Xbox One Post-Release Examination

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't know a lot about how all this works, so need some moving into the right direction, I might be drastically simplifying things here; but do the number of CUs really matter if the CUs aren't fully saturated anyway?

that depends entirely on what you're wanting them to do. If you are relying on lots of data, they can be BW starved, but if not, the BW won't matter. Which is where PS4's advantage comes regards compute - workloads that are data-light have a lot of processing power available.

 

[Prophecy2k]

Sort of, but there's still enough differences, like the ESRAM, DDR3 vs GDDR5, to muddle things more than a straight comparison. for better or worse

Nothing's really muddled tbh, it's not as if either box is particularly bandwidth starved (relative to the other). Plus both leave roughly the same amount of RAM available to devs,

The performance disparity in multi-platform games follows pretty much propotionally the differences in raw GPU grunt (~50%) and fillrate.

It's not really any more exciting than that.

 

[iroboto]

Nothing's really muddled tbh, it's not as if either box is particularly bandwidth starved (relative to the other). Plus both leave roughly the same amount of RAM available to devs,

The performance disparity in multi-platform games follows pretty much propotionally the differences in raw GPU grunt (~50%) and fillrate.

It's not really any more exciting than that.

edit: how much do you think async compute can help additionally fill up the rest?

 

[Cyan]

MS was silly to have gone down this road. DRM, TV and Kinect are relatively fluff issues that impacted the One. If they would have had equivalent power or more than PS4 at the 499 price point, there would been much less barking about the One. A 24 cu machine with gddr5 and the tale of the console release would have been quite different. Many an internet posters career would also have been ruined too.

The last sentence of your post is quite amusing. :smile2:

When a console is first released power is one of the things that people judge first. If it's not good enough they will mock you as an user if you go down that route.

Everything around Xbox One would be judged differently if the Xbox remained loyal to the initial philosophy of Xbox.

Kinect would be a non issue provided it could be disconnected, and DRM could be included as an opt-in, opt-out feature, for those who wanted digital & share games with 10 friends, and those who prefer physical discs and don't care about online that much.

 

[Grall]

In a burst scenario, from rest or burst packages of data 18CUs are going to do a lot better. If the ducks are lined up and in a straight setup drag race the 204GB/s from 12 CUs should technically be outputting more simply because it's being fed better right?

Things don't really work that way. Pretty much no actual real-life task relies on loading new data for each instruction processed. There's matrix multiplication benchmarks and things of that sort, but you're not going to find many games doing a whole lot of that in the middle of rendering a frame...

Pixel shader programs can be upwards of 1000 instructions long in some cases today IIRC, certainly dozens for anything more than trivial stuff, so caching and chewing over the same data set over and over certainly comes into play. In most actual real-world situations, 18 CUs will whoop up on 12 CUs, even if the latter has a significant bandwidth advantage.

 

[Jwm]

All this talk about power, the most powerful consoles seldomly ever won its generation.

True, but look at the PR campaigns compared to past consoles. MS has always failed here while they high-five each other internally over what they think was a great ad. 10/15 years at least, oddly some of their game ads can be great.

So far the ad campaigns have been poor, even the new one with "Jesse" will lead to confusion after the purchase. Although it might work.

/IMO

 

[Rangers]

Nothing's really muddled tbh, it's not as if either box is particularly bandwidth starved (relative to the other). Plus both leave roughly the same amount of RAM available to devs,

The performance disparity in multi-platform games follows pretty much propotionally the differences in raw GPU grunt (~50%) and fillrate.

It's not really any more exciting than that.

I'm just saying there ARE differences. It's not the same setup. Just less differences than prior generations.

If Xbox was 8GB GDDR5 @176 GB/s with 12 CU's, then you'd have a more, almost completely, direct comparison.

Seems likely we will never get truly almost identical consoles. This is probably as close as we'll get.

 

[temesgen]

I'm just saying there ARE differences. It's not the same setup. Just less differences than prior generations.

If Xbox was 8GB GDDR5 @176 GB/s with 12 CU's, then you'd have a more, almost completely, direct comparison.

Seems likely we will never get truly almost identical consoles. This is probably as close as we'll get.

There are differences but the machines are more similar in many ways than ever before. Particle effects are one area that might benefit from the XB1 differences if my memory serves.

Also while its early days I think the DF article and Albert's comments last fall might come to be seen as more hope than fact.

Edit:

Last part might be a bit harsh, lets see how XB1 does with multi-platform titles that aren't held back due to supporting legacy titles and with the Directx updates being leveraged. In some ways how XB1 multiplatform titles hold up should make this fall and winter releases more interesting than last. Destiny is rumored to run at the same frame rate and resolution which is a good sign.

 

[iroboto]

Things don't really work that way. Pretty much no actual real-life task relies on loading new data for each instruction processed. There's matrix multiplication benchmarks and things of that sort, but you're not going to find many games doing a whole lot of that in the middle of rendering a frame...



Pixel shader programs can be upwards of 1000 instructions long in some cases today IIRC, certainly dozens for anything more than trivial stuff, so caching and chewing over the same data set over and over certainly comes into play. In most actual real-world situations, 18 CUs will whoop up on 12 CUs, even if the latter has a significant bandwidth advantage.

lol this was what I was looking for. Figured as much as well. Thanks.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

What is it with the ginormous Day One patches?

Here's another one: a 10Gb patch for Sniper Elite 3 on a game that is circa 20Gb. Day One patches are pretty much the norm but it seems only One devs to be engaging in competition of who has the biggest patch?

SE3's developers points the finger at Microsoft's update system. Anybody know how it works?

I really hope they fix this before I bag a One latter this year. 10Gb is a good couple of hours on my connection.

 

[Rangers]

Ehh, it hasn't effected any games I care about that I know of.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Ehh, it hasn't effected any games I care about that I know of.

Did you skip Dead Rising 3? That had mega patches too. 13Gb patch for DLC, even if you didn't buy the DLC. There's clearly something odd about the way devs roll out updates for the One.

 

[onQ]

Without Kinect does Xbox One face the stigma of being seen as a redundant Console?

A Kinect-less Xbox One doesn't seem to have a good selling point or 'It Factor' next to it's closest competition.

• There is exclusive titles but Halo seems to be the only one that will make a big difference in the line up so far that could make the Xbox One stand out.
  
• No price advantage that could make it the lowest hanging fruit for people who just want a new console.
  
• No technical advantages that will make games look or play better compared to it's competition (besides the push for cloud computing).
  
• There wasn't a years head-start that would make it the more established console on the market with more games & developers having a better grip on the hardware.
  
• It's not aimed at a different market from it's competition where it could escape the head to head comparison in which it pretty much comes up short in every area.
  
• It's not a smaller design making it easier to carry around & better for kids/teens who take their consoles with them from place to place.

Xbox One with Kinect was a vision that a lot of people didn't agree with but at least there was a vision before. Now it seems to be a question of "why is the Xbox One here?" & I have a scary feeling that Microsoft & some devs are starting to ask this same question.

Xbox One remind me a lot of the Sega Saturn.
Priced $100 more at launch then dropped the price to match the competition, 3rd party devs have a hurdle to jump over vs making the same game for the other system and it hasn't really made a case for it's self besides having exclusives but that didn't help Saturn much because people was able to find games that filled the void on the PS1.

 

[Nesh]

Without Kinect does Xbox One face the stigma of being seen as a redundant Console?

A Kinect-less Xbox One doesn't seem to have a good selling point or 'It Factor' next to it's closest competition.

• There is exclusive titles but Halo seems to be the only one that will make a big difference in the line up so far that could make the Xbox One stand out.
  
• No price advantage that could make it the lowest hanging fruit for people who just want a new console.
  
• No technical advantages that will make games look or play better compared to it's competition (besides the push for cloud computing).
  
• There wasn't a years head-start that would make it the more established console on the market with more games & developers having a better grip on the hardware.
  
• It's not aimed at a different market from it's competition where it could escape the head to head comparison in which it pretty much comes up short in every area.
  
• It's not a smaller design making it easier to carry around & better for kids/teens who take their consoles with them from place to place.

Xbox One with Kinect was a vision that a lot of people didn't agree with but at least there was a vision before. Now it seems to be a question of "why is the Xbox One here?" & I have a scary feeling that Microsoft & some devs are starting to ask this same question.

Its not that people didnt agree with the vision of Kinect. Its just that it didnt offer the value that people were willing to pay $100 extra for. It compromised technical advantage with something else and charged extra for it. The Kinect didnt offer anything substantially exciting ready out of the box either. It was mostly a promise for the future. People either would wait for a price drop or buy competition if not convinced.

The pricing was a bigger problem.

Xbox One remind me a lot of the Sega Saturn.
Priced $100 more at launch then dropped the price to match the competition, 3rd party devs have a hurdle to jump over vs making the same game for the other system and it hasn't really made a case for it's self besides having exclusives but that didn't help Saturn much because people was able to find games that filled the void on the PS1.

I wouldnt say it is a lot like the Saturn although I may agree it is a bit in some areas. The PS3 was closer to being the equivalent of Sega Saturn than XB1 is now.
I believe the XB1 sells well and unlike the Saturn, developer support is almost identical to competition. Developing on the console isnt as hard as the Saturn. It's actually "easy" just relatively "harder" compared to competition. They also demonstrate fast changes to their business plan according to market reaction.
Fortunately they got the price down. In terms of features and design I must admit that its well thought, well made and has some nice polish for a launch console although not perfect yet.
The Saturn was a disaster in almost every level. Marketing wise, hardware wise, pricing wise, development friendliness, decision making, UI design, demo packaging......it had some amazing internal talent software wise though, which is what XB1 lacks. But when everything else is executed badly, you arent helping your talent shine in software

 

[iroboto]

There is OS and ecosystem that MS can work on. It is currently an unknown space and there should be some good wins there for them.

We know that the next windows will be for all platforms to support universal applications, so we should see an OS update/install at some time.

There are opportunities in the app space when MS does that, maybe venture into productivity apps or apps that aren't entertainment based.

Maybe focus on more apps that are made specifically for snap.

UI overhaul is not out of question and they can redo the kinect UI/gestures as well until it's right.

I definitely feel they have space to differentiate, they just need to open it up entirely for third party to build it and let the community decide if how Xbox is best exploited

 

[Shifty Geezer]

There are opportunities in the app space when MS does that, maybe venture into productivity apps or apps that aren't entertainment based.

How relevant are they going to be in this age of smart devices? Spreadsheets on your XB1??

 

[iroboto]

How relevant are they going to be in this age of smart devices? Spreadsheets on your XB1??

That depends if you are the type of person to have the x1 hooked up to monitor and a desk and keyboard vs the living room. Kinect x1 has niche of hands free apps, so opportunities of data visualization and dashboards. Keyboard and mouse x1 setups can do productivity.

Every app won't fit everyone's setup, but I won't be particularly upset about my x1 running power point, photo sharing apps, security camera apps, PDF reading, leaving video messages, unified messaging pulling together email,other messaged services and Xbox messaging together.

I don't know what the possibilities truly are. But I so recall in university a time in which I told my roommate that cell phones in japan had colour and he laughed and me and said why would we ever need that it'll just drain the battery faster. In his defence I had no idea smart phones would get to this point I just thought colour was cool back then.

 

[Nesh]

How relevant are they going to be in this age of smart devices? Spreadsheets on your XB1??

Spreadsheets wont. But other apps will be a good fit.
As smart devices become the norm, a non-smart device will be undesirable. The market will demand that every device has as many open "smart" features as possible and that every device has inter connectivity with other devices.
I think both will have no other choice but take that direction

 

[Shifty Geezer]

That depends if you are the type of person to have the x1 hooked up to monitor and a desk and keyboard vs the living room. Kinect x1 has niche of hands free apps, so opportunities of data visualization and dashboards. Keyboard and mouse x1 setups can do productivity.

Sounds extremely niche to me. People use PCs, or tablets. What your suggesting sound better served buying Kinect for PC.

Every app won't fit everyone's setup, but I won't be particularly upset about my x1 running power point, photo sharing apps, security camera apps, PDF reading, leaving video messages, unified messaging pulling together email,other messaged services and Xbox messaging together.

I doubt anyone would be upset over having options. The question is whether adding Powerpoint support to XB1 is going to make it more competitive. A USP of XB1 as you say is that, presumably, it can gain full app support with the Windows ecosystem. As such, will gamers want to buy XB1 because of this ecosystem? For playing games or media, potentially, but I'm not seeing it that much for non-entertainment apps. Tell a lie, I'm not seeing it at all. I can't imagine an advert where MS toots XB1's ability to edit Word documents and check the weather forecast (certainly not without Kinect voice control), and even if they did, I can't imagine that pushing sales in a big way. The real differentiator remains Kinect.

Spreadsheets wont. But other apps will be a good fit.
As smart devices become the norm, a non-smart device will be undesirable. The market will demand that every device has as many open "smart" features as possible and that every device has inter connectivity with other devices.
I think both will have no other choice but take that direction

To a degree. But the suggestion is X1 getting apps as used on phones and PC as a differentiator. Sooner or later there will be smart device saturation. When your TV is smart, your PVR, your phone and your watch, how much will functionality be used on a console and lack of it result in missed sales vs its primary role? We used to use PS3's web browser, but now there's no need as there's a tablet on hand. A docked browser with a walkthrough has some convenience, but it's hardly going to be the USP that moves a console. Compatibility with Yo! on your phone is going to be reason to buy an XB1? I'm not seeing it. The only value as a USP I see app support bringing would be a killer app, and I can't envision that. Plus any out-of-the-way app like Facebook VR Worlds can readily be ported as an app to the rival, so it wouldn't remain a differentiator for long.

 

[function]

Pixel shader programs can be upwards of 1000 instructions long in some cases today IIRC, certainly dozens for anything more than trivial stuff, so caching and chewing over the same data set over and over certainly comes into play. In most actual real-world situations, 18 CUs will whoop up on 12 CUs, even if the latter has a significant bandwidth advantage.

I don't disagree with your overall assessment, but there are situations where Xbox's BW will offer advantages.

The PS4 has the added complication (beyond PC GPUs) that the CPU pulls from the same pool, and that CPU access causes the GPU to lose roughly double the BW that the CPU is using (I don't know the reason).

Even with the 10% reserve in place there is at least one example - a post process filter - where within esram BW usage alone is higher than the PS4 GPU could expect to reliably have access too. This isn't to say that X1 will ever be "faster" than the PS4 across the entire of a frame (although there are probably some examples), just that the %40 advantage that the PS4 has in ALU won't always translate into being 40% faster.

That's where the hardware this generation becomes interesting, IMO.