Xbox 360 slim hardware thread

[Graham]

Sorry I shouldn't have used the term 'build quality'.
And I didn't specifically mean the motherboard, more the design and construction of the system as a whole. The 360 S appears to be a vast improvement, however I'm still amazed how sony managed to cram so much into the PS3 chassis. The use of the available space is exceptional.

Of course ultimately it doesn't really matter, but it's still interesting

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Sorry I shouldn't have used the term 'build quality'.
And I didn't specifically mean the motherboard, more the design and construction of the system as a whole. The 360 S appears to be a vast improvement, however I'm still amazed how sony managed to cram so much into the PS3 chassis. The use of the available space is exceptional.

Of course ultimately it doesn't really matter, but it's still interesting

The PS3 Slim from the comparison photos should have just a little less internal space than the X360. When horizontal it's a tiny bit shorter, but wider and longer. The curved top allows them to somewhat mold the PS3 around the tallest component (the heatsink).

If MS had used a slim drive (noiser), smaller side mounted fans on the heatsink (noisier), and a less bulky HDD cage they probably could have cut another 1/2 inch off the height (when horizontal). MS decided to sacrifice a bit of size to make the system quieter. Probably the correct choice considering the blurb I read on Anandtech has the system 5 db lower when in use than Jasper.

Regards,
SB

 

[RudeCurve]

Yep MS could've made the system even smaller but it would probably cost more. They'd need to use a laptop DVD drive and low profile copper heatsink and fan. My PC internals fit inside of a 1U chassis and it has PCI slots and vertical DIMMs so I don't see why the internals of the new Xbox couldn't if it used a slim DVD drive like my PC.

 

[(((interference)))]

Does anyone have a slim yet?
If they do, try and see whether games load quicker

 

[BadTB25]

Does anyone have a slim yet?
If they do, try and see whether games load quicker

I have one and it appears to load not only games but the Dashboard items quicker. I can't do a more detailed analysis as my launch unit is dead, but it certainly seems to load everything quicker from what I could remember.

Texas Hold'Em arcade definitely loads much quicker as the game is usually loaded before all 5 cards of the splash menu completes its animation. It used to take a couple of seconds after the completion of the animation from what I recall.

It is also very quiet--actually more quiet than my MGS4 edition PS3 which has gotten quite a bit louder than when I first got it.

 

[menmau]

All for the sake of curiosity! In this case curiosity kills the console, or does it?

Anyway, I think we should have a betting pool on how long its going to take for someone to work up the courage.

My bet is two days and 12 hours from now.

Counting down.... No one yet.
I believe that it can be two separate cores in one die, like was mentioned before. But who knows.

 

[(((interference)))]

I have one and it appears to load not only games but the Dashboard items quicker. I can't do a more detailed analysis as my launch unit is dead, but it certainly seems to load everything quicker from what I could remember.

Texas Hold'Em arcade definitely loads much quicker as the game is usually loaded before all 5 cards of the splash menu completes its animation. It used to take a couple of seconds after the completion of the animation from what I recall.

It is also very quiet--actually more quiet than my MGS4 edition PS3 which has gotten quite a bit louder than when I first got it.

Interesting, what could be causing that?

Do games also perform better in game, rather than just start up times. i.e less pop in or shorter load times while entering new areas etc.

 

[BadTB25]

It could also be longer on my old 360 because it was getting ready to die on me.

 

[eastmen]

It could also be longer on my old 360 because it was getting ready to die on me.

no its certianly faster.

I have a 60 gig unit and the 250 is much faster. Perhaps its just the 250 gig drive thats faster than the old 60 gig units. RPMs isn't the only factor in speed.

 

[AlNom]

Probably. Platter density should be significantly higher. (HTS5K500.B datasheet indicates 250GB per platter)

 

[Grall]

Platter density has very little impact on drive performance in most situations on a desktop system, where I/O block sizes tend to A: be very small in size (512 bytes-4k represent vast majority) and B: be randomly scattered all over the place.

In a console it might be different, since there's not a multiplicity of programs running, doing tiny I/O at the same time, and a potentially very fragmented file system slowing things down even further.. Console games could order up big linear chunks of data, which on a 250GB drive would load a lot faster than on a 20GB drive...

Now, if that's actually happening is another matter, but the potential is certainly there. The biggest performance impact would be from a faster-seeking optical drive though. Most (non-marketplace) 360 games don't do any HDD buffering at all from what I understand, so there lower DVD seek times would be the biggest performance impact factor.

 

[RobertR1]

Grall,

The performance we're noticing is from general usage. Forget gameplay. The console zips along noticeably faster throughout the UI.

Not sure where the performance is coming from but it's certainly there.

btw, could having a new MB and an integrated cpu/gpu effect performance at all? Not by design but a byproduct of efficiency?

 

[Grall]

The performance we're noticing is from general usage. Forget gameplay. The console zips along noticeably faster throughout the UI.

You mean like, the dashboard, or whatever they're calling their Mii ripoff alternative?

If so, it seems more like just firmware improvements really, because the 360 UI really shouldn't be disc I/O limited in any way... It should pretty much reside in console RAM the whole time if you're not running a game title.

Not sure where the performance is coming from but it's certainly there.

I'm not doubting you! In fact I'm pleasantly surprised, and just makes me more eager to get a 360 slim. The PS3 UI is rather sluggish really, it takes a lot of time bringing in-game XMB menus up, or exiting back out to the XMB from a game, loading up the DVD/BR player etc. Even just shutting the console down takes ~10 sec.

Too bad though the 360's DVD playback was so immensely shitty last time I checked it out (and doesn't handle BR at all of course). It can't entirely replace my PS3 (which I've invested far too heavily in anyway, both with disc-based software and DLC)

could having a new MB and an integrated cpu/gpu effect performance at all? Not by design but a byproduct of efficiency?

Power consumption has gone down, obviously, but I seriously doubt any actual performance differences whatsoever. Like when Intel integrated the northbridge into their Atom CPUs, they literally baked the existing northbridge straight into the CPU, complete with FSB and all. Result was virtually no performance difference at all.

Also, you probably don't want to change performance characteristics in a closed system as it might break things. And you can't make developers rely on the extra speed either when you have an older type of system that lacks that speed (and which happens to vastly dominate the installed user base as well might be added)... So my guess is if there's an efficiency difference, it's on the order of the odd nanosecond here or there. Undetectable under real-world conditions.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Could the speedup be just because the new hdd isn't fragmented so badly.
Or do these console HDD's fragment as PC's?
I've noticed my PS3 XMB has become somewhat slower in loading the subicons, the main horizontal icon row loads almost immediately, but the vertical icons, especially all the videos, games, music and photos load slower that when my PS3 was fresh and new.
That's just probably because I have quite a lot of stuff on my PS3; I upgraded the original 60GB HDD to 320GB, and I only have about 35 GB free.

 

[menmau]

Could this improvement be related with several factors, for example better memory management, higher platter density and also increased HD buffer cache?

I find it hard to believe this behaviour is caused due to change/integrate hardware.

By the way what is the buffer cache size of 60Gb and 120Gb HD?

 

[Rotmm]

I've preordered, so I may do a side-by-side when I get it. However, as I'm in the UK it's not going to be until mid-July.

 

[Mindfury]

 

[assen]

Hah, interesing - two pieces of silicon, not three. Did the GPU absorb the EDRAM?

 

[Squilliam]

Source article: http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/20100630_377488.html

Rough translation?

Spoiler

XCGPU 取りこんだ CPU and GPU to single-chip appearance is speculative peeling pull and well understood. during the 35 mm square package under the speculative small two multilayer is located. Big multilayer XCGPU body integrated CPU and GPU, little down DRAM chips paid video memory and ROP (Rendering Output Pipeline). So far took the speculative XCGPU XCGPU die size is 168 sq. mm approximately the DRAM chip die is the 45 sq. mm approximately. On the original Xbox 360 (Xenon), IBM 90nm process XCPU's announcement number 168 sq. mm (to XCPU die is a slightly larger version), XGPU was TSMC 90nm process approximately 180 sq. mm. by 45nm化 and integrated die total will be reduced to less than half. eDRAM is NEC's 90 nm process in original Xenon, was 80 sq mm or less. Become a calculation which also decreased to below 60%. XCGPU package by the way, that Canada and printed. XCGPU is likely to be packaged in Canada that IBM's largest packaging FAB. The most likely XCGPU chip itself manufacturing is done by IBM. And legacy is taking production dispersed Chartered Semiconductor Manufacturing with IBM two companies 2007 メモリカンファレンス "memcon" was explained by IBM. Chartered is currently that is absorbed by GLOBALFOUNDRIES. Between both processors by the integration of XCPU and XGPU is wired on the motherboard so far faster FSB (front side bus) has become unnecessary. XCPU FSB is measure CPU during that time in the fastest, 5. 4 GB/S transfer rates). 1.1 And in the small differential amplitude (differential) signal type, up and down in data are 64 books on 32 lanes and clock are 4 lanes would be 8 signal lines. Difficult to take only a fast, on successive motherboards for the Xbox 360, this FSB wiring takes footprint was. It is no longer should increase in freedom in the motherboard. That external fast FSB 取りこむ chip in to contribute to energy savings. The reason was eating power as such traditional is part of the FSB and FSB interface, and be seen.

Edit: According to source? 168mm^2 Combined CGPU + 45mm^2 ED-Ram = 213mm^2 total

Vs Jasper: 135mm^2 CPU + 121mm^2 GPU (256mm^2) + 64mm^2 ED-Ram = 320mm^2 total

Vs Xenon: 176mm^2 CPU + 182mm^2 GPU (358mm^2) + 80mm^2 ED-Ram = 438mm^2 total

Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2682/4

So roughly speaking its 34% smaller than Jasper overall in combined CGPU die sizes and 53% smaller than the original CGPU. The overall die sizes appear to follow the same trend although I haven't calculated the percentage changes. One would expect that what we are seeing here is a combined 45nm die as seen on the leaked roadmaps. I suspect the ED-Ram has also been shrunk although its difficult to say whether its 45nm, 55nm or 65nm.

Sorry for the lack of clarity, im sick at the moment, any mod wanting to clear my post up for clarity should do so, I encourage it.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

So if indeed that smaller die is the eDRAM, that means MS has beaten both AMD and Intel in releasing a CPU w/GPU on die.

Regards,
SB