Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

Status
Not open for further replies.
Should be pretty straightforward. At the moment there's no info at all really.

I'd only guess that Games on Demand might be some sort of hint as to what retail games are backward compatible assuming they don't want to piss people off by not having their Download History transferable. The same would go for XBLA, of course.

Who knows.
 
To people who follow this close: based on the rumours we have so far, what are the chances of X360 getting full backwards compatibility?


Apart from these rumours from HardOCP, there aren't any rumours so far about the next XBox.

Should Microsoft choose to stick with a PowerPC CPU and an AMD GPU with eDRAM, I'd say the chances for having BC are very high.


With multi-core programming becoming more and more popular these days and with Microsoft+developers being generally content with the X360's hardware, I could see the X720 having something like a 12-core/24-thread PPU, a ~2000-core NGC GPU and 4GB of 1600MHz 256-bit GDDR5.
 
Designers spend effort on things that (they think) look cool or (they think) their customers like. It affects modelling and rendering both. That's why you see bizarre levels of detail and work on armor and weapons, and boobie physics, but less on interactive environments. That's why you have DOF and motion blur, even though neither makes sense for games, but lousy frame rates - control and smoothness doesn't translate as well to the promotional material.

This seems so true. Thanks for an insightful post.
 
Apart from these rumours from HardOCP, there aren't any rumours so far about the next XBox.

Should Microsoft choose to stick with a PowerPC CPU and an AMD GPU with eDRAM, I'd say the chances for having BC are very high.


With multi-core programming becoming more and more popular these days and with Microsoft+developers being generally content with the X360's hardware, I could see the X720 having something like a 12-core/24-thread PPU, a ~2000-core NGC GPU and 4GB of 1600MHz 256-bit GDDR5.

That's optimistic! :eek:
 
That's optimistic! :eek:

If it launches in Q4 2013 -> 2014?

Not really. By then, GDDR5 should be hitting the 2GHz mark in graphics cards. Plus, they'd need enough memory bandwidth to feed the upgraded GPU, and I don't think they'd be able to achieve that with a 128bit memory bus.
 
If it launches in Q4 2013 -> 2014?

Not really. By then, GDDR5 should be hitting the 2GHz mark in graphics cards. Plus, they'd need enough memory bandwidth to feed the upgraded GPU, and I don't think they'd be able to achieve that with a 128bit memory bus.

With your prediction, do you think it will be a single pool of ram or dual? I found interesting that Sony kept the dual-pool of ram for Vita...
 
I still like the idea of having slower generic RAM like DDR4 and a faster but significantly smaller by many orders of magnitude embedded cache for graphics and CPU work which is large enough to reduce the bandwidth requirements significantly. That way they can satisfy the need for lower power and higher density RAM without losing performance.
 
I think our expectations and logic suggest that next gen consoles should not reach great heights, or something higher than 4 to 5 times what we have today, but as developers Cevat Yerli, Carmack, Mark Rein expect at least 8GB RAM and 10 times performance.


The xbox360 should have only 256MB and by indications from Epic did Microsoft setter for 512MB. Will developers be able to influence Manufacturers meet their expectations?
 
I've heard a lot about xbox developers not being allowed to "code to the metal" and all that (directx api). Does this guarantee a proper emulation of the hardware next gen or is there still something than can "go wrong" in this regard?
It's a common misconception that Xbox developers need to use a high level DirectX API. That's simply not true.

Check this presentation, if you want to know more about the Xbox graphics API. It's very far from common DirectX when you are doing things in the most efficient way. This presentation tells details about the direct hardware API, ring buffer, command buffers, constant buffers, hardware state blocks, low level resource editing, etc, etc. It's a good read for everyone interesting in lower level graphics programming:
http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=5313
 
I believe that 360 sucessor will use the current CGPU as the main CPU+DX11 GPU+GDDR5 at 256 GB/seg.

Xenos can do the same work than the SPEs in BE when executing next generation software and is a very good solution for BC, add to this the recent presentation of a C++ compiler for heterogenous computing and you have the entire equation.

About Sony, I am more with the idea of Power6 core at more than 4Ghz as the new PPE and 12 SPE instead of current clock speed and 16 SPE. The reason is that I see a most feasible solution a new ring bus for 12 SPE than 16, in terms of processor cost.
 
To people who follow this close: based on the rumours we have so far, what are the chances of X360 getting full backwards compatibility? Still not enough info/too early to tell? Is there anything in particular about the 360's design that could be a potential issue when it comes to maintaing b.c. in the future? I've heard a lot about xbox developers not being allowed to "code to the metal" and all that (directx api). Does this guarantee a proper emulation of the hardware next gen or is there still something than can "go wrong" in this regard? Not being able to play the games I already own (preferably with some visual upgrades:smile:) would be a huge deal-breaker to me.
Will your 360 suddenly mysteriously die when you buy a new console? One thing both MS and Sony found out this generation is that the money spent on BC could have done a lot more making the console better. BC is only useful for the first year of a console. There is no hue and cry about the complete lack of BC in the PS3 Slim, if it's such an important feature, why not?
 
Will your 360 suddenly mysteriously die when you buy a new console? One thing both MS and Sony found out this generation is that the money spent on BC could have done a lot more making the console better. BC is only useful for the first year of a console. There is no hue and cry about the complete lack of BC in the PS3 Slim, if it's such an important feature, why not?

You've asked a number of questions there and I'll give answers from my perspective (which is all anyone can really do) as to why I think BC is a pretty important aspect in the next generation of consoles.

FIrstly, it's unlikely that my 360 will die when I pick up a Nextbox. However, it's even more unlikely that I'll want both consoles sitting in the limited space under my TV. I know some people don't mind having a jumble of electronic boxes and miles of cables sitting in that space, but I'm not one of them. One of the reasons that I haven't bothered to replace by dead PS3 Fat with a Slim is that I like the neatness that just having a BluRay Home Cinema System, Satellite Box and a 360 sitting under my 50" Plasma. To ensure that I don't have a mass of remotes messing up the place, I have everything running from a Logitech Harmony (yet another reason I haven't been quick to replace the PS3). And why I bought into Kinect when I haven't so much into Move (or the Wii+Nunchuck).... less to clutter up my coffee table and media area.

So a Nextbox arrives to the market without BC, I'm not going to be making the jump anytime soon. I'll create a mess and that would annoy me.

You also make the argument that BC is only useful in the first year of a new console. There is probably some truth in that, but I think it would be fairer to say "in the new users first year", which could be 2 or 3 years into the new consoles lifespan. If I've invested £1000's in (for example) a 360, I still have many of those titles and enjoy them occassionally to this day. In fact many games I've bought over the last 12 months or so I still haven't finished, such as Dead Space 2, LA Noire and Comic Jumper. I fully intend to finish them all though when I have the time.

And the latter title I listed there is another key reason why BC is so important. When purchasing digital content, there should be a reasonable expectation that said content will still run on the next generation in the console chain. Without that, there can be no trust of buying digitally going forward. I bought Crysis 2 on Steam on release and I fully expect to be able to play that even when I upgrade the graphics card or processor or even operating system. I still have the original Tomb Raider 1 on CD and (with a little playing around) I can play that on my 2011 Windows 7 PC. A digital purchase MUST offer me a similar level of future protection, and where consoles are concerned then it has to be at least one console ahead.

The cost issue is a red herring. It's not about the cost of implementing BC in future consoles, it's about building Forward Compatibility into the console's hardware and software. That cost should be negligable with proper planning and a coherent vision.

And there was hue and cry when the EU release of the PS3 had 2nd rate BC, there was further crying when that was latterly built into the NA PS3's and yet more upset when it was removed altogether in the Slim.


So from my perspective, and maybe I'm a minority in the console consumer space, BC will be a key factor in whether I make the jump to Nextbox or not, and even if I do it'll certainly affect how soon (or not) that jump is made.
 
The cost issue is a red herring. It's not about the cost of implementing BC in future consoles, it's about building Forward Compatibility into the console's hardware and software. That cost should be negligable with proper planning and a coherent vision.

And there was hue and cry when the EU release of the PS3 had 2nd rate BC, there was further crying when that was latterly built into the NA PS3's and yet more upset when it was removed altogether in the Slim.


So from my perspective, and maybe I'm a minority in the console consumer space, BC will be a key factor in whether I make the jump to Nextbox or not, and even if I do it'll certainly affect how soon (or not) that jump is made.
I wouldn't call the BC cost a red herring, it's one of the main reasons the original PS3 was priced so high. Also, on the MS side, getting BC working required a number of high level engineers for over a year just to get the software working, and the test cost of each update was phenominal.

Would you prefer second rate hardware so that BC works, or top rate hardware without BC?
 
It's a common misconception that Xbox developers need to use a high level DirectX API. That's simply not true.

Check this presentation(...)

Thanks! Does that mean that full backwards compatibility might actually be a bit harder to achieve? Does this sort of low level stuff could potentialy complicate things even more on new hardware?

bkilian said:
Will your 360 suddenly mysteriously die when you buy a new console? One thing both MS and Sony found out this generation is that the money spent on BC could have done a lot more making the console better. BC is only useful for the first year of a console. There is no hue and cry about the complete lack of BC in the PS3 Slim, if it's such an important feature, why not?

The thing is, I'm not going to buy a new console if there's no BC with some additional gfx upgrades (MS actually promised that some time ago but who knows). I'm not an early adopter where it comes to hardware - issues with realiability, high price, small game library etc. I also like replaying my favourite games - I still regulary do that with psx/ps2 titles. Being able to play every console game I own at 1080p - right from the start of next generation - would actually be a huge selling point for me. Not every console title comes out on PC and I don't think the successor to PlayStation 3 will be in a better position to maintain full b.c.(?) That's why I asked.
It would be a shame if all of those great games we play these days were forever 'condemned' to current-gen image quality. I'm not one of those crazy people who can't enjoy themselves because a few lines of pixels are missing... but when you play a game or two on a PC at full HD, you can clearly see the difference.
 
It's a common misconception that Xbox developers need to use a high level DirectX API. That's simply not true.

Check this presentation, if you want to know more about the Xbox graphics API. It's very far from common DirectX when you are doing things in the most efficient way. This presentation tells details about the direct hardware API, ring buffer, command buffers, constant buffers, hardware state blocks, low level resource editing, etc, etc. It's a good read for everyone interesting in lower level graphics programming:
http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=5313

But there are still optimisations/hacks you can't do because the API gets in the way, right? That's the issue, not that 360 suffers from the huge overheads that come with Direct X on PC spec but rather that the APIs stop devs from getting every last drop out of the system (unlike the PS3)

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-directx-360-performance-blog-entry
 
I could envision the next Xbox having an optional piggyback module for BC. Basically a "cartridge" containing the cpu, gpu and edram on one chip+heatsink/fan. This BC cart will use the main RAM and optical drive/hdd/ethernet etc from the parent console. This BC module could be sold for $100 to those who wants it.
 
I could envision the next Xbox having an optional piggyback module for BC. Basically a "cartridge" containing the cpu, gpu and edram on one chip+heatsink/fan. This BC cart will use the main RAM and optical drive/hdd/ethernet etc from the parent console. This BC module could be sold for $100 to those who wants it.

Or, just use the 360 you ALREADY OWN since you own those games :LOL:

That's the thing that makes BC such a non important thing imo. At BEST all you're saving is some room under your TV. Which, big deal. If you care so much about older titles that BC is so important, then you wont mind anyway.

I'm not saying it has zero advantages, the fact I can play all the Halo's to date on my 360 is pretty neat, and I've often though it would be cool if they released some sort of anthology of all the Halo titles (1, 2, 3, Reach, soon 4 and Remake, ODST and Wars)in a big boxed set, and it would be neat they'd all be playable on 360.

But really, that's more a novelty than anything. Sony has the right idea, just ditch BC. I have never ever understood the big deal. As I've said a million times it's always a trade off, people act like it's BC or nothing, but no the real proposition is BC or, something else that you give up because of the cost. Would you rather have had BC in those original 599 PS3, or an extra 256 RAM for likely similar cost? The answer is obvious.

I can see BC being a little more relevant to an extremely family friendly casual company like Nintendo. For some reason Joe Six Pack probably likes the idea of Wii U not "obsoleting" his Wii collection. Though again it's pretty dubious, since he ALREADY HAS A WII.

BTW I haven't thought about it, but how is BC expected to work on Wii U? If software BC is as bad as bkilian says, I'm guessing they just drop the Wii chipset in there?
 
Yeah, true enough. I've got a launch PS3, and it's awfully nice being able to use the hard drive for PS2 game saves and such, but as soon as there got to be a critical mass of PS3 games, I stopped using the backwards compatibility at all.
 
As much as I yearn for BC on PS4, basically because i have pretty much almost every PSN PS3 game available ever (the one's that are worth buying anyways). I know the sad truth is by the time the next console is released and games start getting released on it i won't care about hardly any of my PS3 PSN purchases (i barely play most of them now).

I still do hope for BC on Sony's side. Even if it's some kind of bolt on module containing the PS3's innards. That would make me be an early adopter of the PS4 so i can sell of my PS3 quickly whilst it still has some value.

It would be nice if the console manufacturers had a program where they swap your old console for a cartridge BC unit. They could recycle the old console and recondition it's innards into more of the BC cartridge units to save cost on having to keep fabbing CELLs and RSXs alongside the new console chips. That would grant them some ethical and environmental kudos as well. The sheer amount of disposable consumer electronics nowadays is pretty sickening, but that's highly OT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top