Microsoft may already be planning for the next generation Xbox 720 (or Xbox 3) gaming console based on separate news nuggets that have emerged over the last four weeks and lead us to believe that the next CPU powering the console will be ARM-based.
I think it`s funny people call it the "720" It won`t be called that.
Exactly what i think, why not Xbox 540? or Xbox 3? or X3OX like some people say.
nope it will be going against the ps4 their will be no 3 in its name they didnt name the 360 xbox 2 because then people will be saying xbox 2 or ps3 same with the next gen they will be going against the ps4 with what the xbox 3 highly unlikely
it will probably be called like x square, quad, quatro they might even drop the box part of the name as well since systems are starting to leave the box look and go for a more aesthetically pleasing shape IE:curved surfaces but it will keep the X in its name since the console its self is based off of DIRECT X for the four main points of the system music pictures videos and games all revolving around being online
I doubt MS would, the risk would be too high for a product if they made a mistake in the chip.
If they call it XBox 720, they're crazy. That's the stupidest thing ever. Furthermore, I highly doubt they'll even release a dedicated console next gen. I'd be surprised if they didn't move to cloud gaming and raise XBox Live fees to cover the expense. Pay $200 for a media center and then $15/month for gaming.
I really doubt they would do cloud gaming. The PSPGo didn't feature physical media and it's was pretty much a bust. People want physical property that they can lend, borrow and sell.
Oh, it'll be called "720" cuz the previous one was only "540".
about an unannounced iteration of a console next up, will the xbox 1080 be implanted in our heads?!!??!?! =O!!!! *makes website and writes "article"*
Wow is this what people are putting up? rumorish crap like this
It's a re-post too.
yeah, the licensing news was posted a while ago, but doesn't mean the engineers will build anything based on Arm's architecture. As long as they have IBM, and ARM to draw from they can try again to create processor circuitry in-house. I don't see it applying to a console, they'd probably be looking to make their mobile platform in-house.
MS might already be planning on their future console? No way! Seriously people do you not think that all of these companies (MS, Sony, Nintendo) started planning their next consoles as soon as they released this gen? These are huge companies and they always have development teams working on future projects years before they are announced. Hell most tech is outdated by the time you buy it anyway.
Isn't that the processor used in portable devices,netbooks and pad computers? why the heck would they do that?? unless there has been some colossal jump in ARM based tech I find that hard to believe.
Exactly what i thought, ARM processors are used for smaller devices. ...or are they?
that the graphics look best with ARM on a small 4" screen with 4x anti aliasing. unless maybe this is news about an Xbox portable it seems far fetched.
MS could be licensing ARM for any number of thing. A phone or new for example. They are making a huge assumption it is for 3rd Xbox when there more viable reasons for licensing ARM. Furthermore Mali is way behind anything the current GPU leaders are producing. Oh, and have fun with backward compatibility with PPC on ARM
With the launch of Windows Phone 7 there's a lot of talk of MS putting out a smart phone of their own. Much more likely that licensing ARM would be for that - but who knows.
Microsoft did put out their own smartphone. It was called the Kin and it failed hard. It used an NVIDIA Tegra SoC which is based on ARM11.
The fact that Microsoft licensed the ARM architeture could be a new Zune Phone or something like that.
only thing we can fairly know for sure is the next xbox will be out before the next PS3. 360 will be running out of steam before the PS3 will... its already evident and its NOT a bash by no means I am so much looking forward to Reach, but beyond that I dunno. Only bought 3 360 games this entire year and couldnt get past May of this year without buying 2x that for the PS3.. heck we bought the same amount of games for our Wii this year as our 360..really says something
It is TOO early 4 next gen,becouse even on pc i dont see any graphics that are far better than on consoles,do u remember the difference of the games on ps2 and pc like splinter cell double agent,or fear vs killzone 1,the difference was huge like different games and it was clear next gen vs old gen.THAT is THE time to move to next gen.now consoles graphics are not last gen at all,multiplat games does not have huge graphical difference like i mentioned.so if its early,maybe in 3 4 years when we see a really next gen graphs on pc then we'll see x3ox and ps4
crysis is next gen
I would agree with you sanshatak, but graphics are plateauing across the board, so we will never see the massive differences we saw in previous gens. PC can still push higher res and textures etc, and although I agree there's not a huge amount of difference between consoles / PC games at the moment, there are problems down the road in other areas. For example if Sony really start pushing 3D gaming in their AAA titles - the fact is that the PS3 can not handle 120FPS gaming without severely cutting the resolution or the in-game detail. I doubt we'll see a 3D patch for Uncharted 2 for instance. MS are in the same (probably worse) situation when it comes to 3D so may need to launch earlier
The reason you don't see a massive difference is because developers reuse the same assets in the console versions in the PC version.
@Bob I agree with you on the reuse of assets between consoles and PC, but disagree that this is the reason we're not seeing a bigger difference between PC and console graphics. Look at PC exclusives - they are not significantly better in animation, art style, and image quality and so on. Also, it's pretty obvious that even the GPU developers, ATI and Nvidia, are looking to diversify from the raw power arms race in their chips - for example, Eyefinity, CUDA, PhysX and so on adding value, because each generation of chips shows a smaller improvement over the last in terms of what we are seeing on the screen (irrespective of the horsepower benchmarks).
That's because they tend to focus on the mass PC market, not the high-end one. Crysis focused on the high-end market and that game still looks amazing, 3 years after it released. There are other games that focus on the high-end such as ArmA 2, which looks incredible, but is lacking in some areas due to it being self-published and consequently not having an astronomically high budget. Valve and Blizzard focus on getting their games on as many computers as they can, and they have to compromise their graphics a bit in order to do that. Hell, Valve still has DX8 support. Their games still look great -- StarCraft 2 looks crazy good at times; the cutscenes use the same assets as their CGI -- but, on a technical level, they aren't as advanced as a Crysis or something like that. You can make a profit from developing a high-end PC exclusive, as Crysis has shown with its 3 million sales, but it's a riskier endeavor.
2015? bwahahahahahahahahaaaaahahaha ..........
Our maybe they needed these licenses to make Test phones for win7mobile.
Saying the 360 can last another 5 years means no new console until 2015? NO. That just means that 360 can last another five years. It could have a successor launch well before then, (as soon as 2012). Did the PS2 last to 2010? Did that mean the PS3 didn't launch until 2010? C'mon. It MIGHT use a processor that MIGHT exist eventually (a multi-GHz multicore Arm that may come after after Eagle)? WTF? Kind of a dumb article in general.
You are one of the few that actually understand that a 10 year life cycle means that the console will be SUPPORTED for 10 years (with overlap in about 6 years).
what you mean like MS supported the xbox when the 360 came out ? if you check your history you will find MS did not support the xbox as soon as the 360 was launched they did not care at all about there xbox users.
The reason why they stopped supporting Xbox 1 when the 360 came out was purely financial. They were losing money hand over fist on that console, so it didn't make sense financially to continue to support it. Most of the titles for the 360's launch were Xbox 1 games up rezed. PDZ and Kameo in particular. They did say that when the next console came out, they would continue to support 360. And they can do that because 360 is making a profit. Has been so over the last couple of years at least.
Of course they are, so is Sony planning on the PS4 as are Nintendo planning on their next console. It takes numerous years to develop them, so yeah they all are.
yes but next gen is not gonna be only for 3d,its a extreamly important thing the right time to change the gen,now both sony an ms must be very patient to see where the real next gen tec is leading,are motion control,and 3d the real deal to put money in or gimicks,where the graph tech leading,and afther that to make a choice,4 exaple ps2 suffered its early lunch with bad graphs,xbox sufferd its late lunch being too close to to next gen.and that xbox 360 is grapicaly not that good as ps3 is also an early lunch sign but ms won another aspecs due to its time of lunch,so i want ms and ps3 not to hurry to have good next gen consoles and not let pc be a lot ahead,now graphs are not that bad to ruin the overall experience
and now that people say that xbox has wasted its power its wrong,its ms to blame,yes its graphicaly verx slightly bad from ps3,but remember ps2,it completely dominated xbox1 due to its fantastic games,but graphicaly xbox was miles ahead.so if ms want it can make good very good games,and keep up with competition
This its true if you look at the last two gens the lest powerful console has been the best selling and its the same this gen the wii is doing what the ps 2 did last gen the wii has a lot of bad games just like the ps 2 did but it also has some of the best games this gen that have sold far better than the best ps 3 and 360 games. The console dose not need to be the most powerful or have the best features it needs games after all that is the main reason we buy games machines.
They could license ARM technology - build a multi core CPU / GPU combo. Nothing wrong with such an architecture. CPU's is not the bottleneck for games at the moment. With next gen graphics going to 1920x1080p standard - the GPU is the component that will need the most improvement.
I need a new next gen fix. My 360 is old and crap. PS3 is doing better, but still.... need more POWER!!!!!!!!!
720 cuz its only gona do 720p
It'll have 1080 standard and want everyone 2 know about it plus 1080 sounds cool
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.