Quantcast
How Much Would a PC Cost with Specs similar to Scorpio.

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - How Much Would a PC Cost with Specs similar to Scorpio.

Captain_Yuri said:
Mafioso said:

 

Apples and oranges.

For one Scorpio has a dedicated hardware to offload CPU utilization....meaning it doesnt need a monster i7 to push GPU utilization.

Reality Check: PC = A bunch of parts slapped together on a motherboard running copper traces.

A SoC engineered PRIMARILY for rendering graphics at the silicon level has unmitigated benefits and efficiencies.

Consoles do more with less, and PC parts age faster because after 1-2 years they are no longer the focus of the driver teams.

Yet we see time and time again that it won't matter for most cases... Yes, scorpio has hardware that will push above it's weight (I didn't say otherwise) but there is hardly anything in it which suggests that it will deliver performance like a 1070.

Not sure what some of other PC comments have to do with anything though. Just sounds like you are taking shots if anything... And I am pretty sure the driver support is much longer than 1-2 years although I am not sure what does that have to do with anything... And it's also not like you need an i7 to take advantage of a 1070 (or most other GPUs) either.

Yes, a 1070...to make an argument of its performance- requires a no CPU bottleneck and proper driver support over the long haul. And in the end..its still a 4K/30 GPU at best. Anyone that has seen the rapid demise of the GTX780/780Ti as soon as the 970 came out has witnessed what happens in the PC space. For one year to another you go from balls to the wall the best, to forgotten and poorly optimized even if you are close or faster in the theoretical realm.

The way Scorpio has been engineered it will aim for that same perf target. Will it always deliver a solid 4K profile? No, then again neither does a 1070.



PC I i7 3770K @4.5Ghz I 16GB 2400Mhz I GTX 980Ti FTW

Consoles I PS4 Pro I Xbox One S 2TB I Wii U I Xbox 360 S

Around the Network
Mafioso said:
Captain_Yuri said:

Yet we see time and time again that it won't matter for most cases... Yes, scorpio has hardware that will push above it's weight (I didn't say otherwise) but there is hardly anything in it which suggests that it will deliver performance like a 1070.

Not sure what some of other PC comments have to do with anything though. Just sounds like you are taking shots if anything... And I am pretty sure the driver support is much longer than 1-2 years although I am not sure what does that have to do with anything... And it's also not like you need an i7 to take advantage of a 1070 (or most other GPUs) either.

Yes, a 1070...to make an argument of its performance- requires a no CPU bottleneck and proper driver support over the long haul. And in the end..its still a 4K/30 GPU at best. Anyone that has seen the rapid demise of the GTX780/780Ti as soon as the 970 came out has witnessed what happens in the PC space.

The way Scorpio has been engineered it will aim for that same perf target. Will it always deliver a solid 4K profile? No, then again neither does a 1070.

Well yea if you want to see a no cpu bottleneck but as the resolutions increase, the cpu doesn't become the limiting factor... You don't need say an i7 to get the full performance out of a 1070 at say 4k... But if you are talking about a pure measurement of performance instead of whether or not you need an i7 to take advantage, then I agree.

There is also more to hardware than to just achieve the resolution such as graphical detail settings. I am not talking about achieving 4k because I think the Scorpio will deliver 4k resolution in virtually every single game however I doubt it will be in the same settings as a 1070 thus making it weaker.

Also if we are talking about optimization, lets not forget that it is up to the developers on whether or not they want to optimize to take advantage of the hardware. Case and point: Ps4 Pro. We have seen games be all over the place when it comes to optimization... Some games have visual enhancements at 1080p while other's don't. Some games are checkerboarding from 1440p where as others such as nier are running at 1080p. And many more different configurations so it's not like optimization is the end all be all secret sauce. Where as we have seen a 1060 beat a ps4 pro in visual quality regardless of the resolution it's running in. Specially when you consider that there is little to gain in terms of money from doing additional work apart from just ensuring that the game runs at 4k from the publisher's side.

And yes, the 7xx series certainly performed oddly however I'd consider the 700 series the exception than the rule. Since Pascal has been out for nearly a year now and the 9xx series have not taken a hit like the 7xx did.



             

                               Anime: Haruhi                                                                                      Anime: Love Live
                              Nsfw Anime Thread                                                                             Join our Anime Threads!
                             Sfw Anime Thread                                                                                VGC Tutorial Thread

Captain_Yuri said:
Mafioso said:

Yes, a 1070...to make an argument of its performance- requires a no CPU bottleneck and proper driver support over the long haul. And in the end..its still a 4K/30 GPU at best. Anyone that has seen the rapid demise of the GTX780/780Ti as soon as the 970 came out has witnessed what happens in the PC space.

The way Scorpio has been engineered it will aim for that same perf target. Will it always deliver a solid 4K profile? No, then again neither does a 1070.

Well yea if you want to see a no cpu bottleneck but as the resolutions increase, the cpu doesn't become the limiting factor... You don't need say an i7 to get the full performance out of a 1070 at say 4k... But if you are talking about a pure measurement of performance instead of whether or not you need an i7 to take advantage, then I agree.

There is also more to hardware than to just achieve the resolution such as graphical detail settings. I am not talking about achieving 4k because I think the Scorpio will deliver 4k resolution in virtually every single game however I doubt it will be in the same settings as a 1070 thus making it weaker.

Also if we are talking about optimization, lets not forget that it is up to the developers on whether or not they want to optimize to take advantage of the hardware. Case and point: Ps4 Pro. We have seen games be all over the place when it comes to optimization... Some games have visual enhancements at 1080p while other's don't. Some games are checkerboarding from 1440p where as others such as nier are running at 1080p. And many more different configurations so it's not like optimization is the end all be all secret sauce. Where as we have seen a 1060 beat a ps4 pro in visual quality regardless of the resolution it's running in. Specially when you consider that there is little to gain in terms of money from doing additional work apart from just ensuring that the game runs at 4k from the publisher's side.

And yes, the 7xx series certainly performed oddly however I'd consider the 700 series the exception than the rule. Since Pascal has been out for nearly a year now and the 9xx series have not taken a hit like the 7xx did.

I agree with many of your points, but PS4 Pro has its apparent limitations and that's why developers have been at odds as to which way to offer refinements due to those bottlenecks. I'd argue to the contrary, its actually been impressive what they've achieved given those limitations in many cases.

Take into consideration that game developers have adapted to using PS4's fast memory bandwidth to hit that 1080p target...and now with PS4 PRO they have 2X the GPU and the SAME bandwidth. They are stuck passing the same asset quality and having to resort to checkerboarding to reconstruct a higher quality image.

MS has had a better engineering effort and it shows, they dug deeper and smarter for a hardware refresh. They are giving developers a 384 bit bus and 326 GB/S to handle all the 4K assets and bandwith extensive data...thats GPU bandwith even get in the best 1080 PC with GDDR5/X you can buy.

All the fast ram they need, more bandwidth they'd know what to do with, a FAST GPU clock for a console...they just targeted throughput better than in Sony's case and it will be developer friendly to have the overhead to do more.



PC I i7 3770K @4.5Ghz I 16GB 2400Mhz I GTX 980Ti FTW

Consoles I PS4 Pro I Xbox One S 2TB I Wii U I Xbox 360 S

 

Mafioso said:
Captain_Yuri said:

Well yea if you want to see a no cpu bottleneck but as the resolutions increase, the cpu doesn't become the limiting factor... You don't need say an i7 to get the full performance out of a 1070 at say 4k... But if you are talking about a pure measurement of performance instead of whether or not you need an i7 to take advantage, then I agree.

There is also more to hardware than to just achieve the resolution such as graphical detail settings. I am not talking about achieving 4k because I think the Scorpio will deliver 4k resolution in virtually every single game however I doubt it will be in the same settings as a 1070 thus making it weaker.

Also if we are talking about optimization, lets not forget that it is up to the developers on whether or not they want to optimize to take advantage of the hardware. Case and point: Ps4 Pro. We have seen games be all over the place when it comes to optimization... Some games have visual enhancements at 1080p while other's don't. Some games are checkerboarding from 1440p where as others such as nier are running at 1080p. And many more different configurations so it's not like optimization is the end all be all secret sauce. Where as we have seen a 1060 beat a ps4 pro in visual quality regardless of the resolution it's running in. Specially when you consider that there is little to gain in terms of money from doing additional work apart from just ensuring that the game runs at 4k from the publisher's side.

And yes, the 7xx series certainly performed oddly however I'd consider the 700 series the exception than the rule. Since Pascal has been out for nearly a year now and the 9xx series have not taken a hit like the 7xx did.

I agree with many of your points, but PS4 Pro has its apparent limitations and that's why developers have been at odds as to which way to offer refinements due to those bottlenecks. I'd argue to the contrary, its actually been impressive what they've achieved given those limitations in many cases.

Take into consideration that game developers have adapted to using PS4's fast memory bandwidth to hit that 1080p target...and now with PS4 PRO they have 2X the GPU and the SAME bandwidth. They are stuck passing the same asset quality and having to resort to checkerboarding to reconstruct a higher quality image.

MS has had a better engineering effort and it shows, they dug deeper and smarter for a hardware refresh. They are giving developers a 384 bit bus and 326 GB/S to handle all the 4K assets and bandwith extensive data...thats GPU bandwith even get in the best 1080 PC with GDDR5/X you can buy.

All the fast ram they need, more bandwidth they'd know what to do with, a FAST GPU clock for a console...they just targeted throughput better than in Sony's case and it will be developer friendly to have the overhead to do more.

Sorry for the late reply, I was out.

I will 110% agree that the Scorpio is a much better machine than a ps4 pro. Not in the sense that its more powerful (which it obviously is) but in the sense that it is a lot more well thoughtout than the ps4 pro.

But to go back to the point of the ps4 pro, while I understand the whole "they were able to do a lot with what they had to due to ps4's limitation," there is a point to be made that looking at how developers have treated 1080p experience is kind of lackluster. For most games, developers either seem to do the most basic "enhancements" or none at all. Even sony's own developers have removed some 1080p enhancements from uc4 and the last of us remastered with patches instead of optimizing them. And of course, at checkerboarding for the most part, its just the regular ps4's graphical settings bumped up. The point is, while it's cool what developers can do, it mostly results in the most basic enhancements and then calling it a day.

Another thing is that a desktop 470 which we are matching with the Ps4 pro can achieve PC max settings for Rise of Tomb Raider at 1440p. (Obviously not at 60fps but the pro is running at 30fps)

Now of course, the ps4 pro is also checkerboarding to 4k while the 470 isn't but also remember that Rise of Tomb raider also uses ps4's graphical settings and not the PC max graphics settings. Also the desktop 470 has less memory bandwidth and less vram and a ps4 pro. However, even with all that, at 1080p with its enhanced visuals mode, the ps4 pro couldn't match PC max. So I feel like if they did put in more effort, they could have maybe reached higher detail which goes back to my point of how leaving it to optimization is a double edged sword. And Rise of Tomb raider is actually one of the if not the most enhanced games for the ps4 pro.

Now going back to Scorpio, many of it's enhancements require the developers to be able to take advantage of it. In the tech analysis for example, he states how the way they have implemented the additional bandwidth is not traditional. He goes to state that:

"What makes things especially interesting though is that Microsoft didn’t just switch out DDR3 for GDDR5, but they’re using a wider memory bus as well; expanding it by 50% to 384-bits wide. Not only does this even further expand the console’s memory bandwidth – now to a total of 326GB/sec, or 4.8x the XB1’s DDR3 – but it means we have an odd mismatch between the ROP backends and the memory bus."

"What this means is that at some level, Microsoft is running an additional memory crossbar in the SoC, which would be very similar to what AMD did back in 2012 with the Radeon HD 7970. Because the console SoC needs to split its memory bandwidth between the CPU and the GPU, things aren’t as cut and dry here as they are with discrete GPUs. But, at a high level, what we saw from the 7970 is that the extra bandwidth + crossbar setup did not offer much of a benefit over a straight-connected, lower bandwidth configuration. Accordingly, AMD has never done it again in their dGPUs. So I think it will be very interesting to see if developers can consistently consume more than 218GB/sec or so of bandwidth using the GPU."

So what my understanding is that while there is additional bandwith avaliable, developers will be able to use it through a slightly more different method than they traditionally will which means they will most likely have to optimize specifically for it. And that's just one example.

It might sound like I am consistantly trying to be the downer when it comes to Scorpio's performance but all I am saying is to keep peoples expectations in check because history does repeat itself and relying on optimization for non base hardware consoles is something that might turn out not so great results as one would expect from console level optimization. And of course, even with optimization, I am skepitcal at best.



             

                               Anime: Haruhi                                                                                      Anime: Love Live
                              Nsfw Anime Thread                                                                             Join our Anime Threads!
                             Sfw Anime Thread                                                                                VGC Tutorial Thread

Mafioso said:

That's if you are convinced we are talking of Jaguar as in 2012/13. At worse case scenario this is a Puma+ custom design without the memory controller bottleneck as on the PC.

Puma still comes up short againt Piledriver. It's not a *wide* core. It's a very small and simple core.

Mafioso said:

I'd say based on the custom silicon and unified GDDR5 system memory, for what its meant to do , at the resolution its meant to do it in...it could perform like a Piledriver at 4K.

Hell to the No.
If anything the GDDR5 reduces performance, it's higher latency. CPU's don't care much for bandwidth, but if a design doesn't hide DRAM latency like the Cat cores with their small caches, minimal prediction, narrow pipeline designand more... Then there is a penalty.

Mafioso said:

As far as the GPU goes, apples and oranges. A GTX 1060 has a tiny bus and limited bandwidth and less memory compared to Scorpio for games....and it drops frames at 4K.  Based on the GPU load we saw of Forza 6 Apex on Scorpio, theres lots of room for further optimizations.

And? You do realise the Geforce 1060 can do more with it's bandwidth than AMD's Graphics Core Next right? You can't directly compare the numbers.

As for dropped frames. That's why I said overclock.

With that, Scorpio is running Forza 6 with Xbox One quality settings, the PC is on full ultra settings. The difference isn't comparable my dear watson, a Geforce 1050 could have achieved what Scorpio probably did with the Forza 6 demo, that is 4k, 60fps Xbox One-levels of visuals (Which are nothing to write home about, Xbox One is graphically garbage, I should know. I own one.)

Mafioso said:

Two completely different environments anyways. PC games make VERY Inefficient use of the hardware. That's why for the most part this gen you needed a GTX680 to replicate a PS4 (with a hamstrung 7870, 7850) GPU.  That's the reality...

PC games always tend to look better than consoles. And people seem to always chalk that up to being inefficient?

I don't disagree that consoles have a slight edge, but you are making it sound as if they are able to beat an Enthusiast-level PC. When they can't.

The Radeon 7870 is still able to run every PS4 multiplat game today at similar quality settings... But thanks to the power of the PC you can actually run every one of those games at 1080P. On the PS4 you cannot.

Mafioso said:

All that tells us is hints as to what we expect to pay vs Ps4 Pro. MS simply took an engineering approach to its performance and footprint goals.

Has no bearing on the box's actual performance as its a bespoke design meant to run Xbox/DX12  games to the metal...not poorly optimized,  driver overhead laden PC game code. 

You can build a game to the PC's metal as well you know. You have that freedom. In-fact, before Direct X and Windows came along... That was more common than you think. But there is a reason why it doesn't happen anymore, which I would be more than happy to elaborate on later if you so desire.

When PC's were running high-level API's like Direct X 9, 10, 11, Open GL etc'. The consoles had low-level API's that did give them a rather larger boost in performance relative to the PC.

But since then, the PC has gotten a heap of optimizations, Direct X 12, Mantle which went on to become Vulkan are prime examples of that, they have taken low-level API advantages and brought them all to the playing field.
This generation any "Optimization" advantage consoles have? It's been severely diminished. It's really not an argument point anyway.

Podings said:

It's always a little hard to tell, as the super-duper-optimized games usually are exclusives, to you can't compare them with a PC version.

Horizon looks a lot better than most games available on PC (dialog animation and complete absence of dynamic water notwithstanding,) but a lot of that is art direction and careful polishing aside from the clever optimization.

There is a ton of baked details/static items in that game. Which is why the game runs so light, even on PC.

Mafioso said:

Apples and oranges.

For one Scorpio has a dedicated hardware to offload CPU utilization....meaning it doesnt need a monster i7 to push GPU utilization.

Reality Check: PC = A bunch of parts slapped together on a motherboard running copper traces.

A SoC engineered PRIMARILY for rendering graphics at the silicon level has unmitigated benefits and efficiencies.

Consoles do more with less, and PC parts age faster because after 1-2 years they are no longer the focus of the driver teams.

I think you might be confused at what offloading a CPU does.

It doesn't make a CPU faster. It means the CPU is tasked with doing less. It doesn't turn a garbage CPU like Jaguar into a Core i7 competing chip, Jaguars performance ceiling doesn't change.

8x 1.6ghz Jaguar cores should be roughly equivalent to a Haswell Core i3 3ghz. So the 6x cores at 2.3ghz should be in the same ballpark as well.

...And then you realise. We are talking about dual-core processors.

A Core i5 would slap around an 8-core Jaguar and still have a game of Yahtzee.



Around the Network
Pemalite said:
Mafioso said:

That's if you are convinced we are talking of Jaguar as in 2012/13. At worse case scenario this is a Puma+ custom design without the memory controller bottleneck as on the PC.

Puma still comes up short againt Piledriver. It's not a *wide* core. It's a very small and simple core.

Mafioso said:

I'd say based on the custom silicon and unified GDDR5 system memory, for what its meant to do , at the resolution its meant to do it in...it could perform like a Piledriver at 4K.

Hell to the No.
If anything the GDDR5 reduces performance, it's higher latency. CPU's don't care much for bandwidth, but if a design doesn't hide DRAM latency like the Cat cores with their small caches, minimal prediction, narrow pipeline designand more... Then there is a penalty.

Mafioso said:

As far as the GPU goes, apples and oranges. A GTX 1060 has a tiny bus and limited bandwidth and less memory compared to Scorpio for games....and it drops frames at 4K.  Based on the GPU load we saw of Forza 6 Apex on Scorpio, theres lots of room for further optimizations.

And? You do realise the Geforce 1060 can do more with it's bandwidth than AMD's Graphics Core Next right? You can't directly compare the numbers.

As for dropped frames. That's why I said overclock.

With that, Scorpio is running Forza 6 with Xbox One quality settings, the PC is on full ultra settings. The difference isn't comparable my dear watson, a Geforce 1050 could have achieved what Scorpio probably did with the Forza 6 demo, that is 4k, 60fps Xbox One-levels of visuals (Which are nothing to write home about, Xbox One is graphically garbage, I should know. I own one.)

Mafioso said:

Two completely different environments anyways. PC games make VERY Inefficient use of the hardware. That's why for the most part this gen you needed a GTX680 to replicate a PS4 (with a hamstrung 7870, 7850) GPU.  That's the reality...

PC games always tend to look better than consoles. And people seem to always chalk that up to being inefficient?

I don't disagree that consoles have a slight edge, but you are making it sound as if they are able to beat an Enthusiast-level PC. When they can't.

The Radeon 7870 is still able to run every PS4 multiplat game today at similar quality settings... But thanks to the power of the PC you can actually run every one of those games at 1080P. On the PS4 you cannot.

Mafioso said:

All that tells us is hints as to what we expect to pay vs Ps4 Pro. MS simply took an engineering approach to its performance and footprint goals.

Has no bearing on the box's actual performance as its a bespoke design meant to run Xbox/DX12  games to the metal...not poorly optimized,  driver overhead laden PC game code. 

You can build a game to the PC's metal as well you know. You have that freedom. In-fact, before Direct X and Windows came along... That was more common than you think. But there is a reason why it doesn't happen anymore, which I would be more than happy to elaborate on later if you so desire.

When PC's were running high-level API's like Direct X 9, 10, 11, Open GL etc'. The consoles had low-level API's that did give them a rather larger boost in performance relative to the PC.

But since then, the PC has gotten a heap of optimizations, Direct X 12, Mantle which went on to become Vulkan are prime examples of that, they have taken low-level API advantages and brought them all to the playing field.
This generation any "Optimization" advantage consoles have? It's been severely diminished. It's really not an argument point anyway.

Podings said:

It's always a little hard to tell, as the super-duper-optimized games usually are exclusives, to you can't compare them with a PC version.

Horizon looks a lot better than most games available on PC (dialog animation and complete absence of dynamic water notwithstanding,) but a lot of that is art direction and careful polishing aside from the clever optimization.

There is a ton of baked details/static items in that game. Which is why the game runs so light, even on PC.

Mafioso said:

Apples and oranges.

For one Scorpio has a dedicated hardware to offload CPU utilization....meaning it doesnt need a monster i7 to push GPU utilization.

Reality Check: PC = A bunch of parts slapped together on a motherboard running copper traces.

A SoC engineered PRIMARILY for rendering graphics at the silicon level has unmitigated benefits and efficiencies.

Consoles do more with less, and PC parts age faster because after 1-2 years they are no longer the focus of the driver teams.

I think you might be confused at what offloading a CPU does.

It doesn't make a CPU faster. It means the CPU is tasked with doing less. It doesn't turn a garbage CPU like Jaguar into a Core i7 competing chip, Jaguars performance ceiling doesn't change.

8x 1.6ghz Jaguar cores should be roughly equivalent to a Haswell Core i3 3ghz. So the 6x cores at 2.3ghz should be in the same ballpark as well.

...And then you realise. We are talking about dual-core processors.

A Core i5 would slap around an 8-core Jaguar and still have a game of Yahtzee.

 CPU doing less per instruction, allows it to handle more instructions (driving GPU load up)....that's the point of offloading to the GPU Command block, no?

Why would a 'wide core' be needed? Game code is rather simple compared to the plethora of productivity/ computing CPU's in desktops are engineered to do at scale. And compared to the 30hz/60hz needs of a console game on a television, unless you want a 400w power brick and a large enclosure...what's the point of flexing desktop grade CPU power in a console? At some point we have to come to reality that in 2017, Scorpio's SoC...is probably the best case scenario possible for such application. Have you seen the size of the chip and the cooling required?

The question was never that said PC parts are not more powerful, rather than lots of it is left on the table for obvious reasons. 

We can all come to terms that how a developer optimizes for the console has a lot to do with the SDK and how closely they work with the platform team.

From a personal POV, seeing how the Windows Store MS games of the last year+ have targeted that single GPU 980Ti/1070/R9 Fury perf at 4K, i don't see that as coincidence at all.

Last Ex. Gears 4 Ultra with AsyncOn hitting that 4K/30 target, F6Apex 4K60, 

So if a Scorpio version has to target High settings on some aspects etc...would  that be really be unexpected from a console? 98% of the visual experience is still there, requiring a magnifying glass to a still to point out the most subtle details that are not useful in a livingroom environment.

Its not like i dont have to tone down shadow quality, AA and other things from Ultra on my hardware now to hit my desired perf targets on PC.



PC I i7 3770K @4.5Ghz I 16GB 2400Mhz I GTX 980Ti FTW

Consoles I PS4 Pro I Xbox One S 2TB I Wii U I Xbox 360 S

Mafioso said:
Captain_Yuri said:

Well yea if you want to see a no cpu bottleneck but as the resolutions increase, the cpu doesn't become the limiting factor... You don't need say an i7 to get the full performance out of a 1070 at say 4k... But if you are talking about a pure measurement of performance instead of whether or not you need an i7 to take advantage, then I agree.

There is also more to hardware than to just achieve the resolution such as graphical detail settings. I am not talking about achieving 4k because I think the Scorpio will deliver 4k resolution in virtually every single game however I doubt it will be in the same settings as a 1070 thus making it weaker.

Also if we are talking about optimization, lets not forget that it is up to the developers on whether or not they want to optimize to take advantage of the hardware. Case and point: Ps4 Pro. We have seen games be all over the place when it comes to optimization... Some games have visual enhancements at 1080p while other's don't. Some games are checkerboarding from 1440p where as others such as nier are running at 1080p. And many more different configurations so it's not like optimization is the end all be all secret sauce. Where as we have seen a 1060 beat a ps4 pro in visual quality regardless of the resolution it's running in. Specially when you consider that there is little to gain in terms of money from doing additional work apart from just ensuring that the game runs at 4k from the publisher's side.

And yes, the 7xx series certainly performed oddly however I'd consider the 700 series the exception than the rule. Since Pascal has been out for nearly a year now and the 9xx series have not taken a hit like the 7xx did.

I agree with many of your points, but PS4 Pro has its apparent limitations and that's why developers have been at odds as to which way to offer refinements due to those bottlenecks. I'd argue to the contrary, its actually been impressive what they've achieved given those limitations in many cases.

Take into consideration that game developers have adapted to using PS4's fast memory bandwidth to hit that 1080p target...and now with PS4 PRO they have 2X the GPU and the SAME bandwidth. They are stuck passing the same asset quality and having to resort to checkerboarding to reconstruct a higher quality image.

MS has had a better engineering effort and it shows, they dug deeper and smarter for a hardware refresh. They are giving developers a 384 bit bus and 326 GB/S to handle all the 4K assets and bandwith extensive data...thats GPU bandwith even get in the best 1080 PC with GDDR5/X you can buy.

All the fast ram they need, more bandwidth they'd know what to do with, a FAST GPU clock for a console...they just targeted throughput better than in Sony's case and it will be developer friendly to have the overhead to do more.

Actually PS4P ram it 24% faster than PS4. It is 218 gb/s. Microsoft obviously have spent more time and money on Scorpio so if they can sell it for 450$ it will be a fair price. Having said that we have not seen any games run on it just a report from DF for Forza6 only for now.



 

Mafioso said:

 CPU doing less per instruction, allows it to handle more instructions (driving GPU load up)....that's the point of offloading to the GPU Command block, no?

But the CPU's max theoretical performance remains unchanged, regardless of load of lack there-of.

Jaguar is still still shit, whichever way you cut the cake. It was shit in 2013 when the Xbox One and Playstation 4 launched. It's still shit in 2017.

Offloading some of the processing isn't going to suddenly turn it into a Core i5/i7/Ryzen CPU.

Mafioso said:

Why would a 'wide core' be needed? Game code is rather simple compared to the plethora of productivity/ computing CPU's in desktops are engineered to do at scale. And compared to the 30hz/60hz needs of a console game on a television, unless you want a 400w power brick and a large enclosure...what's the point of flexing desktop grade CPU power in a console? At some point we have to come to reality that in 2017, Scorpio's SoC...is probably the best case scenario possible for such application. Have you seen the size of the chip and the cooling required?

Why? More performance of course. The game code is irrellevent. A wider CPU can execute more instructions per clock.

Jaguar is only 2-issue wide. Ryzen is 6-issue wide. Massive delta.
Newer CPU's also have better branch prediction, micro-op cache, prefretching, turbo/boosting, instructions, better caches and more. Jaguar is low-end and.
It wasn't even fast on it's release.

It's simply a fossil in 2017.

And no. You don't need a 400w PSU. There are CPU's just as efficient as Jaguar on a TDP standpoint, but offer vastly superior performance. Which is to be expected, Jaguar is 4 years old now.

And why would such CPU power be necessary? Well. That's simple. A.I and Physics have a ton of room for improvement. The CPU can also be tasked with decompression for better texturing and audio and other such things.

As for Scorpio's SoC. It's 7~ Billion transistors large. Which is roughly 40% more than the Xbox One's SoC.
That's right. Scorpio doesn't even have twice the transistors as the Xbox One, there was obviously room to move for a better CPU.

Mafioso said:

The question was never that said PC parts are not more powerful, rather than lots of it is left on the table for obvious reasons.

Good. Because a console will never be more powerful than a PC. Ever again.

Mafioso said:

We can all come to terms that how a developer optimizes for the console has a lot to do with the SDK and how closely they work with the platform team.


Sure. And the extra "optimization" a console gets over a PC is being diminished as time goes on. That's the simple fact.

Mafioso said:

 98% of the visual experience is still there, requiring a magnifying glass to a still to point out the most subtle details that are not useful in a livingroom environment

Maybe you are new to the graphics rendering game? Not entirely sure. But I can pick out the differences between the Xbox One and a mid-range PC. It's stupidly substantual.
The same will continue to hold true for Scorpio vs an Enthusiast level PC.

Remember. The PC isn't limited by 4k and 60fps. It can take it farther.

 

exclusive_console said:

Actually PS4P ram it 24% faster than PS4. It is 218 gb/s. Microsoft obviously have spent more time and money on Scorpio so if they can sell it for 450$ it will be a fair price. Having said that we have not seen any games run on it just a report from DF for Forza6 only for now.


You are forgetting something about the Playstation 4 Pro's bandwidth. It's actually more than 24% faster in the real world. I'll let you figure out what that specific technology is though. ;)



Pemalite said:
Mafioso said:

 CPU doing less per instruction, allows it to handle more instructions (driving GPU load up)....that's the point of offloading to the GPU Command block, no?

But the CPU's max theoretical performance remains unchanged, regardless of load of lack there-of.

Jaguar is still still shit, whichever way you cut the cake. It was shit in 2013 when the Xbox One and Playstation 4 launched. It's still shit in 2017.

Offloading some of the processing isn't going to suddenly turn it into a Core i5/i7/Ryzen CPU.

Mafioso said:

Why would a 'wide core' be needed? Game code is rather simple compared to the plethora of productivity/ computing CPU's in desktops are engineered to do at scale. And compared to the 30hz/60hz needs of a console game on a television, unless you want a 400w power brick and a large enclosure...what's the point of flexing desktop grade CPU power in a console? At some point we have to come to reality that in 2017, Scorpio's SoC...is probably the best case scenario possible for such application. Have you seen the size of the chip and the cooling required?

Why? More performance of course. The game code is irrellevent. A wider CPU can execute more instructions per clock.

Jaguar is only 2-issue wide. Ryzen is 6-issue wide. Massive delta.
Newer CPU's also have better branch prediction, micro-op cache, prefretching, turbo/boosting, instructions, better caches and more. Jaguar is low-end and.
It wasn't even fast on it's release.

It's simply a fossil in 2017.

And no. You don't need a 400w PSU. There are CPU's just as efficient as Jaguar on a TDP standpoint, but offer vastly superior performance. Which is to be expected, Jaguar is 4 years old now.

And why would such CPU power be necessary? Well. That's simple. A.I and Physics have a ton of room for improvement. The CPU can also be tasked with decompression for better texturing and audio and other such things.

As for Scorpio's SoC. It's 7~ Billion transistors large. Which is roughly 40% more than the Xbox One's SoC.
That's right. Scorpio doesn't even have twice the transistors as the Xbox One, there was obviously room to move for a better CPU.

Mafioso said:

The question was never that said PC parts are not more powerful, rather than lots of it is left on the table for obvious reasons.

Good. Because a console will never be more powerful than a PC. Ever again.

Mafioso said:

We can all come to terms that how a developer optimizes for the console has a lot to do with the SDK and how closely they work with the platform team.


Sure. And the extra "optimization" a console gets over a PC is being diminished as time goes on. That's the simple fact.

Mafioso said:

 98% of the visual experience is still there, requiring a magnifying glass to a still to point out the most subtle details that are not useful in a livingroom environment

Maybe you are new to the graphics rendering game? Not entirely sure. But I can pick out the differences between the Xbox One and a mid-range PC. It's stupidly substantual.
The same will continue to hold true for Scorpio vs an Enthusiast level PC.

Remember. The PC isn't limited by 4k and 60fps. It can take it farther.

 

exclusive_console said:

Actually PS4P ram it 24% faster than PS4. It is 218 gb/s. Microsoft obviously have spent more time and money on Scorpio so if they can sell it for 450$ it will be a fair price. Having said that we have not seen any games run on it just a report from DF for Forza6 only for now.


You are forgetting something about the Playstation 4 Pro's bandwidth. It's actually more than 24% faster in the real world. I'll let you figure out what that specific technology is though. ;)

So are you saying the scorpio wont be close to the 1070? and/or since you ssaid yourself that consoles punch higher that the pc counterpart, what are we looking at the will be close to? Imm only going with the 1070 cuz digital foundry said so.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

eva01beserk said:

So are you saying the scorpio wont be close to the 1070? and/or since you ssaid yourself that consoles punch higher that the pc counterpart, what are we looking at the will be close to? Imm only going with the 1070 cuz digital foundry said so.

Need to wait for the hardware to release and games to make an appearance before a proper educated opinion can be formed on that front.
But a Geforce 1060 overclocked is probably a little more realistic if Forza is the example. - Remember the Scorpio demo had Forza running with Xbox One levels of quality while the 1070 was all Ultra.
The 1060 OC could do medium settings and have perfectly fine 4k, 60fps performance with processing to spare.