Xbox One (Durango) Technical hardware investigation

[bkilian]

Hey guys.

This is my first post here so I hope you will welcome me Long time reader first time poster

I have a question about the X1. Since I can't ask any developer directly you are the closest one I can think of.

Simply put, Is the X1 capable of running games at 1080p with 60fps? Games like Halo, Gears, Uncharted, The division etc. I know there is power difference between it and PS4 but is it really that big? That's the technical question I have.
I appreciate your help

Forza 5 is apparently 1080p at 60fps. So yes.

 

[Desert]

I didn't know how to edit so forgive me for my second post. Is it really hard for developers to achieve 1080P/60fps cuz of the limitations of the Esram? Will it be a problem in the future?

 

[Desert]

Hey guys.

This is my first post here so I hope you will welcome me Long time reader first time poster

I have a question about the X1. Since I can't ask any developer directly you are the closest one I can think of.

Simply put, Is the X1 capable of running games at 1080p with 60fps? Games like Halo, Gears, Uncharted, The division etc. I know there is power difference between it and PS4 but is it really that big? That's the technical question I have.
I appreciate your help

Forza 5 is apparently 1080p at 60fps. So yes.

Thanks alot bkilian. You are one of my favorite posters and I really values your input. Could you please read my other post please? Is there any problem with the hardware to achieve lets say Ryse graphic at 1080p?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I didn't know how to edit so forgive me for my second post. Is it really hard for developers to achieve 1080P/60fps cuz of the limitations of the Esram? Will it be a problem in the future?

Resolution and framerate are balanced out by pixel quality. Any game on XB1 can hit 1080p60, but it may have to sacrifice certain graphical features to attain that. This is true of any game on any console - the devs have to pick their framerate and resolution target and write graphics code that'll hit that target.

The ESRAM probably isn't a huge issue to achieving 1080p60 in itself. It's the whole system, the 12 CUs and 8 (6 available? I forget) CPU cores and the DDR3, etc., all coming together with different bottlenecks at different points in the rendering. Console gamers are used to new hardware hitting new benchmarks in resolution (we've typically had a resolution quadrupling every gen, I think), but that's not quite happening this gen because neither Sony nor MS went all out on the hardware like they have done on other consoles.

Whether the majority of games on XB1 are 1080p60 or not will come down to the design choices of the developers more than the hardware. Will they favour smooth fidelity, or fancier shading and lighting? Chances are the latter if this gen was anything to go by, as screenshots are still important marketing materials and they look far better for games targeting lower res+framerates. We even had the likes of Insomniac saying they were giving up on 60fps gameplay as they felt consumers didn't value it. There's a whole thread on this board discussing the value of 60 fps if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Popup]

I didn't know how to edit so forgive me for my second post. Is it really hard for developers to achieve 1080P/60fps cuz of the limitations of the Esram? Will it be a problem in the future?

All you can say, with any certainty, is that the developers of Ryse could have opted to make the game run 1080p but, choosing 900p freed up enough resources to add a greater graphical density and effects that, in the end looked better than simply having more pixels on the screen. No doubt the sequel will look better and the devs will learn tricks here and there to push things further but it looks so good because it is balanced technically, for arts sake.

The last time I checked, the effects on my Transformers DVD looked better than any resolution PC game and it only runs at 576p. Resolution is only a small part of the overall picture.

 

[Desert]

Resolution and framerate are balanced out by pixel quality. Any game on XB1 can hit 1080p60, but it may have to sacrifice certain graphical features to attain that. This is true of any game on any console - the devs have to pick their framerate and resolution target and write graphics code that'll hit that target.

The ESRAM probably isn't a huge issue to achieving 1080p60 in itself. It's the whole system, the 12 CUs and 8 (6 available? I forget) CPU cores and the DDR3, etc., all coming together with different bottlenecks at different points in the rendering. Console gamers are used to new hardware hitting new benchmarks in resolution (we've typically had a resolution quadrupling every gen, I think), but that's not quite happening this gen because neither Sony nor MS went all out on the hardware like they have done on other consoles.

Whether the majority of games on XB1 are 1080p60 or not will come down to the design choices of the developers more than the hardware. Will they favour smooth fidelity, or fancier shading and lighting? Chances are the latter if this gen was anything to go by, as screenshots are still important marketing materials and they look far better for games targeting lower res+framerates. We even had the likes of Insomniac saying they were giving up on 60fps gameplay as they felt consumers didn't value it. There's a whole thread on this board discussing the value of 60 fps if I'm not mistaken.

Thanks alot shifty. Great post as always. So if I understand you correctly the X1 hardware is not capable of producing high graphics fidelity and maintain 1080P/60fps at the same time? Do you think there will be huge different between the two systems?

 

[Desert]

All you can say, with any certainty, is that the developers of Ryse could have opted to make the game run 1080p but, choosing 720p freed up enough resources to add a greater graphical density and effects that, in the end looked better than simply having more pixels on the screen. No doubt the sequel will look better and the devs will learn tricks here and there to push things further but it looks so good because it is balanced technically, for arts sake.

The last time I checked, the effects on my Transformers DVD looked better than any resolution PC game and it only runs at 576p. Resolution is only a small part of the overall picture.

You mean they chose 900p I hope you are right about the other stuff cuz am making a huge success investment on it

 

[taisui]

Thanks alot shifty. Great post as always. So if I understand you correctly the X1 hardware is not capable of producing high graphics fidelity and maintain 1080P/60fps at the same time? Do you think there will be huge different between the two systems?

it's a design choice. Forza 5 already does 1080p/60 and it looks amazing.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Thanks alot shifty. Great post as always. So if I understand you correctly the X1 hardware is not capable of producing high graphics fidelity and maintain 1080P/60fps at the same time?

'High fidelity' is a relative metric. Compared to this gen, XB1 will be able to produce graphics in high fidelty at high framerate and resolution. Compared to future technologies and where PC will soon be, XB1 cannot.

Do you think there will be huge different between the two systems?

We're not yet discussing the relative performance of the two consoles. That subject is taboo. It'll be broached when the two consoles launch and we have some actual captured reference material (and it'll probably be short lived as fanboy's bicker instead of engaging in an emotionally detached engineering discussion ).

 

[Desert]

'High fidelity' is a relative metric. Compared to this gen, XB1 will be able to produce graphics in high fidelty at high framerate and resolution. Compared to future technologies and where PC will soon be, XB1 cannot.
We're not yet discussing the relative performance of the two consoles. That subject is taboo. It'll be broached when the two consoles launch and we have some actual captured reference material (and it'll probably be short lived as fanboy's bicker instead of engaging in an emotionally detached engineering discussion ).

Thanks alot Shifty. Really appreciate it. Didn't mean a vs thread at all. I've been hearing lots of negative rumors about X1 performance so I wanted to ask some people with knowledge and fair opinions, and that's here So what I understand from your post, technicaly the X1 can achieve Ryse graphic or better at 1080P/60?

 

[taisui]

calm down now, the console is not even out and you think Ryse is as good as it's gonna get? Look at Perfect Dark Zero, then look at Halo 4.

 

[AlphaWolf]

I wouldn't be surprised if the next crytek game is 1080p with ryse or better level visuals on xb1. They've had less than a year with actual silicon.

 

[Aeoniss]

calm down now, the console is not even out and you think Ryse is as good as it's gonna get? Look at Perfect Dark Zero, then look at Halo 4.

I remember playing that on launch day and thinking "Man, this game (PDZ) is so next gen!" spent hours upon hours fighting bot battles split screen.

 

[Ketto]

PDZ was one of my most hyped game, it took me years later to realize it was an average FPS. I was just so sucked into it purely from a visual aspect. Though many of the textures were absolutely horrible, the POM'ed textures were just....yea.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

TSo what I understand from your post, technicaly the X1 can achieve Ryse graphic or better at 1080P/60?

I didn't say that, although I'd be very surprised if devs fail to make improvements to their rendering engines over the coming years to get from the hardware. But come Ryse 2 and 3, CryTek may choose to stay at 900p and push for photorealism instead of upping the resolution. That's the choice devs make. Seeing as 900p looks very convincing as an HD res, I wouldn't be surprised if more games went that route to get more power per pixel than they could at 1080p.

 

[Desert]

I didn't say that, although I'd be very surprised if devs fail to make improvements to their rendering engines over the coming years to get from the hardware. But come Ryse 2 and 3, CryTek may choose to stay at 900p and push for photorealism instead of upping the resolution. That's the choice devs make. Seeing as 900p looks very convincing as an HD res, I wouldn't be surprised if more games went that route to get more power per pixel than they could at 1080p.

I understand. Thanks again Shifty and all others posters. That sounds pretty good thou. Developers need some time to understand the system and with that time things will get better. But do you know or anyone else for that matter why multiplat games now has low res compared to others?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

That's the big debate. There's a thread on it.

 

[Lalaland]

Thanks alot Shifty. Really appreciate it. Didn't mean a vs thread at all. I've been hearing lots of negative rumors about X1 performance so I wanted to ask some people with knowledge and fair opinions, and that's here So what I understand from your post, technicaly the X1 can achieve Ryse graphic or better at 1080P/60?

Yes. And No. In all honesty this really is a 'time will tell' thing even though I know that's a desperately boring answer. All of these systems will be pushed to 100% at launch but as devs get used to how best to make use of that 100% the graphics will improve and perhaps we may see Ryse 2 @ 1080p/60fps.

To roll out that tired car analogy you can hit max revs on your engine in 1st gear and only hit 30mph but as you learn to drive you can change up gears and hit faster speeds while still at max revs. So data structures and algorithms are trimmed and adjusted to work better within the 32MB ESRAM or certain effects are avoided to minimise the penalties they incur (such as transparency on the PS3, which is why the port of Bayonnetta sucked so hard vs 360). I'll avoid the vs. stuff but it will take a few dozen multi-platform releases before we get a feel for how easy to exploit or relevant the strengths of the two respective platforms are.

 

[MJP]

sparse textures is opengl correct?

Correct, it's the OpenGL extension.

i've already run the search but there seems to be much confusion on what is considered tier 1 and whats tier 2. some of the beyond3d posts state tier 2 is simply PRT support, but then we had dave that stated only Bonaire supports tier 2 (so it can't be a PRT problem since all of 7000 series have PRTs from my understanding). and it seems like XBO gpu seems to be based on bonaire at a glance so what hardware does bonaire/xbox have that makes it tier 2 complaint but other gcn cards aren't? ms seems to be pretty cryptic on the entire thing. i figured since windows 8.1 was out as was drivers someone could shed some light and perhaps we might learn more about xbox's gpu by extension.

Yes it was definitely confusing when MS announced tiled resources, because they put out a working sample before their website had the full documentation for the new functionality. Recently however they updated their docs, and they now list the specific differences between Tier 1 and Tier 2 here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/windows/apps/dn280435. The main differences are the new min/max filtering modes, relaxed rules for mip packing, shader functions for querying tile mapping, and shader reads from unmapped tiles are guaranteed to return 0 while writes are discarded. If it is indeed true that only newer AMD GPU's are Tier 2 capable, then I'm not sure which functionality is missing from the older GCN GPU's. In the sparse texture extension it says that reads from uncommitted pages return an undefined result instead of 0, so it's possible that this is one of the missing features.

 

[zed]

it's a design choice. Forza 5 already does 1080p/60 and it looks amazing.

are you sure its 1080p 100% of the time, Ive seen a couple of ingame shots and they didnt look 1080p even without pixel counting.

Note - the game type is gonna make certain resolutions/framerates easier.
Driver or shooters like resogun or platformers or fighting etc should have no problems 1080p@60 OTOH FPS's/sandbox etc will find it more difficult