Xbox Business Update Podcast | Xbox Everywhere Direction Discussion

What will Xbox do

  • Player owned digital libraries now on cloud

    Votes: 3 23.1%
  • Multiplatform all exclusives to all platforms

    Votes: 3 23.1%
  • Multiplatform only select exclusive titles

    Votes: 8 61.5%
  • Surface hardware strategy

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • 3rd party hardware strategy

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • Mobile hardware strategy

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • Slim Revision hardware strategy

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • This will be a nothing burger

    Votes: 4 30.8%
  • *new* Xbox Games for Mobile Strategy

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • *new* Executive leadership changes (ie: named leaders moves/exits/retires)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .
Spot on.


@Johnny Awesome You should really read this part. MS Releasing a next gen console in 2026 will ram straight into this scenario. It will play titles just marginally better than a PS5 pro and yet will be a very expensive fixed hw system. Most new gen releases these days have to be cross gen because of changes in tech and industry. Releasing in 2026 means having the longest cross gen period for a new console and the consumers will punish MS for this. Of course they could put billions into this new system to make it more powerful than anything Sony releases at the end of 2027 but I doubt that will happen if they had to pinch pennies on the RAM of the Series S. Someone in the Finance department will veto such a decision. I honestly think December 2027 is the earliest time you can release a real generational leap worth moving to without breaking the bank. I think GDDR7 will have been out for about 3 years. But releasing in 2026 means GDDR7 will have been out for about 2 years. It would be quite expensive to pit a next gen system against a PS5 pro without the software catalog to back it up. As well consider that currently there are alot of people on both Xbox and Playstation who feel they havent gotten enough titles on their system. Sony is aiming to push this in the second half and MS will completely miss the boat if they simply release a new box and then start telling consumers "Sorry we haven't released any titles that show off the generational leap of the new system but starting 2027 or 2028 we will start having regular releases of cross gen titles that reveal the true power of our next gen system"
I read what he wrote, but don't agree with it. There are no generations anymore for MS. Just bring out a great machine in 2026 for $599 and sell the X for $399 and the S for $199. Then in 2030 (two years after Sony) bring out another machine for $599 and drop the 2026 machine to $399 and the X to $199 and drop the S or keep it alive as the M. Always support 3 (maybe 4) machines. 30 studios putting out 6 AAA games every year. Day One on GP and 2 years later on Nin/PS.
 
Um, no they aren't.

And if they did, they'd get the same response that they reportedly did with Nintendo. Gabe is not exactly a fan of Microsoft to put it nicely, and is already stinking rich.
 
Interesting proposition. Who says it's a next gen? Could be a new console, not intended as a generational leap, but a refresh. New and better, but not Whole New World. Or, they could have non-generational spec advancement with a next-gen something else, like...Kinect 3. Or whatever. But some real USP. Just selling another console like PlayStation hasn't done MS particularly well, while Nintendo's reinvention has worked incredibly well most of the few attempts.
I think MS can shed generations and just have rolling hardware

I think AI if used correctly could set it apart from just another console like a playstation. MS has the amount of developers that they can publish multiple games a year using AI features that aren't in the other consoles or at the same level.
Yes a Zen 5/6 CPU would be a true generational leap(Actually there's recent leaks about Zen 6), as well an RDNA 5 GPU would be a decent leap but I think memory would be the biggest bottleneck if they released in 2026. My other concern would be the support from devs. I think a 2026 launch would require devkits ready by end of 2025 as well. Just seems like a super tough endeavor. But if they pull it off well and good. Xbox deserves a win.


I thought they just clarified that it wasnt the final design. Wasnt entirely sold on the trash can design to be honest. I want an add on for a disc tbh.
Zen 5 is later this year and I believe zen 6 would be fall 2026/27. It could actually be ready for Ms earlier depending on a bunch of factors one of which is money lol.

Like I've said in prior posts all over the forums the easiest way to get past ram issues is a split pool. You can do 8-16 gigs of DDR5 and 16-24 gigs of whatever GDDR ram is the fastest

I don't think dev kits matter as much any more. Later this year when RDNA4 and Zen 5 hit how much time do you think devs have had to optimize for them ? But you will still see large performance increases over the prior generation in games that are already released.

This isn't the 90s and early 2000s where some consoles have exotic hardware. The most exotic thing in a future xbox might be an NPU which for launch games could be ignored.

I doubt this would ever happen. Unless Gabe is sick or something there isn't a reason for him to sell . Also after ABK the FTC and other countries aren't going to let them buy their biggest competitor.

I could see MS buying another major developer like Ubisoft after the beating they have been taken with their dei shit. They would fit perfectly with MS's putrid dei stench
 
I doubt Gabe would sell unless ... he has something better he'd like to do with the money. Maybe he has an expensive project he'd like to undertake and it needs funding. Otherwise, no way.
 
As for the discussion about a "next gen" Xbox in 2026, I don't see them wanting to take a loss on hardware anymore. They're actions and words are telling another story. And a 599$ price would mean less than 15 millions lifetime, looking at current sales numbers. I don't think i am exaggerating when I say that the brand is dead in Europe. About 700k worldwide in three months on year 3 and a half is pretty grim. And Switch 2 is coming.

They can try and hope for a miracle with a traditional console, make a 600$ console for the fans without subsiding it, or create the rumoured oem's third party consoles. Something is coming, but they don't want to compete with Sony anymore.
 
Zen 5 is later this year and I believe zen 6 would be fall 2026/27. It could actually be ready for Ms earlier depending on a bunch of factors one of which is money lol.

Like I've said in prior posts all over the forums the easiest way to get past ram issues is a split pool. You can do 8-16 gigs of DDR5 and 16-24 gigs of whatever GDDR ram is the fastest

I don't think dev kits matter as much any more. Later this year when RDNA4 and Zen 5 hit how much time do you think devs have had to optimize for them ? But you will still see large performance increases over the prior generation in games that are already released.

This isn't the 90s and early 2000s where some consoles have exotic hardware. The most exotic thing in a future xbox might be an NPU which for launch games could be ignored.
Interesting obersvation. I think the general consensus is you get better performance in terms of latency with unified high bandwidth memory on fixed hw platforms as well as easier development since devs dont have to allocate certain objects or functions to faster memory. This was one of the biggest lessons of the 360 PS3 gen IIRC. Seems the split memory system is a better trade off for PC open systems where you can upgrade the system memory and Video RAM with a new GPU.
I don't think dev kits matter as much any more. Later this year when RDNA4 and Zen 5 hit how much time do you think devs have had to optimize for them ? But you will still see large performance increases over the prior generation in games that are already released.

This isn't the 90s and early 2000s where some consoles have exotic hardware. The most exotic thing in a future xbox might be an NPU which for launch games could be ignored.
I honestly dont see a 2-5x improvement over gaming using an RTX 4090 over a PS5 or Xbox Series X for example. Besides improved frame rate the core visual experience of the fidelity is largely the same. Maybe if you factor in accelerators not present in the current gen systems like dedicated RT blocks you can get better Raytracing. But its largely the same. I dont think a large number of games are fully utilizing discrete GPUs.

On the other hand, one thing where consoles can actually start out with large advantages is memory. I think thats going to be the biggest gap next gen between console and consumer discrete GPUs for the first two years. 32GB unified memory at the min is my bet. Higher upfront cost will be amortized down over the long lifetime of the console. The cost of storage is going to be quite low. It cost at least $100 this gen so next gen most of this saving can be allocated to more memory which itself would see even a steeper drop in cost than the SSDs did this gen.

I read what he wrote, but don't agree with it. There are no generations anymore for MS. Just bring out a great machine in 2026 for $599 and sell the X for $399 and the S for $199. Then in 2030 (two years after Sony) bring out another machine for $599 and drop the 2026 machine to $399 and the X to $199 and drop the S or keep it alive as the M. Always support 3 (maybe 4) machines. 30 studios putting out 6 AAA games every year. Day One on GP and 2 years later on Nin/PS.
Interesting observations, I'm not sure if churning out more hw systems would reconcile with low hw sales and dev complaints about the current hw. Simpler tends to be better. But I would be keen to see how this plays out. Maybe churning out multiple fixed hw configs would come with its own advantages. Maybe some sort of OEM partnership as well.
 
MS was able to buy developers and entire publishers based on their own inflated gamepass numbers.
Yeah and I think that's why they screwed up. I feel sorry for all the work devs have put in without being properly supported financially. I dont know what MS was thinking. But something was off from the way they were describing Gamepass's financial success from the beginning. They weren't very transparent and the wording was very careful. It's a shame because I don't know how Ninja Theory will recuperate their costs.

It explains also the conflicting messaging of Hi Fi Rush's success. It was a success with Gamepass engagement hence why MS said they need games like it for it's service, while they closed the studio down, obviously because it didn't bring the money Nadella wanted to see.
 
Yeah and I think that's why they screwed up. I feel sorry for all the work devs have put in without being properly supported financially. I dont know what MS was thinking. But something was off from the way they were describing Gamepass's financial success from the beginning. They weren't very transparent and the wording was very careful. It's a shame because I don't know how Ninja Theory will recuperate their costs.

It explains also the conflicting messaging of Hi Fi Rush's success. It was a success with Gamepass engagement hence why MS said they need games like it for it's service, while they closed the studio down, obviously because it didn't bring the money Nadella wanted to see.

Nadella needs to realize he's been duped by Spencer this entire time, "Selling your products for less $" was all Gamepass ever was. If you're a hardcore enough player to buy Gamepass you're very likely doing it rationally to save money overall, which means less money for the devs than otherwise. And since MS is by far the biggest dev on Gamepass, that just means less $ for MS.

And let's face it, MS has always been a bad consumer hardware company. Occasionally they'll get a win like the early Surface Pros or the Xbox 360, but overall they always trend back towards middling if they don't just abandon it outright and have done so across every last category they've ever entered (except for computer mice for some damned reason).

They're much better at software, and have an absolutely huge game publishing division. Firing Spencer and trying to max out the money they've already sunk into game studios could easily be their best move.
 
On the other hand, one thing where consoles can actually start out with large advantages is memory. I think thats going to be the biggest gap next gen between console and consumer discrete GPUs for the first two years. 32GB unified memory at the min is my bet. Higher upfront cost will be amortized down over the long lifetime of the console. The cost of storage is going to be quite low. It cost at least $100 this gen so next gen most of this saving can be allocated to more memory which itself would see even a steeper drop in cost than the SSDs did this gen.
We are already in the realm of diminishing returns with 10 GB of video memory for the GPU and 2.5 GB for the CPU. Even having something like a 192 bit bus with 20 GB of GDDR7 and 4GB DDR5 for the OS would be plenty.
32GB of GDDR7 would be a big waste.
 
Nadella needs to realize he's been duped by Spencer this entire time, "Selling your products for less $" was all Gamepass ever was. If you're a hardcore enough player to buy Gamepass you're very likely doing it rationally to save money overall, which means less money for the devs than otherwise. And since MS is by far the biggest dev on Gamepass, that just means less $ for MS.
Gamepass is a long term solution. It effectively locks players into a monthly subscription with a deep library, and destroys the secondary market. People can't sell/trade games if they don't own them! And that means there aren't people buying used copies of your games in 6 months for pennies on the dollar. Remember when people were freaking out when Xbox one launched and it was meant to have single use codes with the discs? This is a more front facing consumer friendly solution to the same problem Microsoft was trying to solve.
 
Gamepass is a long term solution. It effectively locks players into a monthly subscription with a deep library, and destroys the secondary market. People can't sell/trade games if they don't own them! And that means there aren't people buying used copies of your games in 6 months for pennies on the dollar. Remember when people were freaking out when Xbox one launched and it was meant to have single use codes with the discs? This is a more front facing consumer friendly solution to the same problem Microsoft was trying to solve.
Actually I went to visit my young siblings and asked them if they still wanted to use the Gamepass subscription and to my surprise they told me they prefer buying the titles and owning them. Told me they wouldnt mind at all if I stopped paying for their Gamepass subscription. Its just one example but if it turns out to be typifying example of larger sentiment then I think the future of the industry still requires ownership as a major component of gaming. Subscription services are definitely part of that future but likely outright ownership is going to continue being a major part as well. Seems the way we consume games may be a bit more different than how we consume say music or movies as other have suggested here.

We are already in the realm of diminishing returns with 10 GB of video memory for the GPU and 2.5 GB for the CPU. Even having something like a 192 bit bus with 20 GB of GDDR7 and 4GB DDR5 for the OS would be plenty.
32GB of GDDR7 would be a big waste.
I think you could be onto something but will do some research as well. I didn't think memory has reached diminishing returns. Especially considering how much devs have been complaining about Series S memory as well more memory has been a general request by developers.
 
Interesting obersvation. I think the general consensus is you get better performance in terms of latency with unified high bandwidth memory on fixed hw platforms as well as easier development since devs dont have to allocate certain objects or functions to faster memory. This was one of the biggest lessons of the 360 PS3 gen IIRC. Seems the split memory system is a better trade off for PC open systems where you can upgrade the system memory and Video RAM with a new GPU.

Does a cpu need low latency to ram for games ?

Doesn't the xbox series already have slower ram and faster ram that devs have to allocate objects and functions too ?

I honestly dont see a 2-5x improvement over gaming using an RTX 4090 over a PS5 or Xbox Series X for example. Besides improved frame rate the core visual experience of the fidelity is largely the same. Maybe if you factor in accelerators not present in the current gen systems like dedicated RT blocks you can get better Raytracing. But its largely the same. I dont think a large number of games are fully utilizing discrete GPUs.

Well for one a lot of current games on the consoles are cpu limited. Even games like bualders gate 3. So you can get a huge improvement there. Also from the rumors RDNA 5 is going to be brand new and not have anything to really do with RDNA as it exists now. So we could actually see much larger up lifts compared to what is on the market now. Remember even the 4090 is old technology
On the other hand, one thing where consoles can actually start out with large advantages is memory. I think thats going to be the biggest gap next gen between console and consumer discrete GPUs for the first two years. 32GB unified memory at the min is my bet. Higher upfront cost will be amortized down over the long lifetime of the console. The cost of storage is going to be quite low. It cost at least $100 this gen so next gen most of this saving can be allocated to more memory which itself would see even a steeper drop in cost than the SSDs did this gen.

Like I said they can go split pool and have 8-16 gigs of ddr and 16-24 gigs of gddr. 16gigs of ddr5 right now costs a pittance. You can get 4800mhz 16gigs of ddr 5 for $40 bucks right now and thats with the ram manufacturer , 3rd party company and amazon all taking profit from it.

Interesting observations, I'm not sure if churning out more hw systems would reconcile with low hw sales and dev complaints about the current hw. Simpler tends to be better. But I would be keen to see how this plays out. Maybe churning out multiple fixed hw configs would come with its own advantages. Maybe some sort of OEM partnership as well.

I think it be pretty silly to sell a zen2 / rdna 2 machine when you can come out with a zen5/6 + rdna 5 machine with similar performance and likely lower costs and using less power.

Look at it this way. Zen 2 to zen 5 or 6 will have a large IPC increase. AMD seems to be about 10% in general work loads per generation. So simply by putting in a zen 5/6 chip in place of the zen 2 chip will increase performance. RDNA5 if built from scratch as the rumors say could have a huge performance increase in terms of Raytracing. If you go split ram like I've said before you can even reduce ram costs likely. Then you put out a 12-13 tflop $300 system with all those enhancements and I think it be pretty popular.
 
MS was able to buy developers and entire publishers based on their own inflated gamepass numbers.
do you have data to back up that claim? I wonder that 'cos while I think that might be true, MS stopped giving gamepass numbers a long while ago.

I've been a big fan of gamepass at the beginning and sure many people had subscribed, but on PC for instance a lot of people had to suffer a problematic and immature app, so of those which tried pc gamepass and liked it, most of them left the service because of the app, maybe? I don't have empyric data, just a gut feeling from what I read from forumers.

On the console side all I heard about was people having gamepass for years because of accumulated points and Xbox Live Gold, and some similar tricks.

Those were the most common use cases for gamepass, which didn't help at all the growth of the service.
 
Gamepass is a long term solution. It effectively locks players into a monthly subscription with a deep library, and destroys the secondary market. People can't sell/trade games if they don't own them! And that means there aren't people buying used copies of your games in 6 months for pennies on the dollar. Remember when people were freaking out when Xbox one launched and it was meant to have single use codes with the discs? This is a more front facing consumer friendly solution to the same problem Microsoft was trying to solve.
I fear for gampeass. Because after what they have done after purchasing of Activision, they could want to buy it to close Xbox business and that there will never be a trace of that name ever again on the face of the earth.

They know that the Xbox brand is a failed and flawed brand, and they might want to end it as soon as possible. Also after the failure of Hellblade (2000 concurrent players on steam), they are going to take matters into their own hands now.

Dunno.. but the Xbox store on PC might have its days numbered as well if MS don't make it appealing via a hybrid device or whatever.

But yeah, as you describe it, it makes more sense.
 
Last edited:
Does a cpu need low latency to ram for games ?
You generally want lower latency for CPU workloads which is why DDR memory is better since it has lower latency than GDDR. But there's another latency that comes from preparing data and sending it between the system and video memory. You'll have lower latency with unified memory since all the memory is in the same physical memory so CPU calls are faster as you dont have to transfer certain data from video to system memory first for example. Its a much more efficient memory subsystem for consoles.

Doesn't the xbox series already have slower ram and faster ram that devs have to allocate objects and functions too ?
It's a 100% misleading to equate the interleaved unified memory of the Series X to the split memory subsystem you find on most PCs which is separated into system and video memory. On the Series X its 100% unified high bandwidth GDDR6 memory at 14Gb/s per pin so the CPU and GPU have access direct access to the same physical memory unlike what you describe. On the Series X although its unified its interleaved such that 6GB runs at 336GB/s for OS related tasks while 10GB has access to the full bandwidth of 560GB/s for gaming related tasks. But certain gaming related workloads which dont require high bandwidth memory like say audio could still be in the slower memory interleave. But still I have heard there have been issues with the Series X subsystem where certain data meant to run on the higher memory interleave ended up on the slower memory interleave. So Xbox Software APIs to ensure data ended up in the right DRAM module was wonky. Its simply best to have all memory module have access to the full memory bandwidth. I dont think Xbox will be doing this again because it can bottleneck your expensive SoC. They could have have just gotten ten 2GB modules which would be dirt cheap right now instead of six 2GB modules and four 1GB modules as it is today.
Well for one a lot of current games on the consoles are cpu limited. Even games like bualders gate 3. So you can get a huge improvement there. Also from the rumors RDNA 5 is going to be brand new and not have anything to really do with RDNA as it exists now. So we could actually see much larger up lifts compared to what is on the market now. Remember even the 4090 is old technology
I completely agree about the CPU which is why I always take it with a pinch of salt when I hear CPU/GPU/memory increase has reached diminishing returns. We heard the same at the start of the gen how the Zen 2 8 Core CPUs of the new gen wouldnt have any issues for the whole lifetime of the gen. Turns out this wasnt entirely accurate. New advanced tasks requiring faster compute sprung up. And yes you're right about RDNA 5 it could very well be a huge leap.


Like I said they can go split pool and have 8-16 gigs of ddr and 16-24 gigs of gddr. 16gigs of ddr5 right now costs a pittance. You can get 4800mhz 16gigs of ddr 5 for $40 bucks right now and thats with the ram manufacturer , 3rd party company and amazon all taking profit from it.
Yes you're partly right DDR5 has just enough bandwidth as well is low latency by its very nature. I remember Sony as well on the PS4 pro added 1GB of low bandwidth memory for the OS. But they havent done this again I think its for power reasons or something else so they choose what they consider most optimal. A lot of people(including myself) expected them to do the same for the PS5 pro, maybe add 2GB low bandwidth memory for the OS but from all we're hearing it only has 16GB of unified memory not even an addition like last time. I think if it was left to me or you we would propose the split memory but we're not experienced in building these systems. Also leaks suggest due to power budget constraints they were facing a challenge of matching the base PS5's GPU max clock on the Pro. So I think these are things they have to consider which we on the forum dont. So when we bring it back to the Series X or future systems you wont be seeing . The engineers at Sony and MS are not simply using GDDR memory because they dont know these things but because they consider a lot of factors which we miss out on in the forums.
 
You generally want lower latency for CPU workloads which is why DDR memory is better since it has lower latency than GDDR. But there's another latency that comes from preparing data and sending it between the system and video memory. You'll have lower latency with unified memory since all the memory is in the same physical memory so CPU calls are faster as you dont have to transfer certain data from video to system memory first for example. Its a much more efficient memory subsystem for consoles.
But if you have two busses one for the ddr directly through the cpu and one from the gpu to the gddr ram wouldn't you simply have the best of both worlds. Also wouldn't you have less contention for bandwidth if they aren't sharing the same bus
It's a 100% misleading to equate the interleaved unified memory of the Series X to the split memory subsystem you find on most PCs which is separated into system and video memory. On the Series X its 100% unified high bandwidth GDDR6 memory at 14Gb/s per pin so the CPU and GPU have access direct access to the same physical memory unlike what you describe. On the Series X although its unified its interleaved such that 6GB runs at 336GB/s for OS related tasks while 10GB has access to the full bandwidth of 560GB/s for gaming related tasks. But certain gaming related workloads which dont require high bandwidth memory like say audio could still be in the slower memory interleave. But still I have heard there have been issues with the Series X subsystem where certain data meant to run on the higher memory interleave ended up on the slower memory interleave. So Xbox Software APIs to ensure data ended up in the right DRAM module was wonky. Its simply best to have all memory module have access to the full memory bandwidth. I dont think Xbox will be doing this again because it can bottleneck your expensive SoC. They could have have just gotten ten 2GB modules which would be dirt cheap right now instead of six 2GB modules and four 1GB modules as it is today.

Sure but again you'd have distinct pools for cpu and gpu. There shouldn't be a reason for the gpu to use the cpu ram. It would be the same as a pc set up which seems to work just fine. DDR5 cost should be less than the fastest GDDR ram
I completely agree about the CPU which is why I always take it with a pinch of salt when I hear CPU/GPU/memory increase has reached diminishing returns. We heard the same at the start of the gen how the Zen 2 8 Core CPUs of the new gen wouldnt have any issues for the whole lifetime of the gen. Turns out this wasnt entirely accurate. New advanced tasks requiring faster compute sprung up. And yes you're right about RDNA 5 it could very well be a huge leap.
Yup second generation in a row that the cpu is a huge bottleneck

Yes you're partly right DDR5 has just enough bandwidth as well is low latency by its very nature. I remember Sony as well on the PS4 pro added 1GB of low bandwidth memory for the OS. But they havent done this again I think its for power reasons or something else so they choose what they consider most optimal. A lot of people(including myself) expected them to do the same for the PS5 pro, maybe add 2GB low bandwidth memory for the OS but from all we're hearing it only has 16GB of unified memory not even an addition like last time. I think if it was left to me or you we would propose the split memory but we're not experienced in building these systems. Also leaks suggest due to power budget constraints they were facing a challenge of matching the base PS5's GPU max clock on the Pro. So I think these are things they have to consider which we on the forum dont. So when we bring it back to the Series X or future systems you wont be seeing . The engineers at Sony and MS are not simply using GDDR memory because they dont know these things but because they consider a lot of factors which we miss out on in the forums.
I am sure its all a numbers game.
 
Sure but again you'd have distinct pools for cpu and gpu. There shouldn't be a reason for the gpu to use the cpu ram. It would be the same as a pc set up which seems to work just fine. DDR5 cost should be less than the fastest GDDR ram
No this is not correct there isnt a distinct pool of ram for CPU and GPU they share the same physical memory. I've come to conclusion most people dont know what unified memory is and its benefits. I have heard Moore's law is dead claim Series X doesnt have unified memory as well which is shocking because he's a tech Youtuber. Yes PC memory subsystem works fine but there are benefits of using unified memory especially with closed systems like consoles.

Sure but again you'd have distinct pools for cpu and gpu. There shouldn't be a reason for the gpu to use the cpu ram. It would be the same as a pc set up which seems to work just fine. DDR5 cost should be less than the fastest GDDR ram
Again there is no distinction between CPU and GPU memory with unified memory architecture. Only difference(A difference MS will likely not repeat) exists on the Series X is there is lower bandwidth interleaved memory on the Series X with 6GB of the GDDR modules having access to only 336GB/s of memory bandwidth but this 6GB of physical memory along with the 10GB of interleaved high memory bandwidth can both be accessed by both the CPU and GPU. You dont have this contrivance on the PS5 because they went with 8 2GB modules on a 256 bit bus at 14Gb/s per pin for 448GB/s so no interleaving to achieve different memory bandwidth for different ram modules. I strongly recommend reading up on the advantages and disadvantages of a unified memory architecture. You get some latency pros and cons as well with going with unified memory. But the overwhelming empirical data supports this approach for consoles.
 
Back
Top