-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
SUPPOSEDLY Leaked Non-Final XBOX 2 Specifications
- Thread starter MightyHedgehog
- Start date
If I remember correctly, this compares pretty accurately to the previously leaked spec sheet that made the rounds. Of course, this could be feeding off that...
If real, it's a little disappointing to see that DVD media is still the format of choice. I can't imagine this not getting very cramped shortly into next gen.
If real, it's a little disappointing to see that DVD media is still the format of choice. I can't imagine this not getting very cramped shortly into next gen.
sonycowboy
Member
So, from that diagram, which either somebody threw together real damn quick looks legit...
They have decided on a hard drive just not whether it will be "built-in" or not. This fits in with what that guy from M-whatever was saying in that they will be the sole supplier of Xbox storage memory.
They have decided on a hard drive just not whether it will be "built-in" or not. This fits in with what that guy from M-whatever was saying in that they will be the sole supplier of Xbox storage memory.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Well, if this is the real deal, then fine. Sounds more than powerful enough to deliver great-looking, next-gen games at a realistically decent price to the consumer.
Error Macro
Member
I'm really hoping that they throw in a seprate chip for sound processing. Free 5.1 encoding should be standard, as it is on the current Xbox.
Error Macro
Member
Pimpbaa said:
Yeah, but the thing is that the CPU will have to emulate the functions of a dedicated Dolby Digital encoder, which ain't exactly light on the CPU in terms of processing those functions. If it took 10% of the CPU's capacity to encode a DD stream, think of what that 10% could be doing otherwise. Like ensuring a faster framerate, better A.I., just more calculations in general. I don't want the main CPU compromised by having to perform such extranenous features as sound processing.
seems to very very powerful and streamlined IFF programmers can take advantage of the parallel architecture. the design seems to lean towards giving depelopers the option of making decisions on what to do in order to increase performance, rather than hardwired rules of development.
are there comparable PS3 leaks out?
are there comparable PS3 leaks out?
Error Macro
Member
Well, true, but I also seriously doubt that the final product will have 3 3.5 GHz cores.
Well its a multifunctional CPU design, you can think of it that way. They dont have 3 different cores for no reason at all. What i'm saying is, say if there was dedicated hardware for audio and AI outside the CPU/GPU, then there wouldnt be 3 dedicated cores, you can basically think of the CPU itself to be deisgned for mutiple parallel tasking. It's designed for very fast mathematics and instructions handling, they WANT the CPU to be used.
inpHilltr8r
Member
dts, on the other hand, is so cheap, the PS2 can encode it in software.Error Macro said:
No audio chip is part of a larger move away from fixed function pipelines, and back to more generic (albeit, multi-core) processing.
pcostabel
Gold Member
I agree, the first thing I thought when reading the specs is that it resembles very closely the PS2 architecture:kaching said:
3 RISC CPU - check
limited VRAM - check
no dedicated DSP for sound - check
HD as an add-on - check
high speed bus - check
Kudos to MS for designing a multimedia architecture instead of stuffing a PC into a box and call it a console.
Why? Just so you can add more cost by forcing in another different programmable processor(s) into the system and make programmers work with yet Another different paralel unit in the system, not to mention imposing an arbitrary limit on processing available to sound?Gigadrive said:
With the kind of CPU power we're talking about here you can do hundreds of channels mixing with a tiny fraction of it, and without having to deal with limitations of a custom sound DSP.
Like with graphics, there are parts of sound pipeline that lend themselves to fixed hw implementation - ie. you don't really need to throw programmable power at it. In this case they mention hardwired compression codec, it stands to reason that encoding could be done by dedicated hw too.Error Macro said:
Although as a side note - I don't know about how Dolby would fare, but DTS5.1 encoding takes less then 10% of frame time on a PS2 cpu, and we're talking cpu roughly 35-40x faster here.
well it looks like those of you who don't see a problem with audio being processed on CPU have a better arguement. you win!
on another subject, something that I do not understand:
okay but then:
to me, being not a real techhead, this does not make sense. If we have 48 ALUs that can be assigned to process either vertex/geometry or pixel processing, then why the limit of 4 billion AA pixels/sec? could that be a bandwidth limitation or something? what if a developer wanted to use the CPU to do all or most of the vertex processing while the GPU did pixel processing, there is no way around the fillrate limit? I suppose it won't matter anyway since the emphesis will be on how much work is done on each pixel / pixel shading.. but was still wondering about the limit. to my poor confused brain, the two above quotes seem to conflict each other, though probably to the graphics techhead it makes perfect sense.
The real issue is the end result in-game. As an example, 5.1 encoding may be only a small hit for the PS2's EE, but that hasn't made it commonplace in-game for the system whereas it is standard for Xbox and its separate, extra audio muscle. As long as no significant compromises will end up being made, there's no objection to letting a next-generation system CPU handle a lot of the audio processing.
Consider difference between this and the Saturn/PS2...XNA sounds like it's a neccessity.
Without XNA, you'd have no PC ports (I don't have to even go into x86 ports would be painfully painful
), and programming for the console would be just as bad.
And compared to Renderware, XNA would take full advantage of the console's hardware (because MS would know the console inside and out off the bat).
I've talked a lot about BC, and how it should not be considered because it looked like an expensive operation. With the word 'emulation' popping up, it may be way cheaper than I thought, but again, I'll say that the HDD is a bigger concern than BC.
My biggest arguement against BC was that it wasn't worth it (assuming that it would add $80-100 to the console, essentially including the specific Xbox hardware components required to run the games).
But as far as an HDD is concerned...it's worth EVERY PENNY. (IMO)
Sure, HDDs around 20-40 Gbs may be hard to find. And it may be costly (consumer 40Gbs HDDs go for around $50 US, and I figure that bulk costs would be $30, but including it in the hardware would cost $20, making it end up at a cost of $50 to include one). But for all the functionality it provides, I think it's absolutely worth it.*
We all know that included hardware is used more by developers than add-on hardware. It's also common knowledge that many of the biggest Xbox games have used the HDD, since launch. Rather than derailing this thread, perhaps we can make a new one dedicated to this issue.
*Though I do realize, this functionality could still exist without an HDD. I should list down all the functionalities that I think are important, and if they could still exist without the HDD.
Without XNA, you'd have no PC ports (I don't have to even go into x86 ports would be painfully painful
), and programming for the console would be just as bad.And compared to Renderware, XNA would take full advantage of the console's hardware (because MS would know the console inside and out off the bat).
I've talked a lot about BC, and how it should not be considered because it looked like an expensive operation. With the word 'emulation' popping up, it may be way cheaper than I thought, but again, I'll say that the HDD is a bigger concern than BC.
My biggest arguement against BC was that it wasn't worth it (assuming that it would add $80-100 to the console, essentially including the specific Xbox hardware components required to run the games).
But as far as an HDD is concerned...it's worth EVERY PENNY. (IMO
)Sure, HDDs around 20-40 Gbs may be hard to find. And it may be costly (consumer 40Gbs HDDs go for around $50 US, and I figure that bulk costs would be $30, but including it in the hardware would cost $20, making it end up at a cost of $50 to include one). But for all the functionality it provides, I think it's absolutely worth it.*
We all know that included hardware is used more by developers than add-on hardware. It's also common knowledge that many of the biggest Xbox games have used the HDD, since launch. Rather than derailing this thread, perhaps we can make a new one dedicated to this issue.
*Though I do realize, this functionality could still exist without an HDD. I should list down all the functionalities that I think are important, and if they could still exist without the HDD.
The ALUs are shader units - they execute shader ops.GigaDrive said:
Pixel writes are a separate circuit, as are vertices/polygons output to the rasterizer.
Mapping Alus to pixel/vertex writes 1:1 was never necessary, or particularly logical - it was mainly a result of how evolution of graphics hw to date panned out.
Once you get to unified shaders - 1:1 mapping would end you up with lots of redundant hw-logic. And beyond certain numbers, adding more 'pixels/polys' doesn't amount to much, what will noticeably contribute to the scene is the shaders you run on them.
Mind you, I'm not saying that there is absolutely no use for much higher fillrate - it's just that realtime CG is always about making compromises, and the question you always ask is what compromises will give best end results.
It's far more an issue of licensing and availability of DTS libraries. If PS2 devkits shipped with DTS libraries in '99, it would have been standard too.Lazy8 said:
And mind you, 10% is not a lot, but it's still an issue to consider when you work with a CPU limited architecture.
Xenon has far stronger CPU setup (relatively speaking, not just absolute numbers) and basic sound stuff will probably run you much lower then 10% - but having the option to do more complex stuff is well... nice
Duckhuntdog
Member
shpankey said:
Sure: Ahem! This thing is going to get owned by the PS3 and N5.
shpankey
not an idiot
Duckhuntdog said:Sure: Ahem! This thing is going to get owned by the PS3 and N5.
As much as I don't want that to happen... I can't help but think Microsoft is really fucking up with Xenon. And if Microsoft doesn't include a hard drive, I may have to agree with you.
I tell you what, I'm already at the point now, out of frustration with all the problems with Xenon (no HDD, no BC, launching a year early) that I'm going to sit out the first year and see what PS3 and GCN 2 can come up with. If one of them comes with a HDD by default in the system, well, I found my new system (I'm a one system guy for the most part). The hard drive is *THAT* important to me.
I don't care what excuse anyone can make up.. I just plain and simple will not buy a console without a hard drive in it ever again. Period. And I refuse to reward a company taking such a monumental step backwards by removing it. It's more than that though... I want to PUNISH any console maker who doesn't include it next gen. I am just that fanatical about a hard drive now.
One of these consoles is going to have a hard drive (my guess is PS3) and that's where I'll make my home. And I know it's all about the games, but come on, be honest, all three of them are going to have awesome games... so it'll be the intangibles (like HDD) that make it for me (and 1080p would be nice, although unlike a HDD I can live without it).
I know this could probably derail this thread into a great big HD debate, but:shpankey said:As much as I don't want that to happen... I can't help but think Microsoft is really fucking up with Xenon. And if Microsoft doesn't include a hard drive, I may have to agree with you.
I tell you what, I'm already at the point now, out of frustration with all the problems with Xenon (no HDD, no BC, launching a year early) that I'm going to sit out the first year and see what PS3 and GCN 2 can come up with. If one of them comes with a HDD by default in the system, well, I found my new system (I'm a one system guy for the most part). The hard drive is *THAT* important to me.
I don't care what excuse anyone can make up.. I just plain and simple will not buy a console without a hard drive in it ever again. Period. And I refuse to reward a company taking such a monumental step backwards by removing it. It's more than that though... I want to PUNISH any console maker who doesn't include it next gen. I am just that fanatical about a hard drive now.
One of these consoles is going to have a hard drive (my guess is PS3) and that's where I'll make my home. And I know it's all about the games, but come on, be honest, all three of them are going to have awesome games... so it'll be the intangibles (like HDD) that make it for me (and 1080p would be nice, although unlike a HDD I can live without it).
What's the big deal about a hard drive? Other than custom sound tracks, it has had very little use on the Xbox.
Error Macro
Member
Well, DICE said that Rallisport 2 couldn't have been done without the hard drive, and if developers are to make such an improvement in graphics and size of levels like in RSC2 on Xenon, I think they'll need some sort of storage device to stream objects from, as the (supposed) 12x DVD-ROM drive just doesn't seem like it would cut it. My memory is a bit fuzzy, but what is the speed of the DVD drive in the Xbox?
Because some people don't feel like buying a new memory card each time they buy a new sports game. Or like to have a hundred different saves in each different part of one particular game. Or like to play games that have huge save files (KOTOR). Or like to download new content to extend the life of their previously purchased games...
You get the idea.
You get the idea.
Error Macro
Member
Fafalada said:
Hmm, what if they put a 7200 RPM ATA-133 drive into Xenon
shpankey
not an idiot
Custom Soundtracks is huge for me. I use it in just about every game I play. And now it's REALLY starting to get neat, with games like NFL2k5 allowing you to edit parts of a song to play in sports games at certain moments (fumble, touchdown etc). I love the feature to death and it's that important to me. I have about 100 songs or more I continually listen to while playing my games. But games like NFL 2k5 are taking it to the next level. I adore the idea I can set all my own custom music to the IN GAME situations. That kicks ass. This kind of stuff is the tip of the iceberg.
Unlimited saves is even more huge. This is especially true when you have 5 sports games, several seasons and franchises for each game. Those add up. I have 3 franchises in NCAA, 5 Season in Inside Drive, 2 franchises in Madden, 2 in ESPN Hockey, and just tons of shit like that. Also, I can save replays from sports games, save replays of races where I raced the perfect line. I love saving replays of awesome things from a game to show to my friends later, who also get a kick out of it. Or how about downloading replays from XBL? I love downloading the top Ghost in PGR2 and watching his line. This is possible because of the HDD.
No need or worry to have to put in a memory card, or have to mess with that kind of bullshit. My saves are there, plenty of space, no need or worry about them, no need to put a card in or change to this other card that has the right saves on it. The HDD is freedom.
Also, games can take advantage of it... by streaming data in off the HDD, it allows game world to be infinitly larger. Lots of games on Xbox already take advantage of this (Halo, Morrowind, Rallisport Challenge 1 & 2, Blinx etc etc). Developers want a HDD for a reason.. and if they want it, I want them to have it! Because in the end, if they have one, they can do great things with it that will make better games for me.
Loading times. With a HDD, loading times are cut down a great deal in a lot of games. I hate loading times and anything to help get rid of them I'm all for!
Downloadable Content. See Ninja Gaiden 1.1 or Splinter Cell. Or on Xbox how we get new maps and characters, new golf courses, new tracks, new cars, new costumes in all our games because of the HDD. Or how about their adding Xbox Live Arcade to their service by allowing gamers to download the games to the HDD?
Patches to fix glaring bugs (it happens). Or how they update the Xbox Live dashboard sometimes (even later included PS to the dashboard). All this stuff is possible with the HDD.
As time goes forward, things like being able to record video chat from XBL and sound bites (something XBL already does) and save them to the HDD for later viewing/listening. Also, Tivo like functions could become a possibility. Or who knows what else. The fact is, if we have a HDD, we at least have some possibilities and options. Who knows what other creative uses can be used.
Unlimited saves is even more huge. This is especially true when you have 5 sports games, several seasons and franchises for each game. Those add up. I have 3 franchises in NCAA, 5 Season in Inside Drive, 2 franchises in Madden, 2 in ESPN Hockey, and just tons of shit like that. Also, I can save replays from sports games, save replays of races where I raced the perfect line. I love saving replays of awesome things from a game to show to my friends later, who also get a kick out of it. Or how about downloading replays from XBL? I love downloading the top Ghost in PGR2 and watching his line. This is possible because of the HDD.
No need or worry to have to put in a memory card, or have to mess with that kind of bullshit. My saves are there, plenty of space, no need or worry about them, no need to put a card in or change to this other card that has the right saves on it. The HDD is freedom.
Also, games can take advantage of it... by streaming data in off the HDD, it allows game world to be infinitly larger. Lots of games on Xbox already take advantage of this (Halo, Morrowind, Rallisport Challenge 1 & 2, Blinx etc etc). Developers want a HDD for a reason.. and if they want it, I want them to have it! Because in the end, if they have one, they can do great things with it that will make better games for me.
Loading times. With a HDD, loading times are cut down a great deal in a lot of games. I hate loading times and anything to help get rid of them I'm all for!
Downloadable Content. See Ninja Gaiden 1.1 or Splinter Cell. Or on Xbox how we get new maps and characters, new golf courses, new tracks, new cars, new costumes in all our games because of the HDD. Or how about their adding Xbox Live Arcade to their service by allowing gamers to download the games to the HDD?
Patches to fix glaring bugs (it happens). Or how they update the Xbox Live dashboard sometimes (even later included PS to the dashboard). All this stuff is possible with the HDD.
As time goes forward, things like being able to record video chat from XBL and sound bites (something XBL already does) and save them to the HDD for later viewing/listening. Also, Tivo like functions could become a possibility. Or who knows what else. The fact is, if we have a HDD, we at least have some possibilities and options. Who knows what other creative uses can be used.
CrimsonSkies
Member
shpankey you sure seem negative about everything coming out on the Xbox 2 sequel. I personally think it sounds great. But I'm not going to believe it to be anything more than speculation. If the PS3 is more powerful then great for Sony. Hats off to them. Good job.
I personally don't see how anyone is going to keep 1 Teraflop processing cooled in a standard console box, but if they can do it great for them.
Next gen is going to be great.
I personally don't see how anyone is going to keep 1 Teraflop processing cooled in a standard console box, but if they can do it great for them.
Next gen is going to be great
.
shpankey
not an idiot
Well, I don't mean to be. Like I said, the only "big" issue I have is the lack of a hard drive. All the other things are relatively small and are just things I would have liked to seen, but I can live without and would not harp on them for long. Having a HDD would have made me a lot nicer about it though. I think Microsoft should be punished for not including it, not rewarded. I'm certainly not going to praise them for taking away the biggest new feature in consoles this gen. I look at it like analog sticks... once we got them, I never wanted to go back and play without them. Removing such a feature is almost a sin IMO.
LuckyBrand
Banned
right now it is 256MB ram and no HDD..
if they had to choose one, I'd say go with more ram!
having more ram for developers to use standard would be muhc more useful than a HDD standard..
if they had to choose one, I'd say go with more ram!
having more ram for developers to use standard would be muhc more useful than a HDD standard..
CrimsonSkies
Member
I agree with Lucky Brand. I'd rather have more RAM and an option to buy a flash drive plug in with 1 GB of room on it. If all the music was saved in MP3 format then you wouldn't lose really any functionality at all. Hopefully custom soundtrack support would be mandated. With XNA perhaps it could be a simple thing to add.
shpankey
not an idiot
There's much more to a HDD than just Custom Soundtracks, although I love that feature. Downloadable content, patches, streaming technology, load times, Unlimited saves and replays hassle free, XBL options, video chat recording, voice chat recording, tivo features, who knows what else. We just started really exploring what can be done with a HDD, and made some strides this gen with neat and creative ideas.
i'd bet on flash media built in for all the streaming games you guys are talking about and definately the hard drive out side of the box. Dont blame MS, Blame pirates. If x2 has the HD as an external source, i'm guessing it can more easily regulate whats being played from it. As a safegaurd, MS is purposely pushing the HD outside the box. The price wont be effected though. I'd say $249 for the console itself and $49 for the HD add on for a total cost of $300. everyone wins this way EXCEPT pirates. HAW HAW.
Nah, HDD was most probably removed because that is one of the more fragile components of the unit itself. In the current xbox, if the HDD dies, you would be out of luck and forced to by another unit unless you are tech savvy and know how to replace the drive on your own.
With no HDD inside they are making the system itself more stable, and of course if your external HDD breaks down, you can just replace that w/o buying another xbox2/xenon.
And not to mention, it cuts cost...and I wouldn't bet on internal flash memory for streaming either. No point, and it'll add cost.
With no HDD inside they are making the system itself more stable, and of course if your external HDD breaks down, you can just replace that w/o buying another xbox2/xenon.
And not to mention, it cuts cost...and I wouldn't bet on internal flash memory for streaming either. No point, and it'll add cost.
Soul Reaver for dreamcast streamed off the GD IIRC. Streaming would be memory limited anyway, not exacly an HDD issue. Lack of the HDD will result in users buying memory units (profitable for MS) and of course no custom soundtrack options right off the bat which will anger some buyers.