I just had a quick look at the leaked specifications for the next Playstation and X-box consoles, it wasn't interesting. I that the "Amazing unveiling ceremony" tonight is going to be a bit flat.
When previous games consoles have been released we have actually seen some interesting hardware, they horrifically overspent on R&D and actually made systems that moved things forward. Now we've got a few parts from AMDs "wouldn't look out of place on a budget laptop" parts bin.
> When previous games consoles have been released we have actually seen some interesting hardware, they horrifically overspent on R&D and actually made systems that moved things forward. Now we've got a few parts from AMDs "wouldn't look out of place on a budget laptop" parts bin.
Has it not got to the point now where basically the hardware isn't far off of being beyond what the games developers can do. So whilst they could significantly move things forward. The corresponding increase in development for games would essentially make them so expensive that no one would buy them?
In reply to Frank4short:
Well some of the current PS3 games are too much for the PS3 to run properly now: Battlefield 3 runs in 720P because at 1080P it would manage about 3 frames a second. No additional cost for the developer to implement it as they did all the legwork for the PC version.
I do think we've gone well past the point where the best gaming experience is on consoles although it'll be interesting to see what the "Steambox" looks like if it ever sees the light of day.
In reply to itsThere:
If those 8 cores are all running at low clock rates and are not particularly advanced then it is definitely a budget chip. We aren't talking about something from AMDs top line or even mid range.
There are quite a lot of sites with very similar leaked specs, looks like the Xbox Whatever it is today (Durango/720/Next) will be pretty similar but with a cheaper graphics chip.
Even taking into account the performance increase you get for ditching a mainstream PC operating system it isn't looking to hot. 4GB of shared system/graphics memory is a little conservative and AMDs Jaguar isn't exactly renowned for speed. At the rate things are going the top performing smartphones will be outpacing this sort of crunching power before the PS4 gets mothballed.
In reply to mkean: Ok thats crap, however there is a shift in software to implement more cores. I would say if the games are optimized rable rable rable... eg crysis 2 was ported to pc so it ran slower than crysis 1, i think it was crysis but 1.6GHz is slow. There is now a few games that use all 8 cores. Its not all about the clock speed. More slower cores/threads is faster than one single faster cpu, but 1.6GHz. I want to try it now, just to see how well it works.