Microsoft's XBOX 1 Virtualization Architecture is Gimping the X1 Even Further

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for biggles2120
#1 Posted by biggles2120 (44 posts) -

I'm not going to post my resume.  I've worked with virtualization since its inception.  It's my job.  MS is not talking much about how the "3 OS"s" are running on the X1.  The hypervisor layer or virtual host has direct access to the hardware layer of the system.  This hypervisor or virtual host can run virtual machines on top of the hypervisor.  The reason I think this is important to understand is that anything running as a host on the hypervisor is not going to get 100% access to the hardware.  The X1 has a hypervisor integrated OS that hosts 2 virtual hosts.  One is the X1 gaming OS and the other is the apps. OS.

The hypervisor host machine manages what resources go to each virtual computer.  Microsoft is sure to be running a modification of the newest Hyper-V available on windows server.  This means the host server that is running the hypervisor is dynamically moving resources around when applications request the resources.  While this is pretty cool, it's not something that is going to be taking 0% resources to do all this stuff.  The dynamic resource management takes CPU cycles.   The host OS always needs to reserve a good chunk of CPU, Memory, and Disk resources for itself.  

To put things simple, Microsft's virtual architecture with the X1 is stealing much needed resources with a console that is already under powered.  If the X1 was a hardcore gaming machine games would get bare metal access.  Instead we're stuck with the middle man here.  And we all know the middle man always get his cut.  

I'm pasting some information from Microsofts documentation with Hyper-V (MS's Virtual Technology) below.  It is pretty clear I think.  This will give you an idea of the performance penalties to the virtual hosts.  CPU, Memory, Disk Assess all take a penalty. Even the GPU will take a small hit.   It won't be a huge hit.  Maybe 2-3% but still... Things just start adding up. This isn't a system that is 100% efficient.  MS really did go with the jack off all trades and master of none approach.

I guess I'm just a little jaded with what MS has determined is next gen.  Virtualization is a really cool technology, but if you pair that with an overwhelmingly underpowered system, you have to wonder how much MS really cares about gamers.  I guess we know why MS went with DDR3 memory.  This kind of architecture would not work well with GDDR5.  I doubt GDDR5 was even an option unless they were going to do split memory pools.  This was on purpose and probably was set in stone much further back than people reallize.

Link:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc768536(v=bts.10).aspx

CPU Overhead

The CPU overhead associated with running a guest operating system in a Hyper-V virtual machine was found to range between 9 and 12%. For example, a guest operating system running on a Hyper-V virtual machine typically had available 88-91% of the CPU resources available to an equivalent operating system running on physical hardware.

Memory Overhead

The memory cost associated with running a guest operating system on a Hyper-V virtual machine was observed to be approximately 300 MB for the hypervisor, plus 32 MB for the first GB of RAM allocated to each virtual machine, plus another 8 MB for every additional GB of RAM allocated to each virtual machine. For more information about allocating memory to guest operating systems running on a Hyper-V virtual machine, see the Optimizing Memory Performance section in Optimizing Performance on Hyper-V.

Network Overhead

Network latency directly attributable to running a guest operating system in a Hyper-V virtual machine was observed to be less than 1 ms and the guest operating system typically maintained a network output queue length of less than one. For more information about measuring the network output queue length, see the Measuring Network Performance section in Measuring Performance on Hyper-V.

Disk Overhead

When using the pass-through disk feature in Hyper-V, disk I/O overhead associated with running a guest operating system in a Hyper-V virtual machine was found to range between 6 and 8 %. For example, a guest operating system running on Hyper-V typically had available 92-94% of the disk I/O available to an equivalent operating system running on physical hardware as measured by the open source disk performance benchmarking tool IOMeter.

For information about measuring disk latency on a Hyper-V host or guest operating system using Performance Monitor, see the Measuring Disk I/O Performance section in Measuring Performance on Hyper-V.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#2 Posted by ronvalencia (28078 posts) -

I'm not going to post my resume. I've worked with virtualization since its inception. It's my job. MS is not talking much about how the "3 OS"s" are running on the X1. The hypervisor layer or virtual host has direct access to the hardware layer of the system. This hypervisor or virtual host can run virtual machines on top of the hypervisor. The reason I think this is important to understand is that anything running as a host on the hypervisor is not going to get 100% access to the hardware. The X1 has a hypervisor integrated OS that hosts 2 virtual hosts. One is the X1 gaming OS and the other is the apps. OS.

The hypervisor host machine manages what resources go to each virtual computer. Microsoft is sure to be running a modification of the newest Hyper-V available on windows server. This means the host server that is running the hypervisor is dynamically moving resources around when applications request the resources. While this is pretty cool, it's not something that is going to be taking 0% resources to do all this stuff. The dynamic resource management takes CPU cycles. The host OS always needs to reserve a good chunk of CPU, Memory, and Disk resources for itself.

To put things simple, Microsft's virtual architecture with the X1 is stealing much needed resources with a console that is already under powered. If the X1 was a hardcore gaming machine games would get bare metal access. Instead we're stuck with the middle man here. And we all know the middle man always get his cut.

I'm pasting some information from Microsofts documentation with Hyper-V (MS's Virtual Technology) below. It is pretty clear I think. This will give you an idea of the performance penalties to the virtual hosts. CPU, Memory, Disk Assess all take a penalty. Even the GPU will take a small hit. With this configuration MS is most likely using GPU mapping. It won't be a huge hit. Maybe 2-3% but still... Things just start adding up. This isn't a system that is 100% efficient. MS really did go with the jack off all trades and master of none.

I guess I'm just a little jaded with what MS has determined is next gen. Virtualization is a really cool technology, but if you pair that with an overwhelmingly underpowered system, you have to wonder how much MS really cares about gamers. I guess we know why MS went with DDR3 memory. This kind of architecture would not work well with GDDR5. I doubt GDDR5 was even an option unless they were going to do split memory pools. This was on purpose and probably set in stone much further back than people reallize.

....

biggles2120

http://www.giantbomb.com/forums/xbox-one-8450/why-does-the-xbox-one-have-a-hypervisor-and-what-i-1437760/


The hypervisor used on the Xbox One, while definitely based on the same technology, is not Hyper-V 2012. One of the things that has always been lauded in the console versus PC argument is that consoles are a closed environment. Each console is expected to be identical or at the very least have a minimum of resources. Microsoft (especially as a creator) knows exactly what's going into that machine. They can tailor the hypervisor to run those specific operating systems for games and apps. The foot print of the hypervisor will be much smaller than that of Hyper-V 2012

----

With "The dynamic resource management takes CPU cycles" issue, X1 has 6 CPU core reserved for the games and 2 CPU cores non-game workloads i.e. the CPU reasource is fixed.

On X1 GPU's resource management

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/167940-xbox-one-games-will-have-more-access-to-the-gpu-better-graphics-in-the-future-says-microsoft

Goossen does namecheck a handful of GPU hardware features that will help the engineering team free up some processing power for developers. Specifically, he names asynchronous compute queues and concurrent render pipes as being vital in keeping the OS from inhibiting game performance. The two render pipes can allow the hardware to render title content at high priority while concurrently rendering system content at low priority, Goossen says. The GPU hardware scheduler is designed to [maximize] throughput and automatically fills holes in the high-priority processing.

The purpose for having multiple ACE units is to reduce the context overheads that is being managed by the CPU.

PC's Hyper-V 2012 is not designed with AMD GCN is not mind.

Avatar image for biggles2120
#4 Posted by biggles2120 (44 posts) -

Of course MS is going to be running a customized version of Hyper-v. I never said X1 was running Hyper'-V. I said it was a modified version of it. MS didn't make a magical version of Hyper.V that takes no resources.  It's streamlined for sure as it doesn't need to same kind of services as a real server.  That doesn't change the fact that it's still going to sap strength from the system. The link below was meant for reference.  The concept still very much applies.

Avatar image for CJ_ofCamelot
#5 Posted by CJ_ofCamelot (2072 posts) -

All I hear is bad news for MS.

kingoflife9
Take them 2 decades maybe to realize a new controller.
Avatar image for silversix_
#6 Posted by silversix_ (26347 posts) -

[QUOTE="kingoflife9"]

All I hear is bad news for MS.

CJ_ofCamelot

Take them 2 decades maybe to realize a new controller.

how many decades until they stop using batteries?

Avatar image for CJ_ofCamelot
#7 Posted by CJ_ofCamelot (2072 posts) -

Of course MS is going to be running a customized version of Hyper-v. I never said X1 was running Hyper'-V. I said it was a modified version of it. MS didn't make a magical version of Hyper.V that takes no resources.  It's streamlined for sure as it doesn't need to same kind of services as a real server.  That doesn't change the fact that it's still going to sap strength from the system. The link below was meant for reference.  The concept still very much applies.

biggles2120
GatesWilliam.jpg
Avatar image for CJ_ofCamelot
#8 Posted by CJ_ofCamelot (2072 posts) -

[QUOTE="CJ_ofCamelot"][QUOTE="kingoflife9"]

All I hear is bad news for MS.

silversix_

Take them 2 decades maybe to realize a new controller.

how many decades until they stop using batteries?

Bish plz. th?id=H.4996869184948738&pid=15.1
Avatar image for MoneySha
#9 Posted by MoneySha (209 posts) -

The Xbox One is garbage... No matter how much damage controll Microsoft and Lems do, it doesn't take away the fact that the X1 is a weak piece of garbage...

Avatar image for MoneySha
#10 Posted by MoneySha (209 posts) -

The Xbox One is garbage... No matter how much damage controll Microsoft and Lems do, it doesn't take away the fact that the X1 is a weak piece of garbage...

Avatar image for edidili
#11 Posted by edidili (3449 posts) -

The gaming OS doesn't run on virtualization. Is the windows one that will do so. 

And yes the OS of the system along with its apps and other features like DVR will take resources away, like it will on PS4. Unless you want huge lag when trying to access even the achievements page. 

You may be familiar with the virtualization tech but you have no idea how xbox works. 

Avatar image for Shensolidus
#12 Posted by Shensolidus (931 posts) -

Man, TC... you actually do know your stuff on this. Please tell me you aren't another dev. You shouldn't be throwing this stuff out here, they will not care. Believe me.

Avatar image for Shensolidus
#13 Posted by Shensolidus (931 posts) -

Man, TC... you actually do know your stuff on this. Please tell me you aren't another dev. You shouldn't be throwing this stuff out here, they will not care. Believe me.

Avatar image for WilliamRLBaker
#14 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (28915 posts) -

Man, TC... you actually do know your stuff on this. Please tell me you aren't another dev. You shouldn't be throwing this stuff out here, they will not care. Believe me.

Shensolidus
you've thrown nothing out all you've said 100 times is bububbubububu im a developer and no I cant tell you my name, my company, or what game I'm helping to develop on the xbox done or ps4...ubbubububububububububbubububububu im a developer. Just like the TC if you cannot post proof than your a putzy idiot with nothing to back up your claims.
Avatar image for WilliamRLBaker
#15 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (28915 posts) -

[QUOTE="CJ_ofCamelot"][QUOTE="kingoflife9"]

All I hear is bad news for MS.

silversix_

Take them 2 decades maybe to realize a new controller.

how many decades until they stop using batteries?

I've already went through 3 dualshock 3 batteries since launch...not so much the 360....
Avatar image for ronvalencia
#16 Posted by ronvalencia (28078 posts) -

Man, TC... you actually do know your stuff on this. Please tell me you aren't another dev. You shouldn't be throwing this stuff out here, they will not care. Believe me.

Shensolidus

PC's Hyper-V 2012 is not AMD GCN's multiple ACE units aware.

Avatar image for tdkmillsy
#17 Posted by tdkmillsy (3133 posts) -
Oh come on. What is it with all the troll posts. Hyper-v is a server technology why take its down falls and apply it to Xbox One. PS4 is also doing elements of OS while gaming does that mean its running Sony's Hyper-v equivalent. Lame thread.
Avatar image for tormentos
#18 Posted by tormentos (29198 posts) -

Doesn't surprice me 3 OS will consume more resources than plain 1,i think is the reason 2 cores are there for the OS while 10% of the GPU is also reserve the xbox one has a huge hit by its os and features.

Avatar image for LA-Nighthawk
#19 Posted by LA-Nighthawk (335 posts) -
It's a more capable device. It does more so it does have less resources for games. Microsoft must have realized at one point that giving you more bang for your buck is more important than slightly shinier graphics and that great games will get made regardless.
Avatar image for XBOunity
#20 Posted by XBOunity (3837 posts) -

It is so underpowered that its producing the best visuals at launch with ryse.  Shens a dev too and im an astroturfer marketer and the version of hyperviser that you are familiar with is  running on xbo.    

Avatar image for tormentos
#21 Posted by tormentos (29198 posts) -

It is so underpowered that its producing the best visuals at launch with ryse.  Shens a dev too and im an astroturfer marketer and the version of hyperviser that you are familiar with is  running on xbo.    

XBOunity

 

:lol:

 

hahaha ...no..

 

Good looking close to camera character,the rest in unimpressive as hell,Killzone SF not only look better,is way way wayyyyyyy more open has tons of effects and particles going on,and is 1080p...Oh and its multiplayer look way better than Ryse online or offline while been 1080p 60 FPS.

 

Give it up dude is under power,not even Crytek can make the xbox one shine.

Avatar image for XBOunity
#23 Posted by XBOunity (3837 posts) -

[QUOTE="XBOunity"]

It is so underpowered that its producing the best visuals at launch with ryse.  Shens a dev too and im an astroturfer marketer and the version of hyperviser that you are familiar with is  running on xbo.    

tormentos

 

:lol:

 

hahaha ...no..

 

Good looking close to camera character,the rest in unimpressive as hell,Killzone SF not only look better,is way way wayyyyyyy more open has tons of effects and particles going on,and is 1080p...Oh and its multiplayer look way better than Ryse online or offline while been 1080p 60 FPS.

 

Give it up dude is under power,not even Crytek can make the xbox one shine.

I believe my eyes my friend.  Technically shadowfall is most impressive with its almost 60fps that drops all over the place, but ill give you that.  Ryse is thr best visuals fidelity wise.  I know its linear etc save your breath.   Xbo proves its very capable day 1.  I hope you get some games.   I have 4 awesome games at launch and when im done with them I have the best game of 2014 in Titanfall.   No worries for me.   You on the other hand will be starved for an Aaae for a long time, maybe a year.   

Avatar image for Floppy_Jim
#24 Posted by Floppy_Jim (25849 posts) -
I don't know what you're talking about but it's good to have someone on here who does know what they're talking about. Stick around.
Avatar image for deactivated-5ba16896d1cc2
#25 Posted by deactivated-5ba16896d1cc2 (2504 posts) -

It is so underpowered that its producing the best visuals at launch with ryse.  Shens a dev too and im an astroturfer marketer and the version of hyperviser that you are familiar with is  running on xbo.    

XBOunity

unfortunetly you are wrong by that statement, 900p, 30 fps very linear Ryse should look better considering its circumstances, KZ SF without a doubt in my mind looks better then Ryse, the multiplayer side alone STILL looks better then Ryse and runs at actual 1080p and above 30 fps, UNLIKE Ryse

 

XBOunity and lemmings ever since the Xbox One reveal:

 

ilERlIuaHoeTm.gif

Avatar image for deactivated-5ba16896d1cc2
#26 Posted by deactivated-5ba16896d1cc2 (2504 posts) -

[QUOTE="tormentos"]

[QUOTE="XBOunity"]

It is so underpowered that its producing the best visuals at launch with ryse.  Shens a dev too and im an astroturfer marketer and the version of hyperviser that you are familiar with is  running on xbo.    

XBOunity

 

:lol:

 

hahaha ...no..

 

Good looking close to camera character,the rest in unimpressive as hell,Killzone SF not only look better,is way way wayyyyyyy more open has tons of effects and particles going on,and is 1080p...Oh and its multiplayer look way better than Ryse online or offline while been 1080p 60 FPS.

 

Give it up dude is under power,not even Crytek can make the xbox one shine.

I believe my eyes my friend.  Technically shadowfall is most impressive with its almost 60fps that drops all over the place, but ill give you that.  Ryse is thr best visuals fidelity wise.  I know its linear etc save your breath.   Xbo proves its very capable day 1.  I hope you get some games.   I have 4 awesome games at launch and when im done with them I have the best game of 2014 in Titanfall.   No worries for me.   You on the other hand will be starved for an Aaae for a long time, maybe a year.   

good thing you have a opinion, because most people DO think KZ SF is the best looking launch console game coming out, and its true, actual 1080p/above 30 fps/24 players online/etc etc, Ryse 900p, very linear, etc etc with a 10-15 hour story mode and then you throw the game away and never play it again
Avatar image for XxR3m1xInHDn3D
#27 Posted by XxR3m1xInHDn3D (2365 posts) -
[QUOTE="kingoflife9"]

All I hear is bad news for MS.

CJ_ofCamelot
Take them 2 decades maybe to realize a new controller.

Nearly took Sony 2 decades to make the DS a semi decent controller
Avatar image for killzowned24
#28 Posted by killzowned24 (7345 posts) -

Of course MS is going to be running a customized version of Hyper-v. I never said X1 was running Hyper'-V. I said it was a modified version of it. MS didn't make a magical version of Hyper.V that takes no resources.  It's streamlined for sure as it doesn't need to same kind of services as a real server.  That doesn't change the fact that it's still going to sap strength from the system. The link below was meant for reference.  The concept still very much applies.

biggles2120
That link is some damning evidence right from the horses mouth and nobody can deny it will suck more power from the already weak xbone. :D
Avatar image for killzowned24
#29 Posted by killzowned24 (7345 posts) -

BONK

Avatar image for WilliamRLBaker
#30 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (28915 posts) -

[QUOTE="XBOunity"]

It is so underpowered that its producing the best visuals at launch with ryse.  Shens a dev too and im an astroturfer marketer and the version of hyperviser that you are familiar with is  running on xbo.    

xboxiphoneps3

unfortunetly you are wrong by that statement, 900p, 30 fps very linear Ryse should look better considering its circumstances, KZ SF without a doubt in my mind looks better then Ryse, the multiplayer side alone STILL looks better then Ryse and runs at actual 1080p and above 30 fps, UNLIKE Ryse

 

XBOunity and lemmings ever since the Xbox One reveal:

 

ilERlIuaHoeTm.gif

ryse could be 1080p/120fps and you'd still be of the same opinion dont act like yoiur anything but a rampant sheen whom hates any thing microsoft and adores every thing sony.
Avatar image for deactivated-5ba16896d1cc2
#31 Posted by deactivated-5ba16896d1cc2 (2504 posts) -

[QUOTE="xboxiphoneps3"]

[QUOTE="XBOunity"]

It is so underpowered that its producing the best visuals at launch with ryse.  Shens a dev too and im an astroturfer marketer and the version of hyperviser that you are familiar with is  running on xbo.    

WilliamRLBaker

unfortunetly you are wrong by that statement, 900p, 30 fps very linear Ryse should look better considering its circumstances, KZ SF without a doubt in my mind looks better then Ryse, the multiplayer side alone STILL looks better then Ryse and runs at actual 1080p and above 30 fps, UNLIKE Ryse

 

XBOunity and lemmings ever since the Xbox One reveal:

 

ilERlIuaHoeTm.gif

ryse could be 1080p/120fps and you'd still be of the same opinion dont act like yoiur anything but a rampant sheen whom hates any thing microsoft and adores every thing sony.

uh yeah too bad i have owned many many Microsoft products and have played the shit out of them, i actually like the Xbox and Microsoft, hence my name says Xbox in it, i like both Sony and Microsoft, and i am a big Halo fan. if Ryse was 1080p/120 fps then thatd be a different story, quit making terrible assumptions

 

i simply show facts sir, even ask XBOunity, he calls me the COW TECH KING for some reason.. there is a difference between spouting nonsense and speaking truth 

 

Ryse does not look better, even it being 900p and them improving the quality per pixel by alot by going to 900p, sad to say 

Avatar image for timbers_WSU
#32 Posted by timbers_WSU (6076 posts) -

Man, TC... you actually do know your stuff on this. Please tell me you aren't another dev. You shouldn't be throwing this stuff out here, they will not care. Believe me.

Shensolidus
But you are not a dev. Your are a liar claiming to be one. Big difference.
Avatar image for deactivated-5ba16896d1cc2
#33 Posted by deactivated-5ba16896d1cc2 (2504 posts) -
[QUOTE="Shensolidus"]

Man, TC... you actually do know your stuff on this. Please tell me you aren't another dev. You shouldn't be throwing this stuff out here, they will not care. Believe me.

timbers_WSU
But you are not a dev. Your are a liar claiming to be one. Big difference.

lool
Avatar image for NEWMAHAY
#34 Posted by NEWMAHAY (3824 posts) -
This might be the first gen that the console graphic king is held by one console its entire lifespan.
Avatar image for Zaibach
#36 Posted by Zaibach (13466 posts) -

is TC an engineer or dev?

Avatar image for fend_oblivion
#37 Posted by fend_oblivion (6733 posts) -
[QUOTE="silversix_"]

[QUOTE="CJ_ofCamelot"] Take them 2 decades maybe to realize a new controller.CJ_ofCamelot

how many decades until they stop using batteries?

Bish plz. th?id=H.4996869184948738&pid=15.1

:lol: So saving that.
Avatar image for Zaibach
#38 Posted by Zaibach (13466 posts) -

is TC an engineer or dev?

Avatar image for Xplode_games
#39 Posted by Xplode_games (1993 posts) -

The point everyone here seems to be missing is that MS already stated that 2 of the CPU cores would be reserved for the OS and apps as well as 3 GB of the 8GB of RAM. Also 10% of the GPU would be reserved as well but later they could release some of that 10%. 

This is not news, it's already been accounted for and the only thing new is that in the future with optimisation performance will improve. 

Now what about the reason MS is doing this? Can you imagine how sweet it will be to switch between all of your content with the X1 that is using 2 CPU cores, 3 GBs of RAM and 10% GPU? It's going to be an amazing experience and will hardly affect gaming at all except to improve it. 

Now if you tell me MS should've put in a stronger GPU then I am in full agreement. But to say that something that is one of the most amazing things for next gen and will really blow everyone's mind is a bad thing is just dumb.

There is a reason why Sony is reserving 3GBs of RAM to try to copy what MS is doing. They know those will be killer features and they will have to match them just as they spent all current gen trying to match the 360's features. 

Avatar image for Chutebox
#40 Posted by Chutebox (44657 posts) -

It is so underpowered that its producing the best visuals at launch with ryse.  Shens a dev too and im an astroturfer marketer and the version of hyperviser that you are familiar with is  running on xbo.    

XBOunity

:lol:

And dude, "doth protest too much, methinks."

Avatar image for Xplode_games
#41 Posted by Xplode_games (1993 posts) -

The point everyone here seems to be missing is that MS already stated that 2 of the CPU cores would be reserved for the OS and apps as well as 3 GB of the 8GB of RAM. Also 10% of the GPU would be reserved as well but later they could release some of that 10%. 

This is not news, it's already been accounted for and the only thing new is that in the future with optimisation performance will improve. 

Now what about the reason MS is doing this? Can you imagine how sweet it will be to switch between all of your content with the X1 that is using 2 CPU cores, 3 GBs of RAM and 10% GPU? It's going to be an amazing experience and will hardly affect gaming at all except to improve it. 

Now if you tell me MS should've put in a stronger GPU then I am in full agreement. But to say that something that is one of the most amazing things for next gen and will really blow everyone's mind is a bad thing is just dumb.

There is a reason why Sony is reserving 3GBs of RAM to try to copy what MS is doing. They know those will be killer features and they will have to match them just as they spent all current gen trying to match the 360's features. 

Avatar image for biggles2120
#42 Posted by biggles2120 (44 posts) -

The gaming OS doesn't run on virtualization. Is the windows one that will do so. 

And yes the OS of the system along with its apps and other features like DVR will take resources away, like it will on PS4. Unless you want huge lag when trying to access even the achievements page. 

You may be familiar with the virtualization tech but you have no idea how xbox works. 

edidili

Wrong. The XBOX gaming OS is going to be a virtual machine with hardware mapping. Kind of like how a passthrough disk works in hyper-v. or vmware. This provides a more direct route to the hardware but it doesn't change the fact that there is going to be a performance penalty. Things add up. You can't have a hypervisor and another OS both be running off the bare metal hardware. It doesn't work that way.

Avatar image for Mr-Kutaragi
#43 Posted by Mr-Kutaragi (2466 posts) -
Everybody know MS produce gimpbox.