Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[liolio]

I think you miss my point
I wasn't trying to explain why one may chose or had chosen which manufacturer (i already made quiet a lot of predictions in this thread (pretty close to yours and in fact a lot others / as stated in my last post minor adjustment on time frame or silicon budget)... my crystal ball is tired now )
I was questioning the fact that given the state of the market it will make sense to Sony, Ms, Nintendo to try to differentiate themselves on hardware.
The market is more even than it has been for years (ever?) and developers/editors choices will have way more weight than extra hardware muscles. Games look mostly the same on ps3 and 360 it will be worse nextgen, the game will be to "blind test" the systems lol

And my other question was pretty much a joke, but I would really like to see a manufacturer push something new at the expense of risks and R&D as Sony did quiet sometime (but is not likely to do the next time around).
That's why I spoke about a sea of ARM cores as theirs perf per watt are pretty good and they don't suffer from the x86 penalty ( ).
From what I read in the laarabee thread, the software rendering thread, thread from other board, I could be a really interesting design.

 

[Geoson]

I think you miss my point
I wasn't trying to explain why one may chose or had chosen which manufacturer (i already made quiet a lot of predictions in this thread (pretty close to yours and in fact a lot others / as stated in my last post minor adjustment on time frame or silicon budget)... my crystal ball is tired now )
I was questioning the fact that given the state of the market it will make sense to Sony, Ms, Nintendo to try to differentiate themselves on hardware.
The market is more even than it has been for years (ever?) and developers/editors choices will have way more weight than extra hardware muscles. Games look mostly the same on ps3 and 360 it will be worse nextgen, the game will be to "blind test" the systems lol

And my other question was pretty much a joke, but I would really like to see a manufacturer push something new at the expense of risks and R&D as Sony did quiet sometime (but is not likely to do the next time around).
That's why I spoke about a sea of ARM cores as theirs perf per watt are pretty good and they don't suffer from the x86 penalty ( ).
From what I read in the laarabee thread, the software rendering thread, thread from other board, I could be a really interesting design.

I agree with the fact that the Big Three should differentiate themselves from the hardware stand poiint. And I know what you mean by games will look the same across PS4 and Xbox Next or 720. But I think most of them will stick to IBM next time around, or maybe they will try the ARM cores...however, using x86 hardware may not be that bad afterall since Intel makes pretty good processors. But it'd be interesting to see if they use ARM processors. In my opinion, graphics next gen would blow our mind since we're moving to ultrarealism. We have achieved photo-realism (well close), realtime in PC, not sure about consoles but they are pretty close to PC. The only about consoles is that they don't have extra muscles to muster out higher resolutions and AA and all the other pretty bells and whistles...but the general look is the same. Really, I don't see a worlds difference with PS3 games and PC games, Crysis even didn't really surprise me as beasts of those PC should pump out graphics like those. But even if you were to get the best available on the market today, still not even close to maxing out Crysis and playing it smoothly.

 

[Squilliam]

With regards to the Next box, microsoft has put themselves into a position where they can change over to an X86 architecture and maybe even not drop backwards compatibility. Since it's so easy for developers to port between the Xbox and the PC. Backwards compatibility will be important since the X360 is seen as unreliable. Some people would upgrade to the Nextbox just to be sure they can keep playing their favourite games. Microsoft also has huge libraries of material for X86 so it won't be as difficult as say Nintendo doing X86. They could also have full backwards compatibility with the Xbox1 since that console is X86!

One thing to consider is windows 7 - 2010. It's apparantly modular in nature, so they could port a cut down version of it to the Nextbox

One problem with going down the IBM route, is the fact that most of their software is written to run on X86 processors. They would also pretty much get a perfect lineage of succession of x86 processors, which will help reduce development and generational costs. They could pretty much tell developers that the machines they are developing their code on anyway can run it natively. This would reduce development cost and speed initial development on the platform!

 

[Megadrive1988]

Before you just assume Microsoft is going to use a beefed up IBM Xenon CPU with more cores, don't forget about Microsoft's endeavor to design its own CPU. Work began on the 3rd-gen Xbox sometime in 2006.


http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/12043/Microsoft-to-Design-Its-Own-Chips-Xbox-=
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/technology/19soft.html?_r=2&ref=technology&oref=slogin&oref=slogin


Doesn't mean they will design their own CPU on their own, but my guess is they'll have more direct input on the CPU and maybe it'll be a joint MS-IBM design.

 

[Geoson]

Most likely Microsoft is going to design their own chips but they will be helped by IBM probably. Since Microsoft is not as experienced in making hardware than IBM. I am really anticipating on what they're currently doing with regards to the next Xbox. Samething for PS4.

 

[shiznit]

I've been thinking, Intel really wants a piece of the GPU space. Why not pump out cheap 32nm Larrabees for MS for Xbox 720 just to flood the market with their tech? Intel is releasing a dual core Nehalem with GPU on-die in spring 09, By 2011 Intel will probably be able to integrate Sandy Ridge tech especially the 256bit Advanced Vector Instructions (or a cut down OOO hybrid) with most of what is going into Larrabee on 32nm, and provide a single chip solution for MS which they won't be able to get from ATI/IBM (unless they want to license AMD cpu tech).

With Intel purchasing Offset Engine and Havok and working on compilers to make Larrabee development easier, all this could be integrated into the 720 dev kits to give developers a head start. I'm not a programmer but I assume games would run very very well on a hybrid Larrabee/Sandy Ridge GPU/CPU.

If the current gen has show us anything, it is that small OOO cores can be pretty good for games (with all the vector horsepower in Larrabee and Sandy Ridge). I know MS wants to own the IP on the CPU but Intel could sell them to MS for cost and it would still be beneficial for them to expose everyone who works on 360 to their new design.

With Intel's resources, they could easily build a fab specifically to pump out 720 chips, making MS bean counters happy, and with their unmatched manufacturing tech they could ensure cost and power consumption reduction for the entire life of the product.

This could be a very good thing for both MS and Intel, especially if they beat PS4 to market by 2 years. If Intel's new GPU tech succeeds in the console market it would also solidify a place in the PC market, all software developed on 720 would translate well to PC and vice versa. For MS it could be great for cost, especially if Intel can make it a one chip solution and uses some very agressive pricing, but it would also clearly differentiate their hardware from Sony (who won't have anything close to x86 GPU) and lead to more exclusive games for MS.

This is a long shot but it makes sense to me, if Intel can deliver on the hardware they should start pushing MS very agressively now.

 

[kyetech]

shiznit,

It has been discussed already alot, this idea of the Larrabee or intel tech going into an MS console, and although MS does seem like the best fit out the 3 console producers there is still alot of uncertainty.

no big deal, but a little formatting in your text would have been nice.

 

[Megadrive1988]

I've been thinking, Intel really wants a piece of the GPU space. Why not pump out cheap 32nm Larrabees for MS for Xbox 720 just to flood the market with their tech? Intel is releasing a dual core Nehalem with GPU on-die in spring 09, By 2011 Intel will probably be able to integrate Sandy Ridge tech especially the 256bit Advanced Vector Instructions (or a cut down OOO hybrid) with most of what is going into Larrabee on 32nm, and provide a single chip solution for MS which they won't be able to get from ATI/IBM (unless they want to license AMD cpu tech).

With Intel purchasing Offset Engine and Havok and working on compilers to make Larrabee development easier, all this could be integrated into the 720 dev kits to give developers a head start. I'm not a programmer but I assume games would run very very well on a hybrid Larrabee/Sandy Ridge GPU/CPU.

If the current gen has show us anything, it is that small OOO cores can be pretty good for games (with all the vector horsepower in Larrabee and Sandy Ridge). I know MS wants to own the IP on the CPU but Intel could sell them to MS for cost and it would still be beneficial for them to expose everyone who works on 360 to their new design.

With Intel's resources, they could easily build a fab specifically to pump out 720 chips, making MS bean counters happy, and with their unmatched manufacturing tech they could ensure cost and power consumption reduction for the entire life of the product.

This could be a very good thing for both MS and Intel, especially if they beat PS4 to market by 2 years. If Intel's new GPU tech succeeds in the console market it would also solidify a place in the PC market, all software developed on 720 would translate well to PC and vice versa. For MS it could be great for cost, especially if Intel can make it a one chip solution and uses some very agressive pricing, but it would also clearly differentiate their hardware from Sony (who won't have anything close to x86 GPU) and lead to more exclusive games for MS.

This is a long shot but it makes sense to me, if Intel can deliver on the hardware they should start pushing MS very agressively now.

Sounds good for an Intel-Apple console or even a next-gen Wii, but not the next-gen Xbox.

The 3rd-gen Xbox needs not to be PC-based as much as possible. Custom architecture has alot of benefits. The less like PC the new Xbox is, the better IMO. A single-chip solution will always be beat by a multi-chip solution, especially if it (PS4) is a year or two later. I think Xbox3 is going to be a much, much more powerful extension of Xbox 360, with a custom MS-IBM CPU and custom MS-AMD/ATI GPU or GPGPU. There's alot of talk of a combined/unified CPU-GPU / "CGPU"
and while that would have some advantages, they're outweighed by the disadvantages. With one chip, there's only so many transistors you could cram in, thus limiting performance, unless you have 2 unified "CGPUs". It's better to have the best CPU you can have and the best GPU / GPGPU you can have, rather than having a jack of all trades. I do think however, that if Larrabee is all its cracked upto bee (pun intended) that it would be great for a console. So I am torn.

Intel was effectively completely shut out of this current generation of consoles. I'm sure they will have a place in the upcoming generation. Just not as a complete solution for the next Xbox.

 

[Squilliam]

Sounds good for an Intel-Apple console or even a next-gen Wii, but not the next-gen Xbox.

The 3rd-gen Xbox needs not to be PC-based as much as possible. Custom architecture has alot of benefits. The less like PC the new Xbox is, the better IMO. A single-chip solution will always be beat by a multi-chip solution, especially if it (PS4) is a year or two later. I think Xbox3 is going to be a much, much more powerful extension of Xbox 360, with a custom MS-IBM CPU and custom MS-AMD/ATI GPU or GPGPU. There's alot of talk of a combined/unified CPU-GPU / "CGPU"
and while that would have some advantages, they're outweighed by the disadvantages. With one chip, there's only so many transistors you could cram in, thus limiting performance, unless you have 2 unified "CGPUs". It's better to have the best CPU you can have and the best GPU / GPGPU you can have, rather than having a jack of all trades. I do think however, that if Larrabee is all its cracked upto bee (pun intended) that it would be great for a console. So I am torn.

Intel was effectively completely shut out of this current generation of consoles. I'm sure they will have a place in the upcoming generation. Just not as a complete solution for the next Xbox.

AMD - IBM combo... Are we looking at r700-r800 to be the mark for the Nextbox if they include an AMD GPU?

So with that level of graphical power we're looking at what? Full 60htz @ 1080p with enough graphics depth that you can spread it with a knife?

 

[kyetech]

So I am torn.

Hmm I wrote a long response to your post which I scrapped. I think Ill just stick with: it sounds like you might need some therapy over this next gen console conundrum

 

[Megadrive1988]

AMD - IBM combo... Are we looking at r700-r800 to be the mark for the Nextbox if they include an AMD GPU?

So with that level of graphical power we're looking at what? Full 60htz @ 1080p with enough graphics depth that you can spread it with a knife?

R700? no. R700 will be too old to be the baseline for next-gen Xbox. R800 maybe.

Even with Xboxnext's expected massive level of CPU and graphics performance, there will still be lots of 30fps games. I do expect a more even split between 30fps and 60fps games though. Framerate always depends on how much detail per frame the developer throws on screen. Too much and even next-gen systems could bog down to 20fps and less. However I don't expect that to happen often, if ever. I'd hope that no game goes below 30fps, ever, as we have in this current gen. All non-60fps games should be locked at 30fps even when massive amounts of shit happens on-screen with lots of players online.

1080p will probably be used for at least a small majority of the games, thus, MUCH more than this-gen, of which only a small minority are 1080p.

Graphics complexity will naturally go up alot, no matter than resolution or framerate. The most modest, conservative leap from Xbox 360 I am expecting is like, maybe a bit more than from Xbox to Xbox 360. That's a significant leap to be sure but not really huge-- and that's probably considering an Xbox3 that arrives in 2010. If the next Xbox arrives in 2011 and even more so if it arrives as late as 2012, then I would expect/hope for a MASSIVE leap from Xbox 360, like what we saw from PS1 to PS2. or N64 to Xbox.

 

[archangelmorph]

R700? no. R700 will be too old to be the baseline for next-gen Xbox. R800 maybe.

Even with Xboxnext's expected massive level of CPU and graphics performance, there will still be lots of 30fps games. I do expect a more even split between 30fps and 60fps games though.

Why?

Without TRC regulation specifying that all games will need to be 60fps there's no way to stop developers from choosing which ever target they desire & considering the marketability of high end graphics, 60fps is likely going to be sacrificed by most developers across the board, as it has always been in the past..

Framerate always depends on how much detail per frame the developer throws on screen. Too much and even next-gen systems could bog down to 20fps and less.

No.

framerate is dependant on how much processing you're doing per frame (whether efficient or not..), how much of the hardware resources you're spreading this work across & how you manage your bottlenecks & all of these factors may or may not necessarily have anything to do with rendering workload..

1080p will probably be used for at least a small majority of the games, thus, MUCH more than this-gen, of which only a small minority are 1080p.

I would imagine it would be set as standard however there will probably be a few developers who use a lower-than-target-res framebuffer for the sake of cheap optimisation (a la Halo 3..). Afterall a couple of hundred pixels dropped will be less noticable from 1080p than from 720p..

Graphics complexity will naturally go up alot, no matter than resolution or framerate. The most modest, conservative leap from Xbox 360 I am expecting is like, maybe a bit more than from Xbox to Xbox 360. That's a significant leap to be sure but not really huge-- and that's probably considering an Xbox3 that arrives in 2010. If the next Xbox arrives in 2011 and even more so if it arrives as late as 2012, then I would expect/hope for a MASSIVE leap from Xbox 360, like what we saw from PS1 to PS2. or N64 to Xbox.

I wouldn't expect a massive leap with respect to graphics from any of the vendors save nintendo (i'm sure *anything* they provide would be massive leap over what they have currently..)
Especially considering we're fast approaching the limit of mainstream perceptions with regards to differences in high end rendering. If the next generation of consoles can render photo-realistic visuals comfortably, consumers may not see a big jump compared to what the PS3 & Xbox360 will be putting out as they approach the end of their cycles..

 

[Squilliam]

Perhaps the 3d world won't get much more detail, instead we could see all the compromises that current consoles have to make start to fall away? Destructable terrain, physics, voice commands, weather, production values closing in on the real world. For example, the sound of leaves being kicked up.

We could really see games open up once more, instead of all these limitations. Indoor/Outdoor tunnel syndrome is a prime example of this. Furthermore voice, gesture, eye and head tracking could all mature in the next generation.

 

[kyetech]

Yeah,

We could be suspended in high tech pressure suits inside 360 degree motion gyroscopes, and live out new cyber lifes in a neural network AI alter reality... and we could have all this by 2011.

 

[Sound_Card]

I think the next xbox is going to be designed with reliability, size, media, cost, and coolness in mind rather than so much processing power. Something close to 60% of the size of the current 360, built in blu ray drive(hopefully faster than the one in the PS3), and new controller are pretty reasonable guesses for me. I really don't expect MS to go Intel/NV mainly because of IP issues and in which case, IBM and AMD have absolutely no issues with. However, I thought I heard a long time ago that Sun and MS were working on the next CPU for the next xbox code named "Hero".

 

[kyetech]

I think the next xbox is going to be designed with reliability, size, media, cost, and coolness in mind rather than so much processing power. Something close to 60% of the size of the current 360, built in blu ray drive(hopefully faster than the one in the PS3), and new controller are pretty reasonable guesses for me. I really don't expect MS to go Intel/NV mainly because of IP issues and in which case, IBM and AMD have absolutely no issues with. However, I thought I heard a long time ago that Sun and MS were working on the next CPU for the next xbox code named "Hero".

That all sounds about right to me. I think since the tech industry has started to show signs of slowing, and games industry showing us they are better off not launching with very high prices and big consoles (see Japan)

We either have to have 40% less performance in the same time frame. or wait 40% longer for an equivalant performance jump. (ok you dont have to, but this gen has shown us its wise to)

Either way you end up with a console that can be close to 60% of the size of consoles this gen. Which actually feeds quite well in to why I think Sony will extend the PS3 life cycle:

a) they cant really afford to lose another billion so soon for a new console release.

b) Graphics are a commodity not a feature or differentiator. Therefore you will not get the return on investment for making an uber high tech high graphics machine. I still dont think the PS4 will be a slouch though. And actually with some clever GPU design they could do a much better job with the real estate than the RSX (near) off the shelf component ever did.

EDIT:

c) They do have a high def player. MS dont. For me that is a big big big plus.

 

[one]

The problem of PS3 was they released a more difficult-to-develop, more expensive console after competitors' better offerings. These 2 disadvantages would not be a problem if they could release it earlier. I think the next plan of SCE is to release something earlier than others. Without worrying about the external uncertainty that is Blu-ray, they can make a safer schedule.

But it doesn't have to be called PS4, I guess PS3.1 or 3.5 will be what it is as a new configuration of PS3. Like PSP-2000, it can have more RAM, more cores, more shaders, a PS Eye or whatever, and retails at a more expensive price than a plain PS3. It may run a 30fps PS3 game at 60fps, or can run more background services concurrently. The PSX (the PS2 DVD recorder in Japan) failed due to its high price as a console, but it may be worth trying again with a more computer-like feature set and actual benefit to running a game or services such as Home.

To release something called PS4, it has to contain some technical breakthrough such as an optical chip or massive server farms, just more cores/more shaders won't be enough to differentiate itself from others including PS3 IMHO.

 

[Megadrive1988]

^^ That would be nice, but, I don't see it happening. It's against the Sony pholosphey. Sounds too much like PlayStation Type C / PSX Type C which was supposed to have a 4x CD-ROM and more VRAM for Tekken 3 and other games.


Sure there will be newer models of PS3 but all with the exact same game-playing capability, until PS4 arrives sometime after 2011 but before 2015 (6 to 8 years after PS3).

 

[Farid]

Release time frame will be crucial for Sony next-gen

Whatever happens, the PS4 will be released either in the same time frame as the next Xbox, or two years afterward minimum.

Sony and MS go for the same demographics, and they both know it. And what Sony learned out of this generation is that the US consumer sees little difference between the Xbox and the Playstation brand. At least not enough to make Sony confortable enough with releasing a console a year after MS delivers a successor to the Xbox 360.

So, they'll either go out of the door in the same window (more reasonable theory), or Sony will wait at least two years and then try to push the technology superiority of the PS4 as a selling point (extremely dangerous business plan).

Sony can't afford to lag one year behind in sales again.

 

[eastmen]

I think the biggest thing will be the death of low res textures. I think next generation the cheapest thing they could add will be ram and I would expect 4-8 gigs of it in the next 360.

I also expect the xbox next or whatever to come out at $500 bucks and use a bluray drive at perhaps 8x speed , have a built in hardrive (perhaps a ssd one) and have a cpu based on the current waternoose design. Perhaps 9-12 core running at about the same speed. The gpu would take center place and will most likely have a very advanced tenselator(sp?). Perhaps also some kind of new texture compression. It will most likely be a new ati part.

I don't see anything radical for it. They need to get it out the door and have it powerfull enough to last 6 years with the likelyhood that the ps4 wont come for at least a yea after it and this time wont have its budget eaten up by an expensive bluray drive. I expect it in 2010

The ps3 will most likely use a new cell chip. Perhaps a 4x32 if its avaible at a decent price. If not a 2x16. Mabye a 3x24 ? It will most likely have a large mount of ram also. It will use a bluray drive , I'm expecting 12x. It will also use a new nvidia gpu. Most likely not nvidia's newest card or anything custom , just a modified desktop card from a few months before the ps4s release. I expect this in 2012.

Nintendo ? I can actually see them liscensing the xbox 360. Think about it , on the nintendo side they have a system that has a ton of engines already built and extensive knowledge into programing for it. In 2010/2011 the system will be cheap and pretty cool running. I expect they could put it on 32nm both cpu and gpu. Perhaps on one chip ? It will be pretty cheap also. Mabye they can beef it up to 1gig of ram. Ms makes out on the other hand by collecting a fee for the console design. In supersmash brothers hd we will get master cheif as a character.

I think ms will hit in 2010 and try and get the console to hit 6 years before being replaced. They will keep the xbox 360 alive though for as long as possible with ps3 ports this way they can negate the losses on the xbox next like sony has done with the ps1 to ps2 transition and the ps2 to ps3 transitons .

Sony will come out in 2012. They have to much invested in the ps3 and will try and make back as much as possible , also many of their big franchises like final fantasy wont even come out till 2009 so there is no reason for them to rush. I think 2008 they will still struggle alot but in 2009 they will start to sell well and move software.

Nintendo can do whatever they want. I think as the apeal of the wii fades they will introduce the wii 2 with perhaps bluray playback virtual console 2 which will include the saturn , dreamcast and gamecube systems . They will most likely push the wii 1 at $100 prices while the wii 2 comes out at $250 .