My understanding is that the hypervisor OS should be better at guaranteeing resources than an OS like Windows would. So if the option is to run the game in parallel with other apps in Windows, or run the game as its own VM on a hypervisor, I think the latter option is probably better. I don't think the PS360 model of having the console reboot into a small OS every time you start a game is viable anymore. The self-described hardcore may want that, but it would be more limiting in terms of the breadth of the capabilities.
Xbox One (Durango) Technical hardware investigation
- Thread starter Love_In_Rio
- Start date
- Status
My understanding is that the hypervisor OS should be better at guaranteeing resources than an OS like Windows would. So if the option is to run the game in parallel with other apps in Windows, or run the game as its own VM on a hypervisor, I think the latter option is probably better. I don't think the PS360 model of having the console reboot into a small OS every time you start a game is viable anymore. The self-described hardcore may want that, but it would be more limiting in terms of the breadth of the capabilities.
I don't doubt it. But I hope it can guarantee resources *way* better than Windows can.
True. //Warning/Silly Ideas Follow// But I would use a small SoC like RK3188/A4-5000 Kabini/A31 (separate CPU/GPU/Memory resources).
I am not sold (yet) that this is going to be the type of experience expected on a console.
I might be perfectly happy with it in x months, just worried about that particular aspect right now.
Last edited by a moderator:
Excellent find. Thank you.
Yes. Thanks.
It will take time for me to digest. (In case it is not perfectly obvious I am on the hardware end of things, never ever going to code an OS or Hypervisor in this or the next life.)
Yes but I think it is way too late for adding CU's and ROPs. To start in June with a 5 billion transistor count SoC and add another billion with a July tape-out after 24 hour days and first silicon in August with super hot blitz lots and first characterization in September... ...oh wait you can't ship for Christmas. Besides, 6 billion transistors... ...don't even mention 768. Four months is a nightmare to make major changes to much smaller chips.
Unless they designed and fabricated multiple designs but I don't see that as practical. They announced second, they would not announce the lesser of several possible versions and then back track and switch to another. [I mean multiple designs in the same family. There are suggestions that another design in a different family was fabrication for a cancelled TV project.]
Either it is what it is and the rumors are false or there are some mild up-clock and added memory investigations underway.
In the end it should be a fun generation either way.
COPS N RAPPERS
Regular
Ah yes, the 12 Gb rumor. Does this mean it's going to be a 4.9 Tflops machine?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=58138440&postcount=1
that rumor is sooooo May 20th, :smile2: it'd be interesting if it were true though.
Entirely possible someone is just messing with us.
Especially after the latest paste bin post a few minutes ago in the non-hardware Xbox One news/rumors thread.
(((interference)))
Veteran
Well we know that's complete hogwash...
I heard it from eastmen and another person who has a dev source.
It's not confirmed though, they are apparently seeking feedback from devs on the amount of RAM and other stuff.
I heard it from eastmen and another person who has a dev source.
It's not confirmed though, they are apparently seeking feedback from devs on the amount of RAM and other stuff.
Last edited by a moderator:
There are no shared CPU resources. The game gets 100% of it's allocation of cores, with no OS overhead on any of those cores. The only shared bit is the L2 cache on the cores that share the same module as the OS cores. Developers are advised to not run code on those cores that relies on predictable cache behavior. The OS's effects on memory bandwidth should be negligible, especially during full-screen and docked game play. If you full screen an app, the game gets resources taken away from it, but since it should be paused, and isn't rendering to screen at that point, it shouldn't matter.
We started speculating hypothetically back in march after Sony's reveal, hypothetical spec bumps that could make the One more competitive on paper. At this late date i seriously doubt any bump is being considered, clocks and all, all parts are being stockpiled and are heavy in final validation. If it was then that decision was made many months ago and has been kept pretty hush. But like 99% of One spec increases rumors this too will probably pass.
Problem is the point they decided the new specs is often several weeks/months before it leaks, assuming it leaks at all.
(((interference)))
Veteran
If it was merely wishful thinking, don't you think we could do better than a measly 75 mhz upclock and more slow RAM, lol...
Albert Panello posted again (actually on 7/1, I just hadn't seen it). Thought it might be worth putting here, clearing up his other post to some degree.
http://67.227.255.239/forum/showpost.php?p=67515701&postcount=973
http://67.227.255.239/forum/showpost.php?p=67515701&postcount=973
COPS N RAPPERS
Regular
I was sort of thinking that, though i'm particularly neutral on the memory rumors being too far fetched and the posters involved; since the purpose of this thread is to be open to speculation.
To counter some of the wishful thinking, On the same day of the downplaying of specs, on digital foundry's site they did speak with the engineers who talked about an 88% theoretical increase for memory. it seems they weren't adjusting speeds to small increments. they weren't afraid to let their experiments expand so this gives plenty of reason why they could be letting their engineers toy with other stuff as well, to a similar scale.
so who knows how far down the rabbit hole may be with the engineers, and what tests they're conducting.
Themrphenix
Newcomer
I was told to correct my post earlier by my insider!The extra 5 gigs are reserved,but that does not mean that all extra 2 gigs are for the OS!
I apologize I miss spoke on that!
I apologize I miss spoke on that!
So...
help me do the math here.
Original spec: 8GB - 5GB/3GB split
your first post was: 12GB - 7GB/5GB split
what's the math now?
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
I think they are saying that the 12GB dev kit was a PC (Some thing like 8 Core Sandybridge-E, 7970 GPU, 2x4GB DDR3 + 2x2GB DDR3. Not sure, just what I read and some interpolation).
Could someone clarify? Was/is there a dev kit like the Wired photos with the actual SoC and 12GB? Like the 360 dev kit with 1GB and Xenon/Xenos, not Power Mac.
Now perhaps they end up with 16x4G modules and 16x2G modules on the other side of the board. Maybe they already have it, and it is in the dev kit. Maybe the LED and threaded SMA connectors in the Wired photos is a dev kit not production version. Maybe if you unscrew that motherboard and look at the other side there are land patterns for 16 more memory modules already. But 32 memory modules total
Maybe they already thought about this and did it. Perhaps that Wired photo is the 2nd gen dev kit with alpha LED, 2x threaded SMA and 4 more GB of DDR3 soldered on the other side of the board where we can't see it.
So when the panic broke out the engineers said: "Ok, build with the dev kit BOM minus the alpha LEDs, minus the two threaded SMAs and change the clock multiplier to X. Time for lunch."
Imagine they launch with those alpha or beta kits finally with that monster Intel CPU and discrete graphics card!. In this fantasy realm could it even be possible legally to say AMD we don´t want that APU anymore?.
Themrphenix
Newcomer
7Gb for games
3 or 4 for OS
Idk what the other gig is reserved for if they do go with the 12Gb and 900Mhz GPU and ESRAM.
- Status
Similar threads
