yeah cos as other people have said Frankie wouldn't lie about having gear for a system thats not been announced yet would he.
When Frankie says NO he usually means NO
yeah cos as other people have said Frankie wouldn't lie about having gear for a system thats not been announced yet would he.
When Frankie says NO he usually means NO
When Frankie says NO he usually means NO
Didn't he said there would be no Halo:CEA atleast some said in this thread.
I just don't think its going to be on the new Xbox and if they did have the new consoles I would expect Frankie to tip toe around the question rather than flat out answering it like he did. Though I am not Frankie so I have no idea what goes on in his head lol
Will... become?? :S
They sure failed with the Vita, then.
I would expect Frankie to tip toe around the question rather than flat out answering it like he did.
Halo 4 is going to be 360 only Frankie has even said they dont even have a new Xbox dev kit in the studio as of now.
Has anyone offically said how much ram the next xbox will have?
Frankie isn't going to reveal critical information like the existence of an Xbox 3 dev-kit. Sorry man.
there is 0% chance 343 will NOT have one of the FIRST if not the FIRST dev to have an early xbox 3 dev kit. lol
If xbox 3 is BC and there's no reason to think it won't be, then it'll run 360 games up-specced on the 720. Even if it just means tad more stable or higher res.
Wait you meant the nee xbox just upscaling games just like the 360 did for the Xbox? Of course that is going to happen.
bgassassin shot down his own argument.
8 chips of GDDR5 for 2GB GDDR5.
4 chips of DDR3 and 4 chips of GDDR5 for 4GB of DDR3, and 1 GB of GDDR5.
2 chips of DDR3 and 6 chips of GDDR5 for 2GB of DDR3, and 1.5 GB of GDDR5.
8 chips of DDR3 for 8GB of DDR3.
Did he tip-toe when lying about Halo Anniversary?
You mean 4x.
1GB = 1024MB
Wait...what?
Source: http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/Greenmemory/Products/GDDR5/GDDR5_Overview.htmlSamsung said:The Power to Harness the Most Advanced 3D Graphics
Samsung's GDDR5 is next-generation, JEDEC-standard Graphics Memory for the most advanced 3D applications Faster, Denser Memory for Demanding 3D Graphics Requirements.
Three-dimensional graphics applications require advanced memory with exceptional performance. Samsung's GDDR5 memory delivers an ultra-fast peak bandwidth of up to 28 GB/second, making it the fastest graphics memory in volume production today. Since just 16 Samsung 2 Gb GDDR5 components are needed to achieve a density of 4 GB, OEMs are able to save power, space and cost for their graphics board designs.
Samsung GDDR5 memory is ideal for a broad array of products using high-end graphics - from storage devices, digital televisions, set-top boxes and networking equipment to high-end computers, gaming systems, workstations and graphics cards.
40nm 2Gb GDDR5 Features
Features
- 46nm Process
- x32/x16 I/O
- Max 7 Gbps@1.5V VDD
- Support 1.35V VDD for low power
Benefits
- Up to 8 GB buffer size (x512 bit system case)
- Power reduction comparing 1 Gb
Application
- High Performance Graphics Card
- Next Game Console
- HPC (High Performance Computing)
Pushing the Limits
Samsung GDDR5 is a hyper-synchronous, double data rate DRAM, operating at data clock speeds up to 3.5 GHz and delivering data at speeds up to 7.0 Gb/second. These advanced GDDR5 chips are enabling leading graphics card suppliers to push the limits, providing an immersive experience for gamers and enthusiasts. As PC graphics features continue to expand rapidly - advanced graphics memory makes possible the lifelike images and speed that are helping fuel demand.
- Samsung GDDR5 is the best solution for DirectX 11, 3D gaming and HPC (High Performance Computing) thanks to the highest bandwidth and big density.
- Less system I/O's are needed to satisfy system bandwidth requirements for 3D Gaming compared to GDDR3 or DDR3. It enables users to choose high performance GDDR5 graphic cards for a reasonable price.
![]()
A 256 bit system with 4 Gbps GDDR5 can achieve the same system bandwidth of a 512 bit system with 2 Gbps GDDR3.
This advantage of decreasing system I/O can reduce power and BOM cost of Graphics cards.
Xbox 360 has 522MB of RAM, so no. I said what I meant.
It has 512MB. I don't think that 522MB is even physically possible.
You said they could just use a smaller process. It's what I was going to say before I got to that part of your post.
i think he's including the 10mb of edram.
i think he's including the 10mb of edram.
Something(s) is missing from that PR. I'm assuming at that time they went from 1Gbit to 2Gbit and on a smaller process?
Wait...what?
Personally I'll be shocked if any of the consoles have a split pool of memory. Also DDR3 is currently 4Gbit max (not including the stacked memory I've seen), so it would take 8 chips to reach 4GB and 4 chips to reach 2GB.
Those are on a separate card that plugs in, but still, we have a circuit board above with 12 GDDR5 chips sautered on it all on one side along with a GPU right next to it, which is a rather reminiscent situation of a full motherboard setup.
A lot of the bickering back and forth can be summed up easily. Some of us don't think they are going to go balls to the wall with new unproven tech just to have more... because. And other people do.
I think that Sony is going to come up short by almost 100 million units from this gen to last when competing against a toaster. I think that reality will drastically change not only Sony's console reality but MS as well. It took Microsoft years and billions to get into the comfortable position they are in now. The reality that the Wii, something likely making money the day it released could control the market for four years, vastly under-powered hardware and all had to have changed their outlook on their next generation platform. They've rebounded, but they spent billions and watched a wrist watch in comparison walk away with the market.
The console market has always been a lot different than the PC market. This has blurred in recent years, but I think the bigger point still stands. Hardware power means really little. With all three aiming for a bar higher than this gen, in many ways substantially so, does it really matter if they come up short in some ways?
I don't think so.
I assuming each those 4 GB sticks have 4 chips, each chip being 1 GB.
Am I right in assuming that the 360 had eight of these chips originally?
EDIT: The sticks might have 4 chips on either side.
They could also be stacking them: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/l...357550.pdf?arnumber=5357550&authDecision=-203
So basically, the primary argument that Microsoft won't release their next gen console by the end of this year boils down to the fact that HALO 4 comes out the same year??
[Nintex];33992678 said:Like this?
They sure failed with the Vita, then.
How on Earth is Vita not amazing for a mobile device sold for $250? Hell, even for any price, there's no mobile device that can even match it.
Microsoft have announced their biggest 2012 first-party release -- which is a 360 game. Microsoft are currently enjoying literally their best sales year ever, and the right time to launch a successor is a moderate chunk down the back side of the bellcurve, not right at the top. There are numerous 2012 titles already announced by all the biggest third-parties -- all of which are already explicitly 360/PS3 titles. There have been none of the development leak rumors that precede the reveal of every new system, and not nearly enough development resources allocated to potential next-gen development yet. The big publishers (who get told this stuff long in advance) have been consistently name-dropping 2013 as the time for a new generation to begin for years now. And so on, and so forth.
Actually, no, not really at all like that.
It's their main website as opposed to a press release.
I was mainly using it as a reference for the above picture, which is AMD's graphics card with 12 GDDR5 2 Gbit RAM chips right next to each other.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820148276
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820233081
How are they doing it here?
Well, Sony priced themselves out of the market, and have no one to blame but themselves. MS had massive hardware failures and overpriced peripherals and pay-for internet gaming. Not to mention several 1st generation "HD" games were underwhelming visually, and/or not HD at all (Halo 3, Perfect Dark, Socom). The casual observer couldn't see a clear difference. The HD display market was still growing. The GPUs of this generation were undoubtedly underpowered. The mistake was made by over-emphasizing CPU processing power; meanwhile games like SF4 are using the same AI from 1991. There wasn't any evidence to suggest that anything more than a modest increase in CPU power from the previous generation was needed.
But that GPU has a 384-bit bus to go with those twelve chips. That's fine for a card retailing at $550 which I believe has a decent markup, but not to the point where I can see it's reasonable for a console. Speaking hypothetically on a per console basis launch BOMs have Xbox 360's GDDR3 costing them roughly a little over $8 per 512Mbit chip (8 chips). If 2Gbit GDDR5 chips cost $6 per chip at launch, then that's $96 just to buy 4GB worth of GDDR5. And obviously that's before anything else is factored in.
If anything, the CPU processing power was the most underwhelming thing during this generation (esp in 360's side).
If anything, the CPU processing power was the most underwhelming thing during this generation (esp in 360's side).
I think the main difference between our viewpoints here is how much we expect the thing to cost.
I'm expect a $400 device in which they're potentially losing up to $50 with a goal of hardware profitability by the end of the following year and profitability the year they launch based on accessories/software.
If we're assuming something notably cheaper, then yes, it becomes rather more unfeasible.
Or better yet, the difference in our viewpoints is how much do we expect them to lose on a $399 console. I was also considering accessories that will be included in the box at launch. But if we are looking strictly at hardware, a $50 loss and 4GB of GDDR5 based on current densities, then there is approx. $354 (from my hypothetical $96) left to spend on everything else.
Or better yet, the difference in our viewpoints is how much do we expect them to lose on a $399 console. I was also considering accessories that will be included in the box at launch. But if we are looking strictly at hardware, a $50 loss and 4GB of GDDR5 based on current densities, then there is approx. $354 (from my hypothetical $96) left to spend on everything else.
I realize it is all speculation and conjecture at this point, but what do you guys think the chances are that the new system will be backwards compatible with 360 games? And, do you think it is possible or likely that it will support Arcade/Indie games more or less than retail discs?
That may be a strange question, but it just seems like it would probably be easier to emulate those smaller, less CPU/GPU intensive games than it would be a full-fledged AAA title. That is of course, assuming that they would have to emulate at all, which I guess would be the case if the switched CPU and/or GPU manufacturers? I don't really know. That was the problem they had with making Xbox games work on 360, right?
I realize it is all speculation and conjecture at this point, but what do you guys think the chances are that the new system will be backwards compatible with 360 games?