Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[Crossbar]

720p with 4xAA, 16af, 60fps and a nice hardware scaler to 1080p would be the ticket. It'll make for pretty and SMOOTH gameplay and you could use the resources for all the bell and whistles for 720 vs straining to hit 1080p just for the sake of resolution.

I just don´t understand a lot of the discussion going on here. What you describe is very small visual difference compared to the best titles we have today (at least to most of us). Do you really think the platform holders would like to start a new hardware cycle for such a small upgrade, considering all the costs involved? R&D cost, pre-production, marketing, subsidies, new development tools, etc. Not to mention the hazzle it means to split the market with the current gen consoles, both for the platformholders and the game developers.

I´ve noticed a small shift in the predictions of when the 720 an PS4 will be released. Previously people talked about 2011-2012, now I see more people leening towards 2012-2013. Personally I think 2013-2014 is more likely, and even later than that if they decide to make some cheap hardware upgrade e.g. increasing RAM to the current gen.

MS said they are extending the 360s life cycle with the new Natal controller and I believe they are absolutely right, just look at how Nintendo resurrected the GameCube with a new controller, same, same, but different.

There are many good reasons even without the new controllers that are popping up, I could google a few quotes predicting a long current gen life cycle, but I just pick a recent one by Take-Two´s CEO Ben Feder:

"I think this console cycle is going to be a lot longer than people think," said Feder. "I think it's still very early--we're definitely not in a five-year cycle, and this is going to go on for a long time. I think that's good news for developers and good news for consumers. When that console change happens, I think there will be a lot of excitement for it at that point, because technology will have had the time to really accelerate and develop."

Who can disagree with that?

 

[liolio]

There is long and long... Anyway 5 years would be 2010/11, launching in 2012/13 is already a consistent change (+40%).
For the performances resolution is not telling the all story by far.
Depending on the game setting 720p AAx4 and 1080p AAx2 can both make sense I think devs will use what match their needs or perfs objectives better as usual.

 

[Crossbar]

There is long and long... Anyway 5 years would be 2010/11, launching in 2012/13 is already a consistent change (+40%).

Is that what you expect?

 

[Squilliam]

With the Xbox 360 as an example, it wouldn't hurt really to have similar but upgraded hardware. 1GB GDDR5 vs 512MB GDDR3 and a 4 core CPU + some tweaks and perhaps a clock boost and perhaps a modern GPU as well. I doubt that it would cost any more really than whats available currently to produce and provide a smaller step up between generations by making the hardware iterative. Handhelds do it all the time so why not home consoles?

Why not follow a GPU like progression of a new architecture and then a shrunk/tweaked version followed again by a new architecture and instead do it every 4 years or so? That way developers can ease into the new a lot slower and hardware which is older than 8 years gets left behind as usual.

 

[proffesso]

With the Xbox 360 as an example, it wouldn't hurt really to have similar but upgraded hardware. 1GB GDDR5 vs 512MB GDDR3 and a 4 core CPU + some tweaks and perhaps a clock boost and perhaps a modern GPU as well. I doubt that it would cost any more really than whats available currently to produce and provide a smaller step up between generations by making the hardware iterative. Handhelds do it all the time so why not home consoles?

Why not follow a GPU like progression of a new architecture and then a shrunk/tweaked version followed again by a new architecture and instead do it every 4 years or so? That way developers can ease into the new a lot slower and hardware which is older than 8 years gets left behind as usual.

by 2012/13 that would cost a pittance.

but seriously, I think you are all low-balling these numbers based off whats available today.

think what kind of hardware will be out in 3 years time. Larrabee 2 or 3 will be out then and mature, Nvidia will have eclipsed the GTX series a few times over.

6 and 8 core chips from amd and intel are already a reality, ram and ssd prices are falling at manic rates.

one guy above put an estimate at 40% quicker? im gonna say at least 250%

1080p, 60fps, 8 - 16x aa of some variety, shit tons of texture memory and main mem. deffered rendering, voxel, even basic raytracing could well be viable options.

Cell2 should be a hell of a lot quicker than whats out. probaby in the order of 4ghz, 24 spu...at least. bandwidth should be a non-issue

can sometime tell me the specs of a mid-highend pc when the 360 / PS3 launched?

 

[Squilliam]

by 2012/13 can sometime tell me the specs of a mid-highend pc when the 360 / PS3 launched?

I'm in the process of building a few machines and here's what I'm putting together ....... for comparision purposes. All hardware & prices from Newegg.com

EPoX EP-9NPA+Ultra Socket 939 NVIDIA nForce4 Ultra ATX AMD Motherboard - $105

SAPPHIRE Radeon X800PRO 256MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card - $199

Antec TRUEPOWERII TPII-430 ATX12V 430W Power Supply - $70

AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Venice 1GHz FSB Socket 939 Processor - $139

CORSAIR ValueSelect 1GB (2 x 512MB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400 (PC 3200) - $78

Western Digital Caviar SE WD2500JS 250GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - $98

So let's see ... you're at $604 & I'm at $689 .....

http://discussions.virtualdr.com/archive/index.php/t-196786.html

Thats pretty much mid. Actually it wouldn't run many games today ironic really.

Edit: November 2005.

 

[liolio]

Is that what you expect?

Few time ago I was still thinking about possible fall 2011 launch (for ms at least) now I think it's no longer likely I would go for 2012/13, 13 if Natal hold on its promises.

 

[Squilliam]

Few time ago I was still thinking about possible fall 2011 launch (for ms at least) now I think it's no longer likely I would go for 2012/13, 13 if Natal hold on its promises.

What about other services which may require more ram? Say for example Microsoft wanted to port Windows 7 using Natal as the interface. Wouldn't they require extra ram to take full advantage of the operating system? The PS3 browser as well could probably do with some more ram. Websites these days seem to want to use as much ram as they can!

 

[Arwin]

I think the new focus on motion controls is going to bring out a stronger desire for 3d vision as well. It may very well result in that no next-gen machines will be created before there is some type of 3d vision support available for it.

 

[FirewalkR]

720p with 4xAA, 16af, 60fps and a nice hardware scaler to 1080p would be the ticket. It'll make for pretty and SMOOTH gameplay and you could use the resources for all the bell and whistles for 720 vs straining to hit 1080p just for the sake of resolution.

Well this is always a personal opinion, of course, but for example: I played Crysis on my Sammy 40A656 (1080p) and playing it on 1080p with 2xAA or 0xAA versus playing on 720p with possibly 4xAA... to me it was like night and day, 1080p was clearly superior. Of course, the TV scaler also plays a part in this but I hear these models have a pretty good scaler.

Still, I believe the next-gen consoles will be able to go for 1080p with 2 or 4xAA while displaying awesome graphics (unless they all go Wii-style, which would make this graphics whore very very sad), so it's all good.

 

[pjbliverpool]

I'm in the process of building a few machines and here's what I'm putting together ....... for comparision purposes. All hardware & prices from Newegg.com

EPoX EP-9NPA+Ultra Socket 939 NVIDIA nForce4 Ultra ATX AMD Motherboard - $105

SAPPHIRE Radeon X800PRO 256MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card - $199

Antec TRUEPOWERII TPII-430 ATX12V 430W Power Supply - $70

AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Venice 1GHz FSB Socket 939 Processor - $139

CORSAIR ValueSelect 1GB (2 x 512MB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400 (PC 3200) - $78

Western Digital Caviar SE WD2500JS 250GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - $98

So let's see ... you're at $604 & I'm at $689 .....

http://discussions.virtualdr.com/archive/index.php/t-196786.html

Thats pretty much mid. Actually it wouldn't run many games today ironic really.

Edit: November 2005.

That looks pretty low end for the 360's launch period to me. Its using both a last gen GPU and CPU. Also 2GB was pretty much the gaming standard even back then.

I would say a good, but not top end gaming PC from back then would have been:

Athlon X2 4200+
2GB RAM
GF 7800GT

That should be able to handle any game out today as long as your willing to turn a few settings down and play at low resolution.

 

[RobertR1]

Well this is always a personal opinion, of course, but for example: I played Crysis on my Sammy 40A656 (1080p) and playing it on 1080p with 2xAA or 0xAA versus playing on 720p with possibly 4xAA... to me it was like night and day, 1080p was clearly superior. Of course, the TV scaler also plays a part in this but I hear these models have a pretty good scaler.

Still, I believe the next-gen consoles will be able to go for 1080p with 2 or 4xAA while displaying awesome graphics (unless they all go Wii-style, which would make this graphics whore very very sad), so it's all good.

Most sets actually have pretty poor scalers thus people go out and buy high end DVD players and receivers known for their scaling prowess. However, that's a discussion for avsforum.

It absoultely is a personal opinion but I like smooth gameplay and for that, 60fps is key for fast paced games such as shooters and sports. I still believe that 60fps goes a long way to making CoD4 the success it has become. Playing that game vs other 30fps shooters on the console really makes the smoothness come out.

 

[Squilliam]

That looks pretty low end for the 360's launch period to me. Its using both a last gen GPU and CPU. Also 2GB was pretty much the gaming standard even back then.

I would say a good, but not top end gaming PC from back then would have been:

Athlon X2 4200+
2GB RAM
GF 7800GT

That should be able to handle any game out today as long as your willing to turn a few settings down and play at low resolution.

But how much would that have cost? $1100? Thats quite a lot when you think about it now. It would make the PS3 look cheap in many ways.

 

[pjbliverpool]

But how much would that have cost? $1100? Thats quite a lot when you think about it now. It would make the PS3 look cheap in many ways.

Yeah but the question if I understand it correctly was aimed at predicting the level of technology in the next consoles by looking at the level of technology in PC's at the time the last generation launched.

So I wasn't condsidering price, just the "current" level of technology on PC at the time of 360's launch. Consoles will always be way cheaper than "current" mid-high PC hardware but can still be equivilent in power when they launch.

Not that I expect the next generation of console to match PC hardware at launch. It seems as though cost will be a much bigger factor this generation.

 

[Entropy]

Yeah but the question if I understand it correctly was aimed at predicting the level of technology in the next consoles by looking at the level of technology in PC's at the time the last generation launched.

This assumes that graphics enthusiast stationary PCs and consoles will develop along similar trajectories. If that basic assumption is wrong, the conclusions that follow are useless.
I'd contend that the arguments against that assumption being correct are quite strong.

 

[Squilliam]

Yeah but the question if I understand it correctly was aimed at predicting the level of technology in the next consoles by looking at the level of technology in PC's at the time the last generation launched.

So I wasn't condsidering price, just the "current" level of technology on PC at the time of 360's launch. Consoles will always be way cheaper than "current" mid-high PC hardware but can still be equivilent in power when they launch.

Not that I expect the next generation of console to match PC hardware at launch. It seems as though cost will be a much bigger factor this generation.

The heat of what is now a mid level GPU, the HD 4850 would be way too much for any console. I would say that the current generation consoles and PCs have long since departed after being unseasonably close at the start of the generation. So I don't know if its possible anymore to predict anything off PC technology, it seems the only thing a console has in common is the GPU architecure with the PC.

 

[proffesso]

The heat of what is now a mid level GPU, the HD 4850 would be way too much for any console. I would say that the current generation consoles and PCs have long since departed after being unseasonably close at the start of the generation. So I don't know if its possible anymore to predict anything off PC technology, it seems the only thing a console has in common is the GPU architecure with the PC.

and what was the heat of the 7800 (castrated i know) in the PS3? or the 90nm cell?
what about Xenon or the 360's cpu?

just remember that thermal envelopes are completely differernt to PC components.

cost is also another factor to ignore completely. what you can get from newegg is far, far different to what sony pays nvidia directly, for a custom chip....what you can build for $1000, sony / MS can build for $400, if that.

your buying 1....they are buying 10,000,000

 

[Squilliam]

and what was the heat of the 7800 (castrated i know) in the PS3? or the 90nm cell?
what about Xenon or the 360's cpu?

just remember that thermal envelopes are completely differernt to PC components.

cost is also another factor to ignore completely. what you can get from newegg is far, far different to what sony pays nvidia directly, for a custom chip....what you can build for $1000, sony / MS can build for $400, if that.

your buying 1....they are buying 10,000,000

I said that they were close at the start of this generation and afterwards they have to diverge. Your typical performance PC GPU is designed to use up to 200W as a package on its own. These aren't expensive components but the heat they put out and the power they use are expensive to deal with.

The PS3 had essentially the same die area as the PS2 IIRC but used something like 4-5* the power. They probably cannot afford to stick in nearly as much silicon as the current generation consoles for the next generation because the heat and wattage for an area of silicon is getting higher very quickly.

The needs of a performance PC gamer is fast diverging from the needs of a regular PC user and a console owner. So to say that consoles can again be comparable to a performance PC should probably be considered false at this point.

 

[FirewalkR]

Most sets actually have pretty poor scalers thus people go out and buy high end DVD players and receivers known for their scaling prowess. However, that's a discussion for avsforum.

It absoultely is a personal opinion but I like smooth gameplay and for that, 60fps is key for fast paced games such as shooters and sports. I still believe that 60fps goes a long way to making CoD4 the success it has become. Playing that game vs other 30fps shooters on the console really makes the smoothness come out.

I agree with you there. I was assuming that both 1080p and 720p (with more AA) would work at basically the same framerate. If the framerate's comparable, 1080p is much better for me. The picture quality is amazing in a Full HD set. Of course, if the trade-off is 60 for 30 fps... that's another matter. When I played CoD:WaW in my 360 I was kinda amazed at the visuals (at the beginning of the sniper mission for example) mainly because of the framerate. Smoothness can compensate for a lot.

When I say that I believe next-gen hardware will allow for 1080p with good AA, I'm also assuming 60fps along with visuals quite ahead of what we have now. This may be wishful thinking, depending on how far the console makers will push it next time, but I'm hoping they give us some really powerful hardware.

 

[AlNom]

I was assuming that both 1080p and 720p (with more AA) would work at basically the same framerate.

1080p vs 720p with AA will each have fairly different bottlenecks...