Next Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [2018]

[function]

This article from last year shows 1080p and 900p X1 games running at 4K on X1X with a "barebones" port:

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-microsofts-xbox-one-x-benchmarks-revealed

These were early, basic ports but show that while X1X is generally faster at 4K than X1 is at 1080p, 900p X1 games generally (but not always) see slightly degraded performance.

The article also suggest that with X1X being a compute monster but largely a scaled up X1, the bottlenecks can move elsewhere.

 

[Karamazov]

wasn't memory architecture a major bottleneck for the xbox one to prevent it from running some games at 1080p, and not its cpu/gpu ?

 

[function]

wasn't memory architecture a major bottleneck for the xbox one to prevent it from running some games at 1080p, and not its cpu/gpu ?

It could be - if you go outside of the very quick esram you're into relatively slow main memory. The more you scale resolution, the greater the proportion of your accesses are in slow memory, the more proportionally expensive you pixels are.

But for games that make full use of the PS4's GPU there simply isn't the resource on X1 to match it. Even with unlimited esram the gains brought probably wouldn't allow it to get near the PS4 - especially in games built for PS4 (the market leader) and PC that are careful with how they use memory BW (throwing masses of fp16 transparent effects around isn't particularly smart anywhere!).

There doesn't appear to be a practical high BW alternative to GDDR6 available next gen. Unless a console vendor is prepared to take the hit on HBM I don't think console core / base profiles will be exceeding twice the performance of the X1X. On the GPU side, at least.

 

[Megadrive1988]

^ That's why next gen consoles need 24GB 384-bit GDDR6 and 800+ GB/s bandwidth.

 

[Recop]

These were early, basic ports but show that while X1X is generally faster at 4K than X1 is at 1080p, 900p X1 games generally (but not always) see slightly degraded performance.

It's always worse according to this chart (fps) :

Inversely, it's always better at 1080p.

You're using percentages wrong.

It's not the conventional way to use percentages... we commonly say that the difference between 720p and 1080p is 125% = x2,25.

If next gen isn't at least 3 times more powerful than the X, i don't expect a decent improvements in graphics if games run at different resolutions.

 

[Xbat]

Why is the X always brought up it's a gimped console because all games have to still run on the Xbox One. It's a flawed metric to use.

 

[turkey]

Why is the X always brought up it's a gimped console because all games have to still run on the Xbox One. It's a flawed metric to use.

Yet all launch titles are likely to be gross gen and so X comparisons will be rife and the difference over X will be it's perceived power.

 

[Entropy]

If next gen isn't at least 3 times more powerful than the X, i don't expect a decent improvements in graphics if games run at different resolutions.

Unless the games are constructed using the capabilities of the new console as a base, the visual improvements will be modest no matter what. If all that factor of three buys is better 4k rendering, and some improvements in AO and shadowing in a game that previous generation consoles can play, very few people will even notice much less give a damn.
How many were amazed by the factor of two between the PS4 and PS4P? Why would a similar jump plus a little be more impressive?
Compatibility between generations is a dual edged sword.

Bandwidth seemingly puts a rather hard cap on what we can expect from next gen consoles. 0.5-1 TB/s feeding 12-18TF of ALU. Not a terribly great span, meaning there is little room for rendering power being the defining difference between two consoles. Which in turn implies that price, time to market, games library et cetera will dominate consumer reception.

 

[Xbat]

Yet all launch titles are likely to be gross gen and so X comparisons will be rife and the difference over X will be it's perceived power.

I'm positive all launch titles won't be cross gen. In fact there will almost definitely be first party titles that won't be.

There's also more incentive for third partys to upgrade and show there engine's for next gen.

 

[function]

It's not the conventional way to use percentages... we commonly say that the difference between 720p and 1080p is 125% = x2,25.

4x something is 400%. That's always the case. It's never not. 4x is 400% 'of' the original, and 300% 'higher'.

If talking about differences in percentages, rather than using the actual percentages themselves, it needs to be clear e.g. "higher" or "lower" or "difference". Expressing one number as a percentage of another, you never subtract 100%.

When I said X1X is regularly pushing in excess of 300% of PS4 resolutions that meant more than 3x. It's unambiguous.

If next gen isn't at least 3 times more powerful than the X, i don't expect a decent improvements in graphics if games run at different resolutions.

I largely agree, and I don't think next gen will be 3x as powerful as X (with the possible exception of the CPU).

 

[Entropy]

mobile posting messes up long message

 

[turkey]

I'm positive all launch titles won't be cross gen. In fact there will almost definitely be first party titles that won't be.

There's also more incentive for third partys to upgrade and show there engine's for next gen.

Would love to see what select teams can bring when not held back but :

I don't see 1080p going away so I think cross gen is likely, especially as the architecture is likely to be closer than ever. We have not seen the start of awful performance on base hardware yet that we did at the tail of last gen so I don't see the current hardware under as much strain. Finally I feel they will want their mid gen consoles to get longer lifespan, especially Microsoft. The X is still very new although Microsoft may be later to next gen than Sony.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't see why cross-gen for a lot of titles won't continue. It's the same as creating a game to target high end and low end PC. Some AAA titles, especially 1st/2nd party showcases, will target only the new machines, but a lot of the library (looking at indies of all sizes here) will target current machines too, alongside mobiles etc. It all depends on whether the software sells or not. When pubs start seeing numbers on last gen fail to be worth it, they'll stop supporting the ports.

The only reason it hasn't always been that way is because the hardware delta between generations has been huge along with equally huge port costs. For titles that already had robust porting, like FIFA and COD, the cross-gen has been long-term. Next-gen, tools make it easier to port, similarity of architectures makes it easier to port, and the changes in the gaming landscape make it more worthwhile to port (XBox games being on PC as well as XBox, means a game made there can target XB1 and well as XBN and PC). If you play something like SoT (Minecraft / Fortnite), you'll have an improved version on your same game account on your XBN and 15 TF gaming rig, and a simpler version on your old XB1 in the bedroom, and a simpler version on your laptop/Surface Pro.

 

[dten]

The economics of today's big budget games means we'll have a lot more cross-gen. You likely won't see many exclusive big budget games until a console passes ~20 million units. 1st party can eat the cost to promote the newest console but even they'll have a limit to how much loss they're willing to take.

Anyway, we're not going to get 3X the X in TF or Bandwidth if Scarlett is out 2020. Even if PS5 is out 2021, we won't get that.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

I don't see 1080p going away so I think cross gen is likely, especially as the architecture is likely to be closer than ever.

I agree with 1080p sticking around. Both Sony and Microsoft are likely to have some sort of 1080p device operating next generation.

We have not seen the start of awful performance on base hardware yet that we did at the tail of last gen so I don't see the current hardware under as much strain.

True, but we've seen dynamic resolutions become a lot more prevalent as this generation's gone on, as well as overall lower resolutions in more demanding games i.e. Battlefield 1 dynamically scaling down to 900p on PS4 and 720p on XBoxOne. So the base hardware's at least showing signs of not being able to keep up with its 1080p ambitions.

Finally I feel they will want their mid gen consoles to get longer lifespan, especially Microsoft. The X is still very new although Microsoft may be later to next gen than Sony.

Agreed, but I think things will manifest differently between Sony and Microsoft, especially with the recent Scarlet talk.

--- Microsoft ---

Microsoft will launch a platform built around scalability, with the X1X being the lowest common denominator, which devs will have to support down to a minimum of 1080p30. The XBoxOne will be compatible with the streaming service, making all of their current generation consoles next generation compatible in some manner.

They'll release a micro XBoxOne, maybe a portable, at the end of 2019, with no optical drive, an SSD, and some combination of Zen, Vega/Navi, and GDDR6 capable of running XBoxOne code a little better than the XBoxOneS.

They'll release a redesign of the X1X at the end of 2019 with the primary purpose of being cheaper. It will also use Zen, Vega/Navi, and GDDR6 and run X1X code a little better.

Developers will be able to make Scarlet exclusive games from the start of 2020, priming people for the full fat XBoxTwo launch at the end of 2020, and letting them build up a library in advance.

--- Sony ---

Sony will stick with a more traditional generational split.

They'll release a micro PS4/portable, and a Pro Slim, somewhere in 2019. Much like Microsoft, they'll be some combination of Zen, Navi, and GDDR6. Possibly HBM if we're talking a portable.

Somewhere within the end of 2019 and beginning of 2020, Sony launch high and low end consoles, 4K and >1080p respectively. $550 and $350 respectively. All first party PS4 titles are freely patched to take advantage of both PS5 models.

 

[Xbat]

I doubt Sony will go with multiple console launch. They will make the most powerful console they can make using 7nm and what's in there budget that I expect will be between $450-$500 dollars. I expect they will take a reasonable loss on each console.

They will release the PS5 Pro version when 5nm is out or better.

 

[vipa899]

between $450-$500 dollars

I personally hope it will be a $300 machine and good-enough performance, like the PS2.

 

[Pixel]

I personally hope it will be a $300 machine and good-enough performance, like the PS2.

Chip size has increased since the days of PS2, as has the need for an HDD, along with small costs like the need for an ethernet and wifi controller. Gone are the days of $300 hardware especially in an era where leaps in performance are harder to come by in the post Dennard Scaling, slowdown in Moore's law era we are currently in. Also gone are the days of designing your own CPU/GPU and AMD/Intel/Nvidia anyone else wants to make their margins on using their architecture/IP.

 

[borntosoul]

This......gone are the days.

 

[Lalaland]

I can't see either firm allowing next gen titles run on current gen titles as it will kneecap the new box for 3rd party titles (ie min. effort scaling between bixes) and stop 1st party titles from truly showing off the new box. XB1X s/w is compromised by needing to run on XB1 to the point where it's hard in 1080p YT videos to make the case that it's money we'll spent. If XB2 games also have to carry XB1 or XB1X they won't look as good or make as compelling a case to buy XB2 as XB2 only s/w could. Yes the x86 design of the current and future gens makes cross gen compatibility easier but it doesn't make it free. Every game system and design ambition will be stymied by having to ask yourself "But will it work on 8 Jaguar cores?".