News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[MrFox]

How is it a false equivalence if the majority of your bandwidth consumption can be controlled in a manner that can consume the bandwidth of the 32MB effectively and limiting the consumption required by the external RAM? This is the very nature by which a TBDR operates, but even well controlled immediate mode renderers can make effective use of it, especially in a closed platform.

I'm not saying it's not useful. I'm not dismissing it.

If [complex hypothetical]... if you need a hypothetical to make it equivalent, it means it's not. If the bandwidth required for that 32MB is about 3 times more than the rest of the memory, sure you would get that bandwidth. Is that a reasonable ratio? In what kind of code is it attainable? I don't know, and it depends. That's why it's a false equivalence.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I'm not saying it's not useful. I'm not dismissing it.

If [complex hypothetical]... if you need a hypothetical to make it equivalent, it means it's not. If the bandwidth required for that 32MB is about 3 times more than the rest of the memory, sure you would get that bandwidth. Is that a reasonable ratio? In what kind of code is it attainable? I don't know, and it depends. That's why it's a false equivalence.

Yeah, but in what kind of code can you achieve the peak bandwidth of any memory? If you're just talking theoretical peaks, there's nothing wrong with his numbers. If you're talking practical, then that's different, but the competition isn't going to be hitting peak all the time either.

 

[Bigus Dickus]

Some people are going to dismiss the lack of specs, or the inferior paper specs, or even the superior paper specs using whatever rationale/argument suits the situation. Some people are going to down a company's PR for not engaging the community and openly discussing hardware, and then still criticize them when they do. Some people are going to crucify a company for certain policies, and then when that company listens to the wishes of the customer base and responds accordingly, crucify them again for being indecisive or backstepping.

There's a name and a reason for why some people think this way, and there's good reason to ignore them. Panello's comments certainly bring in the vs. discussions, but I didn't think this thread was the place for it.

 

[Tchock]

I don't know, and it depends. That's why it's a false equivalence.

Then it's not.

The combined bandwidth maybe possible. Perhaps there are cases where the ROPs are rendering out of the SRAM while the ALUs use the main memory bandwidth for a GPGPU computation. If you can execute out of both pools of RAM simultaneous, then I say you can add the bandwidth.

Forget about GPGPU, but this is close. The DDR3 pipe does the light, pre-render / fixed asset fetches, render targets go into ESRAM for rapid re-access and post-processing. I'd rather trust MS' confidence in profiling how renderers use bandwidth than some random juvenile GAF posters...

 

[Cjail]

It's not really relative or subjective. It's measurable.

It's true that the "noise" produced by the XBO can be measured but "quiet" is a definition of quality not quantity and thus it's subjective.
Not to mention that perception differs form individual to individual.

 

[Nesh]

Albert panelo again on gaf..


[/INDENT]

I expect you guys to confirm and comment on the specs regardless of who and why he said it instead of arguing about MS.

 

[liolio]

Wow I'm floored at MSFT communication woes...
Really they are engaging anonymous people on a forum and trying to have rational conversation?
It is ridiculous in my opinion, you can't beat fanboys and their sheer number, pretty much like you can't have a donkey to drink when he doesn't want they will repeatedly (and purposefully I would add) misunderstand whatever you say, use multi quoting to show there inability to understand a coherent stream of sentences that runs for more than a couples of lines, and so on.
With time I wonder why at the beginning of the last gen I loose time "discussing" with people which opinion was obviously pre-made, were awfully biased and ultimately wrong on top of it. It always comes down to personal attacks, why is this guy surprised?
Really there is nothing special or unexpected about it.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

No. The treshold of "quiet" is subjective, because each person has a different level of tolerance and experiences to call something quiet. It's a subjective word.

Stupid argument because exactly the same response can levied against the claim the console is big. Obviously in this case we aren't talking scientific metrics measured to a standard other than what people perceive (as you say, subjective). It's 'big' because it's larger than other comparable devices. It's 'quiet' because it's quieter than other devices at a minimum, and reportedly nigh-silent.

As for MS's PR message, I don't see it as changing, but it's different information for different people. Penello is basically engaging his corner of the market with information pertinent to what they seem to want to hear - clearly talking to the GAFfers about what they'll see on screen hasn't been enough for them to stop trying to understand paper specs as a whole, so he's presented them with a selection of metrics chosen to prove there's more to XB1 than just a 50% shortfall in CUs. MS aren't changing voice to talk to the public about specs. As Liolio says, it's pointless really. Corporations are still coming to terms with the dialogue that the internet is enabling with consumers, and they have to learn when to engage and when to draw the line and stay silent, I guess.

As for Penello's specs, people shouldn't discuss the numbers here. Firstly, it's a technical discussion rather than a rumour. Secondly, it's primarily a versus discussion comparing XB1 to PS4, something we're not doing on this forum yet because it's stupid to compare unreleased products (we can barely compare released products!). Let the GAFfers claim one is far more powerful than the other based on the simplest of metrics. Hopefully, the majority of us here care not which to stick a monolithic label on and are more interested in the specifics and where one box has an advantage or disadvantage, and what that leads to in software.

 

[BadTB25]

Some people are going to dismiss the lack of specs, or the inferior paper specs, or even the superior paper specs using whatever rationale/argument suits the situation. Some people are going to down a company's PR for not engaging the community and openly discussing hardware, and then still criticize them when they do. Some people are going to crucify a company for certain policies, and then when that company listens to the wishes of the customer base and responds accordingly, crucify them again for being indecisive or backstepping.

There's a name and a reason for why some people think this way, and there's good reason to ignore them. Panello's comments certainly bring in the vs. discussions, but I didn't think this thread was the place for it.

You're making to much sense.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Some people are going to down a company's PR for not engaging the community and openly discussing hardware, and then still criticize them when they do.

An important point when talking about discussion forums is that it can be different people arguing different points, but the forum is treated as a singular entity. So you will have Penello talk about the games, and Person A say, "you're avoiding the hardware issue." Then Penello posts specs and Person B says, "you shouldn't be talking about hardware." And unless one is keeping tabs on who is saying what, it's impossible to properly parse the conversation into individuals with their POV, and the identity of all the opinions becomes a collective 'you'. It's 'you (all) ask us to talk more about hardware, and when we do, you (all) complain)'. Or "you (all) said this was a bad idea" when that 'all' represents a few posters out of thousands of registered users.

It's impossible to please all the people all the time. It's also nigh impossible to hold individual conversations with people on a public discussion board, which is where dialogue between corporations and the public is fighting a losing battle.

 

[Jwm]

^^ Not to mention a +100 degree of difficulty in where he is attempting to communicate.

 

[BoardBonobo]

IMO, they really just need to shut up and concentrate on getting the product out before they reduce it to a bunch arguments and a bad idea horribly executed.

All these about faces and attempts to reason with the hoi polloi is never going to work.

First price isn't important then it's 'a hundred dollars won't make a difference'... I thought you said price wasn't important?

'It's meaningless to compare hardware specs' and 'the playing field is level'. That becomes 'were not going to concede a 30% advantage' and 'let's just compare hardware specs shall we'

It's like MS are saying 'look, their foot might be 50% bigger but ours fits in our mouths easier. But whilst I'm demonstrating this I'll have to talk out of my arse for a while'

 

[Shifty Geezer]

What MS should have done was stuck to their vision and backed it with some balls. It's remarkable how much they've flopped about under pressure from a tiny minority of consumers with big internet gobs. Shows a complete lack of strong leadership and conviction. I can't think of any similar products swayed by the public. Maybe something like 'Snakes on a Plane', according to heresay, which was supposed to have been influenced by internet feedback during development instead of professional writers doing what they do best and get paid to do.

As I've mentioned before, I'm guessing there was internal conflict as MS over the direction the console should go, and the traditionalists probably used early internet feedback to support their arguments of reverting to a traditional console model.

 

[Cjail]

MS is still in a better position than Ninty and WiiU even if during the last months they have done may things wrong.
This is something to be happy about

 

[Rangers]

It's sad Ms could have avoided this by adding, lets say, 2CU's. With the upclock that would have put them ~1.5 TF, and it really would have likely been a case of neither machine that much better.

What would 2 CU's have cost, 50 cents? They even could have stayed with 16 ROPs.

 

[fehu]

A new redesign + testing + delayed launch would have costed much more
plus you can add what you want, but to keep efficiency you have to change the memory system too

And btw under the one's board there's a full gpu and another 8GB of memory

 

[Rangers]

A new redesign + testing + delayed launch would have costed much more
plus you can add what you want, but to keep efficiency you have to change the memory system too

And btw under the one's board there's a full gpu and another 8GB of memory

I'm talking about early enough in the design phase, obviously.

And they could keep the same memory layout.

They just should have been thinking more about ensuring a competitive power level.

 

[Bagel seed]

It's like MS are saying 'look, their foot might be 50% bigger but ours fits in our mouths easier. But whilst I'm demonstrating this I'll have to talk out of my arse for a while'

I think the reason for that is one hand really just doesn't know what the other is doing. And each department is taking turns at both managing the message and the product.

 

[Rangers]

I think the reason for that is one hand really just doesn't know what the other is doing. And each department is taking turns at both managing the message and the product.

Penello's posts?

Come on. There was ZERO wrong with them (other than he shouldn't be on GAF in the first place, since it's basically a hive bent to attack MS)

It's funny the way people talk is like MS is dead and 1,000 times buried. But they talked the same about 360 and it outsold PS3 worldwide (more than likely). They will be fine. YT comments+Neogaf isn't reality, if it was the PS Vita would be far and away selling 50 million units a month and Sony would be Apple instead of almost always in the red.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

I would have preferred if they put more juice in the machine, even if it's a bit noisier and less elegant in the beginning. This would have made core gamers happy and they could have dealt the heat issue with the soon enough available 20nm transition. Now they came up with a box that I'll always look at as bare minimum.