Rumor: Xbox 720 and PS4 Appearing at E3 2012

[tomfreak]

If they box can replace a PC with keyboard + mouse, it might sell.

I would like them to have dual monitor support, the ability of surfing internet while my mom/wife/kids watching TV/video game.

 

[back_by_demand]

How about they push 3D gaming with the Xbox, then they can call it the Xbox3D

Has a nice ring to it, gives it the 3rd Xbox number

 

[Goldengoose]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]How about they push 3D gaming with the Xbox, then they can call it the Xbox3DHas a nice ring to it, gives it the 3rd Xbox number[/citation]
By the way they are currently pushing it, you might be on to something there.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]Goldengoose[/nom]By the way they are currently pushing it, you might be on to something there.[/citation]
Let's hope so, if they do remember you heard it here first!

 

[slabbo]

Microsoft and Sony are just crapping their pants, because they don't want Nintendo to grab all the attention this coming E3. It's much like those paper launches/press release when a competitor launches a new product. Much like what Nvidia did announcing their 700's stuff when AMD launched the 7900 series.

So Nintendo pretty much forced Microsoft's and Sony's hand when they announced a whole new console last E3. MS just released Kinect, and Sony has their Move, I doubt either really wanted to release a new console until they milked both of those new product lines.

Also rumor has it that both MS and Sony aren't going to put the latest and greatest CPU/GPU into their new consoles. I heard they are going for a more Nintendo'ish strategy (price and performance) this time around, so they can start making money sooner with their consoles, instead of towards the end of its life.

 

[nottheking]

Hints at E3 2012 and a full-show at E3 2013 for the Xbox 720 seems reasonable to me. And yes, I'm fully aware that "Xbox 1080" seems a more likely suspect for name. However, for the uninitiated, the "720" name is partly a running gag and nod to the fact that in spite of the hype, the Xbox 360 almost never does 720p natively for its top-shelf games. Skyrim's as low as 576p, for instance. (similarly, the PS3 does 720p, but can't do AA+HDR)

As for the new generation taking so long (since normally it's been every five years like clockwork since about 1975) I have two ideas... And no, the time is NOT a testament to the current generation at all. Rather, it's either due to one of the following two scenarios:

1. We're really starting to see the effects of diminishing returns here. Yes, Moore's law gives us exponential growth in computing power, but the inverse seems to be true for the visuals: compare an Xbox 360 game to an Xbox game (take Halo 3 vs. Halo 2 for a good one) and now compare it to, say, previous inter-generational differences. Like, say, a GameCube/PS2 game vs. a N64/PS1 game. Or even earlier. It shows a clear trend: the visuals bump for each generation has been LESS apparent each time, even though the logarithmic growth has remained about the same. The result: less apparent (and hence less sellable) improvements for the next generation.

2. Both Microsoft and Sony failed to get anywhere near what they expected in sales for their consoles. Both expected to take the #1 spot; Microsoft believing that they'd finally bought their way in, and Sony just expecting it after the PS1 and PS2 so handily demolished their competition from Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sega. Hence, both makers have been trying to squeeze their current investments for all they could. Talk of a new generation, for once, began with Nintendo, which historically has always been the LAST to each generation's table, a year or two after their main competitors, (Master System, Genesis, PS1, PS2, 360) announcing and dating their console FIRST. This came about due to the Wii's saturation of the market, and their sales levels dropping; it went from out-selling the PS3 and 360 combined in 2007-8 to now being usually the slowest-selling.
[citation][nom]invlem[/nom]a 6000 series GPU is about 4 times more powerful than what's in the systems right now.[/citation]
Overall, you're pretty solidly on, though, of course, given the huge gap between the OEM parts and the enthusiast parts in a single generation, perhaps more clarification was required. The PS3 and 360 roughly equate to the GeForce 8600 GT or Radeon 3650. Four times the power would mean something around the range of maybe a GeForce GT 240 or Radeon 6570... Or in other words, close to the rate of the first popular top-end DirectX 10 cards, like the 8800 GTS and Radeon HD 2900XT. (coincidentally, back in 2006 when those came out I predicted that the 8th-gen consoles would be about that powerful )

I might be willing to give the consoles a bit more power than that; up to maybe 50-100% more. But I'll admit being a little doubtful. For an ATi GPU, I'm expecting between 480-1024 stream processors, or 96-160 for an nVidia one. A major hampering factor will be that all such consoles will never pass a 128-bit memory interface: this is because it requires substantially more complexity on the mainboard, which is both much harder in a compact formfactor, as well as something that WON'T go down in price from miniaturization. So this means that consoles automatically start at a disadvantage against desktop GPUs with their 256-384-bit interfaces.

[citation][nom]hasten[/nom]I would be flabbergasted if both machines used the same hardware manufacturers. I have to believe they wouldn't that to happen. I'm sure MS has signed an exclusive contract with ATI for this GPU to give them a competitive edge. I could be wrong but it's hard to believe otherwise.[/citation]
Well, be flabbergasted all you want, because it already happened. The CPUs for both the Xbox 360 and PS3? Both made by IBM, using the same architecture. (PowerPC 970FX, also what's known as the "G5" to Apple people) Similarly, the GDDR3 for both machines, aside from being identical (1400 MHz for both) was also both sourced from Samsung. The same GDDR3, at the same clock rate, is ALSO found in the Wii... And the Wii ALSO has an IBM-made CPU, though one that (apparently?) uses PPC 750CL architecture, aka G3. And a GPU from ATi. And let's not forget the real kicker: all three consoles are assembled by Foxconn. Yep, the same guys who got infamy for assembling iPhones, too.

 

[nottheking]

[citation][nom]slabbo[/nom]I heard they are going for a more Nintendo'ish strategy (price and performance) this time around, so they can start making money sooner with their consoles, instead of towards the end of its life.[/citation]
That's very likely true, but you're also giving Nintendo too much credit there for the strategy: out of dozens of mainstream consoles released since 1972, the ONLY three to launch at a loss on the MSRP are the Xbox, Xbox 360, and PS3. Everyone seems to forget that at its $300US launch MSRP, Sony was making a pretty penny of profit on both their PS1 and PS2. Ironically, it tended to be Nintendo that made the slimmest profit margin on their hardware (to fuel usually having the lowest MSRP) though they still made a profit.

Given the lack of success that approach has had in dominating the market share, I think that Sony's under a lot of pressure from investors to switch back to the old strategy. Similarly, I think Microsoft's already been headed there: the 360 only made a SLIGHT loss at first, and the manufacturing costs came down so much on the first revision that they made a profit even AFTER they slashed the price.

 

[eddieroolz]

Sony did say the PS3 was a 10-year console, though I think they're being forced to recant that statement.

 

[aaron88_7]

[citation][nom]Djhg2000[/nom]Just because you don't see the difference doesn't mean it isn't there.[/citation]
Just because you don't get the joke doesn't mean it isn't still funny

 

[sockso]

[citation][nom]Anonymous[/nom]Rule of thumb: If it exists in name only or on paper only as a rumor, it's probably just that. A rumor. I don't doubt another XBOX and Sony console are due soon; the 360 and PS3 have been out for several years now. If there is a new console coming in 2013 then it's definitely still in the planning stages right now. It takes YEARS to make these machines, people. I don't think it's going to be ready by 2013. Maybe 2014 or something. Development of the technology and better processing, rendering, etc. takes a while.I have to disagree, consoles can be repaired and tweaked just as PCs can, beoza. I know people who have modded their old XBOX consoles, people who have given them larger hard drives and stuff, etc. With how much these machines can do it's not surprising that there's a community out there devoted to tweaking machines. And obviously, consoles can have parts replaced up to and until the console is rendered obsolete and support's dropped - just like with PCs.Consoles are supposed to last a specified time? Have to disagree there too, sorry. I have an SNES in storage that still works more than a decade later, and the only reason it can't work now is because TV hookup methods have changed. My best friend has her N64 she got the day that console came out, and it still plays just fine. Until recently my XBOX was hooked up to my downstairs TV and it hasn't had a single problem; the only reason it's not playable now is because my XBOX 360's hooked up there. I bet you'll find more than a few NESes, Genesii, and Megadrives at your local gaming warehouse too, so I don't even wanna hear how "consoles only last so long". The components themselves do, yes, but as long as you can find replacement parts and treat the machine gently, the console's good to go.[/citation]
More like borophyll!