Some info from Hot chips.

#1 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

XBox One SOC has a CPU, GPU, and 15 special-purpose processors. Total of 47MB of storage on-chip.

At 363mm2 with over 5b transistors the Xbox One SoC designed by Microsoft and AMD is a very complex SoC.

Audio offload processor in XBox One SoC are "completely designed by Microsoft" and have "more than a CPU core worth of processing

XBox One CPU has eight "modified" AMD Jaguar x86-64 cores, in two clusters of four cores. Modifiations to memory sharing & bandwidth.

Via

Source

Looks interesting but I have no idea what 90% of it means.

#2 Edited by TheSouthernDandy (3855 posts) -

I wish I understood any of this.

#3 Posted by AlexanderSheen (4967 posts) -

I wish I could eat some hot chips right now.

Online
#4 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

I read the title as "Some Info On Hot Chips", like there was some new hardware feature that I'd heard nothing about.

#6 Posted by falserelic (5412 posts) -

I wish I could eat some hot chips right now.

I'm fasting right now, and I wish I can eat anything at the moment. I'm trying my hardest not to let my cravings takeover. Sense the last 3 days I've been eating like a werewolf.

#7 Posted by TheHBK (5471 posts) -

See, something tells me the whole story is not just what frequency the CPU operates at or what kind or memory is used. MS has made modifications to the architecture, as I am sure Sony has, so the true power of the consoles can't be known.

#8 Edited by Blu3V3nom07 (4191 posts) -

Swizzle Copy.

#9 Edited by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

That architecture looks like a freaking spiderweb. Would love to have seen the actual presentation.

What's new is the 8GB of flash disk memory. Interesting.

The 32GB's CPU-cache-coherent bandwidth is likely similar to a customized HUMA method that was being talked about last week.

The 32MB ESRAM bandwidth is fast and a bit faster then they announced after the bump.

Other than that it's more or less everything we already knew. They confirmed the data move engines to have the extra functionality of LZ77 decode/encode and JPEG decompression we knew from vgleaks.

It's too bad this is pretty much a foreign language and meaningless for most of us. Raw theoretical power doesn't mean much when you consider the fact that peak number is split up into a whole bunch of specific functions and those cuts can create bottlenecks. Architecture is designed to try to eliminate those, but is equally meaningless unless you understand how software flows through it, especially DirectX APIs, in terms of game development.

I hope Microsoft or developers clarify how it all comes together as I can't think of too many websites that can actually do this in a satisfying manner. Perhaps Tom's Hardware and Arstechnica but they rarely relate the software side with the hardware. The mainly talk about theoretical numbers. What I can see from the design is that MS went out of their way to make it very efficient similar to the 360.

Edit: I wonder if the flash is directly related to virtual texturing. Obviously for huge megatextures you wouldn't be storing them in RAM since the larger ones won't even fit. Reading them from flash is much faster than a hard disk and can help with some of the texture pop-in associated with streaming textures. The X1's audio chip is also apparently pretty powerful(a CPU worth of power...whatever that means exactly), relieving the need for developers to take away CPU/GPU system resources to implement some of the digital effects.

#10 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
#11 Posted by MildMolasses (3219 posts) -

All I got out of that is that the Xbox One is a modified Jaguar.

Sign me the fuck up!

#12 Edited by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

@the_laughing_man said:

@alexglass: so what does it all mean!?!

Exactly.

Without directly relating to software, it's about as meaningless as 1.3Tflops vs 1.8Tflops. If you're looking for changes in comparisons then there's probably a few things here that favors the X1 more than in previous comparisons but I don't want to speak out of my ass. From reading others comments and from what I have read about it before....

Here's a couple of better pics I found on GAF.

I believe the PS4 CPU's bandwidth to memory is limited to 20GB/s so from that chart the X1 appears to have an advantage here at 30GB/s.

The X1's sound chip appears to be pretty advanced and it doesn't have to rely on CPU/GPU compute to process some of the more tasking digital sound processing effects. The PS4's may have to dedicate some of that raw power to these functions.

The data move engines and swizzle/copy capabilities point directly to more advanced virtual tiling of DirectX 11.1+ . This should make it easy and efficient for developers to tap into virtual textures/virtual tiling. We know AMD has built-in capabilities for both consoles, but it at least appears as if the X1 has some additional hardware to tackle this technique specifically.

Jpeg decompression capabilities could point to Kinect or even user created content. We know video game textures have their own compressed formats.

The eSRAM is going to be used to help with the most bandwidth chugging processes and relieve some of the biggest bottlenecks. It's got both read/write capabilities so it's more advanced than the DRAM on the 360.

The 8GB of flash is going to allow for much faster reading from a solid disk, and whether that's intended for the OS, applications or textures remains to be clarified.

We know a bit more about the X1 architecture now than we do the PS4.

We need people much smarter than me to translate it all. We're a step closer to figuring out how to relate it to the end result of what we see on screen, but still many gaps left to fill.

This explains how everything is split up, but not why and what the specific reasons were for going with this architecture. Which is what we need to find out in order to make sense of it.

#13 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@alexglass: all I know is that people on gaf are flipping out over this for some reason.

#14 Edited by Blu3V3nom07 (4191 posts) -

@the_laughing_man said:

@alexglass: all I know is that people on gaf are flipping out over this for some reason.

At what page do they stop talking Dragon Ballz?

Its like a Rooster Teeth thread..

#15 Edited by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

@the_laughing_man said:

@alexglass: all I know is that people on gaf are flipping out over this for some reason.

Yeah. I think I read about 10-15 posts that actually had some validity in that thread and tired to discuss it intelligently and 200 that were nothing but junk. GAF's not what it used to be. There used to be some pretty smart guys that would post on things like this at one time over there. Guys like Panajev and Fafalada. Don't see them around much anymore.

But at least GAF's still good for their news, Twitter and pics detective work.

Edit: Seems mods locked it and have to do a do-over. About time they act on on this crap.

It also looks like eetimes.com will have a write-up later including interviews with two MS engineers.

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1319316&cid=SM_ELE_EET_Edit

Hopefully we'll get some answers. I'm particularly curious about the 8GB of flash and I hope they answer more questions on the data move engines and eSRAM and what exactly they hoped to accomplish with adding this customized hardware.

#16 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@alexglass: it looks like they might not have the best stuff they did work to make sure what they have works and works well. Even to a point a few bits are better the. pS4 according to some gaffers.

#17 Edited by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

@alexglass: it looks like they might not have the best stuff they did work to make sure what they have works and works well. Even to a point a few bits are better the. pS4 according to some gaffers.

Well personally I was never satisfied with some of the explanations that Microsoft slapped together some eSRAM for the sole purpose of mitigating bandwidth disadvantage and that other than that that's all there was to it.

It was always pretty obvious they had specific goals in mind they wanted to do from the beginning and designed it around those. Whether it's Kinect, Direct X, or compute offloading, low latency hardware components, it's always been pretty apparent they had that in mind from its inception....just as they said months ago. The SHAPE audio chip has been known for quite some time, but most of the time all the little changes in the X1's design were often stripped out, and thrown out as unimportant when people made arguments and comparisons.

For example in addition to the SHAPE audio chip was known for some time, but most people left it out of the arguments. In addition, the CPU bandwidth and eSRAM/data move engines which are clearly all designed to help free up the CPU, anytime a developer is going to use the cloud to offload CPU tasks or that's a pretty significant advantage to the X1 in terms of CPU computational abilities. If developers are also using it to offload GPU compute tasks, then once again, the same idea applies.

A couple of articles came out that didn't really have all the pieces of the puzzles, drew conclusions based on theoretical peak numbers, and probably did some liberal guesswork with MS's intentions for going this route. But I think it's becoming more and more clear the two architectures are quite a bit more different than some of these places led people on to believe.

#19 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@alexglass: So does this mean the gap is smaller then we first thought?

#20 Edited by EXTomar (4665 posts) -

Ignore all of that. The take away is no one knows what the real "gap" is until they put the system through real, typical usage. Specifically AMD has gotten into trouble claiming how much faster and better their performance is than the competition on paper but not actually delivering it. I wouldn't be surprised if both platforms are "overly optimistic".

#21 Posted by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

@alexglass: So does this mean the gap is smaller then we first thought?

Depends where you thought the gap was to begin with, but sure, maybe slightly.

I personally always believed that if both CPUs are identical, than the X1 architecture offloading capabilities gives it an edge in that area and also could eventually balance the CU difference units on the GPU for the games that take advantage. I believed the data move/eSRAM engines could give it some texturing advantages in particular to tiling textures, so for me the only things that changed is that there now appears to be some solid numbers in the CPU bandwidth, the SHAPE adds to that a little more than I thought and now there's this 8GB of flash that I didn't know about before.

They've definitely made small improvements or at least released info that turned out better than expected since the initial unveil. But I never subscribed to the "better in every way" arguments in the first place. You have to ignore a whole lot of X1 hardware to believe that. So I guess it depends if you already knew the things listed above or not.

I know that's a roundabout answer, but probably more correct than if I would have just said yes or no.

#22 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4191 posts) -

I heard from a podcast recently and they said "Stacked GPU," and I don't know what that means..

#23 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
#24 Edited by Blu3V3nom07 (4191 posts) -
#25 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@blu3v3nom07: that's the big secret everyone thinks ms has. That the X1 has a second GPU or something. And ms has to wait till the end of the month to talk about it.

#26 Edited by Blu3V3nom07 (4191 posts) -

@the_laughing_man: The end of the month? That's a long time. I hope that means TGS or something, cuz if not. Hm, I dunno.

#27 Edited by EXTomar (4665 posts) -

Why would a "hidden chip" sway opinion? At this point (70~ days out), one is convinced to buy one or put it on your Christmas list or don't care either way. I have a hard time believing anyone is still on the fence because "it doesn't have enough chips" or other such nonsense.

#28 Edited by Syed117 (387 posts) -

I really doubt there is some massive secret out there. Just doesnt seem likely. Maybe some little things but I would shocked if there was something as ridiculous as a hidden GPU.

It wouldnt matter even if there was. If Microsoft came out and surprised everyone by saying that the xbox one has 16gb of ram and a GPU with twice as many tflops as the ps4, the sony fans would still find fault with it and dismiss it completely.

#29 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@blu3v3nom07: no one has been able to give more proof then what you have there. What did that podcast say?

#30 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4191 posts) -

@the_laughing_man: Shit nothing. It was just a bunch of boring dudes talking about stuff. It was like listening to a scratchy boring pillow. No new information.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.