(RUMOR) Durango CPU clocked at 1.6ghz.

[Arras]

I love how everyone in that thread missed the whole point from marcan's tweets.


Right, extra cores are only any good for asynchronous operations, I doubt most games would utilize more than two cores, even if they could.

Exactly. Using 32 threads would make it near impossible to properly port to other platforms as well, and the other way around, if the only redeeming feature of the CPU is the amount of cores devs will have to find a way to split the regular 2/4 threads into 16/32 separate ones for porting games to the Durango. Not going to happen any time soon.

 

[Rydian]

I doubt most games would utilize more than two cores, even if they could.

Yeah, even new game engines only use 2-3 at the max.

 

[Coto]

Right, extra cores are only any good for asynchronous operations, I doubt most games would utilize more than two cores, even if they could.

So then less cores means higher speed per clock (to carry today's frameworks on most games). marcan knows a lot of stuff, but 1,6ghz on a xbox 720... uhm no.

 

[Rydian]

Intel Atom N2100 @ 1.60GHz: 321 on passmark.
Intel Core i5-2467M @ 1.60GHz: 2322 on passmark.

Ghz means jack shit alone.

 

[McHaggis]

So then less cores me possibly er speed per clock (to carry today's frameworks on most games). marcan knows a lot of stuff, but 1,6ghz on a xbox 720... uhm no.

I wonder what sold more 360s, the CPU or Kinect. For some reason, possibly fanboyism, every 360 owner thinks Microsoft are going to ignore market trends and launch an expensive powerhouse console next generation, but I can't understand why they would.

 

[Coto]

Remember that microsoft have had a good track at gaming console hardware, even back from the xbox 1 era. Plus it carries DX so most PC ports should rely on a faster core. If bus bandwidth/io access is improved then less mhz would be possible, but as far as 1.6 even on a bazillion of cores on a gaming console...

or the SDK could shuffle threads to as much CPU's as possible, or CPU core clock will be higher and better bandwidth on tandem cpus running threads in-sync. (this one could mean less ghz, but 1.6 uhm)

I wonder what sold more 360s, the CPU or Kinect. For some reason, possibly fanboyism, every 360 owner thinks Microsoft are going to ignore market trends and launch an expensive powerhouse console next generation, but I can't understand why they would.

You got a valid question, but.. i'm sure xbox720 will possibly handle much more raw data, mainly because of today's frameworks being developed. Microsoft is kinda like Sony in from that viewpoint. They know the moment 3rd party developers have abandoned their machine because of low specs they will lose the gaming console war.

Also, IIRC PC users tend to buy faster hardware to enjoy games at better framerates/better gaming experience, and right behind that is where Microsoft lives.

But for some reason I suspect we won't see that much difference in the CPU clocks but in GPU/IO because of all those resources required by 3DTV's (which will be the future anyway), mixed with next gen gpu features (possibly hardcoded functions too so they won't bother the stressed CPU)

 

[TripleSMoon]

Wii U CPU Clockspeed leaked: OH MY GAWD GUYS, WII U CPU SUCKS. WEAKER THAN 360 CONFIRMED.
Durango CPU Clockspeed leaked by same guy: FAKE GUYS, IT'S FAKE. MICROSOFT WON'T GIVE US WEAKSAUCE LIKE THIS.




Not that clock-speed really means much, anyways.

Hit the nail on the head.

 

[the_randomizer]

...What is this I don't even... Where do people get these ideas?

Eurogamer and Gamespot.