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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't follow.

?
Wasn't the reason for making a symetric mirror configuration because it makes it easier for BC?

I mean if the 5.5 configuration was instead more CUs and wider data paths, would it still behave the same for BC?
 
Last edited:
Wasn't the reason for making a symetric mirror configuration because it makes it easier for BC?

No, I mean how is compatibility more important to Sony than MS? lol MS also disables half the GPU running with unpatched/boost. Both certainly made customizations that were a superset of features, but clearly compatibility is important or there'd be games that wouldn't be functional.

(Incidentally, the OneS was a test case for boost, although somewhat minor in terms of clocks).
 
No, I mean how is compatibility more important to Sony than MS? lol
Oh sorry, no I mean software vs hardware. Sony seem to use direct hardware compatibility for BC (practically cycle exact fallback mode?) while MS seems to focus on api level and software abstraction, so the hardware compatibility itself is less important for MS.
 
Suppose the Pro was clocked like the X, it would be about 5.5TF which was sony's second choice. They said it was lowered to 4.2 because of costs. That would still require other techniques for improved efficiency and maybe the lowest cost gddr5x to keep it on 256bits. But still allow their hardware-level compatibility which seems to be more important to Sony than MS. There's no way the dropped 5.5 design was a different architecture.

I imagined doubling the Pro GPU the same way, adding yet more advanced features, like they did with dr-fp16 and bufferID, and have significant power reductions which AMD might be focussing on. 16GB Gddr6 256bits, then clock 10% higher than the X on 7nm+. 200W. 12TF. 400mm2. Somehing like that.
They could have used 8 Gbits/s GDDR5 chips for a 256 GB/s bandwidth. That's what I thought they'd use back then just after the leak.
 
Without compression they needed about 100GB/s per TF, and at mid-gen it dropped to 50GB/s per TF. I wonder if there are any more upcoming tricks from AMD which could reduce this even more without losing the unified memory.
 
There's always more cache, I suppose. :| Larger register files etc. idk.
 
Last edited:
Its the consensus that PS5 will be the next console released, but is it beyond MS to release the next Xbox before PS5? I mean 2 mid gen upgrade = 1 next gen jump? :D

Without wishing to state the bleeding obvious, mid-gen is the midpoint between gen X and gen Y, there is is only one midway point. :yep2:

It think Sony dropped Pro in 2016 simply because it's mid-way between 2013 and 2019 where they intend to launch PS5. Six years being the length between PlayStation and PlayStation 2 and would have been the same length between PS2 and PS3 had Sony not had to delay. Nobody, absolutely nobody, wants another seven year generation or has everybody forgotten how compromised games were at the tail end of PS3 and 360 when hardware was just stretched too far. That and not everybody wants to replace a console because it breaks, much better to let to retire gracefully and embrace a new generation.
 
Without wishing to state the bleeding obvious, mid-gen is the midpoint between gen X and gen Y, there is is only one midway point. :yep2:

It think Sony dropped Pro in 2016 simply because it's mid-way between 2013 and 2019 where they intend to launch PS5. Six years being the length between PlayStation and PlayStation 2 and would have been the same length between PS2 and PS3 had Sony not had to delay. Nobody, absolutely nobody, wants another seven year generation or has everybody forgotten how compromised games were at the tail end of PS3 and 360 when hardware was just stretched too far. That and not everybody wants to replace a console because it breaks, much better to let to retire gracefully and embrace a new generation.
Does that mean X2 in 2021? with PS5 in 2019, PS5+ in 2022? That's something I don't think MS would want.
What are the different scenarios that could play out here?

From article http://www.mcvuk.com/articles/consoles/xbox-one-x-outsells-ps4-pro-in-first-week
MOVING ON(E)

Elsewhere, Xbox boss Phil Spencer has already touched upon a future where new game releases could be Xbox One X specific.

"Developers want to reach the largest audience possible," he told The Telegraph. “At some point in the future are there pieces of hardware that become old enough that they fall out of the ecosystem? We see that today; we're not manufacturing Xbox 360 and yet there are 360 games that do very well right now on our platform.

"We'll talk more about this and frankly keep our ears open to what customers want and developers want. But our goal right now is to give them the highest performance in the broadest market they can.

“Three or four years ago if someone made an investment in an Xbox One, they bought that they bought their library of games, I want them to feel they get a full generational use out of their console, same with the Xbox One S. [But] at some point, we see this usage and other things can drop low enough where you kind of move on to things.”
 
Last edited:
Begun backpedaling has
change this to:
If they leverage 1X as their next generation device, then '9th' gen has arrived already. We'd be predicting 10th gen for xbox then going forward.

If this is feasible, or this happens, the CPU is locked. What are some of the repercussions to multi platform dev for next gen if they push for higher CPU etc. These are interesting discussions. Lets avoid the politics of it, we can have another thread for that.
 
If pro/xb1x had a much better cpu there would be a reason to remove the forward compatibility requirement with ps4/x1.

But requiring binary compatibility with ps4/xb1x would limit games next gen if there is a big cpu.
 
change this to:
If they leverage 1X as their next generation device, then '9th' gen has arrived already. We'd be predicting 10th gen for xbox then going forward.

If this is feasible, or this happens, the CPU is locked. What are some of the repercussions to multi platform dev for next gen if they push for higher CPU etc. These are interesting discussions. Lets avoid the politics of it, we can have another thread for that.
Well, what Spencer says is reasonable. Makes a fair bit of sense too given what would be required to provide a substantial generational leap beyond the XB1X. Makes a mess of the concept of generations, but we kinda knew that already. However, nothing ssys that cutting the backward ties to the original XB1 will happen before the successor to the XB1X is released, if they stay in the game.
 
Considering how long last gen consoles got ports I don't really see the problem in letting the PS4 pro and Xbox one x stick around until at least 2021. Honestly i'm extremely satisfied with the Xbox one X's level of fidelity ; it's to the point where they could've gotten away with calling it a next gen console. The base consoles will start to look pretty long in the tooth, but so what? You have the higher end models as an option. I don't care if games have to go sub HD on the base Xbox one even.

Sony could throw a wrench in that but IMO they don't need to freak out about the power divide and they can just try and keep their momentum going with their exclusive games.

To me, anything less than 12TF and 24GBs of memory and they might as well not even bother releasing something new.
 
If pro/xb1x had a much better cpu there would be a reason to remove the forward compatibility requirement with ps4/x1.

But requiring binary compatibility with ps4/xb1x would limit games next gen if there is a big cpu.
Can't games be programmed to run two very different CPU's as they do in PC? Or to put it another way. When we went from 360-X1 for example, many early games were cross-gen but they were often developed separately. Even with two very different x86 CPU's, cross gen games will still be much easier to manage than 360-X1. I could see a situation where a game could be the same exe on the same disk but have features turned off for older machine. Middle Earth was one cross gen game where they turned off a whole big feature on old consoles, probably due to RAM/CPU restrictions.
 
Can't games be programmed to run two very different CPU's as they do in PC? Or to put it another way. When we went from 360-X1 for example, many early games were cross-gen but they were often developed separately. Even with two very different x86 CPU's, cross gen games will still be much easier to manage than 360-X1. I could see a situation where a game could be the same exe on the same disk but have features turned off for older machine. Middle Earth was one cross gen game where they turned off a whole big feature on old consoles, probably due to RAM/CPU restrictions.
If a new game concept requires a significant amount of cpu power, or memory, or gpu, or in the future massive AI inference or even training, the game concept may not even work on older hardware. So if the transitional compatibility is mandatory we won't be able to play the next Fumito Ueda masterpiece for an additional 3 to 5 years. :no:

We end up with graphics quality as the only allowed improvement for next gen.
 
Does that mean X2 in 2021? with PS5 in 2019, PS5+ in 2022?
No it doesn't unless Microsoft are going to play around what Sony might do. I would be surprised if there is a PS5 Pro (or next gen mid-gen offering) unless it's support to develop, launch and support. It's simply too small a market.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top