PS4 neo slideshow leaked

1-You are a moron or you simply lack comprehension of the English language.

My argument is about the R290 vs Fury X the Fury X vs the 980ti mean total shit and are totally irrelevant to my argument,is just another case of you changing the argument.

Worse you show a chart with the FuryX patch but don't do the same with the R290 which would have benefit from patch 7 you hypocrite liar.

2-And who the fu** cares i din't ask you if you owned those,from what i see it you own 300 GPU and 400 CPU because you speak of them using ""My"" into the sentence so either you work for AMD or work on a computer store. That wasn't my argument.

The point is i was talking about the R290 and Fury X you owning them mean total shit,as you use a comparison chart showing the 980ti vs the Fury X not the R290.

3-No you haven't you lying hypocrite link me to |AMD or a Tech site stating that the R290 or Fury X are Bandwidth bound at 1080p,the gap between the R290 and Fury X on SWBF3 is based on performance gap not on bandwidth the way i see it you are fu**ing obsessed with Bandwidth,every pit fall you want to claim is bandwidth it is a joke.

4-LINK TO WERE TECH SITES CONFIRM THE R290 AND THE FURY X ARE BANDWIDTH BOUND AT 1080P.

Link or your full of this,not even the freaking 7870 is bound at 1080p bandwidth wise and has 153GB's stop your freaking denial you blind fanboy you want to tag diminishing returns to bandwidth limitations.

The fact that you even dare to argue that the Fury X is bandwidth bound at 1080p says it all,you who wanted to pretend 16ROP were ok for every scenario at 1080p on the freaking weak XBO you have some shitty made to order arguments.

5- let me prove once and for all how stupid and double standard your arguments are,down right to the point of being contradicting.

On one side you claim that the W5000 example you give with 1.3Tf would not top a 7850.

You missed my W5000 example. W5000 is unable to match retail 7850 regardless of the same memory bandwidth.

W5000 example use as the upper limit for 1.3 TFLOPS GCN. Don't put words into my mouth.

See.

A true 1.4X superior machine shouldn't have results reversal and here we are with results being reversed.

But then you use that fu**ing game which was done with Parity in mind and is 1 frame ahead of the PS4 while being 1080p like the PS4 something that we know MEANS parity was the goal,and you use it as some kind of proof that the PS4 isn't superior there is not a fu**ing single scenario were the XBO would be the PS4 at the same resolution not 1,but you will not understand that because you are a BLIND BIASED MS SUCK UP.

By your pathetic argument,the the PS4 and XBO are equal because well NFS was the same on both,Destiny was the same on both,Mad Max,and many other games that have parity..

So while you hide on a shitty game that had parity in mind,i just let this here..

This highlights one area where a PS4 exhibits an advantage over Xbox One: it boasts a full 1080p output for the vast majority of the duration, with minor drops in resolution occurring in select circumstances. In contrast, Xbox One regularly struggles to hit full 1080p, more often coming in around 1472x828 or lower.

GpGPU particles on XBO and depth of field bring the xbox one GPU to its knees.

The fun part is that not only it drops under 900p on xbox one and close to 720p (lol) it has lower frame rates as well than the PS4,hitting 43 FPS in parts,the PS4 is mostly 60FPS with drops to like 55FPS..

So not only the XBO version drops close to 720p trying to keep frames as high as possible,but it also drop frames lower while being closer to 720p.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-doom-face-off

Another Faceoff were the PS4 walk over the XBO,and another were the XBO has to drop almost to 720p to try to fallow the PS4,so tell men when the XBO is at 1472x828 or lower how big the game is pixel wise.?

2,073,600 -- 1080p

1,218,816 -- 1472 x 828p.

Difference in pixel 70% so the PS4 commands at times gaps as big as 70% in pixel.? Without taking into notice that this are the moments were the frames are also the lowest because that is when the engine drops the most.

So 12FPS under the PS4 while having a 70% gap in resolution.?

It kind of make your pathetic 1 frame argument about Mad Max look like shit.

What is the excuse with Doom.? Is not 2013 any more you can't claim unfinish tools for the xbox one early api or some shit like that.

The gap remained and when developer push both the PS4 walk over the xbox one.

Resolution is a job of the GPU not CPU,what would hurt is if the PS4 try to do Ultra because of the extra stuff that it would need to render since that would be CPU bound.

That is like saying the 720p machine 1080p would require too many compromises.

Console USE to have only one configuration,wast you the one claiming in last page that times change and we most adapt? Hahahahaa

NO.

Is Neo is a PS4 period,same games not only digital or exclusives,same PSN,same saves,same OS..

Is exactly how it work on PC for years,if the PS4 doesn't have exclusive because of neo PC has no exclusives period.

Scorpio is different we don't know if it use the same OS as the XBO,but from what i see it it would be just like Neo as it allow all current games to be play on Scorpio and from what i read all scorpio games would work on XBO.

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

Nice story, but how much is just speculation? Where did that Scorpio APU pic come from? Because the intro video didn't have the dimensions listed. Is there any reliable source to corroborate that there will not be embedded RAM? Even with an increased bandwidth to compensate, you're still having to deal with the physical distance and interface layer to move that pool off-die; complicating compatibility with the Xbox One titles that used it. I've referred to the video and there's really no indication to two different memory types being used or one of them being HBM. Where is this coming from? And what does reusing the APU for the Surface have to do with anything (which your link claims will use an Intel solution)?

Scorpio's SoC picture was from E3 presentation with corrected 3D perspective e.g. Adobe Photoshop's perspective warp tool.

Dimensions are based from common GDDR5 modules.

Microsoft has claimed Scorpio can run existing XBO games. Remaping ESRAM memory locations on GDDR5 is not a problem.

So no actual indication that it will use HBM RAM or lack embedded RAM? Maintaining the pool of ESRAM is the best way to insure compatibility with titles that use it. There's no way I've seen to move things like that off-die without significant issues (though AMD claims a similar performance from HBM with it's higher speed and closer orientation to the CPU). Even with the bandwidth from faster GDDR5 (or more likely, GDDR5x), the physical distance the signals must travel and the higher latency of the GDDR5 modules will come into play.

@asylumni said:

@panda30 said:

@asylumni said:

Umm, yes, people do...

It happens all the time. If you had 4 apples yesterday and got 4 more today; it wouldn't be uncommon to say, "I have twice as many apples today as I had yesterday."

LMAOL you sure pick the wrong picture today buddy that 1 picture was use for EXACTLY WHAT I SAY nvidia claim 2x perf for VR do to VR needs to run from 2x positions any VR game need 2x the amount of performance

witch it's exactly what I insinuate about Sony 2.3tf to run the game and the rest for VR

thx for the picture

What? This picture (as well as the others) was to show that people do use times performance and that it wasn't "shady" of Sony to use it in their slide, as you claimed. Furthermore, this slide isn't to show how you need 2 times performance to use VR, it's to show the double performance and triple efficiency of the new GTX 1080 over the old Titan X card. 2.3 TFLOPS is more than half of the Neo's rating, so suggesting it needs double for VR but using that number just shows your initial error and refusal to back off a stance, no matter how futile.

except you're in denial if you actualy watch the presentacion you wold know Nvida was talking about VR and how you need that much more preformance to get the same graphics on VR

Sony's slide show was most likey use use for the same thing

if a game use 2.3 tf to render a game it need neerly that amount to render it on VR and that sir is FACT because VR render x2 times what a regular game wold

that is why ps4 VR games look like this

it cuts ps4 preformance in half and that is why even a PC rig runs like this

there is better graphics on PC but on a very expesive rig

The PS4 uses reprojections to VR.

lol This look better than Halo 5 on XBO..lol

The power will not be cut in half.

http://ps4daily.com/2015/03/ps4-vr-headset-120-fps/

LOL

Nathandrakeswag, you realize you are all alone here spewing out nothing but lies, misinformation and FUD, right? I mean, are you not in the least bit embarrassed about your posting? You understand that we are just watching you for entertainment purposes, right?

Nop i have tough skin,so this kind of attacks really don't affect me,even more when the maker is a die hard lemm..lol

Tormentos in full meltdown mode is like watching a train wreck. It's ugly, brutal, and a bit sad, but it's hard not to watch anyway.

Apparently you still have not grasped the fact that cpu determines how well the gpu performs.They are tied its not just resolution is the job of gpu.....

Larger the render target the larger chunks of data are.... which is required to be sent to the gpu from the cpu, while smaller the render target, the faster the cpu has to send data to the gpu since the gpu is getting tasks done more quickly.

Fact is your whole post is just wrong. inadequate cpu power affects the gpu in all areas from low 720p-4k max.

You run into one or both issues either the cpu cant feed gpu correctly or the fact you become gpu bound again you have to make compromises to game's assets(graphical settings) and or frame rate to stabilize the system.

Tru dis.

@tormentos said:

@darkangel115 said:

Right tons of grown ups are lining up to play a high school dating sim (P5) lol

could care less about TLG, Gravity rush, Nier, P5 etc. basically I could care less about anything Jpanese. Their games are terrible and their entertainment as a whole is just bad. Doesn't do anything for me personally. COuld care less about racing games. I have Drive club I have Forza 5, that's more then enough for me. Not big on racing. I played the DTD alpha, It was terrible. Dreams we have seen nothing on other then it's going to be a "project spark" like game builder thing. No thanks. Those are better as a concept then they are as reality. So in short, your list does nothing for me. I'm not a lem, unlike many people here I own both a PS4 and X1.

Games I am interested in this year are Gears 4, South Park, Titanfall 2, Maybe Recore depends though. I need to see more gameplay. I'm currently playing overwatch on X1 and PS4, some small amounts of rocket league on X1 and PS4, Halo 5 (a lot of firefight and arena), And just grabbed a bunch of games on sale i never got around to like arkham knight, Metro bundle, SR bundle to name a few. Xbox just has an awesome sale so i grabbed some stuff.

I still haven't found 1 really good game on PS4 that isn't available on Xbox1. I played the UC4 beta and I own TLOU:R, I just don't care for ND style games. I even tried UC2 on PSNOW and was bored as hell after an hour or so. I tried Bloodborne, didn't like it. Never liked the souls series so not surprised. I beat the order, wasn't very good, I have driveclub don't care much for racing games but it's still a pretty poor one by any standards. It's pretty though. I don't really see all this hype for their games. Unless you are into anime Japanese stuff, which lets face it, very few adults are.

This is call a made to order argument,it just consist of bullshit arguments on why you don't like ANYTHING ON PS4, a console that you apparently ""OWN"" but don't like anything on it,wait are't you the one who claim to win a PS4.?

So you don't like Japanese games,but you like Recore which is made by a also Japanese developer Comcept,and which you admit have see little,how the fu** can you like a game which you have barely see.? Oh wait this reminded me of how you lemming downplaying PS4 games which showed gameplay and were Japanese,but some how could not stop mouthing freaking Scalebound when it was just a CG with no gameplay shown whatsoever,worse the game was from a japanese developer as well.

So this is simple a case of i hate ND,Uncharted,TLOU,Bloodorn and anything on PS4 but like any piece of shit MS throw my way even if it is multiplatform.

Yet you are interested in Gears (same old over abused dudebro shooter,South Park (do i even need to say anything) Titanfall 2 (another dude bro COD wannabe shooter) and Maybe Record a Japanese game which you barely have see anything,and what make this incredible is that you are downplaying games like Uncharted2,TLOU,Bloodborn and Uncharted 4 which all are 90+ on metacritic which is a score not found on xbox one exclusives...

Then you bring Halo 5 the biggest letdown and flop of the mighty generation,this game flopping here knows no equal,this is the game is the series that could not ever flop...lol

@darkangel115 said:

I didn't list it as something I'm hyped for. I said I may get it but need to see more. It's not the devs, it's the games themselves. Platinum is a japanese dev, but I love their games. Bayonetta 1 was awesome, never played 2 cause don't have a wii u, but if it ever came on PS4 or X1 (i know it won't) I'd buy day 1. There is a huge difference between Ninja gaiden (another japanese dev game I loved) and something like Persona.

I can care less where the dev is located, I just don't like Anime style, Turn based, Dating sim like games. Plenty of American companies make Games I don't like too, Like ND. Disliking wierd anime games doens't make someone a lem, it makes them an adult who doesn't need to pretend to be able to talk to women. Oh and my wife is Asian so yeah, I'm not hating on culture, It just doesn't entertain me.

And this is what strike me the most,as liking Persona doesn't make you a damn nerd who is into hentai and doesn't know what a woman is,i happen to like the series and i have 7 kids with 3 different woman not counting the countless i banged that din't (thank God) pregnant.

Then how you try to claim you are not a lemming,when you single handed downplayed every fu**ing game on PS4 using as excuse the usual i don't like it or that,which is totally irrelevant i don't fu**ing care if you like Gears,halo Forza shit,most people DONT which is the point and doesn't stop those games from being GREAT on PS4.

UC2,UC4,BB and TLOU all have higher score than every single exclusive on xbox one period.

So while you deny being a lemming.

Probably while wearing one of this ^^.

Combined with one of this..

I wouldn't be surprise if you have one of thise ^^ on your butt cheeks,while denying being a freaking lemming.

I tell you this you and anyone here can claim i am the biggest cow this place has ever seen,but at least i am an honest cow,who doesn't fool its self by denying what it is,maybe you lemming need to learn do to that,because denying being a lemming while doing nothing but kiss MS ass all day here make you look dishonest and sad after all who can take anything you say as true if you can't admit something so easy to see that you are a lemming.

But wait i am not done making you look like a fool..

@darkangel115 said:

IDK If i was a console gamer with only a PS4, I'd jump all over a scorpio. Best multiplats, Access to all the xbox exclusive and a bunch of 360 games via BC that were missed and still have the base PS4 for sony exclusives

By that first line you should not even be playing now on XBO because it is a shitty platform for multiplatforms,yet you don't have any problems claiming this..

@darkangel115 said:

I'm currently playing overwatch on X1 and PS4, some small amounts of rocket league on X1 and PS4, Halo 5 (a lot of firefight and arena), And just grabbed a bunch of games on sale i never got around to like arkham knight, Metro bundle, SR bundle to name a few. Xbox just has an awesome sale so i grabbed some stuff.

So how best multiplatforms count for Scorpio but some how that doesn't stop you from playing multiplatforms on the shitty inferior xbox one.?

I hope you enjoy the ownage you just got for being a liar and a hypocrite.

lol no, I purchased my PS4, Also shown i have a PS4 and TLOU and I'm the one you claimed lied about having a 4k tv and when i posted proof you backtracked and tried saying it doesn't make a difference. You are nothing but a sad person, who has an obsession to a piece of plastic and gets pissed when people don't agree with it.

I mostly ignore you because you are a rambling idiot and everyone is aware of it. I mean all you did was hype the PS4's power advantage and now you downplay the scorpio power advantage. Personally I can care less, I'll buy a scorpio because I have the money and I have the TV to get the most out of it, But it's mostly about the games for me. You make fun of great games, but defend weeaboo anime stuff lol, come on. No normal adult should be watching anime.

Lol trying to brag on the internet that you get a bunch of women lol, that just seems desperate. Something 12 year olds do. You are a joke here and everyone knows it, I'm a liar and hypocrate because I play games on both systems and buy multiple copies? lol no that makes me a gamer.

@panda30 said:

@asylumni said:

@panda30 said:

@asylumni said:

Umm, yes, people do...

It happens all the time. If you had 4 apples yesterday and got 4 more today; it wouldn't be uncommon to say, "I have twice as many apples today as I had yesterday."

LMAOL you sure pick the wrong picture today buddy that 1 picture was use for EXACTLY WHAT I SAY nvidia claim 2x perf for VR do to VR needs to run from 2x positions any VR game need 2x the amount of performance

witch it's exactly what I insinuate about Sony 2.3tf to run the game and the rest for VR

thx for the picture

What? This picture (as well as the others) was to show that people do use times performance and that it wasn't "shady" of Sony to use it in their slide, as you claimed. Furthermore, this slide isn't to show how you need 2 times performance to use VR, it's to show the double performance and triple efficiency of the new GTX 1080 over the old Titan X card. 2.3 TFLOPS is more than half of the Neo's rating, so suggesting it needs double for VR but using that number just shows your initial error and refusal to back off a stance, no matter how futile.

except you're in denial if you actualy watch the presentacion you wold know Nvida was talking about VR and how you need that much more preformance to get the same graphics on VR

Sony's slide show was most likey use use for the same thing

if a game use 2.3 tf to render a game it need neerly that amount to render it on VR and that sir is FACT because VR render x2 times what a regular game wold

that is why ps4 VR games look like this

it cuts ps4 preformance in half and that is why even a PC rig runs like this

No, just no. The presentation was introducing a new GPU, not on VR. If you actual read the slides, they clearly show performance increases of the new models (the NVIDIA one just happens to be performance in VR games). Those VR games look that way because they are lower budget games and need to keep a consistently high refresh rate, not because it's two views. But hey, care to explain why it would require nearly double the performance to render two 960x1080 images (with many shared pixels) as opposed to one 1920x1080 view?

This is sad. You misread the slide. Got mad and called Sony "shady". Now you're desperately reaching for some reasoning that wouldn't make you look foolish.

@asylumni said:

@panda30 said:

@asylumni said:

@panda30 said:

@asylumni said:

Umm, yes, people do...

It happens all the time. If you had 4 apples yesterday and got 4 more today; it wouldn't be uncommon to say, "I have twice as many apples today as I had yesterday."

LMAOL you sure pick the wrong picture today buddy that 1 picture was use for EXACTLY WHAT I SAY nvidia claim 2x perf for VR do to VR needs to run from 2x positions any VR game need 2x the amount of performance

witch it's exactly what I insinuate about Sony 2.3tf to run the game and the rest for VR

thx for the picture

What? This picture (as well as the others) was to show that people do use times performance and that it wasn't "shady" of Sony to use it in their slide, as you claimed. Furthermore, this slide isn't to show how you need 2 times performance to use VR, it's to show the double performance and triple efficiency of the new GTX 1080 over the old Titan X card. 2.3 TFLOPS is more than half of the Neo's rating, so suggesting it needs double for VR but using that number just shows your initial error and refusal to back off a stance, no matter how futile.

except you're in denial if you actualy watch the presentacion you wold know Nvida was talking about VR and how you need that much more preformance to get the same graphics on VR

Sony's slide show was most likey use use for the same thing

if a game use 2.3 tf to render a game it need neerly that amount to render it on VR and that sir is FACT because VR render x2 times what a regular game wold

that is why ps4 VR games look like this

it cuts ps4 preformance in half and that is why even a PC rig runs like this

No, just no. The presentation was introducing a new GPU, not on VR. If you actual read the slides, they clearly show performance increases of the new models (the NVIDIA one just happens to be performance in VR games). Those VR games look that way because they are lower budget games and need to keep a consistently high refresh rate, not because it's two views. But hey, care to explain why it would require nearly double the performance to render two 960x1080 images (with many shared pixels) as opposed to one 1920x1080 view?

This is sad. You misread the slide. Got mad and called Sony "shady". Now you're desperately reaching for some reasoning that wouldn't make you look foolish.

your not there at the presentacion of Sony

what do you think hapen when that slide show up?

a) "hey developers this is half of the TF and its twice this number"

or

b) "neo can use 2.3tf on games and the rest its for VR capabilitys"

dont think of what your seeing but rather what that was use for

all you manage to do is prove my point even father

so looks better then halo witch one halo5 or last gen halo

cut in half EXACLY

to overkill yout video here is something similar runing on ps4 KSF that game looks half of this on VR and empty

@tormentos: So if Sony releases a PS5 in a few years that can play the same games as a PS4, not only digital or exclusives, same PSN, same saves, same OS is it still a "PS4"?..

Also, you're completely proving my point that Windows 10 Xbox Play Anywhere games are exclusives for the Xbox platform.. So please continue...

Because I hope you realize that Xbox Play Anywhere games for Xbox One and Windows 10 can play the same games, same XBL, same saves, same OS.. Just like with the PS4 and Neo, the only difference is the hardware.. And I'm not trying to say a PC is a console or a console is a PC.. I'm simply saying that there is a walled garden of exclusives that can only be played via the Windows Store, on Windows 10 devices, via Xbox Live.. And the Xbox One and a Windows 10 desktop are both Windows 10 devices and provide the hardware for that exclusive software..

Damn, the self-ownage is pretty epic on this thread so far.. You're melting down and running around in so many circles that you don't even know what fanboy stance you're trying to take anymore.. This has been extremely entertaining

When I saw the headline about the slideshow I thought, "Blimey, the Neo's frame rate isn't that bad is it?"

Boom-tish.

Too skint to buy one.

You could tell him the sky is blue, and he would spin that to be a color of his choice.

There's no indications.

12 GDDR5 6700Mhz modules with 384 bit bus yields about 321 GB/s . E3's video shown 12 GDDR5 modules and stated "more than 320 GB/s memory bandwidth".

n terms of logical programming model, XBO's ESRAM is treated like PC's VRAM but the storage is tiny on XBO.

On PC and DX12, CPU can not access VRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

On Xbox One, CPU can not access ESRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

GDDR5 module has full duplex links i.e. two link channels per module. HBM is just DRAM in a different form factor and interconnections. GDDR5 is a type of DRAM.

To access ESRAM, programmers uses MS supplied APIs. API's memory write location can be remapped to another memory locations. It's not my problem that you missed Brad Wardell's spill on Xbox One's old vs new ESRAM APIs.

Fury X's HBM is no where near CPU's SRAM efficiency.

The reason for HBM is to reduce power consumption. The reduced power consumption can then be used to boost CU count e.g Fury X's 64 CU instead of R9-390X's 44 CU.

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

So no actual indication that it will use HBM RAM or lack embedded RAM? Maintaining the pool of ESRAM is the best way to insure compatibility with titles that use it. There's no way I've seen to move things like that off-die without significant issues (though AMD claims a similar performance from HBM with it's higher speed and closer orientation to the CPU). Even with the bandwidth from faster GDDR5 (or more likely, GDDR5x), the physical distance the signals must travel and the higher latency of the GDDR5 modules will come into play.

There's no indications.

12 GDDR5 6700Mhz modules with 384 bit bus yields about 321 GB/s . E3's video shown 12 GDDR5 modules and stated "more than 320 GB/s memory bandwidth".

n terms of logical programming model, XBO's ESRAM is treated like PC's VRAM but the storage is tiny on XBO.

On PC and DX12, CPU can not access VRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

On Xbox One, CPU can not access ESRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

GDDR5 module has full duplex links i.e. two link channels per module. HBM is just DRAM in a different form factor and interconnections. GDDR5 is a type of DRAM.

To access ESRAM, programmers uses MS supplied APIs. API's memory write location can be remapped to another memory locations. It's not my problem that you missed Brad Wardell's spill on Xbox One's old vs new ESRAM APIs.

Fury X's HBM is no where near CPU's SRAM efficiency.

The reason for HBM is to reduce power consumption. The reduced power consumption can then be used to boost CU count e.g Fury X's 64 CU instead of R9-390X's 44 CU.

like i say before all this charts are irrelevant to consoles

and Where did you get DX12, CPU can not access VRAM DX12 its a API do you even know what that means

not only do it have asses to vram but it's the first direct x to communicate between Multi-GPU

@panda30 said:

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

So no actual indication that it will use HBM RAM or lack embedded RAM? Maintaining the pool of ESRAM is the best way to insure compatibility with titles that use it. There's no way I've seen to move things like that off-die without significant issues (though AMD claims a similar performance from HBM with it's higher speed and closer orientation to the CPU). Even with the bandwidth from faster GDDR5 (or more likely, GDDR5x), the physical distance the signals must travel and the higher latency of the GDDR5 modules will come into play.

There's no indications.

12 GDDR5 6700Mhz modules with 384 bit bus yields about 321 GB/s . E3's video shown 12 GDDR5 modules and stated "more than 320 GB/s memory bandwidth".

n terms of logical programming model, XBO's ESRAM is treated like PC's VRAM but the storage is tiny on XBO.

On PC and DX12, CPU can not access VRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

On Xbox One, CPU can not access ESRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

GDDR5 module has full duplex links i.e. two link channels per module. HBM is just DRAM in a different form factor and interconnections. GDDR5 is a type of DRAM.

To access ESRAM, programmers uses MS supplied APIs. API's memory write location can be remapped to another memory locations. It's not my problem that you missed Brad Wardell's spill on Xbox One's old vs new ESRAM APIs.

Fury X's HBM is no where near CPU's SRAM efficiency.

The reason for HBM is to reduce power consumption. The reduced power consumption can then be used to boost CU count e.g Fury X's 64 CU instead of R9-390X's 44 CU.

like i say before all this charts are irrelevant to consoles

and Where did you get DX12, CPU can not access VRAM DX12 its a API do you even know what that means

not only do it have asses to vram but it's the first direct x to communicate between Multi-GPU

Under DX12, CPU has NO access to GPU's memory locations (dGPU and iGPU).

From logic stand point, PC's dGPU and iGPU memory locations are treated like XBO's 32 MB ESRAM i.e. no CPU access.

GPU has an assigned IRQ and I/O memory location within CPU's logical address range.

I have written printer drivers before and I know how Windows kernel works.

For gathering data for the GPU, it's best to use the GPU's gather and move hardware.

Program calls Direct3D API which generates DXIL -> GPU Driver JIT recomplies DXIL into GPU ISA commands and send GPU ISA commands to GPU hardware. WDDM software driver maintains I/O range, IRQ and memory address mappings.

For efficiency reasons, CPU shouldn't get involve with mass data gather/data move process for the GPU i.e. CPU only needs translates DXIL into GPU ISA and let the GPU handles the rest e.g. data move/data gather operations.

CPU's load/store units are less robust than GPU's TMUs/ROPs/Move Units/DMA engines.

@panda30 said:

like i say before all this charts are irrelevant to consoles

PS4's memory bandwidth efficiencies are within ball park of 28 nm era AMD GPUs.

AMD GCN based game consoles uses the same basic parts as AMD's X86 PCs i.e. "copy and paste" engineering for semi-custom SoCs.

@tormentos:

1-You are a moron or you simply lack comprehension of the English language.

1. You are the facking moron since you simply lack the technical handling with the issues at hand.

@tormentos:

My argument is about the R290 vs Fury X the Fury X vs the 980ti mean total shit and are totally irrelevant to my argument,is just another case of you changing the argument.

Wrong. Minus 980 Ti, Fury X's Patch 7 improvements is just as applicable against R9-290.

@tormentos:

Worse you show a chart with the FuryX patch but don't do the same with the R290 which would have benefit from patch 7 you hypocrite liar.

Wrong. In relation to 980 Ti (nearly a constant point of reference), Fury X patch 7 is within expected effective memory bandwdith difference.

Math... 387 / 364 = 1.063 factor difference.

When there's enough TFLOPS for particlar workload, you haven't realized how effective memory bandwdith difference has influenced many PC benchmarks.

@tormentos:

The point is i was talking about the R290 and Fury X you owning them mean total shit,as you use a comparison chart showing the 980ti vs the Fury X not the R290.

New patch's Frame rate difference at very high setting is 1.11 difference factor. That's within the ball park of effective memory bandwdith difference between 980 Ti and Fury X.

Using the best frame rates at very high setting

Math

980 Ti = 27.327 fps

Fury X = 29.2 fps

29.2 / 27.327 = 1.067 difference factor.

What you failed understand 980 Ti remained as a near constant reference point and effective memory bandwdith is king when there's enough TFLOPS for intended workload.

@tormentos:

4-LINK TO WERE TECH SITES CONFIRM THE R290 AND THE FURY X ARE BANDWIDTH BOUND AT 1080P.

Link or your full of this,not even the freaking 7870 is bound at 1080p bandwidth wise and has 153GB's stop your freaking denial you blind fanboy you want to tag diminishing returns to bandwidth limitations.

The fact that you even dare to argue that the Fury X is bandwidth bound at 1080p says it all,you who wanted to pretend 16ROP were ok for every scenario at 1080p on the freaking weak XBO you have some shitty made to order arguments.

I keep showing you effective memory bandwdith gap are influencing the fps gaps.

@tormentos:

But then you use that fu**ing game which was done with Parity in mind and is 1 frame ahead of the PS4 while being 1080p like the PS4 something that we know MEANS parity was the goal,and you use it as some kind of proof that the PS4 isn't superior there is not a fu**ing single scenario were the XBO would be the PS4 at the same resolution not 1,but you will not understand that because you are a BLIND BIASED MS SUCK UP.

By your pathetic argument,the the PS4 and XBO are equal because well NFS was the same on both,Destiny was the same on both,Mad Max,and many other games that have parity..

So while you hide on a shitty game that had parity in mind,i just let this here..

Not just Mad Max e.g. Hitman 2016.

You failed to realized that the tiny 32MB ESRAM usage is not replacement for large storage and higher memory bandwdith setup i.e. there are larger performance pitfialls with XBO's memory setup when compared to W5000.

Both XBO and W5000 has similar performance potential.

Both XBO and W5000 has different performance pitfalls i.e. XBO has larger performance pitfalls while W5000's performance are largely consistent e.g. managing 2 GB VRAM is easier than the tiny high speed 32 MB VRAM.

The absolute superiority is when you have hardware like 7950 against 7850 i.e. 7950 is superior over 7850 in GPU, memory bandwidth and memory storage. Scorpio absolute superiority over NEO in GPU, memory bandwidth and memory storage.

NEO is an improvement over PS4's basic design concepts.

Scorpio is an improvement over both NEO and PS4's basic design concepts. In terms of hardware, Scorpio is a better PS4. MS is not making the mistakes as the original XBO.

Scorpio's CPU has design considerations for VR Oculus which is not part of NEO's design considerations.

@tormentos:

GpGPU particles on XBO and depth of field bring the xbox one GPU to its knees.

The fun part is that not only it drops under 900p on xbox one and close to 720p (lol) it has lower frame rates as well than the PS4,hitting 43 FPS in parts,the PS4 is mostly 60FPS with drops to like 55FPS..

So not only the XBO version drops close to 720p trying to keep frames as high as possible,but it also drop frames lower while being closer to 720p.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-doom-face-off

Another Faceoff were the PS4 walk over the XBO,and another were the XBO has to drop almost to 720p to try to fallow the PS4,so tell men when the XBO is at 1472x828 or lower how big the game is pixel wise.?

2,073,600 -- 1080p

1,218,816 -- 1472 x 828p.

Difference in pixel 70% so the PS4 commands at times gaps as big as 70% in pixel.? Without taking into notice that this are the moments were the frames are also the lowest because that is when the engine drops the most.

So 12FPS under the PS4 while having a 70% gap in resolution.?

It kind of make your pathetic 1 frame argument about Mad Max look like shit.

What is the excuse with Doom.? Is not 2013 any more you can't claim unfinish tools for the xbox one early api or some shit like that.

The gap remained and when developer push both the PS4 walk over the xbox one.

Hitman's reverse result wasn't 1 fps difference.

I have stated XBO's workaround wouldn't resolve ALU bound issues.

Both XBO and W5000 has similar performance potential.

Both XBO and W5000 has different performance pitfalls i.e. XBO has larger performance pitfalls while W5000's performance are largely consistent e.g. managing 2 GB VRAM is easier than the tiny high speed 32 MB VRAM.

Here's the slide, again.

Nowhere does it say 2.3 TFLOPs. What it says is, "NEO: 36 CU at 911 MHz (2.3x FLOPs)"

So I'm thinking they said something like, "The New PS4 has twice the CU running at a higher speed of 911 MHz and provides 2.3 times the floating point performance of the original PS4 model."

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

So no actual indication that it will use HBM RAM or lack embedded RAM? Maintaining the pool of ESRAM is the best way to insure compatibility with titles that use it. There's no way I've seen to move things like that off-die without significant issues (though AMD claims a similar performance from HBM with it's higher speed and closer orientation to the CPU). Even with the bandwidth from faster GDDR5 (or more likely, GDDR5x), the physical distance the signals must travel and the higher latency of the GDDR5 modules will come into play.

There's no indications.

12 GDDR5 6700Mhz modules with 384 bit bus yields about 321 GB/s . E3's video shown 12 GDDR5 modules and stated "more than 320 GB/s memory bandwidth".

n terms of logical programming model, XBO's ESRAM is treated like PC's VRAM but the storage is tiny on XBO.

On PC and DX12, CPU can not access VRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

On Xbox One, CPU can not access ESRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

GDDR5 module has full duplex links i.e. two link channels per module. HBM is just DRAM in a different form factor and interconnections. GDDR5 is a type of DRAM.

To access ESRAM, programmers uses MS supplied APIs. API's memory write location can be remapped to another memory locations. It's not my problem that you missed Brad Wardell's spill on Xbox One's old vs new ESRAM APIs.

Fury X's HBM is no where near CPU's SRAM efficiency.

The reason for HBM is to reduce power consumption. The reduced power consumption can then be used to boost CU count e.g Fury X's 64 CU instead of R9-390X's 44 CU.

Why would you want the CPU to access the ESRAM? And what exactly should I be looking for on Brad Wardell's Wikipedia page? Are you referring to what he said about Direct X 12 and the new API that would analyze the program and help build a profile to make better use of the ESRAM for developers? Remapping the memory address isn't my major concern, it's replacing high speed, extremely low latency RAM with slower, higher latency GDDR5 RAM and not expecting issues. It's not just a matter of the latency in the chips, but also the latency in the distance between the RAM and the APU (both of which HBM also improves, but since it's not being used, is irrelevant). How would an API that makes games even more dependant on the ESRAM make it better if it's removed? Is there something else I'm missing?

Hahaha

@asylumni said:

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

So no actual indication that it will use HBM RAM or lack embedded RAM? Maintaining the pool of ESRAM is the best way to insure compatibility with titles that use it. There's no way I've seen to move things like that off-die without significant issues (though AMD claims a similar performance from HBM with it's higher speed and closer orientation to the CPU). Even with the bandwidth from faster GDDR5 (or more likely, GDDR5x), the physical distance the signals must travel and the higher latency of the GDDR5 modules will come into play.

There's no indications.

12 GDDR5 6700Mhz modules with 384 bit bus yields about 321 GB/s . E3's video shown 12 GDDR5 modules and stated "more than 320 GB/s memory bandwidth".

n terms of logical programming model, XBO's ESRAM is treated like PC's VRAM but the storage is tiny on XBO.

On PC and DX12, CPU can not access VRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

On Xbox One, CPU can not access ESRAM i.e. needs GPU's move engines to fetch data from SYS MEM.

GDDR5 module has full duplex links i.e. two link channels per module. HBM is just DRAM in a different form factor and interconnections. GDDR5 is a type of DRAM.

To access ESRAM, programmers uses MS supplied APIs. API's memory write location can be remapped to another memory locations. It's not my problem that you missed Brad Wardell's spill on Xbox One's old vs new ESRAM APIs.

Fury X's HBM is no where near CPU's SRAM efficiency.

The reason for HBM is to reduce power consumption. The reduced power consumption can then be used to boost CU count e.g Fury X's 64 CU instead of R9-390X's 44 CU.

Why would you want the CPU to access the ESRAM? And what exactly should I be looking for on Brad Wardell's Wikipedia page? Are you referring to what he said about Direct X 12 and the new API that would analyze the program and help build a profile to make better use of the ESRAM for developers?

Why would you want the CPU to access dGPU's VRAM?

Brad Wardell's spill on old vs new ESRAM API existence from http://gamingbolt.com/dx12-should-remedy-the-resolution-issue-on-the-xbox-one-esram-to-receive-new-api

@asylumni said:

Remapping the memory address isn't my major concern, it's replacing high speed, extremely low latency RAM with slower, higher latency GDDR5 RAM and not expecting issues. It's not just a matter of the latency in the chips, but also the latency in the distance between the RAM and the APU (both of which HBM also improves, but since it's not being used, is irrelevant). How would an API that makes games even more dependant on the ESRAM make it better if it's removed? Is there something else I'm missing?

XBO's ESRAM memory bandwidth efficiencies are on par with AMD PC GPUs

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-the-xbox-one-architects

140-150GB/s rather than the peak 204GB/s

ESRAM's 145 / 204 = ~71 percent efficient. Don't expect CPU like L1 cache performance from XBO's ESRAM.

RX-480's 194 / 256 = ~75 percent efficient.

Latency has a relationship effective memory bandwdith.

The non-clamshell GDDR5 module has two seperate data links can support concurrent read and write access i.e. full duplex mode.

XBO's ESRAM didn't delivered superior memory bandwidth efficiencies against GDDR5

XBO's ESRAM chip area consumption resulted in smaller GPU size, hence inferior solution to PS4's GPU.

Microsoft is NOT repeating the same mistakes as the original XBO.

This thread is comedy gold. Watching cows backtrack on 3 years of the same arguments they tormented (haha gid it?) the lems with is just glorious. The war for second place has never been so entertaining.

NO stop dude CPU does not determine at all resolution on PC or consoles,CPU get affected in Ultra because on Ultra you have more things to DRAW and extra details are shown over high or very high,the actually pixel rendering is entirely depending on GPU,when you rise resolution and the frames drops is not a CPU limitation is a GPU one from rendering additional pixel.

NO it does not have to do with that at all,the amount of data being render doesn´t have shit to do with the number of pixel being render, rendering Ultra in 1080p will draw the same amount of stuff it would render on ultra 4K the load is the extra pixels involve in rendering 4k,the CPU is not what process those pixels,is the GPU.

So jumping from 2 pillion pixels to 4 times as many 8 million in 4k is the real load,as on 4k or 1080p on Ultra the GPU will render the same amount of detail no matter what resolution you are,when you select 4k vs 1080p the GPU simple render 8 million pixels instead of 2 million were ever you are on low or ultra the amount of pixel in 4k remain the same 8+ millions so stop trying to imply that resolution has shit to do with the CPU is the amount of things on scree the real problem and i am sure sony will not be using for ultra at all.

When the CPU can't feed the GPU correctly you will get drops in performance no matter if you are in 1024x 768,you don't solve a CPU bound scenario by dropping resolution,which is basically what you are implying,if you are cpu bound at 1080p dropping to 900p will not solve the issue because your CPU load still is the same as pixels are not render by the CPU but the GPU.

Go encode a movie on your PC and drop the resolution from what you usually have and you will see how CPU time use will go un affected by it,you will still use the same CPU at 720p that you will at 1080p is the CPU which is working,now i am telling you to encode a movie on CPU not on GPU compute by the way.

No all i did was stated there would be a difference in power in favor of the PS4 which you even deny..

darkangel115

Ppl still think the X1 can match ps4's superior gpu??TheKingIAm

People think crazier things. some of the funniest rumors i've heard are elvis is alive and the PS4 is more powerful then the X1 ;)

Hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa... But you are not a butthurt lemming right.?

You even deny the gap...

How that went.? Hahahaaa.a..

darkangel115

the titanfall quote is from DF ;) as is the crew quote ;)DF said the game was running at 1080P and 60FPS except in 1 cut scene it dropped to 40, then said it was due to an old video that hasn't been optimized yet since the game is unfinished. we've seen several games running 1080P and 60 FPS on X1 and 0 on the PS4 we did see several games crash and die while running on the PS4 however.

Some more delusion from you and how you would believe what fit you best,by the way what resolution was Titanfall on XBO.? 792p...Hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa And still dropped frames to the mid 30's in intense fights with many metch..lol

Meanwhile today doom is mostly 1080p 60FPS while the XBO version drops almost to 720p and with frame drops to the low 40's,but some how things like that don't bother you as you admit to play multiplatforms on XBO without problems,yet you advice people that you would get a scorpio over neo for better multiplatforms...Hahahaaa

No dude that is what a real man does,you see i don't have to claim people don't talk to woman based on their taste in games,that is moronic some one can play Gears and be Gay and lonely ,and some one can play Persona and be straight with many woman on its life,is just a moronic thing to claim just to try to downplay a game which you don't get.

Any one who downplay Japanese games specially those like Persona and tag them to people without woman,lonely or that can't talk to a woman are stupid,and the real childs in the argument,preference in games has nothing to do with sexual orientation or being able to talk to woman or not.

it shows who is really 12.

What determine if it is a new console is not that the PS5 play all PS4 games that is backward compatibility is the ability of the PS4 to play PS5 games,as that would show forward compatibility which is what PC has,so you have a 2010 GPU you can still play games from 2016,even that GPU are way more advance obviously you will play them accordingly to your specs.

No Because you can't install the PC version or tablet version on XBO or Scorpio you get a version done for your platform,in fact that is not how Scorpio works either,as Scorpio play all XBO games regardless of being digital or physical and include multiplatforms,what MS offer digitally with UWP is 3 version of the same game for 3 different platform and you can get them all for 1 price,which is why UWP doesn't work on physical games,you can have both code also the one for PC many PC do have blu-ray drives,but is not in MS best interest to allow PC Blu-ray drives to read XBO games..

UWP is not even close to what PC does with all its games and what Neo and PS4 will do.

Bullshit link me to were MS state you can play steam games on UWP.? As every single game on PS4 regardless or being digital of physical exclusives or multiplatform work in both platforms,on PC there is several markets which MS doesn't control and which are not included in UWP,worse is only for exclusive MS games or games of UWP,any other game or multiplatform is out of the question again killing your pathetic argument you can't play Star Citizen on XBO or Scorpio or UWP,go head find me a game from PS4 that would not work on Neo ill wait..lol

Not to mention 90% or more of the XBO games don't work on UWP so you can't play them either.

There goes your argument again flying...lol

Wrong again el tormentos lol, your being dumb again

let break it down so even you can understand

stronger the gpu the stronger the cpu has to be to keep up with the gpu.....

Again how much data the cpu has to send the gpu depends on the everything the gpu needs for the frame. This includes resolution you idiot, lower the resolution the gpu can get the frame render done more quickly asking for more data from the cpu. This is when you can more likely run into a cpu based bottleneck where the cpu starves the gpu not allowing the gpu to run its best. At the same time the cpu has to be able to feed the larger sets to the gpu while doing its tasks, and if it cant gpu never performs as it should.

Using super high resolutions like 4k can create a situation where both items are not up to the task. The GPU is the first to become the bottleneck at 4k, then depending on cpu used and then coding quality is for a game the cpu can be a bottleneck as well.

Fact is as it stands for specs of Neo doing 4k or close to it will create compromises to framerate and quality of assets that could have been done at 1080p or even 1440p. No matter how you spin it or ignore it Neo is not a proper 4k ready system.

1-No you are the moron and bitter loser who would argue the most pathetic shit to try to win an argument,you are so sad that you try to claim that since the XBO has backward compatibility that mean the PS3 didn't outsold the 360 because some how XBO backward compatibility count as another xbox 360 sold.

I don't have to say anything more after shitty arguments as those you pull.

YOu have being wrong on ESRAM arguments,your religiously quoted rebellion and banish from the forum when their game released and showed the PS4 had a HUGE gap over the XBO which had to be cap at 30 to get Vsynch active..lol

You were wrong about iler resources working better on 2 memory than one,as well when games that used PRT were also faster on PS4 like Trials basically you have being wrong on everything,regarding the xbox one,you use Metro comparison to claim 5FPS difference again the gaps have being much bigger.

Look at you quoting the same irrelevant charts time and time again trying to claim bandwidth is what keep the gap small on the Fury X vs the R290...

Quoting a game with 3 frame difference for god knows what reason,after failing by using Mad Max which is 1080p and areas were nothing happen the XBO was 1 frame ahead all that while ignoring this..

This highlights one area where a PS4 exhibits an advantage over Xbox One: it boasts a full 1080p output for the vast majority of the duration, with minor drops in resolution occurring in select circumstances. In contrast, Xbox One regularly struggles to hit full 1080p, more often coming in around 1472x828 or lower.

Please quantify me this gap and tell me why the XBO is more often around 1472x828 than on 1080p,doom is a hit on CPU it chases 60FPS which are a bigger hit to the CPU than 30.

On PlayStation 4, the majority of battles play out with only the smallest of drops. We've already presented one of the worst-case scenarios in video form, but the overall experience feels perceptually rock solid to the point where we were surprised to find any drops at all after analysing the footage.

BOOOOOMMMMM.... Solid performance with few drops.. even that most of the time is 1080p.

On Xbox One, performance isn't quite as robust but it still manages to feel great. During many of the larger battles, frame-rates tumble into the mid-50s with some dips all the way down into the 40s. Again, the general perception is that the experience is smooth, but the drops are more evident throughout.

If the XBO is into the 40's at 1472x828 and the PS4 is at 1080pm 60FPS what is the % gap in performance,now since you love numbers so much i would love to heard an answer from you.

Now considering that you totally ignored what i pasted of Doom and say nothing,it would be nice to see you explain why the Gap is so catastrophic here.

Maybe ID doesn't know how to code a game probably,maybe it is using Vulkan on PS4 right.?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-doom-face-off

Don't ignore it this is a 2016 game.

There is no backtracking lemming.

There is simple confirmation that the game would not be as big as some blind console lemmings believe.

For example Dynamitecop thinks that because the PS4 somehow with 500+ Gflops can pull gaps as big as 15 or 20 FPS in the same resolution as the xbox one,that means that having 1.8TF of difference somehow mean a game 3 or more times that of the PS4 vs xbox one...

People who think like this don't know shit about GPU on PC and how the higher you go in flops there is a diminishing return.

So while you can get the 7870 to more than double the 7770 in performance,you can't get the 7970 to more than double the 7850 even that in both cases the number of CU is double.

Hell the 7870 has 20CU the 7770 10 but both have 1ghz speed,the 7970 vs the 7850 is not the same,while the 7970 has double the CU of the 7850,speed wise the 7970 in both version stock and ghz edition has faster clock than the 860mhz 7850 and still the 7970 in any of the 2 version can't double the 7850 performance.

Thanks to diminishing returns,and people arguing with me here deny it.

Look at the gap between the Fury X and the R290 is 12FPS in 1440p in 4k is even smaller,and the gap between those 2 GPU is 3.7TF so imaging if the gap was 1.8TF..

@tormentos stop being argumentative, you cant have it both ways.

Either UWP games are exclusive because you only pay once and you can obtain your version for the platform of choice

or

When Neo comes out PS4 loses its exclusives, there are PS4 and Neo versions on the same disk but they are (at least partly) different versions.

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

Why would you want the CPU to access the ESRAM? And what exactly should I be looking for on Brad Wardell's Wikipedia page? Are you referring to what he said about Direct X 12 and the new API that would analyze the program and help build a profile to make better use of the ESRAM for developers?

Why would you want the CPU to access dGPU's VRAM?

Brad Wardell's spill on old vs new ESRAM API existence from http://gamingbolt.com/dx12-should-remedy-the-resolution-issue-on-the-xbox-one-esram-to-receive-new-api

@asylumni said:

Remapping the memory address isn't my major concern, it's replacing high speed, extremely low latency RAM with slower, higher latency GDDR5 RAM and not expecting issues. It's not just a matter of the latency in the chips, but also the latency in the distance between the RAM and the APU (both of which HBM also improves, but since it's not being used, is irrelevant). How would an API that makes games even more dependant on the ESRAM make it better if it's removed? Is there something else I'm missing?

XBO's ESRAM memory bandwidth efficiencies are on par with AMD PC GPUs

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-the-xbox-one-architects

140-150GB/s rather than the peak 204GB/s

ESRAM's 145 / 204 = ~71 percent efficient. Don't expect CPU like L1 cache performance from XBO's ESRAM.

RX-480's 194 / 256 = ~75 percent efficient.

Latency has a relationship effective memory bandwdith.

The non-clamshell GDDR5 module has two seperate data links can support concurrent read and write access i.e. full duplex mode.

XBO's ESRAM didn't delivered superior memory bandwidth efficiencies against GDDR5

XBO's ESRAM chip area consumption resulted in smaller GPU size, hence inferior solution to PS4's GPU.

Microsoft is NOT repeating the same mistakes as the original XBO.

So it is the Wardell piece I was thinking of. It still doesn't explain why you would want the CPU to access the eSRAM. Even if it's treated like VRAM, it isn't. It's much too small to use as you would the standard VRAM of a graphics card. Better use would be operations that require more bandwidth and repeated read/writes, most of which are GOPU functions. So how would it help to have the CPU able to access the eSRAM?

I'm also aware of how GDDR5 functions. Also latency =/= bandwidth. Latency is like lag on your internet connection. An extreme example would be a satellite internet service. You can get 20Mb bandwidth, but the lag is extremely high since the signal has to go to a satellite in geosynchronous orbit, back down to Earth and then to the proper location and back. So once the data starts arriving, it can arrive quickly and support streaming video and such, but the wait time between sending and responding is much to high to use it for any time of multiplayer gaming. Latency is the biggest problem when you move things off-die. It depends on the response time of the RAM (which is related to the operating frequency) and the distance between the RAM and the CPU/GPU/APU. Bandwidth doesn't change this. Can you actually link to any reliable report saying there will be no embedded RAM in the Scorpio APU?

WTF? really? dude bandwidth on a PC and INTERNET bandwidth are 2 difrent things LMAOL

OK, I'll bite. What's the difference, aside from the numbers being much higher between internal PC components? How is 1Gbps over a network different from 1 Gbps between, say, CPU and RAM (and yes, I know the CPU and RAM connection is usually much faster)?

no a 12 year old digs up posts that are old and were valid at the time with the info given. Here is the difference, i was wrong. see simple. I can admit stuff, unlike you. I listened to DF which is like your god with the way you quote them and they said something about a game, and I believed them, and they were wrong. and yes the PS4 is more powerful, but not enough to make a major difference. Some games run better on PS4, yes but not always. If you played games more then looking at articles you'd be better informed. Like overwatch for instance, it's well known on the forums, the PS4 version isn't as good as the xbox version. While running wise (res and FR) is pretty much the same, it runs slower and aiming is more janky. unfortunately despite the questions on the forums, Blizzard hasn't responded. But thats something that doesn't show up in the DF stuff. I still play it because it's about playing with all my friends across all platforms, it isn't a major deal, but the PS4 version is simply not as good. Just like the xbox version is slower with jankier aiming then on PC. SO no i'm not a butthurt lemming, i could care less about where a game is. I only care about playing good games. Gamers are idiots if they downplay good games because of who makes them or because they don't have access to it. Those people aren't gamers, they are immature fanboys who have so little in life, they cling to a piece of plastic like it makes their life better somehow lol. consoles and even gaming PC are disposable hobby devices. They aren't houses or cars which cost a ton of money and are necessary.

and yes anime isn't targeted to people like me. Older with a family and such. it just isn't. I'm not saying an adult can't like it, but it sure is weird. Hell i like kids movies. I just took the family to see the secret life of pets, and it was a great movie. Most of disney, and pixar movies are awesome as well. as is the despicable me series. Your issue is you hyped up a small power difference in the PS4 vs X1 and now you ahve to backtrack and downplay a much larger difference in the NEO/Scorpio.

I'm also going to demo the PSVR Friday at best buy to see if it's worth getting, Like i said, don't really care about the name brand of a console, I just like good games and playing with friends. The problem is you are so attached to a company while claiming you weren't and now it's biting you in the ass. Thats the problem with being a fanboy, things change rapidly in technology and before you know it, everything you talked about doesn't make sense and you look stupid, thats why I just focus on the games and play the good ones. and metacritic doesn't mean crap. nor does awards. I love bioware, ME is one of the best series ever. the first dragon age was awesome, 2nd was ok. but 2014 GOTY DA:I was bad. Didn't like it. 2015 GOTY the witcher, also bad didn't like it. 2013 GOTY TLOU, didn't like it. and I own all 3 of those games. Much like the movie industry, reviewers like to think they are smarter and more intelligent then everyone and pick stupid stuff to praise. Hell beyonce's album has a 92 on MC, does that mean I should listen to that poop because some so called "experts" say so lol it's sad how many people value others opinions so much more then their own.

they are not even the same thing

Memory bandwidth is the rate at which data can be read from or stored into a semiconductor memory by a processor.

Internet Bandwidth is the data speed supported by a network.

@tormentos:

I've only been reading your meltdowns so I'm not going to take your word for what dynamitecop said. You twist things out of context.

Knowing you I'm guessing you are under selling the difference in compute data between NEO and Skorpio by using vaguely related comparisons between much older components with wildly different components playing different games. So it's fair to say that this is going to be like your last thread. For example your comparison on page 5 using two different games AND GPUs (and likely systems as well). That's absolutely hilarious, and don't bullshit me that "they are the same engine" because they are not and the demands of the game are not even close to the same.

Your entire argument is flawed. The diminishing returns of TFLOPs in games comes from bottlenecks not a magical disappearance of compute data. If memory performance scales with the core count and core speed and the rest of the system can keep pace than there will be an (almost) linear increase in performance with compute performance. Your benchmarks are showing framerates in excess of 70+ FPS where CPU bottle necking becomes prevelant. In applications to Skorpio expect it to perform better than NEO relative to compute capabilities because it is rumored to have far better memory and CPU performance.

Stop calling people lemmings, it's just childish, especially when so many of the people calling you out on your BS own multiple systems. You're a well known rabid cow. Which brings me to the following...

IF YOU KNOW SO MUCH ABOUT PCs, GPUs, AND HIGH-END GAMING WHAT IS YOUR PC TORMENTOS FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME!

This thread will end up like your comical NEO hardware thread which made you the joke of system wars for the next few weeks when Polaris 10 came out.

So, in other words, in both cases, bandwidth is a measurement of the rate at which data can be transferred. So what's the problem?

To address the bolded items, one by one:

1) So you're saying that as long as there is forwards compatibility, it's still a PS4.. despite the fact that it is a new console, with a new name, with new specs.. I guess you also think an iPhone 6 is still an iPhone 5.. and an iPhone 7 will still be an iPhone 5.. the fact of the matter is this: they are still all "iPhones" made by Apple.. but they are different devices.. and an iPhone 5 is not an iPhone 6 or vice versa.. By that same token, these new consoles are still all "Playstations" made by Sony.. but they are different devices.. a PS4 is not a Neo or vice versa..

2) Wrong, what Microsoft is offering with UWP is offering one version of the game for one platform (Windows 10).. Here is what UWP is:

A Universal Windows Platform (UWP) app can run on any Windows-based device, from your phone to your tablet or PC.

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/uwp/layout/design-and-ui-intro

3) And here is UWP being used for Steam games:

So that's it man.. Unless you believe an iPhone 6 is literally an iPhone 5, you wont accept the linked proof that UWP is a single game/app that can be played across all Win10 devices from a single unified store, and you wont accept the video proof that even Steam will eventually be able to use UWP (further unifying gaming across Microsoft consoles and PCs), then this conversation is over.. and even if you don't accept these facts, oh well.. I've proven my points beyond a shadow of a doubt at this point.. anything beyond this is just you being a blind fanboy..

accept your ownage and move on sir..

@tormentos: And in addition to the above info, here's yet another link:

Windows 10 makes it easier to develop apps for the UWP with just one API set, one app package, and one store to reach all Windows 10 devices – PC, tablet, phone and more.

https://msdn.microsoft.com/windows/uwp/get-started/whats-a-uwp

So in summary:

1) an IPhone 5 isn't an IPhone 6 and a PS4 isn't a Neo.. they are the same platform, but different devices.. period.. at best, you're arguing semantics but at the end of the day, a PS4 and a Neo are two different pieces of hardware.. if you cant understand this, then you have deeper issues than being a blind fanboy.. in either case, i'm done debating about something that is so painfully obvious..

2) UWP means the potential for one game, for one platform, from one store.. that's the very definition of "exclusive".. period.. I've provided 2 links to support this fact.. So either provide me a link stating that "UWP is 3 version of the same game for 3 different platform" or accept that you're wrong..

3) Right now, Xbox/Win10 exclusivity via Xbox Play Anywhere is only tied to games from the Windows Store.. In the future, Microsoft will continue to merge "Xbox" on consoles and PC by allowing devs to convert and publish their UWP games on any store they want, to include Steam.. Xbox is a platform moving beyond being tied to a living room console.. period.. I've provided a linked video showcasing exactly that.. Please provide me a link that says UWP will only ever be available from the Windows Store or accept that you're wrong.. Windows 10 growth and UWP growth = Xbox growth..

No more fanboy walls of text dude.. post links to support your claims or accept that you've been owned.. I will not respond to anything else you have to say unless you support it with a link.. if you can't find links more credible than Microsoft.com or Phil Spencer to support your fanboy BS, then that's exactly what it is: BS..

@asylumni said:

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

Why would you want the CPU to access the ESRAM? And what exactly should I be looking for on Brad Wardell's Wikipedia page? Are you referring to what he said about Direct X 12 and the new API that would analyze the program and help build a profile to make better use of the ESRAM for developers?

Why would you want the CPU to access dGPU's VRAM?

Brad Wardell's spill on old vs new ESRAM API existence from http://gamingbolt.com/dx12-should-remedy-the-resolution-issue-on-the-xbox-one-esram-to-receive-new-api

@asylumni said:

Remapping the memory address isn't my major concern, it's replacing high speed, extremely low latency RAM with slower, higher latency GDDR5 RAM and not expecting issues. It's not just a matter of the latency in the chips, but also the latency in the distance between the RAM and the APU (both of which HBM also improves, but since it's not being used, is irrelevant). How would an API that makes games even more dependant on the ESRAM make it better if it's removed? Is there something else I'm missing?

XBO's ESRAM memory bandwidth efficiencies are on par with AMD PC GPUs

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-the-xbox-one-architects

140-150GB/s rather than the peak 204GB/s

ESRAM's 145 / 204 = ~71 percent efficient. Don't expect CPU like L1 cache performance from XBO's ESRAM.

RX-480's 194 / 256 = ~75 percent efficient.

Latency has a relationship effective memory bandwdith.

The non-clamshell GDDR5 module has two seperate data links can support concurrent read and write access i.e. full duplex mode.

XBO's ESRAM didn't delivered superior memory bandwidth efficiencies against GDDR5

XBO's ESRAM chip area consumption resulted in smaller GPU size, hence inferior solution to PS4's GPU.

Microsoft is NOT repeating the same mistakes as the original XBO.

So it is the Wardell piece I was thinking of. It still doesn't explain why you would want the CPU to access the eSRAM. Even if it's treated like VRAM, it isn't. It's much too small to use as you would the standard VRAM of a graphics card. Better use would be operations that require more bandwidth and repeated read/writes, most of which are GOPU functions. So how would it help to have the CPU able to access the eSRAM?

I'm also aware of how GDDR5 functions. Also latency =/= bandwidth. Latency is like lag on your internet connection. An extreme example would be a satellite internet service. You can get 20Mb bandwidth, but the lag is extremely high since the signal has to go to a satellite in geosynchronous orbit, back down to Earth and then to the proper location and back. So once the data starts arriving, it can arrive quickly and support streaming video and such, but the wait time between sending and responding is much to high to use it for any time of multiplayer gaming. Latency is the biggest problem when you move things off-die. It depends on the response time of the RAM (which is related to the operating frequency) and the distance between the RAM and the CPU/GPU/APU. Bandwidth doesn't change this. Can you actually link to any reliable report saying there will be no embedded RAM in the Scorpio APU?

Wrong. Latency has influence on effective memory bandwidth.

DDR3-1600 with C6 has lower time duration than DDR3-1600 with C7/C8/C9.

To extract highest effective memory bandwidth, L1 cache was designed to have lowest latency with highest memory bandwidth.

Higher latency leads to decrease memory bandwidth e.g. latency of 200 ns shows memory bandwidth wall.

PS; These results are quad memory channel Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition.

Latency reduces the time for the actual memory transfer at a given time.

The facts about Xbox Scorpio

1. More than 320 GB/s of memory bandwidth

2. 12 GDDR5 modules

3. 6 TFLOPS GPU

4. 8 CPU cores

5. PC's VR Oculus and Fallout 4 VR considerations e.g. Intel i5-4590 processor equivalent.

Estimates for Xbox Scorpio based on known common parts

1. Xbox Scorpio's estimated SoC is size is 362 mm^2

2. For 321 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 12 GDDR5 modules, it's configuration would be 384 bit with GDDR5-6700.

3. Mainstream SKU RX-480's chip size is around 232 mm^2 and delivers ~5.83 TFLOPS at 1266 Mhz and 36 CU.

4. Vega has 4X perf/watt improvements i.e. increasing effective memory bandwidth will boost frame rates and most high end PC GPU benchmarks are influenced by effective memory bandwidth.

@tormentos said:

1-No you are the moron and bitter loser who would argue the most pathetic shit to try to win an argument,you are so sad that you try to claim that since the XBO has backward compatibility that mean the PS3 didn't outsold the 360 because some how XBO backward compatibility count as another xbox 360 sold.

You are a moron. Any new box the runs Xbox 360 games increases its install base. This is software run-time ecosystem install base 101. This is why Java VM and Adobe Flash player has maximum proliferation regimes. Free Windows 10 upgrade is MS's attempt on maximize install base's proliferation.

@tormentos said:

I don't have to say anything more after shitty arguments as those you pull.

Your is argument shit. You fail computer science basics.

@tormentos said:

YOu have being wrong on ESRAM arguments,your religiously quoted rebellion and banish from the forum when their game released and showed the PS4 had a HUGE gap over the XBO which had to be cap at 30 to get Vsynch active..lol

Sniper Elite 3 delivered 1920x1080p via tiled frame buffer method you fool.

If Rebellion devs didn't use tiled frame buffer method, their game's resolution would be less than 1920x1080 resolution. There's nothing for me to add since Sniper Elite 3 delivered 1920x1080p resolution.

I have repeatedly stated XBO's workarounds wouldn't solve GPU ALU bound issues.

I have no problem continuing that argument.

@tormentos said:

You were wrong about iler resources working better on 2 memory than one,as well when games that used PRT were also faster on PS4 like Trials basically you have being wrong on everything,regarding the xbox one,you use Metro comparison to claim 5FPS difference again the gaps have being much bigger.

Again, PRT usage is dependent on which memory location using e.g.

PRT could be use for HDD to main memory.

PRT could be use for main memory to faster memory locations.

I have repeatably asked you the question, are Trials' devlopers using PRT like Forza Horizon 2's PRT+ESRAM combo?

I have repeatedly stated XBO's workarounds wouldn't solve GPU ALU bound issues.

@tormentos said:

Look at you quoting the same irrelevant charts time and time again trying to claim bandwidth is what keep the gap small on the Fury X vs the R290...

Frame rate gap factor and memory gap factor are similar i.e. ALUs are nothing without effective memory bandwidth. This is basic computer science 101.

@tormentos said:

Quoting a game with 3 frame difference for god knows what reason,after failing by using Mad Max which is 1080p and areas were nothing happen the XBO was 1 frame ahead all that while ignoring this..

You are ignoring other PS4 vs XBO reversal results.

My argument is, a true 1.4X superior box would have near zero reversal results e.g. my old Intel Core i5-2500 with 7950-900 based PC is a true "more than 1.4X" over XBO with superior CPU, superior effective memory bandwidth and superior GPU.

@tormentos said:

This highlights one area where a PS4 exhibits an advantage over Xbox One: it boasts a full 1080p output for the vast majority of the duration, with minor drops in resolution occurring in select circumstances. In contrast, Xbox One regularly struggles to hit full 1080p, more often coming in around 1472x828 or lower.

Please quantify me this gap and tell me why the XBO is more often around 1472x828 than on 1080p,doom is a hit on CPU it chases 60FPS which are a bigger hit to the CPU than 30.

I have repeatedly stated XBO's workarounds wouldn't solve GPU ALU bound issues.

Based from Doom 2016 Vulkan results, this game exposes the TFLOPS gap more than your quoted Rise of Tomb Raider.

@tormentos said:

On PlayStation 4, the majority of battles play out with only the smallest of drops. We've already presented one of the worst-case scenarios in video form, but the overall experience feels perceptually rock solid to the point where we were surprised to find any drops at all after analysing the footage.

BOOOOOMMMMM.... Solid performance with few drops.. even that most of the time is 1080p.

I have repeatedly stated XBO's workarounds wouldn't solve GPU ALU bound issues.

Based from Doom 2016 Vulkan results, this game exposes the TFLOPS gap more than your quoted Rise of Tomb Raider benchmarks.

For Xbox Scorpio vs PS4 NEO, using Doom 2016 example is a double edge sword against PS4 NEO.

On Xbox One, performance isn't quite as robust but it still manages to feel great. During many of the larger battles, frame-rates tumble into the mid-50s with some dips all the way down into the 40s. Again, the general perception is that the experience is smooth, but the drops are more evident throughout.

If the XBO is into the 40's at 1472x828 and the PS4 is at 1080pm 60FPS what is the % gap in performance,now since you love numbers so much i would love to heard an answer from you.

Now considering that you totally ignored what i pasted of Doom and say nothing,it would be nice to see you explain why the Gap is so catastrophic here.

Maybe ID doesn't know how to code a game probably,maybe it is using Vulkan on PS4 right.?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-doom-face-off

Don't ignore it this is a 2016 game.

I have repeatedly stated XBO's workarounds wouldn't solve GPU ALU bound issues.

Based from Doom 2016 Vulkan results, this game exposes the TFLOPS gap more than your quoted Rise of Tomb Raider benchmarks.

For Xbox Scorpio vs PS4 NEO, using Doom 2016 example is a double edge sword against PS4 NEO.

Doom 2016 Vulkan results shows GPU TFLOPS rankings with R9-Fury X smashing lesser GCNs.

So let me get this straight, this system is coming out in about 3 months and Sony hasn't even started marketing it yet? No video's no commercials, no gameplay, no screen shots, no official specs, no nothing? I don't see it selling well. And it starts to make me wonder, is it really coming out in 2016? are they going to start marketing it a week before release? If the GPU is that much more powerful we better get more than just more frame rates? Is it going to have better textures and lighting? Does 4k Upscaling even look noticeably better than 1080p??

@ronvalencia: I never said latency couldn't have an effect on realized bandwidth, and all the previous talk was on the theoretical bandwidth, not effective. It's that I keep questioning the trouble related to switching a low latency memory for a higher latency memory and you keep talking about bandwidth, making me think you are trying to imply that higher bandwidth can reduce latency when really you're just avoiding the question. So these claims there would be no embedded RAM is just your wish and there's not an actual indication it's true. I'm sure, with the move to GDDR5, MS would like to drop the ESRAM, it just may not be practical to remove it since they want to keep the older Xbox One games that fully utilize it running as they should.

I know this isnt my conversation but i dont understand why you think Scorpio would NEED ESRAM?

It is entirely possible to write the same data into GDDR5 and have it work without a problem, im not sure why you think it cant?

I mean if you are looking at it like standard emulating through software, then it is simple code. If you are talking about hardware.........there are other ways to accomplish it. Sure, you could go the Sony route and put the actual hardware in as sony did with PS3 (Im assuming you are talking about this method and why you are talking about ESRAM, correct me if im wrong.)

The advantage MS has is that they control hardware and software and can develop both the hardware and software with BC in mind.

Meaning the Scorpio OS could be programmed to recognize Xbox One games and wall off the needed RAM to use as ESRAM.........and it would be faster. The fact that Scorpio with have 4 more gigabytes of RAM means that running out of RAM or compatibility would be a non issue.

Im not sure why you are thinking the hardware and software needs to be the exact same.

Computer programming is just a bunch of 0s and 1s. If you are smart enough to get them to match up correctly and youre fine.

Easy to do if you own both programs.

Emulation is hard if you have to reverse engineer the hardware.

MS doesnt...........

Thats how they got Xbox One BC to work.

The information given was clear and you chose to ignore it,just like now the PS4 has better games and you deny it,using personal preference and some kind of proof that MS has better games.

You can't admit anything and you are a joke..lol

Can you play the PC version on XBO.? Can you install a XBO game on PC.?
if the answer is NO,the UWP is just a multiplatform distribution that just charge you 1 price for 2 or more versions of the same game,nothing more than a glorified cross buy like sony use to have.

I ca't even believe you are so stupid and go on record with those 2 comparison.

I would be able to play every single Neo game on PS4,and the other way around 100%,exclusive multiplatforms on sony store not on sony store 100%,you can't play PC games on xbox,you can't play xbox games on PC,you can't play XBO games on surface what you get with UWP is this..'

http://www.giantbomb.com/cross-buy/3015-7554/games/

A glorified cross buy programs that only work with some selected games,so while i play COD on my PS4 and Neo with the same disc,you can't play COD on your PC,and xbox one,scorpio or surface with 1 disc,because is not what Neo,PS4 and PC have in common at all.

Thank you i just wanted people to see again how full of shit and moronic your arguments are,the xbox one doesn't increase the xbox 360 base because is not a 360, the xbox one can barely play a few games of the xbox 360 library and some in a very bad form.

By your arguments the PS1 is the biggest console ever,with 346 million units sold,since you know backward compatibility count as another platform sold.

And since the PS2 play PS1 games that means PS1 install base grows to 260 millions,but since the PS3 also read PS1 games that mean it grows again to 346 million...

Just fallowing your stupid lemming logic.. lol

Oh for god sake STFU.

Speaking on Twitter, Gneiting said that developers using DirectX 12 over Vulkan ‘literally makes no sense.’ Elaborating on his stance, and in response to some questions, Gneiting pointed out that with Windows 7 forming a major chunk of the PC gaming market, and with DirectX 12 being incompatible with Windows 7, using DirectX in an attempt to have ‘one codebase’ makes no sense, since developers would need to create two separate ones anyway. He pointed out that the argument that programming for Xbox One and Windows 10 becomes easier by using DirectX 12 is moot too, because DirectX 12 on Windows and on Xbox is very different, necessitating two separate code paths anyway.

http://gamingbolt.com/id-software-dev-puzzled-by-devs-choosing-dx12-over-vulkan-claims-xbox-one-dx12-is-different-than-pc#V6XAzJLMPQydRQeH.99

John Fu**ing Carmack who also makes games on XBO and PC,DX12 on PC and XBO is not like MS claim a 1 code...lol

Worse is incompatible with windows 7 MS own freaking platform,when we know PC is PC and MS just did that to force people to move to windows 10.

So again you pathetic fanboy call me when you can play the same version of COD on your Scorpio PC and Surface,or on your XBO PC and surface because one size truly fits all in sony land..lol

The fact that 100% of the physical games on XBO are incompatible with PC says it all,and the other way around to..lol

What you get with UWP is a cross buy applications which let you download the same version of game you buy for 3 different platforms and has 3 different versions,in fact you can't run on surface what you can on PC,as it lack the power to do so unless an extreme water down version is done.

somebody in this thread has way to much time on their hands.

@tormentos: I post two links from Microsoft that clearly states that UWP is one app for one store for all Windows 10 devices..

In responce, you post a link about DirectX12 that doesn't mention anything about UWP..

You lose and are still owning yourself..

Post a link that says "UWP is 3 different versions for 3 different platforms" or you still talking pure fanboy gibberish..

Lol DirectX12 =/= UWP dude..

I replied to this nonsense since you posted a link.. Your link doesn't even mention UWP, so it does not dispute my links and it doesn't even support your statements concerning UWP.. You have been owned.. Again, if your next post doesn't have another link, it will be ignored..

Thanks for playing and thanks for admitting I was right on points #1 and #3.. Meaning you concede that a PS4 is not a Neo and that UWP can eventually expand beyond the Windows Store.. Your healing has begun

Edit: Also, you don't even realize a Surface Pro is a PC?!?!.. LMAO!!!!! So you think the games/apps available for my Surface Pro 3 are different than the ones available on my desktop PC?.. Lol, you just lost all credibility right there.. Please leave this thread

It's the latency. The quantity of RAM isn't an issue, nor is the bandwidth, it's the delay. The ESRAM was put in the Xbox One to make up for the lower bandwidth of DDR3. In order for it to do this, it was best used for operations that required high bandwidth and many read/writes. MS even wrote a program that would analyze the code for a game and build recommended profiles that the developer could use to get more use from the embedded RAM. The problem is, for external GDDR5 RAM, the latency of the chips is significantly higher and there is more delay in the time it takes the signal to move from the apu to the memory and back. This adds significant delays to each read or write for the operations that expect it to happen much quicker. This delay can also cascade to other operations that depend in the results from the embedded RAM operations.

Windows PC doesn't have XBO's Doom 2016 UWP with AMD GCN hit-the-metal intrinsic functions i.e. PC has Doom Vulkan with AMD GCN hit-the-metal intrinsic functions.

XBO's AMD GCN hit-the-metal intrinsic functions gimps unified UWP ecosystem and MS supports XBO's AMD GCN hit-the-metal intrinsic functions.

AMD has enabled shader intrinsic functions with PC's DirectX11, Direct12 and Vulkan for AMD GPU.

Windows PC has GPU code path politics.

@tormentos:

Thank you i just wanted people to see again how full of shit and moronic your arguments are,the xbox one doesn't increase the xbox 360 base because is not a 360, the xbox one can barely play a few games of the xbox 360 library and some in a very bad form.

By your arguments the PS1 is the biggest console ever,with 346 million units sold,since you know backward compatibility count as another platform sold.

And since the PS2 play PS1 games that means PS1 install base grows to 260 millions,but since the PS3 also read PS1 games that mean it grows again to 346 million...

Just fallowing your stupid lemming logic.. lol

It's not a lemming logic i.e. it's Java VM or Adobe Flash VM logic and basic software run-time ecosystem logic.

If PS4 has PS1 and PS2 BC then it's good for the Playstation platform, but you pay again for PS2 classics on PS4, hence killing BC's goals. It's Sony's greed that killed PS1 and PS2 BC on PS4.

I can't buy a PS4, go to secondhand market, buy PS2 DVD games and run these games on PS4.

I don't view the world with game console system wars.