Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

It's a tech demo, totally not something you would do commercially for many games from many vendors.
After thinking about it I believe this gives four outputs which are probably beamed by four 1080p projectors. Similar stuff has been done on quake 3 and a flight simulator, with PCs.

 

And Forza since forever (3x 360s for surround gaming)

Cheers

 

GT5 seems to have option for 3x and 5x surround gaming as well.
http://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=189301

 

It's a feature of Gran Turismo 5. You can use additional PS3 on multiple monitors/projectors, and select slave display in GT5, and choose the position of that display, you can tile it the way you want. The tech demo was using a 4K projector that could tile four 1080p inputs. There's nothing special about it, except the frame rate slicing, that feature is not in the game, it needs a special display and signalling to combine the frames correctly.

I think it would be great to have that option as a standard feature with support at the API level, instead of having each dev implement something on their own (which is the reason very few Xbox and PS3 games support that). Having multi-display support built-in and mandatory. Maybe a high-speed lightpeak link between consoles to stream the scene, chaining them would be easy and practically unlimited.

 

Are you sure about that? The official website appears to suggest something else, see:

 

Ah, you're right. I just noticed the layouts are called 1x1, 3x1 and 5x1, there's no "2x2" in the menu, it's like they limited it arbitrarily.

GT4 was also doing 3 screens on the PS2.

 

Unfortunately it's not "easy" to implement generally.
It's very much like online play with a reliable connection, but you can't have any lag between the outputs, and you have to lock the frames together.
How easy it is to implement is dependent on how much state needs to be shuttled around, and whether the game is actually running on all of the boxes or doing some sort of slaved render.

It's relatively easy to do if your game is synchronous(which GT probably is), i.e. only dependent on controller input, and frame number. You just run the game on all the boxes and make sure every frame starts with the same controller data and frame count. Being Synchronous in this was was common in older generation games , but it's not common anymore.

The other way to requires the game package enough state for rendering the scene, and render once all the machines have enough state for a consistent image, this would increase latency, probably by 1 game frame, require extra memory and something akin to a client/server architecture. It's more complicated than an online game because any deviation in state is immediately visible.

 

I was thinking of the same idea and it just so happened to already exist. But the truth is, it's actually been thought up of 2 decades ago just about. But it hasn't been publicly accepted, strictly because TVs back then weren't as sophisticated as they are now.

Still Anyways, 4 consoles and a 4k resolution is WAY more then what is needed in a home entertainment theatre. and PCs can do above that with just 2 high end graphics chips as is. in the end you would be spending over the limit just to see a game that can look just as clean at 1080p with FXAA or MLAA.

Only one console should be able to do 1080p out of the box, and 2 for either double the performance or the graphics. Linking up so many consoles for a TV that you probably don't have or might not be able to have would be kinda pointless.

my conclusion would be, 1080p will probably be the standard for 2 decades or so. It's a standard that really doesn't need superseding that's why. most people's tv's in apartments and small homes are recommended at 32" and 42" inches so they would be seeing 4k downscaled.

In fact anybody with 32"- 60" inches would be seeing 4k downscaled theoretically, even if newer models supported it. the bigger the rez the bigger the TV needs to be to benefit.

 

IF the only subtle changes are just the resolution it might be down to only 2 models that can possibly happen. it sounds convincing but one could only Imagine that the better version would inevitably have the most buyers, as it would gradually become cheaper and take the place in stores.

Everywhere I find my self in a place that sells consoles; what I usually see is Bundles and PRO versions of a console on the shelves. The small shops is where I see all the types including stand alone models being stored. But even they have their limits.

Big stores usually don't like having too many variations taking up space, and they can regulate if needed to avoid confusion on their behalf to their customers. Covering a wide range for a console is a good idea, but even if the differences are little to all the gamers it would eventually come down to a last man standing situation. That's what I'm seeing.

The 360 would have been in a worst situation if it had not only multiple HDD SKUs, but also variation in resolutions below and above 720p.

 

Source/s for any/all of this, please... Are there even any, or are you just making it up?

Mouse and keyboard, that is all. Gamepads aren't precise aiming devices. Also, I should expect something more than a bog standard gamepad device in this day and age, or rather, this day and age plus another two full years or more...

 

Multi-monitor is already supported by AMD from 5xxx series up it's called Eyefinity. Depending on the series it support from 3 to 6 monitors. It would be upto the console maker to support it with connectivity.

 

I see not the need to have so many different versions of a console. If the base hardware (the game playing hardware) is equal across all models then sure, have multiple SKU's with the bells and whistles. Just as long as the same exact gaming functionality is present across all models.

 

The info from durango dev kit has been "deleted" from vgleaks.com.

 

But not from www.vgleaks.com

 

wtf ? two different websites?

 

I think the website is just coded poorly. There's vgleaks.com and www.vgleaks.com. Hitting "home" on vgleaks.com take you to www.vgleaks.com.

 

This is just the market research firms speculation, but it's as good as any. The pictured chip looks the same as the one that had been shown previously on Semiaccurate.

 

"2.5D is unanimously praised as the solution for 3D imagery". This statement doesn't fill me with confidence in that analyst.

Edit: I'm talking rubbish. It's not a great translation, but I stupidly missed the context. Now I realise he's talking about 2.5D stacked chips to solve GPU progress, as opposed to 2.5D being a solution for stereoscopic 3D image creation.

 

Just as a note, quiet a few pages ago I was pointing out the risk for Streamrollers/Kaveri to not be ready in time for a launch in 2013. I also spoke in the WiiU thread about the risks implied by pushing the boundaries of what it is sane to mass produce further than where the companies for which it is the main business are willing to go with their own products.

I got quiet some mean responses for various reasons but also lets put it nicely brand loyalty but it seems that it was not a insane opinion.
There are rumors since yesterday about things sadly not going well at AMD at all. It seems that the odds for Streamrollers and Kaveri to be pushed back are high. As I stated betting on such a such a part to be ready for a fall 2013 launch was too optimistic.

In another fashion the claim is lot more iffy, Semiaccurate also stated that MSFT were facing yields problems with its prototypes. In time based on Sony claims (ie they will be first to next gen Nintendo aside) it got me to wonder if MSFT could have changed its mind late and moved to another manufacturer(s). Anyway I would not bet on that.

So just saying, I think when it comes to products more and more complex supposed to ship in large quantity with low margins (more loss at launch) taking too much risks is calling for a black swan.

For the interposer / MCM, it could be an option. Actually looking at Nintendo which made that choice one may wonder if they could not have gone with a SOC + low power RAM on a MCM instead of CPU + a GPU including edram, which seems to be what Intel plans for some Haswell parts.
Anyway I'll take a break on beating WiiU design choices as of late I wondered if the WiiU+ a PC could be all I need for the so called next generation. My redwood + llano powered laptop should run the kind of games I enjoy for a couple extra years (1366p and 15" screen are more forgiving than a +45" full HD TV), I won't buy the WiiU at launch so there could be opportunity for interlaced budgeting

 

Yes, what does "3D imagery" mean?
3D rendering? (like Star Fox and games I was playing on the 386SX). Stereo? that already exists. Consoles will launch tiny flying drones that will 3D-scan you?

At least we have an insightful comment from Teiji Yukata (I've been preaching this for a long time, being horrified by TNT2 M64, FX5200 64bit and other cards), and a good quality picture of the AMD test chip.

512bit bus is not incredibly high btw, it's what Intel uses on Haswell GT3. But Intel uses slow memory.
Why that number, how is it known?