Oh for sure. Let me clarify... I mean that when the console is released, it'll fall somewhere in the upper-mid range of PC cards at *that* time, not current ones. In a few years that very well may be 6970/580-like performance or even better, but of course there will be higher end PC cards by then too.
Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech
- Thread starter Acert93
- Start date
- Status
Is my question so stupid, that nobody try to answer?
True, but a big advantage for EDRAM is that it allows more reuse of main memory.
Consider a very simple render process:
shadow maps (4MB) -> main scene (4MB colour + 4MB depth) -> post pass (4MB)
In a tradtional GPU, this would require 12MB at peak, during the main scene pass where the 8MB of render target memory and 4MB of shadow map memory must be resident. The post pass requires 8MB.
With EDRAM, the memory can be reused during resolve if it is no longer needed - so this situation only requires 4MB of main memory at any one time.
The roadmap nordichardware is using as the basis for the xdr2 conclusion in the 79xx series has been debunked. Even if they did feel a need to move away from GDDR5 so far as I know, no one is even sampling xdr2 yet, so the likelihood of something shipping this year with it, is probably nil.
In 2 years, anything is possible really, I just don't know that it is likely. Rambus claim some power benefits over GDDR5, but for now, it only seems to be on paper. It would certainly depend on expected economies and available performance when they plan to ship. I'd think DDR4 is more likely than xdr2 if only because it is actually already sampling, and seems likely to be the system ram of the future for the PC.
Isn't any console that is launching in the next two years likely locked in terms of specs and design?
Maybe not completely but 80-90% they have a target for what they want to manufacture and what kind of BOM to hit?
They would also use the lead time to work on tools and give some developers what to target?
The jump from 720p to 1080p is much smaller than 720p was from 480 (which was often interlaced). Also this time around consoles lifecycle was longer than usual... as a pure console gamer who does not game on pc, I don't really care how it compares to high end PCs. I'm more interested in how much of a jump it will be from the previous gen... I hope most games will hit 60fps at 1080p with AA on for the next gen. This would provide such a drastic jump for us pure console gamers!
I think you'd see a bigger jump with devs sticking to 720p or thereabouts, especially with 4xMSAA. 
I'd love to see the stats collected on HD display connectivity. Even if it's still around 50% (ala the Gears stat from a couple years back), 1080p over 720p would be a huge waste. Of course, it all depends on what the devs are doing with those pixels.
I'd love to see the stats collected on HD display connectivity. Even if it's still around 50% (ala the Gears stat from a couple years back), 1080p over 720p would be a huge waste. Of course, it all depends on what the devs are doing with those pixels.
I think this is a good point that some here overlook. All the new generation has to do is look substantially better than the previous generation. What's happening in the highend PC space doesn't really matter to most console gamers.
I think you'd see a bigger jump with devs sticking to 720p or thereabouts, especially with 4xMSAA.
I'd love to see the stats collected on HD display connectivity. Even if it's still around 50% (ala the Gears stat from a couple years back), 1080p over 720p would be a huge waste. Of course, it all depends on what the devs are doing with those pixels.
Do you really think we'll get that? Even last (this) gen they were trying to force 1080 earlier on. And as for AA, it always seems to be the first thing to be sacrificed.
Yeah I think the 720 or 1080 is a really good question for next gen...I'm really 50-50 on which way I think it will go. Also wonder if MS/other will try to enforce 1080p (or near 1080P as we saw with 720p this gen) with a TRC or not. Regardless any such TRC would be in jeopardy based on the competition imo (IE if one mandates 1080, the other has success at 720, the one at 1080 will pretty much be forced to drop, somewhat like I think PS3 did this gen (to a limited extent)).
Part of me would love to see the sharpness of native resolution on our TV's though. It's weird how I wouldn't dream of upscaling 720 to 1080 on my PC it would look hideous, yet it looks fine on my 360 on my HDTV.
Part of me would love to see the sharpness of native resolution on our TV's though. It's weird how I wouldn't dream of upscaling 720 to 1080 on my PC it would look hideous, yet it looks fine on my 360 on my HDTV.
It'll probably just end up being a developer decision. MS did drop the TRC for 360, and I don't see why they'd bother with it again next gen. Certainly I can see them using it as a PR bullet point, but... I don't think the resolution game will matter as much (in the same way as between last gen and current gen) in light of the shift in focus to online services.
Yeah, it was dropped sometime in mid-2009.
http://www.develop-online.net/blog/44/Microsofts-new-resolution
You know, I've wondered when Call of Duty might hit 480p, but maybe the generation won't be that long. I mean, consider that @ 640x480, they could enable 4xMSAA on 360 for free still.
http://www.develop-online.net/blog/44/Microsofts-new-resolution
You know, I've wondered when Call of Duty might hit 480p, but maybe the generation won't be that long. I mean, consider that @ 640x480, they could enable 4xMSAA on 360 for free still.
I think 720 w/ good (i.e. not post-processed) MSAA @ 60Hz would be a good jump over the current sub-720, bad AA, mostly-30Hz situation. 1080p is icing but less important than good AA (and texture filtering), especially at typical TV viewing distances.
Anyways my point is there's very little about the console "experience" that can't be duplicated on a suitably configured PC, so that form factor can't be completely ignored. However I agree that as long as Sony and Microsoft do something decent for next generation and sell it for a similar price to this generation, it won't be an issue.
I'm speaking more from the point of view of a graphics researcher of course, and I would desperately like to see consoles (or anyone) drive the graphics market forward Unfortunately it doesn't seem like the market really cares a lot these days, so maybe we'll just have to accept that reality.
That's true but only to a point. It can't get to the point where it's so much worse that someone (say an OEM) can more cheaply throw together a PC box with a HDMI port and 360 receiver (for pads) w/ Steam or similar and get something competitive at a fraction of the cost (to the IHV). We're nearing that point with current generation consoles, but it does take a while for prices of PC components to come down to the point where they can be competitive with the mass-produced and often-subsidized console hardware.
Anyways my point is there's very little about the console "experience" that can't be duplicated on a suitably configured PC, so that form factor can't be completely ignored. However I agree that as long as Sony and Microsoft do something decent for next generation and sell it for a similar price to this generation, it won't be an issue.
I'm speaking more from the point of view of a graphics researcher of course, and I would desperately like to see consoles (or anyone) drive the graphics market forward
Unfortunately it doesn't seem like the market really cares a lot these days, so maybe we'll just have to accept that reality.Maybe more devs should implement dynamic res or AA to maintain the framerate?
Maybe this gen should go on for a little longer to force devs to continue coming up with tricks instead of suddenly relying on brute force all over again.I'm speaking more from the point of view of a graphics researcher of course, and I would desperately like to see consoles (or anyone) drive the graphics market forward
I think that and reprojection caching are going to be big in the next little while. It's worth optimizing directly for the end user experience these days. Fixed performance and variable quality is arguably more desirable than the alternative.
Ha, yeah I mean sometimes useful stuff comes out of it, but we're pretty much past the point where the raw power just isn't enough for even the most theoretically efficient algorithms implemented optimally. Plus the feature gap is starting to become significant as well which is hard to overcome.Maybe this gen should go on for a little longer to force devs to continue coming up with tricks instead of suddenly relying on brute force all over again.
Thanks for the reply, I had no idea that rumors XDR2 in new 7900 series have been debunked. Thanks for the reply again.
This is a Hardware Prediction thread. Keep it on topic or expect disappearing posts.
As output resolution isn't really going to affect what hardware is chosen next-gen, there's no point discussing it at length.
As output resolution isn't really going to affect what hardware is chosen next-gen, there's no point discussing it at length.
Shifty, if you aim for a lower res with higher levels of AA next-gen then you would dedicate more hardware for AA efficiency and less brute force. It would change the dynamic of what you ask for from the IHV to design.
Personally my feeling is that after this amount of time between this gen and next gen a true 1080p resolution with decent AA and AF is an ideal goal - all at 60fps and VSYNC'd - I really can't stand tearing. Why would Sony and Microsoft settle for less as we can achieve this relatively comfortably on mid-range PC hardware now - even a Radeon 5770 with a dual core processor will not have an issue with it.
So lets think of hardware currently available that at a minimum could drive that resolution with enough graphics fidelity to keep the new games looking "next-gen" (global illumination, high res textures, ray tracing, HDR precision etc etc) ....
If Sony and Microsoft aim too low - it will just reduce the longevity of these systems.
An important question is - are Sony and MS waiting for TSMC, Glo Flo, Toshiba and NEC to transition to at least 32/28nm en masse and for bulk silicon? I think they are - hence the delay and lack of leaks currently.
If, (big if), they are indeed waiting for 28nm to become a viable option then MS and Sony will definitely be thinking about the length of time it may take to transition over to 22/20nm - maybe 3-4 years from launch.
If the thermal and die budget remains the same, we are hopefully looking at approximately 8x the power of current gen consoles in FLOPS, fillrate and polygon pushing power (assuming everything scales linearly.)
For the next-gen there are some advantages now, Blu-ray drives are much cheaper and in plentiful supply, lessons learnt regarding cooling and the die packaging material (RRoD), the networking infrastructure is built and only needs modifying rather than re-doing from scratch. Sony and Microsoft should be able to spend less and get more for next gen! Of course that won't happen due to added complexities and management incompetence, (I work for a large corporation and some of the errors management make are absolutely incredible and money wasting - save a penny, spend a pound mentality because they don't really understand IT.)
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
