By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
eyeofcore on 09 November 2013
Edit Thread
fatslob-:O said:
curl-6 said:
fatslob-:O said:
MohammadBadir said:
fatslob-:O said:

I'm glad some of us came to a consensus that a system can do more with less.

it's doing more with more.

@Bold I don't know about that.

I can be pretty sure that it's achieving more with less. 

Depends what we're saying it has less of. It's got less CPU clock speed, less electricity consumption, and possibly less FLOPS, but the original Xbox had less FLOPS than the PS2 and look how that turned out.

On the other hand it has more RAM, more eDRAM, newer GPU features, more CPU cache, more instruction per cycle.

@Bold The IPC is worse than bulldozer no offence. 

I agree with everthing else but the reason why the xbox won has to do with it having an insane fillrate such as pixel and texture. 

You guys should be depending on it's newer architecture, not it's raw power!

 

It is not a disaster for what it is... Espresso matches in GFLOPS;

i5 480M Core's;2/Thread's;4/Litography;32nm/Clock;2.66-2.9Ghz/Cache;3MB/Die Size;81mm^2/Transistor's;328 million/TDP; 35 watts/GFLOPS: 15

Pentium E5800 Core's;2/Litography;45nm/Clock;3.2Ghz/Cache;2MB/Die Size;82mm^2/Transistor's; 228 million/TDP; 65 watts/GFLOPS; 15

Are both of these from above disasters for what they are compared to Espresso that has 3 core's, produced at litography of 45nm, clocked at 1.243Ghz, has 3MB of L3 Cache, die size of just 27.7mm^2 with 60 million transistor's while TDP is like 5--8 watts?!

You deny the fact that it is not a disaster for what it is, for the architecture it is for performance per mm^2 it has at 45nm litography.

We are talking about an ancient architecture from end of 1990is... And from what I can see... It does a heck of a job for what it is...

If Wii U's GPU was 160:8:8 then why is that large? It should be smaller, it should be like 100mm^2 not 146-147mm^2...

This is how GTA V would perform on PC with identical GFLOPS in CPU and supposed 160:8:8 GPU and closest to that is Radeon HD 6450;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLadMpbzF84