| RavenXtra said: Title says slower, but the tweet says its faster but not enough. You didn't even use the title of the article, which also states this. Oh well.. agendas and all that |
Yeah, I noticed that, too. I confess, my first reading of Todd's statement is that it's a production bottleneck, but after a moment of thinking I changed my mind.
It boils down to this. An ERAM machine has to take memory off the main RAM pool and put it on the ERAM before it can be used. I don't know computer architecture enough to know if that's processing the information twice or not, but it at least has to go through the information once before it can even be used.
A unified memory pool can just call the information as needed.
For that reason, if the RAM pool has comparable speeds to the ERAM, the one with the unified pool will not only be easier to develop for, but it will actually be faster because it has fewer operations to make and is not continuously wasting operations flipping information in and out of the ERAM pool.
Now I could be wrong. All these units have APU's, so it's not likely that the X1 is burning any of it's GPU's processor doing any ESRAM flipping. It's likely that the power lost is actually going to come out of enemy AI or another background operation, and not the graphics.
