fatslob-:O on 24 November 2013
| megafenix said: a renesas edram composed of 32 macros each 1 megabyte and of 256bits each shoul do thats 563GB/s with a total of 8192bits wide edram of 32megabytes renesas already said that wii u packs the best of their technologies at the point that making it elsewhere would be difficult shinen said that wii u edram has lots of bandwidth and even is sacry xbox had an edram of 4096 bits with 256GB/s that could be fully accessed by its 8 ROPS, the only drawback was that the work done by the rops was later have to be passed to gpu via an external bus of 32GB/s, but that doesnt make the actual bandwidth of tje edram be 32GB/s when you have the rops inside the edram and have full access to the internal bandwidth, we could consider the external bus as something as latency between the rops and the framebuffer of the gpu renesas has 1024 bis,4096 bits and 8192 bist for an edram of 32megabytes 1024 bits?, yea right, as it was latest technoligy fro renesas and would provide lots of bandwidth, and even gamecubed packed 512 bits wide embedded memory and that was more than a decade ago 4096bits,? not bad but is 7 years old and not latests technology, and doesnt provide a bandwidth that could be consider huge or scary as shinen coments 8192bits? sounds about right, that gives 563GB/s of bandwidth still, i would have liked a terabyte of bandwidth as sony was pretending for its next console, bt well, 563GB/s should do as long as developers take adventage of it |
BTW if you want a reason as to why Pemalite thinks nintendo didn't use anything above 1024 bit bus width that's because he has stated before that increasing the bus width will also mean increasing cache controller complexity and I doubt nintendo spends a shit ton of R&D for hardware.
Once again you still don't understand why the eDRAM is of less importance, eh ? Tell me why the X1 has issues hitting 1080p for every game ?
