Xbox One vs PS4: ESRAM slower than GDDR5, It's Bottleneck"

[freedquaker]

globalisateur said:

Cyborg13B said:
Actually I'm hearing more like 260 GB/s of memory bandwidth for Xbox 3 - they upgraded the specifications, claiming a 192 GB/s bandwidth for the ESRAM. It has already been said though - the Xbox 3's GPU is definitely weaker - so there's no point in more bandwidth.

That's just added peak PR numbers never reachable in real tests.

- Esram: maximum bandwidth in real test done by Microsoft on a rare limited scenario: 145GB/s No developers in the world will ever go higher than those Microsoft numbers. You can see those numbers as peak (but possible) number, on average you can count on a 100GB/S for the esram.

- DDR3: maximum estimated bandwidth: 50GB/s

So if we could add those 2 numbers it would be 195GB/s of cumulated bandwidth but unfortunately we can't do that because when you feed Esram with DDDR3 ram you are using those 50GB/S just to shuffle data to the esram, not to display better graphics (the move engines unload only the CPU, not the DDR3 bandwidth!!). 

If you just use Esram as a glorified framebuffer (like probably most launch games did) then you just really have 50GB/s bandwidth for open world games and 100GB/S-ish esram for the framebuffer operations. You can't add those numbers too because those framebuffer operation only account for some % of the total processing.

But really if you look for proof, just look at the difference of performance in identical games between PS4 and X1 as there is an average objective 70% performance advantage on the PS4 (from 44% to 125%) not explained by the 41% PS4 GPU advantage.

You're reading my mind, sir.