Next Generation Console Hardware Update

nobody_here

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
8,878
I don't think it is realistic to even expect the next console (which is a budget system by nature) which has to be developed on current hardware/technology to run that kind of graphics when it takes the fastest multi thousand dollar PC to run it today. It was a challenge, not a demand, Epic can suggest but they can't dictate. The consoles would continue to move forward without them.
 

next-Jin

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
7,092
It took how many GTX580's to run it? Adding more memory doesn't make a gpu more powerful.....

At 1920x1080 with say a 6970 4GB (assume some made one) for shits and giggles how badass would it be compared to a 2GB? It'll cost way more and be useless, no hardware engineer is going to do it.
 

nobody_here

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
8,878
It took how many GTX580's to run it? Adding more memory doesn't make a gpu more powerful.....

At 1920x1080 with say a 6970 4GB (assume some made one) for shits and giggles how badass would it be compared to a 2GB? It'll cost way more and be useless, no hardware engineer is going to do it.

So I thought we were talking about system memory not vram. Of course in these consoles it tends to be shared, so I'm saying 2Gb shared, 1Gb CPU 1Gb GPU. That's enough to run nearly any game at 1080 with Max settings. If tomorrows consoles can perform the way today's PC's do ill be happy. Average Joe will be blown the hell away.
 

Valset

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
6,533
The Cell processors was a piece of junk. John Carmack hates it, and Gabe Newell can't stop talking trash about it. The Fusion processor is nothing like the Cell.

Fusion = X86 cores + graphics core
Cell processor = PowerPC core + 8 SPE cores

I believe that one of those SPE cores are even disabled. Most developers don't even use the SPE cores, so for the most part the Cell chip is nothing more then a retarded PowerPC.

so all these major corporations just used it for the hell of it? sorry but for what it is designed to do it does kick ass. hence the success. if you want to argue success go ahead but look at what they can do with such hardware in comparison to modern computer specs then come back and explain how they can do so much with comparatively little.

and when I said like it I meant in terms of capability not architecture (although there are parallels to be drawn). no 86 based cpu could ever do what even an older cell could do but with the addition of gpu compute / rendering ....
 

next-Jin

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
7,092
So I thought we were talking about system memory not vram. Of course in these consoles it tends to be shared, so I'm saying 2Gb shared, 1Gb CPU 1Gb GPU. That's enough to run nearly any game at 1080 with Max settings. If tomorrows consoles can perform the way today's PC's do ill be happy. Average Joe will be blown the hell away.

Oh no I was not refering to your post I was commenting on the dude prior to you. I agree, it'll likely be 2GB shared or something. It's what I have been saying all along, be some people want these new consoles to be overkill when they can not realistically be. I'd love for the Playstation 4 to be something like an GTX 690 Ultra in Quad SLI w/ a 3960X and 8GB DDR5... but it's not feasible beacause of costs, thermals, size, wattage, etc etc.

They have to ask themselves "Over the next decade what will be the standard resolution, and possible market saturation?" That is 1920x1080 w/ 3D possible, and with that in mind "At 1920x1080 what system components can we use that will be flexible at that resolution with a 500 dollar mass production cost per"

It's probably not going to be just an APU (depends on what AMD can pull off but I doubt it), and it certainly will not have 8GB of DDR5. More then likely we are talking about an APU chip powering a 6XXX series videocard with 2GB of GDDR5. Getting those components into a 500 box mass produced is possible imo.

And let's face it, if developers had a 6850 with a pretty powerful APU developers could make some amazing things happen at 1920x1080.

The 360 and PS3 have some awesome looking stuff coming out considering the old ass tech in them.
 

next-Jin

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
7,092
Oh no I was not refering to your post I was commenting on the dude prior to you. I agree, it'll likely be 2GB shared or something. It's what I have been saying all along, be some people want these new consoles to be overkill when they can not realistically be. I'd love for the Playstation 4 to be something like an GTX 690 Ultra in Quad SLI w/ a 3960X and 8GB DDR5... but it's not feasible beacause of costs, thermals, size, wattage, etc etc.

They have to ask themselves "Over the next decade what will be the standard resolution, and possible market saturation?" That is 1920x1080 w/ 3D possible, and with that in mind "At 1920x1080 what system components can we use that will be flexible at that resolution with a 500 dollar mass production cost per"

It's probably not going to be just an APU (depends on what AMD can pull off but I doubt it), and it certainly will not have 8GB of DDR5. More then likely we are talking about an APU chip powering a 6XXX series videocard with 2GB of GDDR5. Getting those components into a 500 box mass produced is possible imo.

And let's face it, if developers had a 6850 with a pretty powerful APU developers could make some amazing things happen at 1920x1080.

The 360 and PS3 have some awesome looking stuff coming out considering the old ass tech in them.

lol spelling ftl, need my coffee this morning :eek:
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
6,769
I wonder if stacking the deck will be possible. What new features will be present that we don't have now?

Stacking the deck - Two or more Xbox's hooked together for better 3d, better more player gameplay with multiple HDTVs or monitors.

Phone command - smart phone enable so you can control your x-box, chat with friends, get promos (spam) from Microsoft live. Turn your Microsoft enabled smart phone into a X-box controller. Game on your smart phones multiple players with smart phones using the x-box for graphics processing updating your phone. Game status download to cell phone which you can take with you to other x-boxes, for play or playback of recorded demos to your buddies (gimmick).

Live download - Steam like environment to download your favorite games. Time limited game play, as in pay a lower cost for a period of time to play a title option, kinda like Block-Buster game play.

PC enabled games - As in games are transparently compatible and possibility to use outside client like Steam to download certified/compatiable/tested games.

Programmable controller that not only controls your X-Box, some innovation sure can be used here like LCD display or use Xbox with passthrough for on screen, 3d menus for component controll. Unlikely I think due to having to hookd up potentially a lot of different components to a X-box.

All of these are maybe fantasy and wishful thinking. Still; will the next generation bring about some unique different gaming experiences and potential?

As for performance, I do not expect the next Xbox to have a graphical processing ability of two 580s in SLI and an overclocked Sandy consuming 1000w but somehow consume less then 150w through some sort of magic. That to me is ridiculous to think. Now if a form of CrossFire/Sli like abiltiy is applied (would be kinda cool and console geeks may really stack the deck which could sell uber number more of consoles to the same folks.)

If an APU it will probably be a unique APU between Trinity generation and the next. With very advance power gating ability with a max power rating but a versatile way to use that power. For example ability to shutdown a CPU core, slow down the other and speed up the shaders and visa versa. Maximizing the part of the APU which you are using while keeping things, cool, quiet and small.
 

daglesj

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
5,582
Yeah as the custom 7800/X1950 derivatives are still doing "okay" today then chances are for sutable GPU performance something twice as powerful could be all thats requred.

As consoles can be highly optimised not as much raw power is as necessary as a one size fits as many as possible PC platform.

As said before I'd put my money on a custom 6670/6770 for the Xbox. Anything more would be overkill.
 

tpfaff

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
2,526
So MS is gonna build a decent PC, call it a console, lose their ass on every unit for the first 3 years of production... I just dont see how this makes sense. So kiddies can have their "console". Retarded.

It makes them millions of dollars. Not very hard to understand.
 

Ashbringer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
5,522
It would seem this is a very bad mistake by MS, as the system shall now be badly out performed by -

http://s3gal3aks.wordpress.com/

On paper, it sounds good. In reality, if the Sparc chips were any good, then we'd all be using them. I'm not saying a SPARC64 isn't fast, but if we ran real world benchmarks, chances are an Intel would destroy it. Plus, Sega would lose any compatibility with their games being able to be played on PC. Given that Sega is even thinking about making another game console.
 

WorldExclusive

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
11,419
Oh no I was not refering to your post I was commenting on the dude prior to you. I agree, it'll likely be 2GB shared or something. It's what I have been saying all along, be some people want these new consoles to be overkill when they can not realistically be. I'd love for the Playstation 4 to be something like an GTX 690 Ultra in Quad SLI w/ a 3960X and 8GB DDR5... but it's not feasible beacause of costs, thermals, size, wattage, etc etc.

GPU isn't the focus here, we are talking about DRAM. Of course a mid-range GPU will be used.
The more in DRAM consoles, the less PC's will be held back in game design. "Can" will be used more than "Can't".
 

DeathPrincess

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
18,205
I hate APUs. They just scream of shitty things like tablets, netbooks and nettop level power. I know it's only a console but still...
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
6,769
I hate APUs. They just scream of shitty things like tablets, netbooks and nettop level power. I know it's only a console but still...

Just think of an APU as one big GPU running some cpu code once in awhile for the OS. Also Xenos of the 360 has embedded 10mb of eDram which does speed up the whole setup allowing for 4x AA with virtually no performance hit. So there are many options or possibility for next generation, even if using an APU, to have some rather killer hardware, efficient and not constrain by PC standards.
 

daglesj

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
5,582
Yeah PCs are not the most efficient machines due to there still being 30+ years of legacy, standards, licencing, not to mention all the crap folks like us expect to be included in a chipset and never use.

You can get rid of most of that with a ground up console, lesser hardware can suddenly perform far better and more efficiently.
 

Elledan

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - April 2010
Joined
Oct 18, 2001
Messages
15,913
I hate APUs. They just scream of shitty things like tablets, netbooks and nettop level power. I know it's only a console but still...

Consider the APU's 'GPU' part to be not related to graphics, but a fancy bolted-on physics and such vector processor unit. Whereas running physics, whether using CUDA, OpenCL or DirectCompute suffers from the huge delay of the PCIe bus, communication between the CPU and VPU of an APU is nearly instantaneous, making it very attractive to integrate it and also very efficient since you aren't dealing with messy batch processing, instead using the VPU more like you'd use an FPU.
 

Da1Nonly

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Messages
332
So it will basically be a real computer in a xbox shell...So why not just buy an actual desktop?
 
Top