HD console graphics performance comparison charts

[ryuendo89]

curl-6 said:

AnthonyW86 said:

JazzB1987 said:

memory bandwidth not including edram makes exactly 0 sense.

Its like saying 360 vs X1 CPU performance not including more than 3 cores.

The eDRAM is not included because you can't just add the bandwidth to that off the main memory. Sure developers can use it to partly make up for slower main memory, but their is no way to add that to the graphs. Even with eDRAM faster memory still benefits graphics performance. In comparable PC graphics cards for example the bandwidth difference between PS4/XOne would give the PS4 20-30% higher framerates. eDRAM will make up for that but not all of it.

And that's why it's really important to note that although Wii-U has 2gb it runs at really low speeds. 32mb of e RAM cannot make up for that(and the e RAM of the XOne is also 3 times faster than that used in the Wii-U).

I doubt you have a legitimate source for that.

It's More or less true CPU is responsible not the memory speed, even like that X1 CPU comunication to RAM is 30 GB/sec vs PS4 20 GB/sec, I call it bad optimisation since PS4 is way easier to develop for, Look at Wii U thirdpartys Almost the double GFlops of PS3 GPU-wise and still struggles in framerates because of it's CPU. X1 CPU is well know for being an 8-core @ 1.75 Ghz and PS4 is a 8-core 1.6 Ghz confirmed by both Sony and M$ time will not give graphics but will give framerates to X1, i suspect.

In fact 32 MB of eDRAM can make for it since like in X1 on Wii U eDRAM is built in the same chip, one think is edrams and esrams being separate chips, then yes since they would need to connect t each other from chip A to B. Since wii u edram is built inside the same chip of the GPU it's being used without delay everytime it's needed.