Xbox Series X [XBSX] [Release November 10 2020]

Discussion in 'Console Technology' started by Megadrive1988, Dec 13, 2019.

  1. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    12,046
    Likes Received:
    13,421
    Location:
    The North
    Perhaps I’m not understanding, The developer has to choose how VRS works. It’s not a completely fixed function unit that just does work without being programmed to do it.
     
  2. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,372
    Likes Received:
    3,754
    There is now two distinctions with RDNA2 RT acceleration:

    1- It can't accelerate BVH Traversal, only ray intersections, traversal is performed by the shader cores.
    2- Ray Intersections is shared with texture units.

    In comparison, Turin RT cores:
    1- Accelerate BVH traversal on their own
    2- Ray Intersections is independent and is not shared with anything else

    So in a sense RDNA2 solution is hybrid, as it is shared between both textures and shaders compared to Turing's solution.

    (also posted in the RDNA 2 PC thread)
     
  3. chris1515

    Legend Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    4,476
    Location:
    Barcelona Spain
    I wasn't believing the rumor of 599 dollars. The console is probably significantly more expensive to make than the Xbox One X. I suppose price will be between 499 and 599 dollars for sure.
     
  4. Kugai Calo

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2020
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    97
    Isn't that supposed to be obvious? You don't even need to dig into the patent to see it, it's all in the D3D12 specifications.
     
  5. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,472
    Likes Received:
    4,410
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    From what I've seen, the one instruction per clock per wavefront rule still applies. A bunch of the wait states listed for prior generations may have been removed due to the addition of the second scalar unit and scheduler. Resources that used to be shared between multiple SIMDs were linked to only one, removing an area of contention between wavefronts.
    The various waitcnt scenarios were another category of dependence tracking, and have generally grown in number versus the official table of wait states. However, there are a number of errata concerning instruction combinations or branch scenarios that get cited as requiring NOPs, stalls, or non-dependent instructions for 1-2 cycles for GFX10. AMD labels those bugs, so perhaps RDNA2 fixes them, although the end result for Navi still means wait states.
     
    BRiT and iroboto like this.
  6. Nisaaru

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,044
    Likes Received:
    341
    Splinter Cell on the Xbox was leagues above the PS2/GCN versions.
     
  7. pTmdfx

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    282
    I am referring to the general case for most VALU/SALU instructions, now that the “hazard-free” (ish) back-to-back issuing is gone in Navi. It is true that indefinite long latency requests like VMEM or export still require explicit waiting, and that there are errata. But otherwise the arch does not require NOP to be inserted by the compiler to fill the pipeline bubbles, when two consecutive instructions have data dependency. The tracking/scoreboarding apparently covers also registers used by e.g. VMEM instructions in limited scenarios.

    That said I think RDNA still relies on compile time scheduling to minimise stalls, since there is no sign that it moves away from in-order execution.
     
    #1227 pTmdfx, Aug 18, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2020
  8. anexanhume

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    1,454
    Yes, that is my point. I mean, inherently things are done differently by virtue of D12X vs. whatever software backend Sony has. The key is that I don’t read anything in the HW description that seems beyond the tier 2 VRS standard, unless I missed something.
     
    #1228 anexanhume, Aug 18, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2020
  9. jlippo

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,514
    Likes Received:
    701
    Location:
    Finland
    If I understand it correctly AMD test is basically shooting against scene of single triangle. (Or box.)
    Nvidia uses some form of average/common depth until hit, combining box tests and final triangle tests in real world scene.

    So to get quess of what performance we have with Microsofts numbers for a scene we need to get average amount of box intersections before polygon intersections and average polygon count within final AABB etc box.
    With those we could have some sort of quess on performance for a rays.. in simplest case with coherent rays.

    Performance in case of incoherent rays and all sort of sorting etc methods need proper testing with same scenes etc.
    Same goes for shading and possible traversal restrictions and so on.
     
    #1229 jlippo, Aug 18, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2020
    iroboto and DavidGraham like this.
  10. function

    function None functional
    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    5,517
    Likes Received:
    3,260
    Location:
    Wrong thread
    I suppose this presentation makes Lockhart really come into focus.

    The big killer with cost for XSX is the SoC itself. As big as X1X but on a much more expensive process. Second biggest killer is GDDR6. XSX has a lot of it, and the cost of dram is dropping only very slowly now.

    The two biggest savings with Lockhart are on the die (GPU and memory bus significantly reduced) and also the amount of GDDR6 (likely down by 37.5%).

    There probably couldn't be the XSX we're seeing here without Lockhart.
     
    egoless, mawver, iroboto and 2 others like this.
  11. anexanhume

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    1,454
    I don’t think that’s a necessary conclusion. The PS5 has a remarkably similar BOM (estimated within $40) and will in all likelihood go on to sell at a higher volume.
     
    egoless likes this.
  12. function

    function None functional
    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    5,517
    Likes Received:
    3,260
    Location:
    Wrong thread
    Exactly, MS don't want to be eating $40 per unit only to be wiped out in the market. If that was the plan XSX simply wouldn't exist IMO. But we're moving away from pure tech talk now (which is probably my fault!). :)

    Back on topic, anyone want to take a guess at how much MS can shave of the XSX die for Lockhart? As we have a die shot for XSX, and we know roughly about TFlops and memory configuration we can probably start making some rough guesses now. Time to crack open MS paint and load up this:

     
  13. Xbat

    Veteran Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,549
    Likes Received:
    1,173
    Location:
    A farm in the middle of nowhere
    Won't having two different SKUs effect the economies of scale?
     
    megre likes this.
  14. Allandor

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    303
    Well, I guess they could reuse the whole chip to increase the production output. With 56 CUs on board, chips that don't make it may have at least 20 working CUs on board. This could greatly decrease production cost.
    And well, then there might be another chip just for lockhart with 22-24 CUs but the rest more or less unchanged (well a smaller GDDR6 interface). So I would guess .. ~30% smaller Die size.
     
    function likes this.
  15. Lalaland

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2013
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    690
    It definitely could, ideally the differences between XBSX and XBSS are about what XBSS does not have so that you can run both motherboards through the same production line and simply not add additional chips at certain points of the line. of course that would maximise your economy of scale on assembly and production but would hurt you in that every XBSS is now shipping with an m/b that is too feature rich for the job and thus not that much cheaper. On the other hand you can go with two separate lines and tailor both devices leaving you with very little overlap in terms of assembly but perhaps a materially tighter BoM that lets you seriously undercut PS5 with XBSS.

    The costs of getting these manufacturing choices wrong are very, very high (look at how many drastic PS3 revisions we got) so that's why I wasn't expecting a two SKU launch from MS (I don't count not shipping an ODD in one model as a multiple SKU strategy). It will be very interesting to see the degree of commonality between the two models as in some way it's a sign of confidence in their strategy, low amounts of commonality means they are going hard on maximising that discount on XBSS, high amounts of commonality suggests they are unsure of what their manufacturing split will be in the real world and want flexibility to adjust the mix up and down with little manufacturing impact.
     
    zupallinere, BRiT and function like this.
  16. Rikimaru

    Veteran Newcomer

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    407
    XBSX is 2 board design - it is more expensive.
    XBSS won't have it.
    But of course they will have similarly designed parts (PS3 with EE part on MB looks like torn from PS2).
     
  17. Lalaland

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2013
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    690
    Have they confirmed XBSS is single board?
    split motherboard.jpg
    This looks like the APU + RAM modules are on board A and the I/O ports and SSD are on B but I can't find any imagery to confirm that

    If they do abandon the dual board design then they are very confident in their strategy and will be going very hard for a lower price as you have basically trashed every part of the XBSX physical design at that point and will be custom everything for the XBSS (excepting the APU, presumably).
     
    #1237 Lalaland, Aug 18, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2020
  18. BoardBonobo

    BoardBonobo My hat is white(ish)!
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    3,379
    Likes Received:
    289
    Location:
    SurfMonkey's Cluster...
    And Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay... That looked so much better on the OG Xbox than on anything else at the time.
     
  19. Rikimaru

    Veteran Newcomer

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    407
    There was a rumor that S is not a tower.
    Also X devkit looks like Scorpio devkit (dunno if it has single board).
    There is no reason to make not very power hungry device with 2 boards.
     
  20. cheapchips

    Veteran Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,481
    Likes Received:
    1,448
    MS have been managing the One S/X just fine. They're arguable more divergent that the Series S/X. Same for PS4/Pro.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...