Jump to content

Xbox Series X | S


djbhammer
 Share

Recommended Posts

We now have 4 of the biggest players, with 3 of them developing their own owned streaming systems, so it's not a Microsoft-specific idea. That was what I found most interesting, how we now have 2 platform holders and 2 of the biggest third-parties thinking streaming is going to play a big part in the future, enough to put their money to work on it.

 

 

I noted Phil Spencer's finishing speech where he promised to always have the best hardware to play games on, but unless they plan to go down the money losing route again, that's going to be tough to achieve if they launch at the same time as the PS5, they both use the same hardware supplier so unless they plan to change that fact or take a loss, they'll be pretty close to the PS5, which means it'll once again come down to the other factors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mushashi said:

We now have 4 of the biggest players, with 3 of them developing their own owned streaming systems, so it's not a Microsoft-specific idea. That was what I found most interesting, how we now have 2 platform holders and 2 of the biggest third-parties thinking streaming is going to play a big part in the future, enough to put their money to work on it.

 

 

I noted Phil Spencer's finishing speech where he promised to always have the best hardware to play games on, but unless they plan to go down the money losing route again, that's going to be tough to achieve if they launch at the same time as the PS5, they both use the same hardware supplier so unless they plan to change that fact or take a loss, they'll be pretty close to the PS5, which means it'll once again come down to the other factors.

 

Same CPU and GPU (or very similar) is almost a certainty.  I suspect the only differences we'l see is probs memory type/size and then how much each is willing to push the cpu/gpu. MS seem to have the better cooling solution in the X at the moment.  Also I'm intruiged by all the blurb when they launched the X around tweaking the CPU/GPU to reduce bottlenecks for gaming.  How much more oomph will that have given.  Was it mostly marketing etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mushashi said:

We now have 4 of the biggest players, with 3 of them developing their own owned streaming systems, so it's not a Microsoft-specific idea. That was what I found most interesting, how we now have 2 platform holders and 2 of the biggest third-parties thinking streaming is going to play a big part in the future, enough to put their money to work on it.

 

 

I noted Phil Spencer's finishing speech where he promised to always have the best hardware to play games on, but unless they plan to go down the money losing route again, that's going to be tough to achieve if they launch at the same time as the PS5, they both use the same hardware supplier so unless they plan to change that fact or take a loss, they'll be pretty close to the PS5, which means it'll once again come down to the other factors.

Is there some kind of clever streaming they can do beyond simply receiving player input and sending back the audiovisuals to come out of the client TV? Like capitalising on how online games work (which already rely on streaming a load of the experience anyway)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pob said:

Is there some kind of clever streaming they can do beyond simply receiving player input and sending back the audiovisuals to come out of the client TV? Like capitalising on how online games work (which already rely on streaming a load of the experience anyway)?

 

They annouced a new fast way of playing certain games coming very soon. So possible for a small box with a big cache hard drive and it starts playing the game immediately while buffering a local copy kinda thing? Not sure how the cpu bit would work tho!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose they have an advantage in that Azure is everywhere, so you'll have local ish pings. Is Gaikai/PS Now similarly distributed? And did it make the transition to generic, server-like hardware?

 

In terms of the differences in console hardware (for this last go-round?), I guess the higher tier model could have this fancy cooling again, allowing it to clock higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, fattakin said:

 

They annouced a new fast way of playing certain games coming very soon. So possible for a small box with a big cache hard drive and it starts playing the game immediately while buffering a local copy kinda thing? Not sure how the cpu bit would work tho!

 

From what I read that's just a way for the console to download the parts of the game it requires for you to start playing as soon as possible. A bit like the way PS4 downloads work except the MS version apparently uses machine learning to predict which parts are required based on previous downloads by other players, rather than requiring the developer to do some work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TehStu said:

I suppose they have an advantage in that Azure is everywhere, so you'll have local ish pings. Is Gaikai/PS Now similarly distributed? And did it make the transition to generic, server-like hardware?

 

In terms of the differences in console hardware (for this last go-round?), I guess the higher tier model could have this fancy cooling again, allowing it to clock higher.

 

I’m sure Microsoft would happily sell Sony some Azure space...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Smitty said:

It really better not have baby's first CPU in it again. And way more RAM, geez. I'm amazed at the lack of improvement in textures in games in 2018.

 

Graphics memory shouldn't really be an issue for textures with modern sparse virtual texturing.  Storage, authoring and legacy engines are the issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Pob said:

Is there some kind of clever streaming they can do beyond simply receiving player input and sending back the audiovisuals to come out of the client TV? Like capitalising on how online games work (which already rely on streaming a load of the experience anyway)?

 

You'd need to do a paradigm shift in how games are designed to fully realise the potential for game streaming instead of the current way of taking games designed for local rendering and putting them on servers. John Carmack had some ideas for it that he mentioned a few years back, but as he longer does yearly public speeches, we'll never probably find out what his ideas were to improve Cloud gaming.

 

 

19 hours ago, monkeydog said:

 

Graphics memory shouldn't really be an issue for textures with modern sparse virtual texturing.  Storage, authoring and legacy engines are the issues.

 

But most games don't seem to use that, hence the ever increasing amounts of graphics memory on high end PC graphics cards if you want to use the best possible texture quality. John Carmack's approach to the problem doesn't seem to be that widely copied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to make some silly predictions because what is the point of speculating about new machines if you cant make silly predictions?

 

-2020=Intel. That's how they are going to ensure they have the most powerful machine. Team up with Intel and get a great price on the CPU/GPU, Optane, SSD etc. Also gives instant credibility to Intels attempt to become a player in the GPU space.

 

-Games will only be available via download. 

 

-Drop the need for Xbox Live Gold in order to soften the blow of losing physical games

 

-The Scarlett VR headset is basically a cutdown version of the next HoloLens. It can track your hand and finger movements so that a greater range of games can be played without  controllers. And the headsets wireless.

 

-Scarlett includes one of Microsofts new AI chips which makes Drivatar style functionality available to all games. It can create an AI opponent version of Musashi in something like Killer Instinct by analysing how they play Streetfighter for instance.

 

-MS buy CD Projekt Red and Cyberpunk is the big launch game for Scarlett.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well 2020 is when Intel said their new high end GPU would be on the market. Plus they have been playing around with integrating CPU/GPU and HBM on a single package. 

 

Unlikely, but not impossible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's just about enough of the pieces falling into place that a story claiming Scarlett was Intel based wouldn't be instantly dismissed as fantastical nonsense, even if it is fantastical nonsense I just pulled out my arse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HoloLens could just be supported under Mixed Reality support, right? And I think the latter is entirely possible. I hope  we're not digital only, I actually want a UHD drive. Change to Intel seems possible, given how good MS are at virtualization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hololens is still an entire system, with it's own processor, gpu etc. Unless the next model is dramatically cheaper then it'd be a very expensive option to use instead of a relatively cheap VR headset. 

 

 

I think the current Mixed Reality headsets from Lenovo and friends all use tracking technology that started out in the current Hololens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mushashi said:

 

But most games don't seem to use that, hence the ever increasing amounts of graphics memory on high end PC graphics cards if you want to use the best possible texture quality. John Carmack's approach to the problem doesn't seem to be that widely copied.

 

Virtual texturing doesn't mean Rage-like unique textures everywhere.  It's about how you load textures into memory. It's pretty much just fetching the texels for the size of the object on screen, rather than having to keep the full res texture in memory.   Plenty of devs/engines are using this.  Frostbite for instance, to pick a non-Id example.  Far Cry 4 & 5 do as well.  Id tech 6 games still use virtual texturing, it's just not using an authored monolithic megatexture.

 

The virtual texture page should really only take up a few 100MB  and that's it.  Consoles do need more memory, but if it's going on loading massive textures into memory the devs wasting memory and bandwidth.  

 

There are other performance upsides too.  Blending textures is surprising expensive in 3d.  Far Cry adds procedural scattering of leaf textures at the bases of trees within the virtual texture page.  As it's 2d, it's really fast.  The pre-blended texture is whats actually goes to 3d rendering. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, monkeydog said:

 

Virtual texturing doesn't mean Rage-like unique textures everywhere.  It's about how you load textures into memory. It's pretty much just fetching the texels for the size of the object on screen, rather than having to keep the full res texture in memory.   Plenty of devs/engines are using this.  Frostbite for instance, to pick a non-Id example.  Far Cry 4 & 5 do as well.  Id tech 6 games still use virtual texturing, it's just not using an authored monolithic megatexture.

 

The virtual texture page should really only take up a few 100MB  and that's it.  Consoles do need more memory, but if it's going on loading massive textures into memory the devs wasting memory and bandwidth.  

 

There are other performance upsides too.  Blending textures is surprising expensive in 3d.  Far Cry adds procedural scattering of leaf textures at the bases of trees within the virtual texture page.  As it's 2d, it's really fast.  The pre-blended texture is whats actually goes to 3d rendering. 

 

Are there issues with such trivial things as:

- numbers of textures, streaming, throughout from the relatively slow hard drive?

 

the major difference between the consoles and PCs is that the consoles have unified memory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, footle said:

 

Are there issues with such trivial things as:

- numbers of textures, streaming, throughout from the relatively slow hard drive?

 

the major difference between the consoles and PCs is that the consoles have unified memory.

 

Any AAA game is going to have to stream textures, and everything else, anyway. Virtual texturing is the most efficient way of doing it.  Couldn't say if there are trade offs,, since I'm not a dev, but it's clearly fine for fast paced games when running from a HD.  There aren't many games faster than Doom 2016 (again, this isn't using a mega texture).  

 

The crappy HD's in PS/Xbone do up to 128MB/s .  That's quite a lot when the whole view doesn't change within a second.  You can also extend the virtual texture page to retain tiles for when the player does a 360.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, you’re not a dev. Did wonder.

 

I’ll add that graphics memory isn’t just used for texturing but for creating various buffers and render targets - working memory that are then composited into the final frame sent to screen. Hence why some effects are rendered at less than full resolution. But the memory needs do scale with resolution.

 

if there was a quick and easy win (and most of this stuff is compressed already) don’t you think it would already have been taken?!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, footle said:

Ah, you’re not a dev. Did wonder.

 

I’ll add that graphics memory isn’t just used for texturing but for creating various buffers and render targets - working memory that are then composited into the final frame sent to screen. Hence why some effects are rendered at less than full resolution. But the memory needs do scale with resolution.

 

if there was a quick and easy win (and most of this stuff is compressed already) don’t you think it would already have been taken?!

 

 

My original point was that there's no need for memory to grow for textures, not that it doesn't need to grow for the many other elements that make up the frame.  

 

Next gen will be 4k.  Pro/X games using VT for PBT will use a few hundred MB for the texture page now.*  It won't need to change next gen.  Its a win devs already have if they've take the time to implement it.

 

* Edit: to expand a little, the virtual texture page size is governed by the screen output resolution, rather than the size of textures on the HD. There are great GDC papers on this sort of stuff that can do a much better job than me talking about it. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://gamerant.com/next-xbox-features/

 

Quote

In an interview with Giant Bomb, Spencer went into detail about Microsoft‘s vision for the next Xbox. “I think framerate is an area where consoles can do more”, he said, adding that “When you look at the balance between CPU and GPU in today’s consoles they’re a little bit out of whack relative to what’s on the PC side”. It’s fair to assume from this that the next Xbox is hoping to come closer to the PC experience, which often offers 60fps at 1080p with ease.

 

Sounds like a lot of people might be doing sudden, screeching u-turns on the importance of FPS in a few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd expect games that can't quite manage 60fps this gen, say partially open worlds like Forza Horizons or Uncharted,  will hit 60fps next gen.  The hold outs will probably be proper open worlds with lots of characters and physics, GTA, Cyberpunk etc.

 

Freesync in TVs will make it all ok won't it? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/06/2018 at 21:15, Thor said:

Interesting, my gut feeling based on my own experiences of it have me cautiously hopeful the next gen will go even further with VR. High res, higher fidelity, better lighting in game, more specific tracking, and more innovative games. 

 

VR is absolutely fantastic, did you just not get on with it?

MS don't think it's worth it

 

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/20/17485852/microsoft-xbox-one-no-vr-headset-support-windows-mixed-reality-e3-2018

 

TBH, as awesome as VR is, it's a bit of a flop due to the high price of entry.  Give it ten years and it'll be back, I'm sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/06/2018 at 16:25, Smitty said:

It really better not have baby's first CPU in it again. And way more RAM, geez. I'm amazed at the lack of improvement in textures in games in 2018.

 

Well, some of the games that do pushing high resolution textures or "4K" assets as they get touted as, on XB1X and PC push the installation size to over 100 GB which is simply insane, and on XB1X that requires the further RAM resource. 

 

This isn't really the thing that needs pushed out. Better CPU resources resulting in interesting game mechanics, logic and AI as well as higher frame-rates are what's desirable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my highly technical want list for the future:

 

Lightweight VR with no screen dooring > 60fps on all non-VR stuff > more arcade games in general > HDR on E V E R Y T H I N G  >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4K

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.