Microsoft Xbox 720 could have an Eight-core CPU, according to new leaks.
This latest rumour is via BD, who posts regularly on TGFC, which is a Chinese forum. What’s special about him? Well, he is an ex-Ubisoft employee, and claims to know all information about the Xbox 720, including the RAM, OS, and plenty of other stuff.
0°
10°
10°
0°
Ad 
10°
It is also said that Microsoft will be using Windows 8 kernel for the system, which is pretty straightforward, as they have been pushing it a lot. He said it will have 8 GB memory and a 640GB hard drive.
If theses are accurate it should be a beast, but I still think these will be toned down. I can't see 8 GB of ram, maybe 4 and a 640 GB hard drive seems like a random number picked out of the sky
Anyway, if this is true, I think we will see some really impressive games for it. Can't wait to see what 343 industry will do with this. Halo 4 already looked awesome for a game that runs on a 7 years old system.
But remember that they will be placing orders for millions of drives, they could order any wacky size they wanted to.
Generally speaking, hard drive prices tend to be lower for more common makes/sizes - cheaper to pick from the lot of what's already made en masse rather than requesting special orders.
And we know console makers will be looking to control mfg. costs.
what do you think the console will cost ??!!
We can't really say. None of those spec are off the shelf or detailed enough to give a specific price.
However, performance wise it should be on par with most mid-high to high end gaming laptops which are on par with mid to mid-high PCs.
So it's a jump, but not the leap from sd to hd. Most improvements will come from ai, effects, lighting, hd textures, scale, environment, improved resolution and fps, and scope. Not game changing graphics, but all things that will make games significantly more enjoyable.
Watch Dogs, Star Wars 1313, and all the games you've seen running beautifully on PC will now be on consoles, still not as beautiful, but incredibly difficult to see the difference with the naked eye.
Like those rumors from months ago:
XBOX infinity = XBOX 8
Sounds Beastly powerful, can't believe people were talking about incremental upgrades, this thing (IF true) is a big leap compared to X360, can't wait!
Not to mention the huge amount of heat 8gb of ram will create.
I know consoles are getting closer to being computers but the fact is they still aren't! They are currently media hubs.
i mean according to
http://www.emedialive.com/A...
a blueray disk is about $3 for 1 but of course larger quantities are cheaper
according to a random google search
http://www.dhgate.com/micro...
a sd card is about $5 for 32gb. Now again larger quantities would mean better prices and even Nintendo uses them for the DS. I know it feels like a step back to cartridge but transfer speeds would be awesome and no more scratches (dvds scratch, bluerays are much better i know) and i doubt MS will pay for blueray
I'm betting blu-ray. No way would they stick to DVDs! Maybe they'll go with a proprietary blu-ray based drive like Wii U but I'm betting they'll just use a standard one to be able to play blu-ray movies, like the PS3. Though, that means Sony will be getting a couple cents per Xbox since they co-own the blu-ray patent.
Edit: I don't know why consoles don't go with cartridges anymore, even though SD card sizes have caught up. I think when you buy discs in bulk it's still a heckuva lot cheaper than cards. The DS still uses cards because they use a lot less power and there's very short loading times.
Check the specs, the only thing that's remotely advance would be the CPU, but it could easily be an 8 core FX processor (solid CPU's, but very common), and used in most AMD based gaming PC's.
The 8GB of RAM will likely be 2GB GPU, and 6GB system RAM, but even if it is 8GB system/multipurpose RAM that's generally the bare minimal gaming PC's have today (16GB being the standard).
The 8800M series GPU's are nothing, but a republishing of the 7800M series, that consumes less power, but has boost clock which lets the GUP reach higher clock speeds, as long as it's within heat parameters.
All this is great, but it's not running games at 1080p @ 60fps. THe benefit it has is being in a console and being tweaked to specifically playing games, which could help it outperform your a duplicate Laptop / PC, but not blow it out the water.
As far as the CPU goes I am leaning towards Power7+ CPU for Xbox 3.
Well here is how I see Xbox 3/PS4 hardware so far.
8 core Power7+ with 32 threads
AMD 8870M(992 Gigaflops) + Another GPU. I am thinking AMD 8850 (2990 Gigaflops)
Roughly equal to about 3982 Gigaflops
PS4
AMD Kaveri x2(920 Gigaflopsx2 = 1840 Gigaflops) with 8 cores roughly 16 threads
AMD 7970M or other unknown GPU
Roughly equal to about 3940 Gigaflops
I know if you watch rumors like I do. That 1840 number should catch your eye for PS4 spec.
x86 vs. RISC at its best. Honestly if what I have listed is coming it certainly explains why there was an article claiming Xbox 3 would be twice as powerful. Wrongful claim if indeed true specs.
They have xbox live on windows 8 anyway.
But I have no problem moving to linux. PC gamers are not adopting win8 fast. Actually noone is since it's selling slower than vista. And vista sucks.
Seems Blizzard is porting to linux also..
One thing is for sure xbox 720 UI will be tiled based and will be advertised to be used with kinect.
That just sounds like a MS thing to do.
Slower than Vista? Erm, I don't think so. I do agree that PC gamers aren't adopting 8, but to claim that it's slower than windows Vista, is ridiculous.
http://www.nbcnews.com/tech...
Comparing a console OS to a PC OS doesn't really translate well when it comes to performance. At most you can look at Win8 and see what they might go for with design and usability.
For MS it makes sense to do this, as it is a way for them to push Windows 8 onto the consumer. It people see benefit in PC/Xbox cross-compatibility, they are more likely to pick up Windows 8. On the other hand, they'll be moving on to Windows 9 a year or two after the Xbox is released, and depending on what kind of wacky scheme they come up with to make it "better" than the last, it may render Win8 irrelevant.
I personally can see some benefit to Win8 in the system when it comes to integration with smart-glass, and would make the UI pretty usable and easy to navigate.
Just because something is not selling well off the mark dose not mean it is a flop. (Look at the PS3 sales for example).
As for the Next xbox these specs seem impressive but I really don't expect them to be as high as they are. I see 2GB of ram not 8.
I do see the next xbox having more ties in with Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 though as this will complete the MS eco system to take on Apple and Google.
Look forward to seeing what MS and Sony give us at E3. I think Next gen is going to be even bigger for the games industry as Sony Ninteno and Microsoft will all be gong for the same markets.
Buying it outright for $500 will result in a slight loss but paying $150 and a monthly repayment of $20 over a 2 year period will result in a profit for Microsoft in the long run because the consumer ends up paying $630.
So AMD probably can provide Microsoft with a well developed architecture of the 8800 to use in the Xbox 720 if they really needed it.
For fast switching between tasks (or background tasks) such as fast switching to a browser, chatting with your friends on skype, picture in picture and so on you need gobbles of RAM so this could be true.
For reference, Wii U has 2GB which half is for the OS alone.
DDR3 RAM is general use and as such is manufactured to be cheap and get cheaper until the next iteration replaces it (DDR4).
Video cards, gaming consoles, and servers use RAM that is more tailored to their tasks (GDDR4,5,6, XDR and DDR3 with ECC -- respectively) that also has VERY low latencies and errors and VERY high speeds. These things mean that this type of RAM isn't going to be cheap as it is MUCH more expensive to manufacture.
To put this in perspective 8GB of DDR3 is worth about the same (money-wise) as 2GB of GDDR5. If RAM was as cheap as you think, we'd have video cards with 16GB of RAM for graphics, but this just isn't the case.
DDR3 with ECC is actually slower RAM than the regular counterpart due to the error correction it has to do.
A PC uses two types of memory, system and video. No reason why you can't have a similar system with a cache in between.
You didn't read carefully did you. I mentioned ECC RAM in the case of Servers. Servers need the error correction. Also you do not have a complete grasp on computer architecture to understand that DDR3 with ECC can actually outperform Non-ECC when total performance is taken into account. Servers are working with much larger datasets than the average computer and if the processor is constantly having to re-poll data from memory because of errors and then subsequently the RAM would have to re-poll from either the hard drive cache or processor cache for corrections, you can see how things build up. With ECC RAM you are heading off the bottleneck, but this is only the case in systems where large amounts of time-sensitive datasets are being moved through the system, aka servers.
"A PC uses two types of memory, system and video. No reason why you can't have a similar system with a cache in between."
All caches exist to reduce bottlenecks (at least in the eyes of the user). The downside is depending on how big or small the cache is you can actually create a worse bottleneck. Also caches are VERY expensive to manufacture; this is the primary reason for the large price difference between processors with say 2MB of cache vs 6MB of cache.
Also RAM doesn't have a cache. The processor's cache (graphics or central) serves as the padding between the processor and the memory. RAM has traditionally, believe it or not, been the cache for the hard drive. However, there still was latency issues between RAM and hard drive so hard drives now have built in caches to help reduce latencies between HDD and RAM (and subsequently the processor) further.
It is hard to draw it out for you but any computer system follows this:
CPU <-> CPU Cache <-> Memory <-> HDD Cache <-> HDD
Graphics Cards are the same, just without the HDD:
GPU <-> GPU Cache <-> Graphics Memory (Depending on the system the GPU or Graphics memory will have a connection to the system bus, usually through the system's north bridge, to move data in and out of system RAM)
In most PCs' case everything fans off the northbridge, which is connected to the CPU and acts as a traffic cop directing data between the CPU, GPU, RAM, and out onto the system bus or to the Southbridge toward the HDD. Gaming consoles such as the PS3 and XBOX 360 do not have northbridges and southbridges per se as tasks that these two chips would have done are absorbed into the custom made CPUs and chipsets that these gaming consoles use -- the basic concept is the same though controllers are in different locations than normally with PCs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
The only thing you need to keep in mind and the picture I always try to paint for people is that personal computers are general use machines that need their hardware to be flexible -- flexible meaning more mass produced cheaper, less efficient components. Gaming consoles are high speed streaming systems that are highly focused on primarily one thing -- games; so their architectures are designed to suit the data they process. In effect with this in mind, PCs are HORRIBLY inefficient systems while gaming consoles are far more efficient systems as less resources are going to waste every processor cycle in a gaming console vs a PC.
Also gaming consoles utilize faster more efficient components such as XDR RAM and GDDR5 and 6 graphics memory to aid in this efficiency over general computers. The downside being that to have the faster more efficient RAM you must sacrifice capacity to maintain the same price being spent on the component. Also if the data is being streamed through the system than 16GB is pointless if at any given time only 2GB is really ever needed. Find me a 16GB graphics card under $500 and well talk about the possibility of consoles having more than 8GB of memory in the near future.
First of all, I appreciate that when you believe somebody doesn't understand things well you try to help out instead of bashing them. In my case, I'm a programmer and a trained computer engineer with a degree so I know this very well.
"Also you do not have a complete grasp on computer architecture to understand that DDR3 with ECC can actually outperform Non-ECC when total performance is taken into account."
"Servers are working with much larger datasets than the average computer and if the processor is constantly having to re-poll data from memory because of errors and then subsequently the RAM would have to re-poll from either the hard drive cache or processor cache for corrections, you can see how things build up."
The processor almost always has to fetch data from memory (RAM) because it's internal memory is very very very small. General RAM do not know if it has an error so it doesn't poll from hard drive again.
That is why it is called ECC aka error correcting code. It is an algorithm that is run to ensure correctness to a certain degree.
"All caches exist to reduce bottlenecks (at least in the eyes of the user). The downside is depending on how big or small the cache is you can actually create a worse bottleneck."
You can negatively affect performance with cache if you have constantly have cache misses. That is however up to the programmer to ensure the low amount of cache miss and is relatively independent of the hardware.
In almost all cases do cache improve performance.
"Also caches are VERY expensive to manufacture; this is the primary reason for the large price difference between processors with say 2MB of cache vs 6MB of cache."
It is not the *only* reason, among them yield/die size and mark up.
"Also RAM doesn't have a cache."
A cache is anywhere you put a faster copy of something in front of a storage. CPU registry has (L1-Lx i.e CPU) cache that is again a cache for RAM that is again a cache for hard drive and so on. You can always insert another link.
Keep in mind that consoles are often times a highly specialized design that doesn't always follow PC architecture. A good example of this is the PS3, it has most of the same components, but how to use them is vastly different.
"flexible meaning more mass produced cheaper, less efficient components. Gaming consoles are high speed streaming systems that are highly focused on primarily one thing -- games; so their architectures are designed to suit the data they process."
Yup, although consoles are now evolving to the point of being more generalized and sort of replacing PCs.
"Find me a 16GB graphics card under $500 and well talk about the possibility of consoles having more than 8GB of memory in the near future."
If you look at the PS3, it uses 256 MB general purpose RAM i.e. system RAM, while the GPU has it's own 256 MB dedicated high bandwidth low latency RAM. No reason why next generation console can't have 8GB of general system memory with a connected bus to graphics memory. Still far faster than fetching the data from hard drive or optical disc.
You might not get 4GBs of graphics RAM, but the delay is now a factor of 100-1000 times less due to this caching.
I'm not a hardware engineer, but schemes like that aren't exactly unknown....
Nothing has changed.
Your going to be playing HALO,FORZA,FABLE,GEARS all over again with the 720p.
But this time in superhd.
699 us dollars?
specs are unrealistic... Microsoft wouldn't release an 8 core when they can get passed with a 4 core cpu. GPU wise I can see that happening. ram wise its plausible.
I agree. If the PS4 is a bit less powerful than the next Xbox, I can't see how that would hurt Sony in any way. It saves Sony money, it saves us consumers money, and they'll still get all the multiplats. Just like the 360 this generation, it was weaker than the PS3 but that didn't actually matter for anything other than fanboy bragging rights.
@YoungPlex. MSFT dropped the price of the 360 as conservitive as possible and basically milked the price, just for that very reason. I've been saying this for months.
MSFT tested the waters with their subsidized payment plan. I have a feeling they don't like the cost of new generations too often and are trying to future proof as much as possible. The leaked docs claim more of a PC-ish direction with Hardware/upgrading/multi sku
Wouldn't be surprised if this thing scales in the same ballpark as OPPO blu-ray players.
However, my laptop plays some games like L4D2 @ 1080P full details and rarely drops below 60FPS. On my desktop i don't think it ever does with the same desktop card. So while it's obvious the desktop equivalent card is better than the mobile card, mobile card's are still decent.
I think they should add an SSD to the consoles though even if it's only 64GB as it would make a large difference to load times in games, it does for sure on PC.
Looking for HITS little man?
This rumor is fake ;)
Ah! thought not ;)
However calling a rumor false would indicate that you have some kind of proof that indicates the rumor is inevitably false without question.
it's always the same thing, nothing new. I never played Conker on the N64 but it looks really funny, if they made games like that it would make me want to get away from my gaming rig.. but as consoles stand there are barely any games that make me want to go from my PC to a console. it's just not as fun for me.
I have no idea. They want a pc? or a Steambox? I really dont want a PC OS on my console either. I want it for gaming.
1) 8GB of RAM
2) 8 Core CPU
I think we can fairly safely assume those two tid bits are reality.
The GPU seems to be all over the place and seems to change with each leaked rumor so I am guessing that element was possibly late in the game for finalization.
I think the thing I am most curious about is what do they do to the controller if anything? Will it have some small touch pad window on it? Is it untouched and just the same controller as one rumor suggested? I am guessing they will make some minor change to make consumers have to buy new controllers but I suppose you never know.
Edit: Point taken by @mrbojingles I think this 8GB of RAM while constantly coming up has also been constantly discussed as what is in dev kits. typically dev kits have twice the RAM as the console so this makes me think 4GB is more realistic.
Let's say Kinect 2.0 uses 1GB RAM or 4GB.
That leaves us with 3GB, then lets say 512MB is used for OS multitasking features, that leaves us with 2.5GB, then split it 1.25GB going to system mem, 1.25GB for video memory.
I can see a huge 500GB HD though if they are trying to make this the end all be all entertainment console.
People will be storing all their movies and music on it as well and I'm guessing there will be ways to then listen to your stored music wirelessely on a different device in a different part of the room.
if we observe the specs closely there are lots of eights.
(1) Eight-core CPU; (2) HD 8800 series GPU; (3) Windows 8; and (4) 8 GB memory.
8 is the same as the infinity symbol, but in an upright position.
conicidence? perhaps, but it would be a clever marketing gimmik to play with the number 8 and the infinity symbol
There...I just made MS's Marketing slogan for the next box. Who do I tell my address to for my check? :)
In the end it shouldn't cost an arm or a leg honestly.
It doesn't look bad, not at all actually. But it does have a little lip on the top side, that's obviously meant to look very similar to the original Xbox360s.
That concept art must've been created way back when, cause Xboxes don't have that kind of HHD anymore, and obviously won't in the New Xbox either.
If they gave xbl away without extra cost for 2 years it would pretty much negate the free model Sony and nintendo uses. Once you game for 2 yrs in one place the turnover rate is very small considering all the friends apps and achievements you have racked up. $30 to $60 a yr will seem like nothing. And they could always integrate the PSN model. Imagine if after you have signed up losing a library of games that you have collected for 2yrs.
The surface rt is impressive and the surface pro is insanely powerful so much that it is more like an ultrabook than a tablet.
I think 8gb of ram is on the high side of possibilities but definitely not out of the question. Especially when you consider how much stuff the nextbox is going to run. And they know they need a power horse to utilize kinect the the way they want. All the devs have said they needed more processing power to really use it. 640 hdd sounds right if they are calculating usage and trying to save as much money as possible. I know even with all the stuff I do I find it extremely hard to fill 400gb of data and that would be with everything. Now they have the cloud servers it sounds about right.
The picture looks ridiculous. It is a step backwards. Notice how it looks very similar to a launch 360.
Off topic.
I hate tablets, I really do. They are very convenient and all, but it is hard to pick something from a collapsible menu, to copy/paste. Wonder how much longer it will take for me to put my fist through it.
Hahahahahahhahhhahahahahahha
No
it will either be included or not (as the OS), and it won't change the price of the New Xbox.
I want to see better AI, effects, and advanced new innovative gameplay to go with nicer eye candy, and art direction needs to be a major factor too...
If it's a manufacturer which isn't MS, Sony of Nintendo then I would have to see the software lineup before deciding on the purchase.