misterymedia said:
hinch said:
misterymedia said:
Hi
I've just registered on this forum.
I'm going to banned for saying this, but none of this post is false in anyway. I am not an Xbox fanboy, I do not own an Xbox and never have. The last console I bought was a launch PS3 which I stopped using after MGS4. I do however, work in the tech industry and my job involves the production of silicon wafers (not for consoles).
On the 29th of September you will realize that the rumors that have been flying around regarding a dGPU are entirely true.
A very reliable source from a well known first party developer (who are creating a title for the xbox one's launch) who I've known for a while mentioned that Microsoft had granted them a higher level access from the devkits than almost all other developers. When combined with the APU, the amount of performance in TFLOPs rises from 1.41 to somewhere closer to 3.2 (ish). It's not quite the 5.31tf+ that Misterxmedia is predicting, but some of what he says is true.
He also told me that the dGPU is the reason the console is fairly large. That one die needed massive cooling to begin with. The CPU was also initially clocked at 1.35ghz in the first dev kits to be issued in 'console' form, to offset heat-production from the GPU components of the APU and the dGPU. A massive cooling solution was used to control temps and that's why vents were placed directly above it, to ensure good airflow. It turns out after testing, the heatsink/fan was more than capable to cool the entire die at '100% theoretical load', something that applications would hardly demand. That's what warranted the increased clocks.
I also learned that while 53mhz+ was applied to the GPU core in the APU, it was not applied to the dGPU. This was because the dGPU was already running at 853mhz. What's odd is that the dGPU is granted higher bandwidths to the ESRAM than the GPU core on the APU. No reason was given as to why, and I don't want to pretend like I know.
The NDA is pretty much spot on. But please, don't take my word for it. You'll find out pretty much from the source on the 29th (or possibly the day after depending on how Msoft and mjrnelson or penello want to announce it!).
Look forward to it! |
Are you MisterXMedia by any chance? xD
|
No. I just saw his posts and decided that I might as well use a variant. He ( or she!?) has roughly the right idea, but he's blowing it way out of proportion. 5.31tf? That's a joke, I don't know how he worked that out.
|
Well ok.. I'l let that one fly. I just assumed from your play on that username that you could be "that guy". Anyway, its still I'll believe it when I see it situation for me and that probably goes for most people here commenting on this, and rightfully so. I mean why on gods name would they put a dedicated GPU AS WELL as an APU in there. It's far more cost efficient to go full APU or keep the traditional CPU and GPU separate. Not only does it increase complexity in design, but its just doesn't make a lick of sense considering how much they invested in their custom APU - the Octo-core CPU, GPU, 32mb eSRAM, move engines fitting onto one 28nm die. Only to throw another GPU in there.
I mean from the last couple of months we've have all heard the PR from Microsoft saying that the hardware doesn't matter.. And that they haven't been aiming for the top high end graphics, downplaying the differences in performance at every opportunity they got and hyping their own hardware updates. It just comes off as the old PR BS to me. Especially when you see some multiplatform devs, who've actually got their hands on both dev kits.. coming out to say that the PS4 is ahead of Xbox One in sheer performance.
I'm sorry but honestly, the whole dGPU talk sounds like a lot of old crap.
Currently Online 
