Is DirectX throttling Xbox 360 performance?

[liolio]

Just how different do you expect the GPU to be?

at the end of the day nvidia offer a single driver for all their gpus so I doubt they are that radically different as stuff that works on RSX won't work on a new GPU.

Are we also expecting the next xbox to include a PowerPC CPU too?

that's a strong possibility imho.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Suspicions were first aroused by a tweet by EA Vancouver's Jim Hejl who revealed that addressing the Xenos GPU on 360 involves using the DirectX APIs

Ummm, Xbox = DirectX box. That was the starting ground. Is it any wonder the thing is running DirectX?

 

[TheChefO]

Won't games that rely on the 360's EDRAM run into problems, or are you assuming that they're going to dedicate the same amount of EDRAM to the next console?

Yes.

In fact, I would expect at least a bump in EDRAM to be able to render 720p w/ 2xAA, but likely up to 16mb to handle 1080p w/ 2xAA in two passes.

 

[joker454]

Won't games that rely on the 360's EDRAM run into problems, or are you assuming that they're going to dedicate the same amount of EDRAM to the next console?

If the next machine doesn't include ram as fast as the 360's, then we can just patch the game. In other words, user puts a 360 game into their 720, and we patch it to a version we've tweaked specifically to run on a non edram machine. We do this already with PS3 ports of 360 games, so we'd just do those same downgrades to the "720 compatibility" version of the 360 game. Then it runs the patched executable but uses assets off the game disc. This same patch incidentally could also bump up the msaa and improve texture filtering as well.

In fact, a select few games could get the royal treatment and get new texture packs. It would be a great way to get people migrate to the 720 sooner than later. Imagine if you could play your favorite 360 game with all your friends on live, except having it look better and run much smoother by playing it on the 720. The ability to do that is really helped by the simplicity of getting the base game working in the first place on this new hardware, and that's where a hardware abstraction layer really makes life easier.

I hear over and over again from developers, even in interviews, that on the 360 they can code much closer to the hardware than they can do on PC. Which would suggest that they do

I think that more suggests that the situation on the PC needs improvement.

 

[Demirug]

I am a little bit confused. Have the blog author ever read the XDK documentation? The DirectX version for the XBox 360 has full supports for command buffers.

 

[obonicus]

If the next machine doesn't include ram as fast as the 360's, then we can just patch the game. In other words, user puts a 360 game into their 720, and we patch it to a version we've tweaked specifically to run on a non edram machine. We do this already with PS3 ports of 360 games, so we'd just do those same downgrades to the "720 compatibility" version of the 360 game. Then it runs the patched executable but uses assets off the game disc. This same patch incidentally could also bump up the msaa and improve texture filtering as well.

Isn't this more or less the problem GS emulation is facing, the fact that it ain't so simple to workaround code that depends heavily on EDRAM?

And can we really expect developers to patch games that are several years old? MS certainly didn't make great efforts to improve Xbox classic support -- there are lots of buggy games and lots of games that just don't work.

In fact, a select few games could get the royal treatment and get new texture packs. It would be a great way to get people migrate to the 720 sooner than later. Imagine if you could play your favorite 360 game with all your friends on live, except having it look better and run much smoother by playing it on the 720. The ability to do that is really helped by the simplicity of getting the base game working in the first place on this new hardware, and that's where a hardware abstraction layer really makes life easier.

Yes, I'm sure publishers will be all over this. I mean, Activision certainly would want you to keep playing CoD6 even after CoD9 is out. At best Microsoft would be the only one to do this and even then I doubt it. It's not like Halo 2 got any sort of boost.

 

[betan]

The information on this thread is confusing even ignoring the original article.

The fact that 360 uses DirectX makes it better for backwards compatibility on next-gen Xbox,
yet at the same time 360 lets you program closer to the metal?

Am I really the only who requires better conflict resolution algorithm?

 

[joker454]

Isn't this more or less the problem GS emulation is facing, the fact that it ain't so simple to workaround code that depends heavily on EDRAM?

I don't know what the holdup is with PS2 emulation, but I'm sure it's "to the metal" approach didn't exactly help things. Ultimately, whatever the reason was, it's no longer relevant because a huge business opportunity was missed.

And can we really expect developers to patch games that are several years old? MS certainly didn't make great efforts to improve Xbox classic support -- there are lots of buggy games and lots of games that just don't work.

Like I said the original Xbox is irrelevant, there was never really any need to support it, it should not be used as an indicator to what future compatibility efforts will be. When it comes to patching old games, it just depends. I wager they will have full downloadable game support very early on, if not at launch for the 720. So there is incentive to get old games to work not just for compatibility (which Microsoft likes) but because we can resell them (which we like). Look at that other thread we talked in regarding PS3 ports, where people argued that it was still worth all the time money and effort to make PS3 ports even if they sell a pathetic 200k units. So...if a small team can port a bunch of older 360 games in a month and have them on XBLive marketplace for download sale, then why not?

Yes, I'm sure publishers will be all over this. I mean, Activision certainly would want you to keep playing CoD6 even after CoD9 is out. At best Microsoft would be the only one to do this and even then I doubt it. It's not like Halo 2 got any sort of boost.

Microsoft would be the best bet as they stand to gain the most. Others have to gain as well as I mentioned above. Plus, being able to play cod6 if you own it on a new console is a *good* thing, it would not cannibalize cod9 sales. It's not like an upgraded cod6 would visually compare to a new cod9. Keeping ip lovers happy and/or in the brand family is important. You don't want a PS3 situation where people can't migrate over to their favorite ip's and instead they start to look elsewhere for equivalents. That is a *bad* thing.

And of course, supporting an older 360 game on the 720 means these people can keep playing cod6 with their friends over Live that still just have 360's. In the past buying a new machine basically meant starting over. With the 720 they now have the ability not only to let you play your existing games, but play with your existing friends over your existing Live network. You can still stay fully connected with everyone even though you own a different box. That one feature alone would get tons of buyers to stick with the Xbox family and migrate to a 720 which of course Microsoft likes, but we like it also because then we can impulse sell them some of our old downloadable 360 games.

 

[liolio]

That would be great (improved experience for old games on next Ms system).
Kudos to them if they pull that properly

I think the a hardware fix of LHS would also improve performances quiet a lot if devs on this board are to be believed

 

[obonicus]

I don't know what the holdup is with PS2 emulation, but I'm sure it's "to the metal" approach didn't exactly help things. Ultimately, whatever the reason was, it's no longer relevant because a huge business opportunity was missed.

It's relevant because this is the tech forum, you can't just handwave and say 'we just patch it in'. We have thousand-post-long threads on what the next Xbox will look like, whether it'll have EDRAM or not and what the upsides and downsides are.

Bear in mind that I don't know if it's the same problem, it just sounds very similar and the sort of thing that might be very difficult to handle.

Like I said the original Xbox is irrelevant, there was never really any need to support it, it should not be used as an indicator to what future compatibility efforts will be. When it comes to patching old games, it just depends. I wager they will have full downloadable game support very early on, if not at launch for the 720. So there is incentive to get old games to work not just for compatibility (which Microsoft likes) but because we can resell them (which we like). Look at that other thread we talked in regarding PS3 ports, where people argued that it was still worth all the time money and effort to make PS3 ports even if they sell a pathetic 200k units. So...if a small team can port a bunch of older 360 games in a month and have them on XBLive marketplace for download sale, then why not?

Sure, that was the only case I could see it being interesting, if GoD, when the 720 releases is entirely available to the new console. Since we're going with the idea that patches may be necessary, I can't imagine that this will be the case and instead we'll see a small library to begin that is updated constantly. More or less like how Classics work, or, to be more optimistic, the way XBLA marketplace works.

Microsoft would be the best bet as they stand to gain the most. Others have to gain as well as I mentioned above. Plus, being able to play cod6 if you own it on a new console is a *good* thing, it would not cannibalize cod9 sales. It's not like an upgraded cod6 would visually compare to a new cod9. Keeping ip lovers happy and/or in the brand family is important. You don't want a PS3 situation where people can't migrate over to their favorite ip's and instead they start to look elsewhere for equivalents. That is a *bad* thing.

Actually, the early releases on a console very much tend to be simply upscaled versions of the old game. I highly doubt 3rd parties will be giving them away for free. Especially since this involves asset creation, which has been described on these boards very often as the most costly part of game production. Here the platform holder interests don't necessarily match the publisher's interests.

And of course, supporting an older 360 game on the 720 means these people can keep playing cod6 with their friends over Live that still just have 360's. In the past buying a new machine basically meant starting over. With the 720 they now have the ability not only to let you play your existing games, but play with your existing friends over your existing Live network. You can still stay fully connected with everyone even though you own a different box. That one feature alone would get tons of buyers to stick with the Xbox family and migrate to a 720 which of course Microsoft likes, but we like it also because then we can impulse sell them some of our old downloadable 360 games.

Sure, that's the value of BC early on. You establish continuity for a library. That's important to Microsoft. Publishers want you to buy new games. You're talking about improving games from how they released -- I can see of no situation in which that'd be interesting to a 3rd party. Hell, I have trouble seeing Bungie or Epic with the bandwidth to do this, but maybe MS will have an internal team strong enough to handle it.

 

[liolio]

I don't think Edram will be that much of a problem, OK it provide 256GB/s worse of bandwidth.
It's the bandwidth Xenos render back ends need need to output AAx4 @720p, but latter GPU have made a way better use of bandwidth. I can't see predicated tiling being an issue either.
It's unclear if xenon as some hardware support for it but even in that case I think it could be emulated though compute shaders and the like. Ms would have to port the 360 API to their new GPU.
For more low level code it depends on how much "closed to the metal" is close to the metal, I don't know but low level optimizations could still still be fairly high level and pretty trivially recompiled to work on the new hardware.
On the Cpu side if Ms stick to a PowerPC, free perfs would be a given.

Anyway, Devs here are likely to have better clues but I nevertheless back up Obonicus while I would like it I'm not sure bringing too much improvmentwould serve publishers best interests. I think it's up to Ms to do most of the job.
I think the focus should be on making a wide range of titles interoperable. then they should improved performances (framerate and screen tearing mostly). If they did this I'll be happy.
Extra happiness could come though post processing and improved scaling, something like what Toshiba "super resolution" would be great when 1080p will be the dominant standard.
I have no hope for extra AA, and not much for AF (even if it would help IQ a lot along with a "super resolution" like solution).

 

[TheChefO]

I don't think Edram will be that much of a problem, OK it provide 256GB/s worse of bandwidth.
It's the bandwidth Xenos render back ends need need to output AAx4 @720p, but latter GPU have made a way better use of bandwidth. I can't see predicated tiling being an issue either.
It's unclear if xenon as some hardware support for it but even in that case I think it could be emulated though compute shaders and the like. Ms would have to port the 360 API to their new GPU.
For more low level code it depends on how much "closed to the metal" is close to the metal, I don't know but low level optimizations could still still be fairly high level and pretty trivially recompiled to work on the new hardware.
On the Cpu side if Ms stick to a PowerPC, free perfs would be a given.

Anyway, Devs here are likely to have better clues but I nevertheless back up Obonicus while I would like it I'm not sure bringing would serve publishers best interests. I think it's up to Ms to do most of the job.
I think the focus should be on making a wide range of titles interoperable. then they should improved performances (framerate and screen tearing mostly). If they did this I'll be happy.
Extra happiness could come though post processing and improved scaling, something like what Toshiba "super resolution" would be great when 1080p will be the dominant standard.
I have no hope for extra AA, and not much for AF (even if it would help IQ a lot along with a "super resolution" like solution).

Agreed.

I don't think any BC title will have upgraded visuals as it would cannibalize titles of the new box, but BC for online play will be key and should not be underestimated.


This abstraction allows MS a bit more flexibility on future HW directions.

Who knows, they may just stick with an expanded version of xenos, or may go somewhere radically different. Abstraction layer will help either way.

 

[AzBat]

If the next machine doesn't include ram as fast as the 360's, then we can just patch the game. In other words, user puts a 360 game into their 720, and we patch it to a version we've tweaked specifically to run on a non edram machine. We do this already with PS3 ports of 360 games, so we'd just do those same downgrades to the "720 compatibility" version of the 360 game. Then it runs the patched executable but uses assets off the game disc. This same patch incidentally could also bump up the msaa and improve texture filtering as well.

In fact, a select few games could get the royal treatment and get new texture packs. It would be a great way to get people migrate to the 720 sooner than later. Imagine if you could play your favorite 360 game with all your friends on live, except having it look better and run much smoother by playing it on the 720. The ability to do that is really helped by the simplicity of getting the base game working in the first place on this new hardware, and that's where a hardware abstraction layer really makes life easier.

That sounds awfully like the "forward compatibility" Microsoft touted last year. Hmmm. Me thinks that Joker is on to something...

Tommy McClain

 

[joker454]

...but I nevertheless back up Obonicus while I would like it I'm not sure bringing would serve publishers best interests. I think it's up to Ms to do most of the job.

True, if done it would most likely be to a game published by Microsoft. But you never know, money talks For example, lets say at the launch of the 720, that the hugely popular multi platform game du jour is Fallout 4, GTA5, or whatever. Would it be worth it to MS to cut them a check to add some extra functionality such that the same 360 game disc that works in a normal 360 happens to not only work on a 720 as well, but run slightly improved if run on a 720? Simple stuff like higher res, 60fps, more msaa, better af, stuff like that. Having a layer between the games and the graphics hardware opens up opportunities like this. It can be done without it as well, but it's just easier this way. That seems like good opportunity both for the console maker and the game maker.

 

[TheChefO]

True, if done it would most likely be to a game published by Microsoft. But you never know, money talks For example, lets say at the launch of the 720, that the hugely popular multi platform game du jour is Fallout 4, GTA5, or whatever. Would it be worth it to MS to cut them a check to add some extra functionality such that the same 360 game disc that works in a normal 360 happens to not only work on a 720 as well, but run slightly improved if run on a 720? Simple stuff like higher res, 60fps, more msaa, better af, stuff like that. Having a layer between the games and the graphics hardware opens up opportunities like this. It can be done without it as well, but it's just easier this way. That seems like good opportunity both for the console maker and the game maker.

I see your point, but I would also think that from a longterm viewpoint, it would be in MS's best interest to show higher attach rates on the new box, thus pushing as much software in that direction as possible.

My guess would be taking the same approach, but packaging it as a title for both xb360 AND xb720 ... thus counting it as an xb720 title which shows up better in a board room with suits. Either that or slightly altering it and repackaging solely for xb720, such as what was done with many of the xb360 launch games ...

 

[grandmaster]

In joker's example it is far more likely that the publisher will put a bit more budget into the 720 version and give it a bit more bling and release it as a SKU in its own right. Or simply port more of the features of the PC across.

While a 360 disc with bonus stuff for Xbox Next is very geeky and cool for us, I don't think it's great from a publishing perspective.

 

[Arwin]

You're all talking as if Microsoft didn't already do this with the 360, for instance Halo 2's 720p support.

 

[AlNom]

You're all talking as if Microsoft didn't already do this with the 360, for instance Halo 2's 720p support.

It was free msaa and upscale in the majority of Xbox Original cases, including Halo 2. But yes, such settings are fairly trivial to manage (res, aa, af).

The additional assets that joker and AzBat mention don't have to necessarily be an additional development expense for the next console where PC assets are already created at higher quality. They could simply offer those assets via Live... for free or as an optional microtransaction - for a small fee the end user can choose to download the better assets (or heck, make it free for those with a Gold Subscription, whatever... just an example), but otherwise have the base backward-compatibility built-in or available via profile download ala Xbox<->Xbox 360.

Everyone gets the resolution/AA/AF enhancement & backward compatibility whilst some can also opt to acquire the better assets. (I'm skeptical on "free" in the same vein as how the standard appears to now hover around $10 for 3 multiplayer maps when traditionally, such things would have been free on PC - The Witcher Enhanced Edition comes to mind as free texture/asset upgrades for consumers on PC... ).

 

[obonicus]

You're all talking as if Microsoft didn't already do this with the 360, for instance Halo 2's 720p support.

Yeah, but that's almost irrespective of the library used -- you can run PS2 games with tons of AF and AA and steady FPS on the PC. Not all of them, of course. (But then it's not like every single Xbox game was playable on the 360 -- in fact, some of the very best ones weren't.) You have people running Wii games at 720p and 60FPS, again on the PC.

 

[Arwin]

That's not the way it was for 360 however - Microsoft had a specific patch for Halo 2 that allowed such functionality through a bit of extra code, a kind of patch (just realised that it runs at a higher resolution than Halo 3 ). I think this is possible because already on Xbox1 you could patch games?