DDR3 uses a 64-bit memory controller per channel ( so, 128-bit bus for dual channel, 256-bit for quad channel), whereas GDDR5 is paired with controllers of a nominal 32-bit (16 bit each for input and output), but whereas the CPU's memory contoller is 64-bit per channel, a GPU can utilise any number of 32-bit I/O's (at the cost of die size) depending upon application ( 2 for 64-bit bus, 4 for 128-bit, 6 for 192-bit, 8 for 256-bit, 12 for 384-bit etc...).mad825 said:
8-Core CPU Heads Xbox One's Hardware Specs
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Theoretically the difference is huge, on AMD's fusion PC chips, going from DDR3-1333 to DDR3-1600 equates to a 10%-ish jump in frames per second when gaming, you can bet MSoft won't be speccing higher then 1333. GDDR5 is made more or less specifically for graphics cards, so even if they use identical chips the PS3 will have a speed advantage.A said:
The lack of hardware specifics is hugely disappointing, it probably means the specs will be too.
Two other things that bug me hugely, HDD and controller batteries are no longer replaceable, so Ebay is going to flood with dead on arrival controllers and as game install sizes balloon that 500GB disc is going to become a huge frustration. That's not even 20 installs of the PC version of BF3 (or it's 25hours of 1080p video), since I assume that's the level they'll be shooting for (and hopefully surpassing) prepare for frustration Xbox users.
GDDR5 is standard memory in PS4 because it's an APU, not a GPU+CPU combo like a PC. To simplify it, PS4 is a 8GB GeForce Titan. That does all the processing.mad825 said:
BTW, I wonder if you can actually get a 8GB Titan? Or it's 1 gb tops? i'm kinda behind the curve with PC market.
The 8 cores in the xbone and ps4 are low power, low performance netbook cores (jaguar). A dual core sandy bridge will be faster than either of them. Any recent CPU, from the Phenom II X4 onwards, wont break a sweat beating the PS4/Xbone handily.Krantos said:
Oh.TheComfyChair said:
Well that will teach me for not looking more at the type of cpu they're using. I admit to being slightly confused when I read they were Jaguar, as I had never heard of it. Should have done more research.
On the plus side that makes me considerably happier. Suck it Sony and Microsoft! My free computer is still better than you're Consoles!
So, basically, what they are giving us is a high end current PC (which is fair, they cant invent soem kind of future technology) and use old 86x architecture.
Well, it seems better than PS4, with as little information as we are given. Still, PCs will get ahead soon, but that is to be expected. Though i think my 4 year old one wont be able to run games made for new generation, well, i plan to upgrade this year anyway.
Capcha: lunchtime
Funny, i actually was eating with colegues while reading this.
Well, it seems better than PS4, with as little information as we are given. Still, PCs will get ahead soon, but that is to be expected. Though i think my 4 year old one wont be able to run games made for new generation, well, i plan to upgrade this year anyway.
Capcha: lunchtime
Funny, i actually was eating with colegues while reading this.
A lot of misinformation on this by people who don't study technology.
8 cores does not mean better. A low to mid grade 8 core can be matched by a mid to high grade 4 core. Considering that they are using things meant for smartphones and tablets, it really isn't all that impressive. Really there is quite a bit of diminishing returns after 4.
Microsoft seemed to be a little smarter using DDR3 instead of GDDR5.
DDR3 might have lower bandwith, but it has very little latency. It is quick to respond and will be great for things like AI and physics.
GDDR5 has much higher bandwith but medium latency. That means it has the potential to look prettier, but it won't handle things that require a lot of fast communication very well. I'd take better physics and AI over graphical fidelity any day personally.
Overall a midrange custom PC will be able to run anything that is put out this generation. While doing a whole bunch more applications and uses.
8 cores does not mean better. A low to mid grade 8 core can be matched by a mid to high grade 4 core. Considering that they are using things meant for smartphones and tablets, it really isn't all that impressive. Really there is quite a bit of diminishing returns after 4.
Microsoft seemed to be a little smarter using DDR3 instead of GDDR5.
DDR3 might have lower bandwith, but it has very little latency. It is quick to respond and will be great for things like AI and physics.
GDDR5 has much higher bandwith but medium latency. That means it has the potential to look prettier, but it won't handle things that require a lot of fast communication very well. I'd take better physics and AI over graphical fidelity any day personally.
Overall a midrange custom PC will be able to run anything that is put out this generation. While doing a whole bunch more applications and uses.
oliver.begg said:
No. A midrange pc will beat it while doing a lot more.Strazdas said:
In fact, PCs from 2010 already beat this. With a nice quad-core and a decent gpu you will be able to run anything that is put out this generation.
If you spend about the same amount on a PS4 on an upgrade to a PC you will outdo them
Well, I'd take pretty graphics first and better physics second, matter of taste. What I will say is that we have no idea just how effective those custom APUs are. We can only guess based on APUs used in PCs. I'll have to see games to make an informed opinion. What I would say is that Sony showed stuff that mid-range PC can't run. Those were stage demos of course too, we'll need to see them in action.taciturnCandid said:
It doesn't even matter really. The ps4 and Xbone will be running at 1920x1080 and not 4k. While most high range pcs can run games at 4k or beyond.Lord_Gremlin said:
Even my budget PC can run current games at 1920x1080 and max settings at 50 fps (stress that this was a low budge pc. Medium range would greatly outpace it)
Sony and Microsoft admitted that it can broadcast video at 4k, but not games. This will be a great limiter.
If it really is all that powerful, then it would be like using a flamethrower to make a piece of toast. It costs way more for the same performance as a toaster due to the task at hand being simple
Not even close.Lord_Gremlin said:
And while APUs are a good idea, to compare anything in the PlayStation 4 to the GeForce Titan is... no. No no no. Not even anywhere near.
Windows 8 actually uses less than a gig of memory. it is down from 7, which was much more intensive.kiri2tsubasa said:
the new xbox is stated to have 4 gb dedicated to gaming
The amount of misinformation in this thread is staggering. Let's get a few things straight.
You CAN use GDDR memory as main system memory. The XBOX 360 has done this for years with GDDR3. GDDR tends to be quite a bit faster than standard DDR as far as effective clock speed goes. This gives you more bandwith to work with.
Both the PS4 and the One use x86-64 CPUs. x86 is the official moniker for the architecture. x64 is just the x86-64 extension that allows it to use more than 4GB of system memory. The original architecture is still x86, and the 64 bit extension is AMD64 originally, and the intel implementation (licensing from AMD) is Intel64. It's the same architecture But nobody said x64 because it's still x86.
The CPU and GPU that is being used in the One and the PS4 is still orders of magnitudes faster than current consoles. The GPU in the current 360 is based on the old ATi X1900 chip- and is about as powerful as a modern intel integrated GPU, and the PS3 is essentially a Geforce 7800. And the CPUs blow the doors off the old consoles as well.
Something you probably didn't know, did you know that the original XBOX used an Intel Celeron 733Mhz CPU? Bet you didn't. Did you know that the 360 CPU is a Tri-core 3.2Ghz chip but is in-order, so it is actually fairly weak? The cell core was a stupid idea that didn't work and was difficult to program for.
By Microsoft and Sony switching to x86, it allows all 3 systems to use the same software. they don't have to recompile for RISC, x86, AND the proprietary IBM Cell architecture. It's all just x86, which makes it easier to have consistency in performance ,and cheaper to make games.
You CAN use GDDR memory as main system memory. The XBOX 360 has done this for years with GDDR3. GDDR tends to be quite a bit faster than standard DDR as far as effective clock speed goes. This gives you more bandwith to work with.
Both the PS4 and the One use x86-64 CPUs. x86 is the official moniker for the architecture. x64 is just the x86-64 extension that allows it to use more than 4GB of system memory. The original architecture is still x86, and the 64 bit extension is AMD64 originally, and the intel implementation (licensing from AMD) is Intel64. It's the same architecture But nobody said x64 because it's still x86.
The CPU and GPU that is being used in the One and the PS4 is still orders of magnitudes faster than current consoles. The GPU in the current 360 is based on the old ATi X1900 chip- and is about as powerful as a modern intel integrated GPU, and the PS3 is essentially a Geforce 7800. And the CPUs blow the doors off the old consoles as well.
Something you probably didn't know, did you know that the original XBOX used an Intel Celeron 733Mhz CPU? Bet you didn't. Did you know that the 360 CPU is a Tri-core 3.2Ghz chip but is in-order, so it is actually fairly weak? The cell core was a stupid idea that didn't work and was difficult to program for.
By Microsoft and Sony switching to x86, it allows all 3 systems to use the same software. they don't have to recompile for RISC, x86, AND the proprietary IBM Cell architecture. It's all just x86, which makes it easier to have consistency in performance ,and cheaper to make games.
They will get my money if the next Halo and Forza are exclusives, that's really the only reason I own an Xbox. I'm still not paying for online access.