Existing hardware in next gen consoles.

To make development costs cheaper wouldn't it be best to use outdated hardware for next gen consoles but more powerfull than current gen. For example if the PS4 had a nvdia geforce 8800 as the main GpU, quad core proccesor, 4gb ram. Surely this would make it cheaper for consumers, cheaper for developers to make games, cheaper for the generall public. They would still be more powerfull than current gen systems but not as powerfull as gaming PC's. I think the main problem is they have been trying to keep up with PC technology which is far too expensive and continues to evolve. As long as they are more powerfull than current gen systems and can run Crysis on High?, not sure whether my specifications would enable Crysis on Ultra high, it would be interesting if someone could answer that?-nvdia geforce 8800 as the main GpU, quad core proccesor, 4gb ram ultra high Crysis with that?. Personally i would love to just have a more powerfull Console than a PS3, even if it is outdated compared to Pc's, and would prefer it over a network based console, which is almost a certain considering that's what their doing with PSP Go. Hope they don't do a Nintendo on us either. But seriously guys would a console more powerfull than current gen but less powerfull than PC's be a good idea?, cut costs for everybody.

No it would only have such low specifications if it was coming out this year or next year ... but its not. A quad core would almost be considered downgrading from the Cell ... Also a 7800GTX was high end when the PS3 came out and even though the PS3 had a stripped down 7800 series card it was still good. If Sony doesn't spend lots of money developing a processor they can put in a better graphics card one thats double the GTX 295 (if the console comes out in 2011-2012 this will be possible).

No it would only have such low specifications if it was coming out this year or next year ... but its not. A quad core would almost be considered downgrading from the Cell ... Also a 7800GTX was high end when the PS3 came out and even though the PS3 had a stripped down 7800 series card it was still good. If Sony doesn't spend lots of money developing a processor they can put in a better graphics card one thats double the GTX 295 (if the console comes out in 2011-2012 this will be possible).

nVidiaGaMer

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

No it would only have such low specifications if it was coming out this year or next year ... but its not. A quad core would almost be considered downgrading from the Cell ... Also a 7800GTX was high end when the PS3 came out and even though the PS3 had a stripped down 7800 series card it was still good. If Sony doesn't spend lots of money developing a processor they can put in a better graphics card one thats double the GTX 295 (if the console comes out in 2011-2012 this will be possible).

[QUOTE="Tiefster"]

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

No it would only have such low specifications if it was coming out this year or next year ... but its not. A quad core would almost be considered downgrading from the Cell ... Also a 7800GTX was high end when the PS3 came out and even though the PS3 had a stripped down 7800 series card it was still good. If Sony doesn't spend lots of money developing a processor they can put in a better graphics card one thats double the GTX 295 (if the console comes out in 2011-2012 this will be possible).

sSubZerOo

In 05' the 360 was the strongest card. Some of 06' as well, until the 1950XTX.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Tiefster"]I could've sworn we were well into the 8xxx Series by then. I remember looking at 8 Series cards and I think the 8800GT came out a few months after the PS3.

In 05' the 360 was the strongest card. Some of 06' as well, until the 1950XTX.

[QUOTE="Tiefster"]

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

No it would only have such low specifications if it was coming out this year or next year ... but its not. A quad core would almost be considered downgrading from the Cell ... Also a 7800GTX was high end when the PS3 came out and even though the PS3 had a stripped down 7800 series card it was still good. If Sony doesn't spend lots of money developing a processor they can put in a better graphics card one thats double the GTX 295 (if the console comes out in 2011-2012 this will be possible).

sSubZerOo

Hm downgrading consoles is not good. 360 has a triple core IBM cpu which in 2005 desktops only dual cores and single cores. We could even see an Octo core in the next consoles so don't be surprised.

No.. Both the 360 and PS3 were a full gen behind releasing with a 7800 series and a 1900 series.. That being said I doubt the cpu will be a quad, they are still incrediably expensive and the cheapest one is already still quite expensive.. So your gonna have to cut it down quite alot, I doubt they will have a quad.. Maybe a dual core but doubtful as well.nVidiaGaMer

Hm downgrading consoles is not good. 360 has a triple core IBM cpu which in 2005 desktops only dual cores and single cores. We could even see an Octo core in the next consoles so don't be surprised.

The triple core IBM cpu is a piece of hype it was in no way more powerful than the Core 2 duos of around that time.. Nor does the hardware on the console ever need to be more powerful than a PC to begin with.. A console never wants to have top of the line hardware it raises costs, and is unneeded.. Becuase unlike pc's its a universal system in which optemization is much easier where hardware can run far more efficent.

a Quad core with say 4MB cache would destroy the tri-core 1MB cache CPU seen inside the Xbox 360. 8 threads vs 3.

4GB of RAM is about 8x whats inside the Xbox 360 right now. just make sure its GDRR4 or 5 rather than the current GDRR3 and you will have WAAAAY more bandwidth.

all you need then is to couple it with a high end GPU and you're set to go.

a Quad core with say 4MB cache would destroy the tri-core 1MB cache CPU seen inside the Xbox 360. 8 threads vs 3.

4GB of RAM is about 8x whats inside the Xbox 360 right now. just make sure its GDRR4 or 5 rather than the current GDRR3 and you will have WAAAAY more bandwidth.

all you need then is to couple it with a high end GPU and you're set to go.

CwlHeddwyn

Each core in the 360 has 2 threads. But yeah it would.

well yeah the Xbox 360 can run 6 threads but it is limited- a more modern quad core with a large amount of cache would be better.

well yeah the Xbox 360 can run 6 threads but it is limited- a more modern quad core with a large amount of cache would be better.

CwlHeddwyn

They'll most likely have hardware similar to what is on PC 2 years before they release. I can almost guarantee we'll see symmetrical CPUs this time around.

The GPUs will definitely be more powerful than an 8800GT. We're likely to see dual or quad core GPU with at least 1600 stream processors and 2GB VRAM.

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

No.. Both the 360 and PS3 were a full gen behind releasing with a 7800 series and a 1900 series.. That being said I doubt the cpu will be a quad, they are still incrediably expensive and the cheapest one is already still quite expensive.. So your gonna have to cut it down quite alot, I doubt they will have a quad.. Maybe a dual core but doubtful as well.sSubZerOo

Hm downgrading consoles is not good. 360 has a triple core IBM cpu which in 2005 desktops only dual cores and single cores. We could even see an Octo core in the next consoles so don't be surprised.

The triple core IBM cpu is a piece of hype it was in no way more powerful than the Core 2 duos of around that time.. Nor does the hardware on the console ever need to be more powerful than a PC to begin with.. A console never wants to have top of the line hardware it raises costs, and is unneeded.. Becuase unlike pc's its a universal system in which optemization is much easier where hardware can run far more efficent.

Wrong the Core 2 Duos didn't come out till 2006 so the 360 was better then Athlons and Pentium D's when it was released. No matter what it was a cutting edge machine when it was released same thing will happen with the next gen consoles (PS4/XBOX 720).

To make development costs cheaper wouldn't it be best to use outdated hardware for next gen consoles but more powerfull than current gen. For example if the PS4 had a nvdia geforce 8800 as the main GpU, quad core proccesor, 4gb ram. Surely this would make it cheaper for consumers, cheaper for developers to make games, cheaper for the generall public. They would still be more powerfull than current gen systems but not as powerfull as gaming PC's. I think the main problem is they have been trying to keep up with PC technology which is far too expensive and continues to evolve. As long as they are more powerfull than current gen systems and can run Crysis on High?, not sure whether my specifications would enable Crysis on Ultra high, it would be interesting if someone could answer that?-nvdia geforce 8800 as the main GpU, quad core proccesor, 4gb ram ultra high Crysis with that?. Personally i would love to just have a more powerfull Console than a PS3, even if it is outdated compared to Pc's, and would prefer it over a network based console, which is almost a certain considering that's what their doing with PSP Go. Hope they don't do a Nintendo on us either. But seriously guys would a console more powerfull than current gen but less powerfull than PC's be a good idea?, cut costs for everybody.

caribo2222

i had 8800GTX with 4gb of ram and Q6600 and i ran crysis on ultra high-setting with no AA and AF it runs the game at around 17 frames on average, sometimes higher sometimes lower. it still playable but now i got 9800GTX and it runs at 19 frames on average lmao :P but still i'm happy :D oh resolution was at 1440*900 which is 720P i think :P

[QUOTE="caribo2222"]

To make development costs cheaper wouldn't it be best to use outdated hardware for next gen consoles but more powerfull than current gen. For example if the PS4 had a nvdia geforce 8800 as the main GpU, quad core proccesor, 4gb ram. Surely this would make it cheaper for consumers, cheaper for developers to make games, cheaper for the generall public. They would still be more powerfull than current gen systems but not as powerfull as gaming PC's. I think the main problem is they have been trying to keep up with PC technology which is far too expensive and continues to evolve. As long as they are more powerfull than current gen systems and can run Crysis on High?, not sure whether my specifications would enable Crysis on Ultra high, it would be interesting if someone could answer that?-nvdia geforce 8800 as the main GpU, quad core proccesor, 4gb ram ultra high Crysis with that?. Personally i would love to just have a more powerfull Console than a PS3, even if it is outdated compared to Pc's, and would prefer it over a network based console, which is almost a certain considering that's what their doing with PSP Go. Hope they don't do a Nintendo on us either. But seriously guys would a console more powerfull than current gen but less powerfull than PC's be a good idea?, cut costs for everybody.

pminooei

i had 8800GTX with 4gb of ram and Q6600 and i ran crysis on ultra high-setting with no AA and AF it runs the game at around 17 frames on average, sometimes higher sometimes lower. it still playable but now i got 9800GTX and it runs at 19 frames on average lmao :P but still i'm happy :D oh resolution was at 1440*900 which is 720P i think :P

Something is wrong there I have a Q8200 @ 3.1Ghz, 4GB RAM, and overclocked 9800GTX and it runs at around 30 fps on very high custom settings 1280x1024 and it looks even better then the regular very high settings. All I had to do was to read a few online guides and some tweaking and now its completely playable.

..that would be cheaper..but i see ALOT of people complaining about it though

[QUOTE="pminooei"]

[QUOTE="caribo2222"]

To make development costs cheaper wouldn't it be best to use outdated hardware for next gen consoles but more powerfull than current gen. For example if the PS4 had a nvdia geforce 8800 as the main GpU, quad core proccesor, 4gb ram. Surely this would make it cheaper for consumers, cheaper for developers to make games, cheaper for the generall public. They would still be more powerfull than current gen systems but not as powerfull as gaming PC's. I think the main problem is they have been trying to keep up with PC technology which is far too expensive and continues to evolve. As long as they are more powerfull than current gen systems and can run Crysis on High?, not sure whether my specifications would enable Crysis on Ultra high, it would be interesting if someone could answer that?-nvdia geforce 8800 as the main GpU, quad core proccesor, 4gb ram ultra high Crysis with that?. Personally i would love to just have a more powerfull Console than a PS3, even if it is outdated compared to Pc's, and would prefer it over a network based console, which is almost a certain considering that's what their doing with PSP Go. Hope they don't do a Nintendo on us either. But seriously guys would a console more powerfull than current gen but less powerfull than PC's be a good idea?, cut costs for everybody.

i had 8800GTX with 4gb of ram and Q6600 and i ran crysis on ultra high-setting with no AA and AF it runs the game at around 17 frames on average, sometimes higher sometimes lower. it still playable but now i got 9800GTX and it runs at 19 frames on average lmao :P but still i'm happy :D oh resolution was at 1440*900 which is 720P i think :P

Something is wrong there I have a Q8200 @ 3.1Ghz, 4GB RAM, and overclocked 9800GTX and it runs at around 30 fps on very high custom settings 1280x1024 and it looks even better then the regular very high settings. All I had to do was to read a few online guides and some tweaking and now its completely playable.

Well the next consoles will be powerful but the games don't have to be. SAGE_OF_FIRE

No point making a powerful system if it isn't being taken advantage of. Be easier to have cheaper hardware so the games are cheaper for developers to make. Most developers will be bankrupt next gen if Sony or Microsoft pursuit the same path as last time. Think how long it's taking them to make a profit,