[ArsTechnica] Next-gen consoles and impact on VGA market

[Termie]

Interesting read here on the successors to the Xbox360 and PS3: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...nals-a-sea-change-in-the-console-industry.ars

It notes that while the 360 and PS3 had relatively cutting-edge graphics and unprecedented CPU power when they were released, the next-gen consoles likely will not. This is partly due to the use of consoles as media machines, where cutting edge graphics just aren't required, but also because MS and Sony lost a whole lot of money for the first few years of their previous consoles.

The most relevant point for PC gamers is the discussion of AMD's potential to drive game development in the next generation with what looks like two design wins. This certainly won't help deal with "consolitis," but it could alter the balance away from nVidia, which has historically had more pull with game developers.

 

[blackened23]

Apparently PS 4 will use the DirectX DX11 API.

Good thing for us if true :thumbsup:

 

[Elfear]

Not so excited about watered-down GPUs in the next gen consoles but I like that AMD might make headway with game devs. It's good to have balance in the force.

 

[taltamir]

Apparently PS 4 will use the DirectX DX11 API.

Good thing for us if true :thumbsup:

That is quite generous of them to give microsoft such a leg up.

 

[taltamir]

It notes that while the 360 and PS3 had relatively cutting-edge graphics and unprecedented CPU power when they were released

Both are false.
Both were released with horribly weak CPUs compared to PCs, outdated GPUs (at a time where a massive GPU improvement occured with the DX10 parts), and ridiculously little ram.

 

[Ieat]

Not surprising. Sony and MS lost a sack load selling at a loss while Nintendo used old tech and made a profit on each Wii sold from day one. Just look at the history of console sales. The most graphically powerful system hasn't sold the most units in over 20 years since the SNES. N64 most powerful, PS 1 sold the most. Original Xbox most powerful but PS2 sold the most. PS3 most powerful, Wii sold the most.

 

[blackened23]

That is quite generous of them to give microsoft such a leg up.

Well the latest rumors indicate MS is licensing BR for the 720. So it balances itself out

 

[blastingcap]

They should use DX 12 if available by the time they have to commit to hardware specs.

 

[taltamir]

Well the latest rumors indicate MS is licensing BR for the 720. So it balances itself out

what does BR stand for?

 

[taltamir]

They should use DX 12 if available by the time they have to commit to hardware specs.

I would expect DX10, and would be very pleasantly surprised if it uses DX11

 

[blackened23]

what does BR stand for?

Blu ray, The new GPU's will be dx11 (if the rumors are true)

 

[Termie]

what does BR stand for?

Blu-ray, I believe.

Edit: what he said. ^^^

 

[taltamir]

Blu ray, The new GPU's will be dx11 (if the rumors are true)

It would be very interesting if MS and Sony did a Bluray for DirectX trade. Giving each a non revocable permanent right to the other.
Sony gets the upper hand here unless MS limited it to existing DX and not future versions... But if they DID make such a limit then sony is screwed on their PS5. Since then MS will not license to them DX12 or 13 or whatever. And they will be forced to switch to OpenGL, which will devastate their game ecosystem since all their developers switched to DX and as such will find it much cheaper to develop MS exclusives rather then multi platforms (MS and Sony's)
PS. xbox is closer to PC then it is to other consoles.

 

[blastingcap]

If OP's information is correct about consolification being with us for the next several years, then I think it's up to higher-res monitors, multi-monitor, 3D, people who insist on 60fps, etc. to drive gaming GPU demand. My lowly 6850 is still very viable (30+ fps) at 1080p, even for Crysis and BF3 at reasonably high settings. On one hand that sucks for obvious reasons (c'mon, we all like eye candy right?)... but it's cool in the sense that we wouldn't have to upgrade as often if we stick to basic resolutions.

 

[Aeiou]

Well just think, when things come out in mid 2013, assuming no delays (a man can dream right?) it'll be having tech in the range of a 6670.

a 6670 is considered pretty damn low end at this second in time, once the 28nm chips finish rolling out and the refreshes happen, it'll be even worse.

Sad thing is it'll just hold back the PC gaming progression even more, unless people suddenly stop buying consoles.

 

[blackened23]

Well just think, when things come out in mid 2013, assuming no delays (a man can dream right?) it'll be having tech in the range of a 6670.

a 6670 is considered pretty damn low end at this second in time, once the 28nm chips finish rolling out and the refreshes happen, it'll be even worse.

Sad thing is it'll just hold back the PC gaming progression even more, unless people suddenly stop buying consoles.

But the other thing to consider is how a GPU performs in a PC is not at all how it will perform in a console. A console programs directly to the hardware with considerably less API overhead which is a huge performance advantage, and many xbox 360 titles look great at 720p. Sure its not as good as PC but its PC's aren't using tech from 2004.

 

[Pandora's Box]

Apparently PS 4 will use the DirectX DX11 API.

Good thing for us if true :thumbsup:

wouldnt surprise me at all. Considering AMD's track record with OpenGL

 

[taltamir]

But the other thing to consider is how a GPU performs in a PC is not at all how it will perform in a console. A console programs directly to the hardware with considerably less API overhead which is a huge performance advantage, and many xbox 360 titles look great at 720p. Sure its not as good as PC but its PC's aren't using tech from 2004.

To clarify here. You CAN do it in the PC it is just that in a console it is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED. Making console development an expensive and long processor.
A PC game is much easier and cheaper to develop since you do not have to use such optimization to wring out every last ounce of performance. That being said, supposedly the next generation of unreal engine will be bare metal for nvidia and AMD PC GPUs.

I will dispute your "looks great" argument though.

 

[ElFenix]

so, basically, it's thought that neither ps4 nor xbox3 will be significantly more powerful than wii2

 

[Genx87]

Not surprising. Sony and MS lost a sack load selling at a loss while Nintendo used old tech and made a profit on each Wii sold from day one. Just look at the history of console sales. The most graphically powerful system hasn't sold the most units in over 20 years since the SNES. N64 most powerful, PS 1 sold the most. Original Xbox most powerful but PS2 sold the most. PS3 most powerful, Wii sold the most.

They could have went with a really low end GPU and CPU and the PS3 still would had struggled to make money. Sony doubled down on Blu-Ray. They used the PS3 as a driver in Blu-Ray adoption. The price of the players was insane at the time.

 

[Soccerman06]

So did you guys overlook the date of the article?

 

[taltamir]

They could have went with a really low end GPU and CPU and the PS3 still would had struggled to make money. Sony doubled down on Blu-Ray. They used the PS3 as a driver in Blu-Ray adoption. The price of the players was insane at the time.

That is a good point.
Sony lost money on the PS3 due to blue ray not due to the cell. The cell was costly for a CPU, but it accounted for very little of the cost of the PS3.
And sony won the high def wars and the only reason they did was the PS3 shens.

Xbox 360 on the other hand was made as cheaply as possible, released documentations show where engineers pointed out to management that "saving" cents here and there via cost cutting will cost them more later. For example they "saved" 50 cents by not putting a pad on the CDROM, so that if the console is moved at all the CD crashes into the laser and destroys the CD and possible damages the laser. Likewise they warned about the lack of sufficient cooling, and all other issues that eventually cropped up.

Every single one of the issues that xbox 360 had was internally predicted by their engineers before it went live, and every single time the management decided to "save money" by overruling the engineers with entirely predictable results to anyone who isn't an idiot.

The xbox360 always sold at a profit, MS gaming department lost millions due to how many they had to replace under warranty.

 

[blastingcap]

So did you guys overlook the date of the article?

Haha ok so you got me.

But there's a grain of truth to it anyway, if earlier rumors are true that it will have a ~6770 level of performance.

 

[RussianSensation]

Both are false.
Both were released with horribly weak CPUs compared to PCs, outdated GPUs (at a time where a massive GPU improvement occured with the DX10 parts), and ridiculously little ram.

This part is not true at all. I remember exactly as I followed it very closely.

Xbox 360 had specialized eDRAM that allowed a more efficient use of AA with a smaller performance hit. The GPU was somewhere between R520 and R600 derivative since it had unified shaders. Sure it was gimped due to lower memory bandwidth but its theoretical preformance was very good. I would say easily on par with X1800XT/X1950Pro at the time. When Xbox 360 launched, this type of GPU power was top of the line for AMD's GPUs, actually ahead by half a generation.

PS3 came 1 year later and wasn't as impressive. The GPU in the PS3 was pretty much a derivative of the GeForce Go 7950GTX with half of the memory bandwidth. Alternatively, that would be like a 7950GT with half of the memory bandwidth of the desktop part. At the time, the only faster NV GPU generation on the desktop was GeForce 8800 series that launched 2 days after the PS3. Sure you could say 7950GT was outdated by then but it was impossible to include GeForce 8 in PS3, especially since 8800GTX cost $599 by itself, with the 8800GTS 640 model going for $449. That's not even considering how much power GeForce 8 used. Therefore, the GPU in PS3 was the fastest possible NV GPU at the time given the form factor (top-of-the-line mobile NV part).

Specs wise, the GPU in PS3 was the previous generation upper-high-end desktop part (i.e. equivalent of GTX570 today or GTX6970 with half their memory bandwidth).

By holiday 2013, if PS4 and Xbox Durango were to use "equivalent" power GPUs, then the Durango would use at least some HD8000 style GPU, while PS4 would have the previous generation high-end NV equivalent (So ~ GTX670Ti level of performance with half the memory bandwidth of the desktop version).

Obviously, we are not going to see anything like that this round.

This doesn't bode well for PC gaming unless developers decouple game development and start building games from the ground-up to take advantage of PC's hardware. If we thought the last 5 years of console ports were stagnating PC gaming, then this 8th generation of consoles is about to give us a whole new meaning of stagnation.

 

[Aikouka]

But the other thing to consider is how a GPU performs in a PC is not at all how it will perform in a console. A console programs directly to the hardware with considerably less API overhead which is a huge performance advantage, and many xbox 360 titles look great at 720p. Sure its not as good as PC but its PC's aren't using tech from 2004.

That's how things are right now, but if an API is leveraged... how will it work? Will they allow the developer to ignore the API if desired and work directly on hardware or require all developers to use the API (like on Windows). One nice thing about being DirectX capable is that it paves the way for being XNA capable, which means the XBLA-only games (such as Bastion) will now be capable of being run on the next Sony console.

3D sets, which ideally need 120 frame per second inputs

That doesn't make sense to me. 3D over HDMI is limited to 60Hz at 720p and 24Hz at 1080p.