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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Major Nelson on X1 Power: "I can't wait for the truth to come out."

toadslayer72 on 07 September 2013
misterymedia said:
toadslayer72 said:
I hope it's true, mainly because the meltdowns would be the best. That said, I'm thinking that this dude is someone trying to fuck with people for his own lulz.


I'm not trying to 'fuck' with anybody. I've only just recently gotten back into gaming (currently running through Skyrim on my gtx460!) after a long hiatus. I won't be buying either of the next gen consoles immediately as I've got a family vacation to pay for and I'm not paid that well. I genuinely do work in silicon, and I genuinely do have contacts.

I don't really care if there are meltdowns. All I'm saying is that you'll see on the 29th that everything I've said is true. I was told other things too, but they were just rumours that he'd heard in passing, so we dismissed them.

Ok, well if not to fuck with people, I could definitely see someone doing this to at least prove a point. The point would be that anyone can make some shit up and pass it off as a leak or a source or whatever the hell you wanna call it. I think it would be cool if true but I just don't see some dude (or chick) coming here, VGC, with breaking legit info. I hope I'm wrong though.



I LOVE paying for Xbox Live! I also love that my love for it pisses off so many people.

Around the Network
Mmmfishtacos on 07 September 2013
misterymedia said:
hinch said:
misterymedia said:
Hi

I've just registered on this forum.

I'm going to banned for saying this, but none of this post is false in anyway. I am not an Xbox fanboy, I do not own an Xbox and never have. The last console I bought was a launch PS3 which I stopped using after MGS4. I do however, work in the tech industry and my job involves the production of silicon wafers (not for consoles).

On the 29th of September you will realize that the rumors that have been flying around regarding a dGPU are entirely true.

A very reliable source from a well known first party developer (who are creating a title for the xbox one's launch) who I've known for a while mentioned that Microsoft had granted them a higher level access from the devkits than almost all other developers. When combined with the APU, the amount of performance in TFLOPs rises from 1.41 to somewhere closer to 3.2 (ish). It's not quite the 5.31tf+ that Misterxmedia is predicting, but some of what he says is true.

He also told me that the dGPU is the reason the console is fairly large. That one die needed massive cooling to begin with. The CPU was also initially clocked at 1.35ghz in the first dev kits to be issued in 'console' form, to offset heat-production from the GPU components of the APU and the dGPU. A massive cooling solution was used to control temps and that's why vents were placed directly above it, to ensure good airflow. It turns out after testing, the heatsink/fan was more than capable to cool the entire die at '100% theoretical load', something that applications would hardly demand. That's what warranted the increased clocks.

I also learned that while 53mhz+ was applied to the GPU core in the APU, it was not applied to the dGPU. This was because the dGPU was already running at 853mhz. What's odd is that the dGPU is granted higher bandwidths to the ESRAM than the GPU core on the APU. No reason was given as to why, and I don't want to pretend like I know.

The NDA is pretty much spot on. But please, don't take my word for it. You'll find out pretty much from the source on the 29th (or possibly the day after depending on how Msoft and mjrnelson or penello want to announce it!).

Look forward to it!

Are you MisterXMedia by any chance? xD


No. I just saw his posts and decided that I might as well use a variant. He ( or she!?) has roughly the right idea, but he's blowing it way out of proportion. 5.31tf? That's a joke, I don't know how he worked that out.

 

Why don't you just black out anything that can be traced back to you and post it? Even if they are restricted by the NDA there was nothing stopping them from telling everyone that the Xbox has 2 GPU's, and not going into details. That alone would have been enough to shut a lot of people up. But instead they bring up how superior their programing is. When you take into account that MS said that kinect 2 cost just as much as the box and expect to break even on the system just shoots this whole damn rumor in the head. So back it up. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 07 September 2013
enditall727 said:
Well this is to be expected since they've been fumbling around and trying to get the specs closer and up to par with its competitors.

And wtf does he mean by he "cant wait"? The console has already been revealed and the specs are pretty much already known except for the things they're scrambling to tweak and change


Imagine what would've happened if Sony could've kept it in their pants and not told Microsoft about the power of the PS3 in February and saved it for E3. LOL Microsoft would've never been able to fix the Xbox enough before November. LOL They would've been fumbling downhill.



DD_Bwest on 07 September 2013
Mmmfishtacos said:
misterymedia said:
hinch said:
misterymedia said:
Hi

I've just registered on this forum.

I'm going to banned for saying this, but none of this post is false in anyway. I am not an Xbox fanboy, I do not own an Xbox and never have. The last console I bought was a launch PS3 which I stopped using after MGS4. I do however, work in the tech industry and my job involves the production of silicon wafers (not for consoles).

On the 29th of September you will realize that the rumors that have been flying around regarding a dGPU are entirely true.

A very reliable source from a well known first party developer (who are creating a title for the xbox one's launch) who I've known for a while mentioned that Microsoft had granted them a higher level access from the devkits than almost all other developers. When combined with the APU, the amount of performance in TFLOPs rises from 1.41 to somewhere closer to 3.2 (ish). It's not quite the 5.31tf+ that Misterxmedia is predicting, but some of what he says is true.

He also told me that the dGPU is the reason the console is fairly large. That one die needed massive cooling to begin with. The CPU was also initially clocked at 1.35ghz in the first dev kits to be issued in 'console' form, to offset heat-production from the GPU components of the APU and the dGPU. A massive cooling solution was used to control temps and that's why vents were placed directly above it, to ensure good airflow. It turns out after testing, the heatsink/fan was more than capable to cool the entire die at '100% theoretical load', something that applications would hardly demand. That's what warranted the increased clocks.

I also learned that while 53mhz+ was applied to the GPU core in the APU, it was not applied to the dGPU. This was because the dGPU was already running at 853mhz. What's odd is that the dGPU is granted higher bandwidths to the ESRAM than the GPU core on the APU. No reason was given as to why, and I don't want to pretend like I know.

The NDA is pretty much spot on. But please, don't take my word for it. You'll find out pretty much from the source on the 29th (or possibly the day after depending on how Msoft and mjrnelson or penello want to announce it!).

Look forward to it!

Are you MisterXMedia by any chance? xD


No. I just saw his posts and decided that I might as well use a variant. He ( or she!?) has roughly the right idea, but he's blowing it way out of proportion. 5.31tf? That's a joke, I don't know how he worked that out.

 

Why don't you just black out anything that can be traced back to you and post it? Even if they are restricted by the NDA there was nothing stopping them from telling everyone that the Xbox has 2 GPU's, and not going into details. That alone would have been enough to shut a lot of people up. But instead they bring up how superior their programing is. When you take into account that MS said that kinect 2 cost just as much as the box and expect to break even on the system just shoots this whole damn rumor in the head. So back it up. 


not only that,  why would that have the hot box presentation at the end of august breaking down all the hardware.  Why Fool the world into thinking your product isnt as good as the other.   they would wait to have something like that and we would be hearing alot more "we cant tell you right now because of corporate secrets, but we do have a few undisclosed parts that will change the game".  

plus microsoft has said the kinect is as expensive as the console.  We have also heard they will be selling at either a wash, or a slight profit.  That means the console would have 250$ into it.  How are they going to have some secret tech that isnt even out yet  that pushes its Tflops over 3?



I am Torgo, I take care of the place while the master is away.

"Hes the clown that makes the dark side fun.. Torgo!"

Ha.. i won my bet, but i wasnt around to gloat because im on a better forum!  See ya guys on Viz

Shinobi-san on 07 September 2013
Machiavellian said:
Shinobi-san said:
Machiavellian said:
Remember the Cell SPUs are considered co-processor and they were used to offload task away from the PS3 GPU.  You already see the results of how well that worked out for Sony (at least for their 1st party). Depending on what task the co-processors are used for, they can make a solid difference in performance.  Without any info on what the processor do, I will not speculate as to the difference they can make only that the possibility exist.  

Lets break down the difference between the X1 GPU and the PS4.  I will limit this to just the CU or Sharder cores as that’s were the big difference in TFlops comes into play.  The X1 has 12 CUs and the PS4 has 18.  CUs are generally used to process shaders.  Since that’s a parallel process, the PS4 can execute more shaders at one time then the X1.  Now from the Hotchips convention some interesting things came out and I was processing the information and thinking about design.  MS has made it so that all parts of the system knows what is happening to a segment of code in memory.  If that is so, then MS can leverage specialize co-processor to handle specific gaming code where it would be more process intensive for the GPU or CPU to handle.  

 

Do not forget that GPUs are designed as an add on to a system not as being the main CPU.  What I am getting at is that for efficiency within a closed box, some of the things the GPU does might make more sense to handle with specialize hardware then within the GPU.

As for Albert statements, he is a PR guy so you will always take their comments with a grain of salt.  Interesting enough him commenting on Neograf where he knows his comments are going to get a lot of push back.  Most PR people know where to pick their battles so him making his statements on Gaf says that either he loves contention or MS has a few tricks up their sleeve.

As for Tflops, do you know that the PS3 is stated as having 2.1 TFlops compared to the 1.8TFlops of the PS4.  As a measuring tool for the performance of these 2 devices, the Tflop number really might not be the difference maker.


the tflops number becomes more reliable and worthwhile comparing when the systems have near identical hardware...

We not comparing a Nvidia GPU core to an AMD core...they both have GCN cores. They both have the exact same CPU. Those are the two core components of the system.

And yes we dont know that much about the co-processors but again it cant replace conventional CPU's or GPU's....using the cell as an example is not exatcly a positive thing. The SPU's were only good and well utilised under very strict circumstances. When devs started coding on the PS3 they flat out ignored the SPU's. These co-processors seems to have a set function...so it doesnt give the dev much flexibility either.

But agian i feel like you tring to argue that these co-processors will have a great impact on increasing overall system performance. Whereas, i see it more as a way to maximise the efficiency of the system. And when comparing the two systems...the PS4 also has co-processors or is that a non issue? I've said this three times now but you never actually address that. Do you not agree or ?

I will agree that the Tflops makes much more of a difference when comparing like for like hardware.  In this case the GPU in the X1 definitely a much weaker part to the one in the PS4, no doubt about it.  The CPU is something different.  Thought the parts are the same, the difference between bandwidth and access are different in the X1 to make for a much superior CPU.  The area where thing changes is the other parts of the system we cannot get a direct comparison.  The Shape Audio processor pretty much mean audio is free on the X1.  Meaning the CPU doesn't contribute any processing for Audio. Thus its free to do other things.

I am not sure why you keep saying co-processor cannot replace conventional CPU/GPU.  They are not used that way, they are used to offload specific task that a CPU or GPU would do but more efficiently.  The Shape Audio processor is a good example.  Its designed to offload all audio processing from the CPU where it has specialize co-processors of its own to handle audio task.  By itself its a very powerful audio combination that will handle audio functions much better and faster than the CPU.  

The reason developers did not ramp up to the Cell fast enough was Sony fault.  It was Sony that did not provide enough information to developers on how to use the Cell chips until after the PhyreEngine.  At the beginning of the PS3 gen, Sony was very poor with providing tools, libraries and sample code on how to use the Cell.  When multiplat games started to look worst from developers, it kicked Sony into gear that they needed a multiplatform game engine to get developers up to speed faster on the Cell.  

You are right that the PS3 does have co-processors of its own I just do not think they are used for anything besides Audio and decompression and compression video.  I have no clue what MS is doing with the additional processors, No one does.  What I am stating is that without any info, there are many possibilities. 

My argument is that MS made a statement that is hard to define just by only comparing the GPU specs.  There are many different ways to skin a cat and co-processors are one.  You cannot dismiss their importance until we find out what they are used for.  I have a few ideals light lighting, physics, and animation but we shall see.

You seriously believe Xbone has a much more superior CPU than the PS4? I mean seriously? This conversation was pretty level headed until that comment. Not sure where that comes from. But im not even going to address that because then thats a whole other argument that i think is pointless. You do realise we dont even know the clock speed of the PS4 cpu right?

@ bolded im saying they can only be used for the task they are meant to be used for. It does not replace a GPU or CPU which can be freely assigned to any task thats appropriate. Also, under no circumstances do i think the SPU's were better than either a GPU for GPU specific tasks or  a CPU for CPU optimised tasks. Like I said using the cell as an example is a bad one. And like you said we dont know much details about these co-processors....so how do you know it does the job better than what the CPU could have done it? We literally have no details on it. Other than the fact that certain tasks are offloaded to it to free up CPU and GPU resources. Thats it. I mean the entire premise behind it explains it all...why would they try and free up resources for the GPU and CPU if those other processors did a much better job?

This makes zeros sense to me. I think we overblowing this. And indeed when we get more info on these co-processors we can revisit the topic.



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Around the Network
richardhutnik on 07 September 2013
bananaking21 said:
i cant wait for the truth to come out either. it will end this penis size contest between fanboys. PS4 is more powerful, end of story. i dont see the big deal here

The sore point is that the ONE is going to sell for $100 more expensive than the PS4.  If the prices were reverses, then the debate wouldn't be as much.  So it is all about trying to come up with ways to justify the ONE being more expensive, from talk of "greater value" to "hidden power, you just wait", to whatever else is brought up.  This is why it continues and fanboys argue over it, with Kinect being a huge point, and attacks and defense NOT based on personal preference but to whatever platform the console partisan is married to.



richardhutnik on 07 September 2013
StokedUp said:
It's clearly obvious Microsoft are trying to update there specs to be closer or better than the Ps4. They are chnging them just like they've changed just about everything else they were going to do with the system! It shows that Sony are leading the way because otherwise Microsoft would have to keep changing their original ideas and plans to basically be more like Sony. Not being a fanboy here I'm simply saying what it looks like from a fans view.
I look forward to the next 3-4 months when everything is out.


When the Saturn was going up against the original Playstation, Sega saw that the PSX was going to be it on polygons.  Sega then tried to do an update the the Saturn to make it competitive and launched at $100 more expensive than the original Playstation.  That didn't end up going well for Sega at all.



larrysdirtydrawss on 07 September 2013

oh boy,ms biggest cheerleader is at it again with full skirt on and pom-poms.. this is the same guy who back in the day combined the 360's edram bandwidth with its main system bandwidth and added it together like it was all one pool of bandwidth and compared it with the ps3's bw as if thats how it works..and expected to get that by us without noticing... it looked like a 3-1 margin difference,it was a put your hand over your forehead(hard) moment. he's a pr guy saying pr things,sony/nin got them too,but he gets insane attention



Mmmfishtacos on 07 September 2013
DD_Bwest said:
Mmmfishtacos said:
misterymedia said:
hinch said:
misterymedia said:
Hi

I've just registered on this forum.

I'm going to banned for saying this, but none of this post is false in anyway. I am not an Xbox fanboy, I do not own an Xbox and never have. The last console I bought was a launch PS3 which I stopped using after MGS4. I do however, work in the tech industry and my job involves the production of silicon wafers (not for consoles).

On the 29th of September you will realize that the rumors that have been flying around regarding a dGPU are entirely true.

A very reliable source from a well known first party developer (who are creating a title for the xbox one's launch) who I've known for a while mentioned that Microsoft had granted them a higher level access from the devkits than almost all other developers. When combined with the APU, the amount of performance in TFLOPs rises from 1.41 to somewhere closer to 3.2 (ish). It's not quite the 5.31tf+ that Misterxmedia is predicting, but some of what he says is true.

He also told me that the dGPU is the reason the console is fairly large. That one die needed massive cooling to begin with. The CPU was also initially clocked at 1.35ghz in the first dev kits to be issued in 'console' form, to offset heat-production from the GPU components of the APU and the dGPU. A massive cooling solution was used to control temps and that's why vents were placed directly above it, to ensure good airflow. It turns out after testing, the heatsink/fan was more than capable to cool the entire die at '100% theoretical load', something that applications would hardly demand. That's what warranted the increased clocks.

I also learned that while 53mhz+ was applied to the GPU core in the APU, it was not applied to the dGPU. This was because the dGPU was already running at 853mhz. What's odd is that the dGPU is granted higher bandwidths to the ESRAM than the GPU core on the APU. No reason was given as to why, and I don't want to pretend like I know.

The NDA is pretty much spot on. But please, don't take my word for it. You'll find out pretty much from the source on the 29th (or possibly the day after depending on how Msoft and mjrnelson or penello want to announce it!).

Look forward to it!

Are you MisterXMedia by any chance? xD


No. I just saw his posts and decided that I might as well use a variant. He ( or she!?) has roughly the right idea, but he's blowing it way out of proportion. 5.31tf? That's a joke, I don't know how he worked that out.

 

Why don't you just black out anything that can be traced back to you and post it? Even if they are restricted by the NDA there was nothing stopping them from telling everyone that the Xbox has 2 GPU's, and not going into details. That alone would have been enough to shut a lot of people up. But instead they bring up how superior their programing is. When you take into account that MS said that kinect 2 cost just as much as the box and expect to break even on the system just shoots this whole damn rumor in the head. So back it up. 


not only that,  why would that have the hot box presentation at the end of august breaking down all the hardware.  Why Fool the world into thinking your product isnt as good as the other.   they would wait to have something like that and we would be hearing alot more "we cant tell you right now because of corporate secrets, but we do have a few undisclosed parts that will change the game".  

plus microsoft has said the kinect is as expensive as the console.  We have also heard they will be selling at either a wash, or a slight profit.  That means the console would have 250$ into it.  How are they going to have some secret tech that isnt even out yet  that pushes its Tflops over 3?

Just dosnt' make any sense. 



MonstaMack on 07 September 2013

September 29th is doe or die /que AZ



It's just that simple.