Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[function]

I still think MS and Sony alike will aim for a $399 price point the first year. First year the sell to early adopters and gamers. However a clear strategy for hitting the $299 price point second year and $199 two years down the line will be very important.

I think MS might go for a two sku launch again - there have been benefits this time round to being able to compete with the cheapest model you can while also having a "premium" system with an inflated price that's ideal for service delivery.

299 core / 399 premium again maybe?

I guess you could argue that with 3 or more cores the game is optimised just fine for the PC :smile:

As a Core 2 owner you at least have the option of dropping in a quad Core. I'm on socket 939!

Which does agree with your final point though, it's entirely possible that the processing load is nothing special and majority of the time is wasted on bad thread scheduling and similar issues.

Would it be fair to expect that spending a greater proportion of total cpu time on thread scheduling pays off as the number of cores increases? Also, does the relative lack of efficiency boosting features on chips like Xenon and Cell mean there's a bigger payoff to micromanaging threads (that may not be worth the cost on "smarter" chips)?

 

[ban25]

That's a lot easier said then done. Having some very current experience with taking multicore console-codebase over to less/single-core PCs, the kind of undertaking you ask for can be comparable to rewritting most of the game from scratch (depends on specifics of the codebase, but still).
The fact that (windows)PC is probably by far the most horrific platform in existence to work on when it comes to multithreading games (both by fault of inadequate tools and OS) doesn't help with these kind of ports either. Which does agree with your final point though, it's entirely possible that the processing load is nothing special and majority of the time is wasted on bad thread scheduling and similar issues.

Have you worked with Vista's improved critical section? Maybe dealing with the UI message pump is a pain, but I'll still take it over pthreads and gdb debugging!

 

[ban25]

What would you see as the right balance next time round?

If they intend to follow the leading edge of process technology, then I think Intel is probably their best (only?) option. Otherwise, I suppose its possible they could license something from IBM again, but they will have a hard time competing with Intel on both fabrication and microarchitecture.

 

[Entropy]

If they intend to follow the leading edge of process technology, then I think Intel is probably their best (only?) option. Otherwise, I suppose its possible they could license something from IBM again, but they will have a hard time competing with Intel on both fabrication and microarchitecture.

Uhm. The Wii with its 16mm2 on 90nm PPC CPU is competing quite successfully. I understand your standpoint, but fail to see its relevance.

A console is widget, a toaster. The CPU is tailored to perform to a particular specification in cost, power draw and processing abilities. Most everything that makes an i86 architecture processor relevant, is irrelevant in console space. As in cell phones. As in automobiles. As in.....

While Intel is a lithography powerhouse, that doesn't mean that the rest of the world is far behind. And there are clear benefits to using a solution where you have more influence at the design stage, as well as when you move to new lithography, as well as being able to choose such a process so as to provide maximum cost benefit, (as opposed to a "balanced" benefit against speed potential, since that has little value for a console CPU respin), et cetera.

If anything, I'd say it would make a lot more sense for Nintendo to move to ARM than x86 if they were inclined to change CPU architecture.

 

[AlNom]

While Intel is a lithography powerhouse, that doesn't mean that the rest of the world is far behind.

Depends on your point of view with respect to transistor characteristics (e.g. power, density), which may differ significantly between manufacturing plants at a given process node.

If anything, I'd say it would make a lot more sense for Nintendo to move to ARM than x86 if they were inclined to change CPU architecture.

Btw... they were discussing Microsoft, not Nintendo.

 

[eastmen]

If they intend to follow the leading edge of process technology, then I think Intel is probably their best (only?) option. Otherwise, I suppose its possible they could license something from IBM again, but they will have a hard time competing with Intel on both fabrication and microarchitecture.

Yea but the process lead doesn't come with the chip designs. Do you think intel is going to offer ms their top of the line fabs to create a chip for the xbox next ? Do you think each time they hit a new fab process intel is going to put the xbox chips on that process ?

 

[pc999]

If they intend to follow the leading edge of process technology, then I think Intel is probably their best (only?) option. Otherwise, I suppose its possible they could license something from IBM again, but they will have a hard time competing with Intel on both fabrication and microarchitecture.

Why would Intel microarchitecture be better than IBM, specially if it is costum(ized) like Xenon?

And that is putting aside a lot of no tech related questions.

 

[Entropy]

Btw... they were discussing Microsoft, not Nintendo.

Actually, I was aware - I chose Nintendo as the example because they most clearly demonstrate that a console is not a WintelPC. And, of course, they are far and away the biggest console player. Doubly so when you consider the mobile space. The tendency here is to extrapolate from PC space into console space, totally neglecting that the only player for whom that has a history, Microsoft, has moved away from the PC architecture for the present generation, and regardless of what trend you care to look at: cost, power consumption (= design freedom, space constraints), or the importance of the PC as a games platform, the design impetus is away from desktop PC space.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

The tendency here is to extrapolate from PC space into console space, totally neglecting that the only player for whom that has a history, Microsoft, has moved away from the PC architecture for the present generation, and regardless of what trend you care to look at: cost, power consumption (= design freedom, space constraints), or the importance of the PC as a games platform, the design impetus is away from desktop PC space.

Perhaps Intel is more willing to enter the console stage at this time to perhaps secure better support for their Larrabee chip considering the co-development of many Xbox- and PC-games . I think if interested Intel is in a better position than IBM to offer a solution to MS with their manufacturing advantages. Also Xenon didn't turned up to be exactly what it was supposed to be in the beginning. If I remember correctly MS insisted on having a OoO processor, but IBM was unable to deliver it.

 

[3dilettante]

Given the time frame MS wanted and the demand for OoO on a new design, I'm not sure even Intel could manage it.
The verification effort for an OoO chip is much higher, and that takes money and time.

If Intel were willing to go through all that extra effort for a design that it would have to have razor-thin margins on, perhaps it would be present in a future console. It would have to be generous enough in Microsoft's case to convince them to forget the experience that helped drive them to IBM in the first place.

The IBM presence in consoles may or may not be a permanent thing. The last round happened in part because IBM was struggling enough to be willing to enter into some rather low-margin deals and Intel made enough money not bothering.

 

[Megadrive1988]

I guess it's possible that with the terrible economy, which is the worst it's been since the Great Depression, or will soon get that bad, the next generation of consoles could be put on hold, for years.

Or there could be minimal upgrades to the current consoles, like what Nintendo did with GameCube turning it into Wii.

It certainly does not make sense to invest in new consoles that are a generational leap beyond 360/PS3. At least until things stabalize in the world economy and developers stop dropping off the map.

We don't yet know how the economy will impact the videogame industry. 2009 will be a critical year, the impact of what happened this fall has not yet been felt everywhere. I admit, I'm a bit scared. I just read (unconfirmed report that Factor 5 has now closed down.

With that said, I hope things rebound like they did in the mid-late 90s after the recession of the early 90s. We saw tremendous advancements in technology for games at that time, from 16-bit 2D to full 3D polygon games. I hope that after a few years of bad times, the game industry will surge forward in the next decade with the technology to for
*more immersive, tactile feedback control schemes
*CG-like graphics in realtime
*more seemless online experiences

 

[eastmen]

I don't know if devs failing is a problem with launching next gen consoles though.

Developers are failing because they are putting out tons of crap. Factor five has not had a great game from what I can recall since the first Star wars game on the gamecube. Lair was rubish and sold poorly , The other star wars game on the gc also did poorly.

If video games continue to increase in popularity and gamers want new hardware then they will get new hardware . What we may see is that these current systems extend further into the next gen than the ps2 did in this gen. That may surely be the case if MS or Sony jumps the gun early. The ps3 or xbox 360 would be able to live off ports of the other system while that companys new system gets the brunt of the first party dev time.

I don't see why an xbox 360 can't exist 3-4 years into the life time of the xbox next and still continue to sell hardware and software. The xbox 360 existed at the $300/400 price range from 2005 to late 2008. Thats a good 3 years of sales. If an xbox next stays at the $400 price range for that long there is more than enough room for a xbox 360 at the $100 price range

Someone is going to have to make the jump because it will offer a reason for the core gamers to move on to the new system and will allow them to build a niche and start making in roads into the next gen.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

It can exist along the new platform, but that will depend on alot of things. One of the reason the ps2 hold out so long into this gen is because it had 70% or so from the market so even with the new systems the userbase was still large enough to generate sales. Also it had the ''non games'' selection to keep it going because for the past 2 years I doubt a real gamer has bought his first ps2. That might also be the problem for the ps3 or x360 if they want to extend long into the next gen. At that point nobody will be buying them for the core games anymore, those gamers will already own one or will get the new machine. So they need something for the group that is more interrested in low price. But, just to name one example why would anybody that isnt really that interrested in the core games buy a x360 a couple of years from now while they could get a wii?

 

[Squilliam]

How do you think the current recession will effect the deal making and technology choices the console manufacturers make? Surely it would mean a reduction the price they would have to pay and royalties for the most cutting edge technology?

For example, if Microsoft walked over to AMD and slapped 500M into their hand and said "Make me a system worthy of the name Xbox next" They would get a pretty good deal on even the latest and greatest R8xx or R9xx type hardware and whatever CPU is currently on offer. This would especially be the case if it furthered their aims for Fusion and essentially paid for the R+D for their desktop line at the same time for example.

 

[liolio]

As some just spoke of Nintendo, I still wonder if BigN could move to a "complete ARM solution" and thus easy portability with their next portable system.
Backward compability could be a concerned but what do you think?

 

[Fafalada]

Have you worked with Vista's improved critical section?

The most work we do with Vista is run the game on it to see if it works. The userbase is too small to be relevant, and those that DO run it already need hardware that is easily equal or above our recommended spec.
I suppose I should amend my previous post - PC has long-ass Software compatibility tail as well, which can be equally detrimental as hardware one to PC being a decent development platform.

Would it be fair to expect that spending a greater proportion of total cpu time on thread scheduling pays off as the number of cores increases?

Not really, Amdahl covered this stuff ages ago. I guess we'll move towards algorithms that are less focused on micromanaging threads as cores go up though.

Also, does the relative lack of efficiency boosting features on chips like Xenon and Cell mean there's a bigger payoff to micromanaging threads (that may not be worth the cost on "smarter" chips)?

To the extent that hyper-threading can yield results similar to OOOe sometimes I guess. Other then that it's more an issue that console CPUs don't really give you the choice, their single-thread performance isn't much of a fallback there.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

To the extent that hyper-threading can yield results similar to OOOe sometimes I guess. Other then that it's more an issue that console CPUs don't really give you the choice, their single-thread performance isn't much of a fallback there.

what about Cell and all its gigaflops ?

 

[Blazkowicz]

As some just spoke of Nintendo, I still wonder if BigN could move to a "complete ARM solution" and thus easy portability with their next portable system.
Backward compability could be a concerned but what do you think?

I don't fully understand what you mean ("complete"?). but they could make a great portable console with a single or dual core nvidia Tegra, or a custom derivate of it. (no need for full HD decoding or some other functions)

Most probably running DS games would be easy on that. (another reason I don't understand your post, Nintendo's two last portables are ARM based)

Actually a dual core Tegra with more GPU pipes and ddr3 might be nice for a regular console such as a Wii HD?

 

[grandmaster]

If the general consensus is that PS4 and Nextbox will be duct-taped, enhanced versions of the current hardware, is there any potential at all for backwards compatibility+...? I'm talking about patches for current games to enable them to run in 1080p, for example.

On the one hand, it could be a powerful motivator for selling more consoles and levering existing Microsoft or Sony owners into buying into the new system - their current collection has more value. On the other hand, it may be enough to stop people buying new games for their new consoles...

I'm guessing we'd be talking about a pretty widescale re-engineering for the patches though, right?

 

[pc999]

Why they need to be "duct-taped, enhanced versions of the current hardware"?

Unless one is using a very lossy version of the term, they dont need to be just that, I mean, IBM is still making new PPC CPUs, Cell (like?) is still evolving, ATI and Nvidea are both making GPUs that are BC... (althought some aditional work may be needed to match the costum specs of 360/PS3).

They should be able to deliver a BC console tthat is both significant more powerfull, yet can be released at a significantly lower price/consumption point, low-mid end ATI/NVIDEA GPUs (4650/9600s) already have much more power and performance/power ration than xenus/RSX and are much cheaper than those (original price) (evan the low end, 4350/9400s, should be near that).

They may not be the equivalent to a high end PC, meybe not even to a mid-high end (more mid than high end) one, but that is very diferent from "duct-taped, enhanced versions of the current hardware".