By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Xbox 720 Specs: Eight-core CPU, 8 GB RAM, Windows 8 Kernel?

ManUtdFan on 09 January 2013
ethomaz said:

About that specs...

durango specs are this (most likely, almost certainly)

8 cores 1.6 ghz Jaguar CPU.
8 GB DDR3 RAM.
1+tf teraflop GPU with some sort of alleged unknown special customizations that may help it perform better than the raw teraflops indicate.
2-3GB of RAM likely reserved for the operating system.
ESRAM on the GPU (unknown amount).

the above is likely highly accurate and current summation. take it or leave it believe it or dont, it's real.

Aegis response:

"Everything I've heard from reliable sources makes your series of guesses, particularly about total teraflops, impossible. Save for the DDR3 guess, which I'm worried might be true. Which would be incredibly stupid."

 

-------

Seems like the 1 TFLOPS is impossible (to down or up?) and there is something to be worried about the DDR3 memory (slow memory like Wii U?).

Edit - 8GB means a 256bits bus so not 384bits... with 256bits DDR3 it would have fairly limited bandwidth.


An Atari Jaguar CPU! damn that's gonna bite the dust! 

Seriously tho, DDR4 runs so much quicker than DDR3 it should be a shoe-in. 



Around the Network
ethomaz on 09 January 2013

ManUtdFan said:

Seriously tho, DDR4 runs so much quicker than DDR3 it should be a shoe-in.

DDR3 is cheaper and DDR4 is not released yet... maybe you are confunsing DDR4 with GDDR4 (DDR3 based).



ManUtdFan on 09 January 2013
ethomaz said:

ManUtdFan said:

Seriously tho, DDR4 runs so much quicker than DDR3 it should be a shoe-in.

DDR3 is cheaper and DDR4 is not released yet... maybe you are confunsing DDR4 with GDDR4 (DDR3 based).

No I meant general memory. I think Samsung should be really kind and 'donate' the new tech to be integrated into next gen.  



Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 on 09 January 2013
Barozi said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:


Hey, this is an off topic reply but how do you add friends on XBL without going on the console??

via Xbox.com for example.

Tried but i couldn't find a way. 



Yay!!!

Barozi on 09 January 2013
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Barozi said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:


Hey, this is an off topic reply but how do you add friends on XBL without going on the console??

via Xbox.com for example.

Tried but i couldn't find a way. 

Really ?

Log into Xbox.com with your Gamertag.

Click on Friends (either on the Social tab on the top or scroll down to click on display (or show) all friends.
On the new page there is a search field where you can enter the Gamertag of a friend you'd like to find.
On that friends profile click on the add friend button under his avatar (not the gamerpic).



Around the Network
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 on 09 January 2013
Barozi said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Barozi said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:


Hey, this is an off topic reply but how do you add friends on XBL without going on the console??

via Xbox.com for example.

Tried but i couldn't find a way. 

Really ?

Log into Xbox.com with your Gamertag.

Click on Friends (either on the Social tab on the top or scroll down to click on display (or show) all friends.
On the new page there is a search field where you can enter the Gamertag of a friend you'd like to find.
On that friends profile click on the add friend button under his avatar (not the gamerpic).


I see... Thanks bro.



Yay!!!

D-Joe on 09 January 2013
ethomaz said:

About that specs...

durango specs are this (most likely, almost certainly)

8 cores 1.6 ghz Jaguar CPU.
8 GB DDR3 RAM.
1+tf teraflop GPU with some sort of alleged unknown special customizations that may help it perform better than the raw teraflops indicate.
2-3GB of RAM likely reserved for the operating system.
ESRAM on the GPU (unknown amount).

the above is likely highly accurate and current summation. take it or leave it believe it or dont, it's real.

Aegis response:

"Everything I've heard from reliable sources makes your series of guesses, particularly about total teraflops, impossible. Save for the DDR3 guess, which I'm worried might be true. Which would be incredibly stupid."

 

-------

Seems like the 1 TFLOPS is impossible (to down or up?) and there is something to be worried about the DDR3 memory (slow memory like Wii U?).

Edit - 8GB means a 256bits bus so not 384bits... with 256bits DDR3 it would have fairly limited bandwidth.

AMD China dude said the GPU will be 384bit

I doubt it will slow like Wii U,because Wii U DDR3 even slower than 360/PS3



http://zh-tw.justin.tv/johndoe1899

BlueFalcon on 09 January 2013
ethomaz said:
Well MS have to choice THE BEST or THE CHEAPEST... choose AMD.

And a 8 cores running at 2.4Ghz will be overkill for consoles... even the 1.6Ghz is great.

It's not that simple. If they choose x86, they lose hardware BC. In regard to CPU performance for games, the order of CPU performance is:

Intel >> AMD >>>>>>>>> Everyone else. 

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/2012/test-intel-core-i7-3970x/5/

An 8-core 4.0ghz FX8350 would destroy a 2.4ghz 8-core IBM CPU in games without even trying. PC gamers pay $100 extra sometimes to step up from GTX670 to GTX680 or from 925mhz HD7970 to 1050mhz HD7970GE to just gain 8-11% more performance. In those situations, 15-20% differences between CPUs starts to matter. Also, a lot of enthusiast gamers overclock and power consumption of Intel's CPUs compared to AMD's in overclocked states is dramatically superior.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/11/06/amd-fx-8350-review/7

However, if we look at AMD and Intel processors compared to everyone else, for all intents and purposes for gaming AMD is like a Ferrari 458 and Intel is Pagani Zonda R/Veyron Super Sports/Lamborghini Aventador/Agera R. You go with PowerPC when you cannot afford to go AMD/Intel for a console, not the other way around. It wouldn't even be surprising if a 4-core AMD CPU beat an 8-core IBM CPU in games.



ethomaz on 09 January 2013
BlueFalcon said:
ethomaz said:
Well MS have to choice THE BEST or THE CHEAPEST... choose AMD.

And a 8 cores running at 2.4Ghz will be overkill for consoles... even the 1.6Ghz is great.

Ummm..no. The order of CPU performance for games is: Intel >> AMD >>>>>>>>> Everyone else.

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/2012/test-intel-core-i7-3970x/5/

An 8-core FX8350 would destroy an 8-core IBM CPU in games without even trying. PC gamers pay $100 extra sometimes to step up from GTX670 to GTX680 or from 925mhz HD7970 to 1050mhz HD7970GE to just gain 8-10% more performance. In those situations, 10-20% difference between CPUs starts to matter. However, to if we look at AMD and Intel processors compared to everyone else, for all intents and purposes for gaming AMD is like a Ferrari 458 and Intel is Pagani Zonda/Veyron/Aventador. You go with PowerPC when you cannot afford to go AMD/Intel for a console, not the other way around.

I agree with you... I just said the MS two choices BEST or CHEAPEST... and they choose AMD (the cheapest).

I think 1.6Ghz is low but in console you have dedicated cores to work... not like in PC when the OS uses the same cores than the games... you have no dedicade core to games... so the console can work better with low clock CPU and developers can split the tasks between cores without worrying about if the PC have 2, 4, 6 or 8 cores... in console they already know they can use 7 cores (if the NextBox have 8 with one dedicated to OS).

I think a 8-core CPU clocked at 2.4Ghz for consoles will be really strong.

For PC you have to user more high clock power than parallel tasks because most gamers have a 2-core processor.

It's all about the optimizations the consoles can give to developers.



Chris Hu on 09 January 2013

If its anywhere near as powerful as the rumors say and doesn't have backwards compatibility then I will be very pissed off.