LightHeaven
Regular
I like best cases scenarios to,that doesn't mean i will think that durango will perform even close to a GPU that far far surpass it.
Durango like any other GPU have its limits,ESRAM at best case scenario can help the 7770 achieve its peak,not go over that peak,no matter what some people try to paint this the 7770 peak is far far away from the 680GTX peak.
I am sure when all is say and done Durango will not be even close to that GPU,with all its efficiencies.
That's all true, but it is a meaningless comparison if you don't know how it impacts the final performance (aka framerate).
Let me exaggerate just to make a point: Imagine that a 680 spent 85% of the frame time idle due memory latency and had only 10% for ALU work, and the remaining 5% would be anything else. In that case, while it's true that durango's gpu would never match the flop performance/output of a 680, it turns out that ALU is simply not a huge part of the frame time, so you can actually have a gpu with less ALUs but faster memory that outperforms a 680 in that frame.
Of course, in reality it's not a drastic scenario like this, but Ms has data that shows for all current games where they spent most of their time, and instead of brute forcing everything to improve performance, they seem to have designed a system that tackles those bottlenecks. It's not that far fetch to assume that for running those games that setup could perform better.
But that's not guarantee that they will always perform on par either, because games from 5-6 years from now can be drastically different from current ones and be more suited to another architecture...
It kinda happened this gen when developers started using deferred renders, which nullified the multisample advantage that xenos had in the beginning of the generation, and accentuated its shortcomings.