Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[almighty]

"The graphs below (unless specified otherwise) show the full power draw of the computer (without the monitor) measured after the power supply. It is the total of the power consumption of all the system components."
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-a8-3870k_8.html#sect0

"After the power supply"

So it's actual power consumption and not power drawn from the wall.

The test system has an SSD, 8Gb RAM so you can take around 20-25w off for those 2 and the motherboard.

Either way it's still over the 100w mark so my point still stands

 

[kalelovil]

"After the power supply"

So it's actual power consumption and not power drawn from the wall.

The test system has an SSD, 8Gb RAM so you can take around 20-25w off for those 2 and the motherboard.

Either way it's still over the 100w mark so my point still stands

1. Without knowing the power consumption characteristics of motherboard one cannot just assume a certain wattage.

2. Consoles aren't going to be running FurMark/Prime95 all day.

3. Top of their range desktop chips are not binned or designed to be power efficient, laptop and console chips generally are.

4. Many desktop Llano's can be significantly undervolted without having to reduce clock speed.

5. Despite your assumption, laptop Trinity APUs do consume notably less power than their Llano equivalents. They both use the GF's problematic 32nm process, but Trinity benefits from improvements made to that process over time, experience gained from the design of Llano, and improved power saving technologies.

 

[liolio]

Better data:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/837-11/consommation-overclocking.html

 

[babcat]

Sony can't afford to build and sell that, the loss they suffered on PS3's expensive hardware nearly killed them, they will not be wanting to go through such financial loss again IMO.

Then they cannot afford to build a new console. The only way I think they can be successful is if they make the ps4 powerful enough to be the clear leader when it comes to graphics. They need to far surpass Durango and at least match a high end gaming rig. If they come out with anything less, I do not see any real advantage they will have, or any ace in the hole. The wii u has the casual market and the Xbox will cover casual and much of the hard core market.

I also don't think it would be too expensive for them to make such a system. They will not be spending billions on a custom CPU like cell or a new type of optical drive. Everything can be pretty much off the shelf. They can even use a slightly modified Gpu as well.

 

[babcat]

In my opinion, this will not be the case. I think the next consoles will be more affordable ($299-399 as opposed to 499/599), profitable more quickly, less power consuming, and have a shorter life span. Technology changes too fast and disruptive technologies can destroy a market for competitors who are too slow to adapt. 10 years is a lifetime in consumer tech.

We are in a very bad global recession that is only going to get worse. Unless some major even happens to boost the global economy, I don't expect graphics tech to progress faster than it is now. Also, with it becoming more difficult to shrink dies, unless a radical transistor tech emerges, graphics tech may even slow down a bit. There are only so many improvements you can make without going to a lower process. The main changes and advancements I see are new types of motion control add ons. There will probably be tons of these over the next ten years, but few new consoles.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Off the shelf doesn't mean cheap, it might reduce R&D but long term costs would be higher because of lost efficiency. A high end PC system is only high end for a year or 2.

 

[Ruskie]

Then they cannot afford to build a new console. The only way I think they can be successful is if they make the ps4 powerful enough to be the clear leader when it comes to graphics. They need to far surpass Durango and at least match a high end gaming rig. If they come out with anything less, I do not see any real advantage they will have, or any ace in the hole. The wii u has the casual market and the Xbox will cover casual and much of the hard core market.

I also don't think it would be too expensive for them to make such a system. They will not be spending billions on a custom CPU like cell or a new type of optical drive. Everything can be pretty much off the shelf. They can even use a slightly modified Gpu as well.

And why wouldn't MS do the same if that was so easy? They have quarterly profit bigger than what they lost on 360 and XBOX combined, they could do it in a heartbeat. But, like some other people already mentioned (ERP), console manufacturers are limited by costs and chip size/TDP and there is almost no way one will be able to get any significant lead from visual stand point. Sony just can't put 7970ghz edition if they don't want to:

a) have big, hot and very very expensive console
b) completely vanish from market

Everything we heard so far indicates that both manufacturers will go for similarly powered console, if Sony could get significant lead in graphics department without breaking the bank, don't you think MS engineers wouldn't do the same? Actually, from what we heard, Sony has pretty much locked plans for next gen as far as money they are wiling to spend on it.

 

[user542745831]

Sony just can't put 7970ghz edition if they don't want to:

a) have big, hot and very very expensive console

A lot of users here posted that it would be "very very expensive" / "too expensive" (and so on) the last few days, but without elaborating on what they think the price would actually be or what they consider as being "too expensive".

So, a serious question to all those users:

What do you actually think a "next-gen" gaming console equipped with a GPU in the ballpark of a GTX 680 or HD 7970 would actually cost on launch at retail (amount in figures)?

And what do you consider to be "too expensive" (amount in figures)?

 

[almighty]

A lot of users here posted that it would be "very very expensive" / "too expensive" (and so on) the last few days, but without elaborating on what they think the price would actually be or what they consider as being "too expensive".

So, a serious question to all those users:

What do you actually think a "next-gen" gaming console equipped with a GPU in the ballpark of a GTX 680 or HD 7970 would actually cost on launch at retail (amount in figures)?

And what do you consider to be "too expensive" (amount in figures)?

PS3 was $600 at launch and Sony lost a good $200+ on each machine iirc...

Personally I don't think Sony or Microsoft will want to sustain that kind of loss per machine again next time around.

For the first couple of years you sell every console at a big loss and then as the years go by you can use smaller process nodes and slowly start to reduce the cost, power consumption and heat out put of the chips and components inside the machine.

Those first couple of years are a killer.

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

PS3 was $600 at launch and Sony lost a good $200+ on each machine iirc...

Personally I don't think Sony or Microsoft will want to sustain that kind of loss per machine again next time around.

For the first couple of years you sell every console at a big loss and then as the years go by you can use smaller process nodes and slowly start to reduce the cost, power consumption and heat out put of the chips and components inside the machine.

Those first couple of years are a killer.

To be fair, the reason the ps3 was so expensive was mostly because it was used as a trojan horse for blu ray. I don't think the console would have been as much nor the loss so high if it did not have blu ray.

I think the 360 would be a better gauge. I believe Microsoft was losing about $125 per 360 when it was first launched and while games do not look as good as a gaming pc, I personally think it's still pumping out some decent looking games when compared to consoles themselves.

From my personal opinion, I expect the durango/ps4 to cost in the 399-499 price range with a $100 dollar loss per console. Of course that is if they are planning on going for another 8 years generation +2 years after the successor launches But that's just my opinion and holds no truth or anything. Just my assumption based on history and this gen.

If they go for a more traditional generation, then I will still say price range being in the 399-499 range, but no loss.

 

[Proelite]

http://hybridmemorycube.org/about.html

Update: Microsoft is now a developer member on the HMC consortium along with the other core members.

Increased memory density is anticipated, possibly using TSV ("through-silicon via") or other 3D stacking processes.[4][5][8][34] The DDR4 specification will include standardized 3D stacking "from the start" according to JEDEC,[34] with provision for up to 8 stacked dies.[31]:12 X-bit Labs predicted that "as a result DDR4 memory chips with very high density will become relatively inexpensive".[4] Prefetch remains at 8n[31]:16 with bank groups, including the use of two or four selectable bank groups.[13]

Connect the dots.

 

[McHuj]

Certainly would explain supposed yield issues because I don't think they would be having horrifically low yields with a chip based on Jaguar cores or even the size of Tahiti. (assuming there's any truth to that which I doubt)

 

[Ruskie]

Certainly would explain supposed yield issues because I don't think they would be having horrifically low yields with a chip based on Jaguar cores or even the size of Tahiti. (assuming there's any truth to that which I doubt)

Charlie rumor was bs.

That MS is member of HMC was posted couple months ago. Would be expected to go with DDR4, not sure about stacking. Anyone?

 

[Proelite]

Charlie rumor was bs.

That MS is member of HMC was posted couple months ago. Would be expected to go with DDR4, not sure about stacking. Anyone?

Hence the update is about MS becoming a developer on HMC.

 

[Ruskie]

Hence the update is about MS becoming a developer on HMC.

So that means they are using it or? I'm having trouble understand. They where part of HMC from May 12' and it doesn't say anything new as far as I understand, please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Proelite]

So that means they are using it or? I'm having trouble understand. They where part of HMC from May 12' and it doesn't say anything new as far as I understand, please correct me if I'm wrong.

They will be using it. But we don't know for what yet.

 

[Ruskie]

They will be using it. But we don't know for what yet.

It says in PDF

"While initial system design activity is more evolutionary in nature, with HMC providing high bandwidth memory for
direct support to host processors, HMC is likely to also serve as universal or shared memory in next generation system designs. In turn,
HMC's enablement of tremendously higher performance capability should allow design of new approaches for system virtualization."

http://hybridmemorycube.org/files/SiteDownloads/20120710_MediaEntertainmentTech_HMCMovesForward.pdf

That could be memory BG was talking about.

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

It says in PDF



http://hybridmemorycube.org/files/SiteDownloads/20120710_MediaEntertainmentTech_HMCMovesForward.pdf

That could be memory BG was talking about.

hmmm so the cubes will come in 2gig cubes. They are more space efficient right?

Could this add more credence to the 6-8 gigs Durango is suppose to have?

 

[XpiderMX]

GDDR5 vs XDR2 vs DDR4 vs HMC... pros and cons?

 

[AlphaWolf]

GDDR5 would be expensive, ddr4 should be much cheaper but slower, xdr2 doesn't exist outside of paper (and won't in time for any console launching in the next 18months or so if ever).