Xbox 720 is Coming. November 2013

Stevo105

ShadowHearth wrote: »

on the bright side: i got a perfect platform to demo games i want to buy. 30 min trial can be abused as ****.

Yes this is best use of it for the moment. great way to tial games without installing before you buy. I wonder what it's like with UPC 100meg?

Myrddin

JustAddWater wrote: »

And a sheeeeeeet load of RROD ... I would imagine they dont want a repeat of this and want a tried and tested video card that does what they want it to

They don't need a video card that can make your breakfast and travel faster than a concorde.... It's too much to power and would only be a repeat of 360 Launch consoles

The RROD, & PS3's YLOD, are generally caused by piss poor quality lead free solder at the factory. Sure it saves the planet, and all the logistics of shipping broken consoles around, repairing, replacing & more shipping doesn't count

Liam O

Twilightning wrote: »

It looks like the "upgrade every 2 minutes" **** consoleplayers like to use as a negative point against PC gaming is out the window with this startling revelation. I think I'll be good with my 6970 until 2020 at the rate consoles are evolving.

hardly call a new console a startling revelation, especially since we know very little about it now...

o1s1n

EnterNow wrote: »

The RROD, & PS3's YLOD, are generally caused by piss poor quality lead free solder at the factory. Sure it saves the planet, and all the logistics of shipping broken consoles around, repairing, replacing & more shipping doesn't count

Lead solder? Are you mental?!

What if a child decides to ask for a screwdriver set for Christmas so they can open up their console and eat the solder? You really have to think of these things you know. Children love to eat solder.

I also think it should come wrapped in cotton wool so they don't snag themselves on any sharp edges.

rashers10

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'd put money on games still running at 720p and 30 FPS. The trade off of performance to visuals is too great.

I'd be really disappointed with that. I really want 60fps to become standard.
Then all games can feel as smooth as CoD and Forza!

marco_polo

EnterNow wrote: »

I'd be very surprised at that. 1080p @ 60 should be the baseline of next gen hardware. I'd echo some of the above & say it won't be a direct comparison between pc & console parts. At any rate, why have it overpowered? All that'll do is generate excess heat...& the jump in visuals isn't nearly as great as we've seen with previous generational jumps.

If the specs allow it to run next gen software, at 1080p & 60fps...anything else is a waste. MS know what they're at, the PS3 was so overcomplicated, it took years for devs to get to grips. This way, the next Xbox could hit the ground running

I wonder does the more economically conservative starting point perhaps hint that MS are hedging their bets on the medium/long term future of the dedicated gaming console (ie There may not be a console generation as we know it after this one, and so are not looking beyond getting 4-5 years out of this). Certainly their expansion plans for Xbox Live to other platforms wouldn't be completely incompatible with this train of thought.

gizmo

marco_polo wrote: »

I wonder does the more economically conservative starting point perhaps hint that MS are hedging their bets on the medium/long term future of the dedicated gaming console (ie There may not be a console generation as we know it after this one, and so are not looking beyond getting 4-5 years out of this). Certainly their expansion plans for Xbox Live to other platforms wouldn't be completely incompatible with this train of thought.

Well there's still the rumour that they're going the two SKU path again but this time by developing a full blown console as well as a cheaper set top box version to consider. Who knows at this stage really.

Gunmonkey

Anyone got info on what processor the "Next Box" will use? Best i could find were unconfirmed reports from here: CVG

Reportedly codenamed 'Oban', the processor is said to be a System-on-a-Chip (SoC) - a 32nm processor that incorporates a PowerPC CPU and an ATI Southern Islands GPU - basically a modified version of the 7000 series GPUs.

Kind of makes sense as Intel have been touting these single chip CPU/GPU's for a while now and would help alleviate the airflow problem of 2 seperate chips in a small form box of a console. So if this above pieces of info are true, could potentially have a 2 GPU console (one 7000 series and one 6600 series). Also, the OP's article make mention of architecture or the setup of the mainboard or anything....nope, just its a 6600 chip. Any mention if there would be one or two or three inside the "Next Box"?? Economically it also makes sense (use 2 cheaper chips than 1 expensive one and have the inbuilt drivers divvy up the workload).

So, if a 6600 is x6 the power of a 360, what could a 6600 in SLI with a 7000 produce?



All speculation on my part though, could just be a single 6600 to aim for a cheaper price point.

Twilightning

rashers10 wrote: »

I'd be really disappointed with that. I really want 60fps to become standard.
Then all games can feel as smooth as CoD and Forza!

60FPS pretty much is the standard, it's just not for consoles.

Retr0gamer

hmm thinking about it 60fps might become a standard because if they are pushing 3D TVs games will have to run at a minimum of 60 FPS to be playable.

TerrorFirmer

Considering it's aiming for a late 2013 release, the GPU seems strange - it's fairly low end at the moment, let alone 18 or whatever months away. Relative to the time it came out, the 360 had a high end GPU on launch....

A bit concerned about that really.

deathrider

Honestly, I couldn't give a rat's arse about the specs on this or how well it'll look against PC specs. If it's got some good games that I'll enjoy playing, I'm in!

gizmo

Retr0gamer wrote: »

hmm thinking about it 60fps might become a standard because if they are pushing 3D TVs games will have to run at a minimum of 60 FPS to be playable.

Or they could just half the horizontal res and upscale it when doing 3D. Wouldn't be the first time. :pac:

Magill

ShadowHearth wrote: »

600$ for ati 6670.... ouch...


okay, so it will be 6 times more powerfull then xbox 360, but its still going to be laughable compared to PC standarts.

this is very rough way to compare:

this is the current GPU in new PC compared to 6670

http://www.hwcompare.com/10684/geforce-gtx-570-vs-radeon-hd-6670-oem/

not this is GPU that is in my 5+ year old machine. GPU was updated for 170eu last summer

http://www.hwcompare.com/10709/radeon-hd-6670-oem-vs-radeon-hd-6870/


now i dont want to start a PC vs console war, i just want to show a non pc crowd and people who dont know much about PC components what does it mean. they say it will be 6 times more powerful then xbox, but in reality its still very old technology.

yes, they will use the power on console more efficient, but still it wont beat current gaming gpus on pc. we are talking about almost 1.5 years untill release and there will even faster GPUs out and current ones will be even cheaper. what will happen 1-2 years in to console cycle?

i had hopes that next gen consoles will bring it more to PC level of performance so the gap would be smaller, unfortunately they are doing same thing they did with xbox 360. . it will mean that i will be sticking with my good old pc gaming for way longer then expected.

now please dont understand it as some attack VS consoles! i am not making fanboism war! just trying to show bigger picture! and yes, PCs have their own dissatvantages too bla bla bla!

6 times what a xbox360 can do is pretty impressive for a console tbh... they're only just maxing the damn thing out now fs ! Just look at some of the games available for the 360 and say that they aren't impressive looking games (Gears of war / Red Dead or even sonys UC3) consoles up to now haven't had to support resource heavy OS's and other background applications so they've always been able to push out much more performance out of their components than a PC.

Yeah, i wouldn't be expecting real time rendering or anything but its more than enough for the next generation of games.

Most interesting thing for me in that description is the multiple outputs... wonder if thats for MP games ? Would be awesome being able to play a shooter/racer/co-op game with a mate on 2 tv's with one xbox.

Icyseanfitz

6 times the power of 6 year old hardware :eek: simply Amazing.... the 360 will be like 8 years old by November 2013 ffs, how is 6 times the power of the 360 anyway powerful, im really hoping this is bs as i want pc gaming to make a bigger graphical jump (which will only happen when the consoles do unfortunately)

ShadowHearth

Magill wrote: »

6 times what a xbox360 can do is pretty impressive for a console tbh... they're only just maxing the damn thing out now fs ! Just look at some of the games available for the 360 and say that they aren't impressive looking games (Gears of war / Red Dead or even sonys UC3) consoles up to now haven't had to support resource heavy OS's and other background applications so they've always been able to push out much more performance out of their components than a PC.

Yeah, i wouldn't be expecting real time rendering or anything but its more than enough for the next generation of games.

Most interesting thing for me in that description is the multiple outputs... wonder if thats for MP games ? Would be awesome being able to play a shooter/racer/co-op game with a mate on 2 tv's with one xbox.

sorry m8, but even latest games that came out now multiplatform look like **** on consoles compared to PC. Its not that i want to bite in to consoles gamers ( i can bet someone will run in here and accuse me of it), its just true.

i have bough several games on both platforms: PC and Xbox. crysis 2, mw3, BF3, dead space 1, bioshock etc. pc wins on visuals hands down and xbox cant even come near it ( i said visuals, i dont compare gameplay or games, again, not a strike at console gamers )

its limitation of hardware, no mater how you look at it. that gpu is really bad. they used high end gpu when xbox 360 launched and look at it now. in this new xbox they will use a gpu below mid range by todays standart. something is not right.

in the end of the day as mentioned above: if it will have good games, then hardware wont matter much.

Kinski

Cue a slew of rumours that the PS4 will be roughly 8,000,000x more powerful than the Xbox 720.

Though if this really will only be 20% more powerful than the Wii U, and if Sony really are still looking at a 10ry lifespan for the PS3, then Nintendo's decision not to go all out with super-powered hardware will start looking a lot less short-sighted than I first thought.

Anyway, when has the most powerful console ever been the most successful one?

amacachi

Kinski wrote: »

Though if this really will only be 20% more powerful than the Wii U, and if Sony really are still looking at a 10ry lifespan for the PS3, then Nintendo's decision not to go all out with super-powered hardware will start looking a lot less short-sighted than I first thought.

The whole 10 year lifespan thing is such a red herring because it will include overlap with the PS4. It's out 6 years, if it was announced for the end of next year there's only a 2 year overlap.

Magill

ShadowHearth wrote: »

sorry m8, but even latest games that came out now multiplatform look like **** on consoles compared to PC. Its not that i want to bite in to consoles gamers ( i can bet someone will run in here and accuse me of it), its just true.

i have bough several games on both platforms: PC and Xbox. crysis 2, mw3, BF3, dead space 1, bioshock etc. pc wins on visuals hands down and xbox cant even come near it ( i said visuals, i dont compare gameplay or games, again, not a strike at console gamers )

its limitation of hardware, no mater how you look at it. that gpu is really bad. they used high end gpu when xbox 360 launched and look at it now. in this new xbox they will use a gpu below mid range by todays standart. something is not right.

in the end of the day as mentioned above: if it will have good games, then hardware wont matter much.

Meh, I really don't think the difference is as big as people let on (I've been on a steam spending spree so i defo have games to compare). MW3 particularly looks identical (I've been switching between PC and the PS3 version, which is the weaker of the consoles with that game). BF3 looks much nicer, but certainly doesn't blow it out of the water, meh, maybe im just not that impressed with visuals anymore. I play CSS at 800x600 fs !

KillianS

According to thehiddentech it will cost the same as the Xbox 360.

chin_grin

Rumour mill is in full swing.

http://kotaku.com/5879202/sources-the-next-xbox-will-play-blu+ray-may-not-play-used-games-and-will-introduce-kinect-2

Sources: The Next Xbox Will Play Blu-Ray, May Not Play Used Games (And Will Introduce Kinect 2)
Microsoft will upgrade its disc technology for its next Xbox from DVDs to Blu-Ray discs, catching up to rival Sony, games industry sources tell Kotaku.

Sony's PlayStation 3 currently supports Blu-Ray, which can contain 25 or 50GB of data compared to DVD's 9GB.

But that disc detail could be far less impactful to the next generation of game consoles than the assertion I've heard from one reliable industry source that Microsoft intends to incorporate some sort of anti-used game system as part of their so-called Xbox 720.
It's not clear if that means that the system wouldn't play used games or how such a set-up would work. Obvious approaches—I'm theorizing here—like linking a copy of a game to a specific Xbox Live account could seemingly be foiled by used-game owners who would keep their system offline. My source wasn't sure how Microsoft intended to implement any anti-used game system in the new machine.

A push in any way by Microsoft against used games would likely be cheered from publishers sick of seeing retailers like GameStop crow about their revenues from the sale of used games. But it could potentially anger consumers who rely on buying cheaply-sold used games or even pass games to relatives or friends.

One source familiar with Microsoft's plans for the new Xbox said Microsoft plans to ship their new Xbox with a new version of its red-hot Kinect hands-free sensor system. The new Kinect would contain an on-board processor, a feature originally intended for the first Kinect. That processor would enable a new Kinect to more effectively detect users' motions.

I'm also hearing that Microsoft is interested in making a smaller controller for its new console.

And what of gaming site IGN's report that the machine could be six times more powerful than the Xbox 360? From some industry sources I'm hearing that that's the right ballpark and that Microsoft is estimating they might even get to 8x the Xbox 360. But another insider clarified that no one in the industry has development kits yet and that any talk about specs right now is still hypothetical.

Microsoft did not respond to a request for comment.

"Xbox 720" is being used as shorthand by reporters like me to refer to the next Xbox. It's not necessarily the name of the next device. Tech sites Semi Accurate and Fudzilla have reported that the first chips for 720 development kits are going into production, leading to a possible late 2013 release despite my earlier reporting which had pointed to 2014 as the year of the next Xbox and PlayStation.

Nintendo's next console, the Wii U, will go on sale later this year.

ScumLord

Shiminay wrote: »

Even now, with very old tech, the graphics on the 360 are far from bad.

You could only say that if you don't have a PC as reference, console graphics look like muck especially when you could build a more powerful PC for around that money right now. By the time that console comes out you'll be able to get an even better PC for the same money that will far outperform the next xbox.

Like you say it's not a direct comparison but either way if it's not conically out of date on release it will be within the first year or two when you compare a new xbox to a new PC.

Myrddin

I have to say, manufacturers these days really know how to incentivise hackers to exploit their systems. An anti-used game technology? Asking for trouble imo

Icyseanfitz

Magill wrote: »

Meh, I really don't think the difference is as big as people let on (I've been on a steam spending spree so i defo have games to compare). MW3 particularly looks identical (I've been switching between PC and the PS3 version, which is the weaker of the consoles with that game). BF3 looks much nicer, but certainly doesn't blow it out of the water, meh, maybe im just not that impressed with visuals anymore. I play CSS at 800x600 fs !

and what about the 64 player count on pc and the much bigger maps? graphics are not the only thing that good hardware makes possible, you can make much bigger games etc. with good hardware

ShadowHearth

Magill wrote: »

Meh, I really don't think the difference is as big as people let on (I've been on a steam spending spree so i defo have games to compare). MW3 particularly looks identical (I've been switching between PC and the PS3 version, which is the weaker of the consoles with that game). BF3 looks much nicer, but certainly doesn't blow it out of the water, meh, maybe im just not that impressed with visuals anymore. I play CSS at 800x600 fs !

mw3 looks same, because it was made for console in mind and thrown to pc users so they wouldnt bitch. its poorly coded and very low quality pc title.

if you would really want to compare it properly then go with crysis 2. i will admit, it looks really damn good for console. developers did took some time to make it look good on pc and xbox. on the other hand when dx11 and high resolution patch came out it was clear how better looking it was on pc.

anyway, if it will pull it off with that hardware and make gap between pc and console smaller, then its a good thing. i am pretty sure microsoft should stand up if they will try to pull that out of their arse though.

Icyseanfitz

EnterNow wrote: »

I have to say, manufacturers these days really know how to incentivise hackers to exploit their systems. An anti-used game technology? Asking for trouble imo

stupid really isnt it, the more a company trys to make life harder for hackers and pirates the more they will do it to said system, im amazed they havnt realized this yet :rolleyes:

Helix

aperture_nuig wrote: »

If this is true, I honestly don't see why it means Sony have to rush out the ps4? How does the purported 720 gpu compare with the PS3's current hardware?

sony have to be out within 6 months of ms. theyve got no choice, if its as delayed as the ps3 was it'll cost them big time again

Myrddin

Helix wrote: »

sony have to be out within 6 months of ms. theyve got no choice, if its as delayed as the ps3 was it'll cost them big time again

I'd be very, very surprised if MS & Sony don't know EXACTLY what each other is doing.

ShadowHearth

EnterNow wrote: »

I have to say, manufacturers these days really know how to incentivise hackers to exploit their systems. An anti-used game technology? Asking for trouble imo

they will hack it just to prove that they can.

its really bad idea. i am not a fan of used games and i will newer buy used one if its 5eu cheaper ( not taking online pass in to account ), but if it will have some sort of " hooking up to models serial number and dont work on other xbox ", then i wount even come near the fecking thing.

windows 7 is using something similar now: it will hook up to your motherboard and if you will change system or just motherboard, you got to call microsoft to change license to new pc. its free now, but i bet they will try something on console.

Myrddin

ShadowHearth wrote: »

they will hack it just to prove that they can.

Not necessarily. The really good hackers, the lads with real skill, will only bother if the system doesn't do something they think it should. They're the people to be wary of.

Nobody is saying a console should be designed around the wants & needs of a hacker, but at least don't go and give them incentive to break the security.