Xbox 720 to ship with "insanely powerful CPU"

The Xenos is faster in some ways then a 7800GTX because of it unified architecture, The 7800GTX has 512mb of memory with 54 GB/s memory bandwidth and gpu performance is about 200 GFLOPS, while the Xenos, has around 256mb of memory with only 21 GB/s bandwidth and can do 240 GFLOPS, While the RSX is a gimped Geforce 7800 chipset it only has 25GB/s of memory bandwidth, has only 256mb of memory along with only 8 ROPS (while 7800GTX has 16 ROPS)and only can perform about 160 GFLOPS04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] The Xenos is faster in some ways then a 7800GTX because of it unified architecture, The 7800GTX has 512mb of memory with 54 GB/s memory bandwidth and gpu performance is about 200 GFLOPS, while the Xenos, has around 256mb of memory with only 21 GB/s bandwidth and can do 240 GFLOPS, While the RSX is a gimped Geforce 7800 chipset it only has 25GB/s of memory bandwidth, has only 256mb of memory along with only 8 ROPS (while 7800GTX has 16 ROPS)and only can perform about 160 GFLOPSRyviusARC

[QUOTE="4dr1el"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Gears 3 image quality is like a generation ahead of U3 jaggies fest

loosingENDS

Lol. You really want your arguments to sound legit with comments like these? Try harder you pathetic lem

I posted pics, Uncharted 3 looks horrible and is full of jaggies like a PS1 game

/facepalm

I dont know why I do even bother. Its like talking to a Neanderthal...

If you're a troll congratulations, you managed to p*ss me off as none other before you. Now if you're talking serious and believe the sh*t that comes from your mouth then you're trully a pathetic excuse of a human being.

It's "insanely powerful"....for reading spreadsheets. ;)

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="RyviusARC"] The PS3's RSX was way gimped. It's ROPs and bandwidth was cut in half down to 7600gt levels. Offloading certain GPU tasks to the Cell is what gave it a performance boost. Also....no the 360 does not have an X1900xt. It was based on the same series but there are a whole lots of GPUs from that series. The Xbox 360 actually used something like a mid end GPU spec wise. Probably something like a X1650XT. The reason it perform better than that is because it used unified shader tech. If you were somehow able to make an actual X1900xt utilize unified shaders then it would blow away the Xbox 360. The best way to see this is to compare not shader intensive games and you will see the X1900xt easily performs at much higher results than the Xbox 360's Xenos.04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] The Xenos is faster in some ways then a 7800GTX because of it unified architecture, The 7800GTX has 512mb of memory with 54 GB/s memory bandwidth and gpu performance is about 200 GFLOPS, while the Xenos, has around 256mb of memory with only 21 GB/s bandwidth and can do 240 GFLOPS, While the RSX is a gimped Geforce 7800 chipset it only has 25GB/s of memory bandwidth, has only 256mb of memory along with only 8 ROPS (while 7800GTX has 16 ROPS)and only can perform about 160 GFLOPSRyviusARC

Remember comparing GFLOPS from Nvidia to ATI or visa versa is not correct. ATI would have much higher GFLOPS to an Nvidia card that performs similar to it. A regular x1900xt was reported to be over 400GFLOPS.04dcarraher

Radeon HD x1900xt has superior GpGPU compute over Geforce 79x0. Fat Radeons are usually bottlenecked by it's raster hardware.

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="RyviusARC"] The PS3's RSX was way gimped. It's ROPs and bandwidth was cut in half down to 7600gt levels. Offloading certain GPU tasks to the Cell is what gave it a performance boost. Also....no the 360 does not have an X1900xt. It was based on the same series but there are a whole lots of GPUs from that series. The Xbox 360 actually used something like a mid end GPU spec wise. Probably something like a X1650XT. The reason it perform better than that is because it used unified shader tech. If you were somehow able to make an actual X1900xt utilize unified shaders then it would blow away the Xbox 360. The best way to see this is to compare not shader intensive games and you will see the X1900xt easily performs at much higher results than the Xbox 360's Xenos.04dcarraher

AMD Xenos is equiped with decoupled texture and math operations design i.e. similar NVIDIA's GigaThreads. AMD Xenos has 64 threads over 48 unified shader pipelines.

Geforce 7900 still has ROPs advantage over Xenos.

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] you do realize that the xenon was only $135 i think to manufacture, you can't compare the cost of the RSX to something like a x1900 because its just the chip vs an entire graphics cardtormentos

People don't know the hardware they have is actually worth 5 dollars to produce, be it the GTX 680 (the chip itself) or the Wii graphics chip (modified Radeon 7200 from 2000). The prices are set by the companies that make them and usually far bigger than what they're actually worth. It's just the development that is expensive but the technicians who design them don't nearly get all the profits from the sales. Console makers usually get them a lot cheaper than retail consumers (OEM) and only pay for the licenses (the chips themselves are produced in Foxconn by Chinese workers who are underpayed and overworked).

Ha-very-ha. The console's success depends on its library and marketing. As long as those are good, the rest don't matter.Spinnerweb

True, not even one console succeeded because it was "insanely powerful". The amount of people who buy consoles because they are powerful is marginal.

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] you do realize that the xenon was only $135 i think to manufacture, you can't compare the cost of the RSX to something like a x1900 because its just the chip vs an entire graphics cardnameless12345

People don't know the hardware they have is actually worth 5 dollars to produce, be it the GTX 680 (the chip itself) or the Wii graphics chip (modified Radeon 7200 from 2000). The prices are set by the companies that make them and usually far bigger than what they're actually worth. It's just the development that is expensive but the technicians who design them don't nearly get all the profits from the sales. Console makers usually get them a lot cheaper than retail consumers (OEM) and only pay for the licenses (the chips themselves are produced in Foxconn by Chinese workers who are underpayed and overworked).

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Let's reiterate all this once again. 1-Cell+RSX good enough to match and surpass the 360 in graphics. 2-The PS3 as the edge already proven(Uncharted 3) 3-Uncharted 3 says high. http://www.psu.com/VGA-2011--Uncharted-3-wins-Best-PS3-Game-Best-Graphics--a013874-p0.php tormentos

PC's water effects are ussually coupled with larger scale environments.

Uncharted 3's play in the pool water effects

VS

Crysis 2 PC DX11's water effects

Crysis PC's water effects

Alan Wake PC's water effects.

Battlefield 3's Xbox 360 vs PC water effects

Skyrim PC + ENB mod watter effects

No in fact MS in it own power point about making cross platform games for windows and 360 actually state that the 7800GTX and the X1900 are equivalent to the 360 GPU,go back a page or 2 you will see it i posted it with a link and instructions on how to find it. Even MS admit it,the RSX at $129 wasn't a bad deal,it doesn't have all the performance of the top of the line cards,but it wasn't a cheap GPU in 2006.

tormentos

On more recent game 3D engines, 7800 GTX being equal to X1900 is a LOL material.

NVIDIA's "The Way It's Meant To Be Played Games" during Geforce 7900 era avoids the G7X's design issues as highlighted by Joker.

NVIDIA Geforce 7800 GTX playing Crysis 2 with jerky frame rates

AMD Radeon X1950 playing Crysis 2 with reasonability smooth frame rates

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="tormentos"] No in fact MS in it own power point about making cross platform games for windows and 360 actually state that the 7800GTX and the X1900 are equivalent to the 360 GPU,go back a page or 2 you will see it i posted it with a link and instructions on how to find it. Even MS admit it,the RSX at $129 wasn't a bad deal,it doesn't have all the performance of the top of the line cards,but it wasn't a cheap GPU in 2006.tormentos

[QUOTE="tormentos"]

No in fact MS in it own power point about making cross platform games for windows and 360 actually state that the 7800GTX and the X1900 are equivalent to the 360 GPU,go back a page or 2 you will see it i posted it with a link and instructions on how to find it. Even MS admit it,the RSX at $129 wasn't a bad deal,it doesn't have all the performance of the top of the line cards,but it wasn't a cheap GPU in 2006.

ronvalencia

On more recent game 3D engines, 7800 GTX being equal to X1900 is a LOL material.

NVIDIA's "The Way It's Meant To Be Played Games" during Geforce 7900 era avoids the G7X's design issues as highlighted by Joker.

NVIDIA Geforce 7800 GTX playing Crysis 2 with jerky frame rates

AMD Radeon X1950 playing Crysis 2 with reasonability smooth frame rates

PS3 should have had a 8800 and more RAM tbh. Even if it ment a lower performance CPU. It would provide true 1080p visuals and could run a game like Crysis on high details.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="tormentos"] No in fact MS in it own power point about making cross platform games for windows and 360 actually state that the 7800GTX and the X1900 are equivalent to the 360 GPU,go back a page or 2 you will see it i posted it with a link and instructions on how to find it. Even MS admit it,the RSX at $129 wasn't a bad deal,it doesn't have all the performance of the top of the line cards,but it wasn't a cheap GPU in 2006.tormentos

1-Cell+RSX good enough to match and surpass the 360 in graphics.

2-The PS3 as the edge already proven(Uncharted 3)

3-Uncharted 3 says high.tormentos

1."I'm going to have to answer with an 'it depends,'" laughs Shippy, after a pause. "Again, they're completely different models. So in the PS3, you've got this Cell chip which has massive parallel processing power, the PowerPC core, multiple SPU cores? it's got a GPU that is, in the model here, processing more in the Cell chip and less in the GPU. So that's one processing paradigm -- a heterogeneous paradigm."

"With the Xbox 360, you've got more of a traditional multi-core system, and you've got three PowerPC cores, each of them having dual threads -- so you've got six threads running there, at least in the CPU. Six threads in Xbox 360, and eight or nine threads in the PS3 -- but then you've got to factor in the GPU," Shippy explains. "The GPU is highly sophisticated in the Xbox 360."

"At the end of the day, when you put them all together, depending on the software, I think they're pretty equal, even though they're completely different processing models," he concludes.

-David Shippy. Chief Architect Cell CPU, Xenon CPU

2. That's what Cows said about MGS4. lol. The difference in gfx fidelity is nominal at best. T10 is MS's only 1st-party that pushes gfx. FM4 beats GT5 in gfx. Your point?

Carmacks reply:

@Desmiothe differences between the
PS3 and 360 are modest enough that
differences between developers is a much
larger factor.

Most respected gfx programmer in the industry, perhaps Tim Sweeney is up there as well.

3. Yes. Uncharted 3 says you're high. You are correct. I've posted a plethora of like-for-like scenes from both games that show my point. You're all conjecture.

I'm a fake boy.? I am a member of this site before you were,don't get confuse by my low post count.tormentos

If anything that assertion would cement your status as a troll/fakeboy. lol. I've been on since my sophomore year in HS when it was videogames.com, which would have been 1998.

You've been owned more times in this thread than anybody I've ever seen. Congrats!!!

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="tormentos"]

No in fact MS in it own power point about making cross platform games for windows and 360 actually state that the 7800GTX and the X1900 are equivalent to the 360 GPU,go back a page or 2 you will see it i posted it with a link and instructions on how to find it. Even MS admit it,the RSX at $129 wasn't a bad deal,it doesn't have all the performance of the top of the line cards,but it wasn't a cheap GPU in 2006.

nameless12345

On more recent game 3D engines, 7800 GTX being equal to X1900 is a LOL material.

NVIDIA's "The Way It's Meant To Be Played Games" during Geforce 7900 era avoids the G7X's design issues as highlighted by Joker.

NVIDIA Geforce 7800 GTX playing Crysis 2 with jerky frame rates

AMD Radeon X1950 playing Crysis 2 with reasonability smooth frame rates

PS3 should have had a 8800 and more RAM tbh. Even if it ment a lower performance CPU. It would provide true 1080p visuals and could run a game like Crysis on high details.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

On more recent game 3D engines, 7800 GTX being equal to X1900 is a LOL material.

NVIDIA's "The Way It's Meant To Be Played Games" during Geforce 7900 era avoids the G7X's design issues as highlighted by Joker.

NVIDIA Geforce 7800 GTX playing Crysis 2 with jerky frame rates

AMD Radeon X1950 playing Crysis 2 with reasonability smooth frame rates

04dcarraher

PS3 should have had a 8800 and more RAM tbh. Even if it ment a lower performance CPU. It would provide true 1080p visuals and could run a game like Crysis on high details.

PS3 could have come out in 2007 instead of 2006 as the PS2 was still going strong in 2006 and they could give the basic model a DVD drive instead of a blu-ray drive (the blu-ray model would cost more).

8800 GT was a good P/P GPU.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

PS3 should have had a 8800 and more RAM tbh. Even if it ment a lower performance CPU. It would provide true 1080p visuals and could run a game like Crysis on high details.

nameless12345

PS3 could have come out in 2007 instead of 2006 as the PS2 was still going strong in 2006 and they could give the basic model a DVD drive instead of a blu-ray drive (the blu-ray model would cost more).

8800 GT was a good P/P GPU.

RSX is not quite a desktop 7900 since it's lower clocked, reduced ROPs and VRAM bandwidth.ronvalencia

What's your prediction of the next X720 hardware (based on rumors)?

I'm a bit worried that it might be under powered compared to PS4 as 16 cores out of order PPC usually not that much powerful when compared to in order X86 CPUs.

What do you think?

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"] RSX is not quite a desktop 7900 since it's lower clocked, reduced ROPs and VRAM bandwidth.Mystery_Writer

What's your prediction of the next X720 hardware (based on rumors)?

I'm a bit worried that it might be under powered compared to PS4 as 16 cores out of order PPC usually not that much powerful when compared to in order X86 CPUs.

What do you think?

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="tormentos"] No in fact MS in it own power point about making cross platform games for windows and 360 actually state that the 7800GTX and the X1900 are equivalent to the 360 GPU,go back a page or 2 you will see it i posted it with a link and instructions on how to find it. Even MS admit it,the RSX at $129 wasn't a bad deal,it doesn't have all the performance of the top of the line cards,but it wasn't a cheap GPU in 2006.ronvalencia

AMD Xenos is equiped with decoupled texture and math operations design i.e. similar NVIDIA's GigaThreads. AMD Xenos has 64 threads over 48 unified shader pipelines.

Geforce 7900 still has ROPs advantage over Xenos.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] The Xenos is faster in some ways then a 7800GTX because of it unified architecture, The 7800GTX has 512mb of memory with 54 GB/s memory bandwidth and gpu performance is about 200 GFLOPS, while the Xenos, has around 256mb of memory with only 21 GB/s bandwidth and can do 240 GFLOPS, While the RSX is a gimped Geforce 7800 chipset it only has 25GB/s of memory bandwidth, has only 256mb of memory along with only 8 ROPS (while 7800GTX has 16 ROPS)and only can perform about 160 GFLOPS

savagetwinkie

AMD Xenos is equiped with decoupled texture and math operations design i.e. similar NVIDIA's GigaThreads. AMD Xenos has 64 threads over 48 unified shader pipelines.

Geforce 7900 still has ROPs advantage over Xenos.

You are still thinking of old school GPU or CPU.

Link Xenos has 64 (SMT like ) threads over 48 shader pipelines.

XENOS is capable of processing 64 threads simultaneously, this is to make
sure that all elements are being utilized and so there is minimal or no
stalling of the graphics architecture. So even if a ALU may be waiting for a
texture sample to be achieved, that thread would not stall the ALU as it
would be working on something else from another thread. This effectively
hides tasks that would normally have a large latency penalty attached to
them. ATI suggests that their testing achieves an average of 95% efficiency
of the shader array in general purpose graphics usage conditions. The
throughput is said to be two loops, two texture instructions, 6 ALU
instructions, per pixel, per cycle at Xeno's peak fill rate

This is similar to NVIDIA's Gigathreads and AMD's Ultra-Threads tech.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

What's your prediction of the next X720 hardware (based on rumors)?

I'm a bit worried that it might be under powered compared to PS4 as 16 cores out of order PPC usually not that much powerful when compared to in order X86 CPUs.

What do you think?

ronvalencia

So if both X720 & PS4 had similar dual GPUs (HD 7670), with X720 having 16 cores PPC and an extra HD 6550D GPU and the PS4 havingAMD A8 3850 with built-in HD 6550D GPU.

Which one is more likely to have the slight edge in performance?

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

What's your prediction of the next X720 hardware (based on rumors)?

I'm a bit worried that it might be under powered compared to PS4 as 16 cores out of order PPC usually not that much powerful when compared to in order X86 CPUs.

What do you think?

Mystery_Writer

So if both X720 & PS4 had similar dual GPUs (HD 7670), with X720 having 16 cores PPC and an extra HD 6550D GPU and the PS4 havingAMD A8 3850 with built-in HD 6550D GPU.

Which one is more likely to have the slight edge in performance?

There's no confirmation on the final AMD GPU setup i.e. core design, clockspeed and memory can change. AMD Llano is pretty much EOL(End Of Life) in Q2 2012 i.e. AMD Trinity APU has replaced it.

Both AMD Trinity and Llano APUs still runs similar AMD Radeon HD Virtual Machine (AMD IL). Radeon HD's Virtual Machine is based on LLVM (Low Level Virtual Machine) open source project.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"] 720 may follow Xbox1 and XBox 360 when it comes to 128bit wired VRAM PCB.ronvalencia

So if both X720 & PS4 had similar dual GPUs (HD 7670), with X720 having 16 cores PPC and an extra HD 6550D GPU and the PS4 havingAMD A8 3850 with built-in HD 6550D GPU.

Which one is more likely to have the slight edge in performance?

which one in this case is more likely to have the performance edge?

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

So if both X720 & PS4 had similar dual GPUs (HD 7670), with X720 having 16 cores PPC and an extra HD 6550D GPU and the PS4 havingAMD A8 3850 with built-in HD 6550D GPU.

Which one is more likely to have the slight edge in performance?

Mystery_Writer

which one in this case is more likely to have the performance edge?

What kind of PPC? For example, 16 PowerPC 440, 16 PPE, 16 PowerPC 970, 16 PowerPC A2, 16 Power7.

Is your scenario's PS4 has A8-3850 APU + Dual 7670 VS X720 has 16 PPC(unknown) + Dual 7670?

----

At 32nm fab, A8-3850 APU has a die size of 228 mm^2.

At 45nm fab, IBM Power7 8-core has a die size of 567mm^2 or ~403.2 mm^2 at 32nm fab.

You can remove L3 cache and replace it with more Power7 cores(e.g. 16 core setup) and die size would be still to large for a home console.

Both AMD/GoFlo and IBM shares the same fab tech.

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

ok, let's assume the PS4 has a 4 core 2.9Ghz A8 3850 CPU, and the X720 16 core PPC is at 3.2Ghz (with both console's dual GPU setups clocked at the same frequencies)

which one in this case is more likely to have the performance edge?

ronvalencia

What kind of PPC? For example, 16 PowerPC 440, 16 PPE, 16 PowerPC 970, 16 PowerPC A2, 16 Power7.

Is your scenario's PS4 has A8-3850 APU + Dual 7670 VS X720 has 16 PPC(unknown) + Dual 7670?

----

At 32nm fab, A8-3850 APU has a die size of 228 mm^2.

At 45nm fab, IBM Power7 8-core has a die size of 567mm^2 or ~403.2 mm^2 at 32nm fab.

You can remove L3 cache and replace it with more Power7 cores(e.g. 16 core setup) and die size would be still to large for a home console.

Both AMD/GoFlo and IBM shares the same fab tech.

No not dual discrete GPUs + A8-3850 APU, just one discrete GPU (HD 7670) and the other one is in-chip of the APU itself (i.e. the HD 6550D)

As for X720, two asymetrical discrete GPUs and a 16 core PPC, the asymetrical GPUs are HD 7670 and HD 6550

As for which PPC, let's pick whichever the cheapest (that is capable of achieving 16 cores), let's say 16 cores PPE.

ITT: Fighting over 2nd place

ITT: Fighting over 2nd place

wis3boi

The fight continues.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

So if both X720 & PS4 had similar dual GPUs (HD 7670), with X720 having 16 cores PPC and an extra HD 6550D GPU and the PS4 havingAMD A8 3850 with built-in HD 6550D GPU.

Which one is more likely to have the slight edge in performance?

Mystery_Writer

which one in this case is more likely to have the performance edge?

Very nice news

Especially now that Sony is going bunkrupt and PS4 will have a 2008 GPU at best case scenario

XBox 720 will be the only next gen system as it seems

Very nice news

Especially now that Sony is going bunkrupt and PS4 will have a 2008 GPU at best case scenario

XBox 720 will be the only next gen system as it seems

loosingENDS

Very nice news

Especially now that Sony is going bunkrupt and PS4 will have a 2008 GPU at best case scenario

XBox 720 will be the only next gen system as it seems

loosingENDS

Don't know why this thread is still going on. Seems to be more about general market CPUs and GPUs, than what's going to (supposedly) be in the next box... of which we have NO information about. Time to put this one to sleep.