Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[jonabbey]

I thought the reason that ms strictly enforces the use of their apis is that the next generation console can emulate 360 games. tho it wouldnt really be emulation at that point.

I wonder how much performance benefit Sony has gotten this generation by letting developers program to the metal with RSX / how much it will cost them next-gen when it comes to emulation?

Of course, if Sony abandons the Cell architecture next-gen, RSX will be the least of their worries..

 

[Rangers]

I wonder how much performance benefit Sony has gotten this generation by letting developers program to the metal with RSX / how much it will cost them next-gen when it comes to emulation?

Why would it cost them anything? Sony currently offers zero BC in PS3 and has for a long time. Why would PS4 be different?

I only wish MS would wise up like Sony has...

I can only assume MS is giving up little by restricting to DX only though, performance wise. I say this because A) I dont think they'd have made the decision otherwise B) No developers have spoken out about it all, including ones like Id and Valve who arent shy about criticizing MS.

I'm probably going to make a thread about it soon since I'm always curious and it's always OT in whatever thread it's brought up.

 

[eastmen]

That would be a good point if it was 2011 right now and Nintendo's only option for making a system more powerful then 360/PS3 was to use 360/PS3 hardware. Technology moves on, are you telling me that in 2011 they couldn't create a system that's cheaper to build then either of those two yet still a bit faster and cooler?

I doubt they'll go significantly faster then those two systems though, I'm expecting something around the same power or a bit faster.

By the way, did you predict Wii and its success before it was announced?

from benchmarks a sandy bridge cpu would be faster than the current consoles.

I still think 4 core bobcat + a 5670 class gpu and 2 gigs of ram would cost under $150 right now for them to make a system out of and it would command a good $300 street price and blow away what the 360 and ps3 can do.

 

[Rangers]

from benchmarks a sandy bridge cpu would be faster than the current consoles.

I still think 4 core bobcat + a 5670 class gpu and 2 gigs of ram would cost under $150 right now for them to make a system out of and it would command a good $300 street price and blow away what the 360 and ps3 can do.

What good does right now do, even if that was true? It takes YEARS to launch a console and develop games for it.

Maybe if Nintendo started developing that 3 years ago.

Still dont see how PS360 struggle to make money at 299 but you guys think Nintendo could blow them up at 150, (when 5670 is ~$100) either. Regardless of what tech is used, it's all the same process nodes available.

Anyways, will never happen. Nintendo will never be interested in decent technology hardware again imo. Too expensive.

 

[grandmaster]

I thought the reason that ms strictly enforces the use of their apis is that the next generation console can emulate 360 games. tho it wouldnt really be emulation at that point.

No, that is not the reason at all. Microsoft enforces this in order to ensure that the background OS and any hardware revisions they make are compatible with all games.

 

[thop]

Maybe if Nintendo started developing that 3 years ago.

Nintendo did.

 

[kagemaru]

No, that is not the reason at all. Microsoft enforces this in order to ensure that the background OS and any hardware revisions they make are compatible with all games.

I understand how the use of APIs ensures all games are compatible with the OS, but why would that have anything to do with hardware revisions? Prior consoles have had similar revisions (ps1 and ps2 for ex) and those systems were coded down to the metal AFAIK. Asking out of interest, not debating here :smile:

 

[AlNom]

I understand how the use of APIs ensures all games are compatible with the OS, but why would that have anything to do with hardware revisions? Prior consoles have had similar revisions (ps1 and ps2 for ex) and those systems were coded down to the metal AFAIK. Asking out of interest, not debating here :smile:

PSTwo wasn't 100% compatible with games.

 

[Nesh]

PSTwo wasn't 100% compatible with games.

It did? Which were those?

 

[kagemaru]

PSTwo wasn't 100% compatible with games.

Oh that's right I do remember that now. IIRC One of the tekken games was noted to not work on the PStwo.

Still didn't stop them from selling a boat load though

 

[AlNom]

Still didn't stop them from selling a boat load though

Indeed, but I'm not inclined to think that coding to the metal will significantly increase sales of 360 titles either. So it's really about minimizing the risks and Q/A. It falls in-line with the situation regarding the FSB latency in 45nm 360.

 

[eastmen]

What good does right now do, even if that was true? It takes YEARS to launch a console and develop games for it.

Maybe if Nintendo started developing that 3 years ago.

Still dont see how PS360 struggle to make money at 299 but you guys think Nintendo could blow them up at 150, (when 5670 is ~$100) either. Regardless of what tech is used, it's all the same process nodes available.

Anyways, will never happen. Nintendo will never be interested in decent technology hardware again imo. Too expensive.

Lets see. The majority of 2011 titles will be multiplatform. A bobcat + 5670 would play the pc verisons of these titles . So with very little work nintendo could ship with all of next years multiplatform titles running at 1080p on thier new box.

Why does it take 3 years to develop a console ? AMD did the work on the cpu and gpu in my example. Nintendo would only have to put it in a box and sell it.

I don't believe that the 360 struggles to make money at $300. In fact we already know that it was selling at $200 and I don't believe it was taking a loss at all. The new design with the new shrunk cpu/gpu should cost even less. Its in MS's best intrest to make money per system sold. I really don't know what the dal is with the ps3 but it was expensive and still is.


I would just say that a 4 core bobcat cpu would most likely be in the $50 range for nintendo or lower. The 5670 costs $80 for the 1gig model
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&cm_re=radeon_5670_1gb-_-14-150-467-_-Product

So now we know that for $130 they have a gpu , cpu and 1 gig of ram and other bits fom the gpu. What else is needed that will raise the cost to $300 ?

I fully expect nintendo to put out a good system next gen. I believe sony and ms's will come ou and crush it with huge cpus and gpus with 4 or more gigs of ram. But i think nintendo will put out somehting better than the 360 and ps3 only because its so cheap to do so.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3933/amds-zacate-apu-performance-update

This is a 15watt apu for netbooks. It manges at 768 High quality Batman scores of 19fps. The high quality is marketly improved over the 360s quality.

here is sandy bridge
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/7

768 lowest quality which is under the quality of the 360 gets you 66fps.

That a sandy bridge with a single gpu core. One with a double gpu core will do much better.


Like i said nintendo could make a very cheap system for 2011 based on a ati/nvidia gpu with a laptop/netbook cpu would make a very powerfull console in comparison to the current high def consoles.

 

[Prophecy2k]

Why does it take 3 years to develop a console ? AMD did the work on the cpu and gpu in my example. Nintendo would only have to put it in a box and sell it.

Errrrm.... They most definitely won't just go for an off the shelf part. No console GPU/CPU is exactly the same archetecturally to any off the shelf desktop or laptop part, despite the fallacies that people like to float around the internet. For the console platform holders to even be able to control the rights to their console components they will employ the likes of ATI and NVidea etc to design for them a CUSTOM chip. The developement of such is not a quick-tings process that only takes a few weeks to whip together a design from an existing PC chip. You'd be very naive to think so.

Not only does the hardware need time for development, the software layers also need to be written. We can thank MS that from this gen onwards, gone are the days when platform holders like Sony can simply throw out a new box without any dev tools, sparse documentation, poorly slapped together devkits. These things also need to be developed and that takes a considerable amount of time and effort.

I don't think you really realise how much actually goes into the development of a new console...

 

[wco81]

Maybe if they wait long enough for the next-gen, they can take an ARM-based SOC.

Great for power consumption!

 

[eastmen]

Errrrm.... They most definitely won't just go for an off the shelf part. No console GPU/CPU is exactly the same archetecturally to any off the shelf desktop or laptop part, despite the fallacies that people like to float around the internet. For the console platform holders to even be able to control the rights to their console components they will employ the likes of ATI and NVidea etc to design for them a CUSTOM chip. The developement of such is not a quick-tings process that only takes a few weeks to whip together a design from an existing PC chip. You'd be very naive to think so.

Not only does the hardware need time for development, the software layers also need to be written. We can thank MS that from this gen onwards, gone are the days when platform holders like Sony can simply throw out a new box without any dev tools, sparse documentation, poorly slapped together devkits. These things also need to be developed and that takes a considerable amount of time and effort.

I don't think you really realise how much actually goes into the development of a new console...

The last two generations had two chips in which the console creators did not have the righs over. Actually 3. The intel cpu in the xbox , the nvidia gpu and of course the nvidia gpu in the ps3.


going bobcat + 5670 gpu would mean going strait through amd to get the liscensing deal. I don't see it needing 3 years to get them to work together in a console. IN fact the xbox 360 didn't need 3 years. I believe it was done in 18months. They could also go with a dual core bobcat with 4-6 video cores on it also.

Maybe if they wait long enough for the next-gen, they can take an ARM-based SOC.

Great for power consumption!

wii on 28nm could be powered by hamsters. Just think of the game tie ins !

 

[pc999]

While the ARM idea is a interesting one, wouldnt be better for Nintendo to go with a architecture that would ensure all the multiplatforms on their console (eg Fusion)?

 

[Teasy]

What good does right now do, even if that was true? It takes YEARS to launch a console and develop games for it.

Maybe if Nintendo started developing that 3 years ago.

Still dont see how PS360 struggle to make money at 299 but you guys think Nintendo could blow them up at 150, (when 5670 is ~$100) either. Regardless of what tech is used, it's all the same process nodes available.

Anyways, will never happen. Nintendo will never be interested in decent technology hardware again imo. Too expensive.

Process shrinks aren't the only way that technology advances..

Nintendo will never be interested in cutting edge hardware, but that doesn't mean they won't produce decent hardware.

 

[eastmen]

What about new video codecs ? I know mpeg 7 and 21 exist but these are more functional upgrades and not performance / compression updates.


Mpeg 2 really debuted with dvd players in 96/97 and even decent pcs needed decoder cards to run dvd movies. Mpeg 4 hit the main stream with bluray/ hd-dvd players in 2006 and this gen systems.

Can compression and peformance take another leap foward with 2012 or later consoles ? I'm wondering because ps3 and 360 are pushing streaming video . Would it be wise for sony or ms to invest in better compression again for a new system? Is it even possible for better compression than current codecs allow for ?

I mean i'm sure there could be a huge push for it , so many companys would benfit from it , netflix , blockbuster , hulu , youtube and the likes.

 

[N00b]

What about new video codecs ? I know mpeg 7 and 21 exist but these are more functional upgrades and not performance / compression updates.

The successor to H.264 will be called HEVC. The goal is to achieve 50% better compression with the same visual quality.

 

[MfA]

The patent situation gets a little more obnoxious with each successive generation, I don't see that being legally ready for next gen ... even if it's technically ready.