By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
megafenix on 26 February 2014
Edit Thread
fatslob-:O said:
megafenix said:

bandwidth is important more than you think, if not why would AMD and nvidia increase the internal bandwidth of the gpu  generation?

is imprtant for many things like vertext texture fetches and other things, and i dot say this, its expert people on the topic, like people from nvidia

Whatever you do just keep the neverland lies going. LOLOL

Except it was always easy to get higher internal bandwidth. However embedded memory bandwidth is a different story seeing as it DOES NOT serve as a path way for a sea of data. It serves as a temporary secondary storage. If you were sooo right about it's embedded memory bandwidth then why is the eSRAM in the xbox one slower than the WII U's eDRAM despite the fact that the eSRAM has a ton of more transistors for the same memory density ? Care to explain that ? 

slower?

 even if doenst match the bandwichith of the wiiu edram it still rules on latency, which is also imprtanta and we already saw that  on the gamecubevs xbox era,  so at the end of the day both memories might give the same results. Of course that wanst the only reason they changed the approach

 

here, but you have to read

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-the-xbox-one-architects

"

"This controversy is rather surprising to me, especially when you view as ESRAM as the evolution of eDRAM from the Xbox 360. No-one questions on the Xbox 360 whether we can get the eDRAM bandwidth concurrent with the bandwidth coming out of system memory. In fact, the system design required it," explains Andrew Goossen.

"We had to pull over all of our vertex buffers and all of our textures out of system memory concurrent with going on with render targets, colour, depth, stencil buffers that were in eDRAM. Of course with Xbox One we're going with a design where ESRAM has the same natural extension that we had with eDRAM on Xbox 360, to have both going concurrently. It's a nice evolution of the Xbox 360 in that we could clean up a lot of the limitations that we had with the eDRAM.

"The Xbox 360 was the easiest console platform to develop for, it wasn't that hard for our developers to adapt to eDRAM, but there were a number of places where we said, 'gosh, it would sure be nice if an entire render target didn't have to live in eDRAM' and so we fixed that on Xbox One where we have the ability to overflow from ESRAM into DDR3, so the ESRAM is fully integrated into our page tables and so you can kind of mix and match the ESRAM and the DDR memory as you go... From my perspective it's very much an evolution and improvement - a big improvement - over the design we had with the Xbox 360. I'm kind of surprised by all this, quite frankly."

"

 

if micro would have gone with edram again they might had more bandwidth, but would have more latency and also wouldnt be able to apply that trick between the embedded memory and the ddr3 ram, plus, esram is more expensive than edram, you need about 4x more transistors, s ofc urse you cant get the same chip comapred to an edram with the same money, but you will still get less latency regardless of that