crappy gpu in next xbox?

[pandemonium]

This is just sad since 2160p will becoming more common place in the next 3 years, no? And isn't the PS4 going to be 2160p capable?

This would be a majorly shortsighted mistake on Microsoft's part if they don't use a more capable GPU to drive that many pixels...

 

[ShintaiDK]

Oh random rumours

 

[Gordon Freemen]

A crappy GPU in an XBOX is still a better bet than a current decent low end GPU in a PC in many causes due to most devs biased towards programing for consoles first.

 

[Spjut]

This is just sad since 2160p will becoming more common place in the next 3 years, no? And isn't the PS4 going to be 2160p capable?

This would be a majorly shortsighted mistake on Microsoft's part if they don't use a more capable GPU to drive that many pixels...

They will probably be as "2160p capable" as the PS3/360 is "1080p capable" today



I'm hoping for a GPU at least around the range of the HD 7850, and with the PS4/720 releasing 2013 at the earliest, that's surely not breaking the bank.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

Consoles are a poors mans gaming platform, most of their appeal is incredibly cheap initial investment, even when selling consoles at a loss there is only so much hardware you can afford to put into one and keep the price point attractive for the average joe.

You can infer just from the business model alone that whatever hardware goes into the consoles it will be at best a mid range GPU from either the leading generation of video cards or the one before it, which at launch rumoured to be at least 2013 is going to mean probably a mid range 7xxx based GPU.

You can't get blood from a stone, good hardware costs money and while your audiences primary concern is price you'll always get mediocre hardware, you can mitigate that a little bit by selling the hardware at a loss and recouping costs through royalties but that will only get you so far.

You can bet that whatever is used at launch the best single video card for the PC will likely be at least twice as fast already and SLI/Crossfire will crank that lead up to at least 4x faster at launch.

Consoles leech off PCs by their very nature, it's the sales of video cards, CPUs and Memory year in and year out that pays for the R&D to steadily improve the hardware every year. The console platforms leech off the success once every 5-6 years and by doing so they constrain themselves to only ever be a crappier subset of whatever the PC has to offer.

At the very least it should encourage some significant improvement in game development for the PC, the stagnation of the market right now is awful.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I don't understand why people just don't get it.

TODAY
You need a 7970 or 680 equivalent card to max out console ports at 1440p with good performance. These are the same games that are developed for consoles (originally) and yet require a 7970 or 680 to max out their console ports.

Now, imagine something which is 6x as powerful as the current consoles. You will need 6 times the power of the present 7970 or 680 to have a system that will max out every console title which will exist at 1440p, probably released 3-4 years in the future.

6 times the power of 680 or 7970 is going to take 4-6 years or so and till that time PCs will struggle to play at 1440p even if it is possible to play maxed out at that rez.

It is almost guaranteed that there will be first gen console titles which won't run on a 7950 or 670 at 1440p without AA but other stuff max. Don't worry even 680 SLI owners will cry by the time the next gen consoles are released. Guaranteed.

 

[superccs]

Lol so the next consoles are going to be powered by a dual core APU that you would find in a net book? AHAAHHAHAH I can't wait to see the tards lining up outside Walmart to get their hands on one for $600 when they first come out.

 

[soccerballtux]

this is going to be the end of consoles because phone GPUs these days are already at ~xbox360 graphics capability (IMO), so if the next gen is only 2x better it's not going to take long for Cellphone GPUs to catch up.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

Lol so the next consoles are going to be powered by a dual core APU that you would find in a net book? AHAAHHAHAH I can't wait to see the tards lining up outside Walmart to get their hands on one for $600 when they first come out.

So true. Noobs with their next gen consoles.

Can't defeat the power of PC gaming

 

[Arkadrel]

Celphones use a much lower power envolope than a consol does.
For *this* reason alone, cell phones wont catch up to consols.... ever most likely.

Same as tablets/notebooks wont ever be as fast as the fastest desktops.
You cant find a tablet with a Ivy Bridge OCed to 4.9ghz and a 7970 ghz edition (@1250mhz) in it (today),
(because it defeats the purpose of the tablet = need to be mobil = needs energy effecient designs = long use time).

Also a Trinity APU that has its IGP overclocked abit, could probably do 1080p for a consol, where things are coded for hardware (its much more effecient this way, which is why such lowly tech does so good a job even today).

 

[cmdrdredd]

Either way, no way in hell those GPU's are going to be "cutting edge." If anything, they'll be at least 2 years behind the times. I'm not a huge console guy like most of you. Sure, I own a PS3, but only play a few games.

What surprises me about consoles though, is the ridiculously long transition period from one gen to the next. It's like they plan 3 years ahead with 3 year old technology (insert major WTF here).

How is that supposed to be anywhere near cutting edge when it hits the shelves? Very strange from a PC guy's perspective. Seems completely ass backwards for companies that are trying to push the technology / gaming limits. Hell, by the time the unit hits the shelves, it's already old.

They're limited from day 1.

What you don't understand is Console games do not count FPS. They don't have to run at 120FPS. Games like Uncharted look really good on their own using outdated hardware. Sure from a techincal level a PC game using tessellation and all the DX11 features can look even better but that's not the point. Consoles don't need to have a new version every year just for graphics. Consoles are never cutting edge but thanks for trying.

 

[tviceman]

This would be news. I would love a Kepler GPU in there over some anemic low-end HD6000/7000 series. I am pretty sure I read somewhere that AMD won the contract for MS's next console. I can't find it off the top of my head but definitively recall that AMD or someone announced that they secured the contract for MS's console but didnt' say what GPUs will be used.

Even recent rumours have pointed to PS4/720 sharing a GPU in the form of HD6670/7670 (rebadged 6670). I would be pleasantly surprised to find out this rumour is false but it's being repeated over and over.

Right I remember the same rumors / reports. But it would make absolutely no sense whatsoever to bundle the development kit with an Nvidia GPU, when developers are going to get an entirely different GPU architecture in the final console, which would adversely affect the work and optimization developers do on games with the kits.

 

[cmdrdredd]

This better not be true, because not rendering at 1080p full HD with at least 4x MSAA but scaling it up from 720p is stupid for a next gen console thats meant to have a lifespan of 5+ years. We would be stuck with terrible console ports for the next decade.

There's no substitute for excellence, you can have both excellent graphics and gameplay. If they are going to be slack with making weak consoles, I am going to be slack and not buy their games.

This is a very good point. 1080p is standard now. Not rendering AT 1080p is pathetic now. Some titles even run below 720p and are scaled. They look pretty decent sometimes, but you can tell the fidelity just isn't there.

 

[Schmide]

If you look at previous rumors stating there will be multiple GPUs on the system, for all we know a 6670 is the baseline for standard non gaming functionality and the possible level of this development machine.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Thing is guys, you're comparing apples to oranges. Consoles are not meant to compete with PCs for gaming purposes like you imply in your posting.

"lol console kiddies! Viva Steam" Doesn't mean a thing. For many PC gaming will never happen, they cannot understand it, keep up with it, let alone afford it sometimes.

So why harp on how weak consoles are? When has a console ever been faster than your PC? NEVER.

 

[ZRock]

This has got to be one of the most biased threads I've ever read on AAT. Even if the compnay uses the 6670, it is going to do WORLDS better than a 6670 in today's computers. Game devs won't need to worry about compatibility with differnet drivers or brands, or how a game is going to scale, but instead can focus on making the game work for THAT specific piece of hardware.

 

[RussianSensation]

They're probably hoping to throw together a pile of dung and sell it for $500 with a $100 BOM.

They'll probably spend $100 on Kinect integration (some fancy HD cameras, 1080P 60 fps movement, high quality sensor) and then cripple the console with a $50-60 GPU to save $. Knowing MS's constant push for Kinect and how well that sold, I have a bad feeling their GPU budget may be compromised. The sad part is the Xbox360 userbase loves COD and for that game HD6670 will be fast enough.

Xbox 360 top selling games:
http://www.vgchartz.com/platform/7/xbox-360/

 

[hawtdawg]

If this is true then PC gaming is going to make a huge comeback. A 6670 won't be any faster than the newest Intel integrated GPU by that point.

 

[Grooveriding]

If you look back in the thread, the guy who has this box confirmed via his Twitter it is a PowerPC CPU and an AMD GPU.

I was thinking that MS and Sony could stand to lose some ground by putting out a relatively weak system for their next consoles. Valve is all but confirmed to be putting together their ValveBox ? or SteamBox ? Something like that.

Basically the rumour is that it will be marketed and sold as a console but amount to a small form factor PC. It is expected to use a custom OS and UI that obviously will have Steam incorporated right into it. I have a lot of respect for Valve and there is no joking with the juggernaut that the Steam platform is.

The console market could look completely different once Valve launches this system and if they are successful. Opening up the entire Steam library to console gamers, along with having nearly every game available that the consoles do, and a heck of a lot more.... I think that is a big advantage. I doubt a few exclusives like Gears of War and Uncharted would be enough to hold back the tides if Valve's system takes off. They would also be in a position to use the more powerful hardware in their system as a marketing highlight and it would work on the young console crowd. Mine is better, mine is faster, mine has more games etc. etc. Also having Steam worked right into it is a bonus right off the top. It has all the features that Sony's and Xboxlive have and then some. The social features, game library, achievements etc. Steam really looks like it's been refined for just that purpose.

Valve can usually pull off some incredible things. $3 billion dollar private company with about 200 employees. They can dance to their own tune and vision without having to compromise or water anything down over the niggling of stockholders. Everything they touch turns to gold seemingly. DOTA 2 is already a huge success, Steam is a monster. They have iconic franchises and a library of nothing but hit games.. so on and so forth.

Just a thought.

 

[RussianSensation]

If AMD got the contract for the graphics chip, and Intel got the contract for the CPU, how did AMD screw that one up? They could have had an all AMD machine. That would have been great marketing.

I don't believe this rumor for a second. I am calling 100% BS.

Intel quad-core CPUs are way too expensive. Core i5 2400 is $190 USD. They aren't going to be put a dual core in the Xbox 720. So that leaves a bunch of ARM cores or some evolved PowerPC architecture.

The fact that IBM has a slide called "Project Durango-A" and the codename for the next Xbox is Durango, makes me 99% confident this is legit:

http://sodacan.net/187/will-the-next-xbox-wont-have-16-cores

3.2 ghz 4 Core 4 threads each = 16 threads PowerPC architecture CPU.

Calling BS on NV GPU as well.

 

[Red Hawk]

The problem is that it would stiil be lame by new console standards. When the last console gen came out, they used top end GPUs -- castrated to a 128 bit memory bus width, but still top end. To match that pattern the 720 would need something like a 6970. A 6670 pales in comparison.

 

[HurleyBird]

If you look back in the thread, the guy who has this box confirmed via his Twitter it is a PowerPC CPU and an AMD GPU.

No, he confirmed Intel CPU and AMD GPU.

That being said, an Intel CPU being in the dev kit strongly implies an Intel CPU in the final Xbox360, but only confirms x86.

 

[Rezist]

I think anyone dreaming of even a 7850 crazy. The entire console will likely draw <150W. I'm hoping for 7770 calibre graphics and 128bit 1gb GDDR5 Would be a huge step up from what we have now. There likely going to launch as a SOC as well.

 

[RussianSensation]

This has got to be one of the most biased threads I've ever read on AAT. Even if the compnay uses the 6670, it is going to do WORLDS better than a 6670 in today's computers. Game devs won't need to worry about compatibility with differnet drivers or brands, or how a game is going to scale, but instead can focus on making the game work for THAT specific piece of hardware.

We aren't comparing a PC with HD6670 vs. a console with HD6670. Of course a console will run games much faster since developers optimize for the console. What we are talking about is PS3/360's GPUs relative to PCs at their respective launch dates had roughly mid-range to upper-mid-range GPUs in them. I already linked in this thread that MS used a $141 R500 graphics card from NV in their $399 Xbox. The "equivalent" to that GPU would be at least an HD7850 by end of 2013. This is the main reason people are disappointed. It's a matter of perspective. HD6670 level of performance, even HD7750 level, can already be had for $50-80 today on Newegg. Based on these rumours, MS is barely spending any of their Bill of Materials budget on the GPU. If these next gen consoles will also last 7-8+ years, this will directly impact all PC gamers. The faster the GPU is in the consoles, the better it is for us not because we are "competing with consoles" but because it would allow more developers to make much better looking games because 100 million installed console user base will be able to play them.

Again, this isn't about consoles vs. PCs or being biased against consoles. It's about how such a slow GPU in consoles may negatively impact development of games overall, which in turn will affect us. Think about it, it wasn't long before PS3 and Xbox360 started to limit game engine development and adoption. It would be absurd to deny this. This is another reason why even though HD5870 was DX11 capable in Fall of 2009, it's taking almost 3 years for DX11 games with real DX11 features to come out. The few developers that have put effort into next generation graphics are those who wanted to make a name for themselves (Crytek, CD Projekt) or those with $$ trees in their office (Dice) or small passionate groups of programmers who picked up a publishing license (STALKER: COP, Metro 2033).

If next gen consoles start out of the gate with gimped graphics hardware, it will for sure affect us PC gamers negatively since developers aren't going to be likely to include as many next generation graphical killing features such as Bokeh DOF, Tessellation since they will cripple an HD6670 in a console.

We have already seen that most games are developed with the lowest common denominator - i.e., current consoles. This is why we are discussing why this may be very bad for us.

The problem is that it would stiil be lame by new console standards. When the last console gen came out, they used top end GPUs -- castrated to a 128 bit memory bus width, but still top end. To match that pattern the 720 would need something like a 6970. A 6670 pales in comparison.

I couldn't have summarized this better. I wrote a huge post and you put it down succinctly. :thumbsup:


=============

"According to developers, Microsoft has shipped versions of the new Xbox hardware, due at the end of 2013, to programmers to start coding games for the system. What they&#8217;ve apparently seen is a console with a 16-core IBM PowerPC CPU, a massive jump from the three-core CPU in the current Xbox, as well as an AMD Radeon HD 7000-series GPU. It also comes with a built-in Blu-ray player. The next version of Kinect supposedly requires 4 of those 16 CPU cores, so we know one reason why Microsoft has gone core-happy." ~ Source

 

[KompuKare]

@Grooveriding

If the rumoured ValveBox / SteamBox comes about, if it runs Linux and OpenGL, and if it does well that would possible be the biggest game changer in the last 10+ years.

I know a lot of IF's but with Microsoft skimping on the GPU for the next Xbox plus the likely reaction to Windows 8 (change for change's sake) from anyone who's not using a tablet, the next few years could potentially see Microsoft loosing a large chunk of their monopoly. Which would be no bad thing, IMO.

While Linux does have plenty of flaws, I think the real reason it is not more used in enthusiast circles has been the lack of Linux game support.