Xbox One Architecture Finally Explained

[neoadorable]

you flat out missed my point, even a moderate gaming PC used GDDR5 for graphics intense and DDR3 isn't mean to perform that level of sophisticate task. As for the PS4, it also have extra 2GB of DDR3 RAM to help facilitate background processing and if that is what you're referring what is the purpose of 2GB RAM. 

 

Totally got your point and only partly agree with it - sure GDDR5 is preferrable for graphics processing, but it's basically DDR3. They went for an all-DDR3 approach to save costs. They also went on public record saying they are not targeting highest end graphics (they i mean MS). All-DDR3 works well on other lower cost systems, like non-gaming laptops, which can still run many games with very decent performance.

 

The 2GB DDR3 on PS4 everyone thinks is helping run background processes - well, that explanation makes sense, but then why is there a 3GB OS reserve on the main system memory? This holds true for X1 as well. Why the main memory reserve if there is extra/secondary memory and storage on the board? That's the part of the architecture i don't understand in both.

 

EDIT: OK, correction to myself - on PS4 that is not 2GB DDR3, it's 2Gb DDR3...or 256MB in other words. The websites i read a couple months back all had it listed as 2GB. Guess that small amount of memory is indeed for various assists. I would still like an explanation from MS if possible what that 8GB flash is doing on the X1 board. And would also be nice to know what the boost speeds are on the CPUs, as both have confirmed the stated clocks are base standard settings, not boost settings in games.

[BajiRav]

8GB flash is likely used for speeding up hdd access (like those newer hybrid drives). There are a number of ways it could be used and you are right that only MS can clarify its actual application.

[Melfster]

Just throwing this out there but... you could get a gaming PC and keep your system upgraded to the latest and greatest every three years, enjoying things like real backwards compatibility, multitasking, digital content without a paywall, streaming capabilities... Oh, and you don't need three operating systems! :woot:

 

lol, joking aside, the world is full of options. I personally wouldn't want consoles updating every 3 years though honestly, as I'd feel it'd only create frustration for consumers.

Its already a frustration for consumers on Xbox one and the PS4 .  You have to through out your back catalog unlike a PC.  Maybe design the hardware in such a way tnat you can swap out the APU with future APU. It seems silly to have console last for 10 years in the age where the smart phone keeps on getting faster.  I mean how long until your smart phone outperforms your console.

[Thief000]

This isn't news and I mentioned it months ago. For people not connected: Didn't the build numbering give it away for you?

[NeoWind]

Its already a frustration for consumers on Xbox one and the PS4 .  You have to through out your back catalog unlike a PC.  Maybe design the hardware in such a way tnat you can swap out the APU with future APU. It seems silly to have console last for 10 years in the age where the smart phone keeps on getting faster.  I mean how long until your smart phone outperforms your console.

If i was the one who in charge of X1 or PS4, my first priority will make sure it include thunderbolt 2 to supercharge the GPU for the next few years without purchasing any new console. This will definitely save them enormous of pain in the butt for worrying it become outdated and will probably save more cost in the long run without the concern of backward compatibility as well. 

[NeoWind]

8GB flash is likely used for speeding up hdd access (like those newer hybrid drives). There are a number of ways it could be used and you are right that only MS can clarify its actual application.

Most likely preserve for cache. PS4 will more likely benefit it if they have 8GB flash because of GDDR5 which the latency is slower but the secondary processors is good enough compared to X1 alternative. 

[Raa]

Excellent, then I expect to be able to run all my current Windows programs on one soon then? :P

[neoadorable]

8GB is a lot for cache. I think Baji is right, this must be an onboard SSH, a hybrid drive, to compensate for the frankly quite slow 5400rpm main HDD.

[JonnyLH]

The 3 OS system is something which definitely supports the way they're doing updates. Also, with how DX is handled on the device, I can understand that DX12 will really streamline and optimise how it's handled on the box. 

[trooper11]

in another wording: "Significant Bloat" happens in full-fledged Windows 8, that it need to stripped down to achieve more streamlined performance, which sometimes are not even enough for 1080p/60 .... ?

 

in any case, i wonder is there any detailed lists of what the differences between the stripped down vs full-fledged capability?

Its full windows. Don't you think there are parts of windows that are not needed to play a game? Why try to make this some shot against MS? A general use os would not be the answer to reduce overhead as much as possible while playing a game.

As far as it not being enough to allow all games to hit 1080p/60, there are plenty of other factors that make or break that. Removing OS overhead is useful I'm sure, but its other things like hardware, firmware, and drivers that would move the needle more.

 

 

you flat out missed my point, even a moderate gaming PC used GDDR5 for graphics intense and DDR3 isn't mean to perform that level of sophisticate task. As for the PS4, it also have extra 2GB of DDR3 RAM to help facilitate background processing and if that is what you're referring what is the purpose of 2GB RAM.

A big reason is cost. Sony got very lucky that their bet worked out. They made that pick late in the cycle and was able to get really good yields on the manufacturing side. MS felt that they could make up the difference in a way that saved money. Maybe that choice also matched better on the software side, since the OS is windows after all.

[riahc3]

(first one was derived from Windows 2000).

Actually, this a long running myth.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/xboxteam/archive/2006/02/17/534421.aspx

Its based on Windows APIs, that is true.

[NeoWind]

Its full windows. Don't you think there are parts of windows that are not needed to play a game? Why try to make this some shot against MS? A general use os would not be the answer to reduce overhead as much as possible while playing a game.

As far as it not being enough to allow all games to hit 1080p/60, there are plenty of other factors that make or break that. Removing OS overhead is useful I'm sure, but its other things like hardware, firmware, and drivers that would move the needle more.

 

 

A big reason is cost. Sony got very lucky that their bet worked out. They made that pick late in the cycle and was able to get really good yields on the manufacturing side. MS felt that they could make up the difference in a way that saved money. Maybe that choice also matched better on the software side, since the OS is windows after all.

Microsoft is a companies like 10 times bigger than sony and yet they unable to offered a better memory. Full of excuse if it's to save cost which is implausible. Microsoft should felt embarrassed after more than a decade of experience competing the console war.  Those ddr3 memory is worst than the xbox 360 and how do you expect them to hit 1080p for games like GTA in the future and DX12 won't help much. 

[dead.cell]

Its already a frustration for consumers on Xbox one and the PS4 .  You have to through out your back catalog unlike a PC.  Maybe design the hardware in such a way tnat you can swap out the APU with future APU. It seems silly to have console last for 10 years in the age where the smart phone keeps on getting faster.  I mean how long until your smart phone outperforms your console.

Give it time. Gaming consoles today are much closer to being a PC these days.

 

I feel like the winner of the next generation of gaming will be the ones who are able to bridge the gap between PC gamers and the couch mongers who want something easier to approach in their living room. Steambox might not be the answer, but it's worth noting that Valve is on the right track.

 

Given what's under the hood of the Xbox One already, imagine if Microsoft were the ones to make this happen: a PC that does open platform as well as Xbox games. An easy and seamless transition. I feel Microsoft could go from living on the outskirts of PC gaming to the renown king if they did this. Given their recent statement of discontinuing their rivalry/grind with Valve by trying to create GFWL or something of the equivalent (that would take forEVER to gain traction), they could easily grab their arm and work together in providing a solid experience.

 

Yes, I know I'm day-dreaming, but one can only imagine...

[BajiRav]

Actually, this a long running myth.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/xboxteam/archive/2006/02/17/534421.aspx

Its based on Windows APIs, that is true.

When I said Windows 2000, I meant NT5. I have seen that blog post but it doesn't say as such explicitly.i find it difficult to believe that they built from the ground up especially since they had a solid foundation in NT.

[riahc3]

When I said Windows 2000, I meant NT5. I have seen that blog post but it doesn't say as such explicitly.i find it difficult to believe that they built from the ground up especially since they had a solid foundation in NT.

I mean you are free to believe what ever you want but when if it comes from Microsoft, the guys who built it, its kind difficult not to believe them :laugh:

I just posted it to make sure that myth isnt spread around any more. I believed it too back in the day.

[trooper11]

Microsoft is a companies like 10 times bigger than sony and yet they unable to offered a better memory. Full of excuse if it's to save cost which is implausible. Microsoft should felt embarrassed after more than a decade of experience competing the console war.  Those ddr3 memory is worst than the xbox 360 and how do you expect them to hit 1080p for games like GTA in the future and DX12 won't help much.

Implausible? Its well documented that Sony had to wait until the last minute to go from 4GB of GDDR5 to 8GB once they felt that pricing would not be high enough to force them to increase the price of the console.

MS had planned for 8GB DDR3 for a while and they obviously were not confident that pricing would come down enough on GDDR5 to make that choice.

I know what ifs are not very useful, but considering what we know about how the consoles developed, what if Sony had not been able to get that bump to 8GB? What if we were looking at a ps4 with 4GB of GDDR5 vs an X1 with 8GB DDR3? That could have happened if Sony had not taken the chance on pricing coming down close to launch.

Just because MS is a big company doesn't mean they can just throw money away on a risk. I'm not saying that hindsight is not 20/20. Of course if MS knew then what they know now, the choice of ram could have been completely different. Maybe they go with GDDR5, or maybe they double the size of the esram. But back then, when neither company knew for sure what the pricing would be, they had to make a choice and chose the safer route, the more predictable route. Pricing for ddr3 ram was clearly established.

Let's also remember that the gpu is much more likely to be the reason a game does not run at 1080p, not the ram.

 

 

Given what's under the hood of the Xbox One already, imagine if Microsoft were the ones to make this happen: a PC that does open platform as well as Xbox games. An easy and seamless transition. I feel Microsoft could go from living on the outskirts of PC gaming to the renown king if they did this. Given their recent statement of discontinuing their rivalry/grind with Valve by trying to create GFWL or something of the equivalent (that would take forEVER to gain traction), they could easily grab their arm and work together in providing a solid experience.

 

Yes, I know I'm day-dreaming, but one can only imagine...

Its not as crazy an idea as it use to be.

MS has shown signs of maybe moving away from Xbox gaming being focused on console hardware. If they are moving towards gaming as a service as they are with other software, you could indeed see them work more with Valve/Steam in that process. Alternatively, you may see them use the universal app capability to push a new Xbox Live service that spans all of their hardware devices in a cohesive way that GFWL never could.

[neoadorable]

Consolidation of PCs and consoles is something that's been going on since the first time you could play a music CD on a console, whichever one that was - even a dinosaur like me can't remember. Ultimately separation of devices as we know it will largely disappear, but not yet. Microsoft are the first ones with a vested interest in this happening, let's not forget Xbox was greenlit because it was a neat way to get DX and Windows into more industries and expand their market presence. X1 is definitely a Win 8 machine and there's nothing wrong with that, we knew from the get go it would be. I was really expecting to be asked if i wanted to import settings from my Win 8 PC or Win Phone 8 Nokia on first setup...kinda disappointed she didn't ask me that :wacko:

[KevinN206]

There's an erroneous claim that you make about overheating due to DDR3. It's rather ironic because the DDR3 memory chips on the XB1 don't use any kind of heatsink. The PS4, GDDR5, however, has a heatsink on each of the memory chips. There's absolutely no reason why MS would have to use LPDDR3 to prevent overheating because there's NO overheating issues with DDR3. 

 

This console war reminds of the old GHz war between Intel and AMD as having higher GHz was better, but many people didn't realize that wasn't always the case. For awhile, AMD was performing better at the same clock due to higher IPC. If you can do more per cycle, then you are likely to be faster. Then there are people who claim software can't bring THAT kind of performance improvement because it's limited by the performance of the hardware. And yet computer scientists spend an enormous time to optimize algorithms. For basic comparison, look at the many sorting algorithms.

 

PS4 GDDR5 heatsink:

http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/QiyYGcB2mVAtCcxy

http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/bcJDxQBuMrRqfBpR

 

XB1 DDR3 no heatsink: 

http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/RkWPgfeRsJdBcOcx

http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/6CudjFuUBs32otCX

 

You know, i find it uncanny that the Xbox One didn't have a GDDR5 Memory and instead opted for DDR3. What in the world would you want to put that type of memory for intense gaming stuff? Faster multi-tasking won't do much for console. Xbox 360 included GGDR3 and it just makes sense to put it for the successors with a much more powerful memory. I'm skeptical that the Xbox division management barely have any clue of what next-generation hardware requirements and i won't be surprised if the 9TH generation console of Xbox utilize LPDDR3 RAM to prevent it from overheating the box.  :crazy:

[NeoWind]

 

There's an erroneous claim that you make about overheating due to DDR3. It's rather ironic because the DDR3 memory chips on the XB1 don't use any kind of heatsink. The PS4, GDDR5, however, has a heatsink on each of the memory chips. There's absolutely no reason why MS would have to use LPDDR3 to prevent overheating because there's NO overheating issues with DDR3. 

 

This console war reminds of the old GHz war between Intel and AMD as having higher GHz was better, but many people didn't realize that wasn't always the case. For awhile, AMD was performing better at the same clock due to higher IPC. If you can do more per cycle, then you are likely to be faster. Then there are people who claim software can't bring THAT kind of performance improvement because it's limited by the performance of the hardware. And yet computer scientists spend an enormous time to optimize algorithms. For basic comparison, look at the many sorting algorithms.

 

PS4 GDDR5 heatsink:

http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/QiyYGcB2mVAtCcxy

http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/bcJDxQBuMrRqfBpR

 

XB1 DDR3 no heatsink: 

http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/RkWPgfeRsJdBcOcx

http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/6CudjFuUBs32otCX

 

Obviously, i was just pointing out that the LPDDR3 will just makes the overall box run cooler and use lesser energy consumption. It will alleviate from overheating not from the RAM itself.

[NeoWind]

Implausible? Its well documented that Sony had to wait until the last minute to go from 4GB of GDDR5 to 8GB once they felt that pricing would not be high enough to force them to increase the price of the console.

MS had planned for 8GB DDR3 for a while and they obviously were not confident that pricing would come down enough on GDDR5 to make that choice.

I know what ifs are not very useful, but considering what we know about how the consoles developed, what if Sony had not been able to get that bump to 8GB? What if we were looking at a ps4 with 4GB of GDDR5 vs an X1 with 8GB DDR3? That could have happened if Sony had not taken the chance on pricing coming down close to launch.

Just because MS is a big company doesn't mean they can just throw money away on a risk. I'm not saying that hindsight is not 20/20. Of course if MS knew then what they know now, the choice of ram could have been completely different. Maybe they go with GDDR5, or maybe they double the size of the esram. But back then, when neither company knew for sure what the pricing would be, they had to make a choice and chose the safer route, the more predictable route. Pricing for ddr3 ram was clearly established.

Let's also remember that the gpu is much more likely to be the reason a game does not run at 1080p, not the ram.

 

 

You should know by now that ddr3 RAM is worst then the xbox 360 type which's why i think their main goals was to let the box run cooler from overheating and even joke to suggest that they need LPDDR3.

[trooper11]

You should know by now that ddr3 RAM is worst then the xbox 360 type which's why i think their main goals was to let the box run cooler from overheating and even joke to suggest that they need LPDDR3.

Are you sure about that?

Your comparing GDDR3 @ 700mhz + edram vs DDR3 + esram. I don't remember the 360 numbers off the top of my head, but I believe the X1 offers higher bandwidth potential.

I'm not sure about latency though, GDDR3 may have an edge there.

[NeoWind]

Are you sure about that?

Your comparing GDDR3 @ 700mhz + edram vs DDR3 + esram. I don't remember the 360 numbers off the top of my head, but I believe the X1 offers higher bandwidth potential.

I'm not sure about latency though, GDDR3 may have an edge there.

Yep. Although X1 have more memory but still suffers in terms of performance in many ways due to slower speed that used DDR3. I have no idea how they gonna convince many developer that it's sufficient for games to target 1080p. Watch dogs only run at 900p max which isn't surprised at all while PS4 won't have problem making it 1080p/30fps

 

This competitive landscape isn't identical to 7th generation console that at the time both were pretty much running the same resolution despite PS3 is far more powerful. It's easy to optimized the games for both platform since the architecture way too similar and PS4 happened to be more like giant leap than X1 and it's no brainer not make it better since they don't have to deal with myriad of issues such as the cell processors anymore. 

[neoadorable]

You should know by now that ddr3 RAM is worst then the xbox 360 type which's why i think their main goals was to let the box run cooler from overheating and even joke to suggest that they need LPDDR3.

 

Of course overheating is a major concern - MS was traumatized by the ordeal with 360, it cost them billions in replacements and repairs. And maybe i read you wrong, but are suggesting X1 is less powerful than 360? :wacko: Or do you mean relatively speaking to their time etc?

[HawkMan]

Yep. Although X1 have more memory but still suffers in terms of performance in many ways due to slower speed that used DDR3. I have no idea how they gonna convince many developer that it's sufficient for games to target 1080p. Watch dogs only run at 900p max which isn't surprised at all while PS4 won't have problem making it 1080p/30fps

This competitive landscape isn't identical to 7th generation console that at the time both were pretty much running the same resolution despite PS3 is far more powerful. It's easy to optimized the games for both platform since the architecture way too similar and PS4 happened to be more like giant leap than X1 and it's no brainer not make it better since they don't have to deal with myriad of issues such as the cell processors anymore.

Well at this point in time the X1 suffers from inefficient SDK and API's. The new SDK will automatically take advantage of many of the advanced X1 features devs aren't using today increasing performance. And DX12 will easily provide games at 1080p60 for holiday 2015. We already know that developers can do 1080p60 games today if they put in the effort manually.

As for your last gen comment. The PS3 had a more powerful CPU, a CPU that was only good at a certain type of calculation(SETI at home stuff). It's graphics card however was significantly weaker. In total both consoles balanced each other out, but games tended to run at higher res on the 360 due to the graphics card.

[NeoWind]

Well at this point in time the X1 suffers from inefficient SDK and API's. The new SDK will automatically take advantage of many of the advanced X1 features devs aren't using today increasing performance. And DX12 will easily provide games at 1080p60 for holiday 2015. We already know that developers can do 1080p60 games today if they put in the effort manually.

As for your last gen comment. The PS3 had a more powerful CPU, a CPU that was only good at a certain type of calculation(SETI at home stuff). It's graphics card however was significantly weaker. In total both consoles balanced each other out, but games tended to run at higher res on the 360 due to the graphics card.

yeah the PS3 GPU isn't anything that as powerful as the cell at that time but now the ps4 GPU is much better than cpu which obviously those cpu 8 cores aim at low power device such as tablet. DX12 will benefit more on the PC rather than console since the x1 already have very low level API and speak directly to the graphics card and hardware. But i won't have high prospect it will dramatically change all the performance.