so your saying the bandwidth speed is not enough? i thought durango had 2 cores reserved for the os.
Xbox One (Durango) Technical hardware investigation
- Thread starter Love_In_Rio
- Start date
- Status
so your saying the bandwidth speed is not enough? i thought durango had 2 cores reserved for the os.
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
Well, yes, 10 CUs at 1000Mhz instead of 800Mhz. So, the processing power is similar, near 1,25 Tflops.
Yeah, let's ignore the eDRAM and pretend this thing is working solely from DDR3...
Prophecy2k
Veteran
But Durango also 102GB/s ESRAM to assist with GPU available bandwidth. So it's very likely it'll outperform a 7770 in every case.
I don't want to make analysis on speculated and vague info, and I think that at Microsoft are not dumb, but at the moment I have the impression of a system that will benefit from some more bw
ESRam is onl 32MB, so there's a limited amount of things that you can do on it
I understand that for faith we can say that 68GB/s is more than enough, but until I see final specs and real performance can't say it
ESRam is onl 32MB, so there's a limited amount of things that you can do on it
I understand that for faith we can say that 68GB/s is more than enough, but until I see final specs and real performance can't say it
I thought it was 68GB's
Durango's RAM bus is 68GB/s the ESRAM is 102GB/s
I know it were 8 cycles with the VLIW architectures, but is this documented or measured somewhere for GCN? I remember that GCN presentation where AMD claimed vector instructions of the same wavefront could be issued back to back on one SIMD opposed to the interleaving of wavefronts necessary for VLIW (which implies a 4 cycle latency for GCN). This of course does not apply to certain scheduling hazards, for instance when scalar and vector ALU access scalar regs directly after each other. But this has to be dealt with in the code.
I thought it was 32mb of edram are they the same thing?
Think of it like a PC with 68 GB/s main memory and 102 GB/s VRAM.
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
You have 32MB of ESRAM to which the bandwidth is 102GBs and you have the 8GB DDR3 memory pool to which the bandwidth is 68GBs. The move engines suppossely coordinates the data movement between both pools of memory.
Durango has a chunk of ESRAM, not EDRAM.
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
Well, according to ERP developers are encouraged to use DDR3 as the framebuffer...I am more of the theory that ESRAM is a big L3 cache for GPGPU ops.
Be nice to see how those move engines are set up.
Doesn't really matter where the operations are performed as the BW consumed is the same whether writing FB to DDR3 or ESRAM. Okay, there are particulars about the setup which'll tell us how much BW overhead there is which is important for the overall picture, but the actual BW available to Durango's GPU is certainly a lot more than 68 GB/s!
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
Well, we could trust that rumor that says that depth and color blocks are more than standard back ends and offer free 4xMSAA and FP16 HDR.
Out of the blue everything would change and the available BW would even seem too much.
ERP, stop the fabs a little more!.
That's a pretty nice analogy.
I think we shall wait and see and give credit to the engineers who worked on the machine because while it isn't going to be worlds faster than current gen consoles, it looks like an efficient, fine design to me.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll