Shanadeus said:3 x 360/PS3 CPU
3 x 360/PS3 GPU
etc?
How exactly are you measuring that?
Shanadeus said:3 x 360/PS3 CPU
3 x 360/PS3 GPU
etc?
If you can't see the writing on the wall for physical media by now, I don't know what to say to you.Rolf NB said: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.
LeleSocho said: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
derFeef said:Wow, do you know what 3 times more powerful than 360 or PS3 even means?
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.clashfan said:How exactly are you measuring that?
clashfan said:How exactly are you measuring that?
Big Ass Ramp said:2GB of ram for a console will get better performance than your Pc with 2GB.
duk said:Wii U will not be 3 times as powerful as 360/PS3... PS4/720 might be only 4 times as powerful lol
Jorok Goldblade said: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.
If you can't see the writing on the wall for physical media by now, I don't know what to say to you.
8GB DDR3 can be had for as little as $30-50.
StevieP said:
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.StevieP said: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.
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.thuway said: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.thuway said:Dude is right though, if your going with DDR3, its better to go balls out. Ram is cheap in the DDR3 variant.
amstradcpc said:GPU = 3 times the gigaflops, and the bandwith ( along with ROPs for AA,filtering... and the texture units )
CPU = 3 times the available threads
chaosblade said: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.
When even *I'm* considering getting a Blu-Ray playerchaosblade said: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.
Can't be stressed enough.Projectjustice said: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.
Zinthar said: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!
Great, the chips without the sticks are even cheaper!StevieP said:1) Microsoft isn't shopping for *STICKS* at Newegg.
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.StevieP said:2) Motherboard design needs to be taken into consideration - you're not getting 8GB soldered directly onto a PCB.
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)agrajag said: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?
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.dragonelite said: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.
chaosblade said: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.
chaosblade said: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.
Durante said:Great, the chips without the sticks are even cheaper!
Durante said: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.
Durante said: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.
StevieP said: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.
No. It had 8 512MBit chips. Proofbgassassin said:It had four 128MB chips.
The poster was asking for speculation, I provided it.bgassassin said:We won't know that till Xbox3 and PS4 mature.
Thunderbear said: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.
This is the first UE3 tech demo, from 2004.colt45joe said: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.
Durante said:No. It had 8 512MBit chips. Proof
colt45joe said: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 said: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.
Zinthar said:By the time this thing is released, no gaming PC will use 2GB of RAM.
A lot of ultraportables sold these days start at 2GB of RAM.Halvie said: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.
Thunderbear said: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.
Interview with Mark Rein said: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.
John Carmack said: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"
No since MS designs the Xbox around unified memory pools, not separate ones.-ImaginaryInsider said:Is 2gb of GDDR3, 1gb of GDDR5, and some edram feasible?
good postThunderbear said: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.
-ImaginaryInsider said:Is 2gb of GDDR3, 1gb of GDDR5, and some edram feasible?
claviertekky said:No since MS designs the Xbox around unified memory pools, not separate ones.
StevieP said: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.
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.StevieP said:
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.
eastmen said: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.
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.Linkified said: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?
Linkified said: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?
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.agrajag said: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?