News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[dobwal]

Why?

I have a strange habit of not including negative contractions when im one finger typing on my ipad. Sorry. Thats a very bad ideal as simply trying to run away competition using a capital advantage to produce a lossy product shows an inability to truly compete in a competitive marketplace. A stubborn competitor would just sit and live with a smaller market share until you deplete your capital. I think both Sony and Nintendo are capable of being very stubborn.

 

[Cjail]

What's the source for that quote?

Tomasz Gop, from this article.

I don't know of he is trustworthy or not; he is just working on game for Durango and it's one of the few devs I know of that didn't just say "no comment".

 

[XpiderMX]

Tomasz Gop, from this article.

I don't know of he is trustworthy or not; he is just working on game for Durango and it's one of the few devs I know of that didn't just say "no comment".

Like I said before, it is ambiguous, maybe he mean both consoles are vety similar, x86, 8GB ram, DX11 tech, etc.

 

[AlphaWolf]

If MS can overclock, why can't Sony on the same architecture?

Because they've played their hand?

And who says it's overclocked?

 

[(((interference)))]

I was thinking assuming that the leaked specs for Durango is a year old, can the peak compute performance of the gpu be increased by increasing the clock speed (would it take too long, in time for November)? From 800mhz to 1200mhz (1.85 TF)? 1600mhz (2.46 TF)?

They're not a year old, they're current as of the beta kits which went out a few months ago.

I don't think Microsoft needs an updated of the specs. The difference between the 2 hardwares won't be so big anyway: we are talking at the most of 20-30% .. It will be really hard to spot it for non-hardcores gamers. And i think we are talking of at least 100$ difference in the BOM of the 2 consoles.. it's huge. Microsoft will have a great advantage in the price positioning of the console. Which is what moves the bigger sales.

This is my thinking too, though MS seem to want to keep the difference in BOM for themselves rather than passing the savings onto consumers - if Thurrot is right on the pricing.

 

[(((interference)))]

This is why I don't believe that Forza 5 for Durango launch rumour:
http://www.vgleaks.com/rumor-pgr5-to-be-announced-on-21-may/

Lucid Games seems ready to announce PGR5 at the Xbox announcement, so unless MS wants to squander both their top tier racing franchises at launch, I don't think launcing with Forza 5 as well is too likely.

 

[Tap In]

I would hope so for their sake. But if the rumored $299 2 year $15/mo Live sub and $499 no sub box is true I'm not sure that'd be such a great advantage over a possible $399+ free online PS4. Look at the current gen. PS3 being $100+ (and even more at launch) than 360 held it's own worldwide and then some over the years.

Now, a $199 2 year sub and $299-$349 no sub Xbox.. that would make some bigger waves.

no way PS4 is less than $499

 

[Acert93]

no way PS4 is less than $499

You should put that in your sig!

 

[Tap In]

You should put that in your sig!

 

[Brad Grenz]

If 1000mhz clock speed is possible, then the gpu wold have peak compute performance of 1.57 TF. MIcrosoft could compare that to PS4's "balanced" peak compute performance of 1.4 TF, and say, "see xbox outforms ps4", if only for marketing purposes.

Except that "balanced peak" number is a pure message board invention, and if it had any validity you'd have to give a "balanced" number for Durango too, which in your example would be 1.17 TFlops.

 

[Acert93]

You are a brace soul!

 

[Tap In]

You are a brace soul!

nobody remembers when we were correct but they never let us forget when we are wrong, so yes not a fruitful venture.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Because they've played their hand?

Clocks are subject to change. If MS can get another 100-200 MHz from the APU, I don't see why Sony can't, at which point the argument of chasing higher clocks seems to fall down.

And who says it's overclocked?

bbot was just talking about MS upping their clocks to get competitive advantage with the rumoured PS4 specs. Ignoring the whole performance comparison debate, given reported similarities in architecture I don't see how MS could have the option to up the clocks a little but Sony do not, so that avenue seems a dead-end to me. If MS decide to up clocks to compete, Sony should be able to do the same thus undoing the performance advantage. The end result would be two platforms that run a little faster than they would otherwise be running, but also running hotter and possibly with a higher failure rate, and neither console company gaining from the move.

 

[Cjail]

If MS can overclock Durango so Sony can overclock PS4 simply no MS fanboy would consider the latter as a possibility.

 

[(((interference)))]

Yes, especially as the Durango chip is probably bigger than PS4, with the ESRAM, move engines and sound block all on there.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

To be fair, bbot was only talking about overclocking the GPU part. 18 CUs will be running hotter than 12 CUs, so there's probably more room for MS to eek the clocks forwards, but certainly not gargantuan steps. If there's room within the architecture for MS to get a massive increase, that same opportunity would exist in Liverpool. So maybe, if we're being realistic, MS could get another 50 MHz and Sony choose not to stress their cooling solution by matching.

 

[warb]

Is it not also possible that one could be willing to swallow lower yields than the other in chasing a higher GPU clock?

It doesn't seem necessary to achieve generally perceived parity, so I doubt they'd bother.

 

[Brad Grenz]

The problem is they'd be wasting a ton of money to barely move the needle. Why torpedo your production capacity just to make your system's paper deficit slightly smaller? It's foolhardy to waste potentially billions on the manufacturing of useless chips so that the Durango is only 400 GFlops behind PS4 instead of 600.

 

[Nisaaru]

The problem is they'd be wasting a ton of money to barely move the needle. Why torpedo your production capacity just to make your system's paper deficit slightly smaller? It's foolhardy to waste potentially billions on the manufacturing of useless chips so that the Durango is only 400 GFlops behind PS4 instead of 600.

With 20nm and 14nm steps in sight I don't think stressing the envelope is such a problem if they really want to. Personally I think it would be a mistake not doing so as their new designs seem to be far more scalable than the 360 or PS3 with multiple chips from different companies.

 

[AlphaWolf]

To be fair, bbot was only talking about overclocking the GPU part. 18 CUs will be running hotter than 12 CUs, so there's probably more room for MS to eek the clocks forwards, but certainly not gargantuan steps. If there's room within the architecture for MS to get a massive increase, that same opportunity would exist in Liverpool. So maybe, if we're being realistic, MS could get another 50 MHz and Sony choose not to stress their cooling solution by matching.

Right esram won't be using near the power of cu's at peak performance. And how much room each could raise clocks is going to depend on tolerance they've built into their design. It's not necessarily true that because one could raise clocks the other vendor has the same room without a major redesign.