OK, so the PS4 is stronger than the XBOX ONE...

Do we really know whats going on with the Xbox One SoC? Let's wait for Hot Chips and maybe we will know more about Xbox One SoC

Taken from Xbox One architecture panel:

Nick is saying that "to get all of this processing out of the box" is a challenge too.The new CPU core can do
six CPU operations per core per cycle, on an eight-core CPU.

"When I think about the graphics stack in particular, memory bandwidth is really important." He's saying the
on-chip caching and overall GPU architecture is very different.

Also:

Microsoft's Albert Penello stated, "Given the rumored specs for both systems, can anyone conceive of a
circumstance or decision one platform holder could make, where despite the theoretical performance benchmarks of
the components, the box that appears weaker could actually be more powerful?"

GravityX

X86 instructions can decode to several RISC like instructions.

An X86 instruction could generate RISC instructions for 1 integer/ALU and 1 AGU e.g. F(reg,mem) or F(mem,reg) instruction would generate a Load/Store operation and an ALU operation.. From RISC's POV, that's 3 instruction issues while X86's POV, it's single X86 instruction issue.

X86 floating instructions that specifies a memory access would generate floating point and load/store operations. Code density is an X86 advantage over RISC competitors.

Hasn't it been around 6 months since we found out what the PS4's specs were? Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like that long to me. Trips me out that a behemoth of a company like MS couldn't accomplish anything in that time other than a 53 mhz upclock to the GPU.

Wickerman777

Because like i told you when sony reveal the console on February it was all over for MS,in that time it was impossible for MS to do anything or let alone react well,one of CBOAT leaks talk about sony catching MS off guard,and blame the problem on leadership,and guess what Matrix get fire,it say he resign but we all know what that means he was kicked out.

And that is why now you see MS trying to control their bad image,is the reason they don't want to trasmit live from gamescom,is the reason they even disable comments on youtube videos.

BY the time sony reveal everything it was to late for any change,the xbox one is huge and is not because MS wanted the unit to run cooler,it because they suck making consoles,the PS3 was big but the PS3 had a build in power supply,imagin the xbox 360 having the power brik inside how much bigger it would have been,now the xbox one is even bigger than the 360 and still lack an internal PSU,so changing anything inside that console from ferbuary on ward was impossible for them without a delay,it is how it is now and the console will release in less countries than originaly planned,yield still are a problem.

 

You haven't factored in different color data types and fill rates.

 

X1's claimed to have 133 GB/s alpha blend would be around 8.2 Gpixel/s, which is far higher than 7770 or 7790's results i.e. It's closer to the prototype 7850 with 768 stream processors.

It's up to the individual to choose bteween accepting the 133 GB/s alpha blend claim or not. I'm not interested politics, but only in hardware.

ronvalencia

Hypocrite post.

You want people to see that the xbox one has more bandwidth than the 7770 and 7790,but you resufe to see that the xbox one has less power than both.

1.18 vs 1.28 7770 and 1.79 from the 7790.

The 7790 has 610 Gflops more than the xbox one,and you ignore it,even if we ignore the 10% GPU reservation the xbox one GPU is just 30,000Gflosp stronger than a 7770,and 480 Gflosp weaker than a full 7790.

What you want to imply is that magically because the damn xbox one has more bandwidth it should beat both GPU while having less power..

So if we give the xbox one 290GB/s bandwidth it should be able to beat the 7970 right.? Because it will have more bandwidth right and as we all know bandwidth is all that matter power is meaning less.

Hey Ron what do you think about this.?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/549?vs=647

660Ti vs 7850.

The 660Ti has more power than the 7850 every one knows that,yet it delivers it over a smaller bit bandwidth..

The 7850 has 256 bit 4800mhz effective for a total of 153GB/s.

The 660 TI has a 192Bit one 6006mhz effective for a total of 144Gb/s.

So what gives.? how can the 660Ti with more power but less bandwidth beat the 7850,ins't the 144GB/s bandwidth limit the 660 Ti.?

So yeah more power still is more power and less power still is less power even if more bandwidth is present,i don't think the xbox one will beat the 7790 even that it has more bandwith because the 7790 has way more power.

[QUOTE="Wickerman777"]

Hasn't it been around 6 months since we found out what the PS4's specs were? Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like that long to me. Trips me out that a behemoth of a company like MS couldn't accomplish anything in that time other than a 53 mhz upclock to the GPU.

tormentos

Because like i told you when sony reveal the console on February it was all over for MS,in that time it was impossible for MS to do anything or let alone react well,one of CBOAT leaks talk about sony catching MS off guard,and blame the problem on leadership,and guess what Matrix get fire,it say he resign but we all know what that means he was kicked out.

And that is why now you see MS trying to control their bad image,is the reason they don't want to trasmit live from gamescom,is the reason they even disable comments on youtube videos.

BY the time sony reveal everything it was to late for any change,the xbox one is huge and is not because MS wanted the unit to run cooler,it because they suck making consoles,the PS3 was big but the PS3 had a build in power supply,imagin the xbox 360 having the power brik inside how much bigger it would have been,now the xbox one is even bigger than the 360 and still lack an internal PSU,so changing anything inside that console from ferbuary on ward was impossible for them without a delay,it is how it is now and the console will release in less countries than originaly planned,yield still are a problem.

Balls. Things got changed late with the 360. Yeah, there was a problem with heating but ya just make sure you do that part better the next time. And judging by the enormous fan in Xbox One I reckon they took it to heart in a big way. I really could care less about the size of the case. And if it needs delayed to improve it then freakin' delay it. I would rather wait longer and get a 2 tflops Xbox One or even higher than get a 1.3 tflops Xbox One now.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

 

You haven't factored in different color data types and fill rates.

 

X1's claimed to have 133 GB/s alpha blend would be around 8.2 Gpixel/s, which is far higher than 7770 or 7790's results i.e. It's closer to the prototype 7850 with 768 stream processors.

It's up to the individual to choose bteween accepting the 133 GB/s alpha blend claim or not. I'm not interested politics, but only in hardware.

tormentos

Hypocrite post.

You want people to see that the xbox one has more bandwidth than the 7770 and 7790,but you resufe to see that the xbox one has less power than both.

1.18 vs 1.28 7770 and 1.79 from the 7790.

The 7790 has 610 Gflops more than the xbox one,and you ignore it,even if we ignore the 10% GPU reservation the xbox one GPU is just 30,000Gflosp stronger than a 7770,and 480 Gflosp weaker than a full 7790.

What you want to imply is that magically because the damn xbox one has more bandwidth it should beat both GPU while having less power..

So if we give the xbox one 290GB/s bandwidth it should be able to beat the 7970 right.? Because it will have more bandwidth right and as we all know bandwidth is all that matter power is meaning less.

Hey Ron what do you think about this.?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/549?vs=647

660Ti vs 7850.

The 660Ti has more power than the 7850 every one knows that,yet it delivers it over a smaller bit bandwidth..

The 7850 has 256 bit 4800mhz effective for a total of 153GB/s.

The 660 TI has a 192Bit one 6006mhz effective for a total of 144Gb/s.

So what gives.? how can the 660Ti with more power but less bandwidth beat the 7850,ins't the 144GB/s bandwidth limit the 660 Ti.?

So yeah more power still is more power and less power still is less power even if more bandwidth is present,i don't think the xbox one will beat the 7790 even that it has more bandwith because the 7790 has way more power.

This little game you keep playing where you subtract from the GPU what the OS will be using is bs. Guaranteed the PS4 will be the same way. No way the OS is gonna totally not touch the GPU's resources at all. Is just another case of MS coming out with something right away and Sony keeping it secret as long as possible.

 

1. 96 GB/s with efficiency factor of 71 percent is 68.16 GB/s.

2. With both having about 8 Gpixels/s, prototype 7850 with 768 stream processors @ 860Mhz closer to X1's 768 stream processors @ 853 Mhz.

• 133GB/s ~= 8.2 Gpixel/s for X1

 

3. We are using PC benchmarks which has multitasking enabled.

4. You're not actually addressing the issue, instead you tangent to some political based argument.

• Xbox 360 has 8 old school ROPS.
• Running out 10MB EDRAM for certain workloads e.g. Halo 3's double frame buffers HDR workaround i.e. two 40 bits color framebuffers since Xbox 360 has issues with 64bit color framebuffer targets. This issue doesn't exist on AMD GCN. Also, DX11 has improved JIT texture compressions for HDR (i.e. BC6H) and LDR (i.e. BC7).

ronvalencia

That efficiency if pulled from your behind. more power still is more power and i alreay prove that.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/549?vs=647

The 660TI has more power yet less bandwidth.

The 133 gb/s was not confirmed it is belive to be,and it comes from MS period they lied about bandwidth performance.

MS lied about the xbox 360 bandwidth there is nothing you say that will change that,278GB/s was a joke and a lie by MS.

 

This little game you keep playing where you subtract from the GPU what the OS will be using is bs. Guaranteed the PS4 will be the same way. No way the OS is gonna totally not touch the GPU's resources at all. Is just another case of MS coming out with something right away and Sony keeping it secret as long as possible.

Wickerman777

The xbox one has a 10% GPU reservation the PS4 has no such thing,and even if it has one,10% it will not be the PS4 doesn't run a guide for cable box alone side with a HDMI in port.

The reason MS use so much GPU resources is because they are targeting cable box and TV guide on PS4 that is a miss,but on xbox one that does require resouces,cables boxes had proccesors inside.

[QUOTE="Wickerman777"]

 

This little game you keep playing where you subtract from the GPU what the OS will be using is bs. Guaranteed the PS4 will be the same way. No way the OS is gonna totally not touch the GPU's resources at all. Is just another case of MS coming out with something right away and Sony keeping it secret as long as possible.

tormentos

The xbox one has a 10% GPU reservation the PS4 has no such thing,and even if it has one,10% it will not be the PS4 doesn't run a guide for cable box alone side with a HDMI in port.

The reason MS use so much GPU resources is because they are targeting cable box and TV guide on PS4 that is a miss,but on xbox one that does require resouces,cables boxes had proccesors inside.

Yeah, same way PS4's OS will only use 1 gig of memory. :) Until somebody drags it out of them I guess you're gonna believe whatever you want to.

 

Balls. Things got changed late with the 360. Yeah, there was a problem with heating but ya just make sure you do that part better the next time. And judging by the enormous fan in Xbox One I reckon they took it to heart in a big way. I really could care less about the size of the case. And if it needs delayed to improve it then freakin' delay it. I would rather wait longer and get a 2 tflops Xbox One or even higher than get a 1.3 tflops Xbox One now.

Wickerman777

No they did not,the changes were done on 2004 not after february 2005,and what was done was just use higher density chips which is not quite the same as making a GPU change i have told you this like 3 times already,i would not be surpise to learn that the actual 53mhz up clock is what is causing the yield issues,because if you increse the GPU speed probablye the ESRAM would have to be up clokc to,is call fine tunning where the difference in speed can't be great,so when the up clocked the ESRAM had a little gain from it from 102Gb,to 133GB/s (still unconfirmed) and the flop upgrade do to the GPU up clock.

The heating problem of the xbox 360 were several not just one,from GPU to CPU cheap solder.

You will rather wait longer but MS know that any delay mean they have no chance what so ever,a time advantage for sony would mean disaster,by the time the xbox land with a stronger GPU sony could already lowering the price,and probably had sell 10 million units,and for what for 160,000 Gflops more than the PS4.?

[QUOTE="Wickerman777"]

 

Balls. Things got changed late with the 360. Yeah, there was a problem with heating but ya just make sure you do that part better the next time. And judging by the enormous fan in Xbox One I reckon they took it to heart in a big way. I really could care less about the size of the case. And if it needs delayed to improve it then freakin' delay it. I would rather wait longer and get a 2 tflops Xbox One or even higher than get a 1.3 tflops Xbox One now.

tormentos

No they did not,the changes were done on 2004 not after february 2005,and what was done was just use higher density chips which is not quite the same as making a GPU change i have told you this like 3 times already,i would not be surpise to learn that the actual 53mhz up clock is what is causing the yield issues,because if you increse the GPU speed probablye the ESRAM would have to be up clokc to,is call fine tunning where the difference in speed can't be great,so when the up clocked the ESRAM had a little gain from it from 102Gb,to 133GB/s (still unconfirmed) and the flop upgrade do to the GPU up clock.

The heating problem of the xbox 360 were several not just one,from GPU to CPU cheap solder.

You will rather wait longer but MS know that any delay mean they have no chance what so ever,a time advantage for sony would mean disaster,by the time the xbox land with a stronger GPU sony could already lowering the price,and probably had sell 10 million units,and for what for 160,000 Gflops more than the PS4.?

You keep talking about yield issues but that isn't confirmed. For all we know the delays in those countries might be because of all the backpedaling they've been doing with drm, Kinect, and pretty much everything else. Software has to be rewritten for changes like that and that could be the cause of the delays just as much as it could be yield issues. At this point I'm even suspecting that a SKU without Kinect will be released given that it no longer has to be hooked up and a headset is coming with it. That in and of itself, if it happens, would necessitate tweaking software.

But anyway, their decision making is just pissing me off to no end. If you're gonna delay it in several countries then just delay it everywhere and improve the damned hardware! Dump the ESRAM, dump the DDR3, improve the GPU!

Do Tormentos and Ron not realise they have gone in circles 17 times throughout this thread?

 

You keep talking about yield issues but that isn't confirmed. For all we know the delays in those countries might be because of all the backpedaling they've been doing with drm, Kinect, and pretty much everything else. Software has to be rewritten for changes like that and that could be the cause of the delays just as much as it could be yield issues. At this point I'm even suspecting that a SKU without Kinect will be released given that it no longer has to be hooked up and a headset is coming with it. That in and of itself, if it happens, would necessitate tweaking software.

But anyway, their decision making is just pissing me off to no end. If you're gonna delay it in several countries then just delay it everywhere and improve the damned hardware! Dump the ESRAM, dump the DDR3, improve the GPU!

Wickerman777

Oh it was confirmed.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/14/4620584/xbox-one-launch-delay-european-countries

You just did not read it well.

MS will not admit yield issues period to any one,even if theyare the worse ever,implying Yield issues mean hardware problems,in this case the ESRAM is on the same die as the GPU and CPU which mean if the ESRAM fail the GPU and CPU will not work.

Yield problems is where not enough chips are coming out working out of the wafers,or not enough working as intended,this mean higher price of component for MS,as well as future problems for probably first adopters,RROD or Yellow light of death sony experience,mind you that sony Cell was suppose to be 8 working SPE but 1 was disable on all chips to improve yields,that mean if the majority of chips come out with 8 or 7 working SPE they will be use.

Ad to this that store have leak that they have ay more PS4 to sell than xbox one,even on US and UK,and pre-orders are showing it.

Do Tormentos and Ron not realise they have gone in circles 17 times throughout this thread?

AMD655

Ronvalencia is a joke he knows the difference in GCN and he pretend they don't exist,there are many people who say stupid things about hardware but he knows the PS4 is stronger he just want to pretend that bandwidth will be some king of performance booster but only on xbox one,because the PS4 also has faster bandwidth than the 7870 be he make not such claims about the PS4.

[QUOTE="Wickerman777"]

 

You keep talking about yield issues but that isn't confirmed. For all we know the delays in those countries might be because of all the backpedaling they've been doing with drm, Kinect, and pretty much everything else. Software has to be rewritten for changes like that and that could be the cause of the delays just as much as it could be yield issues. At this point I'm even suspecting that a SKU without Kinect will be released given that it no longer has to be hooked up and a headset is coming with it. That in and of itself, if it happens, would necessitate tweaking software.

But anyway, their decision making is just pissing me off to no end. If you're gonna delay it in several countries then just delay it everywhere and improve the damned hardware! Dump the ESRAM, dump the DDR3, improve the GPU!

tormentos

Oh it was confirmed.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/14/4620584/xbox-one-launch-delay-european-countries

You just did not read it well.

MS will not admit yield issues period to any one,even if theyare the worse ever,implying Yield issues mean hardware problems,in this case the ESRAM is on the same die as the GPU and CPU which mean if the ESRAM fail the GPU and CPU will not work.

Yield problems is where not enough chips are coming out working out of the wafers,or not enough working as intended,this mean higher price of component for MS,as well as future problems for probably first adopters,RROD or Yellow light of death sony experience,mind you that sony Cell was suppose to be 8 working SPE but 1 was disable on all chips to improve yields,that mean if the majority of chips come out with 8 or 7 working SPE they will be use.

Ad to this that store have leak that they have ay more PS4 to sell than xbox one,even on US and UK,and pre-orders are showing it.

Don't know why you linked to that article cuz it doesn't mention a peep about yield issues.

But anyway, if they are having yield problems because of the ESRAM then it's just another reason the dumbasses should have delayed the thing and redesigned it.

 

Yeah, same way PS4's OS will only use 1 gig of memory. :) Until somebody drags it out of them I guess you're gonna believe whatever you want to.

Wickerman777

Yeah by insiders it use 2 and some claim it doesn't even use them,and is just sony holding ram hostage because they don't want the PS4 to end like the PS3 where party chat wasn't possible because they shrink the OS to much.

Once the game has part of the OS you can't take it back,the game will not work period,this also can be true for MS and they could be holding 3GB for future proofing,fact is the xbox one per frame will not be able to use probably more than 5GB,the PS4 can use 6Gb i think the most.

 

Don't know why you linked to that article cuz it doesn't mention a peep about yield issues.

But anyway, if they are having yield problems because of the ESRAM then it's just another reason the dumbasses should have delayed the thing and redesigned it.

Wickerman777

Oh you can play blind fact is MS delay on 8 countries after claiming they would release on 21,and use crappy excuses to justify it,this is the same company who summit us to RROD because it wanted to beat sony to the market and rushed their console,there is not enough units for US and UK where the xbox could potentially sell the most,so they are leaving countries out were they know even if they release will have no big impact on EU.

Is a choice for a shortage the same reason why Japan was let out to.

But like i told you a delay for MS mean failure and they know it,it give the PS4 advantages of games,so mutlplatforms like COD and blattlefield which sell a fu** ton will sell Ps4 like there is no tomorow.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

1. 96 GB/s with efficiency factor of 71 percent is 68.16 GB/s.

2. With both having about 8 Gpixels/s, prototype 7850 with 768 stream processors @ 860Mhz closer to X1's 768 stream processors @ 853 Mhz.

• 133GB/s ~= 8.2 Gpixel/s for X1

3. We are using PC benchmarks which has multitasking enabled.

4. You're not actually addressing the issue, instead you tangent to some political based argument.

• Xbox 360 has 8 old school ROPS.
• Running out 10MB EDRAM for certain workloads e.g. Halo 3's double frame buffers HDR workaround i.e. two 40 bits color framebuffers since Xbox 360 has issues with 64bit color framebuffer targets. This issue doesn't exist on AMD GCN. Also, DX11 has improved JIT texture compressions for HDR (i.e. BC6H) and LDR (i.e. BC7).

tormentos

That efficiency if pulled from your behind(1). more power still is more power and i alreay prove that.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/549?vs=647

The 660TI has more power yet less bandwidth(2).

The 133 gb/s was not confirmed it is belive to be,and it comes from MS period they lied about bandwidth performance(3).

MS lied about the xbox 360 bandwidth there is nothing you say that will change that,278GB/s was a joke and a lie by MS.

1. That efficiency factor is based on the following graph.

Radeon HD 5870 has theoretical 153 GB/s with a 108 GB/s practical.

2. Geforce 660 TI has a raw 2459.52 GFLOPS and 10.3 Gpixel/s (Vantage score), which is superior to 7850's raw GFLOPS and effective Gpixel/s. Modern games such as Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 are not color fill rate bound. You also have issues with AMD drivers with some games in http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/549?vs=647

3. It's up to you to decide if you accept MS's claims or not.

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

Do Tormentos and Ron not realise they have gone in circles 17 times throughout this thread?

tormentos

Ronvalencia is a joke he knows the difference in GCN and he pretend they don't exist,there are many people who say stupid things about hardware but he knows the PS4 is stronger he just want to pretend that bandwidth will be some king of performance booster but only on xbox one,because the PS4 also has faster bandwidth than the 7870 be he make not such claims about the PS4.

Your too stupid to read a basic bar chart that shows a prototype 7850 with 768 stream processors/12 CUs @ 860Mhz will never exceed the retail 7850 (16 CU @ 860Mhz) let alone a GCN with 18 CUs @ 800Mhz.

 

1. That efficiency factor is based on the following graph.

 

Radeon HD 5870 has theoretical 153 GB/s with a 108 GB/s practical.

 

 

2. Geforce 660 TI has a raw 2459.52 GFLOPS and 10.3 Gpixel/s (Vantage score), which is superior to 7850's raw GFLOPS and effective Gpixel/s. Modern games such as Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 are not color fill rate bound.

 

3. It's up to you to decide if you accept MS's claims or not.ronvalencia

Really.?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/550?vs=647

660Ti vs 7950..lol

WTF happen here ron what is your excuse now the 660ti beating the 2870 flops 7950,oh and the 7950 ahs 1 GB more of ram to.

But wait because you focus on the power of the 660Ti to claim it is better,but that is the point the PS4 GPU is stronger than the xbox one,and just like the 660ti beat the 7850 while having less bandwidth the PS4 will do the same with the xbox one,hell the PS4 has more bandwidth as it is right now.

To further prove how bandwidth mean sh** when  your GPU is out power,look at the bandwidth of the 7950.

240Gb/s vs the 660ti 144GB/s...

The 7950 has almost 100GB/s more than then 660Ti yet in losses vs the 660 Ti in many test..

I proved my point a weak GPU still is a weak GPU even if you give it 1000Gb/s bandiwdth.

Do Tormentos and Ron not realise they have gone in circles 17 times throughout this thread?

AMD655

 

Your too stupid to read a basic bar chart that shows a prototype 7850 with 768 stream processors/12 CUs @ 860Mhz will never exceed the retail 7850 (16 CU @ 860Mhz) let alone a GCN with 18 CUs @ 800Mhz.

ronvalencia

No you are the stupid one..

7790 >>>>>> xbox one bandwidth mean sh** and i already prove that the 660TI has almost 100GB's less bandwidth than the 7950 yet it beats it in many test,so yeah a weak GPU still is a weak GPU even if it has more bandwidth.

Oh and the xbox one doesn't have a Pitcairn GPU it has a Bonaire with 2 CU disable.

Tormentos is correct with the 660Ti, but the 7950 beats the 660Ti at high resolutions.

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

Do Tormentos and Ron not realise they have gone in circles 17 times throughout this thread?

ronvalencia

the W5000 is not inside the xbox one..

Link please.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

1. That efficiency factor is based on the following graph.

Radeon HD 5870 has theoretical 153 GB/s with a 108 GB/s practical.

2. Geforce 660 TI has a raw 2459.52 GFLOPS and 10.3 Gpixel/s (Vantage score), which is superior to 7850's raw GFLOPS and effective Gpixel/s. Modern games such as Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 are not color fill rate bound.

3. It's up to you to decide if you accept MS's claims or not.tormentos

Really.?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/550?vs=647

660Ti vs 7950..lol

WTF happen here ron what is your excuse now the 660ti beating the 2870 flops 7950,oh and the 7950 ahs 1 GB more of ram to.

But wait because you focus on the power of the 660Ti to claim it is better,but that is the point the PS4 GPU is stronger than the xbox one,and just like the 660ti beat the 7850 while having less bandwidth the PS4 will do the same with the xbox one,hell the PS4 has more bandwidth as it is right now.

To further prove how bandwidth mean sh** when your GPU is out power,look at the bandwidth of the 7950.

240Gb/s vs the 660ti 144GB/s...

The 7950 has almost 100GB/s more than then 660Ti yet in losses vs the 660 Ti in many test..

I proved my point a weak GPU still is a weak GPU even if you give it 1000Gb/s bandiwdth.

This topic was about AMD GCN products NOT about NVIDIA.

-----------------

To counter Geforce 660 Ti's 915Mhz(with 980Mhz boost) clock speed, 7950 was later updated to 7950 Boost Edition via firmware patch i.e. 850Mhz base clock with 925 Mhz boost.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html

---------

Differences in GPU designs

K20 vs 7970 vs GTX680 (GK104) vs M2050 vs GTX 580 from http://wili.cc/blog/gpgpu-faceoff.html

K20 = GK110

There's very difference between NVIDIA's OpenCL and CUDA.

App 1. Digital Hydraulics code is all about basic floating point arithmetics, both algebraic and transcendental. No dynamic branching, very little memory traffic.

App 2. Ambient Occlusion code is a very mixed load of floating point and integer arithmetics, dynamic branching, texture sampling and memory access. Despite the memory traffic, this is a very compute intensive kernel.

App 3. Running Sum code, in contrast to the above, is memory intensive. It shuffles data through at a high rate, not doing much calculations on it. It relies heavily on the on-chip L1 cache, though, so it's not a raw memory bandwidth test.

App 4. Geometry Sampling code is texture sampling intensive. It sweeps through geometry data in "waves", and stresses samplers, texture caches, and memory equally. It also has a high register usage and thus low occupancy.

Ronvalencia always keeps my hopes up that both X1 and PS4 will end up having pretty much comparable performance, and tormentos keeps waking me up to what I too feel is the harsh truth of X1 being ridiculously inferior to PS4.

Nonetheless, I'm really enjoying the debate. And would love to see who's right based on the first multiplats that will hopefully come out later this year.

Tormentos is correct with the 660Ti, but the 7950 beats the 660Ti at high resolutions.

AMD655

In some test not all.

In Total war,Portal,BF3 and civilisation the 660TI out does it even on higher resolution.

But the 7950 has 1 GB more of ram,also the 144Gb/s bandwidth could be a holding the 660ti.

At launch, nextsilversix_

no

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

Tormentos is correct with the 660Ti, but the 7950 beats the 660Ti at high resolutions.

tormentos

In some test not all.

In Total war,Portal,BF3 and civilisation the 660TI out does it even on higher resolution.

But the 7950 has 1 GB more of ram,also the 144Gb/s bandwidth could be a holding the 660ti.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="AMD655"]

Do Tormentos and Ron not realise they have gone in circles 17 times throughout this thread?

tormentos

the W5000 is not inside the xbox one..

Link please.

 

This topic was about AMD GCN products NOT about NVIDIA.

-----------------

 

To counter Geforce 660 Ti's 915Mhz(with 980Mhz boost) clock speed, 7950 was later updated to 7950 Boost Edition via firmware patch i.e. 850Mhz base clock with 925 Mhz boost.

 

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html

 

 

 

---------

Differences in GPU designs

 

K20 vs 7970 vs GTX680 (GK104) vs M2050 vs GTX 580 from http://wili.cc/blog/gpgpu-faceoff.html

 

K20 = GK110

 

There's very difference between NVIDIA's OpenCL and CUDA.

 

App 1. Digital Hydraulics code is all about basic floating point arithmetics, both algebraic and transcendental. No dynamic branching, very little memory traffic.

App 2. Ambient Occlusion code is a very mixed load of floating point and integer arithmetics, dynamic branching, texture sampling and memory access. Despite the memory traffic, this is a very compute intensive kernel.

App 3. Running Sum code, in contrast to the above, is memory intensive. It shuffles data through at a high rate, not doing much calculations on it. It relies heavily on the on-chip L1 cache, though, so it's not a raw memory bandwidth test.

App 4. Geometry Sampling code is texture sampling intensive. It sweeps through geometry data in "waves", and stresses samplers, texture caches, and memory equally. It also has a high register usage and thus low occupancy.

 

 

ronvalencia

Oh look at who is crying now that the topic wasn't Nvidia,you who some one say something and you quote 30 different things that aren't related.

Regardless of the different of flops which on Nvidia doesn't = the same as on AND the point is that even with 100GB/s less of bandwidth the 660Ti actually beat the 7950,there is no math that will explain that period.

More power is more power period,the PS4 has more power it will perform better than the xbox one by a considerable margin,maybe 20 or so frames per seconds who knows if more.

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

Tormentos is correct with the 660Ti, but the 7950 beats the 660Ti at high resolutions.

tormentos

In some test not all.

In Total war,Portal,BF3 and civilisation the 660TI out does it even on higher resolution.

But the 7950 has 1 GB more of ram,also the 144Gb/s bandwidth could be a holding the 660ti.

For BF3, AMD is just having driver issues.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/5.html

Portal is a DX9c game so expect AMD driver issues. If X1's TitanFall Source Engine is being optimized for GCN then it's good news for AMD GCN owners.

[QUOTE="tormentos"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

Tormentos is correct with the 660Ti, but the 7950 beats the 660Ti at high resolutions.

ronvalencia

In some test not all.

In Total war,Portal,BF3 and civilisation the 660TI out does it even on higher resolution.

But the 7950 has 1 GB more of ram,also the 144Gb/s bandwidth could be a holding the 660ti.

For BF3, AMD is just having driver issues.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/5.html

Portal is a DX9c game so expect AMD driver issues. If X1's TitanFall Source Engine is being optimized for GCN then it's good news for AMD GCN owners.

W5000 was use as a guide that reflects X1's triangle per cycle rate and slightly greater memory bandwidth than 7790. It's better than your 7770 for X1. With 853Mhz for X1 GPU, the prototype 7850 with 768 stream processors and it's effective memory bandwidth is even closer to X1. ronvalencia

Actually the 7770 has more usable power than the xbox one.

Bonaire is not the same as Pitcairn period and is Bonaire what is inside the xbox one,not Pitcairn,in fact with 12 CU at 825 mhz like the W5000 Bonaire would perform worse than the W5000.

Ronvalencia always keeps my hopes up that both X1 and PS4 will end up having pretty much comparable performance, and tormentos keeps waking me up to what I too feel is the harsh truth of X1 being ridiculously inferior to PS4.

Nonetheless, I'm really enjoying the debate. And would love to see who's right based on the first multiplats that will hopefully come out later this year.

Mystery_Writer

If Havok physics for AMD GCN is enabled for future UE4 titles, a GCN with higher CU count has greater capability.

You may also see higher CU advantages with AMD HSA enabled PC games i.e. AMD HSA software enables proper GPU physics compute (with results returning to the CPU).

[QUOTE="tormentos"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

Tormentos is correct with the 660Ti, but the 7950 beats the 660Ti at high resolutions.

ronvalencia

In some test not all.

In Total war,Portal,BF3 and civilisation the 660TI out does it even on higher resolution.

But the 7950 has 1 GB more of ram,also the 144Gb/s bandwidth could be a holding the 660ti.

For BF3, AMD is just having driver issues.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/5.html

Portal is a DX9c game so expect AMD driver issues. If X1's TitanFall Source Engine is being optimized for GCN then it's good news for AMD GCN owners.

I actually see what you did there...

Pick the resolution where the 660TI would be limited not only by having 1 GB less of ram,but also by its 144Gb/s bandwith,why did you posted the 2560x1600.?

Oh yeah because the difference in 2560X1600 is less than  2 frames per second..:lol:

On 2 GPU that have almost 100GB/s in bandwidth difference,so yeah if the xbox one had a stronger than the PS4 GPU sure even with less bandwidth it would beat the PS4,sadly the PS4 has a stronger one and more bandwidth to.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="tormentos"]

In some test not all.

In Total war,Portal,BF3 and civilisation the 660TI out does it even on higher resolution.

But the 7950 has 1 GB more of ram,also the 144Gb/s bandwidth could be a holding the 660ti.

AMD655

For BF3, AMD is just having driver issues.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/5.html

Portal is a DX9c game so expect AMD driver issues. If X1's TitanFall Source Engine is being optimized for GCN then it's good news for AMD GCN owners.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

For BF3, AMD is just having driver issues.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/5.html

Portal is a DX9c game so expect AMD driver issues. If X1's TitanFall Source Engine is being optimized for GCN then it's good news for AMD GCN owners.

ronvalencia

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="tormentos"]

In some test not all.

In Total war,Portal,BF3 and civilisation the 660TI out does it even on higher resolution.

But the 7950 has 1 GB more of ram,also the 144Gb/s bandwidth could be a holding the 660ti.

tormentos

For BF3, AMD is just having driver issues.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/5.html

Portal is a DX9c game so expect AMD driver issues. If X1's TitanFall Source Engine is being optimized for GCN then it's good news for AMD GCN owners.

I actually see what you did there...

Pick the resolution where the 660TI would be limited not only by having 1 GB less of ram,but also by its 144Gb/s bandwith,why did you posted the 2560x1600.?(1)

Oh yeah because the difference in 2560X1600 is less than 2 frames per second..:lol: (2)

On 2 GPU that have almost 100GB/s in bandwidth difference,so yeah if the xbox one had a stronger than the PS4 GPU sure even with less bandwidth it would beat the PS4,sadly the PS4 has a stronger one and more bandwidth to.

1. PC is not limited to 1080p.

2. It's minor.

When it's possible, I play games at 5760x1080p on my 7950 (with 900mhz firmware) @ 1000Mhz which is higher than the reference 7950 @ 800Mhz.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] AMD are certainly not having any issues, 13.8 driver cleaned up all the issues.AMD655

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"] W5000 was use as a guide that reflects X1's triangle per cycle rate and slightly greater memory bandwidth than 7790. It's better than your 7770 for X1. With 853Mhz for X1 GPU, the prototype 7850 with 768 stream processors and it's effective memory bandwidth is even closer to X1. tormentos

Actually the 7770 has more usable power than the xbox one.

Bonaire is not the same as Pitcairn period and is Bonaire what is inside the xbox one,not Pitcairn,in fact with 12 CU at 825 mhz like the W5000 Bonaire would perform worse than the W5000.

Actually, the 7770 has less usable power than the Xbox One since lesser GCNs with less internal SRAM storage has greater chances for compute overspill. 7770 also has less triangle rate than 7790 or 7850.

My 8870M takes a greater performance hit when I lower the memory speed to DDR3 levels i.e. AMD's GDDR5 bar graphs are applicable for these cases.

-----

7790 doesn't sport X1's memory bandwidth and the prototype 7850 (with 12 CUs) is a closer fit to the X1.

X1's GCN has Pitcairn's crossbar, 256bit memory controllers and related L2 cache. L2 cache bandwidth is important since this is used as a shared cache across 4 CUs.

7790/7790 has less I/O L2 cache bandwidth than the Pitcairn's version.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/848-4/amd-radeon-hd-7970-crossfirex-review-28nm-and-gcn.html

GCN Cache Hierarchy

With 128bit memory controllers, 7790/7770 has two L2 blocks. That's 64 bytes per cycle per L2 block x 2 = 128 bytes per cycle.

With 256bit memory controllers, 7850/7870 has four L2 blocks. That's 64 bytes per cycle per L2 block x 4 = 256 bytes per cycle.

Do Tormentos and Ron not realise they have gone in circles 17 times throughout this thread?

AMD655

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

Do Tormentos and Ron not realise they have gone in circles 17 times throughout this thread?

22Toothpicks

 

1. PC is not limited to 1080p.

2. It's minor.

When it's possible, I play games at 5760x1080p on my 7950 (with 900mhz firmware) @ 1000Mhz which is higher than the reference 7950 @ 800Mhz.

 

ronvalencia

Stop it you blind biased fanboy that game is unplayable on both the 7950 and 660Ti at that resolution,so 2560x1600 is actually more playable and the difference is not even 2 frames,but nice to miss the point and change the argument..

The 660Ti has 144Gb/s bandwith is even lower in Bandwidth than the 7850 yet it perform as good or better in some test vs the 7950 which has 240Gb/s bandwidth,so yeah my was proven the 7790 >>> xbox one..

damn Ron stop with the ownage,no wonder why you get so easily under the basement dwellers skin..you prove them wrong with knowledge :cool:Tessellation

[QUOTE="Tessellation"]damn Ron stop with the ownage,no wonder why you get so easily under the basement dwellers skin..you prove them wrong with knowledge :cool:AMD655

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="Tessellation"]damn Ron stop with the ownage,no wonder why you get so easily under the basement dwellers skin..you prove them wrong with knowledge :cool:Tessellation

 

Actually, the 7770 has less usable power than the Xbox One since lesser GCNs with less internal SRAM storage has greater chances for compute overspill. 7770 also has less triangle rate than 7790 or 7850.

 

My 8870M takes a greater performance hit when I lower the memory speed to DDR3 levels i.e. AMD's GDDR5 bar graphs are applicable for these cases.

-----

7790 doesn't sport X1's memory bandwidth and the prototype 7850 (with 12 CUs) is a closer fit to the X1.

 

X1's GCN has Pitcairn's crossbar, 256bit memory controllers and related L2 cache. L2 cache bandwidth is important since this is used as a shared cache across 4 CUs.

7790/7790 has less I/O L2 cache bandwidth than the Pitcairn's version.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/848-4/amd-radeon-hd-7970-crossfirex-review-28nm-and-gcn.html

GCN Cache Hierarchy

With 128bit memory controllers, 7790/7770 has two L2 blocks. That's 64 bytes per cycle per L2 block x 2 = 128 bytes per cycle.

With 256bit memory controllers, 7850/7870 has four L2 blocks. That's 64 bytes per cycle per L2 block x 4 = 256 bytes per cycle.

ronvalencia

The broken song again,stop the damn 660Ti has 100Gb/s of bandwidth less than the 7950 and still out perform it in some test...:lol:

You have no argument,i demostrated how a GPU with 100Gb/s less bandwidth than another can still beat it,so the xbox one miserable 37gb/s over the 7790 should be even less of a problem.

The 7790 is very close to the 7850 even that it has 57Gb/s less in bandwidth,so yeah bandwidth is not the issues is power,so yeah the 7790 >> xbox one..

No matter how you slice it what you try to imply is idiotic,if you put 250Gb/s bandwidth on the xbox one would it beat the 7950.? Just because it has more bandwidth.?

[QUOTE="Tessellation"]damn Ron stop with the ownage,no wonder why you get so easily under the basement dwellers skin..you prove them wrong with knowledge :cool:AMD655

Careful or Tessellation may claim that he got under your skin..:lol: