#team2019 baby
Feel free to share as you see fit, with or without attribution.anexanhume is it ok to post this info on other forums? Seems a shame to restrict such a great amount of hard work to one place.
anexanehume nice work!
A couple of small notes I would offer:
On Navi's microarchitecture - if we're citing Usman Pirzada's reporting at WCCFTech, his more recent reporting from June 2018 onward revised the record a bit, and suggests based on his sources that Navi is a brand new microarchitecture, the one that 'Next Gen' in that original roadmap will also be based on, rather than the same as prior GCN (see: https://wccftech.com/exclusive-amd-navi-gpu-roadmap-cost-zen/). However, in discussing whether Navi is 'GCN' or not, I suppose there might be a semantics issue - Navi could indeed be that new architecture while still being compliant with the GCN ISA, I guess.
On "AMD has stated they will certainly consider ray-tracing, but only when it can be implemented in their entire lineup of cards" - this is a bit subtle - and possibly not relevant for the next-gen consoles anyway - but I think Wang was referring to game support for ray tracing not being ubiquitous until they (vendors) could offer it across their range of cards. I don't think he was necessarily saying AMD wouldn't support it until it could be done in all their cards, even though a lot of headlines reported it that way.
Feel free to share as you see fit, with or without attribution.
Yes if only to make it easier to find.
Nice work anexahume and all of the co-contributors too. Just finished reading it and its well though out.Ackowledgements
This is by no means an exhaustive list, but I'd like to extend a thanks to the following users for their continued contributions, insight, and positive attitude in this topic:
Gemüsepizza
Intersect
chris 1515
BitsandBytes
Kyoufu
Locuza
[US
kinda curious if there needs to be a new post because OT have a 400-page limit (though this isnt an OT)Cheers OP for threadmarking anexanhume's superb posts.
That definitely makes it easier to refer back to as this thread continues to grow.
kinda curious if there needs to be a new post because OT have a 400-page limit (though this isnt an OT)
Not really. It would only be if they screw up with the launch. The hardcore will buy it day 1 regardless and Sony may be able to keep the price relatively high over the years assuming the game quality is there. We also have the Xbox X showing it is feasible too. It has performed rather well.If $499 happens with ps5, do you see that price point hurting them next gen?
I'm sure Microsoft is seeing game streaming as new business and I'm sure that they are more than ready to eat lossss if there's needing because of competition..all to to try to win the initial game . The competion against Google and maybe Amazon is loooooot (not even comparable)more important for Ms than what it is vs Sony.And on this we agree.
This is the same MS that recent was bragging to investors about how they are "best in class at monetising" their services and the Xbox platform. And its true, they've done a superb job as they're making proportionally more dollars per user than Sony is extracting from PS owners.
Considering this mindset, they aren't going to launch a new datacentre load-heavy, bandwidth heavy service and give it away for free.
It's crazy to think that.
Netflix as a start-up business lost money until they became profitable. They didn't have a choice.
Most new businesses will lose money until their sales revenues grow sufficiently to support their business with increasing profits.
Profitable corporations like MS are nothing similar.
I think you're confusing sunk costs when launching a new business with launching a new service offering alongside an existing profitable business.
The original Xbox, Zune , Bing, Netflix and Amazon were all new businesses. Losses are expected until revenues grow sufficiently to make a profit. That's basic business 101.
An already profitable business, Xbox, launching a new ancillary service will NOT lose money on that service for no material gain. How would they ever recoup the losses? Why would they hamper the existing Xbox business's profitability by launching a new service, refusing to monetise it and giving it away for free.
I'm afraid you're not being realistic with your expectations, mate.
It's more of a soft rule, really. NBA OT has reached 650 pages with no new thread.
That said, anexanhume 's post is so thorough, complete, well written and overall glorious that it needs to be the OP of a new thread. Make it "PS5 and next Xbox launch speculation - 2019 Edition".
I'm sure Microsoft is seeing game streaming as new business and I'm sure that they are more than ready to eat lossss if there's needing because of competition..all to to try to win the initial game . The competion against Google and maybe Amazon is loooooot (not even comparable)more important for Ms than what it is vs Sony.
Not really but they did shut down the previous thread with little reasoning
I agree with thisIt's more of a soft rule, really. NBA OT has reached 650 pages with no new thread.
That said, anexanhume 's post is so thorough, complete, well written and overall glorious that it needs to be the OP of a new thread. Make it "PS5 and next Xbox launch speculation - 2019 Edition".
It's more of a soft rule, really. NBA OT has reached 650 pages with no new thread.
That said, anexanhume 's post is so thorough, complete, well written and overall glorious that it needs to be the OP of a new thread. Make it "PS5 and next Xbox launch speculation - 2019 Edition".
They know that they will have to eat a lot of the cost early on and that it will take time to make what they have invested in streaming tech. They may also subsidize it to try and get as many people on board as possible and see where that boat takes them.I'm sure Microsoft is seeing game streaming as new business and I'm sure that they are more than ready to eat lossss if there's needing because of competition..all to to try to win the initial game . The competion against Google and maybe Amazon is loooooot (not even comparable)more important for Ms than what it is vs Sony.
Google, Amazon are all huge players. If it their desire to get into gaming, then it is something that they can do. They could very easily place $2 billion dollars and go around buying independent studios and in no time you have 10 or more of those.Agreed. I vote for a new thread.
The thing is, for xCloud there is no competition because across all devices on the Xbox software platform, xCloud is the only streaming option available.
Google can't compete because they're neither a games publisher, own a gaming platform nor do they produce any gaming content. They haven't even launched a gaming streaming service and all indications point to them having no desire to, rather them being a middleware or backend service infrastructure provider, similar to how Amazon Web Services provides datacentre services to PSN. Google will provide their streaming tech to game publishers like Ubi and EA to integrate into their own distribution platforms, e.g. Origins, UPlay.
Amazon doesn't even have a presence in game streaming so far.
xCloud is very unlikely to be free.
X Cloud is not going to bankrupt Microsoft. It is a long term bet on where they think the industry is headed. Sony wants to bring Playstation Now to other devices. Google was testing Project Stream, Nvidia has GeForce streaming platform and Ubisoft's big wig thinks that this is going to be the last console generation before streaming is the main way people play games (I think he is wrong).
We stream a lot of content today from music to movies, TV shows and even sports events. The streaming aspect is something that has also given a lot of content creators a career that they would have never had prior to tech being this good or being as widespread across majority of the world.
So what is Microsoft doing? They are going to leverage their cloud with gaming. Try and get a system that works for both gaming and cloud compute so that as the market for gaming takes time to grow, they still have something that can generate revenue.
I also do not know why they would be giving away the service to users. X Cloud as I see it (and I could be wrong) is a medium to simply bring Game Pass to more devices.
They were willing to make huge losses on the PS3 to win the next generation disc format standard. That was short term hurt for what they believed would be long term gain for the company. Digital happened and it is unlikely that we will see Blu Ray seeing the success of DVD. It will make them a lot of money, but it will never be as ubiquitous as DVD was.
kinda curious if there needs to be a new post because OT have a 400-page limit (though this isnt an OT)
My wording was wrong not in intent though, you have it right. There is the ability to come into the system at a low monthly price, but within that ecosystem there is the ability to go on and purchase games if that is what the consumer so wishes.In the long run, MS sees xCloud as something which will generate revenue. A company like MS is only going to make investments like this if they expect to see long term growth based on their internal estimates and trending.
I think it's both interesting and difficult to speculate on how MS monetizes xCloud because of how much data we lack. When GamePass was announced, then again last year when MS announced that their first party titles would come to the service day and date, there was a lot of paper math going on in the forum, and people couldn't grasp how it would be a profitable move. We don't know the full economics of Gamepass, and probably won't know these details for xCloud either.
I think xCloud is not just meant to get people onto Gamepass, but get them overall in to Xbox, whether they direct purchase games, sub to Gamepass, or whatever.
My current expectation is that access to xCloud will somehow be tied into XBL Gold. But, I also wouldn't be surprised if MS has a found way to monetize the service in a way that allows them to provide cloud gaming for "free." Other than PS Now, none of the big companies investing in cloud gaming have announced pricing structure, I think they're all trying to figure out how to provide the lowest barrier to entry. In that regard I think MS is best positioned to provide a service with a low barrier to entry and a compelling service due to their ability to leverage Azure and Xbox.
Excellent post! I really appreciate not only the depth of topics, but the detail in the references you provided!
I'd like to see a new thread and a new poll.
With the way tech is going, you do not have to have a console to reach a market of gamers. And it is not just what gaming on a wide scale does in terms of generating revenue, it is that it has the potential to push people into an ecosystem for far greater monetization.there was a time when Ms was thinking to use Xbox as trojan horse for the living room ...but both Google and Amazon are doing better than them with Google home and echo..and Google have Android ....Ms will want to fight them in whatever way they can...
kinda curious if there needs to be a new post because OT have a 400-page limit (though this isnt an OT)
The number of chips you use determines your bus width. 32 bits per chip. So, if you use 8 chips, that's a 256 bit bus. You can also do a clamshell design, where two chips sit on opposite sides of the board and physically share the lines. You only do this when you can't get enough density to reach your desired amount in a single chip. I attempted to illustrate these possibilities with the RAM table.anexanhume, that's some damn fine work. Thanks for putting all that effort in.
Something I was curious about that you mentioned in there - just what are the cost savings like for using less overall RAM chips, vs using smaller chips? With the way I've heard it discussed, it got me wondering about when you would even want to use anything other than the biggest chips in the smallest numbers.
I just finished reading your summary anexanhume It took me half an hour or so, but that was really good. I think it's of help because it's easy to understand, even omitting the more technical information, someone is able to get the picture and comprehend what each part is talking about. Cheers for that. For the next thread, if we still don't have official info, this should be part of the OP, IMO. Thank you for taking your time to type it all out and adding the references to each information.
Oh dang, true, we're hitting 400 pages LOL C'mon Sony, that Playstation Meeting announcement so we're able to go to a new thread the proper way ;) I guess we can create a new one after AMD's CES keynote, if there's any new relevant info whatsoever.
The number of chips you use determines your bus width. 32 bits per chip. So, if you use 8 chips, that's a 256 bit bus. You can also do a clamshell design, where two chips sit on opposite sides of the board and physically share the lines. You only do this when you can't get enough density to reach your desired amount in a single chip. I attempted to illustrate these possibilities with the RAM table.
I doubt we'll see clamshell in a next gen console, either because they only go with 16-24GB, or because 32Gb chips become available by then.
As far as cost, overall capacity in the die certainly matters, but overall die quantity matters more.
I do not know what it is they will do with Gold. I cannot see them getting rid of it because that is one heck of a buffer to have. There are going to be issues with messaging on how you pay for a cloud based service but have to pay to play online and the sort, and that is something that somewhat sways me to thinking that they maybe bump the price of game pass up by a bit and get rid Gold if you are on the subscription. They could have thought of something different though.