Xbox 720 Durango Dev Kit Appears Online for Sale

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]KingOtaku[/nom]HOnestly...I don't think this is legit.Looking at the specs, they seem a bit high compared to what was previously assumed. We went from an (assumed) IBM or AMD quad core with possibly 4 gigs of ram and a 67xx series gpu to this? An eight core intel alone costs at least $800, not to mention a likely high end graphics card, which would cost another $200-300? I mean I know microsoft gets discounts for bulk, but seriously. All together this has to be around $1100 at I market price. Even if they could cut that in half, I don't see anyone spending $500+ on a console.[/citation]
I read the same articles; but God I hope you're wrong for the sake of PC and Console gaming over the next 10 years.
But 8 (Intel) cores does seem stilly, 8 threads seems more likely.
 
[citation][nom]ConSOULGamingllll[/nom]Awesome! Day 1 purchase here. PC gaming is so stale and boring anymore with no good exclusives. Looking forward to seeing these new consoles, as they should be pretty future proof with the specs they are touting (8GB RAM, 8-core CPU, modern GFX card). Hopefully they have a new Call of Duty as a launch title for this like they did for the 360. Or maybe Halo?[/citation]
You gave me a trollgasm.
 
[citation][nom]RockNRollz[/nom]I don't see anyone spending $500+ on a console.PS3 was there when it was first released, and they did sell a lot.[/citation]

the PS3 at 600$ was one of the biggest launch mistakes Sony had made. 😵. It forced Sony to sell them at a lower cutting heavily into their profit margin, which was eventually saved by good titles going to it.
 
[citation][nom]leongrado[/nom]I wonder why they're going to have 8 cores. Are they predicting games to use that much more cpu in the future? I have an i5 quad core right now and cpu has never been a bottleneck. What do you guys think. Is this just another reason for them to charge us more for the system or are games really going to require that much more professing power?[/citation]
Games are massively parallel, with a lot of very different things all going on at once (audio, video, AI, physics, social services, OS services, etc., and each of these things can be comprised of many threads). Having more CPU cores helps give game designers more ways to distribute the load so that they can make more complex games.
The 2 huge things that consoles hold back the industry on (I am talking game design, not graphical output which can be cured by even a moderate GPU) are AI which are all dumb as a box of rocks, and map design. Throwing in massive amounts of memory, and a bunch of cores will help those 2 things a great deal as we can have much larger/more interesting maps, and then have AI that could actually make a decision further than "find user, run at user while shooting or hide behind chest-high wall, stop at boundary".
I would love to play games where the AI has more of a real person's reaction in being less predictable, and using more of the options available to them. And maps need to get more interesting, more layered/tiered, bigger, with more interesting boundaries, and more interaction/destructability that current consoles simply cannot do nicely. PCs have the ability to do this, but games are designed for console, so the lowest common denominator determines gaming for all.

Besides, these next consoles need to last 8-10 years, and will not be released until Christmas of 2013. While quad core CPUs will still be the norm for the next 2 years, we will start to see 8+core CPUs come out with SkyLake/SkyMont processors in ~2015. So the consoles will be ahead of the curve on core count (granted with a slower CPU) for a year, and then be left in the dust for the remaining 6-9 years of it's life-cycle.

Something they are not saying is that these may possibly be the last gen of traditional 'gaming consoles' as network speeds increase dramatically and server based gaming gets better and better. In 10 years I fully expect a new console, but I expect it to be a cheap $50 or free box that forces you into a monthly contract to stream your game content rather than a traditional machine that does any real local processing.
 
[citation][nom]ConSOULGamerlllll[/nom]Nice try, troll, but my Mac Pro was way more expensive than your toy computer and is far more advanced. Professionals like me use computers for REAL work and leave games to consoles where they belong.I'd love to see your "real PC" hang with an 8-core Xeon in things that matter in the real world, like doing grown up work, LOL. Hint: your overpriced graphics card doesn't mean JACK![/citation]
You do realize you can make a duel Xeon PC for well under $3000, while an equivalent mac cost nearly double that price right? And because of the OSX bloat the PC will run faster even with the same hardware specs. I cannot tell you how many of my friends are art students who were forced to buy macs for their school's program, but then run win7 for doing work on it because it takes hours off their rendering time.

I'm not saying that Mac sucks all the time (I use macs all the time, and through the first Intel macs they were without question the way to go), or that the PC has always been on top (Because winXP and Vista really held hardware back). But at the moment the windows7 and linux PCs rules the art world, especially for 3D design and video work. I am sure that mac will catch on before their art base decides to leave in mass, but at the moment your big mac is just an overpriced paperweight.
 

My guess is, that it'll need more grunt for the next gen Kinect.
 
[citation][nom]leongrado[/nom]I wonder why they're going to have 8 cores. Are they predicting games to use that much more cpu in the future? I have an i5 quad core right now and cpu has never been a bottleneck. What do you guys think. Is this just another reason for them to charge us more for the system or are games really going to require that much more professing power?[/citation]

To a large extent, the games will take advantage of what's available. If you're developing games targeted at the lowest-common denominator CPU-wise for the current generation, then you're looking at the PS3 which has only one general-purpose main core. Since you have to make it run on that, and it will run much faster on the PS3 regardless, there's not much point in building an architecture designed to take full advantage of 8 cores.

It is possible to create a game engine architecture that is reasonable to use and supports N cores. I think with this next console generation that will happen.

It's only worth the overhead to create a completely threaded architecture though for 4+ cores, because it requires doubling the memory used for some operations, and scheduling interdependent modifications to happen in a separate pass. That means in the single core case, it's slower and uses more memory. However, once you take that initial hit, it will scale basically infinitely with the number of cores.
 
Nice try, troll, but my Mac Pro was way more expensive than your toy computer and is far more advanced. Professionals like me use computers for REAL work and leave games to consoles where they belong.

I'd love to see your "real PC" hang with an 8-core Xeon in things that matter in the real world, like doing grown up work, LOL. Hint: your overpriced graphics card doesn't mean JACK!
Click to expand...
Do you jerk off to your Mac every night?
 
I think people will find that the perceived gap in performance between the PS4/X720 and the Wii U isn't as great as people think. These outlandish specs are either false or these consoles will (again) be priced $500-600. Microsoft may even repeat what they did with the $99 Xbox 360 and have you pay a monthly surcharge for a slightly lower initial cost, but in the end will cost you way more money had it been purchased outright. I just don't see these specs being true on a console costing less than $500.
 
If its online only or doesn't have an optical drive will that mean that you need to download all the games?
I hope not because bandwidth here costs 100$ for 15 gb of data I'm sure I'm not the only one with crappy "Canadian high speed internet" low bandwidth nightmare... were not even that rural here.
 
[citation][nom]antilycus[/nom]8 CORES Does NOT equal 8x the performance.AX,BX,CX,DX, EX, EAX All the cores use the same, extremely small memory registers. Don't be fooled. any performance increase you see will be for the GPU, not the CPU. Are you willing to pay 500ish dollars for a GPU for your PC? Then why would your TV? Only to have it out of date by the time you purhcase it, with NO HOPES OF UPGRADING. IMO Console's are dying. It's the same repeated trash for way too much money that hinders developers and hinders advances. OUYA, is the way to go. Low costs, easy to upgarde (just buy a new one) and open-source.[/citation]

I don't think you know what you're talking about....simply tout the CPU registers and saying it's 'small'...of course it's small! Show me a CPU with 'BIG' memory register please??? And i don't think anyone said 8 cores=8x performance. Only idiots will have such ideas...

Consoles dying?? Look at the sales figures....hardware power means nothing if there is no games for it. Time and time, i've been dissapointed by the PC...same shit all over with marginally better graphics. There is nothing but endless FPS on the PC...even genre like RTS and dungeon crawling also seems to be dead (Diablo 3...urggh...Starfcraft 2...yeuck.....same old stuff with enhance graphics).

Everytime i upgrade to an expensive GPU, it's the same old story...dissapointment...nothing to play except looking at higher frame rates and resolution......it gets old...REALLY QUICK.
 
"Something they are not saying is that these may possibly be the last gen of traditional 'gaming consoles' as network speeds increase dramatically and server based gaming gets better and better. In 10 years I fully expect a new console, but I expect it to be a cheap $50 or free box that forces you into a monthly contract to stream your game content rather than a traditional machine that does any real local processing.?"

I don't think cloud gaming is going to happen anytime soon, or even at all.
PC gaming will go to hell if cloud gaming comes up. No one will buy amd/nvidia's gpu's and intel/amd's cpus. Everyone will go to consoles because they will have the best hardware.
 
[citation][nom]ConSOULGamingIIII[/nom]How is it trolling? Current XBOX has 512MB of shared memory, a triple core CPU, and an X1900 series graphics card, and games still look great on it. Heck, the PS3 has a weaker graphics card, and the Uncharted and God of War series are FAR better looking than anything on PC.This is a substantial hardware upgrade. The games already look great now; I can't even imagine what the next Uncharted will look like![/citation]

I'll tell you how its a troll. its a troll because you said " the Uncharted and God of War series are FAR better looking than anything on PC" Seriously have you seen any pc games in the last year or 3? BF3? Yeah I didn't think so. You sir are the reason consoles crap sells, uninformed dolts like yourself who don't know jack about PC's or what good is.
 
[citation][nom]GreaseMonkey_62[/nom]Do you jerk off to your Mac every night?[/citation]

Typical blind faith and fanboyisim for apple.
 
[citation][nom]ConSOULGamingIIII[/nom]How is it trolling? Current XBOX has 512MB of shared memory, a triple core CPU, and an X1900 series graphics card, and games still look great on it. Heck, the PS3 has a weaker graphics card, and the Uncharted and God of War series are FAR better looking than anything on PC.This is a substantial hardware upgrade. The games already look great now; I can't even imagine what the next Uncharted will look like![/citation]

ill give you that ascetically uncharted series looks better than most pc games, because god knows we have to have shades of grey or brown otherwise it wont look real.

[citation][nom]RockNRollz[/nom]I don't see anyone spending $500+ on a console.PS3 was there when it was first released, and they did sell a lot.[/citation]

they are also a bluray player, and if you were willing, could be a full pc back in the eairly days with a linux boot. they also had a full ps2 on the inside to, something i would pay for today, just so i could get an hdmi input as i dont have composite on my new monitor anymore.

but that was a long time ago, i believe it was before pcs hit that good enough for anything area, where the only reason any pc right now cant play a game is because it doesn't have a graphics card, when the ps3 and 360 came out, it was also they may not have a good enough cpu.

you can not bring out a 500$+ console today and expect it to do well, even if the graphics are 10 times better than they are currently. you would get some to move over, but there isnt a need it for this gameplay jump.

 
did i really see someone say their mac pro was a real pc? ha! hey mac boy can ur mac run 3ds max? did not think so and the trolling here is hard just thought id join in!
but really this next gen xbox dev kit does seem to be where its at bet anything it has a intel core i3 or something similar with a gts 450 or so
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom