Microsoft to unlock reserved GPU performance for Xbox One development.

[MeachTheMonster]

The XBOX 360 dashboard has gotten so slow over the past few years...this isn't even debatable.

I realize that I just don't agree with Microsoft's plans. The whole XBOX One development cycle seems to have changed in a matter of months because of initial decisions they made. If Kinect is/was so important to the success of the console, why possibly strip guaranteed resources away from it? It just doesn't make sense to me.

You didn't read the article did you? They aren't talking about stripping recourses away. They are talking about being able to do both simultaneously.

 

[daze23]

If Kinect is/was so important to the success of the console, why possibly strip guaranteed resources away from it?

because further optimization could make it need less resources

 

[FloorGeneral]

were the PS peeps motivated to get more out of the console late into it's life only because competition exists?

What do you mean by "more" though? And what "peeps"? The folks at Sony that made the console? I don't think they "unlocked reserved" anything, especially later in the console's life. Or do you mean game developers? If so, then that's a totally different argument. It's known that the system was...let's say...not easy to develop for. As time went on, developers (the one's that were dedicated, and put time into learning the architecture) were able to squeeze out every thing they could.

But I've not heard of Sony publicly announcing they were "unlocking" any "reserved" resources at any point in the PS3's life, though I admittedly don't scour the gaming news wire every hour to know if that were indeed the case.

 

[Lord Beasley]

sound like them first-gen X1's gonna be burning up left and right

 

[Smooth3d]

The XBOX 360 dashboard has gotten so slow over the past few years...this isn't even debatable.

I realize that I just don't agree with Microsoft's plans. The whole XBOX One development cycle seems to have changed in a matter of months because of initial decisions they made. If Kinect is/was so important to the success of the console, why possibly strip guaranteed resources away from it? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Being slower does not mean disaster, lol Its a box from 2005 doing more shyt than it even thought possible when it was being designed in 2003/4. I think its doing well considering it's age.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Definitely, but to act like they don't care is so off base that its almost laughable.

Hell the "console wars" is partly what caused Microsoft to quickly change their DRM stance.

Indirectly yes. But they didn't change their stance just cause Sony wasn't doing it. They changed their stance due to fan backlash/preorder numbers

 

[Liquid]

because further optimization could make it need less resources

Understood, but it just comes off as a rush to try to maximize gaming performance at the last minute because they have the weakest hardware out there.

Kinect has gone from a vital piece of the puzzle to something that is not even required for the console to work anymore. Now allocating resources. I wouldn't be surprised if they announce a Kinect-Less SKU soon

 

[ChrisDorner]

Let's try this again

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Understood, but it just comes off as a rush to try to maximize gaming performance at the last minute because they have the weakest hardware out there.

If gains could be made, why not make them? Why did Sony start freeing up more ps3 resources as the gen went on? Were they rushing at the last minute?

Kinect has gone from a vital piece of the puzzle to something that is not even required for the console to work anymore. Now allocating resources. I wouldn't be surprised if they announce a Kinect-Less SKU soon

I swear you dudes can't read. They are not talking about removing resources from kinect

Once you get over the initial surprise that the background system takes up quite so much GPU time in the first place, the notion of being able to give developers access to this resource while not compromising functionality may sound rather like having your cake and eating it, but Microsoft points to particular aspects of the GPU hardware that make this scenario possible.

"In addition to asynchronous compute queues, the Xbox One hardware supports two concurrent render pipes," Goossen pointed out. "The two render pipes can allow the hardware to render title content at high priority while concurrently rendering system content at low priority. The GPU hardware scheduler is designed to maximise throughput and automatically fills 'holes' in the high-priority processing. This can allow the system rendering to make use of the ROPs for fill, for example, while the title is simultaneously doing synchronous compute operations on the compute units."

 

[Smooth3d]

Understood, but it just comes off as a rush to try to maximize gaming performance at the last minute because they have the weakest hardware out there.

Kinect has gone from a vital piece of the puzzle to something that is not even required for the console to work anymore. Now allocating resources. I wouldn't be surprised if they annwounce a Kinect-Less SKU soon

The Kinect function is still there. Working without Kinect had more to do with complying certain laws in other countries and the NSA backlash.

 

[daze23]

What do you mean by "more" though? And what "peeps"? The folks at Sony that made the console? I don't think they "unlocked reserved" anything, especially later in the console's life. Or do you mean game developers? If so, then that's a totally different argument. It's known that the system was...let's say...not easy to develop for. As time went on, developers (the one's that were dedicated, and put time into learning the architecture) were able to squeeze out every thing they could.

But I've not heard of Sony publicly announcing they were "unlocking" any "reserved" resources at any point in the PS3's life, though I admittedly don't scour the gaming news wire every hour to know if that were indeed the case.

I changed "PS peeps" to "PS3 devs"

"unlocking" "reserves" is a little beyond the scope of what you originally said

Well, clearly M$ is gonna try and push the Xbox One to it's limits now that everyone acknowledges that the PS4 obviously has more horses under the hood.

and your next response

I do not. I think if the systems were viewed equally, they would be content and just leave it alone. I feel the pressure of everyone saying that the PS4 is more powerful is forcing their hands.

what I said was about "pushing the system to it's limits" and not being "content". it's a more broad statement about the optimization of hardware over time, although that goal may be reached with different methods

 

[Rekkapryde]

*walks back in*
*sees nikkaz is furious*

Mission Accomplished....



*exits stage left*

 

[Malta]

If the machine were as capable as you clowns say, they wouldn't need to unlock the hidden power of greyskull every other week or talk about how balanced and efficient it is.

Every week MS is talking about specs and power and make up for what we can clearly see on paper as being a gap.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

If the machine were as capable as you clowns say, they wouldn't need to unlock the hidden power of greyskull every other week or talk about how balanced and efficient it is.

Every week MS is talking about specs and power and make up for what we can clearly see on paper as being a gap.

So should they not try to make the system the best it can be and talk about that process?

 

[King Sun]

If the machine were as capable as you clowns say, they wouldn't need to unlock the hidden power of greyskull every other week or talk about how balanced and efficient it is.

Every week MS is talking about specs and power and make up for what we can clearly see on paper as being a gap.

I wonder whatever happened to the cloud