[Silenti]

I am trying to imagine what would have to be involved for me to shell out for those specs. I'm not coming up with much beyond a very low price tag and full backwards compatibility to go along side set top box features. If there is any truth to this it reeks of "stopgap" measure. That or MS is abondoning the hardcore and leaving it to Sony.

[Rangers]

Originally Posted by babybumb

http://www.develop-online.net/news/3...ul-as-Xbox-360



The expectations must have been really low if 2x is far exceeding them..

2X would exceed my expectations of Wii U.

I would have been surprised if it was honestly faster at all, in a way. But expected 30%.

Still do for that matter.

[Rangers]

Originally Posted by Proelite

With these current rumors, it's looking like a 2012 fall release is looking more and more likely.

LOL bookmarked.

I'm just wondering why people are being so gullible about next gen rumors. By my count this is like the 7th one, every preceding one has been false. Do you get any hint?

If we're believing the 6670 rumor it means:

Lets see: MSnerd next Xbox is a ARM set top box or something: false. Xboygen Xbox has a dual GPU and is coming at CES :false Hardocp Xbox is based on a cell CPU and some other stuff: false. Charlie: Xbox is called Oban and has a HD7000 GPU: false Another random rumor I cant remember origin of: Xbox is going to be tablet based: false. Each of these rumors were discussed as if they were certainly true at the time.

At this point I fully expect tomorrows rumor that Xbox is a repurposed Gameboy color chipset that runs n a watch battery and Ps4 is going to totally like, blow it away by 100 times, let alone Wii U which is now a supercomputer.

Might as well throw this Kotaku rumor into the unfounded mess:

http://kotaku.com/5879202/sources-th...oduce-kinect-2

And what of gaming site IGN's report that the machine could be six times more powerful than the Xbox 360? From some industry sources I'm hearing that that's the right ballpark and that Microsoft is estimating they might even get to 8x the Xbox 360. But another insider clarified that no one in the industry has development kits yet and that any talk about specs right now is still hypothetical.

I think only the second insider is the real one.

[UPDATE: A Microsoft rep e-mailed me the following statement: "As an innovator we're always thinking about what is next and how we can push the boundaries of technology like we did with Kinect. We believe the key to extending the lifespan of a console is not just about the console hardware, but about the games and entertainment experiences being delivered to consumers. Beyond that we don't comment on rumors or speculation."]

Sounds if anything like they're planning on keeping 360 longer due to Kinect, which is the gist of most of MS statements on the matter.

A "Kinect 2.0" could indeed be pretty compelling to the masses though. Streamlined and more effective, cheaper.

[AlStrong]

Here, I've got it. 2x is just an average of all the specs:

WiiU

3x3.5GHz CPU cores
48 threads
3MB L2 Cache
32MB eDRAM
50 StrongALUs
2 XtRad ROPs
2 UltRad TMUs
8 geometry engines
457.14286 MHz GPU
8GB flash memory (vs 4GB on 360 Arcade)
1152MB of RAM (64-bit, GDDR5 @ 700MHz)
25GB optical disc (vs DVD9)


And all at 3.6W load (against 90W 360S).

That is exactly 2x the 360.

[Teasy]

Originally Posted by babybumb

http://www.develop-online.net/news/3...ul-as-Xbox-360

The expectations must have been really low if 2x is far exceeding them..

Your selective quoting there makes it sound totally different than the actual article. The "unverified calculation" is the 5x IGN mentioned.

Originally Posted by Rangers

I would have been surprised if it was honestly faster at all, in a way. But expected 30%.

Still do for that matter.

No offence, but expecting only 30% more than 360 is quite crazy IMO. Unless you're deliberately looking extremely low in order to make sure you're impressed rather than disappointed?

[babybumb]

Originally Posted by Teasy

Your selective quoting there makes it sound totally different than the actual article. The "unverified calculation" is the 5x IGN mentioned

What? The journalist says in the comments he was comfortable to claim it is 2x when IGN posted their article. They are not claiming its 5x like IGN but just confirmed better than 360.

However, when we got the information about Wii U being "twice as powerful as Xbox 360" - in December last year - we were not able to verify the claim.
It was only when IGN's sources expressed that Wii U is far more powerful than the Xbox 360 that we were comfortable in publishing the story.
This was why IGN's sources are referenced in the article, because despite the "algebra" being out, both point towards the same thing.

[liolio]

At least we are pretty sure that now something is in the tube and a 2013 release likely. So it's offically the start of the silly season and we may expect everybody and his brother to come with "insider info" in a relentless quest for "clicks"

Out of all the rumors I would not dismiss Charlie's claims. IGN is big site may be they are not lying and heard something (true not true is another matter). Anyway it's likely that we will face more and more noise on that topic. In this world of hairy speculations and click quest I've found an hairy explanation for the discrepancies between the X6 claim and the HD6670 type of hardware, something that a marketing guy or not too tech oriented guy may come with.
In raw throughput the HD6670 is barely x4 times Xenos. A quad core with 8 wide simd units operating at reasonable clock speed may deliver twice (or more) the throughput of xenon. So 4+2=6
this is half a joke but in a world of hairy speculation and marketing guys you never know

[Teasy]

Originally Posted by babybumb

What? The journalist says in the comments he was comfortable to claim it is 2x when IGN posted their article. They are not claiming its 5x like IGN but just confirmed better than 360.

I didn't say they were claiming that. I just said you chopped out quite important parts. Like the fact that the only verification they have for their article is another article from IGN that actually disagrees with there sources conclusion of 2x as powerful.

[function]

PCs are shrinking, getting more power efficient and quieter. LOL ultrabooks etc. The trend for larger, hotter and noisier consoles had to end some time. Why not start with a system that everyone is happy to buy instead of spending five years and billions of dollars shrinking down to it?

[tongue_of_colicab]

Originally Posted by function

PCs are shrinking, getting more power efficient and quieter. LOL ultrabooks etc. The trend for larger, hotter and noisier consoles had to end some time. Why not start with a system that everyone is happy to buy instead of spending five years and billions of dollars shrinking down to it?

Not only that, that way you can either release a new console earlier and have consumers spend more money again or you can gain more profits because the hardware isn't such a financial burden.

I think we are about to hit the point where the average person doesn't care about more power anymore. Even a sandy bridge system or fusion system is capable of running most modern games at decent fps and for every day use even something like a i3 is already overkill.

Buying high end hardware just doesn't give you the performance advantages we used to have anymore.

Sure, a new i7 system with super gfx card runs things great. But my 4+ year old q6600 with 2gb ram and a 560ti runs every game out there with good settings at 1680x1050/1920x1080. And that's pretty much what most people will be game at. Not too long ago you wouldn't dream a 4+ year old system with only a modern mid range gpu would run all games with no problems.

(sorry for getting off topic)

[bgassassin]

Originally Posted by babybumb

What? The journalist says in the comments he was comfortable to claim it is 2x when IGN posted their article. They are not claiming its 5x like IGN but just confirmed better than 360.

You're doing selective reading like some other people. The writer said a developer told them late last year that it was 2x more powerful. However IGN's article confirms what they were told more recently about the dev kits. Read the last part of the article again. His comment reaffirms that.

EDIT: Upon further review I'm just going to say it was bad writing for now.

[east of eastside]

A small low cost box fits with the theme that has been repeated from MS lately about moving Xbox from a game box to an entertainment hub.

If you came out with another beast console, hot and loud with a noisy fan, it would take at least another 3 years before it was shrunk into anything resembling and entertainment hub.

A smaller, low cost box, on the other hand, can be marketed as an entertainment hub from the get go.

Frankly, I'm sick of the old concept of a game console. I would support either MS or Sony if they went the low cost hub direction.

Speaking of Sony, I have no illusions of them going for a much more high end console than MS. Maybe a notch more at most if they are a year later. After all they are in a terrible financial situation and the Japanese market with its struggled state of publishing and development didn't give much support to PS3. Look at Vita and how it is struggling to take off now. Does that give much encouragement to go all out on super console?

[Megadrive1988]

Nintendo’s next generation hardware will be roughly twice as powerful as Microsoft’s current system, the Xbox 360, according to a studio source speaking to Develop.

The person, communicating anonymously from a studio currently building a Wii U title, said the new Nintendo console could achieve roughly twice the processing and graphical potential of Microsoft’s current generation machine.

While twice the power of an Xbox 360 is broadly above market expectations, Develop’s source claimed this is in fact less than some studios had expected.

“I've heard [a project designer] complain it's underpowered compared to what Nintendo announced, resulting in people having to de-scale their plans,” the source added.

yeah I thought that was really interesting. Still well below what I would've liked (RV770 / 4850) but with twice the processing, graphical, bandwidth and RAM than Xbox 360, we could see some amazing games on Wii U by EAD Tokyo and Retro.

[bgassassin]

Originally Posted by Megadrive1988

yeah I thought that was really interesting. Still well below what I would've liked (RV770 / 4850) but with twice the processing, graphical, bandwidth and RAM than Xbox 360, we could see some amazing games on Wii U by EAD Tokyo and Retro.

Don't take anything from it. Apparently the writer is virutally saying the 2x he was told by a developer in December is equal to the 5x IGN is reporting.

[Bagel seed]

Originally Posted by Silenti

I am trying to imagine what would have to be involved for me to shell out for those specs. I'm not coming up with much beyond a very low price tag and full backwards compatibility to go along side set top box features. If there is any truth to this it reeks of "stopgap" measure. That or MS is abondoning the hardcore and leaving it to Sony.

A stopgap measure may just be exactly MS's plan. Although of course they would never admit it, but technology wise it would be. If the specs are true it's definitely an interesting strategy.

Basically, get a mildly higher spec'd Xbox 3a out there to take on Wii U, expand their Kinect casual market, and probably offer more online connectivity features at a breakeven or small profit at launch. Then 4-5 years later in 2017, launch the true Xbox successor with all of the above plus a significant spec bump on matured processes. It kind of singles out Sony, and I'm thinking they're betting on the chance that any advantage of Sony bringing out a more powerful box in 2014 would be marginalized. In any case they'd still be raking in profits with at-cost, low spec reliable hardware. And if PS4 does sway things back in Sony's direction, Xbox 4 in 2017 would hamper that imo.

[KULTKILRZ]

Originally Posted by dfan

A stopgap measure may just be exactly MS's plan. Although of course they would never admit it, but technology wise it would be. If the specs are true it's definitely an interesting strategy.

Basically, get a mildly higher spec'd Xbox 3a out there to take on Wii U, expand their Kinect casual market, and probably offer more online connectivity features at a breakeven or small profit at launch. Then 4-5 years later in 2017, launch the true Xbox successor with all of the above plus a significant spec bump on matured processes. It kind of singles out Sony, and I'm thinking they're betting on the chance that any advantage of Sony bringing out a more powerful box in 2014 would be marginalized. In any case they'd still be raking in profits with at-cost, low spec reliable hardware. And if PS4 does sway things back in Sony's direction, Xbox 4 in 2017 would hamper that imo.

MS is having identity issues.

[almighty]

Originally Posted by KULTKILRZ

MS is having identity issues.

Yep, Releasing an underpowered console compared to what Sony will more then likely release is suicide and all the die hard casuals that are waiting and crying out for faster hardware could move right to Sony and leave Microsoft with a much lower user base.

[Bagel seed]

Originally Posted by almighty

Yep, Releasing an underpowered console compared to what Sony will more then likely release is suicide and all the die hard casuals that are waiting and crying out for faster hardware could move right to Sony and leave Microsoft with a much lower user base.

Die hard casual is an oxymoron isn't it?

I think they just want to keep the ball rolling with a 2013 release and betting on their loyal fanbase to upgrade. As long as their users are hooked on Live it gives them a bit of cushion. People won't jump ship from them as easily because of that.

But if PS4 can be substantially more powerful than it, and 3rd parties can be swayed...

[TheChefO]

Originally Posted by east of eastside

A small low cost box fits with the theme that has been repeated from MS lately about moving Xbox from a game box to an entertainment hub.

If you came out with another beast console, hot and loud with a noisy fan, it would take at least another 3 years before it was shrunk into anything resembling and entertainment hub.

A smaller, low cost box, on the other hand, can be marketed as an entertainment hub from the get go.

Frankly, I'm sick of the old concept of a game console. I would support either MS or Sony if they went the low cost hub direction.

Speaking of Sony, I have no illusions of them going for a much more high end console than MS. Maybe a notch more at most if they are a year later. After all they are in a terrible financial situation and the Japanese market with its struggled state of publishing and development didn't give much support to PS3. Look at Vita and how it is struggling to take off now. Does that give much encouragement to go all out on super console?

You'll have that later this year. It'll be called an xbox360SS (superslim)

Seriously a bit of understanding for how electronics and heat dissipation would be great. If you want more/better from the games of the future, it will require bigger chips which inevitably run hotter than the same old/existing chipset at the newest manufacture process.

That doesn't mean it has to be loud, huge, and ugly ... but it will be bigger than what would be possible by shrinking the current old hardware down to 28nm and throwing it in as small a box as possible.

There's no magic here. That's the reason Wii looked so wonderfully slim and quiet in comparison to real nextgen systems. It was in fact, a last gen system, thrown in a new smaller box.



YOU might be happy with such a concept, but I think the majority of gamers would prefer the term NEXTGEN to actually mean what it says.

Otherwise, just go ahead and buy the superslim 2005 tech xbox360 and be done.

[TheChefO]

Originally Posted by dfan

A stopgap measure may just be exactly MS's plan. Although of course they would never admit it, but technology wise it would be. If the specs are true it's definitely an interesting strategy.

Basically, get a mildly higher spec'd Xbox 3a out there to take on Wii U, expand their Kinect casual market, and probably offer more online connectivity features at a breakeven or small profit at launch. Then 4-5 years later in 2017, launch the true Xbox successor with all of the above plus a significant spec bump on matured processes. It kind of singles out Sony, and I'm thinking they're betting on the chance that any advantage of Sony bringing out a more powerful box in 2014 would be marginalized. In any case they'd still be raking in profits with at-cost, low spec reliable hardware. And if PS4 does sway things back in Sony's direction, Xbox 4 in 2017 would hamper that imo.

They could very well adopt an Apple strategy here...


Ms could say offer a biennial updated console (enough time to ensure process shrinks available to support ~2x increased hardware for the same msrp)

Increase the ram, along with the rest of the guts and ensuring that software is forward compatible, games would take advantage of the increased spec in some way or another to encourage adoption of the new console, while still being compatible with the original model.

This means MS could afford to be less aggressive on selling for a significant loss as they do now, while at the same time, never being fully outclassed by any competing hardware. This would also mean the MSRP out the gate wouldn't have to be astronomical either.

OR, they could adopt this approach right out the gate and have a true "Core" unit, and a true Premium/Elite unit as the other multi-sku rumor suggested.

Such an arrangement would put a lot less pressure on end-of-life console production hardware and software and the same for "NG launch" hardware and software.

If a consumer is feeling the console is getting a bit long in the tooth and would like to see an "upgrade", they can simply buy the next version. Or if they're happy with having 7 year old hardware *ahem* they can still game on the ancient console!

I'd love to see some variation of this. Either with the console directly, or with a PC-centric core standard. Preferably with the console as PC gaming in general is a headache.

Of course, such a concept would mean "scaling the hardware" ... and we know how some around here don't like that idea ...

[Shifty Geezer]

This is the tech predicition thread, not the business strategy thread...

[Shifty Geezer]

Originally Posted by TheChefO

Of course, such a concept would mean "scaling the hardware" ... and we know how some around here don't like that idea ...

Scaling the hardware is a legitimate strategy. It's just not the only one, nor the only one that makes sense, and it comes at a sacrifice versus the efficient performance of clean-slate hardware. See the likes of ERP talking about how well x86 can perform - ditching PPC and going with x86 has advantages and disadvantages.

The rumours so far certainly sound like a 360 compatible box, but I take them to be 360+, and not XB3.

[McHuj]

Let me ask a question related to this next Xbox rumor. Suppose the 6670 is your starting point, it's a 716M transistor chip, clocked 800MHz with 480 shaders, 24 TMU's, and 8 ROPs. It's based on the VLIW5 architecture.

How would you modify/customize this part to in order to provide a good upgrade for the next gen? (Without saving just use a 6850 or higher)

My guess is that the silicon budget for the GPU is around 800-1000M transistors (in a hypothetical 1.5B transistor SoC) so that would limit the shader count to the ball park of the 6670 and I would guess the clock limits would be similar as well.

Do you think it's a good idea to stay with a VLIW5 architecture? Does going to VLIW4 or GCN shaders buy anything in terms of performance, specifically, for a gaming console (ie 5 VLIW5 vs ~ 7-8 VLIW4 vs ~7-8 GCN CU's?

[ToTTenTranz]

Originally Posted by TheChefO

They could very well adopt an Apple strategy here...


Ms could say offer a biennial updated console (enough time to ensure process shrinks available to support ~2x increased hardware for the same msrp)

Increase the ram, along with the rest of the guts and ensuring that software is forward compatible, games would take advantage of the increased spec in some way or another to encourage adoption of the new console, while still being compatible with the original model.

We have that.
It's called "Personal Computer".

All you'd need to make PC equal to that business strategy you're talking is for every game to bundle a standardized and efficient "dumb mode" for system config, like Rage's.
For example, detecting the proper resolution, or at least the screen ratio (I just panic everytime I see a friend playing a 4:3 stretched game on a 16:9 screen), then running a mini-benchmark to determine quality options.



As for the latest X720 rumours, I think most of us agree that a HD6670-esque GPU wouldn't make it a "next-gen" console.

Maybe it could be just a X360 Super-Slim model with an updated GPU that simply renders all X360 games at 1080p (+4xMSAA +FXAA?) and also brings some more/faster system memory.

Developers could make future games with a special path and assets (higher resolution textures, tesselation) that take advantage of the newer hardware, but 100% compatibility with the old console would be mandatory.

Though this is a less-than-ideal solution, Microsoft would gain parity with Wii U's visuals and boost hardware sales for another 2 years, until the real next-gen console comes out. Also, they'd get the 10-year "lifecycle" they initially projected.
This is actually really close to TheChefO's proposition, but it's more of a "one-time extension" for the hardware than a continuous business model.

[MfA]

Originally Posted by tongue_of_colicab

Not only that, that way you can either release a new console earlier and have consumers spend more money again or you can gain more profits because the hardware isn't such a financial burden.

It simply won't work without (illegal) collusion ... either both do it, or the one who does it will have to compete with Nintendo for Nintendo's market and lose half the customers who bought their last console in the first year.