News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[Silent_Buddha]

What are the chances of Microsoft actually going with a PowerVR Rogue based GPU instead of an AMD solution, given that

Highly unlikely it'll be anything but an AMD GPU. As the likelihood of a discrete GPU is extremely low. And for an integrated GPU, it'd be far cheaper to get the same performance from and AMD GPU than to pay extra for AMD to integrate another vendor's GPU.

Now, that all goes out the window if it ends up not being an AMD CPU. But that's highly unlikely as well.

Regards,
SB

 

[XpiderMX]

I know that specs are closed now, but... Is there any posibility that Microsoft have 2 (o even more) choices and now they are deciding one of those? Or it is too late?

 

[B Real]

I know that specs are closed now, but... Is there any posibility that Microsoft have 2 (o even more) choices and now they are deciding one of those? Or it is too late?

What would devs have been targeting? Would be working on a lower spec and then upscale or working towards the higher spec and then downscale. Legit question since I'm not I dev. I'd be curious to how it would work.

 

[AlphaWolf]

MS changed to 512MB late for the 360, so dev kits were behind the curve. I'd say more significant changes are unlikely. A bump in clocks or memory maybe. They may start with multiple idea's, but once you start shipping dev kits I'd think they'd be narrowed to one plan.

 

[XpiderMX]

What would devs have been targeting? Would be working on a lower spec and then upscale or working towards the higher spec and then downscale. Legit question since I'm not I dev. I'd be curious to how it would work.

I'm not a developer either, but all the "QoS" and "scalable platform" (from patents) and "GTX 680 like" things, made me think about something like it.

 

[dragonelite]

What would devs have been targeting? Would be working on a lower spec and then upscale or working towards the higher spec and then downscale. Legit question since I'm not I dev. I'd be curious to how it would work.

Most logically would be to provide the devs with the lowest spec design.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I'm not a developer either, but all the "QoS" and "scalable platform" (from patents) and "GTX 680 like" things, made me think about something like it.

Not all, or potentially even most patents will ever make it into a shipping product. Many times a patent application is submitted for something that sounds promising but no commercially viable vehicle has been thought up to use it. If you then find out something you can use it in 3-4 years later it's better to have filed a patent when you couldn't put it into anything than to sit on it and risk a competitor releasing a patent for that thing.

IBM's research department, for example, used to put out a LOT of patents every year. Many of which never made it into a shipping product.

Regards,
SB

 

[liolio]

Highly unlikely it'll be anything but an AMD GPU. As the likelihood of a discrete GPU is extremely low. And for an integrated GPU, it'd be far cheaper to get the same performance from and AMD GPU than to pay extra for AMD to integrate another vendor's GPU.

Now, that all goes out the window if it ends up not being an AMD CPU. But that's highly unlikely as well.

Regards,
SB

Well I agree that anything non based on AMD IPs is unlikely but I think that there is a discrete GPU in durango and a discrete CPU ie the whole thing is not an APU to me till it gets doubled confirmed at least.

 

[XpiderMX]

Not all, or potentially even most patents will ever make it into a shipping product. Many times a patent application is submitted for something that sounds promising but no commercially viable vehicle has been thought up to use it. If you then find out something you can use it in 3-4 years later it's better to have filed a patent when you couldn't put it into anything than to sit on it and risk a competitor releasing a patent for that thing.

IBM's research department, for example, used to put out a LOT of patents every year. Many of which never made it into a shipping product.

Regards,
SB

I agree, but the patents is just one example. Aegies said that MS (documentation? Cant remember) said the "target" was a GTX 680 (similar to), and some games are using a GTX680 for showing games... Coincidence? Maybe.

I just asking if there is any posibility of two targets, and MS choosing which one will be Durango.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I just asking if there is any posibility of two targets, and MS choosing which one will be Durango.

Even more unlikely unless the two targets are so similar that it makes little to no difference from a performance perspective.

If the console is going to launch this year then the big ticket launch titles will have been under development for at least half a year by now. Changing the system specs would mean changing development mid-stride. That could wreck havoc with development budgets, development time frames, etc.

One could argue that developers "could" target two specifications, but since development for launch titles is tight, that wouldn't be something advisable to do in order to get the best possible launch titles out by the time the console ships.

What is possible however, is that the leaks are in reference to an older specification which hasn't been the target for quite a while now. Considering all we have are rumors. Anything is possible on that front.

Regards,
SB

 

[orangpelupa]

the two target maybe Xbox Durango powerful and Xbox Settop-box notpowerful (XBLA, Windos Store Games, media streaming) ?

the rumors long time ago that there will be multiple xbox. But it is just rumor

 

[McHuj]

I've always wondered if the rumored set top box/Xbox tv would just use salvaged chips that have broken units/maybe lower clocks than the proper Durango APU.

Imagine an SOC with just 4 jaguar cores, 192-384 shaders, no ESRAM, (you can still render to the DRAM) used for the set top box. I think it would really save them money to be able to reuse their failing chips. If its clocked lower as well, power consumption for this could be really low.

 

[B Real]

so no 2 gpus'?

 

[dumbo11]

I've always wondered if the rumored set top box/Xbox tv would just use salvaged chips that have broken units/maybe lower clocks than the proper Durango APU.

Imagine an SOC with just 4 jaguar cores, 192-384 shaders, no ESRAM, (you can still render to the DRAM) used for the set top box. I think it would really save them money to be able to reuse their failing chips. If its clocked lower as well, power consumption for this could be really low.

I don't think there's any requirement for the 2 boxes to share architecture - and I doubt an STB has much use for shaders. There seem to be rumours of 'Oban' being produced a while ago by IBM for MS... I wonder if those are the STB chips?

 

[McHuj]

I don't think there's any requirement for the 2 boxes to share architecture - and I doubt an STB has much use for shaders. There seem to be rumours of 'Oban' being produced a while ago by IBM for MS... I wonder if those are the STB chips?

My thinking wasn't that there's an requirement to use the same chip, but just from an economic point of view for them to basically reuse chips that fail to meet performance for Durango. Being able to use more chips from each wafer for multiple products SKU's should lower the overall costs.

 

[ramr]

importance of DVR - People seem to be really discounting the importance of a whole house streaming DVR. Currently in the US, it would cost around $200/yr or more from the cable company to accomplish this in just 3 rooms.

 

[DJ12]

Maybe that's because most people PCs already stream anything they want round the house. Not really sure being able to record something on TV and then stream it is that big of a deal to be honest. I've already got a Tivo.

 

[ramr]

Maybe that's because most people PCs already stream anything they want round the house. Not really sure being able to record something on TV and then stream it is that big of a deal to be honest. I've already got a Tivo.

LOL is your definition of "most people" ~2-3%? Most people on this forum possibly. Even now streaming anything other through 360's WM app is a giant pain in the ass.

I am just bringing it up because the NPV of the DVR feature alone could easily be $500 or more over the life of console.

 

[XpiderMX]

I hope Durango support RemoteFX:

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/rds/archive...ing-in-windows-server-2012-and-windows-8.aspx

Xbox 8 games on my tablet

 

[dumbo11]

Maybe that's because most people PCs already stream anything they want round the house. Not really sure being able to record something on TV and then stream it is that big of a deal to be honest. I've already got a Tivo.

As I understand it, Durango/STB is a hell of a lot more than Tivo...
- in theory it should be able to stream the TV to your tablet, whilst you play a game on the TV.
- a popup window or a twitter feed or whatever that appears on your TV, but appears identically in your 1080p AAA game.
- "play a game whilst the console record's the TV you were watching".
- in your 1080p60 game, you get a popup with your tv programme to warn you that it's starting.
- you press install and then select 'tv', the system tells you when it's installed.
- you recieve an email and a warning pops up on the tv 'newemail' - you can select it and the live tv records then resumes afterwards.
- it connects to your PC and informs you when something happens to it.
- skype pops up overlayed, recieving the call pauses the TV (or the game).
- it connects to your phone.
[etc]
(the original leaked design brief covers a bunch of use cases - and, I guess, there's no requirement for only 1 HDMI in, or only 1 HDMI out?)

Having said all of that, and despite being intrigued... I am concerned that tablets might make this 'less relevant' in 2013 than it seemed a few years ago. Also the interface is likely metro, which hasn't been all that popular.