you cant take compression methods and say 326gb/s is now 340-350gb/s , 326gb/s is still 326gb/s..... increasing the effective memory bandwidth by using color compression saves bandwidth needed to do the same job when it would take up to 35%(polaris architecture) more bandwidth for uncompressed color data. In that case RX 580 stock has upto 345gb/s, or 388gb/s when its memory is overclocked to 9000mhz. Or Nvidia's Pascal DCC allows gtx 1080 to go from 320gb/s to like 540 gb/s effective memory bandwidth.
Scorpio should have around 300gb/s of real bandwidth. and if has same compression potential Scorpio's gpu would allow upto 405gb/s and even if it had an insane amount of bandwidth potential beyond 405gb/s , it wouldn't mean squat if gpu's pixel fill rate is below current Polaris top card RX 580 (ie 42.9 G/Pixels).
Which really determines if the gpu is able to pump out enough pixels for 4k above 30 fps without any sizable compromises taken. You have to take into account gpu has to share its vram pool with game data as well, so the gpu will most likely never see 6gb or more of vram allocation.
We need the Scorpio's performance numbers to truly gauge its potential. as of right now with the info available its looking like at best its slightly better than RX 580. Going by MS's claim that it has 2.7x fill rate of X1 and memory bandwidth of ~300 gb/s.
"Jaguar" cpu bottleneck says no? Unless assets used are of middle quality.
It's not a Jaguar, it's based off of one but it's modified, to what extent who knows, it could be heavily. Also don't forget about the DirectX 12 module built into the hardware which parses drawcalls down to only 9-11 from what would be hundreds of thousands of instructions the CPU would be processing that it no longer has to.
Yes it is stop your denial it is a jaguar with the same modifications found on xbox one as well done to the command processor no amount of customization would turn a jaguar into an i7 or Ryzen if AMD could do that they would be KINGS now selling cheap ass jaguars that perform like i7,the tech inside scorpio isn't MS is AMD.
So yeah it is a jaguar bumped 31% clock speed wise with the same modification,and yes it will bottlenect the GPU in certain scenarios,just like bigger FX series CPU from AMD bottleneck many GPU and intel showed better performance in many tests.
DX12 is built into the xbox one as well confirmed by MS it self,DX12 is not magic and on consoles is basically redundant DX12 is nothing more than several API done on consoles for years ported to PC,including that command processor modification which MS has been doing since the 360 days.
Just like the PS4 doesn't need DX12 either and its API are even lower level than MS DX12.
IN fact even MS admit that gains are totally dependent on game,so it change on a game by game basis.
This is completely incorrect, and you're grossly speculating things you have absolutely zero knowledge of.
I don't need to say anything else, your post is dead in the water.
you cant take compression methods and say 326gb/s is now 340-350gb/s , 326gb/s is still 326gb/s..... increasing the effective memory bandwidth by using color compression saves bandwidth needed to do the same job when it would take up to 35%(polaris architecture) more bandwidth for uncompressed color data. In that case RX 580 stock has upto 345gb/s, or 388gb/s when its memory is overclocked to 9000mhz. Or Nvidia's Pascal DCC allows gtx 1080 to go from 320gb/s to like 540 gb/s effective memory bandwidth.
Scorpio should have around 300gb/s of real bandwidth. and if has same compression potential Scorpio's gpu would allow upto 405gb/s and even if it had an insane amount of bandwidth potential beyond 405gb/s , it wouldn't mean squat if gpu's pixel fill rate is below current Polaris top card RX 580 (ie 42.9 G/Pixels).
Which really determines if the gpu is able to pump out enough pixels for 4k above 30 fps without any sizable compromises taken. You have to take into account gpu has to share its vram pool with game data as well, so the gpu will most likely never see 6gb or more of vram allocation.
We need the Scorpio's performance numbers to truly gauge its potential. as of right now with the info available its looking like at best its slightly better than RX 580. Going by MS's claim that it has 2.7x fill rate of X1 and memory bandwidth of ~300 gb/s.
On 3DMarks Vantage Extreme, RX-480's color pixel fill rate is superior to R9-390X's 64 ROPS without DCC.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5512505 R9-390X's color fill is 19.4 pixels/s with 384 GB/s physical memory bandwidth
http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5587697 RX-480's color fill is 30.1 pixels/s with 256 GB/s physical memory bandwidth.
DCC has a larger impact with boosting ROPS performance. This is a synthetic benchmark which doesn't show concurrent operations with ROPS and TMUs.
If your argument on Pixel fill rate holds true, RX-480 should be about 57 percent faster than R9-390X which doesn't match real game results..
AMD's ROPS includes color ROPS, stencil/Z ROPS and MSAA processors.
Large memory bandwidth consumers are color ROPS, stencil/Z ROPS, MSAA and TMUs, and when they are running in parallel, it's memory bandwidth bottleneck during non-shader ALU bound.
The problem for current AMD GPU designs are the ROPS <---> TMU iterative loop chain and concurrent ROPS and TMU operations i.e. 2 MB L2 cache enables tile render for the best concurrent ROPS and TMU operations.
Your pure color ROPS argument doesn't reflect real world workloads when both TMU and ROPS are operating at the same time.
Why are you arguing with GTX 1080 vs Scorpio?
Pure ROPS argument doesn't reflect PC benchmark results. TMU memory bandwidth results has greater influence.
The frame rate gap between 980 Ti and RX-480 reflects texture effective memory bandwidth.
Extra TFLOPS from RX-580 has slightly narrowed the gap. RX-580's pixel fill rate mean squat when texture effective memory bandwidth has higher influence.
Forza wet track has to load the textures (TMU) and render the alpha/semi-transparent (ROPS) texture effects, hence why the machine needs increase memory bandwidth and improvements with Pixel Engine.
The frame rate gap between 980 Ti and R9-290X reflects texture effective memory bandwidth.
If you scale RX-470's 36 fps result by the memory bandwidth difference with Scorpio, it lands on GTX 1070 range.
Scorpio's GPU hardware changes was profiled against existing XBO 3D engines.
"We also leveraged the fact that we understand the AMD architecture really, really well now and how well it does on our games," continues Goossen, "so we were able to go through and examine a lot of the internal queues and buffers and caches and FIFOs that make up this very deep pipeline that, if you can find the right areas that are causing bottlenecks, for very small area [on the processor] we could increase those sizes and get effective wins."
Increasing FIFO buffers and internal queues can reduce external memory hit rates. For example, Maxwell/Pascal GPU's Pixel Engine connection with L2 cache benefits deferred rendering.
Scorpio's Forza result with around GTX 1070 and Fury X level performance doesn't just disappear and land on RX-580 level GPU.
No RX-480/580 GPU has matched GTX 1070 in any games, while Scorpio has rivaled GTX 1070/Fury X in Forza.
The changes they did to the gpu they stated a 2.7x fill rate increase compared to X1 which means most likely that we are looking at under 40 G/pixels rate with gpu that is still vastly still Polaris based. The gpu will not see the full 326gb/s, so suggesting 300gb/s area is not out of the realm of probability.
Also the command processor is not a true saving grace for cutting cpu to gpu workloads in half.
Microsoft's Andrew Goossen has been in touch to clarify that D3D12 support at the hardware level is actually a part of the existing Xbox One and Xbox One S too.". The amount of win is dependent on the game engine and content, and not all games will see that size of improvement."
Vega 11 is just Polaris 10/20 with L2 cache connected to Pixel Engine and double rate FP16 equipped CU which is pointless for existing 3D engines.
2.7X for existing XBO's ROPS memory bandwidth needs.
RGBA8: 54 GB/s -> 145.8 GB/s
RGBA16F: 109 GB/s -> 294.3 GB/s
RGBA32F: 218 GB/s -> 588.6 GB/s (BW bound)
2.7X for existing XBO S's ROPS at 914 Mhz memory bandwidth needs
RGBA8: 57 GB/s -> 153.9 GB/s
RGBA16F: 117 GB/s -> 315.9 GB/s <---- sweet spot.
RGBA32F: 233 GB/s -> 629.1 GB/s (BW bound)
32 ROPS at 1172 Mhz
RGBA8: 150 GB/s
RGBA16F: 300 GB/s <---- sweet spot.
RGBA32F: 600 GB/s (BW bound)
That's only one type of ROPS workload which doesn't include stencil/Z-ROPS and MSAA.
DCC is useful for reduce memory bandwidth consumption hence improving concurrence TMU, color ROP, stencil/Z-ROPS and MSAA.
Larger L2 cache is useful for reducing external memory hit rates hence improving concurrent TMU, color ROP, stencil/Z-ROPS and MSAA. Current AMD GPU's Pixel Engines are not connected to L2 cache.
you have to include what the cpu and other devices will be using as well. So the gpu will have 300gb/s or little less
I am, 326 GB/s bandwidth with DCC= about like 340-350 GB/s effective bandwidth, 8 core Jaguar at 2.3 ghz with whatever customizations it has won't use more than 30 GB/s in a CPU cycle ever, leaves some bandwidth for other components and still leaves GPU with around 300 GB/s +
DCC and 326 GB/s are only part of the solution. Using 2 MB L2 cache with 4K rendering is a major factor i.e. the secret sauce for NVIDIA Maxwell/Pascal GPU.
Current AMD Pixel Engine setup without L2 cache connection belongs in NVIDIA Kelper era.
The new items for Polaris GPU is Compute Engine with increase 2 MB L2 cache, hence AMD/Sony's push for Async/Sync Compute workloads i.e. the half ass'ed upgrade.
The full upgrade is when both pixel shader and compute shader are treated the same i.e. both shader types connected to L2 cache.
This is why AMD GPUs can be close to and far from NVIDIA's TFLOPS counterpart, but no RX-480/580 GPU has matched GTX 1070 in any games, while Scorpio has rivaled GTX 1070/Fury X in Forza.
API difference occurs at the CPU side.
@aroxx_ab said:
Lems going to get a brutal awakening once Scorpio is released if they think it can touch PC in power
What level of PC power?
Scorpio's GPU hardware changes was profiled against existing XBO 3D engines which the old R9-390X and RX-480/580 GPUs doesn't have this luxury. This is like designed custom ASIC for optimized Bit-Coin processing.
Scorpio is a beast. Probably doing this with 'Ultra' textures as well. Can't wait to see the actual unit at E3...and find out the price.
DF Faceoff articles will be great..."PS4 Pro maintains same quality as PS4 with res boost to 1800cb then upscale to 4K with curiously inferior framerate to the OG PS4." "Scorpio on the other hand is a visual match for PC highest settings at native 4K with stable framerate"
Scorpio is a beast. Probably doing this with 'Ultra' textures as well. Can't wait to see the actual unit at E3...and find out the price.
DF Faceoff articles will be great..."PS4 Pro maintains same quality as PS4 with res boost to 1800cb then upscale to 4K with curiously inferior framerate to the OG PS4." "Scorpio on the other hand is a visual match for PC highest settings at native 4K with stable framerate"
For Forza 6 nurburgring wet track, my GTX 1080 Ti blast pass 4K /60 fps in Forza M6 with 87 fps to 153 fps range while Scorpio's 4K 60 fps Ultra settings has 88 percent to 100 percent GPU usage..
If Scorpio is at 88 percent GPU usage, it's unlock frame rate mode would yield 68 fps, hence Scorpio's Froza M6 fps range is 60 to 68 fps.
Not only that by far the biggest games played today that reak in by far the most money are PC games, consoles are not even close. E-sports is a real thing and completely dominated by PC gaming.
Wrong. Mobile gaming has surpassed PC in revenue. Hot girls and non-gamers playing Candy Crush, Angry Bird, etc bringing more $ than those dropping dead in Asian internet cafes who are addicted to MMO. The funny part is right before you said this, you even mentioned mobile gaming.
1) the scorpio is not coming anywhere near close to a 980 ti gpu solution. It's a 970 at best. ( let alone a 1080 what the other guy was talking about lol )
You'll be eating a lot of crow.
So you got nothing. I own multiple platforms, i know exactly how hardware functions. Go explain to me how the cpu isn't going to choke to death with a 6tflop gpu. The cpu's already are hot garbage on the ps4 and xbox one, now it's even more enhanced.
The only way any game will run at 4k 60fps, is when they heavily bribe developers to build there game around there system and just throw crap ports everywhere else. Which is most likely going to happen as microsoft and both sony have a track record of doing just that.
System RAM means absolutely ZERO to gaming performance and VRAM is measured in memory bandwidth and amount which can both BE bottlenecks and BE bottlnecked by the GPU... Which in the Scorpio's case it is.
Just look at the Fury X with and 980 Ti...
Fury X = 512GB/s
980 Ti = 336GB/s
Battlefield 1 4K =
Fury X = 31FPS
980 Ti = 37FPS
Memory Bandwidth doesn't mean a thing if the raw horsepower can't keep up.
BF1 uses 3.6-3.8GB VRAM so its not a bottleneck that's stopping the Fury X... Its the chip.
300GB/s on a Polaris chip doesn't change a thing, a GTX 1070 at stock will rape it.
Compute Science 101
My 1st claim, Fury X does NOT get 512 GB/s memory bandwidth.
Notice the compressed effective memory bandwidth from GTX 980 Ti is similar to Fury X's compressed effective memory bandwidth.
Memory subsystem inefficiency comes back to bite you.
Furthermore, GTX 980 T's Pixel Engines has ultra fast/ultra low latency L2 cache linkage while Fury X's Pixel Engine runs into HBM memory controller bottleneck.
The gap between 980 Ti and Fury X mirrors Beyond3D's texture benchmark.
That's exactly why you should stop posting about specifications.
The Fury X on paper is rated 512GB/s of Bandwidth... But achieves 387GB/s.
Now the Polaris chip in the Scorpio is rated at 300GB/s... Yet you are using that as a solid number in every thread about scorpio.
It's pointless really, dude is full of lists and comparison tables while ignoring the reality of things.
Picking up comparison screens of bf1 means nothing, the thing is it's a heavily sponsored AMD game. There is a reason why that craphole engine mantle was supported by it. It plays to the weakness of AMD big time.
It's no suprise they advertise the gains with bf2 which they probably also heavily paid for to nuke settings down on all versions in order to make it run on there box.w
@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:
@ronvalencia said:
@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:
@xhawk27 said:
The Scorpio has faster Ram.
Faster RAM...
System RAM means absolutely ZERO to gaming performance and VRAM is measured in memory bandwidth and amount which can both BE bottlenecks and BE bottlnecked by the GPU... Which in the Scorpio's case it is.
Just look at the Fury X with and 980 Ti...
Fury X = 512GB/s
980 Ti = 336GB/s
Battlefield 1 4K =
Fury X = 31FPS
980 Ti = 37FPS
Memory Bandwidth doesn't mean a thing if the raw horsepower can't keep up.
BF1 uses 3.6-3.8GB VRAM so its not a bottleneck that's stopping the Fury X... Its the chip.
300GB/s on a Polaris chip doesn't change a thing, a GTX 1070 at stock will rape it.
Compute Science 101
My 1st claim, Fury X does NOT get 512 GB/s memory bandwidth.
Notice the compressed effective memory bandwidth from GTX 980 Ti is similar to Fury X's compressed effective memory bandwidth.
Memory subsystem inefficiency comes back to bite you.
Furthermore, GTX 980 T's Pixel Engines has ultra fast/ultra low latency L2 cache linkage while Fury X's Pixel Engine runs into HBM memory controller bottleneck.
The gap between 980 Ti and Fury X mirrors Beyond3D's texture benchmark.
That's exactly why you should stop posting about specifications.
The Fury X on paper is rated 512GB/s of Bandwidth... But achieves 387GB/s.
Now the Polaris chip in the Scorpio is rated at 300GB/s... Yet you are using that as a solid number in every thread about scorpio.
Dude you are talking against a wall. You are right. The memory isn't going to change anything.
It's almost like reading ps4 launch again.
I bet his logic would be that 1500gb/s memory and 64gb is going to make the base ps4 5x faster.
Lems going to get a brutal awakening once Scorpio is released if they think it can touch PC in power
It'll outperform the vast majority of shitty laptops with a 1366x768 screen resolution and on-board GPU.
And out perform the majority of computers released today. We just got 17 new computers at work last month, Windows 10 and all, and Scorpio shits all over them for gaming.
Lems going to get a brutal awakening once Scorpio is released if they think it can touch PC in power
It'll outperform the vast majority of shitty laptops with a 1366x768 screen resolution and on-board GPU.
And out perform the majority of computers released today. We just got 17 new computers at work last month, Windows 10 and all, and Scorpio shits all over them for gaming.
It's pointless really, dude is full of lists and comparison tables while ignoring the reality of things.
Picking up comparison screens of bf1 means nothing, the thing is it's a heavily sponsored AMD game. There is a reason why that craphole engine mantle was supported by it. It plays to the weakness of AMD big time.
It's no suprise they advertise the gains with bf2 which they probably also heavily paid for to nuke settings down on all versions in order to make it run on there box.w
Dude you are talking against a wall. You are right. The memory isn't going to change anything.
The only craphole is your lack of understanding for AMD's push for async/sync compute.
Compute Engine (Async and Sync Compute ) is connected to L2 cache.
For NVIDIA Maxwell/Pascal GPUs, both Compute (Compute Shader/TMU) and Pixel Engines (Pixel Shader/ROPS) has the same access to L2 cache hence similar latency rates.
For current AMD GPU designs, only Compute (Compute Shader/TMU) Engine is connected to L2 cache hence Pixel Engines (Pixel Shader/ROPS) different latency rates to Compute Engine. AMD's push for async/sync compute is to minimize memory controller bottleneck.
Back in August, our pal David Kanter discovered one of the important ingredients of the secret sauce that is NVIDIA’s efficiency optimizations. As it turns out, NVIDIA has been doing tile based rasterization and binning since Maxwell, and that this was likely one of the big reasons Maxwell’s efficiency increased by so much. Though NVIDIA still refuses to comment on the matter, from what we can ascertain, breaking up a scene into tiles has allowed NVIDIA to keep a lot more traffic on-chip, which saves memory bandwidth, but also cuts down on very expensive accesses to VRAM.
...
Meanwhile, on the ROP side of matters, besides baking in the necessary support for the aforementioned binning technology, AMD is also making one other change to cut down on the amount of data that has to go off-chip to VRAM. AMD has significantly reworked how the ROPs (or as they like to call them, the Render Back-Ends) interact with their L2 cache. Starting with Vega, the ROPs are now clients of the L2 cache rather than the memory controller, allowing them to better and more directly use the relatively spacious L2 cache.
I also use NVIDIA Gameworks game.
@Gatygun said:
It's almost like reading ps4 launch again.
I bet his logic would be that 1500gb/s memory and 64gb is going to make the base ps4 5x faster.
1) the scorpio is not coming anywhere near close to a 980 ti gpu solution. It's a 970 at best. ( let alone a 1080 what the other guy was talking about lol )
You'll be eating a lot of crow.
So you got nothing. I own multiple platforms, i know exactly how hardware functions. Go explain to me how the cpu isn't going to choke to death with a 6tflop gpu. The cpu's already are hot garbage on the ps4 and xbox one, now it's even more enhanced.
The only way any game will run at 4k 60fps, is when they heavily bribe developers to build there game around there system and just throw crap ports everywhere else. Which is most likely going to happen as microsoft and both sony have a track record of doing just that.
As long 1.6 ghz CPU has physics and AI 60 hz update rates, it would be fine for Scorpio. A straight 2.3 Ghz increase, it can turn from 41 fps into 60 fps.
Most pcs around a shitty ones that your grandma uses.
The ps3 outruns most pcs.
PC is stronger + doesn't have the countless limitations + no sub fee + cheaper games
There is no reason to own an scorpio unless xbox randomly pulls out 10 quality exclusives out of it's ass (true exclusives)
Oh there are reasons, its the most powerful cheapest gaming platform that will be on the market, its the console that will have the best version of multiplatform games and that is a retroactive feature and there are and will be games that can ONLY be played on an Xbox console.
Don't be a victim of console shame. Don't hide behind PC gaming.
Most pcs around a shitty ones that your grandma uses.
The ps3 outruns most pcs.
PC is stronger + doesn't have the countless limitations + no sub fee + cheaper games
There is no reason to own an scorpio unless xbox randomly pulls out 10 quality exclusives out of it's ass (true exclusives)
Oh there are reasons, its the most powerful cheapest gaming platform that will be on the market, its the console that will have the best version of multiplatform games and that is a retroactive feature and there are and will be games that can ONLY be played on an Xbox console.
Don't be a victim of console shame. Don't hide behind PC gaming.
You mean the console that doesn't even have a price tag yet and is just being speculated about price wise?
PC will have the best multiplat and the scorpio won't be the best value for your money, it'll be vastly more expensive than a pc + the xbox exclusives are pretty lame + they'll all be on pc (pc also has true exclusives of it's own)
Let's be honest, only lemmings are getting the scorpio, anyone with a brain would look at the scorpio and go "just getting a pc"
The reason ps4 gets out of pc gaming benefits is cuz it has true exclusives of actual quality.
Most pcs around a shitty ones that your grandma uses.
The ps3 outruns most pcs.
PC is stronger + doesn't have the countless limitations + no sub fee + cheaper games
There is no reason to own an scorpio unless xbox randomly pulls out 10 quality exclusives out of it's ass (true exclusives)
Oh there are reasons, its the most powerful cheapest gaming platform that will be on the market, its the console that will have the best version of multiplatform games and that is a retroactive feature and there are and will be games that can ONLY be played on an Xbox console.
Don't be a victim of console shame. Don't hide behind PC gaming.
You mean the console that doesn't even have a price tag yet and is just being speculated about price wise?
PC will have the best multiplat and the scorpio won't be the best value for your money, it'll be vastly more expensive than a pc + the xbox exclusives are pretty lame + they'll all be on pc (pc also has true exclusives of it's own)
Let's be honest, only lemmings are getting the scorpio, anyone with a brain would look at the scorpio and go "just getting a pc"
The reason ps4 gets out of pc gaming benefits is cuz it has true exclusives of actual quality.
Config a PC box with the cheapest GTX 1070 card.
Scorpio doubles as a 4K blu-ray player with HDMI 2.1 support.
Scorpio doubles as a 4K blu-ray player with HDMI 2.1 support.
With UHD BD-drive and mini-itx+gamepad setup: i3-based = $600, i5-based = $670
Without UHD BD: i3-based = $530, i5-based = $600
This is win10, mini-itx case, 600W bronze modular PSU, i3/i5 with cheap mobo, 8GB DDR4-2133(upgrade to 16GB later), 1TB HDD, Xbox One Gamepad(bluetooth) and bluetooth receiver.
So that's around $600 without a GPU. RX 480 8GB and GTX 1060 6GB run around $225. GTX 1070 is ~$350.
We're talking $750-900 to match the Scorpio. INB4: big clunker case, shit psu, used i3, shady 3rd-party windows key, no UHD drive, no KB/M or gamepad cost, etc...
Most pcs around a shitty ones that your grandma uses.
The ps3 outruns most pcs.
PC is stronger + doesn't have the countless limitations + no sub fee + cheaper games
There is no reason to own an scorpio unless xbox randomly pulls out 10 quality exclusives out of it's ass (true exclusives)
Oh there are reasons, its the most powerful cheapest gaming platform that will be on the market, its the console that will have the best version of multiplatform games and that is a retroactive feature and there are and will be games that can ONLY be played on an Xbox console.
Don't be a victim of console shame. Don't hide behind PC gaming.
You mean the console that doesn't even have a price tag yet and is just being speculated about price wise?
PC will have the best multiplat and the scorpio won't be the best value for your money, it'll be vastly more expensive than a pc + the xbox exclusives are pretty lame + they'll all be on pc (pc also has true exclusives of it's own)
Let's be honest, only lemmings are getting the scorpio, anyone with a brain would look at the scorpio and go "just getting a pc"
The reason ps4 gets out of pc gaming benefits is cuz it has true exclusives of actual quality.
Config a PC box with the cheapest GTX 1070 card.
Scorpio doubles as a 4K blu-ray player with HDMI 2.1 support.
Lems going to get a brutal awakening once Scorpio is released if they think it can touch PC in power
It'll outperform the vast majority of shitty laptops with a 1366x768 screen resolution and on-board GPU.
That's like saying "look at this new premium car, it can drive faster than most shitty bicycles."
Outperforming most laptops isn't much to brag about, but outperforming "shitty" laptops, that clearly weren't made for gaming, is nothing worth mentioning since it should be a no-brainer.
The Scorp will be much more than that, it will outperform most gaming rigs, which is to be expected for a premium gaming device.
Most pcs around a shitty ones that your grandma uses.
The ps3 outruns most pcs.
PC is stronger + doesn't have the countless limitations + no sub fee + cheaper games
There is no reason to own an scorpio unless xbox randomly pulls out 10 quality exclusives out of it's ass (true exclusives)
Oh there are reasons, its the most powerful cheapest gaming platform that will be on the market, its the console that will have the best version of multiplatform games and that is a retroactive feature and there are and will be games that can ONLY be played on an Xbox console.
Don't be a victim of console shame. Don't hide behind PC gaming.
You mean the console that doesn't even have a price tag yet and is just being speculated about price wise?
PC will have the best multiplat and the scorpio won't be the best value for your money, it'll be vastly more expensive than a pc + the xbox exclusives are pretty lame + they'll all be on pc (pc also has true exclusives of it's own)
Let's be honest, only lemmings are getting the scorpio, anyone with a brain would look at the scorpio and go "just getting a pc"
The reason ps4 gets out of pc gaming benefits is cuz it has true exclusives of actual quality.
Config a PC box with the cheapest GTX 1070 card.
Scorpio doubles as a 4K blu-ray player with HDMI 2.1 support.
Scorpio is a beast. Probably doing this with 'Ultra' textures as well. Can't wait to see the actual unit at E3...and find out the price.
DF Faceoff articles will be great..."PS4 Pro maintains same quality as PS4 with res boost to 1800cb then upscale to 4K with curiously inferior framerate to the OG PS4." "Scorpio on the other hand is a visual match for PC highest settings at native 4K with stable framerate"
Yep even the Titan is a piece of crap compare to Scorpio..lol
@gordonfreeman said:
This is completely incorrect, and you're grossly speculating things you have absolutely zero knowledge of.
I don't need to say anything else, your post is dead in the water.
NO actually i proved my points with information backed by LINKS.
The modifications are the same and it is a jaguar/puma CPU with 31% faster speed.
Scorpio is a beast. Probably doing this with 'Ultra' textures as well. Can't wait to see the actual unit at E3...and find out the price.
DF Faceoff articles will be great..."PS4 Pro maintains same quality as PS4 with res boost to 1800cb then upscale to 4K with curiously inferior framerate to the OG PS4." "Scorpio on the other hand is a visual match for PC highest settings at native 4K with stable framerate"
1. Yep even the Titan is a piece of crap compare to Scorpio..lol
@gordonfreeman said:
This is completely incorrect, and you're grossly speculating things you have absolutely zero knowledge of.
I don't need to say anything else, your post is dead in the water.
NO actually i proved my points with information backed by LINKS.
2. The modifications are the same and it is a jaguar/puma CPU with 31% faster speed.
1. My MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming X card is faster than reference TitanMaxwell and it couldn't match Scorpio in Forza wet track. With nurburgring dry tracks, it blast pass 4K/sustain 60 fps with ease i.e. it doesn't like excessive high resolution alpha/semi-transparent wet effects.
My GTX 1080 Ti (GP102) with reduced to 6.5 TFLOPS with 480 Gbps physical memory bandwidth has no problems handing the wet track's alpha/semi-transparent wet effects and the CPU was slower than MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming X 's i7-4790K. My point, NVidia's Paxwell TFLOPS are not the problem.
2. Both reducing latency and increasing clock speed will impact on completion time .
A simple example with L2 cache that feeds the CPU.
3.2 ghz with 26 clock cycle latency has 10 ns completion time.
11 clock cycle latency version is 42 percent of 26 clock cycle latency. I'm using Intel Haswell's L2 cache 11 clock cycle latency number.
2.3 Ghz is about 71.8 percent of 3.2 Ghz.
2.3 ghz with 11 clock cycle latency may yield 5.8 ns. Lowering latency has a larger impact with reducing completion time.
Ryzen, Sandybridge, Ivybridge, Haswell has the following improvements
- lower latency
- increase L2 cache bus width
- increase clock speed
MS focused on lower latency with moderate clock speed increase. The level of low latency improvement is unknown, but Ryzen's L2 cache lower latency rivals Intel's version. Lower latency only works when there's unused compute resource available.
Sizable unused compute resources are available for Jaguar.
Jaguar was designed to beat ARM competition and wasn't designed to eclipse AMD's desktop CPUs at that time. Improving Jaguar's latency is not a problem with ZEN being AMD's current desktop PC CPUs.
Piledriver's L2 cache latency is similar to unmodified Jaguar .
You mean the console that doesn't even have a price tag yet and is just being speculated about price wise?
PC will have the best multiplat and the scorpio won't be the best value for your money, it'll be vastly more expensive than a pc + the xbox exclusives are pretty lame + they'll all be on pc (pc also has true exclusives of it's own)
Let's be honest, only lemmings are getting the scorpio, anyone with a brain would look at the scorpio and go "just getting a pc"
The reason ps4 gets out of pc gaming benefits is cuz it has true exclusives of actual quality.
Config a PC box with the cheapest GTX 1070 card.
Scorpio doubles as a 4K blu-ray player with HDMI 2.1 support.
And still no price tag.
Scorpio will not cost $700 USD.
We'll see.
Not to mention pc won't cost 60 a year to do online + has exclusives of it's own actually + has cheaper games.
Scorpio doubles as a 4K blu-ray player with HDMI 2.1 support.
And still no price tag.
Scorpio will not cost $700 USD.
We'll see.
Not to mention pc won't cost 60 a year to do online + has exclusives of it's own actually + has cheaper games.
Scorpio's BOM cost is similar to PS4 Pro with differences
1. Extra 4 GB which is minor cost increase.
2. 4K blu-ray drive which is minor cost increase.
3. 12 percent larger APU which is minor cost increase.
The extra development time leads to smarter design e.g. memory and data transfer bottlenecks reduced and greater silicon maturity.
Vega has 2 main improvement areas
1. Reduced data transfer bottlenecks e.g. Pixel Engine being connected to L2 cache and higher memory bandwidth (over RX-580). Scorpio's 326 Gbps is between RX-580's 256 GB/s and RX-Vega 64's ~500 GBps
2. Compute Units e.g. double rate FP16 feature which increases math operation rate. Classic AMD/IBM's FLOPS per $$ bullshit. Polaris has dual subword FP16 data processing increase without increasing math operation rate.
Sony selected option 2.
MS selected option 1.
Both MS and Sony has Polaris IP baseline.
Only one of Vega's improvement path leads to general performance increase beyond AMD's normal CU scaling.
Loading Video...
MS has learnt the lessons from NVIDIA's Maxwell and Pascal designs path.
Only one of Vega's improvement path leads to general performance increase.
Which paired with the lack of appropriate memory increase has probably lead to the woeful lack of support for PS4 Pro in general.
Scorpio went the Nvidia route which paired with the appropriate increase in RAM should result in superior support.
Sony's mentality is still stuck to "high FLOPS per $$$", hence their 8.4 TFLOPS via double rate FP16 selection path over data transfer bottlenecks reduction selection path.
"When we started looking at Scorpio," he says, "we asked the partners, 'in order to build a true high-fidelity 4K game, what capabilities do you need?' That’s what we designed Scorpio around. It’s kind of like a [GeForce GTX] 980 card on the PC. I get the capability that I need as a developer to deliver a high-fidelity 4K game. ”
MS was looking at green camp's Maxwell v2 results.
@ronvalencia Too bad they didn't even hint at the PC specs. Makes the whole comparison meaningless. Then consider the fact it is an early build and still being optimized. The comparison is stupid.
@ronvalencia Too bad they didn't even hint at the PC specs. Makes the whole comparison meaningless. Then consider the fact it is an early build and still being optimized. The comparison is stupid.
Both XBO and PS4 are constant baseline hardware targets.
Both XBO and PS4 are constant baseline hardware targets.
Cute that you omitted to mention those benchmarks include NVIDIA PCSS, HBAO+ and TXAA which you know, absolutely kill performance. Without those your performance jumps by 30%. Also didn't mention PS4/X1 aren't running at anywhere near max settings either.
Both XBO and PS4 are constant baseline hardware targets.
Cute that you omitted to mention those benchmarks include NVIDIA PCSS, HBAO+ and TXAA which you know, absolutely kill performance. Without those your performance jumps by 30%. Also didn't mention PS4/X1 aren't running at anywhere near max settings either.
Assassins Creed Origins development build's visual quality difference between Scorpio and PC is similar.
The report mentions that the writer had some hands-on time with the game running on Scorpio, and while on PC it ran at “fairly steady 30 FPS,” on Project Scorpio it ran at a frame rate that “felt more consistent” at 4K resolution. We also hear that both versions are still being optimized, so there is room for improvement.
Other than that, the small size of the screen used for the demo unfortunately made noticing tremendous differences with the standard version difficult.
Interestingly, Ubisoft told the magazine that developers managed to get the game running on Scorpio within weeks of receiving the development kits, which seems to indicate that porting to the new console is fairly easy.
Interestingly, the article still calls the new console “Scorpio.” Considering that it was supposed to be released after Microsoft’s conference, this could be an indication that the name “Scorpio” is being retained, or that Microsoft might not yet be ready to reveal its official name. Of course, this is just speculation.
The cruncher for NVIDIA PCSS, HBAO+ and TXAA are with Pixel vs Compute path difference i.e. current AMD GPUs has problems with Pixel Engine path being connected to memory controller instead of L2 cache.
Against TXAA, AMD GPUs has EQAA. TXAA only runs on NVIDIA hardware and it doesn't run on AMD PC GPU hardware.
Which is irrelevant because the game is still an early build and unoptimized which arks back to my first point, your comparison is meaningless and using Syndicate on PC at Ultra running Gameworks settings to compare to console is dumb.
The worst of it all? "Running better than PC" doesn't mean shit. There's not just one PC out there.
Log in to comment