That's pretty interesting...
You have been saying that the eSRAM is cache, and latency is solved by using a cache, so why the eSRAM couldn't help with that? :smile2:
I read here that the eSRAM is like 0.4% of the system memory, and that is appallingly low and contrasts strikingly with the total amount of memory.
However, both VGLEAKS documents and the hardware architects emphasised low latency as a key design of the console. :smile2:
The documents say clearly that some great benefits of the 32MB eSRAM are related to latency in preference to bandwidth, and that would be smart given the figures we have at hand with the Xbox One. :smile2:
For instance, X360's EDRAM buffer has 256GB/S of bandwidth, which is an immense amount of bandwidth, even if only for a relatively small amount of storage.
We don't know the figures of latency of the Xbox 360, nor Xbox One. But I think the ESRAM was meant for this especially when you consider that the PS4 could go with 1TB/s of bandwidth if they wanted to.
Microsoft took this approach, but decided to go with less bandwidth. Theory? Latency was preferential compared to bandwidth? :smile2: