ESRAM will help with the bandwidth problem,but it will not double fill rate add extra CU or anything of that sort.
ESRAM going by theory here will give Durango a boost in bandwidth that will put it close to Orbis,not that will surpass it.
I'm not talking about surpassing Orbis. And can't the eSARAM be involved heavily in handling virtualized assets? Thought I read something about that here before, but might be wrong. Those kinds of assets don't require much bandwidth for the same visual output iirc.
Wasn't Display Planes already shutdown and something other GPU already are doing.? even on PS3 or even PS2.?
So the contention is that MS/AMD engineered in hardware display planes (and
patented them) that have been commonplace for gaming for the past 13 yrs? Am I interpreting your comment right?
Didn't DME suffer the same fate..?
I'm not as up on the details as others here are, but my impression was that the DME's are not to be dismissed merely as run of the mill DMA's due to their extra functionality and/or how they work with the eSRAM. Not sure on that though. Be careful not to lean to heavily on confirmation bias with this stuff. You seem to lean on conclusions made by ppl who were openly mocking the notion that extra hardware even existed on Durango in the first place by labeling it as 'secret sauce' just to undermine it.
Wasn't all that secret sauce debunked already.?
Dismissed by ppl with an agenda who set out to mock its (now confirmed) existence in the first place? Sure. 'Debunked'? I dunno about that. I do seem to get the impression that of the two console Durango is the one looking better from day to day relative to the initial leaked specs. I think the expectation of what Orbis can do has been relatively static in contrast.
If AMD/MS already had a stock GPU with most of this stuff in it as is supposedly commonplace they wouldn't add extra kit around the GPU to do these things. Or are we to assume they removed those functions to push them outside the GPU? If so, wouldn't this suggest more room freed up for Durango's GPU to put its 1.2 Tflops to work on other stuff?
I think some ppl rely on the notion that MS added this stuff to remove performance issues
relative to what Orbis was doing. A simple look at the timelines proves this can't possibly be true. MS had a major advantage based on what insiders are saying circa summer 2012 when devs revolted and forced Sony to up their specs. There is a VGLeaks article from Jun that bears that out to a tee. Yet we have specs for Durango that still hold true from 5 months
prior to that. So clearly MS wasn't ever designing this stuff as a reaction to Orbis. It also doesn't make sense that MS and AMD would take the off the shelf 'stock solution', consider it, and then opt for a much more complex and elaborate (aka expensive to design) setup just so they could end up with weaker hardware than the stock solution offered. The whole off the shelf stock approach would surely have been the very first thing they considered after all.
Let me ask you this,will DME ad extra 400Gflops.? Will ESRAM ad 400Gflosp as well.?
I dunno. I'm asking. I don't see anyone arguing those two add 800 Glops to the performance. If MS is trying to leverage virtualized assets (virtual textures, virtual geometry) in the hardware design maybe they don't need as much processing? They certainly wouldn't need as much bandwidth based on what I've read either.