Carry on. ಠ_ಠ
Hahaha that is f'ing awsome!
Microsoft Roadmap, the XBox 720 and more - Leak
- Thread starter Rotmm
- Start date
Hahaha that is f'ing awsome!
The consoles are designed with a 5-10 year road map. Even if DDR4 is in tight supply in late 2013 it will be *the* standard the majority of it's lifetime. DDR3 of equal speeds is hard to come by and has power issues and, very importantly, EOL in terms of technology. As DDR4 ramps up over the next couple years DDR4 prices will drop and availability rise while DDR3 will be on the reverse coarse. This is very similar to MS's selection of GDDR3 700MHz for the Xbox 360.
I would love to hear your sales pitch on GDDR. It is more expensive and has some performance and power trade offs. If MS is looking to spool off high bandwidth clients (eDRAM, a pool of stacked memory, etc) the benefits of GDDR may not be as appealing and the downside, cost and power as well as long term AFFORDABLE availability, could be big negatives.
If this was made in 2010 then 22nm on the roadmap for a quick shrink in 2014 was a totally reasonable game plan.4- process : 22 nm, really ?
iirc the Xbox 360 block diagram used similar nomenclature, e.g. "256MB+ RAM". Especially if the author/audience is not a technical design group (the document looks like a big picture product plan) giving general data like frequencies, performance range, memory ball parks, etc are all reasonable -- especially if things are in flux and other things nailed down. They may have already spec'd a CPU but markets and contracts are dictating memory, etc. And of course 3+ years out everything is subject to change. Expecting such a document to "qualify" comment is ridiculous.
upnorthsox
Veteran
Such documents as these (if legit) are not handed to an exectuive and left at that, but explained in a presentation. Without the context of the talk that accompanied the slides you have no idea what the figures represent. eg. "These clockspeeds are ballpark figures. On the eDRAM we feel we really ought to be aiming for more than 32 MBs but we'd have to cost that." Again, these obviously aren't technical documents.
They could also just ask and the website may just oblige as a courtesy, without legal wranglings. When we see a 'cease and desist' writ, then we know this action was a legally motivated one. Otherwise, we only know these lawyers asked for its removal - we don't know that scribd valiantly refused to take down any content unless proven that they needed to, and the lawyers whacked them with a load of legal mumbojumbo threatening costly legal action causing sribd to back down.
The fact the document was removed doesn't really prove anything. Could be that MS have had a massive leak telling their competitiors what their thinking is and future marketing strategies will be. Could be that MS seeded a leak so that their competitors are misdirected. Could be that some bored person spent a lot of time and create creating a presentation for no reason whatsoever.
upnorthsox
Veteran
I wouldn't assume that at all. First, Sep/Oct 2010 is almost 18 months before Cape Verde's launch. They wouldn't have even known about it. Heck, Turks was even announced yet.
The most likely scenerio is that product development was asked for their current target specs, or given a $299 pricepoint and a possible 2012 launch, what would the target specs be.
Also, one needs to put into context how the presentation would've been done. The Director of Product Management would've given an overview/framework to which he would've summarized some aspects stating Joe so and so from prod dev will go into more detail and Jane whatsherface from finance will expand on later, yada yada. In that context, this would've been only one deck of slides out of a probable 4 or 5 that were shown. Of course, here at B3D we'd be most interested in the Prod Dev deck as that would've gone into the kind of detail we crave.
One more thing of minor interest, Sep 24th 2010 for a Monday meeting (Sep 27th) would align perfectly with Don Mattrick's takeover as the head of the EDD division. This then could've been a "State of next gen xbox" meeting or even a hit the ground running proposal.
upnorthsox
Veteran
This is true, I was giving Scribd the benefit of the doubt that they wouldn't be so gutless and would actually follow their own dcma policies.
Proof, no. Indicator, yes.
Yes, because cloud infrastructure still needs a generation of console hardware until it has caught up to be able to offer cloud gaming. If MS went cloud only next-gen, Sony would clean up. Both of them are looking at WAN computing for the future because that's obviously where things are headed - Sony even had papers or patents on it this gen. And MS need to shure up that area or they risk losing their OS cashcow, when everyone uses thin clients and streamed apps running on servers. All these firms have to chase the emerging markets.
the doc is old,i bet they changed the plan about cloud gaming
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...andwidth-issues-make-cloud-gaming-a-challenge
they will still do that,but i guess not 2015 anymore
Last edited by a moderator:
so theyre going to get depth information from paralax between the 2 cameras images.
should be pretty awesome if true, like reach out and interact with stuff in front of the screen.
or like imagine an nvidia particle demo, where they sprayed the particles toward the camera, and they appeared to be bouncing off the observer, collision data via kinect.
hope its true anyway, seems kinda fakey
What if...
- Yukon = rumored set-top box Xbox
- Durango = Next-Gen Xbox
It could be. But do we know what Durango actually refers to? Is it the next xbox as a whole, the devkit, the potential SOC, etc? Years ago when I worked for a big semiconductor company, I got to work on an SOC where each submodule had it's own code/project name.
Chances are there are code names for the CPU, GPU, other modules, overall system, software, even potentially specific milestones like an initial tapeout and a debug/eval board. If a company is being very secretive, the other teams may not be aware of what the other projects names are other than their own. so we may get leaks, depending on where they originate, referring to the next Xbox (or PS4) by different code names.
anexanhume
Veteran
I will refuse to use it too. I'm not going to be dependent on an Internet connection to game, especially if ISPs institute bandwidth caps. And not owning my games, digital or otherwise? No thanks.
Question. Historically, do dev kits under-represent gpu performance? I'd be disappointed if next Xbox only had cape verde level performance. I would hope it would be based on a 100W NI GPU, like an 8850 potentially.
Last edited by a moderator:
There is still a question of what they may do with the current Xbox 360 design. If this design document is obsolete or irrelevant and it implied that they wanted a console which would effectively replace the current Xbox 360 and EOL the device, then what of the Xbox 360 if they've moved on from this document? If they intend to bring in a higher performance and higher priced console (Durango) then perhaps that also means that the 360 has some life in it also.
There's a lot stuff posted on GAF first, I just thought that the rumor with corresponding slides & photos was worthy of discussion here, regardless of the small clip of the tech slide. The slide for the Road to Fortaleza ws done well enough that I thought it was legit. Everybody just looked at the tech slide & brushed off the rest without consideration.
Tommy McClain
Not a lawyer but that was a good enough question to call my uncle, who is and handles business law at his company, and walked him through it.
He informed me that though its up to the company a document like that, even if fake, would usually get a "request" email from legal to ask that it be taken down. It wouldn't, or doesn't seem to be something they can force to have removed, but he made it clear that a company like MS can threaten while not threatening and would take down false documents. He also stated since there are so many mentions of a companies name, system names, and just general bits in it, that his company would ask for it to be removed if they heard about it and if they were a large enough company that the press would be something they would have to deal with. He said that was one of the big sticking points. If it would become a PR issue, or even had 1 or 2 items it it that matched up with what they were doing. He also stated that false documents are removed all the time in these kinds of industries as they can cause problems in the future if even 1-2 points are right it can make it appear like someone truly is an insider which can be damaging enough that a sternly worded email "asking" to take something down is within the realm of possibility.
Then I asked him if he thought it was real. In his opinion, having worked at MS for 9 years, and HP for 21, he said it looked like the typical proposal that exists in companies and was probably one of many that are happening all the time. Water cooler decisions are a thing of the past and proposals and even general brainstorming comes in these kinds of forms so that no ones time is wasted and that the presenter(S) can make sure his audience gets the general drift.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
- Locked