• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Microsoft: Cloud quadruples Xbox One power

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
smackababy said:
Have you guys never actually played a game that used a server to calculate things? WoW does this for damage, loot, spawning of mobs. Offloading things from the client is helpful. Sure, you require an internet connection, but this is 2013.
Click to expand...

wow does that because it's an MMO and has to broadcast a lot of that stuff off to other clients and there'd be rampant cheating if people could access the loot table themselves locally. it's not doing it because client computers are slow.
 
smackababy said:
Except from what has been displayed, if the Xbox is off you have to say "Xbox on" and then use the skype app. I think your tin foil hat is tighter than your... um grip.
Click to expand...

I've gotten to the point now following the new console threads in here that all I do is scroll to see the next pro Xbox post you make. Congrats, you have a new fan. You on Twitter?
 
I can only think of one advantage provided by remote servers doing calculations for you that won't be offset by network latency: Large GTA / Crackdown / open world games where the world continues to function outside of your immediate sight range, and all of the decisions about what the actors in that world are doing are handled remotely.

The examples provided in that article are nonsense - you're going to calculate the math for fog remotely and get it back in time to display it on screen? Or even more ludicrous, sunlight shining down on you? I would be happy to be proven wrong but I just don't see it.
 
Arkaign said:
True, it also seems like a preemptive pile of BS to help defend them against the truth that the PS4 is simply a more powerful unit.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.With so many similarities between the two systems, it's so easy to objectively argue "PS4 is better" thanks to the faster memory and beefier GPU. Microsoft can try to argue that thing about the "eDSRAM or whatever kinda is better, maybe." People like me who don't know enough about hardware don't really understand, but it smells like BS. However, I don't think it's *that* rare for mainstream gamers to see and understand the benefits just by looking at the system specs.

If average consumers start to think of the PS4 as more powerful, Microsoft can pretend that the xbox's real power is in cloud computing. I bet they'll have a live tech demo at E3 this year or next to show off some crazy graphics using the cloud computation thing, but I doubt it will really matter, if at all, in most games.

...but, TBH, I think maybe Microsoft will just advertise Kinect like crazy, and continue to buy game studios for more 1st party games. I hate the later, it seems like such an unfair way to compete. Imagine: "You want to play GTA 6 or Modern Warfare 5? We just bought exclusivity for three years!" Sony will not win if they fight microsoft with an appeal to the average gamer (I think they realized this). I hope they focus all of their efforts on "hardcore" console gamers (whatever that mean) and hope that enough of their mainstream gaming friends follow their lead. I think it's unrealistic to expect Sony to beat Microsoft, but I think perhaps Sony can stay strong as the brand for the nerdier, smaller gamer crowd, while microsoft wins over the whole family, Wii style.
 
Doppel said:
...

It is a little like a guy selling a car capable of 200mph and pretending that it will let me get to my destinations in half the time I can in my current car with half the top speed.
Click to expand...

A great analogy!

And i'm going to jump on the "I'm sick of the word 'Cloud'" bandwagon here.

I'm a software engineer and hear this crap all the time... so sick of it. It's as if all the marketing people in the world simultaneously realized that we can do centralized computing (which we've been doing essentially since the beginning of computing). Ugh.
 
purbeast0 said:
im so fucking tired of the buzzword "cloud". it's thrown around EVERYwhere now.
Click to expand...
Me too 🙂.

Otherwise, using remote servers to calculate complicated equations isn't anything new. However i'd imagine it would be helpful, so i guess for those buying an Xbox One is will be a useful feature.

Krioni said:
It's as if all the marketing people in the world simultaneously realized that we can do centralized computing (which we've been doing essentially since the beginning of computing). Ugh.
Click to expand...
Ha, i never thought about it like that, but it's absolutely true. I'm too young to have ever worked up against a mainframe with a terminal, but yea - Cloud Computing !!!! 😛
 
Last edited:
Krioni said:
A great analogy!

And i'm going to jump on the "I'm sick of the word 'Cloud'" bandwagon here.

I'm a software engineer and hear this crap all the time... so sick of it. It's as if all the marketing people in the world simultaneously realized that we can do centralized computing (which we've been doing essentially since the beginning of computing). Ugh.
Click to expand...



It always pisses me off because it feels like a regression in technology. I always thought it amazing to have such powerful distributed computing in the world with the PC. Now we're going backwards to the mainframes. 😵

It also makes NO business sense to do it. Servers are expensive, much moreso than conventional consumer level computing. For MS to eat the costs of all those servers instead of simply beefing up the XBone a little and passing the costs to consumers doesn't make sense. Using it to do DRM and maximize profits by destroying the used game market however does.

I'm sure MS did a cost/benefit analysis of all the used games being sold and how much they could make even if they charged $5,10,15... etc for the license for each game sold like that and have arrived at an acceptable level of server performance and cost with how much a license will cost a used game buyer.
 
The thing is, they don't necessarily need to dedicate any large number servers at all to be "Xbox servers".

They set up 300,000 Azure servers, for their standard cloud services to compete with Amazon and Google. They use a certain number of those for Xbox depending on actual use and sell the rest of the server time to business customers.

So, if they've paid EA to include some goofy cloud feature in Madden 2014 as a marketing gimmick, they use more servers for that when the game comes out. Once use drops off the servers go back to running database jobs for a paper clip manufacturing company.

We use Amazon cloud servers at work for some tasks so I know how they can be useful, but given latency and bandwidth issues I'm not convinced yet that they can magically make Fallout 4 single-player a better game.
 
DaveSimmons said:
We use Amazon cloud servers at work for some tasks so I know how they can be useful, but given latency and bandwidth issues I'm not convinced yet that they can magically make Fallout 4 single-player a better game.
Click to expand...


And that's why until everything is on a minimum fiber network that I think this is all BS in the sky talk for the marketers to bad their year end bonuses.
 
So looking at the news, EVE and Dust 514 has been down due to a DDoS attack, I'm really curious how MS, which garners much more hate, will deal with this. They're going to already have tons of legit traffic then toss in a DDoS and I'm really wondering just how well this whole thing will work out. I'm really looking forward to it overall despite my belief it's a failed endeavor for the consumer.
 
Nintendesert said:
So looking at the news, EVE and Dust 514 has been down due to a DDoS attack, I'm really curious how MS, which garners much more hate, will deal with this. They're going to already have tons of legit traffic then toss in a DDoS and I'm really wondering just how well this whole thing will work out. I'm really looking forward to it overall despite my belief it's a failed endeavor for the consumer.
Click to expand...

EVE has how many servers? There is a reason sites like Google and Facebook don't go down from DDoS attacks. It isn't exactly rocket science to build a robust network and have a little security over how connection requests are handled. I don't see a bot net stopping MS, especially their Azure servers.
 
smackababy said:
Have you guys never actually played a game that used a server to calculate things? WoW does this for damage, loot, spawning of mobs. Offloading things from the client is helpful. Sure, you require an internet connection, but this is 2013.

Wanna play a game with large, randomly generated levels? Good luck doing that on your console. They can be generated on the server much faster then just rendered by the console. The client is pretty much a dummy client and the servers can take care of all the real work.
Click to expand...

Are you really this ignorant or just trolling?

Servers use essentially the same processors that desktops do. And if the data is so complicated that it takes a farm to process it, then the resultant data set will be far too large to download over your puny broadband connection in any reasonable amount of time.

High performance real time applications process locally. Cloud computing is for non-realtime calculation.
 
smackababy said:
EVE has how many servers? There is a reason sites like Google and Facebook don't go down from DDoS attacks. It isn't exactly rocket science to build a robust network and have a little security over how connection requests are handled. I don't see a bot net stopping MS, especially their Azure servers.
Click to expand...



Sure, if we believe MS is going to devote more resources to it than EA or Activision did for their games. 😀 How long will MS bleed money from more profitable uses of their Amazon competing hosting services? :sneaky:

That's the bad part of this great online experience, once they decide to shutdown the servers, it's done. What happens to all those great online features then? We've already seen the effects on the PC side when game servers get shutdown. I guess by then we'll just all upgrade to the X2Ba. :thumbsup:
 
KomodoRogue said:
...but, TBH, I think maybe Microsoft will just advertise Kinect like crazy, and continue to buy game studios for more 1st party games. I hate the later, it seems like such an unfair way to compete. Imagine: "You want to play GTA 6 or Modern Warfare 5? We just bought exclusivity for three years!" Sony will not win if they fight microsoft with an appeal to the average gamer (I think they realized this). I hope they focus all of their efforts on "hardcore" console gamers (whatever that mean) and hope that enough of their mainstream gaming friends follow their lead. I think it's unrealistic to expect Sony to beat Microsoft, but I think perhaps Sony can stay strong as the brand for the nerdier, smaller gamer crowd, while microsoft wins over the whole family, Wii style.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Microsoft doesn't have the right games to appeal to the family. Nintendo does, Sony does if they bring them out like Jack & Daxter for example. Microsoft built itself on mature rated games and that is where their base is(Halo, Gears of War, Fable and they even pushed CoD during their reveal). It's no secret. This is why they are forcing kinect. I firmly believe that they don't feel confident in gaining different markets without a gimmick to sell people on. If they can make people think that they need kinect and some TV functions they can sell content (games, apps, subscriptions to XBL). I think they already alienated a very large population of gamers out there with their reveal. A good friend of mine who is a manager at a local gamestop was talking to me just today about the perception of the PS4 vs the Xbox One. There are a lot of people who don't read much info about stuff but the one common theme was the perception that the PS4 is built for gamers and the Xbox One is built with gaming as an after thought. Almost like a PC which you can play games on too. Not the primary purpose if you understand what I mean. Whether you feel the same way or not if up to you, but I really think Sony made a better presentation to gamers in general. Especially with Indie Dev Self Publish. I'm not a fan of very many indie games. I just don't seem to enjoy them the same way I enjoy a game from Rockstar, Gearbox, Naughty Dog, Nintendo etc. You know, the so called AAA titles. Having said that the importance of bringing in and embracing the indie game developer community cannot be understated.
 
KomodoRogue said:
I agree with you.With so many similarities between the two systems, it's so easy to objectively argue "PS4 is better" thanks to the faster memory and beefier GPU. Microsoft can try to argue that thing about the "eDSRAM or whatever kinda is better, maybe."
Click to expand...

That's totally why Anand argued it, yes?

Depending on how the eSRAM is managed, it’s very possible that the Xbox One could have comparable effective memory bandwidth to the PlayStation 4. If the eSRAM isn’t managed as a cache however, this all gets much more complicated...

There are merits to both approaches. Sony has the most present-day-GPU-centric approach to its memory subsystem: give the GPU a wide and fast GDDR5 interface and call it a day. It’s well understood and simple to manage. The downsides? High speed GDDR5 isn’t the most power efficient, and Sony is now married to a more costly memory technology for the life of the PlayStation 4.
Click to expand...

Oh, nevermind. This isn't a "simple" discussion.
 
In other words, the PS4 is better now, but maybe with the right optimizations the Xbox can be as good later. But the Xbox design will save MS more money over time either way.
 
DaveSimmons said:
In other words, the PS4 is better now, but maybe with the right optimizations the Xbox can be as good later. But the Xbox design will save MS more money over time either way.
Click to expand...

Better is a relative term. If the XBox sells even close to as well as the PS4, MS will make more money per unit (or they will sell more because it's cheaper, perhaps) and also make money from Live. That could be considered winning.

Winning isn't about the console with the best graphics. Hell, no one "won" the last console gen, really. They competed. Which is a GOOD thing.
 
But we were talking about better in terms of graphics, not who will win or which one offers the best value. Out of the gate, the PS4 wins in this one area.

Will it win in any other way? Who knows.
 
RampantAndroid said:
Better is a relative term. If the XBox sells even close to as well as the PS4, MS will make more money per unit (or they will sell more because it's cheaper, perhaps) and also make money from Live. That could be considered winning.

Winning isn't about the console with the best graphics. Hell, no one "won" the last console gen, really. They competed. Which is a GOOD thing.
Click to expand...

That depends on the BoM cost because we already know that every Xbox comes with a Kinect 2 but does every PS4 comes with Eyetoy thing?
 
RampantAndroid said:
Winning isn't about the console with the best graphics. Hell, no one "won" the last console gen, really. They competed. Which is a GOOD thing.
Click to expand...

True. If we are talking dollars and cents, then the Wii decimated the field in spite of being graphically inferior to both the PS3 and 360. The Wii also brought a ton of new casual gamers into the community that simply wouldn't have existed otherwise. The 360 dominated the PS3 over much of its early life, but in the end it became pretty much a tie.

With Nintendo fumbling so hard with the Wii U, the field is ripe. The performance potential between the PS4 and XB1 is so similar that this next gen is going to be defined almost completely by software. Exclusives by third party developers are going to become even more rare because they want to maximize revenue, which minimizes the differences between the consoles even further.

I bet ultimately gamers will choose their next console based on whether they want God of War and Gran Turismo or Gears of War and Forza. I'm generalizing here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top