Agreed, 7750 is only capable of 819 GFLOPS. That is something I would expect for the WiiU.
http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/DESKTOP/GRAPHICS/7000/7750/Pages/radeon-7750.aspx#2
Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech
- Thread starter Acert93
- Start date
- Status
Agreed, 7750 is only capable of 819 GFLOPS. That is something I would expect for the WiiU.
http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/DESKTOP/GRAPHICS/7000/7750/Pages/radeon-7750.aspx#2
I can't speak to resource usage of rumored future products, It was just a guess based on what it currently uses and how the system works, making some simple projections based on a theoretically increased fidelity. For all I know, the skeletal team could find some revolutionary new way to store the data that actually reduced the required RAM. It all comes back to how much you spend on pre-calculation and how many degrees of freedom your model has.
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
Well, "batshit crazy" doesn´t compute with a Cape Verde GPU. If Xbox next is truly such a beast we are talking a custom pitcairn with more CUs, without DP logic... ( that match with the rumor of being a more custom design ). Forget the idea of being a beast with only a great CPU. This gen at least has shown this with Cell and precisely has been MS which has been successful for chosing a future proof GPU like Xenos.
I think MS is trolling everybody with 6670 and such rumors.
Sony better go for the most powerful possible or will be trolled by MS and many "hardcore" soniers will go with MS.
About RAM, what avoids Sony from ditching GDDR5 and put also DDR3 with enough EDRAM to fulfill the needed bandwith?. Aren´t they on time to redesign it?.
Last edited by a moderator:
I have to agree with you. I really think there is an element of misinformation going on here.
The last generation worked especially well for MS because they built a very well balanced system. The CPU while weak in many areas worked well for what was really needed. And the GPU was very advanced for its days.
Why would they go from that to a system with huge ram, huge cpu performance and weak GPU? It makes no sense at all. Betting the farm on kinect doesnt make sense when they made most money lat gen out of convincing core gamers that the 360 was the place to be for high end, visual lush fps and action games. While of corse you can go the PS3 route and use extra performance in the CPU to help out the GPU, I cant see that as a reason to cut back on hte GPU.
I can see reasons to do many things, cut general purpose power for float as per the in order many core/thread route with VMX in the first. Made a lot of sense. But this gen throwing all your transistor budget at the CPU seems illogical to me.
The last generation worked especially well for MS because they built a very well balanced system. The CPU while weak in many areas worked well for what was really needed. And the GPU was very advanced for its days.
Why would they go from that to a system with huge ram, huge cpu performance and weak GPU? It makes no sense at all. Betting the farm on kinect doesnt make sense when they made most money lat gen out of convincing core gamers that the 360 was the place to be for high end, visual lush fps and action games. While of corse you can go the PS3 route and use extra performance in the CPU to help out the GPU, I cant see that as a reason to cut back on hte GPU.
I can see reasons to do many things, cut general purpose power for float as per the in order many core/thread route with VMX in the first. Made a lot of sense. But this gen throwing all your transistor budget at the CPU seems illogical to me.
The weak GPU stuff floating around make not much sense to me either. Kinect and stuff in all its glory sure, fine. It did make MS some money, it has sold fairly well and all that stuff and I am for sure not against them trying to improve upon it, make it an even bigger part of the whole xbox experience and jadda jadda, but at what cost? It must be possible to do all that but not gimp the console as perceived by the "core" gamers.
One would think that the Wii is a lesson learned. Was it huge fully successful? yes it was. Did it sell games? yes it did. Which is selling better now? the 360. Where are the most consumer $ being spent every month? the 360. In the end when everything is said and done MS made money from the 360, and is making more and more money from the 360 and that is all because of the core gamers for the most part.
The waving around your arms controls have been done now, it is not the new thing that it was when the Wii came out. You can't count on ma and grandma to stand in cue again to upgrade to the newest wave around your arms controls, they barely know what the difference is from one console to the other and what high definition is. What you can count on are the core gamers, will stand there to buy the next new tech, but most of them would most likely not stand in que either if the tech being offered is a low range card they have in their laptops at home.
If MS goes all out betting the farm on Kinect and the non cores, well that is definitely a bet worth the name, or maybe Epic convinced them that indeed software rendering is the future...
One would think that the Wii is a lesson learned. Was it huge fully successful? yes it was. Did it sell games? yes it did. Which is selling better now? the 360. Where are the most consumer $ being spent every month? the 360. In the end when everything is said and done MS made money from the 360, and is making more and more money from the 360 and that is all because of the core gamers for the most part.
The waving around your arms controls have been done now, it is not the new thing that it was when the Wii came out. You can't count on ma and grandma to stand in cue again to upgrade to the newest wave around your arms controls, they barely know what the difference is from one console to the other and what high definition is. What you can count on are the core gamers, will stand there to buy the next new tech, but most of them would most likely not stand in que either if the tech being offered is a low range card they have in their laptops at home.
If MS goes all out betting the farm on Kinect and the non cores, well that is definitely a bet worth the name, or maybe Epic convinced them that indeed software rendering is the future...
That quote is silly. You'd think MS have no idea how to run a business. "More powerful consoles would sell more? Oh, thanks for telling us that. We hadn't figured that out. What's that, Mr. Corporate Advisor? Better hardware costs more and may lead to lower profits or even loss? Oh, thanks for telling us that; we hadn't figured that out."
You don't just throw in more hardware because the devs want it. You also need to worry about price-point and long term objectives and competitive positioning. I seriously doubt any rumour that attributes hardware choices to developers - considering lots of other aspects of these consoles that the console companies ignore (download limits, pricing of patches, license fees, etc.), why should we believe the developers dictate the hardware but have no control over the rest of the business?
8GB RAM could be anything, although I imagine it'll refer to some form of DRAM rather than flash by convention (besides you'd have way more than 4/8 GBs flash if using that!). Could be 4+4 or 2+6 with a slower RAM for working space and data caching though. If GDDR5 can't get above 2GBs comfortably than split pools is pretty much a given. Then one has to consider what compromise is made. Durango may have half the graphics bandwidth of Orbis, say.
french toast
Veteran
We need a very well rounded console, I don't want a very powerfull component with a very weak bottleneck aka n64.
If rumours are right and they are concentrating resources on kinect then that is a very good thing imo, I want a innovative, reasonably powerfully well rounded console with enough headroom for long term innovation.
A lag free hd kinect 2 is what we need.
Gcn gpu with around 1.5 flops.
Quad core ooo gpu with decent cache.
4.gb ram and around 250gbs bandwidth.
That's my dream.
If rumours are right and they are concentrating resources on kinect then that is a very good thing imo, I want a innovative, reasonably powerfully well rounded console with enough headroom for long term innovation.
A lag free hd kinect 2 is what we need.
Gcn gpu with around 1.5 flops.
Quad core ooo gpu with decent cache.
4.gb ram and around 250gbs bandwidth.
That's my dream.
They'll need some crazy bandwidth if they really go for a fully-blown HSA design. I really doubt that GDDR3 + a few dozen MBs of eDRAM would be enough if the GPU part is supposed to do a whole lot more than just rendering frames ...
Even my Llano APU benefits GREATLY from higher memory performance - and that's an ancient CPU architecture + 400 Evergreen shaders that don't work together in an unified address space and don't even begin to understand what compute context switching is.
Just Imagine a Pitcairn-level GPU being restrained to a <100000MB/s memory interface - and then add the notion that the same memory is supposed to be simultaneously accessed by the CPU ...
Blazkowicz
Legend
bandwith usage would be more efficient with a HSA, no need to do any silly things, the CPU directly reads something that has been written by the GPU, or the reverse.
but yes it's greatly constrained by memory bandwith.
but yes it's greatly constrained by memory bandwith.
Hi, I use to read you on GAF as well. I thought both Lherre and you were more or less convinced the nextbox was gonna be the most powerful of the bunch.
I´m far from being an expert, but from what I´ve been reading about the latest specs of the PS4 and if the Xbox 3 is already being produced, wouldn´t be the PS4 the most powerful console?.
I know it´s hard to say, but but the latest rumors, how do you see both consoles?.
It's way too early to assume which will be more powerful and besides, that's not what this thread is about.
You are right, Aaron is wrong. There are GDDR5 chips that can be used in clam shell mode.
Not saying it´s a likely configuration though.
Hey now, that's not very nice!
Why is it "betting the farm on Kinect" to make (a revised version of) the device integral to the console in more ways than one? It's extremely important to MS.
Interesting that the 2 consoles have basically the same tie ratio, right?
Yes they would, if the software that they want is on the console. That has almost nothing to do with tech. Consoles are always sold on mass market software. Whether the GPU in the Durango, for example, is 1.3tf or 3.5tf, Halo 5 is going to move the console to these folks.
How much does clam shell add to the BOM? What's the roadmap like for cost reductions later on.
upnorthsox
Veteran
You don't have clam shell with on-board chips, it would have to be stacked. That's also going to cut your effective bandwith in as much as half.
It's misleading to say that the ram is new tech. The ram in the HMC is traditional ram, the TSV on the bottom is proven tech.
A big challenge is cooling the stack properly.
Idk, reading more about it, it seems quite possible to be used in a console releasing in 2013. This is technology specifically developed to break the memory wall.
The Cell, XDR, and Blu-ray were bigger gambles.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sure its important to them it helped bring people onboard who were tiring of their Wii's , gave MS another way of clawing back money from early adopters, tried to make the system more casual friendly.
In terms of units shifted it really was quite incredible for something which as had such limited support software wise.
I am still not convinced it will sell many Next boxes since kinnect 2 definitely won't be bundled. How could it? I mean they didn't include a hard drive in millions of this Gen units. And that's so much more important for the user, and arguably MS too for DL content.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
