New Nintendo Console Confirmed?

[CaffeinePowered]

i wonder if we'll get a console with a real amount of RAM instead of 512MB

Consoles always skimp on RAM because they don't really have background processes (well at least until this gen), that being said, RAM is cheap as hell and there's no real reason to skimp on it

[at0m]

[quote author=Squishy link=topic=5574.msg204469#msg204469 date=1303922797]
i wonder if we'll get a console with a real amount of RAM instead of 512MB

Consoles always skimp on RAM because they don't really have background processes (well at least until this gen), that being said, RAM is cheap as hell and there's no real reason to skimp on it
[/quote]Yeah there is a big one: PCB real estate. RAM chips take up a sizeable chunk of the PCB, but they also cost money, need to be cooled, and are prone to failure. So if you oversize the RAM for negligible performance gain, you're losing on cost, complexity, and miniaturization. Its all about striking a balance.

Source: personal experience with embedded systems design in school and work.

[Kirby]

yeah that 4000 series is top of the line

I didn't say shit about 'top of the line' Sorry we're not all used to daddy buying us every new thing that comes around, you spoiled little fuck.

[quote author=Kirby, the Spyro link=topic=5574.msg204397#msg204397 date=1303853484]
Article says based off ATI's R700 chip, which is the HD4000 series cards. That's real processing power for you, not a cheesy-ass integrated video chip like the Xenos or Hollywood chips are. That's what excites me, a console with PC sized video rendering capability. Real graphics, not console'd down shit.

In 2012 it'll be 'console'd down shit'. The 4000 series is pretty much low end now, it will be even more so in 2012.

Of course it will be much better than the consoles currently are. They also will be able to create some crazy games with all that power. But five to six years later you'll be saying the same thing I bet. "console'd down shit".  b)


I'm sure Microsoft and Sony's consoles will be a bit better than this though.
[/quote]


You're speaking like 2012 is years and years down the road and large leaps will be made in technology advancements for PC between now and then. It'll be out in probably less than a year. That makes it still quite relevant, considering the games will be optimized for that specific chip, and a 4800 card can still run even DX10 heavy games at nearly vsync performance if you have a processor capable of overrunning the video card.

But five to six years later you'll be saying the same thing I bet. "console'd down shit".  b)

In 5 or six years, anything is "console'd down shit" when compared to tech that's 5-6 years newer, PC or console.

That comment was more toward the fact that consoles are always rougher looking when compared to PC, not a comparison to modern GPU's vs the 360 or ps3, I was enthused about the crossover of hardware.

[Versus]

[quote author=Versus-pwny- link=topic=5574.msg204468#msg204468 date=1303922504]
yeah that 4000 series is top of the line

I didn't say shit about 'top of the line'[/quote]

it was mostly agreement with toh's post, that the 4000 series is already last-gen at best. a console with one is not going to impress me (until i see mario on it oh god)

Sorry we're not all used to daddy buying us every new thing that comes around, you spoiled little fuck.

lmfao raped

i would be very happy if he bought me "every new thing that comes around", but that's not true.

a 4800 card can still run even DX10 heavy games at nearly vsync performance if you have a processor capable of overrunning the video card.

i'd ask what you're smoking but i think we all know

[CaffeinePowered]

[quote author=Caffeine link=topic=5574.msg204471#msg204471 date=1303922921]
[quote author=Squishy link=topic=5574.msg204469#msg204469 date=1303922797]
i wonder if we'll get a console with a real amount of RAM instead of 512MB

Consoles always skimp on RAM because they don't really have background processes (well at least until this gen), that being said, RAM is cheap as hell and there's no real reason to skimp on it
[/quote]Yeah there is a big one: PCB real estate. RAM chips take up a sizeable chunk of the PCB, but they also cost money, need to be cooled, and are prone to failure. So if you oversize the RAM for negligible performance gain, you're losing on cost, complexity, and miniaturization. Its all about striking a balance.

Source: personal experience with embedded systems design in school and work.
[/quote]

Wouldn't this just depend on what kind of RAM they were using, I mean PC RAM whether you get a 1 gig, 2 gig, or 4 gig set of dual channel chips still takes up the same amount of space inside the case.

[Versus]

edit: whoops

[PyroZombie]

so wait, why are the schematics getting out for this, whats that do for anyone who owns a console?

[BS1]

You're speaking like 2012 is years and years down the road and large leaps will be made in technology advancements for PC between now and then. It'll be out in probably less than a year. That makes it still quite relevant, considering the games will be optimized for that specific chip, and a 4800 card can still run even DX10 heavy games at nearly vsync performance if you have a processor capable of overrunning the video card.

Depending on when Nintendo releases the console in 2012, there may be two new generations of graphics cards out already. I know AMD is already working on their newer series which is supposed to be released sometime this year. The 4800 series are already two generations old. However, this will be a revamped version of the R700 chip. That doesn't mean it will even match a 4800 in performance. It may be more similar to the 4700 performance. We will have to wait and see.

And yes, I know that the games will be optimized for the card. That's why I said it will be able to create some crazy games.

[CaffeinePowered]

Depending on when Nintendo releases the console in 2012, there may be two new generations of graphics cards out already.

When the PS3 was released in 2006, it's graphics chip was based on the Nvidia 7800, at that point, the 8 series was already on the market.


No console is ever released with the 'latest and greatest GPU', it would price itself out of the range of the vast majority of the home market.

[at0m]

[quote author=BS1 link=topic=5574.msg204488#msg204488 date=1303935572]
Depending on when Nintendo releases the console in 2012, there may be two new generations of graphics cards out already.

When the PS3 was released in 2006, it's graphics chip was based on the Nvidia 7800, at that point, the 8 series was already on the market.

No console is ever released with the 'latest and greatest GPU', it would price itself out of the range of the vast majority of the home market.
[/quote]
Or would be cannibalized by consumers for its GPU if it was a discrete card. The graphics card production companies would throw a fit if they were being undermined by the GPU manufacturer like that, because they charge an ENORMOUS premium for latest-and-greatest cards.

And I think you're underestimating how long it takes to develop an embedded system: when the PS3 was spec'd out originally, I'd put money on the 7000 series being either latest-and-greatest or more likely soon-to-be-released. It's not like you can just drop in a different GPU when you have to rewrite all of your firmware (or change your PCB layout, which is an even bigger PITA when you're talking about 100+ pin BGA chips) to support its instruction set.

And think about it: if you didn't have to rewrite for the instruction set (that takes advantage of some sort of new technological/hardware advancement in graphics processing), then what performance gain are you getting out of the new GPU in the first place?

[BS1]

No console is ever released with the 'latest and greatest GPU', it would price itself out of the range of the vast majority of the home market.

That's what I'm getting at. I read his post like he thought it would be any different than it usually is.

[EarthlingJohn]

Either way nintendo will have like, a 2 year advantage on microsoft and sony since they project that they wont be releasing another console until like, '13, or '14.

[Spore]

Either way nintendo will have like, a 2 year advantage on microsoft and sony since they project that they wont be releasing another console until like, '13, or '14.

A two year advantage turns into a 2 year hardware disadvantage when Sony and Microsoft release their technically superior consoles.

[at0m]

[quote author=EarthlingJohn link=topic=5574.msg204660#msg204660 date=1304054977]
Either way nintendo will have like, a 2 year advantage on microsoft and sony since they project that they wont be releasing another console until like, '13, or '14.

A two year advantage turns into a 2 year hardware disadvantage when Sony and Microsoft release their technically superior consoles.
[/quote]And the pendulum will swing back and forth, into eternity. Nintendo got out of the hardware race when they started offsetting their releases to not coincide with the XBox/PS release schedule, and focused instead on innovation and usability. See Wii.

In the meantime, Nintendo will still rake in the cash because they turn a profit on every single console sold, and even more on the games' licensing fees, where Sony and Microsoft have to rely on licensing and subscription fees alone (and how many subscribers going to not resub to PSN or XBL after this latest fiasco?), and _lose_ money on each console.

[CaffeinePowered]

In the meantime, Nintendo will still rake in the cash because they turn a profit on every single console sold, and even more on the games' licensing fees, where Sony and Microsoft have to rely on licensing and subscription fees alone (and how many subscribers going to not resub to PSN or XBL after this latest fiasco?), and _lose_ money on each console.

People seem to think this, Oh the Gamecube was an abysmal failure, 3rd place, etc etc.

But it still made money, probably more than the xbox, because Nintendo made money on each console sold + licensing fees for each 3rd party game. At launch the Wii was making them a per unit profit, and Sony I think started $150 - $200 in the can on every unit. So if someone just buys the unit and then doesnt buy enough games/DLC/etc. to make up for the loss, they're still in the hole.

All those "casual gamers" that just got a Wii and maybe Sports & Fit, Nintendo still made money on them.

[Spore]

Nintendo got out of the hardware race when they started offsetting their releases to not coincide with the XBox/PS release schedule, and focused instead on innovation and usability. See Wii.

The 360 was the outlier this generation, not Nintendo. Wii and PS3 essentially came out at the same time. Not that I'm arguing with the second half of that statement though.

[shoopfox]

Sony I think started $150 - $200 in the can on every unit. So if someone just buys the unit and then doesnt buy enough games/DLC/etc. to make up for the loss, they're still in the hole.

To be fair though, it's not like PSX and PS2 where tons of people bought the console for the express purpose of modding/pirating on it. Considering how many years they went without people pirating I bet they did alright on licensing

Though considering how well PS1/PS2/DS have done, maybe piracy is good for console manufacturers as long as you profit off the hardware.

[backfire]

Okay, found a secret leaked video of the Project Cafe.

Don't share this with anyone. :-X

nintendo revolution mockup

[Versus]

lol

[EarthlingJohn]

olol, that thing