NGGP: NextGen Garbage Pile (aka: No one reads the topics or stays on topic) *spawn*

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't believe anything Proelite says. The guy keeps changing his tune at different times. He said Durango was going to be 2.5 TF now he is backpedaling.

You shouldn't. Everything is rumors until MS and Sony came out with figures themselves.

Btw, I am no where in a position to get info about the next Xbox even if I did work at MS.
 
You shouldn't. Everything is rumors until MS and Sony came out with figures themselves.

Btw, I am no where in a position to get info about the next Xbox even if I did work at MS.

Cool, that is what I was saying. You just hear of the different rumors and go by them.

I know some of the things that we know are true, we just don't which ones and we don't know the real info on the chips themselves, just the basics.
 
I don't really care which one is more powerful as long as they both can handle Samaritan/agnis philosophy at 1080p 60 frames per second with good AA, lots of physics, AI, big environments, etc.

Epic games said they wanted 2+TF for Samaritan at 30 FPS so I'm already disappointed at the rumoured specs. I know people will say wait for the secret sauce but all I expect is compromises to be made whether it's frame rates, resolution, game design...

I hope Orbis has 3D stacking, fast ram, lots of bandwidth, Full HSA, good enough processor and over 2 TF custom GPU. I'd be content with that and it's not even as expensive as it sounds.
 
^ How do you know what they are able to accomplish with their resources? Unless of course you work for those companies.

Tradeoffs and compromises happen and TDP as well as costs have to be considered for them no matter what kind of set ups they go with.

If your setting yourself up for a super high base standard off the bat, your not doing it right and are going to be disappointed regardless of what happens.

For example,


Agni's philosophy was a much less demanding target according to Square Enix's notes than Samaritan. Agni was running at full 1080p at 60fps with 8xMSAA PLUS FXAA even when unoptimized.

In comparison to Samaritian which was only using FXAA, 30FPS and 1080p and needed 2.5 tflop GPU right off the bat.

How can you expect similar targets for both of them if we know they require different abilities?

And we also know that devs aren't going to be mandating 1080p 60fps across every game, probably not even a majority of them, and that will become even more common as the gen goes on as games become more ambitious and technically complex than they already will be.

I don't understand how people don't see common sense when they are so close to tech every day. We would not have half the technically impressive games we have today if we did like Microsoft tried to do at the beginning of this gen and mandate even 720p for all games, let alone framerates. They just would not have been possible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't understand how people don't see common sense when they are so close to tech every day. We would not have half the technically impressive games we have today if we did like Microsoft tried to do at the beginning of this gen and mandate even 720p for all games, let alone framerates. They just would not have been possible.

Damn right!!

One day my dream of a MCGA 320x200 game using a next gen console will become true!

Resolution is for suckers, just think of the AA! ;)
 
Agni's philosophy was a much less demanding target according to Square Enix's notes than Samaritan. Agni was running at full 1080p at 60fps with 8xMSAA PLUS FXAA even when unoptimized.

In comparison to Samaritian which was only using FXAA, 30FPS and 1080p and needed 2.5 tflop GPU right off the bat.

One was made by ~20 programers in 2-3 months, and the other one was made with the might of large video game developer who has excellent sense for design and atmosphere.

I never liked demos that were made by Epic....
 
Damn right!!

One day my dream of a MCGA 320x200 game using a next gen console will become true!

Resolution is for suckers, just think of the AA! ;)
I'd love a demo crew or some enterprising developer to have a go at a low-res demo just to see what's actually possible. But I suppose advanced techniques (realtime lighting engine) would need a lot of development and not really be worth it if it can't be used in real games.
 
One was made by ~20 programers in 2-3 months, and the other one was made with the might of large video game developer who has excellent sense for design and atmosphere.

I never liked demos that were made by Epic....

Which dev applies to what circumstance? ;)

We know SE was working on Agni for a little bit. But developing the Luminous engine tools in parallel which took about a year from what i heard.

I thought Samaritan looked cool, but i thought Elemental in particular looked bland, not a good show for the first unveiling of UE4. But you know what? A lot of people were erroneously putting it down as "diminishing returns" because they were not impressed with Elemental, when that simply isn't the case. The art style plays a big part in the visual fidelity, it doesn't mean that you can't be impressed by the graphics anymore.
 
^ How do you know what they are able to accomplish with their resources? Unless of course you work for those companies.

Tradeoffs and compromises happen and TDP as well as costs have to be considered for them no matter what kind of set ups they go with.

If your setting yourself up for a super high base standard off the bat, your not doing it right and are going to be disappointed regardless of what happens.

For example,


Agni's philosophy was a much less demanding target according to Square Enix's notes than Samaritan. Agni was running at full 1080p at 60fps with 8xMSAA PLUS FXAA even when unoptimized.

In comparison to Samaritian which was only using FXAA, 30FPS and 1080p and needed 2.5 tflop GPU right off the bat.

How can you expect similar targets for both of them if we know they require different abilities?

And we also know that devs aren't going to be mandating 1080p 60fps across every game, probably not even a majority of them, and that will become even more common as the gen goes on as games become more ambitious and technically complex than they already will be.

I don't understand how people don't see common sense when they are so close to tech every day. We would not have half the technically impressive games we have today if we did like Microsoft tried to do at the beginning of this gen and mandate even 720p for all games, let alone framerates. They just would not have been possible.
I don't think my standards are that high for next gen specs. They probably wouldn't lose that much money compared to last gen but we still need to get more details I guess. You're right that engines are not optimized yet for the consoles since hardware is not 100% finalized so I suppose we can still be surprised. All I'm asking for is a strong baseline for next gen with good framerates and a little bit of future proofing.

Remember, this will last a decade and it's not the same as ps360 where they were better then high end pcs at the time. X86 architecture is involved now which means PC advancements will happen much quicker and AMD will apply what they've learned from next gen consoles into future GPU and CPU products right away.
 
I think when people say this, they also keep forgetting why devs want powerful console hardware...its because they will be targeting those specs. The PC gamers will get the icing on top from being able to upgrade their hardware with better AA, resolutions, frame rates and whatnot, but by and large everybody will be getting the same experiences.

So it really matters much less than even last generation when consoles were so weak they could not even get the same games as PC because they were just so far behind, that will not happen again.
 
We only have general information even for the most consistent rumors.

We have Durango with 8 gigs of ram, DDR3 or 4 is up in the air.

A 1.2 TFLOP level GCN2 GPU

8 jaguar CPU cores clocked at 1.6ghz.

"Secret heavy customizations" which make the whole unit's real world performance more significant than it would be otherwise.



Not much is known about PS4

For Orbis we have 4 gigs of fast ram or 8 gigs of slow ram, and an APU and GPU set up.
 
Damn right!!

One day my dream of a MCGA 320x200 game using a next gen console will become true!

Resolution is for suckers, just think of the AA! ;)

I ran Quake 3 at 320x240 with 16xS, for the fun.
It does look better than we'd think
AA really brings you detail that isn't there without AA, too.
Of course, a 17" CRT was forgiving and ran native res everything (and not at thay crappy 60Hz).
 
cross post from next gen thread
It seems likely both next generation consoles are using architecturally similar GPUs from AMD, in which case FLOPS can be a good guideline.

GCN is as far as I know an architecture without any great flaws, so I have my doubts even access to a large SRAM cache can bridge the rumoured 50% FLOPS deficiency in Durango.

but durango also seems to have more RAM. so the total picture is maybe less flops, more ram.
 
So if the new vg247 article is right, final post-OS ram counts are 3Gb and 5GB Orby and Durbo. 1.84 and 1.23 jiggaflops.

To translate, imagine this gen with:

PS3 750 mhz RSX+300MB ram
360 500 mhz Xenos+500 MB RAM

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
 
Although it would more likely be 750 Xenos v 500 Xenos as the Gpus are made by the same company this time and are likely to even be the same series.
 
Although it would more likely be 750 Xenos v 500 Xenos as the Gpus are made by the same company this time and are likely to even be the same series.

But even with the same series if the difference is all down to only "floppage" count, the final performance delta (meaning the framerate) wouldn't be anywhere close to 50%.
 
So if the new vg247 article is right, final post-OS ram counts are 3Gb and 5GB Orby and Durbo. 1.84 and 1.23 jiggaflops.

To translate, imagine this gen with:

PS3 750 mhz RSX+300MB ram
360 500 mhz Xenos+500 MB RAM

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
No, its not right. They looked at forums (b3d and GAF) and practically copied specs posted by couple of people who seems to enjoy thinking they have sources, even though they don't really have any.

1.23TF...Interesting number. Sounds alot like the one I mentioned yesterday and asked where did people get that (exactly the same number). Turns out someone on GAF said it. The people there ran with it and VG247 picked it up. The same persona also mentioned "4GB GDDR5 for PS4 confirmed", even though just couple days ago he was "cloaked fanboy" who desperately cried for system with ~4TF and never really gave any impression of someone mature who may have sources.

This is gibberish. People have certain dreams and they will believe in their own lie just to feel better, pathetic really.

As far as I know, only person who is trusthworthy is Sweetvar26 (Bkilian and Iherre too, but they are zipped), everybody else are people who would should have proof behind their posts or get banned. Gaming "journalists" just got two meaty articles just by looking at couple of posts made by imaginary insiders on forums.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top