Predict: Next gen console tech (9th iteration and 10th iteration edition) [2014 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Clustered deferred rendering and Async Computing are the keywords here...

Then we have the particle system which has been transitioned over to the GPU. Lords of the Fallen featured Nvidia Apex GPU particles in the PC version but on consoles, the particles were still handled entirely by the CPU. By moving to a new GPU particle solution, it's possible to push more particles than before with clusters of particles both emitting and receiving lights.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-the-surge-face-off
 
There's no current catch-all because PS4Pro is out and there're no next-gen rumours. A meaningful rumour should have its own thread for now. If there are enough rumours appearing, one of these individual rumour threads will be turned into the catch-all.
 
arijoytunir said:
Is an apu with zen and 8tf gpu viable in 2018 at console price point?
Click to expand...
Very unlikely without another die shrink (maybe absolute earliest 2019), I'm not going to say impossible because, perhaps there's some miraculous engineering available, but looking at the main constraints that we've traditionally looked at (thermals, power etc) it doesn't seem probable.
 
arijoytunir said:
Is an apu with zen and 8tf gpu viable in 2018 at console price point?
Click to expand...
Very unlikely.
For consoles: Microsoft and retailers like Gamestop can make virtually no profit off their hardware, instead making it back via software sales and in MS case also online subscriptions.

In the case of PC: Because they don't sell software or services OEMs like ASUS and EVGA need their cut of profit margins directly from the hardware (this I don't know but I'd speculate somwhere in the range of 15-25%). Also retailers need their cut: unlike console hardware sold at close to no margin because retailer can sell new/used games, for PC hardware/components retailers are almost completely out of the software chain, thus charge an additional 20-30% margin on the pcs and components they sell.

for a PC you are probably looking at + (15-25%) + (20-30%) above what a console of comparable costing components would cost.
 
Last edited:
Ryzen has 5 billions transitor... Too much for a console designed APU... Then backward compatibility and power&termal budget. Unlikely. Jaguars lack of AVX2 and few others new -important- instructions.... The best possible is some kind of evolved Jaguar or Puma. If it is true next Intel APUs are going to integrate AMD GPUs its also possibile to see an Intel CPU on Intel silicon (that is more possible for MS... )
 
HBRU, better to kill that hope now whilst you're ahead. Otherwise you'll be bitterly disappointed.

It's been discussed to death here already many times, but Intel has a monopoly on significantly high margin CPU parts in the PC and server markets. They develop and fab their own chips.

Intel will never licence a design to a console company that can be fabbed anywhere other than their own manufacturing fabs, and it will never sell a console company already fabbed chips because the opportunity cost of giving up its own fab space, from producing high margin parts for the PC/server space to making wafer-thin margin CPU parts for a console, is much too high for a company like Intel.

Intel in consoles is a pipe dream and will never happen.

On the other hand, Ryzen has proven reasonably competitive with Intel CPUs, and AMD will pretty much continue to be desperate enough to be willing to sign lucrative deals with console platform holders because they consider it a solid and vital revenue stream for their business. Considering how much Intel and even Nvidia make from other markets, it's easy to see why the best we'll ever see from either of them in a future console is some dated chip design from one of their failed mobile lines, e.g. Switch using X1.
 
Prophecy2k said:
Intel will never licence a design to a console company that can be fabbed anywhere other than their own manufacturing fabs, and it will never sell a console company already fabbed chips because the opportunity cost of giving up its own fab space, from producing high margin parts for the PC/server space to making wafer-thin margin CPU parts for a console, is much too high for a company like Intel.

On the other hand, Ryzen has proven reasonably competitive with Intel CPUs, and AMD will pretty much continue to be desperate enough to be willing to sign lucrative deals with console platform holders because they consider it a solid and vital revenue stream for their business. Considering how much Intel and even Nvidia make from other markets, it's easy to see why the best we'll ever see from either of them in a future console is some dated chip design from one of their failed mobile lines, e.g. Switch using X1.
Click to expand...
Not that I disagree with your sentiments, but you do contradict yourself here. Perhaps you meant proportionally lucrative for AMD who are strapped for cash, and proportionally wafer-thin margins for Intel compared to what they get on PC parts?
 
I think becouse of silicon different evolution from past -ahed of us- things may change quite a bit... in a 2020/2021 scenario... with all the fabs almost paired at 10 nm or 7 nm who knows ?
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Not that I disagree with your sentiments, but you do contradict yourself here. Perhaps you meant proportionally lucrative for AMD who are strapped for cash, and proportionally wafer-thin margins for Intel compared to what they get on PC parts?
Click to expand...

In that paragraph I'm talking specifically about the opportunity cost for Intel, in using their fabs to make narrow-margin console parts as opposed to high-margin parts for other markets.

When I said AMD would sign "lucrative" deals with console manufacturers, I meant "lucrative" to the console platform holders, not necessarily to AMD. So yes, I could have been a bit clearer here.
 
HBRU said:
I think because of silicon different evolution from past -ahed of us- things may change quite a bit... in a 2020/2021 scenario... with all the fabs almost paired at 10 nm or 7 nm who knows ?
Click to expand...

This won't change the fact that, whatever limitations are imposed on the manufacturing side, Intel still has billions more dollar to invest in their manufacturing technologies to ensure the chips they're producing are best in class.

So business-wise (and this is the important bit, because it's purely a question of business opportunity in seeing Intel IP in future consoles), it's unlikely that Intel will ever be in a position to want to offer their IP and manufactured chips cheaply enough to make a console product cost effective.
 
Prophecy2k said:
So business-wise (and this is the important bit, because it's purely a question of business opportunity in seeing Intel IP in future consoles), it's unlikely that Intel will ever be in a position to want to offer their IP and manufactured chips cheaply enough to make a console product cost effective.
Click to expand...
There's another argument here, that as long the consoles don't encroach on Intel's other sectors (you can't use Windows on Xbox), licensing their IP would mean money for nothing, and help squeeze their competition even more. Only if they have to offer silicon would be daft for them to sell the same silicon for lower margins, as you say.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
There's another argument here, that as long the consoles don't encroach on Intel's other sectors (you can't use Windows on Xbox), licensing their IP would mean money for nothing, and help squeeze their competition even more. Only if they have to offer silicon would be daft for them to sell the same silicon for lower margins, as you say.
Click to expand...

That's a good point!

I always assumed Intel's designs are inherently tied to their manufacturing technologies. Has Intel ever licensed out their IP to a third party to fab chips elsewhere?
 
Prophecy2k said:
That's a good point!

I always assumed Intel's designs are inherently tied to their manufacturing technologies. Has Intel ever licensed out their IP to a third party to fab chips elsewhere?
Click to expand...
I think the closest thing would be TSMC manufacturing Intel Atoms
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
Full transcript of John Carmack's QuakeCon 2005 Keynote
3 4 5
Replies
98
Views
32K
nemisis
N
Back
Top