He was refering to total processing powers.
Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech
- Thread starter Acert93
- Start date
- Status
He was refering to total processing powers.
Source? Lherre has said that Next Xbox CPU is not PowerPC and 8gb RAM.
My source is LMB. Give me a link to Lherre's post because I don't remember him saying that.
My source is Lherre xD
Xbox 3 is different, in fact is neither powerpc.
From a spanish forum: http://www.elotrolado.net/hilo_hilo-oficial-wii-u_1628403_s8320
If durango has the rumored 8Gb RAM will be interesting to see who has the better looking games.
If it's like this:
Durango 8GB+1.5TF GPU
Orbis 2 GB+1.8 TF GPU
I'll go with Durango easily.
If it's like this:
Durango 8GB+1.0 TF GPU
Orbis 4GB+1.8 TF GPU
That is a better contest and I might lean Orbis.
Since we have a "range" of 1-1.5 TF's rumored for Durango GPU currently (not final), and we seem to be at 2GB with message board hoping for 4GB on Orbis.
Plus the 8GB would likely be DDR3 with some kind of EDRAM setup (probably all these compromises, 8GB needs DDR3, DDR3 needs EDRAM, EDRAM takes away all the GPU transistors, Durango ends up with flimsy GPU) mandated by the Kinect team needing 8GB of RAM, "Kinect, ruining gaming since 1492"). Vs the 4GB being fast powerful DDR5 on a 256 bus.
For sure a simple 256 bit bus and no EDRAM is the way to go, that is good system design by Sony if true.
I lamented once how I've often considered the 2009 4890 in my PC, and how it outpowers the 360 etc, and how disappointing it would be for next consoles to only match it. Well an 1152 SP Pitcairn, given how much more efficient it is per SP (EG,7850 being close to 1536 SP 6970, itself much faster than 1600 SP 5870), would likely be 2X as powerful imo. That is going to produce some impressive games, especially without bothersome EDRAM holding it back.
It will also be cool though if like one system ends up at 4GB the other 8, how different the games look etc, we'll be back to only first party exploiting the differences, should be fun. I've said all along this gen PS3 and 360 are almost exactly equal which is actually amazing, and that will likely not happen again.
If it's like this:
Durango 8GB+1.5TF GPU
Orbis 2 GB+1.8 TF GPU
I'll go with Durango easily.
If it's like this:
Durango 8GB+1.0 TF GPU
Orbis 4GB+1.8 TF GPU
That is a better contest and I might lean Orbis.
Since we have a "range" of 1-1.5 TF's rumored for Durango GPU currently (not final), and we seem to be at 2GB with message board hoping for 4GB on Orbis.
Plus the 8GB would likely be DDR3 with some kind of EDRAM setup (probably all these compromises, 8GB needs DDR3, DDR3 needs EDRAM, EDRAM takes away all the GPU transistors, Durango ends up with flimsy GPU) mandated by the Kinect team needing 8GB of RAM, "Kinect, ruining gaming since 1492"). Vs the 4GB being fast powerful DDR5 on a 256 bus.
For sure a simple 256 bit bus and no EDRAM is the way to go, that is good system design by Sony if true.
I lamented once how I've often considered the 2009 4890 in my PC, and how it outpowers the 360 etc, and how disappointing it would be for next consoles to only match it. Well an 1152 SP Pitcairn, given how much more efficient it is per SP (EG,7850 being close to 1536 SP 6970, itself much faster than 1600 SP 5870), would likely be 2X as powerful imo. That is going to produce some impressive games, especially without bothersome EDRAM holding it back.
It will also be cool though if like one system ends up at 4GB the other 8, how different the games look etc, we'll be back to only first party exploiting the differences, should be fun. I've said all along this gen PS3 and 360 are almost exactly equal which is actually amazing, and that will likely not happen again.
I think Microsoft is taking the Apple route & the Next Xbox will be a starting point for this platform like the iOS devices,
have devs make games starting with the Next Xbox but release newer models of the console every few years.
& at the same time make this Xbox platform the standard for games being made on Windows PCs going forward.
have devs make games starting with the Next Xbox but release newer models of the console every few years.
& at the same time make this Xbox platform the standard for games being made on Windows PCs going forward.
Isn't Orbis GPU on-die?
Both memory and bandwidth will be shared with the CPU. It's a fast GPU, but still it will be kinda of cripled with respect with the full Pitcairn. I hope they have a quite large cache on the APU-die, it would reduce the bandwidth problem.
As for Durango, I really hope they will rethink the GPU and go for at least 1.5TF.. Which is still is much less than what we expected (damn, that full Pitcairn looked so good).
Offcourse, 8 GB are a lot..
Any dev out there want to say how they would use so much memory?
btw, http://www.diedagain.com/crysis-2-dev-wants-next-gen-consoles-with-8gb-of-ram
MS listened to them!
What good is a memory if your GPU is 1 TFLOP? I guess you could take a better look at all those nice textures while running single digit frames, but still... 
I said it when MS started heavy on multimedia and Kinect that I won't mind it if it doesn't effect next gen hardware, but those rumors seem to imply it does. Building a console around Kinect and movies, music and social networking doesn't look good from here. Spending transistors and money on RAM and CPU because said things are limited by it and than taking from GPU seems like such a bad idea.
I still don't buy those 1 TFLOP rumors because it just seems to pointless. Generations don't last ~4 years anymore, it will be 8 years when new consoles are announced and the trend seems to only get longer each generation. That kind of a GPU will simply "cough blood" at mere mention of next gen engines. For all the talk about bunch of memory and stuff from developers, one would think they would actually push them for thing that is essential for running their games.
So...cheapening out on it and getting of shelf HD6670 seems like suicide mission. I guess GPU would be the cheapest part of the system in that case, and I don't think 3rd party would have fun when porting games to system with the GPU so much slower like rumors imply.
I got to say that PS4 side looks good. If its ~2 TFLOP GPU with 4 gb GDDR5 that would be some nice specs from Sony, along with good price I suppose.
I said it when MS started heavy on multimedia and Kinect that I won't mind it if it doesn't effect next gen hardware, but those rumors seem to imply it does. Building a console around Kinect and movies, music and social networking doesn't look good from here. Spending transistors and money on RAM and CPU because said things are limited by it and than taking from GPU seems like such a bad idea.
I still don't buy those 1 TFLOP rumors because it just seems to pointless. Generations don't last ~4 years anymore, it will be 8 years when new consoles are announced and the trend seems to only get longer each generation. That kind of a GPU will simply "cough blood" at mere mention of next gen engines. For all the talk about bunch of memory and stuff from developers, one would think they would actually push them for thing that is essential for running their games.
So...cheapening out on it and getting of shelf HD6670 seems like suicide mission. I guess GPU would be the cheapest part of the system in that case, and I don't think 3rd party would have fun when porting games to system with the GPU so much slower like rumors imply.
I got to say that PS4 side looks good. If its ~2 TFLOP GPU with 4 gb GDDR5 that would be some nice specs from Sony, along with good price I suppose.
What good is a memory if your GPU is 1 TFLOP? I guess you could take a better look at all those nice textures while running single digit frames, but still...
I said it when MS started heavy on multimedia and Kinect that I won't mind it if it doesn't effect next gen hardware, but those rumors seem to imply it does. Building a console around Kinect and movies, music and social networking doesn't look good from here. Spending transistors and money on RAM and CPU because said things are limited by it and than taking from GPU seems like such a bad idea.
I still don't buy those 1 TFLOP rumors because it just seems to pointless. Generations don't last ~4 years anymore, it will be 8 years when new consoles are announced and the trend seems to only get longer each generation. That kind of a GPU will simply "cough blood" at mere mention of next gen engines. For all the talk about bunch of memory and stuff from developers, one would think they would actually push them for thing that is essential for running their games.
So...cheapening out on it and getting of shelf HD6670 seems like suicide mission. I guess GPU would be the cheapest part of the system in that case, and I don't think 3rd party would have fun when porting games to system with the GPU so much slower like rumors imply.
I got to say that PS4 side looks good. If its ~2 TFLOP GPU with 4 gb GDDR5 that would be some nice specs from Sony, along with good price I suppose.
Well, Lherre and bgassasins have said that Durango will be the most powerful next gen console...
Durango = Xbox1
PS4 = GC
Wii U= Dreamcast
Something like that.
lherre said nothing of the sort.
All he said was that the difference between Durango and wii-u is bigger than ps2 and Xbox on paper. Considering that PS2 had a better CPU on paper, that should tell you a lot.
Its a bit more complicated than that I would assume...
Better CPU and more RAM is a good thing, when your GPU isn't crippled in comparison that is and you don't have to dedicate cores to big OS and Kinect 2.0 that is:smile:
Ok, so bkilian just proved me wrong. It would seem very fishy to go for 8 gigs and good CPU, yet having slow GPU if Kinect doesn't require that much memory and CPU power.
Better CPU and more RAM is a good thing, when your GPU isn't crippled in comparison that is and you don't have to dedicate cores to big OS and Kinect 2.0 that is:smile:
Ok, so bkilian just proved me wrong.
It would seem very fishy to go for 8 gigs and good CPU, yet having slow GPU if Kinect doesn't require that much memory and CPU power.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kinect does not need 8GB of RAM, and the Kinect team would not have been the driving force for getting that much memory into a system. You could get a significantly enhanced Kinect with 2-3% of that much RAM (and that would be more than 4 times the current usage, depending on features enabled)
3-4 GB ram, 1 TP total processing power sounds inline with your expectactions right?
It's also telling why Epic said 1 TP is the minimum required for UE4.
Thats 7 month old quote (not that I doubt its authentic, I googled it) so some things may have changed. But, those 6670 rumors have to be false, no two ways about it.
Might? MIGHT? You are talking an 80% difference in GPU performance.
Think of all the issues people had with the PS3 not hitting the same framerate and features as the 360 and the gap between RSX and Xenos is much smaller than 80% across the board (RSX even does some things faster).
I will call it now: If we end up seeing a difference that big not mitigated by something like stacked memory we are going to have the following smoke blown: "Sony is just continuing on the old path but MS is looking to the future with Kinect and investing in advancing gaming." blah blah blah.
As I noted earlier while MS will trumpet the sales success of Kinect -- and it has obvious $$$$$$ tie in potential as a media centric device -- it sucks for core games because MS is totally aiming for hands free. So while I love me some Fruit Ninja, Kinect Sports, Your Shape 2012, Powerup Heroes, etc Kinect is a non-starter for core games. And MS has *still* failed to create an app that is a lot of games aimed at fitness (meaning instead of doing pushups while twisting your neck at the screen... so stupid... a game where you are doing fun game stuff like skiing or boxing etc that is really a workout; Your Shape 2012 is the closest to do this but it is still presented as a WORKOUT instead of a game giving a workout; and the "game" games are all wonky jesture stuff for the most part).
If they go this route they really won't care what core gamers are saying because they already had the marketing folks run the numbers and it would be a decisive design to break in a new direction.
But as a core gamer I am really hoping they can meet the needs of both markets... or at least be up front that they aren't competing in the other arena. Because 80% more GPU power is *a lot* especially if Sony is doing an APU with fast GPU/CPU sharing and possibly stacked memory.
I think MS is interested in having the least ram / processing power needed to do the dynamic lighting of UE4 at 720p, 30fps. This is probably after Epic convinced them that UE4 is going to save development costs.
IMO, the number one priority for MS next generation is to get Kinect working well.
That doesn't make much sense. Epic would convince them anyway they can to go for as powerful as possible, not entry level.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
