Xbox 720 next year...your hardware predictions?

Because Nvidia chose to work with them and the demo was done on a PC?

Also APEX is a content creation system I believe, it isn't something specific to Nvidia hardware. It is not PhysX.
 
From what I've read about the Xbox 720, a current top of the line PC will destroy the Xbox 720. Personally, I think that they're releasing their next gen console a little too soon and that the PS4 will be way ahead of it hardware wise if Sony releases their system 1-2 years after the Xbox's.

We haven't had any huge hardware break through s in the past few years, wait a few more years and the difference should be as big as it was going from the PS2 to the PS3.
 
If the design has been on the drawing board for a year.
And Microsoft is going to spend billions on billions eventually.

Every piece of hardware in the thing will have been purchasable in 2010.

720 will be a 2010 version of the 360.:D
Don't get your hopes up. It's still a console. It has to come in under $400.
 
By the very nature of the process, consoles have hardware at least a year behind the current top of the line. Where they make it up is in having custom parts that perform better even with lower specs, like the 360's unified memory architecture, Cell's multiple units etc. Then its up to developers to optimize games for the hardware. So in effect consoles end up with a much larger effective lifespan given their tech specs.

The interesting battle will be if Sony is able to get any marketshare back after the debacle that was the PS3. They made a big bet on Bluray and a supposedly much faster console (which turned out not to be the case). Will they make the same bet again? Microsoft has a much bigger opportunity to truly unite media/tv/gaming across your pc/console/phone, it remains to be seen if they have the vision and are able to execute. That will mean a lot more than just the hardware.
 
JoeUser said:
Well with the Xbox 720 being announced next year along with a probable release sometime 4th quarter 2012/1st quarter 2013 what are your predictions as to the hardware that will be in this beast?
Click to expand...

2 days ago word got out that Ubisoft is developing for the next Xbox on ""target boxes" designed to emulate the system's projected specifications".

Quote from the actual Edge article:
Ubisoft’s teams are said to be working on PCs containing off-the-shelf components provided by Microsoft, and it’s our understanding that several other major developers, including certain EA studios, are also in possession of these target boxes.
Click to expand...

They're still speculating about the release dates because the hardware is still not finalized.
Until finished devkits are released, I'm not putting any stock into rumored release dates.

JoeUser said:
1. Next gen consoles WILL have graphics similar to those in the tech demo. Zero doubt!
Click to expand...

Ps2 owners looking for realtime graphics that equal the CG of the Final Fantasy VIII ballroom dancing scene say hi. :rolleyes:
Go ahead and lump in the Killzone 2 tech demo for Ps3 that looks 1000x better than Killzone 2 and Killzone 3.

Real games have NEVER ended up being ANYTHING CLOSE to the tech demos shown for the respective console. Ever. Why do you think this is all of the sudden going to change? Come on man.

JoeUser said:
2. Developers SHOULD at this point already have developer kits for the next Xbox.
Click to expand...

Wrong, and my link above shows this to be true.
 
Sovern said:
From what I've read about the Xbox 720, a current top of the line PC will destroy the Xbox 720
Click to expand...

Spec for spec, yes, but with bare-metal programming, unified platform, and the fact that games have been designed around 512MB of ram and old hardware for the past 6 years, I think a lot of people are going to be blown away. Just look at what that 512MB is able to put out.
. Personally, I think that they're releasing their next gen console a little too soon and that the PS4 will be way ahead of it hardware wise if Sony releases their system 1-2 years after the Xbox's.
Click to expand...

No. This has been the longest generation ever, it should have ended last year at the latest.

We haven't had any huge hardware break through s in the past few years, wait a few more years and the difference should be as big as it was going from the PS2 to the PS3.
Click to expand...

Uhh. No again. Moore's Law has continued just as it has for the past 40+ years.
 
the PS3 was fairly powerful for a console that is, which is not saying a ton. But I expect in this next generation due to the success of nintendo that we may see a backlash and actually be fairly dissapointed with the power of the hardware as they shoot for cheaper devices. Has anything been said about blu ray? I would love to see a console go without an optical drive and go streaming only but probably not this generation. Certainly not sony.

As far as avatar graphics psshh, you guys were really born yesterday? You believe what they say for consoles. They also told us all about HD but almost no games used 1080p the console makers are always going to throw out marketing catch phrases to get ignorant people all excited but I am pretty sure that is just brilliant marketing because after all avatar level graphics will not happen on a console to an exact level but at the end I am sure alot of people are going to say close enough or I cant tell a difference afterall most console gamers dont even realize they are not seeing true HD at this point. Look all the optimization in the world does not make miracles happen. I also think that the next gen consoles may have at least 1 player that goes for a thin model right off the start. Honestly that would be a pretty big hit given the average console buyer which is a mom.
 
The latest news from the rumormill that I've seen so far is from these sites:

The choice of going towards an ARM CPU and GPU is in stark contrast to the last rumor posted on [H]: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/07/07/e3_rumors_on_next_generation_console_hardware

Now, I cannot fathom the thought Microsoft would backtrack on CPU and GPU power by going to an ARM-based console. The only thing that can lend some credence to this rumor is the fact that Windows 8 will have an ARM version. However, ARM and any smartphone GPU isn't exactly a powerhouse in terms of graphics especially if going towards 1080p, high-end gaming. It is my belief that the most powerful handheld mobile GPU is on the upcoming PSP Vita, with the graphics being "PS3-quality" according to Sony. Tegra 3 should be on par if not faster than the A5, and the Tegra 4 should be much more faster than that.

However, since this is a prediction thread, given everything I've read so far on these rumors, this is my thoughts on the next Xbox console:

CPU

Possibility:
- 6 core PowerPC CPU with enhanced PPE units using the latest PPC ISA v2.06 that uses enhanced vector scalar floating point instructions at 3.5 GHz minimum on 32 nm or 28 nm.

IBM-based PowerPC processor, at most 6 cores-- twice that of the current 360. The Xenon CPU has three cores based on a modified version of the CELL PPE units. It was later shrunk and integrated with the GPU-- XCGPU. It would most likely use an updated PowerPC ISA from IBM. CELL was based on PowerPC ISA v2.03 and the newest is 2.06 finalized in 2010.

Speed at least 3.5 GHz and probably faster.

A PowerPC-based CPU should at least provide some modicum of backwards compatibility with existing 360-titles-- hopefully.​

GPU

Possibilities: (All on-die with CPU or separated.)
- 28 nm 7800-series GPU with support for either XDR2 RAM or GDDR5
- 28 nm 7900-series GCN-based GPU with support for XDR2 RAM, but with less RISC MIMD units
- 28 nm 7800-series GPU with GCN bits (i.e. MIMD units, x86 addressing) with support for XDR2 RAM

All with UVD 3 support, 3D video support, H264 hardware decoding, and HDMI 1.4a support.

On-die, embedded GPU based on the 7000-series architecture. The codename "Xbox Next" and later "Xbox Loop" made me think it's probably based on the GCN (graphics core next) GPU from AMD.

Now, we know by now that the 7000-series GPUs up to the 7800s will be die-shrunk VLIW4-based GPUs, but will be faster and smaller, and hopefully cooler running. GCN on the other hand is a 28 nm GPU and will be the basis of all 7900-series cards. It will also use XDR2 RAM.

When I look at it, I tell myself that this has to be released by 2013 or 2014 at the earliest. In regards to a previous post I made here on [H] that the console was in the works since 2010 given the 3 to 4 year gap needed to develop it, that means the next GPU has to be 6000-series. However, given that the 7000-series up to 7800 are die-shrunk 6000-series GPUs, I would not be surprised the next console uses that instead.

At minimum, I'm looking at 28-nm, on-die 7800-series based GPU modified for console use with some architecture bits from GCN. This will keep the power profile low while giving it enhanced GPGPU capabilities from GCN architecture over the older VLIW4 one.

The reason I think this is because the Xenos architecture included units that were later used in an upcoming ATI GPU. The upcoming Wii U uses a 4700-series based GPU with support for Eyefinity, which was first added to the 5000-series. So, it would not surprise me that the next GPU would have both a VLIW4 core with support for both RISC MIMD and x86 addressing.​

Memory

Possibilities:
- 2 GB XDR2 RAM shared between GPU and software
- 2 GB GDDR5 RAM shared between GPU and software

There are two ways to go about this. They can continue to use GDDR3 or go ahead with XDR, or even XDR2. If they go towards XDR2, it would probably give more credence to a GCN-based GPU. They can also move up to GDDR5, which a lot of graphics cards use nowadays.

Now, if we look back at the 360, it uses shared 512 MB of GDDR3. I would think Microsoft will follow this same trend to keep costs down, but use GDDR5 instead.

A move to XDR2 would increase costs slightly but at the same time offer both speed and power efficiency improvements over GDDR5.

I am looking at no more 2 GB total RAM though. This will be shared between both the GPU and software. 1 GB is my belief to be the bare minimum a GPU needs for 1080p HD gaming with 30 FPS minimum. 2 GB shared should be more than enough, but the speed has to be fast enough to not be burdened by this shared nature.

XDR2 seems to be the most likely candidate here.​

Software

Possibility:
- Xbox System Software "Next" supporting a variant of DX11 with features of DX12, including a full-on MetroUI modified for the consoles.
- Xbox System Software based on a modified version Windows 8 kernel but that would imply DirectX 12 support so this is not likely. (Note: Last PPC supported OS was NT 4.0)

Xbox 360 uses a variant of DirectX 9 with some support for some features of DX10 (according to another poster on [H]).

Next Xbox I would think is an updated Xbox System Software with full MetroUI probably mimicking Windows 8 panel interface redesigned for the console. It will also use at minimum DirectX 11 but would not be surprised if they add support for some features of DX 12, which will be included with Windows 8.

There will probably be more on-demand and downloadable content support from games to music, movies and maybe apps. I would not be surprised that what is currently on the 360 is carried over to the next Xbox system including Netflix and the like.

I also would expect the Windows app store coming to Windows 8 be carried over to the next console. Connectivity with Windows 8 is also another likely possibility.

Backward compatibility with the first Xbox will be removed with Xbox 360 support added as a replacement. I also will not be surprised they allow downloadable 360 titles of full games.​

Storage and Drives

Possibilities:
- HD-DVD for games with 15 GB (single layer) or 30 GB (dual layer) capacity. I expect at least double that for a maximum of 60 GB.

I kid you not, Microsoft has to do something in this area. Not everyone is going to have high speed fiber connections so downloading large games is out of the question especially if they span over 10 GB in size.

For sure the PS4 will include Bluray storage with hopefully support for higher capacities such as 100 GB.

Seeing Microsoft's stubbornness and unwillingness to add Bluray support even to the 360, I would expect Microsoft to revive HD-DVDs for the next console. Maximum storage was 30 GB for dual sided or dual layer discs. I would like to see that doubled at the very least.

For the love of god Microsoft, stop with the proprietary crap. I would like Microsoft to shift towards using standard 2.5-inch SATA hard drives and SSDs. It's cheaper and more affordable especially to consumers. At minimum, 250 or 320 GB will be the standard size. 500 GB or 750 GB is another likely possibility.

For removable storage, I would love to see Microsoft support external hard drives like the PS3 does. Also, support for SD and SDHC cards up to 32 GB capacity.​

Peripherals and everything else

For peripherals, support for the previous 360 controller would be no surprise there. A newer, redesigned controller would be expected as well and maybe using Bluetooth support or RF radio like it currently does.

Kinect 2.0 will most likely make a reappearance but with better accuracy and motion capture.

HDMI 1.4a support as well. All the audio features of the 360 carried over to the new console. Audio support will either be a dedicated chip or included on-die with the CPU.​

Other than that, that's what I'm thinking would be the next console. As zero2dash has said in his post, if true, using off-the-shelf components and an AMD GPU means they are using current graphics hardware we currently have available.

A 6000-series based graphics card should be a very good indication of what's in the next console. Make it smaller on 28 nm fabrication, cooler and faster like what is being done with the 7000-series.

But, keep in mind about everything rumored or speculated so far: The software-- OS, API, and drivers-- are running bare metal and are optimized for the console.

If they are using something closer to a 6870, I would not be surprised at all that a midrange GPU will be outputting graphics at 60 FPS equivalent to something a higher end GPU can put out on a Windows PC. The 360 and PS3 are the best examples of this. As I have said before, it didn't take until at least around 2008 when PC graphics caught up with 360/PS3 graphics when more powerful DX10 GPUs came out-- midrange to higher end 4000 series from AMD and 200-series from Nvidia. It wasn't until the AMD 5000-series/Nvidia 400-series in 2009 along with games to take advantage of them outpaced the graphics of both consoles.

The same is going to happen with the next consoles. An optimized OS kernel and a graphics API with direct access to a single hardware configuration will do things better than a Windows PC with a high end graphics card and CPU. The closest to highly realistic graphics engine is Frostbite from DICE in BF3 and before that the CryEngine in Crysis 1, and the engine behind Metro 2033. The three graphics engines that I can think of at the top of my head that pushes current and previous graphics cards to their limit.

And, you wonder why developers prefer the console over the PC when developing games. It's the reduced cost aspect of consoles, their optimized nature, and the single hardware configuration of it. If that same attitude is applied to PC games, we would have graphics excelling console graphics by a wide margin in every single game. As long as Microsoft and Sony keeps releasing highly optimized pieces of hardwares-- game consoles-- the war between console and PC games will continue, with the PC getting the shorter end of the stick.
 
octoberasian said:
And, you wonder why developers prefer the console over the PC when developing games. It's the reduced cost aspect of consoles, their optimized nature, and the single hardware configuration of it. If that same attitude is applied to PC games, we would have graphics excelling console graphics by a wide margin in every single game. As long as Microsoft and Sony keeps releasing highly optimized pieces of hardwares-- game consoles-- the war between console and PC games will continue, with the PC getting the shorter end of the stick.
Click to expand...
To be perfectly frank, I completely understand the motivation from a developer. And as much as I enjoy building PCs, I'd probably switch to console for my main gaming platform if they'd just release one with universal KB+M support. I just can't stand using a gamepad for shooters, strategy games, and RPGs.
 
This will be a Q1 2013 release, at which point we can all play MW4 at 720p.....hahahaahahaaha
 
Ryan711 said:
Spec for spec, yes, but with bare-metal programming, unified platform, and the fact that games have been designed around 512MB of ram and old hardware for the past 6 years, I think a lot of people are going to be blown away. Just look at what that 512MB is able to put out.
Click to expand...

OMG someone gets it! What people fail to realize is that comparing a consoles specs directly to a PC is not the same. PCs run complex OS atop the metal, tons of processes and all sort of resources have to be allocated for that level to function. Even then, nothing on a PC is unified so developers have zero ability to really streamline software. On a console, the OS is basically a tiny hypervisor that runs thin and has a tiny TINY memory footprint. Combine that with a unified platform that developers can streamline on and what you get is what a powerful box. You would think that people on a forum called [H]ardforum would understand this, but it seems that its very common round these parts for people to be blind with console ignorance. The elitism really is the blindfold at times.

This thread shouldn't be about PC vs Console.. it should be about what people think the next Xbox specs are going to be.

I should add here on this forum that my connection inside Blizzard, my mole so to speak is a high ranking individual who is working on the team writing the framework for Project Titan. This team is locked away in higher security wing at Blizzard and have access to things others at Activision/Blizzard do not.

My mole told me yesterday they just got their "official" next Xbox development kit and that it was causing quite a stir on the Titan team. My source is as reliable as they come, so for me I now have proof that developers have their hands on finalized development kits. The next Xbox specs (regardless of whats leaking on the internet) are 100% final at this point.

edit. Also, what I'm getting at in a stealth manner is that the team working on Titan at Blizzard, the successor, the next MMORPG after WoW is now working on writing framework for the next Xbox in addition to PC. The only other thing I was told was that the SDK for the next Xbox is the best SDK they have ever worked with.
 
Last edited:
theNoid said:
OMG someone gets it! What people fail to realize is that comparing a consoles specs directly to a PC is not the same. PCs run complex OS atop the metal, tons of processes and all sort of resources have to be allocated for that level to function. Even then, nothing on a PC is unified so developers have zero ability to really streamline software. On a console, the OS is basically a tiny hypervisor that runs thin and has a tiny TINY memory footprint. Combine that with a unified platform that developers can streamline on and what you get is what a powerful box. You would think that people on a forum called [H]ardforum would understand this, but it seems that its very common round these parts for people to be blind with console ignorance. The elitism really is the blindfold at times.

This thread shouldn't be about PC vs Console.. it should be about what people think the next Xbox specs are going to be.

I should add here on this forum that my connection inside Blizzard, my mole so to speak is a high ranking individual who is working on the team writing the framework for Project Titan. This team is locked away in higher security wing at Blizzard and have access to things others at Activision/Blizzard do not.

My mole told me yesterday they just got their "official" next Xbox development kit and that it was causing quite a stir on the Titan team. My source is as reliable as they come, so for me I now have proof that developers have their hands on finalized development kits. The next Xbox specs (regardless of whats leaking on the internet) are 100% final at this point.

edit. Also, what I'm getting at in a stealth manner is that the team working on Titan at Blizzard, the successor, the next MMORPG after WoW is now working on writing framework for the next Xbox in addition to PC. The only other thing I was told was that the SDK for the next Xbox is the best SDK they have ever worked with.
Click to expand...


*rubs hand furiously together*
 
4GB hopefully. RAM is the most important component in the console.
More ram equals bigger and more immersive games along with better PC versions/ports.

If devs can create more content, detail and larger levels on console, the better it is for PC gamers. We'll always have the visual and computing advantage.

Hell, Crytek asked for 8GB in next gen consoles:
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/16241-crytek-wants-minimum-8gb-memory-next-console-generation/

2GB is enough and makes sense, but a few years from now these devs are going to be right back in the same situation. Need moar ram.
Asking for more ram isn't going to blow up the console, it will only make it better. Looking at things from a corporate point of view and expressing that to consumers, only causes stress on the brain.
The next gen consoles are going to be used more for multimedia and computing tasks than the current ones. If 2GB wouldn't limit gaming once again five years from now I'm all for it, but I'm not that optimistic.
 
Last edited:
ScottSwing said:
Yeah right. They said the Nintendo 64 would have graphics like Toy Story.
Click to expand...

that was nvidia making that claim....

"When NVIDIA launched the GeForce 2 back in 2000, Jen-Hsun Huang said it was a "major step" towards achieving "Pixar-level animation" in real-time."

EDIT: HD DVD is dead and is NOT making a comeback in any MS console and ATi claiming avatar graphics is just plain stupid......
 
zero2dash said:
Real games have NEVER ended up being ANYTHING CLOSE to the tech demos shown for the respective console. Ever. Why do you think this is all of the sudden going to change? Come on man.
Click to expand...

1. This was done by Epic, not the 1st party manufacturers.
2. It was put together in an EXTREME rush, unoptimized to hell, and using an extremely inefficient 3-sli setup


Mark my words, those graphics will be the gears of war of next-gen, aka pretty much the peak with a little (10-20%?) room to grow, a la gears 1 to gears 3. There MIGHT be some things taken out, but all in all, it will look as good to 99% of people.

Note that this will be for corridor shooters and the like, more open game like Skyrim I'd expect something that's a little better than BF3.
 
I feel like Microsoft is going to take a few pages out of Nintendo's philosophy with the Wii. Nintendo essentially proved that a large portion of the market isn't going to get caught up in specs and system power. Boasting about teraflops, fill rates, and internal hardware isn't going to push units. The market is going to look at the system price and the software library when making their decision.

I'm expecting the next Xbox to be a less substantial upgrade over the 360 than the 360 was over the original... though I expect the gap to be larger than the gap between the GCN and the Wii.

The focus will likely be on producing a small, cool, quiet, and reliable gaming unit. Given the Xbox360 RRoD fiasco, I'd expect to see Microsoft going to great lengths to ensure that the new system is very reliable. In the past we've seen consoles designed very aggressively, some even being more powerful than any commercially available PCs for up to six months after the console's release. I'd expect the new system to be on par with a mid-high end PC come release time and be built using a more PC-like hardware architecture to reduce manufacturing costs. I'd also expect the unit price to be substantially lower than the Xbox360. Where the 360 launched at about $400USD, I'd expect the new unit to be around the $250-300 range.

I could see the device using the Xbox360 controller design, perhaps taking a page out of Sony's book and using Bluetooth with a built-in rechargeable battery. I figure that the final controller will look like the wired 360 controller, which is just like the wireless controller but without the big battery pack at the back.

The system itself will probably have a high-capacity internal HDD, with greater emphasis on downloadable content (including full games from the Xbox Live Marketplace). I wouldn't be too shocked to see a version with PVR capabilities. I'm sure that the unit will also come with much of the hardware required for Kinect, and will come bundled with a smaller profile Kinect camera.

In terms of software, I wouldn't be shocked to see the unit running a Windows 8-based OS. The interface is going to be based on the Windows Phone/Windows 8 GUI and is going to have heavy Kinect integration. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if you are able to access and control your other Windows-based devices (phone, PC, etc) from your Xbox and/or vise-versa.
 
Last edited:
Cant wait for Halo 5,Gears 4,MW6,Killzone 5..blah blah blah//
 
Yes, I've seen what they've been doing with 512MB of RAM and it's ugly. Very ugly.

Console are introduced with well balanced hardware, which is why we'll get 2GB of RAM in the Nextbox. However memory space is the first thing to become a devolpement bottleneck.
 
theNoid said:
OMG someone gets it! What people fail to realize is that comparing a consoles specs directly to a PC is not the same. PCs run complex OS atop the metal, tons of processes and all sort of resources have to be allocated for that level to function. Even then, nothing on a PC is unified so developers have zero ability to really streamline software. On a console, the OS is basically a tiny hypervisor that runs thin and has a tiny TINY memory footprint. Combine that with a unified platform that developers can streamline on and what you get is what a powerful box. You would think that people on a forum called [H]ardforum would understand this, but it seems that its very common round these parts for people to be blind with console ignorance. The elitism really is the blindfold at times.
Click to expand...

It is not like no one ever says or gets what you are saying. Consoles are made with PC hardware there for they are comparable. Second the whole arguement that consoles are somehow way more efficient due to the fact they are standardized and run an OS of limited function is still debatable. It is highly opinionated and very little facts are ever well sorted out. Of course console fan boys and companies are going to claim this is true no different than apple is going to claim their OS somehow magically makes the same hardware in your PC better. Does the OS efficiency matter, yes does it make for a doubling of power hell no. Most console games now are limited to 30 fps and run at very low resolutions and then are upscaled. The same games on PCs are running at insanely higher resolutions with no scaling. The efficiency gains people claim are simply not going to overcome raw horsepower. It is like saying I can design a really efficient 4 cylinder 2 liter engine and go hang with on an indy car circuit. This is why the specs matter the long life of a console and its ability to improve graphics over time are going to be based on how much ram, how powerful the CPU and GPU. Also with consoles the baremetal programming arguement is a misguided one. The main claim is that because it is standard this is possible, but if that was the case GPU companies would stop inventing more instructions and start going toward a standard GPU that allows for more bare to metal programming even on PCs. The API is not about power it is about ease of programming. The reason bare metal programming is done and needed on a console is because the hardware does not change and in order to sell the next game and improve the quality you have no choice but to waste tons of time getting down to the nitty gritty. Otherwise everything would stagnate after 6 months of games. If PC hardware stopped advancing today we would see all focus shift to efficiency since there would be nothing else to be done.
 
I'm guessing something along the lines of

~ 1GB dedicated video memory
~ 4GB system memory
~ 1TB hard drive storage

I'm hoping the next generation of consoles gets rid of physical media entirely. If the hard drives are large, we should just be able to download and play (like Steam). Use the extra space to implement better cooling.
 
I already went with the PC HD1080P. Should keep me happy for a few console generations. In the long run, money well spent and saved. I don't even have to pay to play online, streams movies, music, netflix, burns Blu Rays, has both mouse/keyboard and controller input ... the PC HD 1080P does it all ;) No more dashboard updates, performance dips to 1 FPS. God, I'm happier with the PC HD1080P than I've ever been with my 360 or Wii.
 
rudy said:
It is not like no one ever says or gets what you are saying. Consoles are made with PC hardware there for they are comparable. Second the whole arguement that consoles are somehow way more efficient due to the fact they are standardized and run an OS of limited function is still debatable. It is highly opinionated and very little facts are ever well sorted out. Of course console fan boys and companies are going to claim this is true no different than apple is going to claim their OS somehow magically makes the same hardware in your PC better. Does the OS efficiency matter, yes does it make for a doubling of power hell no. Most console games now are limited to 30 fps and run at very low resolutions and then are upscaled. The same games on PCs are running at insanely higher resolutions with no scaling. The efficiency gains people claim are simply not going to overcome raw horsepower. It is like saying I can design a really efficient 4 cylinder 2 liter engine and go hang with on an indy car circuit. This is why the specs matter the long life of a console and its ability to improve graphics over time are going to be based on how much ram, how powerful the CPU and GPU. Also with consoles the baremetal programming arguement is a misguided one. The main claim is that because it is standard this is possible, but if that was the case GPU companies would stop inventing more instructions and start going toward a standard GPU that allows for more bare to metal programming even on PCs. The API is not about power it is about ease of programming. The reason bare metal programming is done and needed on a console is because the hardware does not change and in order to sell the next game and improve the quality you have no choice but to waste tons of time getting down to the nitty gritty. Otherwise everything would stagnate after 6 months of games. If PC hardware stopped advancing today we would see all focus shift to efficiency since there would be nothing else to be done.
Click to expand...

No, you're pretty wrong with most of what you just wrote. I suggest watching John C's keynote from this years quakecon to get a little insight. It seems you're just rambling on and really not making much of a point what so ever.
 
I am not wrong, and I am well aware of Carmac who has always been a very opinionated person. This is the guy who stuck by openGL and made the same claims about that when everyone else was moving on and doing just fine with D3D. This is also where rage came from which PC people had lots of negative things to say about. Maybe if carmac is such a genious he can figure out why other companies can make games on "inferior" platforms that have better performance and graphics than his.
Then he can also explain to us why most gaming PCs can push just about any game at 1080p and greater than 30fps while almost all consoles and their games must set the resolution lower and upscale just to get to 30fps. And we wont get into all the other sacrifices that have to be made in settings on a console.

The main point here is that even if the optimizations in consoles are great there still comes a point where you are simply limited by hardware and if you want the nextbox to be good and last long you better be voting for lots of power and memory.
 
rudy said:
The main point here is that even if the optimizations in consoles are great there still comes a point where you are simply limited by hardware and if you want the nextbox to be good and last long you better be voting for lots of power and memory.
Click to expand...


I agree, but it is much more than you are saying. Just the implication of a single unified platform is so huge. Devs can say "This byte of memory is going to do this at this time", on PC it's more like "We're going to do this and see how much memory it uses". Bare-metal programming adds something like another 20-25% efficiency on top of that.

I absolutely want the next consoles to be beasts simply because it will finally push PC gaming forward. If it's anything less than 4GB, then they shouldn't even bother imo, preferably 6GB. I can guarantee this though, that 4GB and whatever else they put in if the rumors are true will blow away anything we've seen in a game thus far, and I think my point will come across when those get ported to PC. You'll see how much hardware is needed to run them properly.
 
tuaarita said:
I doubt even those consoles will render at 1080p. More like 1360x768 and upscale.
Click to expand...

Ehren8879 said:
Yes, I've seen what they've been doing with 512MB of RAM and it's ugly. Very ugly.

Console are introduced with well balanced hardware, which is why we'll get 2GB of RAM in the Nextbox. However memory space is the first thing to become a devolpement bottleneck.
Click to expand...

if thats what you call ugly, im sitting here in front of my 55" HDTV looking at something that is great...call me a fan of ugly I suppose, i'd never hunch over a keyboard to get better than this
 
18 months on a PC adds 100% increase in power per moores law, which means the 25% increase in efficiency bought about what 6 months? Not saying I agree with that number even just going with it for arguements sake. Few companies or people are interested in baremetal programming, it is a waste of time. It is just something that is needed on consoles because the hardware is set so you have no option. If those same devs spent the same time optimizing for the PC they could do alot more. They just choose not to because they know they can just tell people to buy better hardware, a luxury they abuse and do not have on the console. The consoles are not pushing PC gaming they are splitting up the platforms so people cant get particularly proficient on any one platform. The same thing is happening with smart phones and tablets. I like to say the OS is getting better due to competition but the actual applications we use are getting far worse since everyone is splitting their efforts.
 
theNoid said:
OMG someone gets it! What people fail to realize is that comparing a consoles specs directly to a PC is not the same. PCs run complex OS atop the metal, tons of processes and all sort of resources have to be allocated for that level to function. Even then, nothing on a PC is unified so developers have zero ability to really streamline software. On a console, the OS is basically a tiny hypervisor that runs thin and has a tiny TINY memory footprint. Combine that with a unified platform that developers can streamline on and what you get is what a powerful box. You would think that people on a forum called [H]ardforum would understand this, but it seems that its very common round these parts for people to be blind with console ignorance. The elitism really is the blindfold at times.
Click to expand...
Lol, the 360 has an operating system, something very similar to windows XP embedded with a custom shell (the same as the kiosk's you see around or a cash register). They get to pick what they want and don't want and make it as skinny as they like. They're still using directX which is an API, so we're talking about barebones here not bare metal.

If you have a technet subscription you can build your own version of windows XP/7 embedded and play around with that.

Now, what really set's the xbox360 apart from the PC is the memory bandwidth, which is insane @ 256 GB/s. This is faster than most high-end graphics cards even now.
 
rudy said:
18 months on a PC adds 100% increase in power per moores law, which means the 25% increase in efficiency bought about what 6 months?
Click to expand...

You can have all the power in the world, but it doesn't matter because an extremely small subset of users have the power to run it, so no games are getting developed with. We have 10x the power on top PCs today and what do we have to show for it? Crysis in 2007, arguably BF3/TW2, and the rest are running at 4K+ resolutions just to justify the hardware. The days of PC exclusive graphic powerhouses are long gone.

Not saying I agree with that number even just going with it for arguements sake.
Click to expand...

It was a number thrown out by Carmack at one point.

Few companies or people are interested in baremetal programming, it is a waste of time. It is just something that is needed on consoles because the hardware is set so you have no option
Click to expand...

No, just no. Devs absolutely love programming against metal and with a unified platform. Not sure why you think otherwise. It allows them to work with the hardware instead of the software abstraction on top of it.

If those same devs spent the same time optimizing for the PC they could do alot more. They just choose not to because they know they can just tell people to buy better hardware, a luxury they abuse and do not have on the console.
Click to expand...

Again, no. The only advantage of the PC with regards to programming is the ability for it to bruteforce it because it has the ability to upgrade hardware. Take a PC with 512MB of ram, an x800 and a coreduo and try to get the games looking the same as consoles. NOT gonna happen.

The consoles are not pushing PC gaming they are splitting up the platforms so people cant get particularly proficient on any one platform.
Click to expand...

Stop being such a delusional fanboy. I game on PC most of the time, and even I realize that without consoles, 80% of games out today would not be made. And with regards to splitting up platforms, I'd say that working on unified platforms offsets that, and even still, engines and dev tools are making it easier and easier to program for these machines, and the knowledge learned and the tools will cross over into next-gen.


The same thing is happening with smart phones and tablets. I like to say the OS is getting better due to competition but the actual applications we use are getting far worse since everyone is splitting their efforts.
Click to expand...

You must be an android user, because apple apps are tailor made and run as expected 95% of the time. You can think of android as PC and Apple as the consoles.


Wiseguy2001 said:
They're still using directX which is an API, so we're talking about barebones here not bare metal.
Click to expand...

It's much more complicated than that, and it's not the fact that the OS is light. It's got much more to do with drivers and the like, but it's over my head at this point. Regardless, it is closer to the metal than a PC.

Now, what really set's the xbox360 apart from the PC is the memory bandwidth, which is insane @ 256 GB/s. This is faster than most high-end graphics cards even now.
Click to expand...

That's just the 10MB of edram. The system ram is only 22GB/s. If it were 256GB/s, you'd be seeing some insane shit produced.
 
My guess for the Xbox 360 successor:

Quad-Core 3.6GHz (IBM)
1GB Dedicated System Ram
HD 6970 Equivalent GPU w/ 1GB VRam
Blu-ray Optical Disk and 320/500GB Hard Drives
Built in motion-sensing technology

So basically it would be roughly 5-6 times more powerful than the current Xbox 360 and as powerful as a high-end PC now, but by the time of release will be about as powerful as a mid-range PC.
 
Xbox 720 guess

AMD Fusion processor, QuadCore 3.5ghz/6950ish GPU ( special dedicated RAM 2GB)
4GB System RAM
1TB Hard drive
BlueRay
Likely have Kinect 2.0 standard.


those parts minus the kinect are not expensive really come 12-16 month down the road they will be even cheaper.

The kinect 2.0 is where the cost will come imo

This is a doable $400 console imo MS will save with going for a AMD combo giving it room to spend on kinect.

gotta believe it took MS and SOny both by surprise that this generatioon lasted so long so they fully expect the same if not more form this cycyle so they have to make it resource heavy early with space and RAM.
 
I don't think they will make Kinect be standard, or at least I hope they don't. My guess is they will sale sale a package that comes with it like they do now. A lot of people (myself included) are not fans of motion controls and I don't want to be paying a extra ~$100+ for something that I won't use. Besides if at some point somebody does decide they want it they can just go buy the attachment.
 
Consoles have always been quite powerful compared to same-day-as-launch PCs. Both the Xbox360 and PS3 were running multi-core 3.2ghz CPUs when a dual-core AMD was the fastest CPU out there.

Times have changed and now we have hex-core sandy-bridge CPUs, and GPUs with 2+GB of onboard GDDR5.

All I can say is that the day-of-launch graphics are going to blow our minds, then in two years PCs will catch up, and then annother two years, PCs will be far superior.
 
actually.. I think this will be the first generation of consoles to not be more powerful then current pc's.

Current pc's arnt even being tested with good code i gotta believe anything next gen consoles can do pc's will already be able to do day 1 graphics wise.
 
rudy said:
due to the success of nintendo that we may see a backlash and actually be fairly dissapointed with the power of the hardware .
Click to expand...

Both PS3 and XBOX have been a success, and unlike last release, this time round, everyone has a HDTV of some sort.....even if it's their $150 PC LCD with HDMI.
 
Last edited:
Ryan711 said:
I agand I think my point will come across when those get ported to PC. You'll see how much hardware is needed to run them properly.
Click to expand...

Hang on a sec.....don't consoles run at approx this spec

Low-med settings
none-low AA
640p-720p resolution..

Now bump it up to ULTRA, 4-8XAA, and 1080p and no wonder a PC can be under pressure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top