IMHO MS should have bought Tomb Raider/Deus Ex+teams from Square Enix last year. A completely missed opportunity.
Xbox Series X [XBSX] [Release November 10 2020]
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
-
- Tags
- microsoft xbox xbox series x xbsx
IMHO MS should have bought Tomb Raider/Deus Ex+teams from Square Enix last year. A completely missed opportunity.
cheapchips
Veteran
While ABK was still ongoing they couldn't if they'd wanted to. Or at least, wouldn't have helped their case.
Now that's nearly closed and Crystal are working on Perfect Dark, it seems like something MS should do.
Google Play Store Now Letting Spotify Use Alternative Billing for In-App Purchases
Google today announced that popular streaming music service Spotify will be able to bill Android users directly in the Google Play version of Spotify...www.macrumors.com
This is really all I can find on it. I haven't used spotify in years. But I think google still takes a cut
I have not tried a new payment in years, but years ago when I start subbing to Spotify, I must pay via their website, directly to Spotify. Just like paying for gamepass (direct from Xbox.com or Xbox console)
Thus I don't think Google can take any cut.
Dunno if they've added the ability to pay directly thru the app in my region.
I just don't think they have the value that people think they do. Deus EX is basicly a dead franchise and TR didn't really move the needle for MS last time it was an exclusive.
Im not sure, last time I subscribed I did it through the app but it has been years. I just have amazon music since the family plan is a lot cheaper for me
I think the franchise and production quality were there. It's about how you market them while providing consistency to raise interest and demand. Are Sony's Action Adventure titles really better?
Embracer paid 300M for both and other stuff which looks like a bargain to me compared to MS other purchases.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
I think it's not that those things wouldn't have value for MS, but rather that they already get those games through 3rd party and have their own offerings. MS doesn't need Lara when they have Senua and Joanna Dark. They don't really need Deus Ex when they have a ton of other Western dev RPGs like Starfield, ESIV, Avowed, Fable, Outer Worlds etc... IMO their next acquisition should be Japanese like Sega or Capcom. Japan is a lost cause, but things that would help them in Europe or on PC would be smart.
I can't find Xbox Series X thread, so will ask here.
1) Is it true what XSX fast ram is 320 bit and slow ram 192 bit, so that is total 512?
2) There are 6 chips with 2 GB of RAM and 4 with 1 GB of RAM. Is it true what 2 chips have 1 GB of fast RAM and 1 GB of slow RAM in each?
3) What is XSX RAM frequency?
MOD : Lliandry couldn't, I could 
2) There are 6 chips with 2 GB of RAM and 4 with 1 GB of RAM. Is it true what 2 chips have 1 GB of fast RAM and 1 GB of slow RAM in each?
3) What is XSX RAM frequency?
Last edited by a moderator:
I can't find Xbox Series X thread, so will ask here.
1) Is it true what XSX fast ram is 320 bit and slow ram 192 bit, so that is total 512?MOD : Lliandry couldn't, I could
2) There are 6 chips with 2 GB of RAM and 4 with 1 GB of RAM. Is it true what 2 chips have 1 GB of fast RAM and 1 GB of slow RAM in each?
3) What is XSX RAM frequency?
1) No, the bus doesn’t work like that. There are 6 chips with 2GB of memory and 4 chips with 1GB of memory. Each chip has 32 bit lanes to the cache. So when you access all 10 chips simultaneously it’s 10x32 which becomes 320 bits. If memory is stored in the remaining half of the 6 chips, it will pull 6x32bits which becomes 192bit pull per clock. You cannot add them together.
2) the chips are all the same speed. So the concept of fast and slow ram is a misnomer here. The series X can access all 10 chips or 6 chips. The reason is how we store data into memory, to maximize bandwidth we split the data over as many chips as possible so that in a single clock cycle we can pull all the chips at once. So you will always write to chips evenly. Once the 1GB portion of each chip is filled, it will start filling the remaining 6 chips they have 1GB of storage remaining and data will now be divided over 6 chips.
Thus we get to accessing 10 chips (320bits) or 6 chips (192bits). You can consider this a high bandwidth pool and a lower bandwidth pool. The actual memory speed operates the same between the two pools.
3) it’s the same as any GDDR5 of that. The slower variant, the faster variant would be significantly more expensive for minimal bandwidth gain.
That suggests as you fill more memory, you end up hitting a threshold where it slows down. That could mean a situation where you access one texture and it's on the fast side of that 10GB line, and then another texture on the slow side, and can't be sure what BW you data will be. Isn't it a case that the devs can choose where to put the data, in the first half with higher BW or the second half with lower BW?
Yes. There is a memory shuffle command to move things from slow to fast pool or vice versa. Apparently this is terribly slow and they advise against it for runtime
I largely suspect that they make use of keeping things where they belong, graphics in the fast pool and all other media in the slow. It may be more advantageous to use lower quality assets than to spill over if under a time constraint to make things work. I actually think we see this often, ps5 textures do come across as looking slightly better.
But it’s hard to say without developer input here.
There are some tools provided for series consoles though; both VRS and SFS and reduce the bandwidth requirements and space requirements. Other options may include to have longer shaders to do more things in a single pass reducing the number of buffers required.
Is the shuffle the only option? Back in The Day one could choose the exact memory locations of data! If not, which I can well expect with the engines being cross-platform and handling memory automatically, maybe that's proving an unexpected bottleneck in some XBSX games? Perhaps data isn't always being ideally located?
I'm pretty sure they fix this with the MMU to have linear memory so you have control over what's fast and slower. Most of that slower memory pool is most likely be used by the OS, io cache or code.
You have control over where the memory sits as per @Nisaaru. I called the memory rotation a shuffle, but it’s not actually a shuffle, you are just moving it. But if you need to rotate something from fast to slow or vice versa that it’s a slow command.
I don’t think memory rotation is typically used by developers, it’s just there if they need it. This item is in the leaked Sdk documentation and they describe it in decent detail, and is discouraged but they have been improving its speed.
I'm not sure if valuation is that simple from a business stand point.
With Embracer purchase I thought there was always speculation that the numbers put out may not have told the full story? I believe the word was the studios were not cash flow positive and Embracer was also taking on their debt/liabilities. It's worth mentioning that Amazon chose to lease the Tomb Raider IP from Embracer for a reported $600m just half a year after the purchase. So if the numbers were completely straight forward than Microsoft is not the only one that misjudged by far.
In terms of franchise valuation. As much as I like Deus Ex (the original would be on my short list of considerations for favorite of all time, and I actually like IW even) and the cyberpunk genre in general I have to admit it overall does not have the broad mainstream appeal. And with the direct comparison to Sony these days I feel the general mainstream impression for Tomb Raider is it's the "we have Uncharted at home" franchise.
As I understand XSX can't get all 560 GB/s and all 336 GB/s at the same time. I calculated this. 560 GB/s 10 GB means what all RAM can be write or read 56 times per second. 336 GB/s 6 GB also 56 times per second. On PS5 448 GB/s 16 GB 28 times per second. So in some scenarious in multiplatfor games that will be 280 GB/s of fast RAM and 168 GB/s of slow RAM. 28 times and 28 times and 448 GB/s total same as PS5. So there is no any advantges on XSX. But only in some scenarious. In some exclusive games for XSX developers can use RAM different, but for now we don't know if they will.
You look at this from a completely impractical angle.
Unified memory bandwidth is shared so there is always memory access demand from different sources. What matters is that when the GPU is accessing the fast pool it could get 560GB/s as long as it has access and the GPU/Shaders/Driver is actually able to make use of that bandwidth.
When the CPU or whatever IO accesses the slow pool the related memory channels are blocked for that time which obviously limits GPU bandwidth for that timeframe.
That's not any different on the PS5.
The difference is that the XSX can get more bandwidth when it matters.
Ok, thanks for mentioning about PS5 bandwidth, but anyway xsx don't have 560 GB/s, in most of scenariuos that will be same or very similar to PS5. In thery that is possible what BW for GPU will be higher than on PS5, but that still will not be big difference. Why they made this idea with two pools? That only will give more work for developers.
Sigh....let's make it as simple as possible
The XSX can move more data when *it* needs to compared to the PS5 but I don't even know if the PS5 GPU could effectively use more bandwidth if it had it.
Will both reach their maximum bandwidth all the time. No.
Will they reach it most of the time? Unlikely.
Does it matter? Depends if a game on the XSX actually needs and can use the extra bandwidth it has over the PS5. That only developers can really answer per case and depends on so many factors.
People with the dev information can probably explain the details more accurate.
There is 10GB fast memory and 6GB slow memory
2.5 GB is reserved memory for the OS and whatever and which is most likely mostly slow memory.
So you have 3.5GB slow memory left.
Now when a game is loaded all its code sections would go into the slow memory.
Audio data would be slow memory.
Some IO cache would be slow memory.
What's left the game can probably decide on the fly what data is less relevant.
If that gives significant more work for developers they are in the wrong job.
Why did they do it this way?
More bandwidth when needed while not increasing the price of the console if they added extra memory.
The XSX can move more data when *it* needs to compared to the PS5 but I don't even know if the PS5 GPU could effectively use more bandwidth if it had it.
Will both reach their maximum bandwidth all the time. No.
Will they reach it most of the time? Unlikely.
Does it matter? Depends if a game on the XSX actually needs and can use the extra bandwidth it has over the PS5. That only developers can really answer per case and depends on so many factors.
People with the dev information can probably explain the details more accurate.
There is 10GB fast memory and 6GB slow memory
2.5 GB is reserved memory for the OS and whatever and which is most likely mostly slow memory.
So you have 3.5GB slow memory left.
Now when a game is loaded all its code sections would go into the slow memory.
Audio data would be slow memory.
Some IO cache would be slow memory.
What's left the game can probably decide on the fly what data is less relevant.
If that gives significant more work for developers they are in the wrong job.
Why did they do it this way?
More bandwidth when needed while not increasing the price of the console if they added extra memory.
The question is the studios with it and ip. Tomb raider would be the only worth while ip but even that has been damaged with bad movies and games. I don't even know if there was another dues ex in development. So what would they really get in the deal ?
Bethesda was a bunch of dev studios and strong ip, activision is the same thing. I dunno
I thought the last 3 TR games were quite strong. Deus Ex would have added another franchise with a lot of potential.
People criticise that MS doesn't provide Action Adventure/Single player experiences and both of these franchises could have provided that or at least could be used as a foundation to build up on.
Similar threads
- Locked
