[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

There's alot of information out there to support the idea that MS is going for a media center first, gaming 2nd outlook.

loosingENDS

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511871

Seller of Durango devkit says Durango info is old, and is actually better than Orbis

"If only you knew" !!!!

BOOM !!!!

It doesn't say it's better than Orbis.  It says it COMPARES better to Orbis than what it is comparing to now.  I can't imagine anything too drastically different besides adjusting clock frequencies.

Completely expected as UE4 is supposed to be extremely scalable. However, UE4 not officially supporting Wii U is really not good news considering that each developer will have to manually port over the code to run on Wii U, which takes time and effort. I bet there will be many developers that will skimp on Wii U versions of UE4 games, partly due to this (and other audience related reasons, I imagine).

Like the articles and the OP says, this is from 2010, meaning things have changed. Who knows if that roadmap will hold up still or if it was a bit too ambitious at the time. However, as this thread seems to focus on the general and not the specs, I will just say I doubt the $300 pricepoint will hold true. From what it sounds, Microsoft has modified and upgraded the initial targets, so I have a hard time seeing a $300 console. The only way I could possibly see that pricepoint is if they offered a bare-bones SKU, but I think speculating over something like that is a bit too premature at the moment.

...When was this confirmed fake? If you're talking about that little blurb at the end of the docoument about the casestudy, that doesn't imply it being fake. At all. All signs seem to point to it being true, even the original documents got removed off the site.

I hope it's got 4GB of RAM. I know it's going to be a far cry from a high-end gaming rig, however one of the PS3's biggest problems this gen was a lack of RAM, and I hope Sony learns their lesson and gives it a little more than they assume it needs instead of barely enough to operate. I think devs will let out a sigh of release if they have 4GB to work with instead of just 2, especially since this gen they had to work aound a sad 256MB. Also, the processor sounds very nice.Timstuff

Well, according to the vgleaks report, they currently (at least these targets were) going with 2GB, but hoping to push for 4GB. Since these were the initial targets, and Epic has already stated trying to get Sony and Microsoft to raise their initial specs, I think 4GB could be reasonable. Of course, it all boils down to the RAM type. I would think it would be far better to go with smaller amounts of faster RAM type (GDDR5) than a larger quanity of slower (DDR3) RAM.

Right now, due to the 256MB desnity of GDDR5, you would need a whole 8 chips to get 2GB. Going 16 chips on a console to hit 4GB seems way too excessive and complex, but frankly, I don't know.

So no GPU only an APU using a similar chip to what is used in the 7970?hoosier7

Sort of. Except it won't be 7970-Tahiti. Basically, according to people with knowledge at NeoGAF (if I'm summarizing this correctly), is that these are the target specs. At the time when these specs were given, the only 7XXX chip known was Tahiti, so that was the only comparable chip to classify what was in the PS4. As you can see, though, the 7970 is 3789 GFLOPS card. This is nowhere near it. Instead, as the specifications of the SI series were released, it sounds like the chip will be more of an underclocked Pitcairn (underclocked 7850/7870).

Still a rumour. Not confirmed or even acknowledged in the vaguest sense.

Grey_Eyed_Elf

People with knowledge over at NeoGAF confirmed this is the real deal. Have they changed their initial targets, however? I don't know, but right now, this is the most accurate information we have of the specs. Regardless, though, I imagine these should be right around the final PS4's performance.

Apparently this is not fake, but OP got the specs wrong. There is no 7970. They're referring to the 1843 GFLOPS GPU in some way. So this:

AMD x86 Quad Core at 3.2 GHz ATI r10xx(3rd generation)GFLOPS at 800 MHz and 1843

killzowned24

is the APU of the console. There is no secondary 7970 GPU.

[QUOTE="Cheese-Muffins"]

[QUOTE="finalstar2007"]

I see, very interesting thanks for the information but storing pictures, music and videos isnt that the function of the external HDD each console has? sounds like RAM is actually the one responsible for the "Picture" icon or the "Video" icon, am i correct? :o

AdobeArtist

I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. From my limited knowledge in my computer architecture class, RAM stores data for the program/game from the HDD (or disk?). In a game setting, whatever you're currently accessing and using in the game must be stored in RAM to continually access it. RAM has a MUCH faster access time than a HDD. It's why it takes so long to first load up a program or something on your computer as it has to load it up from your hard drive first. However, RAM is limited and you can't just store the whole game code in RAM. Thus, you have to continually evict and replace data in your RAM from the HDD. From my understanding, this is what causes "pop-in" in games. The textures you are now just accessing have not loaded into memory yet, and thus there is a penalty/delay in loading to the RAM from the HDD/Disk, which causes the "pop-in". Therefore, more RAM is typically a good thing as you can store more data in a much faster environment. It would allow better quality assests, more things on screen, etc, like yoshi_64 said.

However, the cost-to-benefit ratio above 4GB for console makers right now makes a large amount of RAM not worth it.

I think the simpler way of explaining is that where a hard drive or media disc is stored data, the RAM is used for processing the data actively being used for the given scenario of a game. So all the character models, level maps, audio clips, animation data and such are pulled of the stored data and processed to occur on screen via the RAM. The RAM also processes all statistical data, such as physics, damage calculations based on character attributes or weapons the character is equipped with (and in RPG cases the in-game stats) to determine the outcome of player actions.

And since RAM is limited, data is continuously swapped in and out in an as-needed basis. So levels exited are purged out to make room for the next level to be rendered, and so on. So more RAM means more situational variables can be calculated to create real time actions and maintain the flow of the game.

Hah yeah, looking back at my post, that does make more sense than how I worded it!

[QUOTE="yoshi_64"][QUOTE="finalstar2007"]

How much do they have right now?

and what does RAM do in consoles? what its benefits? ......yes i dont know deal with it >_>

finalstar2007

I see, very interesting thanks for the information but storing pictures, music and videos isnt that the function of the external HDD each console has? sounds like RAM is actually the one responsible for the "Picture" icon or the "Video" icon, am i correct? :o

I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. From my limited knowledge in my computer architecture class, RAM stores data for the program/game from the HDD (or disk?). In a game setting, whatever you're currently accessing and using in the game must be stored in RAM to continually access it. RAM has a MUCH faster access time than a HDD. It's why it takes so long to first load up a program or something on your computer as it has to load it up from your hard drive first. However, RAM is limited and you can't just store the whole game code in RAM. Thus, you have to continually evict and replace data in your RAM from the HDD. From my understanding, this is what causes "pop-in" in games. The textures you are now just accessing have not loaded into memory yet, and thus there is a penalty/delay in loading to the RAM from the HDD/Disk, which causes the "pop-in". Therefore, more RAM is typically a good thing as you can store more data in a much faster environment. It would allow better quality assests, more things on screen, etc, like yoshi_64 said.

However, the cost-to-benefit ratio above 4GB for console makers right now makes a large amount of RAM not worth it.

2-4GB. From what it sounds like now, Wii U has 2GB, NextBox has 4GB, and Sony has either 2-4 (it remains to be seen if they changed their initial specs like Microsoft did to 4GB or if they will stay at 2).