With RX480 out its now possible to realistic predict PS4NEO and Xbox Scorpio performances
the PS4 NEO performance prediction is more acurate, its pretty clear that it will have the same GPU as RX480 but instead of 5,8 teraflops on max 1266mhz it will have 4,19 teraflops on 911mhz, so its (at least) 30% slower than tha RX480, not to mention the RX480 has dedicated 8gb of faster Vram
the Xbox scorpio is more difficult to predict with the same accuracy, it will have 6 teraflops with much slower clocks on a much bigger GPU, but hitting almost the same TFlops on AMD hardware its safe to say that it will be 3-4% faster than stock RX480, the same way that despite Xbox One having a bigger GPU than the HD7770 it had the same 1,2 TFlop performance and did perform almost the same as a HD7770 in many Multiplatform titles
so i added this red and green bars to a RX480 benchmarks bellow and its safe to predict that a stock clocks GTX970 will beat PS4 Neo with easy and be on par with Xbox Scorpio
We actually can't accurately predict Scorpio yet because we don't know what exact GPU it's using, If it's using Vega 10, some of the specs would be higher and would help performance a bit, most notably at resolutions higher than 1080p.
We actually can't accurately predict Scorpio yet because we don't know what exact GPU it's using, If it's using Vega 10, some of the specs would be higher and would help performance a bit, most notably at resolutions higher than 1080p.
Lol, yeah, sure, they're going to roll out a Vega 10 GPU in a few months...
We actually can't accurately predict Scorpio yet because we don't know what exact GPU it's using, If it's using Vega 10, some of the specs would be higher and would help performance a bit, most notably at resolutions higher than 1080p.
Lol, yeah, sure, they're going to roll out a Vega 10 GPU in a few months...
With RX480 out its now possible to realistic predict PS4NEO and Xbox Scorpio performances
the PS4 NEO performance prediction is more acurate, its pretty clear that it will have the same GPU as RX480 but instead of 5,8 teraflops on max 1266mhz it will have 4,19 teraflops on 911mhz, so its (at least) 30% slower than tha RX480, not to mention the RX480 has dedicated 8gb of faster Vram
the Xbox scorpio is more difficult to predict with the same accuracy, it will have 6 teraflops with much slower clocks on a much bigger GPU, but hitting almost the same TFlops on AMD hardware its safe to say that it will be 3-4% faster than stock RX480, the same way that despite Xbox One having a bigger GPU than the HD7770 it had the same 1,2 TFlop performance and did perform almost the same as a HD7770 in many Multiplatform titles
so i added this red and green bars to a RX480 benchmarks bellow and its safe to predict that a stock clocks GTX970 will beat PS4 Neo with easy and be on par with Xbox Scorpio
For Rise of Tomb Raider, the large limitation influence is with random texture memory bandwidth.
AMD's memory compression is not as good as NVIDIA's Maxwell.
The random texture memory bandwidth gap between R9-290X and R9-Fury X is 1.266X.
If we apply 1.266X factor on R9-290X's 60 fps, it's estimate result is 75.96 fps. The real Fury X has 69 fps.
If we apply 1.266X factor on R9-290X's 45 fps, it's estimate result is 56.97 fps. The real Fury X has 53 fps.
The TFLOPS gap factor between Fury X and R9-290X is 1.56X.
FPS increase between R9-290X and Fury X is most influenced by memory bandwidth's 1.266X factor.
Spencer says, developers are usually building a PC version of any given game alongside the Xbox version—and increasingly, that means a 4K version. “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. ”
There's a reason why Scorpio has "more than 320 GB/s of memory bandwidth".
When there's enough shader power, effective memory bandwidth plays a big part in the overall frame rate yields.
The 480 is just great for the market period. AMD is driving the market forward at mass market prices unlike Nvidia. I will reserve comments on the neo and scorpio till I see how the power is used. All games have to work on the base consoles and devs don't like to spend extra money.
@ronvalencia: ok, but we should take all this PR talk with a grain of salt, they claim Scorpio can do 4k high quality gaming, and we know that even 2 gtx 980s (each one more powerfull than Scorpio) cant sustain 60fps in Star Wars Battlefront in 4k, not to mention 2017/2018 games, Scorpio is more likely to be a 1080p 60fps console on medium settings for 2017 games
The 480 is just great for the market period. AMD is driving the market forward at mass market prices unlike Nvidia. I will reserve comments on the neo and scorpio till I see how the power is used. All games have to work on the base consoles and devs don't like to spend extra money.
AMD has Maxwell style SKU release cycle e.g. NVIDIA started from small Maxwell GTX 750 Ti to big Maxwell 980 Ti/Titan X.
The 480 is just great for the market period. AMD is driving the market forward at mass market prices unlike Nvidia. I will reserve comments on the neo and scorpio till I see how the power is used. All games have to work on the base consoles and devs don't like to spend extra money.
480 has a good price compared to past gen GPUs like 970, but im disapointed with it, it has inferior performance per watt than many past gen nvidia cards, the archtecture advance of maxwell has not yet been achieved by AMD and all their cards will still perform slower or consume more power with similar specs (transistor count, die size) nvidia has now the oportunity to take AMD out of the market and create a monopoly if they release a 180 dollars GTX 1060 that beat 480 and consume only 90watts, the path to kill AMD is clear than ever for nvidia
@ronvalencia: ok, but we should take all this PR talk with a grain of salt, they claim Scorpio can do 4k high quality gaming, and we know that even 2 gtx 980s (each one more powerfull than Scorpio) cant sustain 60fps in Star Wars Battlefront in 4k, not to mention 2017/2018 games, Scorpio is more likely to be a 1080p 60fps console on medium settings for 2017 games
Drop the graphics settings 1 step or 2 steps for large fps boost. There's a diminished return with visual gain vs extra processing load with max settings.
@ronvalencia: ok, but we should take all this PR talk with a grain of salt, they claim Scorpio can do 4k high quality gaming, and we know that even 2 gtx 980s (each one more powerfull than Scorpio) cant sustain 60fps in Star Wars Battlefront in 4k, not to mention 2017/2018 games, Scorpio is more likely to be a 1080p 60fps console on medium settings for 2017 games
Why do people keep thinking Scorpio is trying to achieve 60fps at 4k when it's been stated through the rumored spec that it's targeting 30fps at 4k. Anyone expecting otherwise, fodder or actual belief is a fool... If Scorpio actual get's offshoots of the Zen processors which is far more CPU horsepower then Jaguar then high quality 1080p 60fps and 4k 30fps is well within grasp no matter the game. I'm sure 4k will still have to have tweaks here and there, but the fact it would even be possible on consoles is a real win at those price points for a complete system. This is all hearsay and speculation anyhow, while the specs may in fact be somewhat true between Neo and Scorpio, it's not a sure thing until the specs are released. Given Scorpio's specs though, 4k 30fps is very possible. Besides, we all know SLI/Crossfire have their own issues and adding 2 aren't a 1+1=2 equation.
@ronvalencia: ok, but we should take all this PR talk with a grain of salt, they claim Scorpio can do 4k high quality gaming, and we know that even 2 gtx 980s (each one more powerfull than Scorpio) cant sustain 60fps in Star Wars Battlefront in 4k, not to mention 2017/2018 games, Scorpio is more likely to be a 1080p 60fps console on medium settings for 2017 games
Why do people keep thinking Scorpio is trying to achieve 60fps at 4k when it's been stated through the rumored spec that it's targeting 30fps at 4k. Anyone expecting otherwise, fodder or actual belief is a fool... If Scorpio actual get's offshoots of the Zen processors which is far more CPU horsepower then Jaguar then high quality 1080p 60fps and 4k 30fps is well within grasp no matter the game. I'm sure 4k will still have to have tweaks here and there, but the fact it would even be possible on consoles is a real win at those price points for a complete system. This is all hearsay and speculation anyhow, while the specs may in fact be somewhat true between Neo and Scorpio, it's not a sure thing until the specs are released. Given Scorpio's specs though, 4k 30fps is very possible. Besides, we all know SLI/Crossfire have their own issues and adding 2 aren't a 1+1=2 equation. There is a reason why Nvidia is getting away from it...
taking battlefront as an example, 2 980s cant make 60fps in ultra settings, (not crazy 200% resolution 8x msaa) and the game is very optimized, almost linear performance growth, so one 980 cant make 30fps in 4k, scorpio wont do it even 25fps on battlefront in 4k, now lets imagine battlfield 1, or 2017, 2018 games much more demanding than battlefield 1, 4k 30fps will happen only on medium settings, more likely most games will be 1080p or 1440p,
4k is the selling point for scorpio, just like 1080p was for xbox one and ps4
@ronvalencia: ok, but we should take all this PR talk with a grain of salt, they claim Scorpio can do 4k high quality gaming, and we know that even 2 gtx 980s (each one more powerfull than Scorpio) cant sustain 60fps in Star Wars Battlefront in 4k, not to mention 2017/2018 games, Scorpio is more likely to be a 1080p 60fps console on medium settings for 2017 games
Why do people keep thinking Scorpio is trying to achieve 60fps at 4k when it's been stated through the rumored spec that it's targeting 30fps at 4k. Anyone expecting otherwise, fodder or actual belief is a fool... If Scorpio actual get's offshoots of the Zen processors which is far more CPU horsepower then Jaguar then high quality 1080p 60fps and 4k 30fps is well within grasp no matter the game. I'm sure 4k will still have to have tweaks here and there, but the fact it would even be possible on consoles is a real win at those price points for a complete system. This is all hearsay and speculation anyhow, while the specs may in fact be somewhat true between Neo and Scorpio, it's not a sure thing until the specs are released. Given Scorpio's specs though, 4k 30fps is very possible. Besides, we all know SLI/Crossfire have their own issues and adding 2 aren't a 1+1=2 equation. There is a reason why Nvidia is getting away from it...
taking battlefront as an example, 2 980s cant make 60fps in ultra settings, (not crazy 200% resolution 8x msaa) and the game is very optimized, almost linear performance growth, so one 980 cant make 30fps in 4k, scorpio wont do it even 25fps on battlefront in 4k, now lets imagine battlfield 1, or 2017, 2018 games much more demanding than battlefield 1, 4k 30fps will happen only on medium settings, more likely most games will be 1080p or 1440p,
4k is the selling point for scorpio, just like 1080p was for xbox one and ps4
I get where you are coming from, but Battlefield is only one example. BF4, Metro (Dare I say one of the more demanding games in 4k), etc do run 30-40fps at 4k Ultra (However without FSAA) on one 980 and even if we assume from a raw power standpoint that Scorpio will be around 980, this is also assuming unknown Vega architectural improvements, as it's a massive bandwidth advantage over the 9xx. I'm not saying it would run pure Ultra setting at 4k, but it'll certainly be capable. There is a lot of assuming we are all doing, but that's the beautiful of specular debating.
For VR, it'll will likely target 1080p, for raw gaming 1440p 60fps, and for the showing off it will push 4k 30fps, maybe not Ultra... but certainly better then pure medium settings. Again this is assuming Zen/Vega (A generation beyond what's used in the 480 chipset) end up in it. We shall see.
@ronvalencia: ok, but we should take all this PR talk with a grain of salt, they claim Scorpio can do 4k high quality gaming, and we know that even 2 gtx 980s (each one more powerfull than Scorpio) cant sustain 60fps in Star Wars Battlefront in 4k, not to mention 2017/2018 games, Scorpio is more likely to be a 1080p 60fps console on medium settings for 2017 games
For memory bandwidth bound games and assuming memory bandwidth efficiency remains the same with Polaris....
Scorpio's 320 GB/s / RX-480's 256 GB/s = 1.25X
R9-290X (320 GB/s memory bandwidth) and R9-390/390X(384 GB/s) has similar result as RX-480 (256 GB/s memory bandwidth), hence there's improvements with AMD's memory compression and memory controllers.
There is no way really to predict what the Scorpio GPU will be. So the estimates are best case if the scorpio used a 480x. If it uses anything newer the gap might well be bigger.
No. No AMD card can currently handle VR. Both the Oculus Rift and Vive have said they want at minimum a GTX 970 for their Machines.
I'm looking at the charts and the best offering from AMD is not coming close to the 970 in most games, thats bad that was minimum they are saying 970 they prefered 980 and 980 ti and titan's that's what the devs want,.
If you want VR, if you want next gen AMD is a total disaster for you.
If you want a budget PC you got the 1060 GTX launching supposively again more powerful and cheaper than anything AMD is pumping out this company doesn't know how to do business if your product is bad you go lower you don't try go to bat against the 1060 gtx with a 200 dollar price tag that better come down AMD.
@ProtossRushX: "No. No AMD card can currently handle VR. Both the Oculus Rift and Vive have said they want at minimum a GTX 970 for their Machines.
I'm looking at the charts and the best offering from AMD is not coming close to the 970 in most games"
what are you talking about? Plenty of AMD cards are powerful enough for VR. And the new 480x is not an exception:
It's not going to blow anyone away, but it packs sufficient power for the VR recommendations and beats out the 970 on average (which isn't in itself amazing, since the 970 is now old tech - but the key thing here is the 970 is the recommended power level for VR so it's an important comparison point)
No. No AMD card can currently handle VR. Both the Oculus Rift and Vive have said they want at minimum a GTX 970 for their Machines.
I'm looking at the charts and the best offering from AMD is not coming close to the 970 in most games, thats bad that was minimum they are saying 970 they prefered 980 and 980 ti and titan's that's what the devs want,.
If you want VR, if you want next gen AMD is a total disaster for you.
If you want a budget PC you got the 1060 GTX launching supposively again more powerful and cheaper than anything AMD is pumping out this company doesn't know how to do business if your product is bad you go lower you don't try go to bat against the 1060 gtx with a 200 dollar price tag that better come down AMD.
@ronvalencia: you are showing benchmarks with max setting. The Scorpio won't max out games at 4K more like medium to high. So after seeing the benchmarks i believe that most games wil run in 4K.
Those benchmarks were performed on a system with a 4.5 GHz i7 6700K with 3000MHz DDR4. The CPUs of the Neo and Scorpio will be nowhere near that good, even if they are Zen. Desktop Zen might compete, but a <2.0 GHz console chip doesn't stand a chance.
Those benchmarks were performed on a system with a 4.5 GHz i7 6700K with 3000MHz DDR4. The CPUs of the Neo and Scorpio will be nowhere near that good, even if they are Zen. Desktop Zen might compete, but a <2.0 GHz console chip doesn't stand a chance.
That's 6700K quad core at 4.5 Ghz or 2.25 Ghz effective with 8 threads mode. 2.1 Ghz ZEN would need 2 cores for rendering workload to match one Broadwell core at 4.2 Ghz.
NEO has 8 core ZEN Lite LP at 2.1 Ghz solution which is roughly equal to quad core/8 threads ZEN at 4.2 Ghz. Highest FX ZEN is an 8 core/16 threads at ~4Ghz.
Those benchmarks were performed on a system with a 4.5 GHz i7 6700K with 3000MHz DDR4. The CPUs of the Neo and Scorpio will be nowhere near that good, even if they are Zen. Desktop Zen might compete, but a <2.0 GHz console chip doesn't stand a chance.
That's 6700K quad core at 4.5 Ghz or 2.25 Ghz effective with 8 threads mode. 2.1 Ghz ZEN would need 2 cores for rendering workload to match one Broadwell core at 4.2 Ghz.
NEO has 8 core ZEN Lite LP at 2.1 Ghz solution which is roughly equal to quad core/8 threads ZEN at 4.2 Ghz. Highest FX ZEN is an 8 core/16 threads at ~4Ghz.
I believe the Zen numbers when I see them in benchmarks, AMD has a terrible track record on their cpu's they have been hyping up. 6700k is Skylake btw, not Broadwell
Those benchmarks were performed on a system with a 4.5 GHz i7 6700K with 3000MHz DDR4. The CPUs of the Neo and Scorpio will be nowhere near that good, even if they are Zen. Desktop Zen might compete, but a <2.0 GHz console chip doesn't stand a chance.
That's 6700K quad core at 4.5 Ghz or 2.25 Ghz effective with 8 threads mode. 2.1 Ghz ZEN would need 2 cores for rendering workload to match one Broadwell core at 4.2 Ghz.
NEO has 8 core ZEN Lite LP at 2.1 Ghz solution which is roughly equal to quad core/8 threads ZEN at 4.2 Ghz. Highest FX ZEN is an 8 core/16 threads at ~4Ghz.
I believe the Zen numbers when I see them in benchmarks, AMD has a terrible track record on their cpu's they have been hyping up. 6700k is Skylake btw, not Broadwell
6700 has a minor IPC increase over Broadwell. My pcper benchmarks is not Skylake. This is why I don't upgrade my Haswell CPUs.
ZEN design is getting the basics correct. Bulldozer/Piledriver didn't get the basics correct i.e. 2 X86 instructions issue/retirement per cycle per thread is a retrograde from K10.
Bulldozer/Piledriver couldn't form four X86 instructions issue/retirement per cycle per thread per module. It's a no brainier on why Bulldozer/Piledriver is crap for single thread.
There's many things with Bulldozer/Piledriver that are inferior to my old Intel Core i7-2600 e.g. number of AVX units, instructions issue/retirement per cycle per thread rate, pipeline length and 'etc'. I could write a multiple page essay on why Bulldozer/Piledriver is crap. I'm mostly C++ programmer by trade and know my X86 CPUs designs and I can write inline X86 ASM in my C++ coding. The old P6 compilers are optimized for 3 X86 instructions issue/retirement per cycle per thread model and AMD went backwards with Bulldozer/Piledriver design.
AMD Piledriver and Jaguar IPC are similar.
Atm, I like what I'm seeing with ZEN i.e. getting the basics correct.
@ronvalencia: I do hope AMD delivers, would stop Intel asking what ever they want for their cpu's. Planning on finally getting new mobo+cpu at the end of the year/start of next year. My old 2600k has served extremely well and I paid 250€ for it back in the day, now same tier i7 is +100€
@ronvalencia: I do hope AMD delivers, would stop Intel asking what ever they want for their cpu's. Planning on finally getting new mobo+cpu at the end of the year/start of next year. My old 2600k has served extremely well and I paid 250€ for it back in the day, now same tier i7 is +100€
I hope AMD delivers downward pressure for 8 core Haswell/Broadwell Extreme Edition level solution into 6700's price range i.e. a proper upgrade for my Intel Haswells.
I have ClarksField/Sandybridge/Ivybridge/Haswell quad core/8 threads CPUs and I'm getting tired of buying similar products.
@ronvalencia: I do hope AMD delivers, would stop Intel asking what ever they want for their cpu's. Planning on finally getting new mobo+cpu at the end of the year/start of next year. My old 2600k has served extremely well and I paid 250€ for it back in the day, now same tier i7 is +100€
I hope AMD delivers downward pressure for 8 core Haswell/Broadwell Extreme Edition level solution into 6700's price range i.e. a proper upgrade for my Intel Haswells.
I have Sandybridge/Ivybridge/Haswell quad core/8 threads CPUs and I'm getting tired of buying similar products.
Ye that would be nice, the price for 6 or more core Intel solutions are outrageous, no way I'd pay for that much for a gaming cpu as it stands.
@ronvalencia: you are showing benchmarks with max setting. The Scorpio won't max out games at 4K more like medium to high. So after seeing the benchmarks i believe that most games wil run in 4K.
Scorpio should be a match for Polaris so it should run 4k just it is shown there,probably faster because of medium settings.
You forget the CPU bottleneck... Those benchmarks are running i7's at 4Ghz, with ANY AMD cpu you could lose a lot of fps over a i5 let alone a i7 now take into account that not only are they amd cpu's but they are also below 3ghz so yeah... might want to slide those bars down another 25-30%.
You forget the CPU bottleneck... Those benchmarks are running i7's at 4Ghz, with ANY AMD cpu you could lose a lot of fps over a i5 let alone a i7 now take into account that not only are they amd cpu's but they are also below 3ghz so yeah... might want to slide those bars down another 25-30%.
Gallery
Are you claiming AMD ZEN has half the IPC of Haswell/Boradwell like Jaguar and Piledriver?
AMD DX11 PC drivers runs on single thread which is not a limitation for DX12 Scorpio.
You forget the CPU bottleneck... Those benchmarks are running i7's at 4Ghz, with ANY AMD cpu you could lose a lot of fps over a i5 let alone a i7 now take into account that not only are they amd cpu's but they are also below 3ghz so yeah... might want to slide those bars down another 25-30%.
Gallery
Are you claiming AMD ZEN has half the IPC of Haswell/Boradwell like Jaguar and Piledriver?
AMD DX11 PC drivers runs on single thread which is not a limitation for DX12 Scorpio.
I'll believe otherwise when I see it. AMD for CPU intensive games haven't been doing well since the Phenom II.
Why the fu** you cotinue to compare scorpio total system bandwidth with just bandwidth of gpu the 320gb are shared with scorpio system an cpu.
There's a situation where onion links reduces CPU's memory access to zero and ZEN has two 100 GB/s links which is large upgrade from XBO's (30 GB/s) and PS4's (20 GB/s) onion links. Polaris' primitive triangle discard hardware reduces the need for CPU driven triangle culling, hence reducing the CPU workload and memory access. CPU side game play modeling will be gimped by older PS4 and XBO consoles.
For XBO, MS already stated ~54 GB/s GPU read/write memory access for their 68 GB/s DDR3 memory pool. Sony already shown a situation with zero CPU memory access.
On PC, there's a need to copy data via ~16 GB/s (PCI version 3.0 16X limit) link from system memory to VRAM prior to GPU processing. On PS4, this step doesn't occur i.e. zero copy. PCI-E version 3.0 16X is a full duplex links i.e. 16 GB/s read and 16 GB/s write, but on normal PC workloads, it's mostly one direction.
Why the fu** you cotinue to compare scorpio total system bandwidth with just bandwidth of gpu the 320gb are shared with scorpio system an cpu.
There's a situation where onion links reduces CPU's memory access to zero and ZEN has two 100 GB/s links which is large upgrade from XBO's (30 GB/s) and PS4's (20 GB/s) onion links. Polaris' primitive triangle discard hardware reduces the need for CPU driven triangle culling, hence reducing the CPU workload and memory access. CPU side game play modeling will be gimped by older PS4 and XBO consoles.
For XBO, MS already stated ~54 GB/s GPU read/write memory access for their 68 GB/s DDR3 memory pool. Sony already shown a situation with zero CPU memory access.
On PC, there's a need to copy data via ~16 GB/s (PCI version 3.0 16X limit) link from system memory to VRAM prior to GPU processing. On PS4, this step doesn't occur i.e. zero copy. PCI-E version 3.0 16X is a full duplex links i.e. 16 GB/s read and 16 GB/s write, but on normal PC workloads, it's mostly one direction.
Why the fu** you cotinue to compare scorpio total system bandwidth with just bandwidth of gpu the 320gb are shared with scorpio system an cpu.
There's a situation where onion links reduces CPU's memory access to zero and ZEN has two 100 GB/s links which is large upgrade from XBO's (30 GB/s) and PS4's (20 GB/s) onion links. Polaris' primitive triangle discard hardware reduces the need for CPU driven triangle culling, hence reducing the CPU workload and memory access. CPU side game play modeling will be gimped by older PS4 and XBO consoles.
For XBO, MS already stated ~54 GB/s GPU read/write memory access for their 68 GB/s DDR3 memory pool. Sony already shown a situation with zero CPU memory access.
On PC, there's a need to copy data via ~16 GB/s (PCI version 3.0 16X limit) link from system memory to VRAM prior to GPU processing. On PS4, this step doesn't occur i.e. zero copy. PCI-E version 3.0 16X is a full duplex links i.e. 16 GB/s read and 16 GB/s write, but on normal PC workloads, it's mostly one direction.
dont the Vram reads from hdd?
Yes and No.
Refer to Quantum Break PC build's memory requirements as an example.
1. system memory = 8 GB minimum and 16 GB recommended.
2. video memory = 2 GB minimum and 4 GB recommended.
Why the fu** you cotinue to compare scorpio total system bandwidth with just bandwidth of gpu the 320gb are shared with scorpio system an cpu.
There's a situation where onion links reduces CPU's memory access to zero and ZEN has two 100 GB/s links which is large upgrade from XBO's (30 GB/s) and PS4's (20 GB/s) onion links. Polaris' primitive triangle discard hardware reduces the need for CPU driven triangle culling, hence reducing the CPU workload and memory access. CPU side game play modeling will be gimped by older PS4 and XBO consoles.
For XBO, MS already stated ~54 GB/s GPU read/write memory access for their 68 GB/s DDR3 memory pool. Sony already shown a situation with zero CPU memory access.
On PC, there's a need to copy data via ~16 GB/s (PCI version 3.0 16X limit) link from system memory to VRAM prior to GPU processing. On PS4, this step doesn't occur i.e. zero copy. PCI-E version 3.0 16X is a full duplex links i.e. 16 GB/s read and 16 GB/s write, but on normal PC workloads, it's mostly one direction.
dont the Vram reads from hdd?
Refer to Quantum Break PC build's memory requirements as an example.
1. system memory = 8 GB minimum and 16 GB recommended.
2. video memory = 2 GB minimum and 4 GB recommended.
http://www.quantumbreak.com/windows10/
ok, but does it mean that what is loaded in the Vram comes from system ram and not directly from hdd? what is the point of putting textures for example in the system ram, not processing anything and then transfer it from system ram to vram to be finally used for something?
Log in to comment