinion of the man.

as has been said, it's too much detail to explain the nuances of the process when they were trying to make a simple (true) point about the 360's abilities compared to a competitor's.

Then you don't go to Ars for a feature, you to to Gamespot for a soundbite. These guys purposefully chose to wrap themselves in the credibility of a tech site, but they didn't hold up their end of the bargain.

It seems to me those abilities were not lied about. Those wanting to read the short shrift version in their head and say it's the same as PS3 so "they lied" are mistaken IMO.

The abilities are there, but for example when you read an article on B3D (or anywhere), is it the abilities you're concerned with, or is it the process? Certain sites cater to a more knowledgeable readership. I have my opinions on Ars, but that is a site where the readership (and the interviewers) would expect more from their interviewed 'experts.'

 

[Tap In]

As MMkay pointed out I too remember this story first getting legs on Cnet News.

here is the story

it was a story explaining how 360 was now capable of 1080p and comparing actual games side by side (for the first time) to the PS3. It was more an attempt to say... "see, after 18 mos of posturing, in the real world PS3's games are not head and shoulders above ours."

the chip was there to promote the new 1080p aspect.

 

[Carl B]

If I recall correctly, the same presentation was given to several sites. 1UP covered it separately, and Cnet had it a month before Ars published theirs.
http://news.com.com/2300-1043_3-6142310-1.html

Well, not sure if that changes my opinion. I think basically they shouldn't have gone to Ars holding that chip then, and making false claims as to its purpose. If you're going to do it to the mainstream media, I'm ok with that. But when you go the extra step to sit down and "show" the scaling chip in question to a site that knows all the ins and outs of such hardware, then... well, just tell it like it is or don't do it at all.

I'll put it like this: if *I* were the one who had conducted that interview, I'd be pretty pissed right now.

 

[Tap In]

Well, not sure if that changes my opinion.

look at the original cnet story... and read my edit... if i remember correctly the Cnet story was to merely compare the graphics real time between systems (when PS3 released).

It took the Arstec route iirc and the ANA story went in a different direction weeks later when the PS3 scaling fiasco blew up and people with HDtv's that got bumped down to 480p got pissed.

that's when the chip story took on a life of its own. :smile:

 

[Dave Baumann]

Dave you're defending the confusion with regard to Amir vs Scott, but if that sort of out-and-out shell game took place in an interview of yours when you used to run this place, I mean... wouldn't you agree that you would feel that was uncool?

I'm not really defending that point at all. The point being is that Amir saying something on a forum does not equate to "oh, there's no scaling hardware in 360", which is the conclusion that many are willing to jump to (but not, evidently the site that took Amir's comments).

However, I'm not convinced that either the Ars article or Amir is wrong. Amir is a video guy and he's answering questions related to to HD DVD handling / playback on 360. Video scaling is not display scaling - in a computing device like this, video scaling is usually performed before well before display scaling so that overalys can be done; when the full image is composited together this is then sent to the display scalar in order for everything to be scaled to the target resolution of the set.