Thank you for your opinion and completely dismissing the actual point I was trying to make which was only two sentence below.  Your addition to this conversation is much appreciated.

I didn't say he was, I asked him if he was.  There is a significant difference.

I personally know of no way to calculate the CPU speed based on the components that support the CPU.  I neither accept nor defend the validity of the authors statement.  That said, the guy who wrote this has been in the field, he's written countless articles, and he advises clients on the subject of semi-components.  His creditials are solid.

I don't have a problem with someone saying they don't believe it.  I take issue with someone saying he's wrong and not being able to contradict what he is saying.  I haven't read post for post, but so far I haven't read where EThomaz has actually contradicted his argument, he's only introduced his own argument to rationalize why the author is wrong.  I want more than that.  To me, that isn't a justified argument against someone who has creditials I can take stock in.

Understand, this isn't an attack on EThomaz, per se.  This is an attack on the shrill and insufficient conversations that permeate the Internet.  Opinions are like assholes.  We all know this.  Everyone has one.  There needs to be a higher level of conversation where people can actually move out of their encampments to come to rational, logical conclusions. 

That's what this is about.  The moderation on this site won't do anything to improve the level of discussion or discourse.  As long as no one is trolling or flaming, they don't see problems.  Unfortunately there are problems and they are significant to the level of discourse on this site.  Seriously, why are your most vocal Xbox supporters the most frequently banned?  On the face of it you will say because they've violated the rules, but the problem is we can't have a conversation here about the Xbox platform without the thread being filled with useless opinion.  Unfortunately, the few people on this site who can straddle both sides of the isle with some unbiasedness often resort to the same childish conversation.

I believe EThomaz is capable of providing decent, unbiased, quality conversation.  I want him to offer insightful, thoughtful, intelligent arguments.  That was my challenge in saying "prove it."  I don't always agree with what Walsulfur says, but the guy when he makes an argument comes packing heavy fire.  He supports pretty much every argument he makes. 

I'm not saying every conversation on this site has to be intellectual.  I'm saying, if someone is going to refute someone who is a known professional in their industry and has experience and credentials in that industry, and you say they're wrong.  You better have a good argument to support it.

There is a huge difference between.  "He's wrong." and "I think he's wrong."  The first one is fact, the second one is opinion.  One implies first-hand knowledge that contradicts.  The other an opinion, whether educated or not.

I don't want to shut-out differing opinions from my own, but the shrill, immature conversations are getting tiresome.  They're getting tiresome for a lot of people, not just me.  That's why you see people in your Xbox community getting banned more frequently.  That's why you see your Nintendo community leaving.  You have a problem.  It's not those two communities, and it isn't the level of conversation we bring to the site.  How we act is a direct reflection of how we are treated.

If you want this site to be one big Sony circlejerk, do nothing.  It'll happen.  Your community will continute to fester and boil until the Xbox and Nintendo community leave for good.  You want to a strong gaming community, you want lively and intelligent conversation, then start considering doing something to foster it.  Because right now you're banning the people that help bring something diverse to this site.

You assumed.  Your assumptions are patently false.     

Adinnieken said:

And logically you can have hUMA without eSRAM being involved.

However, regardless there are two points to be made here.

First, Microsoft designed and fabricated their own silicon.  They purchased the rights to AMDs technology.  AMD doesn't know what Microsoft did or didn't do.

Second, your argument doesn't stand, anymore than any other assertion.  The Xbox One SoC includes coherency between the GPU and CPU.  It utilizes unified memory on the DDR3 memory, and it employes an hetrogenuous system architecture.  Not only that, but the Xbox One's SoC also includes coherency with the eSRAM.  So whether or not it uses "hUMA" it is, AS I stated, a hetrogenuous memory architecture.  As have many others in the professional community.

The argument against there being so, was largely based on the fact that some marketing guy from AMD said so.  Yet the fact remains that the core Jaguar technology included it, so in the very least, the CPU and GPU would have had hUMA on the DDR3 memory, and no on the eSRAM.  However, that isn't the case because Microsoft made the eSRAM coherent between the CPU and GPU. 

Finally, let's drop this conversation, it isn't germain to this thread.  I brought it up not because I wanted to discuss it here, but because while you stated your opinion in that thread, you along with a couple of other people (one joined in this thread) failed to actually look at what was being said and discreditted it out of hand, saying any opposition to it was wrong, despite the facts that proved otherwise. 

In the end, those, including myself, who were indeed right have the satisfaction of knowing we were indeed right, and knowing that whether you truly knew you were right or wrong didn't matter, but the fact that you were closed minded enough to join in the infantile conversation and not support the logical conclusions based on factual information.  Suggests that your arguments are slanted (e.g. biased). 

I personally don't care whether you support the PS4, the Xbox One, or the Wii U.  That isn't important to me.  What is important to me is, when you have the technological knowledge whether you offer an impartial opinion or argument.  Especially when it isn't something you want to do.

It's not a contradiction.  On a PC, you are able to run most games with a dual core processor.  Even some of the most intensive games don't need much more than that.  Today the most important thing is RAM and GPU, because like I said most games don't need that much CPU power.  

The PS3's CPU and GPU are very similar in performance, I typically see numbers like 200 GFlops for both.  The CPU was basically made as a back up for the GPU.  This is according to ND.

 "For Uncharted 2 - and indeed many recent games - Cell is used as a parallel graphics processor working in tandem with the RSX. Tasks traditionally associated with the GPU are passed off to the Cell's SPUs."

The Xbox 360 was better RAM wise(slightly, mostly due to being unified) and GPU wise, but the PS3 was far better in terms of CPU and in a lot of instances made up for its other bottlenecks.  

Though back to today, a lot of GPU power is needed for games.  The CPU for playing games (right now for the most part) will never be an issue unless you are running very old CPUs.

Because I have zero interest in console horsepower dick measuring, I'll just continue to contribute the ways I can.

Well, the typical trend has been more GPU force and it has been for awhile.  In fact, the Cell was more like a GPU.  Regardless of that though, the new gpus(I know the PS4 does, Xbox One probably also does) are able to utilize "GPGPU" or General-purpose computing  on graphics processing units.  This means that the system can offload some CPU processes onto the GPU.  So even if at some point we need more CPU power, the GPU can handle some of it.