Support NeoGAF

[clashfan]

3 x 360/PS3 CPU
3 x 360/PS3 GPU


etc?

How exactly are you measuring that?

 

[venne]

This no-optical drive debate is hilariously misguided. You cannot possibly believe this shit. Just stop trying to prove that Blu-ray was completely without merit. It's been five years. Microsoft will use it and ya'll look like total muppets to ever doubt it.

If you can't see the writing on the wall for physical media by now, I don't know what to say to you.

This isn't to say it will be gone tomorrow, hell they still sell CDs.

 

[jax (old)]

I swear, if i see someone else seriously complain about the ram of this (shitty) rumor saying that today the ram is cheap and they should insert AT LEAST 4GB I'll kill someone

your post makes little to no sense.

 

[Nealand Liquor]

Wow, do you know what 3 times more powerful than 360 or PS3 even means?

Like six rolls of duct tape?

 

[chaosblade]

How exactly are you measuring that?

If you measure by GFLOPs you're looking at something in the general ballpark (possibly the parking lot) of a GTX 250 and 450. Not the most accurate way to determine performance, but it would at least give a rough idea.

And for the record, both of those are less powerful than high end cards from 2008.

 

[amstradcpc]

How exactly are you measuring that?

GPU = 3 times the gigaflops, and the bandwith ( along with ROPs for AA,filtering... and the texture units )
CPU = 3 times the available threads
RAM = 3 times the available RAM for the total system

 

[JNappula]

I'm pretty sure that MS will use an unified memory architecture in the final product, but for now are using a split architechture in the dev system (2GB DDR3 + 2GB GDDR5?). X360 is an unified memory system, but the dev system for it was a split one (PowerMacs + discrete graphics cards).

Same with the dual GPU setup, I'm sure it will replaced with single a GPU in the final product.

So, all in all, this rumour might make some sense as long as it is taken as one describing the current development system instead of the final console HW.

 

[duk]

Wii U will not be 3 times as powerful as 360/PS3... PS4/720 might be only 4 times as powerful lol

 

[Zinthar]

2GB of ram for a console will get better performance than your Pc with 2GB.

By the time this thing is released, no gaming PC will use 2GB of RAM. RAM is dirt cheap -- 8GB DDR3 can be had for as little as $30-50.

But that's beside the point, because I think this rumor is total bullshit. Modern graphics cards use GDDR5 video RAM because it's significantly faster than DDR3. By the time the 360's successor is released, it's likely that DDR3 won't even be the standard for system memory. It's highly unlikely that Microsoft would choose to begin with a technology on the verge of obsolescence.

This rumor sounds like it was started by some dumbass who just took the 360 and did the following calculation:

3-core CPU x 2 = Hex-core!
1 GPU x 2 = Dual GPU!
512MB RAM x 4 = 2GB!

 

[Zinthar]

Wii U will not be 3 times as powerful as 360/PS3... PS4/720 might be only 4 times as powerful lol

Well, theoretically, modern mid/high-end PC's are roughly 10-12x more powerful than 360/PS3 based upon transistor count and and GFLOP performance. Of course, this doesn't at all translate into games that either perform or look a full 10-12x better, so terming something as X times more powerful when it's not to used in a benchmark that represents the end use of the product makes the statistic a red herring.

 

[StevieP]

I wish I could find the quote again, but I remember reading someone from Epic saying that hardware capable of running Samaritan won't make sense to put into a console until three years into next gen.

Carmack said the same thing a couple days ago.

If you can't see the writing on the wall for physical media by now, I don't know what to say to you.

2 problems with a DD-only console.
1) Bandwidth caps. They'll only become worse and more restrictive (in the west).
2) You want to sell your console at retail with razor-thin (or non-existent) margins for retailers? You're going to need physical games that *do* carry margins.

Much as with the Wii U, the Loop will be using Blu-Ray. Whether it's Blu-Ray in name (i.e. it can play movie discs with a paid license) or just in format like the Wii U it will be Blu Ray.

8GB DDR3 can be had for as little as $30-50.

Why don't people read through the thread before making comments like this?

1) Microsoft isn't shopping for *STICKS* at Newegg.
2) Motherboard design needs to be taken into consideration - you're not getting 8GB soldered directly onto a PCB.

 

[thuway]

Carmack said the same thing a couple days ago.

1) Microsoft isn't shopping for *STICKS* at Newegg.

Dude is right though, if your going with DDR3, its better to go balls out. Ram is cheap in the DDR3 variant.

 

[chaosblade]

Much as with the Wii U, the Loop will be using Blu-Ray. Whether it's Blu-Ray in name (i.e. it can play movie discs with a paid license) or just in format like the Wii U it will be Blu Ray.

Why wouldn't Microsoft want to use BD? This makes no sense at all to me, passing on BD kills their ability to claim their console is a media center. Is it still the "SONY OWNS BLUE RAYZ" thing, because I'd hope we'd be beyond that by this point.

Dude is right though, if your going with DDR3, its better to go balls out. Ram is cheap in the DDR3 variant.

DDR3 is slow, using enough chips to give it enough bandwidth to even match current gen consoles - much less get what you'd want in a next-gen console - will probably lose any savings over faster memory types in manufacturing. DDR3 has also pretty much hit it's peak, DDR4 is on the horizon, they'd be dumb to go with that.

 

[blu]

Dude is right though, if your going with DDR3, its better to go balls out. Ram is cheap in the DDR3 variant.

Faulty motherboards are not, though.

 

[nib95]

Lol DD only is a long way away yet. Half the UK's Internet is getting worse as over crowding and throttling becomes a bigger issue. Fibre optic is still a ways off getting everywhere and even then it's pricier. Add to that, bandwidth caps completely destroy the notion. Bly-ray, something similar or bust.

 

[clashfan]

GPU = 3 times the gigaflops, and the bandwith ( along with ROPs for AA,filtering... and the texture units )
CPU = 3 times the available threads

Sorry but that's not accurate measurements for real world performance. The wiiu will be a powerful console but your arguments are wild speculations.

 

[dragonelite]

Why wouldn't Microsoft want to use BD? This makes no sense at all to me, passing on BD kills their ability to claim their console is a media center. Is it still the "SONY OWNS BLUE RAYZ" thing, because I'd hope we'd be beyond that by this point.


DDR3 is slow, using enough chips to give it enough bandwidth to even match current gen consoles - much less get what you'd want in a next-gen console - will probably lose any savings over faster memory types in manufacturing. DDR3 has also pretty much hit it's peak, DDR4 is on the horizon, they'd be dumb to go with that.

Does sony even hold the biggest % of bluray patent?
I believe the Blu ray group are the guys who determine who gets the license and sony is part of that group.

 

[Walshicus]

Why wouldn't Microsoft want to use BD? This makes no sense at all to me, passing on BD kills their ability to claim their console is a media center. Is it still the "SONY OWNS BLUE RAYZ" thing, because I'd hope we'd be beyond that by this point.

When even *I'm* considering getting a Blu-Ray player

Spoiler

for the TNG-HD releases

you know it's time to bury the hatchet.

 

[clav]

2GB is more than enough, pretty surprising that so many want 2011 PC levels of spec in their console. If thats the case then just build yourself a PC. Console and PCs dont work the same. Thought this a general understanding around here. Guess not.

Can't be stressed enough.

A PC setup with similar specs to today's consoles cannot run those same games.

Can you insert a DVD/Blu-Ray in your PC to start a game?

 

[agrajag]

So now that it seems pretty likely that Microsoft is releasing its next console in 2012, and Sony soon after, how powerful do you all figure those consoles will be in comparison to WiiU? I think that if MS wants to keep the price competitive, they can't really put in off-the-shelf components in their next box that will be a whole lot more powerful than what WiiU's got.

However, a part of me feels that MS and Sony might be willing to bleed money again and put out "cutting-edge" machines that will make the WiiU look very underpowered. If that is the case, does Nintendo even have time to make last minute tweaks to make WiiU a little more powerful to match the next X-Box, somewhat?

 

[DopeyFish]

By the time this thing is released, no gaming PC will use 2GB of RAM. RAM is dirt cheap -- 8GB DDR3 can be had for as little as $30-50.

But that's beside the point, because I think this rumor is total bullshit. Modern graphics cards use GDDR5 video RAM because it's significantly faster than DDR3. By the time the 360's successor is released, it's likely that DDR3 won't even be the standard for system memory. It's highly unlikely that Microsoft would choose to begin with a technology on the verge of obsolescence.

This rumor sounds like it was started by some dumbass who just took the 360 and did the following calculation:

3-core CPU x 2 = Hex-core!
1 GPU x 2 = Dual GPU!
512MB RAM x 4 = 2GB!

Uh what? No game will likely use 2GB of ram (efficiently) when the next console comes out either

Ram density is increasing far quicker than the average consumer need

I've been at 4GB+ for 5 years now and I barely even scratch it unless I'm working on media applications

Once again for the average folk

Sound/music/code/game variables are relatively fixed assets now

Meshes might double compared to current gen, so that leaves roughly what? Potential 5-6x increase of texture data? In a world where developers are using shaders, that's a rather large leap IMO

It's not about how much you cram in the ram anymore, it's about what you can do with it

The power of the consoles from Xbox 360 onwards is shaders shaders shaders

 

[Deleted member 22576]

I didn't even think the Samaritan demo even looked that good. I guess I should watch it again.

 

[Durante]

Bandwidth caps are a very regional thing, they are not generally worsening at all. (My cap-less connection just got upgraded from 25Mbit to 35Mbit for free)
But since some regions are still problematic DD-only clearly won't happen next gen.

1) Microsoft isn't shopping for *STICKS* at Newegg.

Great, the chips without the sticks are even cheaper!

2) Motherboard design needs to be taken into consideration - you're not getting 8GB soldered directly onto a PCB.

No, but you could easily get 4GB in 8 chips, which is the same amount they used for 360. Most likely you could even get it in 4.

So now that it seems pretty likely that Microsoft is releasing its next console in 2012, and Sony soon after, how powerful do you all figure those consoles will be in comparison to WiiU?

I think the difference will be slightly smaller next gen compared to now, but WiiU will still be closer to PS3 and 360 than their successors. However, what could work in Nintendo's favour is that at least this time around the technology will be fundamentally similar, just slower. (Not completely out of date in terms of GPU capabilities like it was the case with Wii)

 

[chaosblade]

Does sony even hold the biggest % of bluray patent?
I believe the Blu ray group are the guys who determine who gets the license and sony is part of that group.

Sony was also a founding member of the DVD Consortium, and that didn't stop Microsoft from licensing that. They won't have any problem getting BD in their next console, unless they just don't want it for god knows what reason.

 

[clav]

For reference, what were your gaming PC setups when the Xbox 360 was revealed?

I actually just built mine back in the day with 1GB of DDR1 RAM, Nvidia 6600GT, and a single core Athlon XP Barton processor.

That same computer cannot run the games you see on the 360/PS3 platforms today.

You can't use the computer analogy to compare the console power.

Sony was also a founding member of the DVD Consortium, and that didn't stop Microsoft from licensing that. They won't have any problem getting BD in their next console, unless they just don't want it for god knows what reason.

If the next Xbox uses blu-ray, that will just be another checkbox for MS to fill. In the end, it won't look bad at all.

 

[Jorok Goldblade]

Why wouldn't Microsoft want to use BD? This makes no sense at all to me, passing on BD kills their ability to claim their console is a media center. Is it still the "SONY OWNS BLUE RAYZ" thing, because I'd hope we'd be beyond that by this point.

The other thing to consider is that while SOny championed Blu-Ray, they're actually one of many companies who own the format. Much like DVD, no one company owns it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Association

as of June 2009, 19 companies where on the BDA's board:


Apple Inc.
Dell Inc.
Hewlett-Packard
Hitachi, Ltd.
Intel Corporation
LG Electronics
Mitsubishi Electric
Panasonic Corporation
Pioneer Corporation
Royal Philips Electronics
Samsung Electronics
Sharp Corporation
Sony Corporation
Sun Microsystems
TDK Corporation
Technicolor SA
20th Century Fox
Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group
Warner Bros. Entertainment


Fear of giving profit to Sony is a moot point, especially since they were also a founding member of the DVD Forum:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_Forum

 

[bgassassin]

Great, the chips without the sticks are even cheaper!

Depends on how many are ordered

No, but you could easily get 4GB in 8 chips, which is the same amount they used for 360. Most likely you could even get it in 4.

It had four 128MB chips.

I think the difference will be slightly smaller next gen compared to now, but WiiU will still be closer to PS3 and 360 than their successors.

We won't know that till Xbox3 and PS4 mature.

 

[Thunderbear]

If VRAM is around 2GB as well, this could be a beast of a machine. I didn't expect any less from MS though.

 

[Thunderbear]

I swear, Samaritan has completely poisoned the discussion of next generation consoles.

1) *none* of the next gen consoles will have the computational power required to render it
2) "bu-bu-bu it can be optimized for one GTX 580, they said!" equates to the downscaling of resolution, textures, light sources, etc. not to mention a GTX 580 is too hot and power hungry still for a console and its 22nm counterparts aren't going to help you here. Whatever is going into a 2012 console is not going to be a 2013 part.
3) Samaritan was a cutscene. There was no "game code" in it. By design, more of its i7+3 tri-SLI GTX 580s could be used to shiny it up
4) The cost to create a game that looks like that the whole way through for is not feasible, even if we had $799 consoles with the required minimum hardware for it

The end. Stop looking at it.

I am going to save this post and show it back to you when The Samaritan level games are appearing on next-gen consoles.

Having been in this industry for 15 years I feel I have a fairly educated opinion about this. Everyone should expect _at least_ Samaritan level quality gameplay.

And the cost question is bullshit. The tools have evolved insanely since the days of the PS2/Xbox and has made it easier to create games and they are still evolving. Will it increase a bit? Yes, but it's definitely within reason. If you won't listen to me, I would at least listen to the engine makers out there like Epic and ID before making the statements that you are making.

Z-Brush was barely used at the beginning of this generation and that piece of software alone has evolved massively allowing for the creation of detailed models in a much, much shorter time. And it's no longer used for just characters.

 

[Durante]

It had four 128MB chips.

No. It had 8 512MBit chips. Proof

We won't know that till Xbox3 and PS4 mature.

The poster was asking for speculation, I provided it.

 

[colt45joe]

I am going to save this post and show it back to you when The Samaritan level games are appearing on next-gen consoles.

Having been in this industry for 15 years I feel I have a fairly educated opinion about this. Everyone should expect _at least_ Samaritan level quality gameplay.

nah dude. remember that first Unreal 3 engine tech video that was shown a long time ago, that showed how this generation was supposed to look like. Games still dont look like that tech video. Next gen will probably finally look like that u3 tech video.

 

[brotkasten]

nah dude. remember that first Unreal 3 engine tech video that was shown a long time ago, that showed how this generation was supposed to look like. Games still dont look like that tech video. Next gen will probably finally look like that u3 tech video.

This is the first UE3 tech demo, from 2004.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m7T5ay_8DI

I don't see anything that isn't possible right now.

 

[bgassassin]

No. It had 8 512MBit chips. Proof

Guess the old BOM was wrong or I read it wrong.

EDIT: I can't find the one I saw, but I could have sworn it said 1Gbit. Anyway that would mean they spent a approx. $8 per chip at launch.

 

[clav]

nah dude. remember that first Unreal 3 engine tech video that was shown a long time ago, that showed how this generation was supposed to look like. Games still dont look like that tech video. Next gen will probably finally look like that u3 tech video.

This is the first UE3 tech demo, from 2004.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m7T5ay_8DI

I don't see anything that isn't possible right now.

Looks like a rough build of Gears of War.

 

[Halvie]

By the time this thing is released, no gaming PC will use 2GB of RAM.

Can you even buy a computer with 2gb of ram anymore? If my cheap laptop can have 6gb I see no reason why the new consoles can't at least have 4gb.

 

[clav]

Can you even buy a computer with 2gb of ram anymore? If my cheap laptop can have 6gb I see no reason why the new consoles can't at least have 4gb.

A lot of ultraportables sold these days start at 2GB of RAM.

Again, can't compare PC specs to console specs.

 

[StevieP]

I am going to save this post and show it back to you when The Samaritan level games are appearing on next-gen consoles.

Having been in this industry for 15 years I feel I have a fairly educated opinion about this. Everyone should expect _at least_ Samaritan level quality gameplay.

And the cost question is bullshit. The tools have evolved insanely since the days of the PS2/Xbox and has made it easier to create games and they are still evolving. Will it increase a bit? Yes, but it's definitely within reason. If you won't listen to me, I would at least listen to the engine makers out there like Epic and ID before making the statements that you are making.

The fact that you ignored the entire hardware conundrum I presented,
OK. From the past couple weeks, no less.

When asked what he wants from that next gen, Rein focused on giving developers and publishers more pricing freedom rather than pure horsepower. He wants a beefy GPU as well, but it's telling to see the acknowledgement that the next wave of consoles will be as much about how games are delivered as what they look like.

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/10/27/epic-wants-unreal-engine-4-ready-for-the-next-gen-console-launch/

But according to John Carmack, fans should not expect an "EPIC" leap in graphics with next generation console. In a recent interview to Official Xbox Magazine, Carmack said, "I sitll want to make better graphics, but I think we're past the curve there"

http://www.gamepur.com/news/6155-ca...ect-epic-leap-graphics-next-gen-consoles.html

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

Is 2gb of GDDR3, 1gb of GDDR5, and some edram feasible?

 

[clav]

Is 2gb of GDDR3, 1gb of GDDR5, and some edram feasible?

No since MS designs the Xbox around unified memory pools, not separate ones.

 

[-COOLIO-]

I am going to save this post and show it back to you when The Samaritan level games are appearing on next-gen consoles.

Having been in this industry for 15 years I feel I have a fairly educated opinion about this. Everyone should expect _at least_ Samaritan level quality gameplay.

And the cost question is bullshit. The tools have evolved insanely since the days of the PS2/Xbox and has made it easier to create games and they are still evolving. Will it increase a bit? Yes, but it's definitely within reason. If you won't listen to me, I would at least listen to the engine makers out there like Epic and ID before making the statements that you are making.

Z-Brush was barely used at the beginning of this generation and that piece of software alone has evolved massively allowing for the creation of detailed models in a much, much shorter time. And it's no longer used for just characters.

good post

 

[bgassassin]

Is 2gb of GDDR3, 1gb of GDDR5, and some edram feasible?

Piggybacking on claviertekky's post, even if they did go split pool I seriously doubt that would choose those two together.

 

[DopeyFish]

No since MS designs the Xbox around unified memory pools, not separate ones.

You can still have them split but still unified fyi

It would be split in terms of their core function (textures/geometry vs miscellaneous data) but can be accessed at full data rate (by both cpu and gpu) making it technically unified

The memory controllers would have to be designed with this in mind but it's possible

It would give developers a ton of flexibility if they chose to store more textures in the main ram pool for example

 

[Gorgon]

2) You want to sell your console at retail with razor-thin (or non-existent) margins for retailers? You're going to need physical games that *do* carry margins.

This. Retailers would drop consoles if they coudn't make money from games. Good luck with that, unless you expect people to only buy consoles online or at Sony/MS stores.

 

[infinityBCRT]

to

Totally the same thing.



I swear, Samaritan has completely poisoned the discussion of next generation consoles.

1) *none* of the next gen consoles will have the computational power required to render it
2) "bu-bu-bu it can be optimized for one GTX 580, they said!" equates to the downscaling of resolution, textures, light sources, etc. not to mention a GTX 580 is too hot and power hungry still for a console and its 22nm counterparts aren't going to help you here. Whatever is going into a 2012 console is not going to be a 2013 part.
3) Samaritan was a cutscene. There was no "game code" in it. By design, more of its i7+3 tri-SLI GTX 580s could be used to shiny it up
4) The cost to create a game that looks like that the whole way through for is not feasible, even if we had $799 consoles with the required minimum hardware for it

The end. Stop looking at it.

You need to think out of the box. Development processes will also get more streamlined and engine stuff like better lighting/depth of field, etc will not cost more money to pull off to put those effects across an entire game. Not totally disagreeing with you, but you need to anticipate that some things will happen in the next generation that haven't happened in the past. We're in a totally different environment now with a bunch of very popular middleware packages being used which are only getting better and better.

 

[gofreak]

It all depends.


1) MS can spend to get higher density Ram . So instead of 2 + 2 needing 12 modules it may only need 6. For 2+ 4 it may only require 10 .

2) Ms can go with higher chip counts now and wait till later in the generation to reduce chips. Its what happened this generation.

#1 won't happen just because of money.

The product supply has to be there. Looking at Samsung and Elpida, I don't see anything that would bring 4Gbit GDDR5 modules in 2012, not even the mention of early dev/sampling on that. (But could be wrong on that? I haven't found anything anyway.)

MS could go with higher chip counts, but 8 seems to have been adopted as sort of cap on the assumption that MS or Sony wouldn't want motherboards bigger than what they put in PS3/360, and more chips would (all else being equal) require bigger boards. And take longer to cost reduce.

That's not to say it couldn't happen, though - they could trade off elsewhere in favour of more memory modules, spend more to get more modules etc. 12 isn't out of the realm of possibility, but would be fairly surprisingly aggressive. I'd certainly love that, but I'm certainly also hoping for no less than 8, and think it might be a safer bet

 

[Linkified]

So regarding the basic architecture of the Xbox 3, if it is similiar to that of the 360 but with more RAM, better graphics card etc. Does that mean effectivly the console will be designed for backwards compatibility rather than software emulation?

 

[brotkasten]

So regarding the basic architecture of the Xbox 3, if it is similiar to that of the 360 but with more RAM, better graphics card etc. Does that mean effectivly the console will be designed for backwards compatibility rather than software emulation?

Depends on the CPU architecture, I think. If they use anything else than PowerPC for the CPU (ARM, x86), they'll have to use software emulation.

 

[DopeyFish]

So regarding the basic architecture of the Xbox 3, if it is similiar to that of the 360 but with more RAM, better graphics card etc. Does that mean effectivly the console will be designed for backwards compatibility rather than software emulation?

If it doesn't have EDRAM, there's almost no chance of emulation/backwards compatibility (simply because of how much bandwidth that memory had) it would be easier to trick for games that used just a frame buffer, but any game that used it for anything else and it would be unlikely

If it does have it, should be quite easy

 

[alphaNoid]

So now that it seems pretty likely that Microsoft is releasing its next console in 2012, and Sony soon after, how powerful do you all figure those consoles will be in comparison to WiiU? I think that if MS wants to keep the price competitive, they can't really put in off-the-shelf components in their next box that will be a whole lot more powerful than what WiiU's got.

However, a part of me feels that MS and Sony might be willing to bleed money again and put out "cutting-edge" machines that will make the WiiU look very underpowered. If that is the case, does Nintendo even have time to make last minute tweaks to make WiiU a little more powerful to match the next X-Box, somewhat?

You don't just add a little more power to anything this late in the design process. The metal, the hardware specs were probably 100% finalized long long ago, so far back that nothing else could start until they were defined.

WiiU is going to be what its going to be and the next Xbox and Playstation are going to trump it, guaranteed. Nintendo is going to have to rely on first party titles and its loyal fan base, which means they should be good. In 2012 and beyond, key online network functionality, media center capabilities are going to be just as important as gaming itself. Nintendo really has little to no experience in this regard and if they do not change it they are going to fall by the wayside in that regard.

I think they'll be just fine.. for now. MS is going to flex its muscles next gen with software features. They are a software giant, expect Live and all of its features to blow wide open.

 

[DopeyFish]

Food for thought: the dual GPU is a new gpu with the old gpu alongside it hmmm