Microsoft boosts Xbox One GPU by 53MHz in pre-launch tweak

Gikaseixas

Platinum Member
Jul 1, 2004
2,836
218
106
Is this an attempt to:
1 - match PS4 performance
2 - boost GPU power to play upcoming demanding games fairly well (BF4)

http://hexus.net/gaming/news/hardware/58525-microsoft-boosts-xbox-one-gpu-53mhz-pre-launch-tweak/

Article:
Microsoft has confirmed that a few changes have been made to the Xbox One to tweak it and get it ready for its launch in November. Xbox One chief product officer Marc Whitten revealed some of the changes in a podcast hosted by Major Nelson just before the weekend. In summary, after substantial hands-on and testing time the Xbox One developers have improved the console by tweaking up the GPU clock speed to 853MHz and created a new "mono driver" that is "100% optimised" for the hardware.
During the podcast Whitten said "It’s a super exciting time". He explained that "This is the time when you’ve gone from all of these specs and all of these arguments over the last several years to having the product, and really starting to try it internally. We’re running our internal beta and using it at home and starting to see the product really come together."

Whitten mentioned some specific changes to the Xbox hardware and software that the design team thought were optimal choices, following the testing of the first models, "This is the time when we’ve gone from the theory of how the hardware works - what we think the yield is going to look like, what is the thermal envelope, how do things come together - to actually having it in our hands." He detailed "...an example of that is we’ve tweaked up the clock speed on our GPU, from 800 MHz to 853 MHz. Just an example of how you really start landing the program as you get closer to launch."

The driver software which will help developers make the most of the Xbox One hardware has also been improved "...developers have the final dev kits in their hands and are really working closely with us on how things have come together. Since E3, an example is we’ve dropped in what we internally call our ‘mono driver.’ It’s our graphics driver that really is 100% optimized for the Xbox One hardware". Whitten concluded his Xbox One update by saying that the development team is working hard, with passion and everyday they are trying to improve and refine what the Xbox One will offer.

According to the most recent leaks the Xbox One will be released in the UK on 29th November, priced at £419.99. Prices in other regions are 499 US Dollars, 499 Euros and 599 Australian Dollars.
 

Bateluer

Lifer
Jun 23, 2001
27,730
8
0
Is this an attempt to:
1 - match PS4 performance
2 - boost GPU power to play upcoming demanding games fairly well (BF4)

http://hexus.net/gaming/news/hardware/58525-microsoft-boosts-xbox-one-gpu-53mhz-pre-launch-tweak/

Interesting. But there is no way for the Xbone to match the PS4's GPU performance through a clock increase.
Nor do I believe its simply to be able to play BF4. BF4 has been in development for a while and surely MS and EA would have held hands from an early stage. If the GPU in the Xbone wasn't going to cut it, they'd have known before the hardware specs were set in stone.

Perhaps yields were good on the silicon and they were able to increase the frequencies.
 
Last edited:

Mushkins

Golden Member
Feb 11, 2013
1,631
0
0
It's marketing, plain and simple. They want people to think that they're still squeezing more and more out of the XBOne. All of the launch games are already designed assuming the previous specs, they've been in development for at least the past year, an extra 53 mhz on the GPU two months before release isn't going to make a lick of difference. These games are all in the final testing phases or already gone gold and shipped to the printers to be ready for that November launch date.

Even on new games, that extra 53 mhz isn't going to make the XBOne do anything new or exciting, we might see an extra 4-5 FPS or a little more smoothness in borderline GPU taxing situations.
 

Smoblikat

Diamond Member
Nov 19, 2011
5,184
107
106
It's marketing, plain and simple. They want people to think that they're still squeezing more and more out of the XBOne. All of the launch games are already designed assuming the previous specs, they've been in development for at least the past year, an extra 53 mhz on the GPU two months before release isn't going to make a lick of difference. These games are all in the final testing phases or already gone gold and shipped to the printers to be ready for that November launch date.

Even on new games, that extra 53 mhz isn't going to make the XBOne do anything new or exciting, we might see an extra 4-5 FPS or a little more smoothness in borderline GPU taxing situations.

I agree, its roughly a 6% clock increase...............which doesnt really amount to much extra performance.
 

ZGR

Platinum Member
Oct 26, 2012
2,058
671
136
Both of these consoles are so similar internally that it makes me wonder if the PS4's 50% extra shaders will even make a noticeable difference.

Regardless, they are both black boxes with similar internals, similar prices, and companies with similar business practices. Both consoles will require a paid subscription to pay online.

The most important difference is the software experience and that is going to be the deciding factor for me; more so than the exclusives. If the software side is lackluster for both, then PC gaming will be just fine and dandy.
 

Mushkins

Golden Member
Feb 11, 2013
1,631
0
0
Both of these consoles are so similar internally that it makes me wonder if the PS4's 50% extra shaders will even make a noticeable difference.

For the vast majority of games it wont make a lick of difference for one specific reason: they (developers/publishers) intentionally won't optimize mutliplatform games for increased performance on the PS4. Both platforms are extremely close architecture-wise and hardware-wise, they're going to develop for the lowest common denominator, replace all the API hooks with the correct ones for each system, and push it out. Those minor optimizations cost time and money, and are guaranteed to piss off the publishers (who will most likely intentionally tell the developers not to do them) because it makes the product on the PS4 look like the "better" version and skews their XBOne sales numbers.

Where the added horsepower of the PS4 might actually get used will be PS4 exclusive titles, where the developers don't have to worry about if the XBOne can handle it, they can plan to take full advantage of the hardware right from the starting gate.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
I would not be surprised to see that the PS4 has fewer FPS drops during certain scenes in games. I know even in BLOPS2 on the 360 it gets some major frame rate drop if there is a bunch of explosions or the like.
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Where the added horsepower of the PS4 might actually get used will be PS4 exclusive titles, where the developers don't have to worry about if the XBOne can handle it, they can plan to take full advantage of the hardware right from the starting gate.

Yup, and PS generally have very good exclusive titles, like the past, always at the forefront of graphics excellence.

Also, the PS4 should have much much better minimum frame rates, which is the key factor for online shooters.
 

futurefields

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2012
6,470
32
91
For the vast majority of games it wont make a lick of difference for one specific reason: they (developers/publishers) intentionally won't optimize mutliplatform games for increased performance on the PS4. Both platforms are extremely close architecture-wise and hardware-wise, they're going to develop for the lowest common denominator, replace all the API hooks with the correct ones for each system, and push it out. Those minor optimizations cost time and money, and are guaranteed to piss off the publishers (who will most likely intentionally tell the developers not to do them) because it makes the product on the PS4 look like the "better" version and skews their XBOne sales numbers.

They would have to intentionally hamstring the PS4 version for it not to perform better. If the assetts are the same, the PS4 will be able to process them up to 50% faster which will lead to better framerates, even if they dont "up the graphics for the PS4 version."

If they are going to start intentionally hamstringing software to artificially level the playing field, [redacted].

Warning issued for inappropriate language.
-- stahlhart
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gikaseixas

Platinum Member
Jul 1, 2004
2,836
218
106
Both of these consoles are so similar internally that it makes me wonder if the PS4's 50% extra shaders will even make a noticeable difference

Interesting. But there is no way for the Xbone to match the PS4's GPU performance through a clock increase

Was thinking the same but i'm not sure the Xbox can reach PS4's level of performance. in the end it all depends on how well each manufacturer optimizes/tweak the software (OS)

Nor do I believe its simply to be able to play BF4. BF4 has been in development for a while and surely MS and EA would have held hands from an early stage

Used BF4 just as an example, could be 2014 games under development as we speak
 
Last edited:

Mushkins

Golden Member
Feb 11, 2013
1,631
0
0
They would have to intentionally hamstring the PS4 version for it not to perform better. If the assetts are the same, the PS4 will be able to process them up to 50% faster which will lead to better framerates, even if they dont "up the graphics for the PS4 version."

If they are going to start intentionally hamstringing software to artificially level the playing field, [redacted].

Warning issued for inappropriate language.
-- stahlhart

They've both stated that their goalpost this time around is 1080p/60. Current gen games were very frequently hard coded to cap at 30FPS to present a smooth, consistent level of performance. I'd imagine they're going to do the same but at 60FPS. All the better hardware in the world doesnt make a difference if both systems are already consistently sitting at the FPS cap because they could do more. Then it becomes a game of turning up the eye candy at the cost of those superfluous FPS, which is where things like the PS4s higher shader count come into play.
 

mizzou

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2008
9,734
54
91
it's a move for marketing payback with a risk of hardware malfunction

if it were a move for performance gains with a risk of hardware malfunction, it would not make sense because the risk of faulty units (crashing/artifacting/overheating) would outweigh the gains in performance.

We all have had cards and processors that would normally be OK to overclock to a certain degree, I'm sure there will be a few Xbones suffering the same fate.
 

BigChickenJim

Senior member
Jul 1, 2013
239
0
0
A 53 Mhz increase is not going to amount to any noticeable difference in performance and even if it did the PS4 would still come out on top. You can't just overclock a component and call it equal to an entirely different platform. This reeks of marketing to people who don't know any better. Come to think of it, that's pretty much been Microsoft's strategy all along.

Also, are we sure that MS knows what it's doing? When the 360 came out people considered themselves lucky just to have a unit that worked for more than a month before RROD.

If, and this is a really big if, I purchase a new console I can promise that an extra 53MHz is not going to sway me towards the Xbox. Especially not with that creepy Kinect thing watching me all the time and sending everything off to "the cloud."
 

CakeMonster

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2012
1,497
658
136
They know their own history, the MHz bump is surely withing safe margins with regards to projected heat/power/failure rates. I'm glad to see it but I'd prefer that a late tweak would include adding another 4Gb or something.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
A 53 Mhz increase is not going to amount to any noticeable difference in performance and even if it did the PS4 would still come out on top. You can't just overclock a component and call it equal to an entirely different platform. This reeks of marketing to people who don't know any better. Come to think of it, that's pretty much been Microsoft's strategy all along.

Also, are we sure that MS knows what it's doing? When the 360 came out people considered themselves lucky just to have a unit that worked for more than a month before RROD.

If, and this is a really big if, I purchase a new console I can promise that an extra 53MHz is not going to sway me towards the Xbox. Especially not with that creepy Kinect thing watching me all the time and sending everything off to "the cloud."

Wow people are still on this spy cam garbage? You can turn the kinect off. Turn it off, zero power, it doesn't function at all. You can bury it behind stuff and face the wall. It doesn't have to face you, you don't have to use it. It can't spy on you if you turn it off and bury it behind your A/V rack.

As for the GPU. There were rumors about them actually clocking the GPU under the standard speed before. Maybe they have just brought it up to where it should be anyway? It's no big deal, 53Mhz is going to be less than 1% improvement in actual performance.
 

Jimzz

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,399
190
106
I would bet this is more the game makers saying some early designs are dropping frames compared to the PS4.

The hardware is pretty much a done deal; to change now would mean a delay and new testing. I'm sure some people freaked out when Microsoft wanted the 53mhz bump oked. Its not just the extra 53mhz but the extra heat, power, and some cores will be trashed as they could not hot the new specs.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
They've both stated that their goalpost this time around is 1080p/60. Current gen games were very frequently hard coded to cap at 30FPS to present a smooth, consistent level of performance. I'd imagine they're going to do the same but at 60FPS. All the better hardware in the world doesnt make a difference if both systems are already consistently sitting at the FPS cap because they could do more. Then it becomes a game of turning up the eye candy at the cost of those superfluous FPS, which is where things like the PS4s higher shader count come into play.

Developers are what matters, not what manufacturers say. Ion Storm, the developers of the new Thief says they are going to do 30fps because "it's enough".
http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/thief..._producer_suggests_60fps_not_a_necessity.html

The next-gen console versions of Thief will likely be capped at 30 frames per second, Eidos Montreal producer Stephane Roy has suggested, telling VideoGamer.com that he would "prefer to have better physics" in PS4 Thief than a smoother "60 frames per second frame rate".

"For a shooter it's a no-brainer. The higher the frame rate is, the better it is." Roy told us, when asked if his team would be striving to achieve a high frame rate on next-gen consoles.

"On my side, the type of game I'm going to work on... I don't want to put extra pressure on the team just because we can do it if it's not a necessity. If the players see nothing different, maybe I would prefer to have better physics and stuff like that and not this 60 frames per second frame rate."

It was also confirmed by EA and DICE that Battlefield 4 is 720p @ 60fps. Not 1080p.

http://wccftech.com/battlefield-4-s...5-game-details-leaked-arriving-november-2013/
 

CakeMonster

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2012
1,497
658
136
I doubt any cores will be trashed. Given the power budget and the fact that they prioritize low noise, all of these chips will probably easily do much higher clocks when properly cooled.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
They've both stated that their goalpost this time around is 1080p/60. Current gen games were very frequently hard coded to cap at 30FPS to present a smooth, consistent level of performance. I'd imagine they're going to do the same but at 60FPS. All the better hardware in the world doesnt make a difference if both systems are already consistently sitting at the FPS cap because they could do more. Then it becomes a game of turning up the eye candy at the cost of those superfluous FPS, which is where things like the PS4s higher shader count come into play.

I have not heard of a single developer say they will be running at 1080/60.

Just like with the 360, most games are 720/30 or 720/60. With a few being 1080/30.
 

BigChickenJim

Senior member
Jul 1, 2013
239
0
0
Wow people are still on this spy cam garbage? You can turn the kinect off. Turn it off, zero power, it doesn't function at all. You can bury it behind stuff and face the wall. It doesn't have to face you, you don't have to use it. It can't spy on you if you turn it off and bury it behind your A/V rack.

As for the GPU. There were rumors about them actually clocking the GPU under the standard speed before. Maybe they have just brought it up to where it should be anyway? It's no big deal, 53Mhz is going to be less than 1% improvement in actual performance.

Last I checked, it had been confirmed that the system will not function without the Kinect plugged in. Even when it is "off," the microphone is still functioning. How else do you think you can turn on the system with a voice command at any time? As for burying it, I shouldn't have to actively take steps to prevent an entertainment item from potentially spying on me. That's ridiculous.

Maybe you don't care much about your privacy, but I'll be damned if I'm going to allow a cloud-based, always-on camera and microphone in my house. That's especially true given Microsoft's involvement in the recently disclosed domestic surveillance programs. I will also not be used as an unwitting advertising research study participant. Take a look at the patents the company has filed for the technology's uses. Facial recognition software? Heart rate monitors? Cloud-based voice recognition? Yeah, what could possibly go wrong?

It's funny to me that people still treat these concerns as conspiracy propaganda in the face of the now widely circulated acknowledgement of such programs. You can decide for yourself how much privacy you're willing to sacrifice for entertainment and how much trust you're willing to put in the privacy policies of faceless corporations. Call me crazy or paranoid if you want, but I'm going to steer well clear of Kinect.
 
Last edited:

rgallant

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2007
1,361
11
81
Last I checked, it had been confirmed that the system will not function without the Kinect plugged in. Even when it is "off," the microphone is still functioning. How else do you think you can turn on the system with a voice command at any time? As for burying it, I shouldn't have to actively take steps to prevent an entertainment item from potentially spying on me. That's ridiculous.

Maybe you don't care much about your privacy, but I'll be damned if I'm going to allow a cloud-based, always-on camera and microphone in my house. That's especially true given Microsoft's involvement in the recently disclosed domestic surveillance programs. I will also not be used as an unwitting advertising research study participant. Take a look at the patents the company has filed for the technology's uses. Facial recognition software? Heart rate monitors? Cloud-based voice recognition? Yeah, what could possibly go wrong?

It's funny to me that people still treat these concerns as conspiracy propaganda in the face of the now widely circulated acknowledgement of such programs. You can decide for yourself how much privacy you're willing to sacrifice for entertainment and how much trust you're willing to put in the privacy policies of faceless corporations. Call me crazy or paranoid if you want, but I'm going to steer well clear of Kinect.
unless you become rich or powerful the BigChichen file will never be opened.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Last I checked, it had been confirmed that the system will not function without the Kinect plugged in. Even when it is "off," the microphone is still functioning. How else do you think you can turn on the system with a voice command at any time? As for burying it, I shouldn't have to actively take steps to prevent an entertainment item from potentially spying on me. That's ridiculous.

Maybe you don't care much about your privacy, but I'll be damned if I'm going to allow a cloud-based, always-on camera and microphone in my house. That's especially true given Microsoft's involvement in the recently disclosed domestic surveillance programs. I will also not be used as an unwitting advertising research study participant. Take a look at the patents the company has filed for the technology's uses. Facial recognition software? Heart rate monitors? Cloud-based voice recognition? Yeah, what could possibly go wrong?

It's funny to me that people still treat these concerns as conspiracy propaganda in the face of the now widely circulated acknowledgement of such programs. You can decide for yourself how much privacy you're willing to sacrifice for entertainment and how much trust you're willing to put in the privacy policies of faceless corporations. Call me crazy or paranoid if you want, but I'm going to steer well clear of Kinect.

You need to check again. When it's off, it's off. Not functioning. It has to remain plugged in because that's how the controllers function, through it's connector. It is not watching or listening when it's off. You can as I said tuck it in the corner somewhere behind your A/V rack.

If you don’t want the Kinect sensor on while playing games or enjoying your entertainment, you can pause Kinect. To turn off your Xbox One, just say “Xbox Off.” When the system is off, it’s only listening for the single voice command -- “Xbox On,” and you can even turn that feature off too.

You're repeating blind hate and fanboy drivel from months ago that is totally false and 100% unfounded. You are not sacrificing privacy by owning an xbox one any more than connecting your PC to the internet. Plus it's totally off topic.

Anyway the GPU speed won't matter. Games have been designed for whatever specs they had access to before, the games we have seen won't change because of 53Mhz.
 
Last edited:

rgallant

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2007
1,361
11
81
You're repeating blind hate and fanboy drivel from months ago that is totally false and 100% unfounded. You are not sacrificing privacy by owning an xbox one any more than connecting your PC to the internet. Plus it's totally off topic.
- xbox 1 has less capabilities than a avg. smart phone for watching\tracking a peep.

-wonder if the ps 4 might be oc'ed in the future .
 
Last edited: