Next-gen Xbox Speculation Summarized

Valset said:
not that AMD can't build a really good gaming PC but do they do anything with consoles beyond the graphics chips for the one (I don't remember the exact one)?
Click to expand...

The Xbox 360 uses an "R500" Xenos gpu which is pretty much the predecessor of the R600. Capability-wise, it's ~an x1900XT with a unified architecture and it taps into 512MB of shared system memory (the 360 only has 512MB of total DDR3 RAM clocked somewhere around 700MHz and that's shared between the gpu and system; one benefit of this for the 360 has been that a lot of developers have shoved more of that system RAM into VRAM hence one of the reasons the 360 tends to compete better graphically against the PS3, but ofc that comes at the cost of not having as much system RAM to bring to bear...). One of the big issues w/the 360 is that ATi designed the card and cooling solution but MS tossed-out ATi's work for the cooling and supplanted it with their own, cheaper solution. That is just one reason for it's unofficial name of "Failbox" and for all the RROD's.

Also, the Wii and GameCube utilize ATi gpu's.

The PS3 utilizes "RSX" which is nVidia's adaptation of the 7800GTX. It has 256MB of dedicated VRAM and the PS3 itself has 256MB of dedicated system RAM, so it doesn't have the versatility of the 360 in that area. Of course, whether that's good or bad is debatable.

As far as rasterization being at its peak atm... do we have Intel spies here or something? There's still plenty of room for improvement there even in a game like Crysis. Of course, there's also the matter that not even a single GTX 280 or HD 4870X2 can really bring down Crysis at 1920x1200. I should also probably mention that there are quite a few rasterization techniques that have not been used at all yet on this generation of consoles in-game (to my present knowledge anyway).
 
pigpen said:
Most people could care less about Bluray now, and it's a brand new technology. Why would it get more important in 4 years? I know DVD took a while to hit the mainstream, but people were still excited about it even though they were waiting for prices to come down. Bluray is definitely lacking that excitement.
Click to expand...

BlueRay lacks the HUGE advantages DVD had over VHS. I know there are some diehard BD fans that would argue the superior storage and image quality, but DVD to BD does not have near the advantage of VHS to DVD.
Rewinding, VASTLY superior image quality, size, etc just to name a few.

Even with the huge advantages DVD had- it took YEARS. BD doesn't have as big of advantages, how long do you think that will take?? IMO it'll never take- in a few years something new will come along.
 
TerranUp16 said:
The Xbox 360 uses an "R500" Xenos gpu which is pretty much the predecessor of the R600. Capability-wise, it's ~an x1900XT with a unified architecture and it taps into 512MB of shared system memory (the 360 only has 512MB of total DDR3 RAM clocked somewhere around 700MHz and that's shared between the gpu and system; one benefit of this for the 360 has been that a lot of developers have shoved more of that system RAM into VRAM hence one of the reasons the 360 tends to compete better graphically against the PS3, but ofc that comes at the cost of not having as much system RAM to bring to bear...). One of the big issues w/the 360 is that ATi designed the card and cooling solution but MS tossed-out ATi's work for the cooling and supplanted it with their own, cheaper solution. That is just one reason for it's unofficial name of "Failbox" and for all the RROD's.

Also, the Wii and GameCube utilize ATi gpu's.

The PS3 utilizes "RSX" which is nVidia's adaptation of the 7800GTX. It has 256MB of dedicated VRAM and the PS3 itself has 256MB of dedicated system RAM, so it doesn't have the versatility of the 360 in that area. Of course, whether that's good or bad is debatable.

As far as rasterization being at its peak atm... do we have Intel spies here or something? There's still plenty of room for improvement there even in a game like Crysis. Of course, there's also the matter that not even a single GTX 280 or HD 4870X2 can really bring down Crysis at 1920x1200. I should also probably mention that there are quite a few rasterization techniques that have not been used at all yet on this generation of consoles in-game (to my present knowledge anyway).
Click to expand...

ok thanks guys, could not for the life of me think of what it was. I
 
to whoever said MS is gonna have 20 percent and wii will have 50 percent and sony will have 30 percent, get a clue, you're wrong.
 
Hope it's backwards compatible with the games.
 
^^^

If the next xbox uses an intel arch cpu, then bc will need to be done in software again, aka phail.
 
I dont believe the terabyte crap. Thats possible if and only if they decide to use that in combination with dvd9's so you can install games on the hdd(since its that large, space wouldnt be an issue). Then they wouldnt need the BD media. That would be wise if they dont want to support Blu ray and also that will encourage their digital downloads.
 
Ok, so with all of these "advancements", the next gen console will cost 1,000$. Why are you going to buy one of these instead of a computer again?
 
Charlie Hustle said:
also that will encourage their digital downloads.
Click to expand...

Which brings-up that rather interesting point about what happens, distribution model-wise, as distribution itself trends more towards digital distro. Ofc, we've all heard the claims that there won't be another Xbox or PS, and imo the only way that's going to happen is if the base business model that they rely on to be profitable collapses. Battlefield: Heroes, Quake Live, etc... if brought to bear on a more massive scale (that is, to projects not designed to be so "safe" from a business standpoint atm) could well tear apart the traditional console distribution model and I doubt we'll see such efforts on the consoles ever without MS and Sony shifting to a strategy where they make most of their money off console sales as opposed to game sales. It's a sizable "if", but with games increasingly being viewed as a long-term service, it is not unforseable at all that developers and publishers will seek to embrace distribution models that extract revenue over time as opposed to up-front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top