MS needed to create your own tech because I can't see the hUMA that AMD implemented working together with eSRAM and DataMoves... it's not only CPU and GPU accesing the same data pool in memory... it's CPU, GPU and DataMoves accesing the same data pool in memory or eSRAM.

The MS solution seems to be more complex to be implemented than the AMD hUMA.

No, not really.

The Xbox One's memory architecture:


SOURCE

Also the only source for the AMD quote is a single German publication. Apparently AMD hasn't said this to any other outlets like ARS Technica, Engadget, or CNET.

Not a reliable source of info.

I can't really understand this graph since the first time I saw it... seems like they tried to add stuffs to make easy or there are something missing because I'm sure all MoveEngine have direct access to 8GB DDR3 and ESRAM (they are created to copy data from DDR3 to eSRAM - and vice versa - without use CPU or GPU).

I don't know how the MS version of the "hUMA" works but at least it need to handle the CPU, GPU and DataMoves shared access in DDR3... so MS needs to customize it because the AMD version just handle CPU and GPU.

And a Xbox One Dev at Reedit said "Xbox One To Have A Similar Solution to huMA"

http://gamingbolt.com/xbox-one-to-have-a-similar-solution-to-huma-xbox-one-dev

That's exactly what I'm talking... it is not like Xbone didn't have but the solution need to be different because particularities like DataMove and/or eSRAM.

Gamers are so easily swayed by the marketing hype. So, AMD has a new processor tech and they are saying that it makes everything better if you use it. Did anyone expect them to say that their new advertising slogan of hUMA is garbage and doesn't help performance? AMD/Intel are always saying some crap about how their new "tech" is going to revolutionize the power of the gaming/pc world. All of these ideas take years for developers to even take a look at, as they would have had to plan for that at the beginning. Even if they had some plan to do so, do you think that the code writers were instant experts at do it? Also, if you assume that these capabilities do enhance the capability of their processor, has it been studied or used by enough people to determine if there is some type of trade off being made. The short answer is Probably Not or No.

New processor tech takes years to be implemented into the software and unless Intel is doing the same, won't be implemented at all. The reason is that almost everyone of these games(even first party) will be ported to another system or PC at some point. If you write the program with too little or no ability to use or not use a tech that is implemented in so few machines, you are throwing away a shit ton of $$$ long term. Developers know that games last forever now. It can be released on one system and years later released to all systems via digital downloads.

Bottom line = Don't fall for the PR B.S.

It is not really new and I can't think any Unifed Memory system working without that... Xbone have something similar too.

The name is a new marketing word... hUMA... like Cloud is too but I won't enter in this discussion

Yes, I was saying this as well yesterday.  I got shouted down by others that I didn't know what I was talking about,

And, my post above was the Reddit post, slightly altered for better readability.

I thought the VGLeaks image was taken from documentation, but it appears it is thier understanding of how it works based on what they concluded from the documentation.

Yes, not really about it being new, as AMD isn't just a console chip maker.  They are pimping the capabilities of their architecture over someone(intel) elses.  They are NOT going to say that if you do X,Y, or Z you basically don't need our hUMA tech.  Their job is to sell you on what their tech and such.  The fact that XBOne has something similar only adds to how funny this whole thing is.