Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[aaronspink]

Sounds great so now we just need data servers for local loop data set up by....... ?

Would it be the hardware vendors?
Software vendors?
Service Providers?

Who guarantees up time?

You mean like the CDN servers already setup up by MICROSOFT, SONY, and a dozen other companies?

We are shifting distribution costs from physical media to digital downloads, the infrastructure is going to cost a lot to create and then to maintain.

Um, no not really. A CDN box that can serve 10 Gb/s takes 2U and can handle TBs of data.

 

[aaronspink]

We are talking about the downloads not impacting your download caps imposed by your ISP, so it would have to be somewhere local and not Redmond.

You are widely mistaken if you think all windows patches/updates/etc come from redmond. You probably think all steam downloads come from seattle as well right?

The flows are pretty simple, you connect master server. Master server determines what network you are on and forwards you to the nearest local CDN point from which everything is downloaded.

 

[Tahir2]

You are widely mistaken if you think all windows patches/updates/etc come from redmond. You probably think all steam downloads come from seattle as well right?

The flows are pretty simple, you connect master server. Master server determines what network you are on and forwards you to the nearest local CDN point from which everything is downloaded.

Obviously they are not centralised, the internet doesn't work that way anymore for such large distribution of sofware, but neither is their an agreement with ISP's to ensure this patch data is not included in the data caps.

Which is the point.

Who arranges that? (Hardware vendor) and who pays for it (hardware vendor) and who offers the guarantees of service? (ISP and hardware vendor or ISP, hardware vendor, software house).

As stated earlier, you are simply shifting costs from one area to another.
Net benefit does not outweigh the costs at this point.

 

[aaronspink]

As stated earlier, you are simply shifting costs from one area to another.
Net benefit does not outweigh the costs at this point.

Um, the costs are extremely minor. Like incredibly minor. As in less than a dime minor. MS/Sony/et al already have the CDNs in place. You are trying to make it sound like they would have to do everything from scratch, but the reality is that it is already in place. The cost per unit is less than the basic shipping fees from the duplication factor to the distributors.

 

[gongo]

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/20110210_425921.html

this link..a new interview, in it Sony says they are suspending PS4 development (10 years = 2014-5 PS4?) and putting their eggs on NGP...no Larabee...IBM Cell2 non-finalized...and no 32nm Cell+RSX??? I know NGP looks like a..really big project...and Sony are investing so much because they expect handheld gaming to be big......intrigued happenings at HQ SCEI!

Microsoft is also ..just mapping out Xbox720 plans....as leaked in that report! Next gen is coming like 2014? 22nm? Sounds good...i haf a powerful PC ATM.

 

[eastmen]

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/20110210_425921.html

this link..a new interview, in it Sony says they are suspending PS4 development (10 years = 2014-5 PS4?) and putting their eggs on NGP...no Larabee...IBM Cell2 non-finalized...and no 32nm Cell+RSX??? I know NGP looks like a..really big project...and Sony are investing so much because they expect handheld gaming to be big......intrigued happenings at HQ SCEI!

Microsoft is also ..just mapping out Xbox720 plans....as leaked in that report! Next gen is coming like 2014? 22nm? Sounds good...i haf a powerful PC ATM.

I believe the xbox 360 project was a little over 18 months to come up with the design and bring it to market. So if they are starting now we could see a console in 2013. A bit later than i thought but if kinect keeps doing well then they might as well make a bigger return on their investment with the 360.

 

[corduroygt]

I bet nintendo could make such a system for around $200-$250

You have the worst cost estimates ever. 2009's radeon 5770 still costs $130 and we're in 2011. Such a system by next year would at least have to be $400 to be profitable, since Nintendo doesn't sell systems at a loss.

 

[eastmen]

You have the worst cost estimates ever. 2009's radeon 5770 still costs $130 and we're in 2011. Such a system by next year would at least have to be $400 to be profitable, since Nintendo doesn't sell systems at a loss.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...1348&cm_re=radeon_6850-_-14-161-348-_-Product

Radeon 6850 with 1gig of built in ram , 3rd party vendor mark up and Store mark up $160

I think you don't understand the concept of retail prices not equaling what a vendor would purchase the parts in bulk to be.

 

[corduroygt]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...1348&cm_re=radeon_6850-_-14-161-348-_-Product

Radeon 6850 with 1gig of built in ram , 3rd party vendor mark up and Store mark up $160

I think you don't understand the concept of retail prices not equaling what a vendor would purchase the parts in bulk to be.

5770 was the around the same ballpark last year and it's hardly gone down much at all. So in the best case, you're still $100 for the 6850 next year purchased in bulk. Impossible to put inside a $250 console.

 

[MfA]

100$ GPU, 100$ CPU+memory/storage, 50$ everything else ... where's the problem?

Not going to earn back non recurring cost in a hurry at that price, not going to incur extra losses either.

 

[corduroygt]

100$ GPU, 100$ CPU+memory/storage, 50$ everything else ... where's the problem?

Not going to earn back non recurring cost in a hurry at that price, not going to incur extra losses either.

I doubt that 50$ can cover motherboard, assembly, case, cooling system, power supply, disc drive, controller, packaging, shipping, retailer margin. Escpecially since the 6850 is a 150W monster by itself.

 

[eastmen]

5770 was the around the same ballpark last year and it's hardly gone down much at all. So in the best case, you're still $100 for the 6850 next year purchased in bulk. Impossible to put inside a $250 console.

Because the 5770 is still the same chip on the same micron process with the same amount of ram

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...1338&cm_re=radeon_5770-_-14-161-338-_-Product

The 5770 1GB is $100 now so prices do go down even without micron drops.

And remember thats with newegg and HIS taking a cut of the sale , additonal shipping and of course amd making money.

 

[Tahir2]

Comparing the price of a standalone graphics card to a graphics card inside a console doesn't tell is that much because there are too many dissimilarities.

The equivalent GPU in a console will be integrated onto a motherboard so shares PCB expense with the rest of the system for a start.

The only data of value is - power consumption (gives an idea of heat output and what kind of cooling may be required in a console enclosure, die size (how many dies will fit on a wafer to give some indication of price per die to manufacture) and performance (just to make sure it has the pre-requisites for being "next-gen" worthy).

Shrinks, optimizations etc can then be speculated on if said graphics card was proposed for a console. A good reference point is current gen and previous gen scaling factors in power/performance and speculations on cost as per first post.

In any case a 5770 with 800 stream processors and a 128bit memory controller would be great. Or would it?

Current essential specs at 40nm:

166 to 185mm2 (depending on what site you read)
100-120 watts at load
30-40 watts at idle

Average system consumption at load approx - 170 watts to 220 watts (varies site to site). Idle power consumption is approx 30-40 watts for the card alone.

Performance - mid-level, lacks tessellation performance, superseded by a new more efficient architecture (VLIW4).

Even then, is the 5770 powerful enough for a next gen console, in say, 2012?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Even then, is the 5770 powerful enough for a next gen console, in say, 2012?

To be 'powerful enough,' it only needs to provide sufficient visual upgrade from the current hardware. TBH I think the current graphics level with high AA and 60 FPS as standard would be good enough to count as 'next-gen' for lots of consollers. Obviously a monster machine in 2014 will provide significant graphical advances that it looks as much of a generational improvement as this gen did over last, but a fair compromise between cost, power, and visual results, is attainable for a 2012 machine that expects 2 years before it looks dated, and it can still endure as Wii has.

 

[bomlat]

Simply just define "improved visualism" is not a business plan.

They have to support with revenue the investment into a new console project,and the question is where the money will came from?

From the PS1-PS2 transition it came from the improved visual,in the case of the PS2-PS3 from the network capability+ slightly improved visuals,but where is the money in the PS4?
If you increase the visuals-great,but will that force anyone to upgrade to the PS4?
And if you can push the visual complexity by a visible margin,what will be the cost of that?In money,and in power consumption?

For me the main question is the WHY,and the money stream,that will support the investment.Which mean value to the customer,compared to the current generation.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If you increase the visuals-great,but will that force anyone to upgrade to the PS4?

Yes. Remember EA's Next-gen Madden 'trailer'? We are a long way from that, and there's plenty of room for improvement in how games look that makes them more fun to play. The cost issue the same as any generation - you pick a pricepoint and develop for it.

 

[liolio]

Comparing the price of a standalone graphics card to a graphics card inside a console doesn't tell is that much because there are too many dissimilarities.

The equivalent GPU in a console will be integrated onto a motherboard so shares PCB expense with the rest of the system for a start.

The only data of value is - power consumption (gives an idea of heat output and what kind of cooling may be required in a console enclosure, die size (how many dies will fit on a wafer to give some indication of price per die to manufacture) and performance (just to make sure it has the pre-requisites for being "next-gen" worthy).

Shrinks, optimizations etc can then be speculated on if said graphics card was proposed for a console. A good reference point is current gen and previous gen scaling factors in power/performance and speculations on cost as per first post.

In any case a 5770 with 800 stream processors and a 128bit memory controller would be great. Or would it?

Current essential specs at 40nm:

166 to 185mm2 (depending on what site you read)
100-120 watts at load
30-40 watts at idle

Average system consumption at load approx - 170 watts to 220 watts (varies site to site). Idle power consumption is approx 30-40 watts for the card alone.

Performance - mid-level, lacks tessellation performance, superseded by a new more efficient architecture (VLIW4).

Even then, is the 5770 powerful enough for a next gen console, in say, 2012?

Speaking of which I read again some review of the HD5670 (mainly because I'm really curious about how AMD Kurts 66xx will fare in perf per watts and perf per mm2). I read this review

here the set-up

Spoiler

- CPU : Intel Core i7 965 EE
- Carte mère : Asus P6T
- Mémoire : 3x 2Go OCZ DDR3 PC3-16000 Platinum Series Low-Voltage
- HDD : Hitachi Deskstar 500Go 7200tr/mn
- Alimentation : Thermaltake PurePower 1500watts
- Windows 7 Ultimate
- Drivers Catalyst 9.12 pour les HD 4770 & 4670
- Drivers Catalyst 8.69 RC3 pour le HD 5670

Power consumption goes from 162Watts idle to 219W in charge. The set up is beefy. If somebody were to release a system now (so @40nm) I'm not sure they could go further than 4 lower power X86 CPUs along with a HD5670 class of gpu.
In 2102 with 28nm available HD57xx level of performances would be possible.

In regard to perf I think 4 bobcats on the same chip as a HD56xx class of GPU should already offer a meaty improvement upon actual systems. PC perfs are misleading because of massive overheads and lesser level of optimization than on consoles. Actual Low/mid end GPUs provide impressive performances imho.

 

[TheWretched]

I don't think for 2012 a 56xx will cut it. My Laptop with a 5650 Mobility (400 Stream Processors) can play most console port with full specs at about 720P@30Hz with 4AA. But that's about it. The performance delta between that and ye olde consoles is too small.

Though... doing a Wii... then I'd sign it. Just a smaller upgrade.

 

[Gubbi]

I'm expecting next gen to be exactly like the previous generations.

Around 400-500 mm² in total silicon area for the CPU and GPU, then fill up with RAM to hit a BOM around $450 (launch price).

I'd expect 8-16 cores in the CPU and a GPU above and beyond what we have today.

Cheers

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Around 400-500 mm² in total silicon area for the CPU and GPU, then fill up with RAM to hit a BOM around $450 (launch price).

Does that make sense when there looks to be less room for die shrinking, so less price reduction and probably no chance at hitting a non-lossy $200 pricepoint. I think the design will be based on predicitions of what process tech will be like 5 years into the generation, and a rather conservative prediction at that given this gen's lessons. PS3 was supposed to launched at 65nm, but missed the mark, and process shrinks haven't had the gains that PS2's process shrinks had. They'd possibly look at around 300-400 mm² aiming for a smaller die size and cheaper cooling by the time the consoles get slimified.