Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Xbox One: GPU Clock Speed Increased


23 posts in this topic

Posted

From Engadget: 

 

Plain old civilians like us can't buy Xbox One just yet, but some lucky folks who work for Microsoft already have beta units in their homes. Xbox VP Marc Whittenshared that tidbit, among others, with Xbox spokeperson Larry "Major Nelson" Hryb on a recent podcast. Not only do some folks internal to Microsoft have beta kits of final retail units, but many game developers have their hands on final versions of development kits.

Given that last bit, Whitten said that Microsoft increased the Xbox One's GPU clock speed from 800MHz to 853MHz, released its "mono driver" to developers -- a DirectX graphics driver "100% optimized for Xbox One" -- and more and more games are inching closer to "final" every day as a result. Essentially, Whitten's signaling the transition for Xbox One from a model seen only at press briefings to a physical thing you can own and use. Though Whitten kept mum about many other details, he repeatedly reiterated that we'd hear more solid detail at Gamescom in a few weeks. We'll of course be on the ground in Cologne, hounding Whitten and co. for more.

Today's Xbox One news comes just over a week after Microsoft revealed a moreindie-friendly publishing model for its upcoming game console. It was also recently revealed that each Xbox One console acts as debug hardware, allowing developers to run incomplete code on any box -- a concept with major implications. Xbox One arrives this November and, should you be convinced by Microsoft's next-gen game console, it'll cost you $500.

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2013/08/02/xbox-one-internal-beta/

 

This doesn't surprise me as there was a rumor which pointed to this a while back. Now it makes more sense to hear developers say the boxes are pretty equal, for example John Carmack. I hope they release more specifics about the hardware because we've not heard too much officially. I'm listening to the podcast now to see if there's anymore cool tid bits to add. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Could do with a bit more

 

PS4 GPU @ 800MHz
1.84 TFLOPS
57,600 MTex/s
25,600 MPix/s
176GB/s
 
Xbox One GPU @ 853MHz
1.31 TFLOPS
40,944 MTex/s
13,648 MPix/s
68GB/s + eSRAM
 
On a related note I hope this is because it really can be done okay, and not to try and close the gap on the PS4 and worry about any issues overclocking this late later (aka "RROD"). It's a strange number to land on 53mhz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess that increase is better than nothing, even if it's still far behind. Multiplatform games will suffer slightly less now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

 

Could do with a bit more

 

PS4 GPU @ 800MHz
1.84 TFLOPS
57,600 MTex/s
25,600 MPix/s
176GB/s
 
Xbox One GPU @ 853MHz
1.31 TFLOPS
40,944 MTex/s
13,648 MPix/s
68GB/s + eSRAM
 
On a related note I hope this is because it really can be done okay, and not to try and close the gap on the PS4 and worry about any issues overclocking this late later (aka "RROD"). It's a strange number to land on 53mhz.

 

Not really, it creates an unbalance between the CPU and GPU because of the memory architecture. Also, its far from raw specs. The recent developer interviews should show you that.

 

What's interesting on this podcast is he's referring how they've build DirectX for the X1. They took 11.2 and took any PC elements out of it and created it specifically for the X1 so it's '100% optimized' for the X1.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

 

Could do with a bit more

 

PS4 GPU @ 800MHz
1.84 TFLOPS
57,600 MTex/s
25,600 MPix/s
176GB/s
 
Xbox One GPU @ 853MHz
1.31 TFLOPS
40,944 MTex/s
13,648 MPix/s
68GB/s + eSRAM
 
On a related note I hope this is because it really can be done okay, and not to try and close the gap on the PS4 and worry about any issues overclocking this late later (aka "RROD"). It's a strange number to land on 53mhz.

 

 

The new Xbox One is a large unit, heat dissipation was one of Microsoft's major concerns after the RROD fiasco so they built it bigger with more room for air flow and additional cooling.

I don't think they'd have any over-heating issues this time around it cost them way too much in warranty returns/repairs.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

People need to stop looking at just the raw theoretical numbers the hardware "could" do when that's never been the case.   It's been said a number of times that even if you have 30% more hardware "power" it doesn't equal a 30% performance gain/difference.  These things don't scale like that.

 

When developers say the two are close they mean it, the difference is more like 10-15% I bet, and at that we're talking a few extra frames per second, around 5 or so depending on what number one is running at as the base.  But if XB1 games already hit 60fps at 1080p then if the PS4 does 69fps it matters little in the end.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

 

Could do with a bit more

 

PS4 GPU @ 800MHz
1.84 TFLOPS
57,600 MTex/s
25,600 MPix/s
176GB/s
 
Xbox One GPU @ 853MHz
1.31 TFLOPS
40,944 MTex/s
13,648 MPix/s
68GB/s + eSRAM
 
On a related note I hope this is because it really can be done okay, and not to try and close the gap on the PS4 and worry about any issues overclocking this late later (aka "RROD"). It's a strange number to land on 53mhz.

 

why did you just write eSRAM,and not 124GB/S ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The new Xbox One is a large unit, heat dissipation was one of Microsoft's major concerns after the RROD fiasco so they built it bigger with more room for air flow and additional cooling.

I don't think they'd have any over-heating issues this time around it cost them way too much in warranty returns/repairs.

 

Well they will have more heat than Sony due to embedded RAM. I believe it's something like 5 billions transistors in the Xbox One and 3. something billion in the PS4? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

People need to stop looking at just the raw theoretical numbers the hardware "could" do when that's never been the case.   It's been said a number of times that even if you have 30% more hardware "power" it doesn't equal a 30% performance gain/difference.  These things don't scale like that.

 

When developers say the two are close they mean it, the difference is more like 10-15% I bet, and at that we're talking a few extra frames per second, around 5 or so depending on what number one is running at as the base.  But if XB1 games already hit 60fps at 1080p then if the PS4 does 69fps it matters little in the end.  

Far from it, the software/hardware harmony matters more in a console because its fixed hardware. If you've got poor development tools and software stacks then you're not going to be able to exploit much of the power in a optimized way. GDDR also creates HUGE bottlenecks in the CPU.

 

I'm excited to see so much used of the cloud in the release titles. Turn 10 stating that they can off-load 10-20% of the load on the cloud, does actually give 10%-20% more power to work with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Far from it, the software/hardware harmony matters more in a console because its fixed hardware. If you've got poor development tools and software stacks then you're not going to be able to exploit much of the power in a optimized way. GDDR also creates HUGE bottlenecks in the CPU.

 

I'm excited to see so much used of the cloud in the release titles. Turn 10 stating that they can off-load 10-20% of the load on the cloud, does actually give 10%-20% more power to work with.

 

I agree with the optimization being so important but I'm just pointing out that even if one GPU has 30% more hardware resources/raw theoretical power it doesn't give it a 30% performance advantage as well.  It's like some people don't follow benchmarks for things.  CPUs and GPUs just don't scale that way.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree with the optimization being so important but I'm just pointing out that even if one GPU has 30% more hardware resources/raw theoretical power it doesn't give it a 30% performance advantage as well.  It's like some people don't follow benchmarks for things.  CPUs and GPUs just don't scale that way.  

Yeah sorry, I just word my posts in a weird way. I was referring to the FPS difference.

 

If you was calculating pi to a billion decimal places, then the PS4's GPU would be a large percentage faster. With games, it's more about optimizing the processes in parallel the best way possible to get the most out of the GPU. The GPU is hardly ever maxed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The New Generation should be called: THE SPEC SHEET WARS...

 

I threw "Spec Sheet" brag out the window years ago.

 

The PS2 Spec Sheet was better than the Dreamcast.

I felt the Dreamcast was the better performer.

 

I've learned to take physical/software performance over whats written down.

 

If Microsoft has all the hardware and software working in harmony... And give the developers the proper tools (which are always top notch)....

 

I'm sold...  I was sold at the reveal...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The New Generation should be called: THE SPEC SHEET WARS...

 

I threw "Spec Sheet" brag out the window years ago.

 

The PS2 Spec Sheet was better than the Dreamcast.

I felt the Dreamcast was the better performer.

 

I've learned to take physical/software performance over whats written down.

 

If Microsoft has all the hardware and software working in harmony... And give the developers the proper tools (which are always top notch)....

 

I'm sold...  I was sold at the reveal...

 

In the case of the ps2/dc, the specs sheet was right. The ps2 did far more than the dreamcast would have been capable of.

 

And you were seriously sold on "TV TV TV"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

In the case of the ps2/dc, the specs sheet was right. The ps2 did far more than the dreamcast would have been capable of.

 

And you were seriously sold on "TV TV TV"?

 

 

Yes I'm sold on tv,tv,tv...sports. skype. snap in... all digital library where i can jump in between games and college sports and the NFL, and back to my Watch Dogs in a split second....

 

I'm paying $500 it better do more than game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

 

Could do with a bit more

 

PS4 GPU @ 800MHz
1.84 TFLOPS
57,600 MTex/s
25,600 MPix/s
176GB/s
 
Xbox One GPU @ 853MHz
1.31 TFLOPS
40,944 MTex/s
13,648 MPix/s
68GB/s + eSRAM
 
On a related note I hope this is because it really can be done okay, and not to try and close the gap on the PS4 and worry about any issues overclocking this late later (aka "RROD"). It's a strange number to land on 53mhz.

 

 

 

 

Was there ever confirmation on the eSRAM running at 192GB/s? I saw that floating around a while back.

 

 

Either way, more speed is always better. What it means overall is less clear to me.

 

As far as this impacting the reliability of the console, it sounds like they are aiming to squeeze every bit of performance out of the hardware within their thermal limit. That 53 number may be evidence of nearing the thermal limit they built the machine to handle.

 

Its nice to hear they are still refining the system though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Well they will have more heat than Sony due to embedded RAM. I believe it's something like 5 billions transistors in the Xbox One and 3. something billion in the PS4? 

They have a larger box too. I think the odd 53 number is the highest they can do while still being "virtually silent".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The New Generation should be called: THE SPEC SHEET WARS...

 

I threw "Spec Sheet" brag out the window years ago.

 

The PS2 Spec Sheet was better than the Dreamcast.

I felt the Dreamcast was the better performer.

 

I've learned to take physical/software performance over whats written down.

 

Every generation has it's spec sheet war. It's inevitable. In the end it has little bearing on sales of a console.

 

OG Xbox was more powerful than PS2, PS3 more powerful than Wii etc. What most people care about is value for money and exclusives these days, and usually they both have to be in hand. That's why the Wii U's unofficial price drop last month didn't help the sales, there's still a drought of exclusives on offer.

 

I feel the X1 and PS4 will have a repeat of this generation. The PS4 is obviously better on paper, but Microsoft have great tools to allow devs to keep games close to performing the same. Plus they develop for the stronger console and the weaker one benefits in the process as a by-product almost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Every generation has it's spec sheet war. It's inevitable. In the end it has little bearing on sales of a console.

OG Xbox was more powerful than PS2, PS3 more powerful than Wii etc. What most people care about is value for money and exclusives these days, and usually they both have to be in hand. That's why the Wii U's unofficial price drop last month didn't help the sales, there's still a drought of exclusives on offer.

I didn't even go to the PS2 right away because they couldn't give me a Phantasy Star type of game.

Or a single player game like Shemnue. It was 3-4 yrs into the PS2 that I got one.

I feel the X1 and PS4 will have a repeat of this generation. The PS4 is obviously better on paper, but Microsoft have great tools to allow devs to keep games close to performing the same. Plus they develop for the stronger console and the weaker one benefits in the process as a by-product almost.

That is true... What sold me on the Xbox, 360, & now Xbox One, is the infrastructure behind it..

Phantasy Star on the Dreamcast, to made my imagination go nuts. And I said I will no longer be confined to the box and disc that is in it.. The XBOX One Is tearing down the already excellent Xbox Live, and giving developers what seems like a blank canvas to create till their hearts content.

I did a post earlier, about the Internet being the killer feature and it's your ISP who's is holding you back this generation.. And I still believe that... Specs are a need don't get me wrong, to see this come to fruition... But Microsoft should focus on specs to make the Xbox better.., and not worry about the comp...

Xbox live as a service made people forget about specs, and I think that will also be the key for this gen as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That is true... What sold me on the Xbox, 360, & now Xbox One, is the infrastructure behind it..

Phantasy Star on the Dreamcast, to made my imagination go nuts. And I said I will no longer be confined to the box and disc that is in it.. The XBOX One Is tearing down the already excellent Xbox Live, and giving developers what seems like a blank canvas to create till their hearts content.

I did a post earlier, about the Internet being the killer feature and it's your ISP who's is holding you back this generation.. And I still believe that... Specs are a need don't get me wrong, to see this come to fruition... But Microsoft should focus on specs to make the Xbox better.., and not worry about the comp...

Xbox live as a service made people forget about specs, and I think that will also be the key for this gen as well

I think their NFL deal will really help their sales, especially when it comes to the Super Bowl. So I would agree that services will be crucial, but at the same time, a lot of people don't care about 'killer' services and just want to play some freaking incredible games. Perhaps the bigger advantage is XBox One's family friendly potential--kids go bonkers over Kinect, and the next gen motion games should impress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think their NFL deal will really help their sales, especially when it comes to the Super Bowl. So I would agree that services will be crucial, but at the same time, a lot of people don't care about 'killer' services and just want to play some freaking incredible games. Perhaps the bigger advantage is XBox One's family friendly potential--kids go bonkers over Kinect, and the next gen motion games should impress.

 

I agree that the NFL deal will bring in customers to the Xbox One, but to anyone outside of the US it won't matter (Unless they are originally from the US and liked NFL)

 

The Kinect 2.0 on the other hand is the main advantage the Xbox One has in my opinion, I'm not too sure but I think the PS4 Eye will still utilize the Move Orb Controllers... I didn't use the PS3 Move and I wont use the PS4 Eye if that's the case and would rather buy the Xbox One for its kinect motion control options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

 

 

On a related note I hope this is because it really can be done okay, and not to try and close the gap on the PS4

 

 

Exactly what i was thinking. I doubt they'd want to go through all that again, especially as that would be a game ender.

Every generation has it's spec sheet war. It's inevitable. In the end it has little bearing on sales of a console.

 

OG Xbox was more powerful than PS2, PS3 more powerful than Wii etc. What most people care about is value for money and exclusives these days, and usually they both have to be in hand. That's why the Wii U's unofficial price drop last month didn't help the sales, there's still a drought of exclusives on offer.

 

I feel the X1 and PS4 will have a repeat of this generation. The PS4 is obviously better on paper, but Microsoft have great tools to allow devs to keep games close to performing the same. Plus they develop for the stronger console and the weaker one benefits in the process as a by-product almost.

 

This all makes sense to me and why i doubt there will be much difference between the performance of the two once they're released.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

well the Dreamcast   did perform better  looked better  in some cases  because  it had more Vram back then .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Xbox One games look good enough to me where they are now. It does not bother me that the PS4 games will look slightly better.

I don't need an additional 53mhz, if it's gonna over heat the console... I understand it's has a huge fan and built large for heat dissipation, but iirc, faster means shorter lifespan with internal components... I rather have the always on 10yr brag, than slightly increased gpu clock speed and shorter hardware lifespan.

Now if the increase was within (well within to be safe) its thermal limits... Well I say, thank you for the boost...

Just make sure that all software is properly optimized, all drivers are up to snuff, and all the other good stuff...

Xbox On (actually can't wait to say that)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.