All Channels
Popular
490°

Xbox One eSRAM Readily Available For Any Purpose, Smooths Out Optimization:Dying Light Tech Director

A lot has been made out about the Xbox One's eSRAM. Some have posited that it's responsible for the limited resolutions being seen in launch titles. However, it has its uses as well.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
Lalanana4566d ago

As long it is not imposing limitations..it's a good sign for dev. Hopefully it will help out dying light devs.

Eonjay4566d ago

The limitation is 32MB. But as some have already pointed out the 360 only had 10MB. It will only become an oppressive limitation if you want to use it for everything and don't correctly manage it.

Other than that, I would like to read some articles from developers that are getting creative with this relatively small resource. I am really interested. Developers can be super creative sometimes.

Dehnus4566d ago

It has a very low latency, so for some very specific jobs it will shine. The thing is you will need to be very specific and program for the hardware. So operations that require a lot of small reads and writes, which need to be done as soon fast as possible.. it will shine.

Again that is latency, not throughput.

Eonjay4566d ago (Edited 4566d ago )

@Dehnus

I think I misunderstand your comment. DDR3,(and GDDR5 for that matter) have almost completely negligible latency ratings. And remember, the only reason why Microsoft would ever bother using ESRam is because of the throughput of DDR3 which would probably bottleneck the GPU.

Basically I don't understand how a developer would benefit by storing code with a low latency precondition in ESRam and not regular DDR3. I do see how they would benefit from a read/write heavy function which to me seems more about throughput and not latency.

GameNameFame4566d ago

Idk why PS4 is brought up in this thread.

This is not comparison to PS4 and doesnt make it any less weaker vs PS4.

Literally all he is saying is that you can use esram for "CPU, GPU and etc" which we what we knew. And also feature exist on PS4 except that it does it better with unified GDDR5 Ram.

I cant tell some people are desperate or what as they are trying to use this as some sort of argument that it makes it less weaker.

P0werVR4565d ago (Edited 4565d ago )

@Eonjay

I highly doubt that they made the eSRAM to compensate for DDR3. If anything I believe they chose DDR3 for low latency to allow the technology that eSRAM is used for (Deferred Shading, Tile Rendering, just for exp.)

It's the most incompetent thing to implement a DDR3 and than use eSRAM to "fill it's void". Otherwise it would have been smarter and cheaper to just did what Sony did, implement a boring looking architectural design.

I also doubt launch games are even using eSRAM.

EDIT:

Wow disagrees and no comments?!

I've been stating way before anyone on N4G, that eSRAM will be used for textures. Expect some AMAZING first party games next year.

Post Marked

Eonjay4565d ago (Edited 4565d ago )

@p0wervr

Low latency of DDR3 is not a tangible benifit of ddr3 over esRam or other high bandwidth memory modules. The difference in latency is measured in terms of nanoseconds. Because esRam and GDDR5 have such monstrous bandwidth peaks in comparison, the use of DDR3 offers no benefit other than being plentiful.

Microsoft themselves have been very forthcoming about their reasons for including EsRam. It has high bandwidth and is considerably cheaper than GDDR5. Most mmodern high performance gfx cards use GDDR5. The reason for this is because DDR3 and older types of memory starve the GPU of bandwidth.

They need EsRam because the GPU can render and calculate much faster than the DDR3 memory can handle. EsRam is essential to xbox reaching its potential.

Developers are using esRam already but manily as a location to store frame buffers and render targets. But I as I said before I will be excited to hear about other uses that developers find for it. It is, after all, just a small chunk of fast memory.

The architectures of both designs are fascinating for those into computer architecture. If not then you will probably default to a fanatic fanboy stance.

fr0sty4565d ago (Edited 4565d ago )

@powervr

ESRAM was put into the console for the sole purpose of bridging the bandwidth gap from DDR3, because it has nowhere near the bandwidth needed by modern GPUs. This is why all GPUs stopped using DDR3 long ago.

Also, ESRAM isn't very well suited for storing textures, as... it just isn't big enough. Unless you want your games to look like PS2 quality textures. PS2 did what it did on 32mb of RAM. It just isn't enough for modern games.

MS couldn't just go with GDDR5, as Sony pulled a fast one on them. They expected Sony to go with 4gb of GDDR5. With the ESRAM, MS' 8GB of DDR3 would have meant both consoles were on similar ground as far as power went. However, Sony matched them with 8GB of GDDR5, and they did so well after MS would be able to make the change in time to get their system built. Any change to the Xbox One's memory system would have meant having to design a new memory controller, send it through months of rigorous testing, possibly have to redesign the cooling system to accommodate the extra chips and repositioned hardware, which would have equaled Microsoft having to delay Xbox One.

There was nothing they could do. They couldn't let Sony get away with launching first. So, they did all they could with what they had. A 6% clock increase here, 10% increase there... little things that served mostly as bullet points for fanboys to spew, but had little other technical significance other than that.

The ESRAM was meant to give Xbox One parity with PS4, when PS4 was only a 4gb RAM console. That no longer is the case.

So anyway, back to the topic. Yes, technically they can utilize the ESRAM how they like, 32mb is 32mb. You can't even fit an entire album of MP3s at near-CD quality in there... what makes you people think you can fit enough textures to paint a game world with? Ultimately, you have a machine that does the vast majority of its work at DDR3 speeds, with a little 32mb chunk getting more priority. Developers will get used to it with time and will be able to take the games way farther than anything you're seeing on the market today. However, it is not a technical advantage as some are making it out to be.

wooferine4565d ago

@fr0sty
My understanding too is that third party developers, Gearbox in particular, twisted Sony's arm into including 8gb of GDDR5 RAM instead of the 4gb that was in the original design. Sony lucked out because the price of GDDR5 RAM dropped dramatically during the run up to the PS4 launch.

This is a particularly interesting story because a similar story happened with the Xbox 360. It was originally designed with 256mb of RAM but the Xbox developers came back to the Xbox product managers and showed them how Gears of War would run at a lower resolution with only 256mb RAM. The Xbox product managers convinced Microsoft corporate to spend the extra dollars for 500mg RAM.

P0werVR4565d ago (Edited 4565d ago )

@frosty

It's funny how you state that eSRAM "isn't well suited" to store textures when in fact the emphasis although indirectly by the use of Tiled Rendering, which has been confirmed time and again lately that eSRAM will most definitely be used for such purposes.

I don't know about this source:

http://pastebin.com/qW6LVdF...

But it's statements have been fairly revealing lately given how developers are stating positives of eSRAM's implementation and how similar it's uses have been shown more to be than a "filler" for 8Gbs of DDR3.

Also, it has been confirmed lately that it WILL store up to 6GB of Tiled Textures, which is MAJOR if the ratio of GBs to MBs of texture is truly significant if technology is used smartly.

http://www.giantbomb.com/xb...

http://gamingbolt.com/why-x...

The only way we'll see it's true implementation are the first party developers utilizing it. I have full confidence that Microsoft has brought the "Microsoft Talisman" back and in full force.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 4565d ago
JackISbacK4565d ago

yeah this was going to happen ,edge interviewued devs when devs just recieved the developer kits or you can say devs were not having the experience with kits and not for even a month,and as reported xb1 dev kits and softwares were not utilising the power of the kit and and also the lack of experince with the kits could have been a reason,yeah devs will find some way to reduce the gap of ps4 and xb1 ,and also staed by witcher devs that xb1 is more easy to develop. i'am waiting to see the resolution of witcher 3 on xb1 and ps4 ,it will give us the answer wether they and this guy is saying true but i hope it comes out to be true ,gap is to be reduced and must be reduced and i will buy games on my xb1 and ps4 simuntaniusly and especilay online based games on xb1 because of dedicated servers.

TheKayle14565d ago (Edited 4565d ago )

@Eonjay;@fr0sty etc etc

no they could have gddr5 as well seen that this memory system cost them 28$ dollars more (and 28$ in a console build are A LOTS) than the ps4 memory system
who think tht ms just arrived late for the gddr5 is a fool or live outerspace

the average bandwith of the ddr3+esram is around 140-150GB/s and u can find it on digital foundry article
u need to imagine that the averate speed of the ps4 is 155/160 gb/s ....with a peak of 176 gb/s meanwhile
the xb1 have a peak of 204 gb/s

"Of course if you're hitting the same area over and over and over again, you don't get to spread out your bandwidth and so that's one of the reasons why in real testing you get 140-150GB/s"

meanwhile the esram peak is 204 gb/s

but here is why they go with this

http://www.microsofttransla...

and then this

http://gamingbolt.com/why-x...

bjmartynhak4565d ago

It is not a limitation, it is a band-aid for the low bandwidth of the DDR3 memory.

The DDR has not bandwidth for the 1080p when using deferred rendering with AA. The ESRAM has, but 32MB is not enough framebuffer for 1080p, hence the 720p-900p games.
Only games with baked (forward) rendering are 1080p (Forza, NBA2K)...

Mr Pumblechook4565d ago

So is this the technical explanation behind that 'secret sauce' Major Nelson keeps banging on about?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4565d ago
Naga4566d ago

It's refreshing to see developers praising this. I feel like the only positive references I've seen up to this point on the Xbox One's eSRAM has been coming from Microsoft itself.

ic3fir34566d ago

witcher 3 devs say, xbox one is more easy work, and ps4 is more complicate that x1

Prime1574566d ago

That was the feature set they were talking about the library... this is different.

ToyboxDX4565d ago

Sony created the PS4 base on feedback and recommendation from various developers, so the argument that it is more complicated to develop for doesn't make sense at all.

The PS4 had the architecture of a PC whereas the XBone with the special ESRAM and no GDDR5 RAM, is as far away from a PC design as can be.

Which specific area did they say it's complicated?

wooferine4565d ago

@ic3fir3
The Witcher 3 developers said the Xbox One was easier to develop for because the SDK and API were so similar to PC SDKs and API. Given that Witcher 1 started life on the PC, they have experience with developing for the PC environment. In addition, it probably also helps that Microsoft owns both the Windows OS and the Xbox One OS so the SDKs and APIs would naturally be similar.

JokesOnYou4566d ago (Edited 4566d ago )

Well really all the somewhat negative talk about X1 development/hardware so far was from sony cboat, butthurt blow and "annonymous sources"= BS as I'm sure ps4 is a powerful console, X1 is no slouch both like all consoles will have strengths and weaknesses but more importantly deliver some helluva games anyone who can't recognize that is just full of fanboy shiii. lol

Pope_Kaz_Hirai_II4565d ago

Jokesonyou back on ms,s behalf spreading super fud.

ratchet4264565d ago

Joke SONY ou ? (see what I did there?) Just admiring the irony in your screen name. :-)

AngelicIceDiamond4566d ago (Edited 4566d ago )

CDPR Also said this: http://pixelenemy.com/cdpr-...

They're not the first devs to say this but I give them positive credibility on there word considering they are PC experts that make PC games.

Wikkid6664566d ago

Some developers probably never worked with it, so they don't know how to optimize it. So it just ends up being harder to work with.

wooferine4565d ago

@AngelicIceDiamond
CDPR is the developer for the Witcher 3 aren't they? So far, I've only seen one developer comment that the Xbox One is easier to develop for than the PS4 and that is because the Xbox One SDK and API are similar to a PC's and and CDPR developed Witcher 1 for the PC. By all accounts, programming to make use of the Xbox One's esram is more difficult than programming for the PS4's unified 8gb GDDR5.

fossilfern4566d ago

Ofcourse this would happen. Sounded like the development kits for XBO developers were constantly changing which ,ofcourse, affect how their games run.

Its just like when the PS3 launched.

curtis924566d ago

True and that could work out well for first party xb1 games. But as we saw with PS3, 3rd party games typically suffer because of the complexities of the RAM.

AaronMK4566d ago

And the complexities of the Cell processor.

BISHOP-BRASIL4566d ago

How that could work well for XB1 first party? I mean, sure they'll be better optimized sooner than thrid party games, but it's nothing like PS3 where they pulled ahead competition, simply because PS3 was more powerful than Xbox 360, which is not the case with Xbox One against PS4.

curtis924566d ago

In the same article:

Does it cause any bottleneck or actually help simplify the process? According to Klarowicz, “We haven’t played around with the eSRAM much yet."

gameseveryday4566d ago

That does not mean they haven't played with it 'at all'. Even with limited hands on they have been able to store a lot of data and it's only going to get better from here.

theWB274566d ago

Sshhh Rashid don't use too much logic. It's the same thing as devs praising the 8gigs of ram in the PS4 even though we know they haven't tapped into yet.

AngelicIceDiamond4566d ago

@Rashid Say in theory; Ok so Techland isn't using ESRAM much but for basic functions. But the game will look great on X1 version. But if they did utilize ESRAM would the game look THAT much better on X1?

I'm just theorizing here.

Show all comments (74)
150°

Dying Light Retouched vs Enhanced Ed Comparison Shows Notable Improvement In Textures & Lighting

The Retouched update for Dying Light that improves graphical features has been released; here's how it compares with the Enhanced Edition.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
Lionsguard341d ago

I knew holding off playing it for 10 years was the right call.

ocelot07341d ago

I remember playing this for the first time on the PS4 and it knocking me sick and hurting my eyes due to the horrible motion blur and FPS.

Played it a lot on pc a year later. Then again on ps5 once they dropped the 60fps update. I'll be giving it another go. Mad how they have kept updating this game for 10 years.

90°

Ten Years Later - Still Going Strong: Dying Light: Retouched Update Releasing June 26

Hey Survivors! Tymon here, your favorite Dying Light Franchise Director.

It's been an absolutely wild month here at Techland! We're in the thick of what I'm calling the "Summer of Dying Light," delivering updates and big news across all three Dying Light games. Just a few weeks ago, we dropped the first gameplay for Dying Light: The Beast, revealed its release date, and kicked off pre-orders (if you haven't seen it, check out my last dev blog). I'm incredibly proud of what we're building with The Beast - it’s the culmination of more than 10 years of experience in open-world survival horror!

But here's the thing: we never forget where we came from. That's why, this week, we're not just looking forward - we're rolling out significant updates for both the original Dying Light and Dying Light 2: Stay Human. We promised to support our games for a long time, and we're committed to continuing that support, right through and beyond the launch of Dying Light: The Beast.

Read Full Story >>
pilgrimoutpost.techlandgg.com
130°

Looking Back At The $386,000 Dying Light 'My Apocalypse Edition', 10 Years Later

It has been more than ten years since Dying Light was released, but what happened to the $386,000 'My Apocalypse Edition' of the game?

Read Full Story >>
insider-gaming.com
jznrpg472d ago

Nobody bought it for an obvious reason.

Gamingsince1981471d ago

Wtf did this edition come with ? A real helicopter and a real zombie virus ?

Vithar471d ago

For one lucky person willing to spend $386,000, the My Apocalypse Edition of Dying Light promised a staggering collection. It included the buyer’s face in the game, a human-sized ‘Volatile’ statue, and parkour lessons with a freerunning team. It also came with night vision goggles, an all-expenses paid round trip to Techland’s offices, and four signed copies of the game. Oh, and it also came with a custom-built, ‘zombie-proof’ survival shelter.

LOL but it was a stunt from the team:
‘It was a PR stunt and got a lot of media attention for its wild and over-the-top nature, it was designed to generate buzz around the game’s release. It did a great job of getting the game noticed, though! But nobody purchased it – thankfully, I guess!’