Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[AlNom]

Actually, in the demos so far, it has been demonstrated inexactly half the rendering resolution

This is nitpicking, but it's 640x704.

 

[wco81]

Well maybe by the time they come out with the next-gen, they'll come to their senses and drop 3D entirely.

According to a presentation to SMPTE, maybe up to 20% of the population may not be able to view 3D due to various eye and other problems.

 

[kyetech]

3d is gimmik. end ex.

 

[phenix]

3d is gimmik. end ex.

I agree. As it is today, it is just a gimmick and wont pick up unless it brings real higher immersion without any loss of picture quality for FREE. Today it sacrifices picture quality for the sake of 3D-ness and it costs you extra. It dims the picture and it flickers like hell with that refresh rates.

 

[ShadowRunner]

Am interested in how well crysis2 3D works. Aparently is free (well about a 1.5% performance hit). If it works well enough there will be no reason for it not to be used in every game. If i remember correctly Batman:AA GOTY edition used a similar 'free' technique and the impressions from that were very positive, and although it was anaglyph type 3D the same techniques should be applicable to full colour 3D.

 

[matthias]

If i remember correctly Batman:AA GOTY edition used a similar 'free' technique and the impressions from that were very positive, and although it was anaglyph type 3D the same techniques should be applicable to full colour 3D.

Yes, batmann aa goty uses the tech from TriOviz. I could not notice any performance impact between 2d and 3d on the 360. Especially the detective mode looks impessive, normal gameplay not so much because the screen colors get distorted.
Batman is a cheap way to find out if you like 3d in games and if you can tolerate the extra glasses.

 

[Rangers]

Interesting thoughts on next gen from David Reeves http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=276488

Are you ready for the X-Station? Or maybe the PlayBox? According to Sony's former global games boss, it might not be too far away.

David Reeves retired from his joint position as deputy president of SCE worldwide and president of SCEE last year.

"When you're on the first-party side, you realise how really, really expensive it is to develop a platform. Whether it's PS3, or Xbox 360 or even Wii, they cost millions - maybe not billions, but absolutely millions. You don't know when to put that stake in the ground of technology and move on. You know, say 'that's enough'.

"Eventually, it may just become so expensive to develop [their consoles] that Microsoft and Sony say, 'Okay, let's get together.' I'd say it's between 10 and 15 years away. That's how long I think it will take. I don't think it will be the next console cycle, but probably the next cycle after that, where you might have something platform-agnostic.

And also Cevat Yerli

Crytek boss Cevat Yerli has claimed that developers' focus on PS3 and 360 is holding back game quality on PC - a format he believes is already "a generation ahead" of modern day consoles.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=277729

"As long as the current console generation exists and as long as we keep pushing the PC as well, the more difficult it will be to really get the benefit of both," Yerli told the latest issue of Edge.

"PC is easily a generation ahead right now. With 360 and PS3, we believe the quality of the games beyond Crysis 2 and other CryEngine developments will be pretty much limited to what their creative expressions is, what the content is. You won't be able to squeeze more juice from these rocks."

 

[liolio]

That's a strange POV especially coming high ranking executive. It's actually scary to which extend this person looses track with reality or let say modernity.
The big battle ahead whether it's for games, bring content to people television (movies, music, whatever services) is not about consoles. the war is about OS and CPU architectures. So between Apple, MS, Google on one side and Intel vs ARM on the other side. (by the way OpenGL may regain dominance under editors pressure). Thanks to the exploding mobility market times ahead are set to be really interesting

In 10/15 years, damned I'm not sure that there's still be console. Next gen may be the last. What would be the differentiator between PC and consoles? Hardware I don't think so. I can't see MS or Sony being competitive at a reasonable cost against whatever AMD/Intel(for X86) or Qualcom/Samsung/Apple (ARM based) put together. The battle will be on OS (and API). PC has we know them may go through a revolution (more/new interfaces, more actors, etc.) but Ms joining Sony? What is the point? Which dynamic?

Honestly it sounds like a fucked up idea.

 

[Rangers]

Next gen may be the last. What would be the differentiator between PC and consoles?

The same differentiators that exist between PC and console now. Massive ease of use differences, and piracy rendering the PC market orders of magnitude less profitable.

I also think Onlive type services could be the boogeyman in the closet, we'll see how it shakes out.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The big battle ahead whether it's for games, bring content to people television (movies, music, whatever services) is not about consoles. the war is about OS and CPU architectures. So between Apple, MS, Google on one side and Intel vs ARM on the other side.

OS can be hardware independent. High level metalanguages can be cross-OS. And as for OS, you've explained the tactical application of consoles. Why will people pick MS OS over Google OS next gen? How's about because MS OS is the OS on the PlayStation which is the platform that has far and away the best game experience for every flavour of gamer thanks to MS adding its franchises to Sony's. Alternative, how are Google going to get an extra leg-up in the OS market space if they aren't being targeted for AAA games development? Whereas Google OS on PS4 makes a machine that covers all bases.

Consoles aren't redundant yet. Mobile phones won't be competing. Set-top boxes are the same thing as consoles, but they tend to be low-spec for financial reasons and can't compete with consoles designed for the task. Unless PC gaming can make a dramatic come-back such that a PC is used for all purposes, there's room for a gaming platform, and if there's room for a gaming platform, there'll either be competing platforms, or a converged device where all parties decide it's in their best interests to compromise rather than fight against each other.

I don't think it'll happen next gen, but I think both side are considering strategic alliances, only Sony have more possibilities there as they aren't tied to an OS. PS4 with Intel offering a Larrabee design cheap, or AMD offering a Fusion cheap, with Google offering an OS platform to grow their install base...lots of options.

 

[liolio]

The same differentiators that exist between PC and console now. Massive ease of use differences, and piracy rendering the PC market orders of magnitude less profitable.

I also think Onlive type services could be the boogeyman in the closet, we'll see how it shakes out.

OS can be hardware independent. High level metalanguages can be cross-OS. And as for OS, you've explained the tactical application of consoles. Why will people pick MS OS over Google OS next gen? How's about because MS OS is the OS on the PlayStation which is the platform that has far and away the best game experience for every flavour of gamer thanks to MS adding its franchises to Sony's. Alternative, how are Google going to get an extra leg-up in the OS market space if they aren't being targeted for AAA games development? Whereas Google OS on PS4 makes a machine that covers all bases.

Consoles aren't redundant yet. Mobile phones won't be competing. Set-top boxes are the same thing as consoles, but they tend to be low-spec for financial reasons and can't compete with consoles designed for the task. Unless PC gaming can make a dramatic come-back such that a PC is used for all purposes, there's room for a gaming platform, and if there's room for a gaming platform, there'll either be competing platforms, or a converged device where all parties decide it's in their best interests to compromise rather than fight against each other.

I don't think it'll happen next gen, but I think both side are considering strategic alliances, only Sony have more possibilities there as they aren't tied to an OS. PS4 with Intel offering a Larrabee design cheap, or AMD offering a Fusion cheap, with Google offering an OS platform to grow their install base...lots of options.

We're speaking of 10/15 years ahead of now, that's a lot of time. I can't envision PC as devices locked in "nineties" from the twentieth century. Pc will evolve both in form factor and interfaces. Actually PC has we know them may disappear from most houses. Plenty of things are at work to back up my claims. Tablets are on the raise. It's only the beginning still today in the subway I saw an advertisement for the new HP printers that allow you print from your smart-phone from anywhere (as long as you have wifi/3G network available). But there are also possible form factor, a computer "fitting" in the keyboard is another one that I expect to appear at some point, tech like intel wireless display make this all too tempting.
PC gaming will evolve (or disappear as it is), if you look at the sales previsions for the upcoming years (not even 10 15 year from now which is 2020/2025 Shifty we're not speaking PS4 and xbox3) the trend is that desktop sales are to crumble in share. "computers" as generic devices are too big of a market for games and many things to let a fraction of the users that want to run +300watts GPU card in a big tower set the requirement for the whole market. For greater good they need to be discard.

Spoiler

I'm trying to make friends here

.

The truth is that modern computer are ridiculously powerful in regard to their intended use and windows incredibly heavy in regard to its intended use too. This is true for plenty of users not only personal users actually most of the users. I believe that Ms is well aware of that and that things may improved with future renditions of Windows.

As you state Rangers on top of that there is cloud computing where it will be in 10 15 years? I guess we will no longer speak about it the same we're no longer speaking of standard cell phone, it will there absolutely necessary but people we no longer aware of it, they will consider it a given.
But I guess you're speaking of services as Onlive/Gakkaï. For those likes actually in 2020/25 the size of the market they might be able to address could be quiet healthy. But I don't expect those services to address the whole gaming market but they could be more significant than we're inclined to think.

Shifty I don't think that smart-phones are to compete or that consoles are redundant now or by the time next gen consoles are to launch. But in 10/15 I can't see portable consoles as relevant devices, way too limited. More generic devices would no longer be portbale consoles tho. May cloud services (onlive/gakkai/etc.) could be a link between mobile and home gaming.

Where I agree with you is that would make more sense for Sony to team up with Google than with Ms. Ms has already its own resources for games, support from third party and Os (ans more API, working programming languages, etc.), Sony misses the latter. Looking forward I can see a fight between directx/compute and openCL/GL. I'm not sure Ms can afford to "ignore" PC (or whatever replace that and the shares they get out of this market) as gaming device. If they don't leverage this user base fighting against OpenGL/CL may prove even tougher (I believe OpenGL/CL will gain momemtum as the mobility markets expand). Once directx is dead and game portability trivial Ms may a lose a selling point for its OS.

Spoiler

In 2025 I'll be a fifty years old guy, damned I should quit this discussion that make me think of less trivial matter like waking up three times per night

 

[Shifty Geezer]

(not even 10 15 year from now which is 2020/2025 Shifty we're not speaking PS4 and xbox3)

Well given the thread title, we should be!

 

[Squilliam]

The whole reason why game consoles are affordable is that they spread the development costs over a wide base. The real implication of what he said is that the costs are so high the pressure in releasing a platform is astronomical. My guess is that words were spoken in the background that they will never again eat their whole suit in losses when they launch their next console. The cost structure works so long as you sell your console but if the console market doesn't gravitate to your console then the development costs would eat any console maker alive.

To spread the development costs you would need to cater to as many markets as possible. This presents a dillemma as current generation consoles are more than adequate for all of the media functionality which they could care to add. Then theres also the wider market to consider which hasn't really been turned on by graphics above and beyond other considerations and the high end which represents a lot of core and hardcore buyers whom purchase a lot of software and whom will be the early adopters of 3D technology. So where to position the console?

If nothing else, this generation shows the danger of overshooting the market. By positioning a console too high and leaving the last generation console as a rear guard can let that position get over-run by a cheaper and lower performance console variant which is coming in fresh to the market. The two more expensive consoles were well over $300 at launch for the 'good' versions and that left a hole in the sweet spot. If the graphics card market has a sweetspot at $200-250 to maximise revenue then the console market may very well have one too.

I believe that Sony and Microsoft both recognized they were overshooting their market because of the existance of cheaper cut down variants of their mainline consoles. However we have to also recognize that as they add functionality to the consoles the number of background tasks would also increase. However the cheaper version which likely doesn't have a HDD doesn't have the ability or need to perform as many background tasks. So why not take a leaf from the GPU makers handbook and disable a core and some functional units on the GPU as a form of cost management, especially at the start when yields are bad? Why keep resources active on the cheaper console variants when they cannot make use of them? They can always re-enable them at a later date when they revise their console with larger internal storage etc.

 

[Megadrive1988]

Take this with a huge grain of salt:

Microsoft chooses AMD Fusion II for XBox 720


December 1st, 2010 at 11:06 am - Author Jules
OK, the chances of the next XBox being called 720 are 50:50 at best but, for now, at least you all know what we’re talking about. While the name and final design for the box and packaging might still be up in the air, the internals appear to have been locked down. KitGuru investigates.

Microsoft launched its original little black XBox in 2001. Famously, the press sheets on the chairs at the seats in the announcement hall had AMD specifications the evening before, but Intel ones the morning of the actual launch. nVidia was always a lock on the graphics etc, but last minute dealing had meant the CPU was a Pentium surprise for most people.



Also famous was Intel’s complaining that no money could be made from the CPUs being sold to Microsoft and that it was having to mark the whole project as a marketing and brand awareness exercise. Bear in mind that, in most years, Intel can sell almost everything it makes – so having production lines running to make ‘chips without profit’ is frowned upon.

There were some heated debates between Microsoft and nVidia during the project. Probably the most famous is when, near the end of the project, Microsoft asked for the list of issues raised and fixed with the hardware and nVidia refused to release it, reportedly saying that it was ‘nVidia’s intellectual property and not to be shared with outsiders’.

Against that background, Microsoft ignored Intel and went with an IBM designed, triple-core Xenon CPU that is actually manufactured by Global Foundries. Originally a 90nm part, it is now only 45nm. More on this in a second.



Graphically, both Sony and Microsoft raised the bar significantly from previous generations. While nVidia provided Sony with a chip similar to the DX9 7600GT card (which today would have graphics performance similar to a GT220 for £30), Microsoft went with an R600 derivative from ATI called the Xenos. Performance is close to a Radeon HD 1900, but with DX10 features from the R600. Both choices have worked out well and game sales for both consoles are good.


For our story, the kicker is the summer release of the XBox 360 ‘s’. From the outside, everything looks the same. However, the CPU and GPU have now been integrated onto a single chip from Global Foundries. Sound familiar?

One last strike against Intel in the decision to go with AMD on the new console would be a ‘control’ issue between Microsoft and Intel. Once dubbed WinTel, there are now some pretty clear divides between the two companies.

For Intel and Microsoft, DirectX is the San Andreas Fault Line. No doubt that Microsoft’s use of an API like DirectX to sit between complex hardware and the operating system itself, has meant stability for everyone. It’s also generated tons of fun with driver writers around the world. But do you still need DirectX? It’s possible to conceive of a world where Intel offers TeraScale computing to the masses at low, low prices and all programs are written, and executed, in pure x86. Ex-Intel VP Pat ‘Kicking’ Gelsinger said as much when interviewed in 2007. “All your computer are belong to me” is what we heard.

The biggest ‘win’ that Radeon and GeForce will ever have over Intel’s Larrabee is the driver. The best graphics driver teams already work for AMD and nVidia, so Intel is playing catch-up, which it does not like. The ‘power model’ for business gives you another option. Radically change the environment. That’s what getting rid of DirectX would do. We’re not sure that Microsoft wants to give up that wonderful middleware which allows its operating systems to remain essential for all the best games.

So, choosing Intel is unlikely for CPUs and Microsoft’s experience of working with nVidia was less than stellar. At the same time, Microsoft now has a single chip, Fusion processor (version 0.9 ?) in the XBox from Global Foundries and it’s shipping by the million.



Initial AMD Fusion designs will work, but the full potential won’t be realised until the end of next year. Based on comments by people like Chekib Akrout, of all the likely designs to be targeted at the XBox 720 product, we think there’s a good chance that it will be the AMD Krishna product. This will be produced on Global Foundries’ 28nm ‘high-k gate first’ process (originally introduced in 2007 by co-inventors IBM, Toshiba and, ironically, Sony). The only real technical challenge for the first XBox 360 consoles was heat/noise, for which the AMD Krishna product could be the answer.

If it is AMD’s Krishna product, then that brings another tantalising possibility to the table. More on that later.



Given how slowly things move in the world of console gaming, we’d expect a new XBox 720 product (assuming no major issues with Global Foundries) to be launched in 2012.

http://www.kitguru.net/software/gaming/jules/microsoft-chooses-amd-fusion-ii-for-xbox-720/

Another story on the same subject, but not in english: http://www.tomshw.it/cont/news/xbox-720-con-amd-fusion-ii-pronti-a-scommettere/28379/1.html

Another mention of the original KitGuru article:

While the Xbox 360 is still going strong, particularly with the recent release of the Kinect, it appears Microsoft is preparing the innards of its successor rumoured to be called the Xbox 720. KitGuru reports that Microsoft has chosen the AMD Fusion II processor for the console.

http://www.techeye.net/hardware/foxconn-motherboard-gtx-460m-sli-xbox-720-processor#ixzz16stsNwRq

 

[Squilliam]

The interesting thing is that AMD are exploring multiple unique memory technologies which have incredibly high densities. I don't think Fusion would be a problem so long as the GPU has access to 20+ MB of cache on die. The thing is these technologies require SOI. I wonder if GF are keeping SOI for 22nm.

 

[Rangers]

Take this with a huge grain of salt:



http://www.kitguru.net/software/gaming/jules/microsoft-chooses-amd-fusion-ii-for-xbox-720/

Another story on the same subject, but not in english: http://www.tomshw.it/cont/news/xbox-720-con-amd-fusion-ii-pronti-a-scommettere/28379/1.html

Another mention of the original KitGuru article:

http://www.techeye.net/hardware/foxconn-motherboard-gtx-460m-sli-xbox-720-processor#ixzz16stsNwRq

These seem completely ridiculous, and as far as I can tell dont even claim to know anything. The original "kitguru" article doesn't even say anything vague like "sources say". It honestly says nothing at all except...well nothing really.

I can say this for sure, dont expect the next Xbox until fall 2013 at the earliest. We know Gears 3 is fall 11 tentpole, and we essentially know 343 Halo (4?) is fall 2012 tentpole. Therefore 2013 is the earliest.

Also, dont expect next Xbox to use any Fusion or other low end product.

This one sentence seems to be the "meat" of the article

Based on comments by people like Chekib Akrout, of all the likely designs to be targeted at the XBox 720 product, we think there’s a good chance that it will be the AMD Krishna product

Hardly compelling.

 

[fehu]

For me, it's not about what the next Xbox is going to be called. I don't think it's going to be named either Xbox 720 or Xbox 1080. The point was, is the next Xbox going to be using some sort of AMD Fusion APU or not. I do hope it's a discrete GPU, not Fusion.

that article is so wrong and light that i can't take it seriosly

 

[liolio]

that article is so wrong and light that i can't take it seriosly

Indeed the article seems pure speculations but I would see nothing wrong with Ms going with AMD.
On the other side I don't expect Krishna product to be up to the task in the slightest. I'm pretty confident that those chips will have a pretty fucked up CPU/GPU power ratio.

Something more custom why not. On top of it I expect the next xbox to offer more than directx11 capabilities.

 

[TheChefO]

The whole reason why game consoles are affordable is that they spread the development costs over a wide base. The real implication of what he said is that the costs are so high the pressure in releasing a platform is astronomical. My guess is that words were spoken in the background that they will never again eat their whole suit in losses when they launch their next console. The cost structure works so long as you sell your console but if the console market doesn't gravitate to your console then the development costs would eat any console maker alive.

To spread the development costs you would need to cater to as many markets as possible. This presents a dillemma as current generation consoles are more than adequate for all of the media functionality which they could care to add. Then theres also the wider market to consider which hasn't really been turned on by graphics above and beyond other considerations and the high end which represents a lot of core and hardcore buyers whom purchase a lot of software and whom will be the early adopters of 3D technology. So where to position the console?

If nothing else, this generation shows the danger of overshooting the market. By positioning a console too high and leaving the last generation console as a rear guard can let that position get over-run by a cheaper and lower performance console variant which is coming in fresh to the market. The two more expensive consoles were well over $300 at launch for the 'good' versions and that left a hole in the sweet spot. If the graphics card market has a sweetspot at $200-250 to maximise revenue then the console market may very well have one too.

I believe that Sony and Microsoft both recognized they were overshooting their market because of the existance of cheaper cut down variants of their mainline consoles. However we have to also recognize that as they add functionality to the consoles the number of background tasks would also increase. However the cheaper version which likely doesn't have a HDD doesn't have the ability or need to perform as many background tasks. So why not take a leaf from the GPU makers handbook and disable a core and some functional units on the GPU as a form of cost management, especially at the start when yields are bad? Why keep resources active on the cheaper console variants when they cannot make use of them? They can always re-enable them at a later date when they revise their console with larger internal storage etc.

I disagree that MS and Sony overshot the market this gen.

Two mistakes were made:
Sony: BR
MS: RRod (engineering)

Both of which cost the platform makers a ton of lost revenue, but the tech inside each box was spot on.

Xbox arcade was functionally identical to the premium and later Elite models. The HDD was not necessary. The functionality of the Arcade unit was based on the existing usage model proved successful by PS2's 100+ million userbase (memory cards, wired controllers, disc based media).

Sony's issue was core to all versions offered and was gamble on potential movie revenue, but the core tech was again roughly equivalent to xbox360 if slightly more expensive. The use of BR also "forced" HDD to be included standard which also increased baseline cost.

Nothing in the GPU/CPU/ram selection in either console was insurmountable cost wise. From what I remember, they both were similar to the losses given to ps2/ps1 (roughly $100/console).

It's safe to assume we will have a similar loss/console next gen but without the issues experienced by both ps3(new expensive media) and xb360 (poor industrial engineering design).


Die-size and ram I expect to scale roughly the same as what we experienced with xb360/ps3.

The only safety precaution I'd expect both to be wary of is the future of process shrinking to enable future cost reductions.

 

[Megadrive1988]

Rumour - Microsoft Have Chosen AMD Fusion II for Next Xbox Hardware

By Matt Williams - Fri Dec 3, 2010 3:11pm -
Xbox 720?

Tech-site KitGuru has dissected the history of the Xbox CPU and made a pretty big prediction. Analysing the history of Microsoft's consoles and business relationships around them, the website is claiming that the next Xbox will feature a AMD Fusion II CPU.

"Based on comments by people like Chekib Akrout, of all the likely designs to be targeted at the XBox 720 product, we think there’s a good chance that it will be the AMD Krishna product. This will be produced on Global Foundries’ 28nm ‘high-k gate first’ process."

Should the rumour be true it would potentially serve to quell two of the longest ongoing complaints targeted at the Xbox 360: Heat and Noise.

"The only real technical challenge for the first XBox 360 consoles was heat/noise, for which the AMD Krishna product could be the answer."

Be aware that all of this is only rumoured, but for all we know the next Xbox could be just around the corner. Microsoft remain tight-lipped.

http://games.on.net/article/10946/R...e_Chosen_AMD_Fusion_II_for_Next_Xbox_Hardware