XBone eSRAM/GPU Performance Problems Rumors

There's a rumor that Microsoft are having problems with the XBone. There's been rumors before that they're behind on software, but these latest rumors pertain specifically to the hardware and the combination of eSRAM and GPU. The rumor is saying that they're having yield problems, specifically related to the eSRAM.

I will now go on and speculate widely. You have been warned.

It is claimed that the XBone APU is a one-die CPU+GPU+eSRAM solution, meaning that it's very large (~410mm^2). The only thing MS really said at their reveal was "5 billion transistors". This is interesting, and some correctly pointed out that it probably meant they couldn't compete with the PS4 on specs, because if they could, they'd be more specific.

The primary risk with large dies of course are low yields, resulting in higher costs to get enough dies that meet your specification. Now, Microsoft was not building a gaming machine first. They wanted to load a familiar operating system on there. They wanted more focus on applications that historically have not been heavily optimized for one platform. A relatively fat OS, and applications from developers who are not used to the scant resources typically awarded a gaming console, leads to one design conclusion; "we need lots of memory!"

So they design for 8GB, from the start. Again, they put applications (and cost) above gaming, and go for a well known, cheap, plentiful technology in DDR3. Back then 8GB of GDDR5 would look too expensive, almost insane, and DDR4 wasn't on the immediate horizon.

To compensate the gaming side, they now need some fast RAM, hence 32MB eSRAM on-die. The XBone eSRAM is said to be a 6T type, meaning that each bit requires six transistors. 32MB gives us 32*1024*1024*8 bits times six equals 1,610,612,736 transistors. That's 1.6 billion, a huge chunk out of the total 5 billion!

They do desperately need this very fast cache-like memory to fix the fact that they're using "slow" DDR3, which they settled on because they wanted to have a lot of it, for apps -- not games.

Recap: Decision to not focus on games results in design for a lot of memory, which is "slow" for cost reasons, which is compensated with cache. Result: Large die, with large percentage dedicated to what turns out to be a possible problematic memory to fab. Because the cache use so much die, they have to scale down on GPU.

They're reportedly roughly 2 billion transistors larger than the APU used by Sony in the PS4, which means worse thermals, which means lower clocks. The rumor is saying that the yields on this APU, due to the eSRAM, is so low, that they may have to cut the clocks on the eSRAM+GPU even further than what they've previously communicated to developers under NDA. This would make the XBone even weaker on the GPU side vs the PS4, which was already believed to be quite a bit stronger.

MS probably thought for the longest time, like PS4 devs did, that the PS4 would only have 4GB of GDDR5. Microsoft could work with that, they'd have the fast cache (which no doubt can be awesome when properly used -- I'm a huge cache nerd) and more total memory. They designed their system around being the platform with More Memory.

Cerny meanwhile had bet on GDDR5, and his bet has been that availability will increase and cost decrease at such a pace, that even back when they were first thinking about the PS4 and 2GB seemed like ample amounts, as time went on 4GB became viable.. and then at the last second... tick. Out of nowhere Sony steps up on stage and announce that they'll be using 8GB of GDDR5, twice the amount insiders thought for sure.

And they probably did this to match Microsoft, which has now lost their one advantage in specification. They on their parts are left having to pay the price of designing for apps before games, and that price just went up if this rumor is true.

There are so many "#potentialscenario" implications here, which I'll write about in a later post.

60 Comments
60 Comments
  • 60 results
  • 1
  • 2
Edited by ArtelinaRose

Good post; nice to have somebody actually talking specifics about hardware and what that means. Looking forward to the continuation!

Edited by believer258

If the XBone manages to outsell the PS4 in the US, where a good chunk of the AAA games industry is headquartered and where games seem to make the most money, then won't this all be a moot point because devs will have to make sure it runs well first on the XBone?

Unless the PS4 somehow winds up running everything at a blazing smooth framerate and average Joe notices that his XBone isn't playing Call of Duty quite as well as his buddy's PS4 does, and he goes to buy a PS4 and forgets about the XBone. That would certainly be an interesting phenomenon to happen around the US.

All just speculation, anyway. This might sound really weird, but I'm more interested in seeing how things pan out than I am in actually acquiring any of these consoles. I'm still playing games, yes, but mostly on my 3DS, PS2, and PC.

Posted by killacam

thanks for this. it's real interesting stuff.

Edited by mikey87144

If the PS4 is the stronger of the two systems and easier to program for I see the PS4 outselling the XBOX. If you put the same code in a stronger system wouldn't that system then show the difference more easily? It might be in more than just looks.

Posted by Max_Cherry

You got to put games first!

Posted by Winternet

That's you get for trying to put 5 billion transistors on that thing.

Posted by MooseyMcMan

Fascinating post, but historically it's usually the weaker console that sells better because it's cheaper, or some other reason. Unless Sony launches at a lower price, or has something else crazy going for it, most of the people who only had a 360 this generation are going to automatically go to the XBONE regardless of how much better the PS4 is.

I'm still getting a PS4 though.

Also, let me say this again, fascinating post. I read it the whole way through, which I usually don't for really technical posts because I'm not super up to date on tech-y stuff.

Posted by mosdl

If the XBone manages to outsell the PS4 in the US, where a good chunk of the AAA games industry is headquartered and where games seem to make the most money, then won't this all be a moot point because devs will have to make sure it runs well first on the XBone?

Unless the PS4 somehow winds up running everything at a blazing smooth framerate and average Joe notices that his XBone isn't playing Call of Duty quite as well as his buddy's PS4 does, and he goes to buy a PS4 and forgets about the XBone. That would certainly be an interesting phenomenon to happen around the US.

All just speculation, anyway. This might sound really weird, but I'm more interested in seeing how things pan out than I am in actually acquiring any of these consoles. I'm still playing games, yes, but mostly on my 3DS, PS2, and PC.

Devs will make sure the games run well on both systems - since it will take a while to see if any of the systems commends a significant lead. So if games have to be downgraded to run on the One, the PS4 version will be similarly downgraded.

Posted by SpartyOn

@mosdl said:
@believer258 said:

If the XBone manages to outsell the PS4 in the US, where a good chunk of the AAA games industry is headquartered and where games seem to make the most money, then won't this all be a moot point because devs will have to make sure it runs well first on the XBone?

Unless the PS4 somehow winds up running everything at a blazing smooth framerate and average Joe notices that his XBone isn't playing Call of Duty quite as well as his buddy's PS4 does, and he goes to buy a PS4 and forgets about the XBone. That would certainly be an interesting phenomenon to happen around the US.

All just speculation, anyway. This might sound really weird, but I'm more interested in seeing how things pan out than I am in actually acquiring any of these consoles. I'm still playing games, yes, but mostly on my 3DS, PS2, and PC.

Devs will make sure the games run well on both systems - since it will take a while to see if any of the systems commends a significant lead. So if games have to be downgraded to run on the One, the PS4 version will be similarly downgraded.

I don't think it will take as long as it has in the past. This is the first time the two main consoles are nearly identical in regards to their basic architecture....not only that, they're nearly identical to the 3rd big multiplatform...well, platform: The PC. In the past it took time to really get what each system was capable of, and that was a separate process for each console. This time, I think they're so similar that it will be very obvious to devs which system can squeeze out the most, and how to do it.

Edited by Zeik

@mosdl: Depends on what they consider "running well". There were plenty of ports this gen that could be considered "passable" while still being notably inferior to what was on another console. (Often that being 360 to PS3 ports.)

If the Xbox One is notably less capable than the PS4 you probably won't see multiplatform games that push the PS4 to it's limit, but it's not out of the question that the PS4 will end up with the better running version of the game.

Online
Edited by mosdl

@spartyon said:

I don't think it will take as long as it has in the past. This is the first time the two main consoles are nearly identical in regards to their basic architecture....not only that, they're nearly identical to the 3rd big multiplatform...well, platform: The PC. In the past it took time to really get what each system was capable of, and that was a separate process for each console. This time, I think they're so similar that it will be very obvious to devs which system can squeeze out the most, and how to do it.

I actually meant in term of sales, it will take some time to see which one is the dominant (if any of them gets any sort of lead) platform.

Posted by Hailinel

@zeik said:

@mosdl: Depends on what they consider "running well". There were plenty of ports this gen that could be considered "passable" while still being notably inferior to what was on another console. (Often that being 360 to PS3 ports.)

If the Xbox One is notably less capable than the PS4 you probably won't see multiplatform games that push the PS4 to it's limit, but it's not out of the question that the PS4 will end up with the better running version of the game.

Discrepancies can run both ways, depending on which was the primary development console and the direction of the port. The PS3 version of Bayonetta was jacked (not the developer's fault, in that case), while the 360 version of Final Fantasy XIII was mostly the same as its PS3 counterpart save for lower-quality cutscenes and a need for multiple discs.

Edited by Hunkulese

@eloj: It's moronic to think that they're not building the Xbox with a games first mentality.

Posted by Max_Cherry

The PS4 will become the primary development platform.

Posted by tourgen

that's pretty specific for a rumor. this fall will be interesting. I just heard about 2014 plans for kinect and the xbox controller for PCs though. So at this point, don't really care about either console. kinect + rift + decent new controller on PC will be fun.

Posted by Tackchevy

Console companies destined to share software should coordinate better. The majority of market dollars aren't sensitive to these types of competitive variations, so they really just end up costing themselves and making it tougher on developers. Even if XBone is marginally or even significantly weaker, the vast majority of games are multiplatform and necessarily must work with the lowest common denominator.

Posted by eloj

@hunkulese said:

It's moronic to think that they're not building the Xbox with a games first mentality.

I have tried with this blog post to explain why I don't think so, as if the reveal event weren't clear enough! To me, the technical evidence strongly suggests that the XBone was in fact designed not as a gaming machine foremost, but to be a generic "media hub" product that can also play games way better than a Wii-U or iPad.

I value all constructive feedback though, feel free to try again!

Edited by Darji

The PS4 will become the primary development platform.

Yeah because it is more open and devs are loving the environment Sony is creating. but Microsoft is trying to make them look bad. How? With money of course.

Two of our most trusted neoGAF insiders have said that

Microsoft is reacting hard to what has went down, and so they're going to try to dismantle PS4's image as a "for gamers" console by paying publishers and devs to not show their multiplatform titles during E3 on a PS4.

In other words, even if the multiplatform version is coming out for the PS4, they won't be able to show them at E3, thus contributing to the perception that somehow Sony is getting significantly less support for PS4 than Microsoft is "for gamers."

Of course, I'm sure multiplatform games will slip through - they can't possibly pay everyone - but it's extremely telling how they're choosing to spend their money. Rather than do the thing everyone wants, which is end the anti-consumer nonsense, they'll spend their time trying to deceive everyone instead. That should say it all about Microsoft since this year started

Posted by The_Laughing_Man

@darji said:

@max_cherry said:

The PS4 will become the primary development platform.

Yeah because it is more open and devs are loving the environment Sony is creating. but Microsoft is trying to make them look bad. How? With money of course.

Two of our most trusted neoGAF insiders have said that

Microsoft is reacting hard to what has went down, and so they're going to try to dismantle PS4's image as a "for gamers" console by paying publishers and devs to not show their multiplatform titles during E3 on a PS4.

In other words, even if the multiplatform version is coming out for the PS4, they won't be able to show them at E3, thus contributing to the perception that somehow Sony is getting significantly less support for PS4 than Microsoft is "for gamers."

Of course, I'm sure multiplatform games will slip through - they can't possibly pay everyone - but it's extremely telling how they're choosing to spend their money. Rather than do the thing everyone wants, which is end the anti-consumer nonsense, they'll spend their time trying to deceive everyone instead. That should say it all about Microsoft since this year started

Because Neogaf is all ways right.

Posted by Darji

@darji said:

@max_cherry said:

The PS4 will become the primary development platform.

Yeah because it is more open and devs are loving the environment Sony is creating. but Microsoft is trying to make them look bad. How? With money of course.

Two of our most trusted neoGAF insiders have said that

Microsoft is reacting hard to what has went down, and so they're going to try to dismantle PS4's image as a "for gamers" console by paying publishers and devs to not show their multiplatform titles during E3 on a PS4.

In other words, even if the multiplatform version is coming out for the PS4, they won't be able to show them at E3, thus contributing to the perception that somehow Sony is getting significantly less support for PS4 than Microsoft is "for gamers."

Of course, I'm sure multiplatform games will slip through - they can't possibly pay everyone - but it's extremely telling how they're choosing to spend their money. Rather than do the thing everyone wants, which is end the anti-consumer nonsense, they'll spend their time trying to deceive everyone instead. That should say it all about Microsoft since this year started

Because Neogaf is all ways right.

They have the best insiders and which of their next gen rumors more than one guy confirmed was wrong? I give you a hint. NONE. Again it makes Sense and Microsoft is known for this kind of stuff.

Posted by SpartyOn

@mosdl said:

@spartyon said:

I don't think it will take as long as it has in the past. This is the first time the two main consoles are nearly identical in regards to their basic architecture....not only that, they're nearly identical to the 3rd big multiplatform...well, platform: The PC. In the past it took time to really get what each system was capable of, and that was a separate process for each console. This time, I think they're so similar that it will be very obvious to devs which system can squeeze out the most, and how to do it.

I actually meant in term of sales, it will take some time to see which one is the dominant (if any of them gets any sort of lead) platform.

Oh, my bad. On that point, I totally agree. I think this gen is going to be really cutthroat with both major consoles launching (most likely) within a few weeks of one another. Microsoft and Sony are clearly taking different approaches to this generation judging by their different approaches to the tech, so I'll be really interested to see which tactic works best.

Edited by Darji

@spartyon said:

@mosdl said:

@spartyon said:

I don't think it will take as long as it has in the past. This is the first time the two main consoles are nearly identical in regards to their basic architecture....not only that, they're nearly identical to the 3rd big multiplatform...well, platform: The PC. In the past it took time to really get what each system was capable of, and that was a separate process for each console. This time, I think they're so similar that it will be very obvious to devs which system can squeeze out the most, and how to do it.

I actually meant in term of sales, it will take some time to see which one is the dominant (if any of them gets any sort of lead) platform.

Oh, my bad. On that point, I totally agree. I think this gen is going to be really cutthroat with both major consoles launching (most likely) within a few weeks of one another. Microsoft and Sony are clearly taking different approaches to this generation judging by their different approaches to the tech, so I'll be really interested to see which tactic works best.

Microsoft US and rest for Sony. It is really easy to that.

Posted by Cirdain

Digital Foundry guys:

...yes, GPU-wise, PS4 is indeed more powerful than the Xbox One...

...PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core [IF TRUE] has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console..

And the weird intergrated 3x OS thing may have a game performance impact.

Posted by Darji

@cirdain said:

Digital Foundry guys:

...yes, GPU-wise, PS4 is indeed more powerful than the Xbox One...

...PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core [IF TRUE] has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console..

And the weird intergrated 3x OS thing may have a game performance impact.

Of course. We already know that these Function will deduct 3GB of DDR3 ram already so whats left is 5GB of slow DDR3 ram.

Edited by Sooty

@darji said:

@cirdain said:

Digital Foundry guys:

...yes, GPU-wise, PS4 is indeed more powerful than the Xbox One...

...PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core [IF TRUE] has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console..

And the weird intergrated 3x OS thing may have a game performance impact.

Of course. We already know that these Function will deduct 3GB of DDR3 ram already so whats left is 5GB of slow DDR3 ram.

Oh noes! Only 5GB, how will we live?

People really need to stop making such a fuss about RAM. No PC game uses more than around 1.7-2.2GB at the moment (to run the games EXE), now considering the 360 currently only has 512MB and gets OK versions of most games I think it will be quite fine.

I'm not touching the Xbox One, it'll be PS4 day one for me, but please, let's not make out that RAM matters as much as some of you are making out. You don't even need more than 4GB in a PC right now to run all games comfortably (GPU is still the bottleneck) and RAM timings/speeds make less than a 3% difference to game performance. Look that up.

Posted by Darji

@sooty said:

@darji said:

@cirdain said:

Digital Foundry guys:

...yes, GPU-wise, PS4 is indeed more powerful than the Xbox One...

...PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core [IF TRUE] has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console..

And the weird intergrated 3x OS thing may have a game performance impact.

Of course. We already know that these Function will deduct 3GB of DDR3 ram already so whats left is 5GB of slow DDR3 ram.

Oh noes! Only 5GB, how will we live?

People really need to stop making such a fuss about RAM. No PC game uses more than around 1.7-2.2GB at the moment (to run the games EXE), now considering the 360 currently only has 512MB and gets OK versions of most games I think it will be quite fine.

I'm not touching the Xbox One, but please, let's not make out that RAM matters as much as some of you are making it out to be. You don't even need more than 4GB in a PC right now to run all games comfortably (GPU is still the bottleneck) and RAM timings/speeds make less than a 3% difference to game performance. Look that up.

LOL where do you live? Crysis 3 alone can not even run with 2GB of Ram. on the PC. It is recommended to use 8 GB of Ram for example.

Edited by Sooty

@darji said:

@sooty said:

@darji said:

@cirdain said:

Digital Foundry guys:

...yes, GPU-wise, PS4 is indeed more powerful than the Xbox One...

...PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core [IF TRUE] has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console..

And the weird intergrated 3x OS thing may have a game performance impact.

Of course. We already know that these Function will deduct 3GB of DDR3 ram already so whats left is 5GB of slow DDR3 ram.

Oh noes! Only 5GB, how will we live?

People really need to stop making such a fuss about RAM. No PC game uses more than around 1.7-2.2GB at the moment (to run the games EXE), now considering the 360 currently only has 512MB and gets OK versions of most games I think it will be quite fine.

I'm not touching the Xbox One, but please, let's not make out that RAM matters as much as some of you are making it out to be. You don't even need more than 4GB in a PC right now to run all games comfortably (GPU is still the bottleneck) and RAM timings/speeds make less than a 3% difference to game performance. Look that up.

LOL where do you live? Crysis 3 alone can not even run with 2GB of Ram. on the PC. It is recommended to use 8 GB of Ram for example.

You seem to have missed my point, I was saying no games currently use much more than 2GB on their process (exe), I did not say 2GB is all you need for total system RAM. Load a game, go to task manager, look at how much RAM the game is using. 4GB is still plenty and that's with over 1GB being eaten up by Windows and other programs.

I had 4GB of RAM, every game out ran fine including Crysis 3. Now I have 8GB. No differences.

The consoles strip a lot of that as the OS mostly goes away when the games are launched, of course that's going to be different for these more advanced consoles, but it's still a similar principle. 5GB solely for games is more than enough, that's over twice as much as games utilise on PC now, 4GB only became a recommended requirement for PC games in recent years. You can still run a lot of games on a rather paltry 2GB system.

Posted by Darji

@sooty said:

@darji said:

@sooty said:

@darji said:

@cirdain said:

Digital Foundry guys:

...yes, GPU-wise, PS4 is indeed more powerful than the Xbox One...

...PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core [IF TRUE] has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console..

And the weird intergrated 3x OS thing may have a game performance impact.

Of course. We already know that these Function will deduct 3GB of DDR3 ram already so whats left is 5GB of slow DDR3 ram.

Oh noes! Only 5GB, how will we live?

People really need to stop making such a fuss about RAM. No PC game uses more than around 1.7-2.2GB at the moment (to run the games EXE), now considering the 360 currently only has 512MB and gets OK versions of most games I think it will be quite fine.

I'm not touching the Xbox One, but please, let's not make out that RAM matters as much as some of you are making it out to be. You don't even need more than 4GB in a PC right now to run all games comfortably (GPU is still the bottleneck) and RAM timings/speeds make less than a 3% difference to game performance. Look that up.

LOL where do you live? Crysis 3 alone can not even run with 2GB of Ram. on the PC. It is recommended to use 8 GB of Ram for example.

You seem to have missed my point, I was saying no games currently use much more than 2GB on their process (exe), I did not say 2GB is all you need for total system RAM.

I had 4GB of RAM, every game out ran fine including Crysis 3. Now I have 8GB. No differences.

The consoles strip away a lot of that as the OS mostly goes away when the games are launched, of course that's going to be different for these more advanced consoles, but it's still a similar principle. 5GB is more than enough.

8GB on PC is standard. If you for example have only 4GB of Ram good luck running Crysis 3 for example on max details in 1080P. Ram is important. Ram is important for many thing like Player count as well. Also the great thing about shared memory is that you actually can use as much GPU ram as you want and if its not needed it can go do other stuff like having more players on the field etc.

Seriously if you want to keep a console alive for more than 5 years from now on you need at least 8 GB of Ram.

Edited by Sooty

@darji said:

@sooty said:

@darji said:

@sooty said:

@darji said:

@cirdain said:

Digital Foundry guys:

...yes, GPU-wise, PS4 is indeed more powerful than the Xbox One...

...PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core [IF TRUE] has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console..

And the weird intergrated 3x OS thing may have a game performance impact.

Of course. We already know that these Function will deduct 3GB of DDR3 ram already so whats left is 5GB of slow DDR3 ram.

Oh noes! Only 5GB, how will we live?

People really need to stop making such a fuss about RAM. No PC game uses more than around 1.7-2.2GB at the moment (to run the games EXE), now considering the 360 currently only has 512MB and gets OK versions of most games I think it will be quite fine.

I'm not touching the Xbox One, but please, let's not make out that RAM matters as much as some of you are making it out to be. You don't even need more than 4GB in a PC right now to run all games comfortably (GPU is still the bottleneck) and RAM timings/speeds make less than a 3% difference to game performance. Look that up.

LOL where do you live? Crysis 3 alone can not even run with 2GB of Ram. on the PC. It is recommended to use 8 GB of Ram for example.

You seem to have missed my point, I was saying no games currently use much more than 2GB on their process (exe), I did not say 2GB is all you need for total system RAM.

I had 4GB of RAM, every game out ran fine including Crysis 3. Now I have 8GB. No differences.

The consoles strip away a lot of that as the OS mostly goes away when the games are launched, of course that's going to be different for these more advanced consoles, but it's still a similar principle. 5GB is more than enough.

8GB on PC is standard. If you for example have only 4GB of Ram good luck running Crysis 3 for example on max details in 1080P.

I've played Crysis 3 to completion on ultra on 4GB, and I remember looking at its process in the task manager and it didn't use anymore RAM than what I've already stated.

Thanks for the good luck though, not that I needed it because as I said, I was already able to play Crysis 3 very smoothly on ultra at 1920x1080 when I used to have 4GB still. The bottleneck is the GPU, then the CPU, as long as you have at least 4GB of RAM you're not going to run into any issues with the current state of games, people should worry about their GPU first.

Are you trying to justify your purchase of lots of RAM? I don't really understand why you are stating 8GB is required, when it's not. Whatever, don't really care.

Good day.

Posted by PillClinton

Hmm, interesting. So excited for this E3, can't wait to finally see games actually running in real time on these machines to compare back to back... hopefully, that is. It's not unreasonable to expect them to actually show games running on the real hardware, right? RIGHT?

Posted by SathingtonWaltz

Are there any estimates as to how much Xbox One will cost? Rumors have indicated that it isn't as fast as the PS4, so Microsoft may have a price advantage once again.

Posted by Darji

Are there any estimates as to how much Xbox One will cost? Rumors have indicated that it isn't as fast as the PS4, so Microsoft may have a price advantage once again.

You are forgetting Kinect.

Edited by Wuddel

I think the xbox will do fine. Also devs will ensure that everything gets scaled appropriately. Also I am sure they put games first, and to suggest that MS can not make relatively slim OS is bold. They made a phone OS you know. I am still getting a PS4 though.

Edited by BlackLagoon

@sathingtonwaltz said:

Are there any estimates as to how much Xbox One will cost? Rumors have indicated that it isn't as fast as the PS4, so Microsoft may have a price advantage once again.

Actually, the Xbox may end up being the more expensive one. The new Kinect will likely cost a fair bit more than the PlayStation Eye 2, and Sony hasn't even confirmed that the Eye will be included with the PS4. Also the Xbox APU may be weaker than the PS4s, but it is a lot more complex. It is probably more expensive to manufacture, especially with what the OP is saying about low yields (a lot of the finished chips are of too low quality and have to be thrown away).

Posted by kpaadet

@blacklagoon:

There have been ads from Sony saying PSeye is sold separately, so its pretty much confirmed Sony will not bundle it.

Edited by TrafalgarLaw

It is not a rumor, it has been confirmed by CBoat, the one that leaks insider information (like xbox360 specs in 2005) with 100% accuracy.

Posted by Alexander

If the XBone manages to outsell the PS4 in the US, where a good chunk of the AAA games industry is headquartered and where games seem to make the most money, then won't this all be a moot point because devs will have to make sure it runs well first on the XBone?

Unless the PS4 somehow winds up running everything at a blazing smooth framerate and average Joe notices that his XBone isn't playing Call of Duty quite as well as his buddy's PS4 does, and he goes to buy a PS4 and forgets about the XBone. That would certainly be an interesting phenomenon to happen around the US.

All just speculation, anyway. This might sound really weird, but I'm more interested in seeing how things pan out than I am in actually acquiring any of these consoles. I'm still playing games, yes, but mostly on my 3DS, PS2, and PC.

By the sounds of things performance parity isn't going to be as much of an issue this time around. As for CoD, MS have first dibs on DLC so any CoD megafan is probably going to want to play on the X1.

Posted by Hunkulese

@eloj said:

@hunkulese said:

It's moronic to think that they're not building the Xbox with a games first mentality.

I have tried with this blog post to explain why I don't think so, as if the reveal event weren't clear enough! To me, the technical evidence strongly suggests that the XBone was in fact designed not as a gaming machine foremost, but to be a generic "media hub" product that can also play games way better than a Wii-U or iPad.

I value all constructive feedback though, feel free to try again!

Try again at what? Look at what they're putting in the Xbox and I don't see how you could think it's not a games first console. Gambling on DDR5 becoming more affordable was a huge risk that paid off for Sony but by no means means that Microsoft wasn't designing a gaming console by opting for DDR3.

Posted by jgf

Microsoft should get their act together. Suck the costs up or delay release but do not downgrade at the last moment. I hope they fire some of their business people and put smart engineers at their place. This includes mr monkey dance - they can keep him as mascot but don' t let him steer a technology company. Put bill back in place or one of the numerous really smart people working there.

Edited by Stratesfear
Edited by Blu3V3nom07

@stratesfear: Most people online don't like positive things like that. But that's good to hear. :)

Online
Edited by The_Laughing_Man

@stratesfear: Most people online don't like positive things like that. But that's good to hear. :)

Im more amazed someone got Nelson to respond. So thats a good bit of news right?

Posted by phantomzxro

@eloj said:

@hunkulese said:

It's moronic to think that they're not building the Xbox with a games first mentality.

I have tried with this blog post to explain why I don't think so, as if the reveal event weren't clear enough! To me, the technical evidence strongly suggests that the XBone was in fact designed not as a gaming machine foremost, but to be a generic "media hub" product that can also play games way better than a Wii-U or iPad.

I value all constructive feedback though, feel free to try again!

Try again at what? Look at what they're putting in the Xbox and I don't see how you could think it's not a games first console. Gambling on DDR5 becoming more affordable was a huge risk that paid off for Sony but by no means means that Microsoft wasn't designing a gaming console by opting for DDR3.

Well to have a nice chunk of the power of the system for the OS seems to mean they care about that first and added the customs parts to boost the gaming part later. They are trying to do it all which is the problem if you ask me.

Edited by eloj

@jgf said:

Microsoft should get their act together. Suck the costs up or delay release but do not downgrade at the last moment. I hope they fire some of their business people and put smart engineers at

Personally I think that's the way they'll go if they're having problems, but it depends on the magnitude. Downgrading would have to be the second option after letting the coffers take the hit, but if the yields are bad enough they may not have a choice.
Either way, I doubt the near future will shed any light on the situation. We'll probably have to wait for the release and someone to do a BoM tear down, or some dev leak.
As for 'gaming first', I have no idea how you can argue that when the reveal event was 90% tv, tv, tv. That's the first impression they've decided on, for a reason. They stagnated the PC gaming market to go after the console gamers to get a media consumption machine into every home. Now that the box is there they're going to stagnate the console market to cater to people who'd rather watch a ball game than play a video game, because there's way more of those guys already.
(Congrats on making this editor suck so much: del doesn't work, backspace works sometimes, formatting isn't working in this post at least and editing quoted paragraphs is all but impossble. Another WYSIWYG failure, how surprising.)
Posted by 6n00bkilla9

the reason pc games only use around 2gb of ram is because they have to target a 32-bit pc for delopment which can onlly handle around 3 to 3.5gb of ram. Once most people are running 64bit OS's and CPU's than devs will finally get to use more. plus think about 7 years from now RAM will always be useful wether its right now or later more is always better than less.

Edited by Stratesfear

@blu3v3nom07 said:

@stratesfear: Most people online don't like positive things like that. But that's good to hear. :)

Im more amazed someone got Nelson to respond. So thats a good bit of news right?

The stars were aligned, for this Scott Dyer fellow, and he used that moment to ask Major Nelson a question. His sacrifice should be honored.

Posted by OurSin_360

If the XBone isn't cheap as hell, i don't see any advantage it will have against the ps4 to justify all the shortcuts and limits to user rights. I remember even the developers were surprised about the ram at the ps4 reveal and they were already working on games (not sure if that negatively affects anything as it adds ram not takes it away but i don't know) so that's a pretty good theory. But honestly i think they want to make a internet tv box that can play games and not a game console that can do all the extra shit, so they just don't care about that aspect of it too much.

Edited by eloj

We can only hope that it's not false in the same way that the RROD problems were false, which is to say they were officially false until they were not false.

"no.

pr=$$$ to shil for corps

me=notpaifd fpor anyting 9 ysrs here on gaf, all free and all myo love. gamers and games, noohther.

esram stands, perio.d.

truthfact."

Edited by The_Laughing_Man

@eloj said:

We can only hope that it's not false in the same way that the RROD problems were false, which is to say they were officially false until they were not false.

"no.

pr=$$$ to shil for corps

me=notpaifd fpor anyting 9 ysrs here on gaf, all free and all myo love. gamers and games, noohther.

esram stands, perio.d.

truthfact."

Nelson just posted three links about A LOT of asked questions.

Edited by eloj

His twitter banner is "My officially unofficial tweets" so we're still waiting on an official denial I guess? :-)

  • 60 results
  • 1
  • 2