Pemalite said:
setsunatenshi said:
I don't think it's a matter of 'want', but a question of 'can'. Remember that the current XB1 games are using a DDR3 + ESRAM memory architecture that is itself taking space on the APU. The only way they could get some type of APU that would match or overtake the PS4 (neo or otherwise) would be by ditching the ESRAM and going for GDDR5 like the PS4 did. This would mean that you couldn't simply plug and play the same games onto the new box without them being worked around the new architecture. This would take time and $ to do. When people were worried about the PS4 and Neo split, that would be the equivalent of moving a graphic setting slider from mid setting (PS4) to high/ultra (PS4 Neo). For the new Xbox it would be more like porting a game from Xbox 360 to Xbox 1 without emulation.
I'm sure some people will bring some crazy ideas like cloud computing and secret spicy sauce soon enough to explain it away.
|
You do realise you can have both eSRAM and GDDR5? The eSRAM could be used as an L4 cache for the CPU and be used for retaining backwards compatability. It could also be a seperate chip that isn't a part of the main SoC and can also be used to reduce power consumption.
Besides, the Xbox One's SoC is built at 28nm, the eSRAM takes up something like 1.5 billion transisters, at 28nm this is a massive 30% of the chip... But if you drop down to 14nm and blow out the chip size, it might only be taking up 10% of the chip or less.
setsunatenshi said:
Mark Cerny was the gift to Sony that keeps on giving, I don't know if he should get the full credit on this, but making sure the platform was as standard as it was (basically an X86 architecture easily upgradeable), made it impossible for backwards compatibility on one hand, but pretty much secured cheap and powerful hardware that should just carry an entire userbase over to the new consoles without having to reset to 0 everytime they implement an upgrade. The people you mentioned complaining at first are pretty much by now forced to get on with the program (since every other console manufacturer is releasing new hardware) and by the time the Neo is out they won't think too much about it. For people who bought it day one, probably enough time passed that they are ready for something shinier, and for those who bought a PS4 not that long ago they are still good with their system and won't be left behind.
For developers what's more attractive? Creating a game for a userbase of 50M (by the time Neo is out probably) or launch some exclusive on a new platform that may or may not perform well in the long run?
Sony might have the chance to lock their userbase in with this move, giving them all that PC Steam users have enjoyed for years and years. Upgrading your machine doesn't render your game library useless anymore, so what reason would those users have to switch sides?
We will have to see how it plays out, but I think there was some high level 3-dimensional chess when they decided for this strategy.
Bravo.
|
Whilst I do agree that Cerny made the right decisions at the right time, backwards compatability can still be broken in the future.
And not only that but the PS4 *could* have offered backwards compatability with the PS3 via several methods... Like including the original PS3 SoC or a software approach like what Microsoft has done.
Though... I think having hardware based PS2 and PS1 backwards compatability would be better than PS3 IMHO, I wouldn't say no to a limited run of PS2 consoles though with HDMI support for up-to 4k upscaling.
GribbleGrunger said:
Agreed. What keeps people locked into an ecosystem? Exclusives, and soon the XB1 won't have a single exclusive. I've always likened Sony's strategy to chess and Microsoft's strategy to poker. One is played with guile and patience while the other is played with money and bluffs.
|
Halo and Fable has kept me gravitating towards Xbox, Gold kinda' locked me in.
With Fable now gone...
If Halo went to PC though, I will likely keep the Xbox, it's a multimedia powerhouse, it's probably one of the best HTPC devices you can get, especially with Kinect, which kinda' undermines the Xbox brand as I would rather watch a movie on it than play a game right now. :P
|
Yes all that is true but we have to take 2 things into account, price and the current rumors.
There is no magic here, if MS wants a console that is as powerful, if not more powerful as the PS4 Neo within the same pricerange they need to remove ESRAM. If it's included in the same APU, it will reduce yeilds and space for CUs. If they have a different apu that somehow includes the same or more CUs as the Neo while remaining with ESRAM then for sure it will be a much more expensive APU.
In a world where price was not a factor of course they could throw anything inside the console and have it serve coffee as well, but that's not how things work.
The same goes for the case of PS4 offering backwards compatibility in the way you are describing. It would not meet a competitive price point first of all, and more importantly PS3 users would still not be able to play PS4 games. Now as it stands original PS4 owners can play Neo games and probably will be able to play PS5 games (less demanding ones i would assume) at lower settings. All because of settling down on a non exotic PC architecture :)
