With E3 2012 on the horizon, it should come as no surprise that the Xbox 720 and the PlayStation 4 are at the forefront of gamers’ minds. It turns out that next-gen consoles may be more powerful than originally thought, as the Xbox 720 is alleged to contain hardware similar to that of a modern-day PC.
While the Xbox 720 has yet to be formally announced, recent rumors suggest developers already have access to dev kits for Microsoft’s latest console. These dev kits were shipped just recently, after the Durango events held in London and at GDC.
Xbox World Magazine’s sources say the Xbox 720 will contain an 16-core IBM PowerPC CPU, which for a game console is ridiculous. The Xbox 360 already delivers some stunning visuals with it’s 3-core CPU — it’s almost impossible to imagine what games on a system with a 16-core CPU would look like. AMD launched the first 16-core CPU last year via their Bulldozer line-up, though unfortunately there are no games (yet) that take advantage of the processing power.
As for the GPU, prospective Xbox 720 owners can look forward to a graphics card similar to AMD’s Radeon HD 7000-series. It has been rumored for some time that the Xbox 720 would be using an AMD 7000 series card, so this should really come as no surprise. Unfortunately, there has been no mention of the amount of RAM in the console, but Battlefield 3 developer DICE wants to see at least 4GB of RAM in the new consoles, so let’s hope Microsoft is listening.
The next Xbox sounds like it’s going to be a monster, but without talented first-party development studios, that power may never be fully tapped. First-party studios only need to focus on developing for one console, allowing them to take full advantage of the system — just look at how much nicer PS3 exclusives look compared to multi-platform titles. While the next Forza and Fable will definitely look gorgeous, it could do wonders for the system if Microsoft had more studios to push the new hardware to its limits.
What do you think of the rumored Xbox 720 hardware specs?
-
Follow me on Twitter @AnthonyMole
Source: Xbox World [via CVG]
Electronic Arts Discontinues Online Pass Program 
‘Minecraft’ Snapshot Update Brings Horses & Hardened Clay 
‘ZombiU 2′ Prototype in Development; Will the Sequel Include Co-op? 
Lionhead Job Listings Hint at ‘Fable 4′ ‘Reimagining’ the Franchise 
Loading ...
Looking forward to the reveal. GPU plays a much more important role than RAM in XBOX’s, but honestly, 4gb of ram isn’t too much to ask. I am really hoping for a quieter system, I hate how loud my xbox’s are (got older and newer gen)
RAM is the biggest drawback of the current consoles. RAM will always be one of the most important aspects of gaming. RAM is holding back the visuals in the current systems. Texture resolutions are low because there’s not enough RAM.
One big issue? Loading data into RAM. How do you fill 4-8GB of RAM without taking 5 minutes to move the data? That’s going to be the bottleneck of this next generation. Still, I’m excited.
Um, sorry, but CPU, GPU and BUS speed have a lot larger of a role to play than ram does, compared to a standard computer… there is very little, if anything running in the background on a console, and all that software was designed specifically for the specs on that box.
All console interfaces are streamlined, even with stuff like XBox Live to run in the background with very minimal load. It is built this way, to mimimize the effects to actual gameplay.
Most of what you see on the screen is effectlivly from the GPU… can studios publish games that use a lot of ram? Sure thing… have they done so in the past? Nope, because it really isn’t required due to how little overhead a standard console has. As I said before, 4gb of ram will be plenty with a nice Chip, GPU and BUS….
You are utterly wrong. The OS on each machine utilizes about 40MB of system memory. The X360 has a shared pool of 512MB and the PS3 has a split pool of 512MB (effectively 256 – 40MB). The reason this generation has stagnated is because of RAM limitations. There’s just no way to squeeze more out of the systems.
Yes, GPU and CPU are important, but RAM has been the single limiting factor on consoles ever since their conception. This will be the first generation that moves beyond this limitation. That’s going to make more of a difference than faster CPU/GPU.
If you added more RAM to the X360 and PS3 (as they are right now), developers could do a lot more with them (including better visuals). That’s what you don’t understand.
Word.
AnonymousGuy, someone that gets it.
Actually, dvd/blue ray read times are as much, if not more responsible for poor textures. Games like Battlefield 3, Rage, and Witcher 2 actually instal a lot of the textures onto the hard drive to make up for this. Consoles run Direct Compute I believe, so RAM usage for things like the OS is going to be incredibly minimal (40mb you said? any links to support this?). Anyhow, its funny how many people were throwing out lousy 4, 8 core and/or 7600 specs. I wonder if these people were even old enough to remember when the last gen came out. Funny enough, it was IGN throwing around these laughable rumors. News Corp can’t even report news they are illegitimate (fox news*cough*) games won’t be shipped on either blue ray or DVD, doubtfully even discs
I hope they can make it affordable. That is essential.
A 500-600 dollar PlayStation 3 wasn’t able to gain anywhere near the traction people expected of it, and that was BEFORE the economic meltdown.
I wonder if this coming generation in general will have a hard time matching the performance of the consoles that launched back in 05 and 06, so much has changed since then.
As nice as the games on a system comparable to a high end gaming PC, compared to previous generations, the leap is still going to be fairly conservative.
I think Microsoft and Sony are possibly going to focus on dramatically improving the functionality of their new systems as well as the visuals to make a new platform a more attractive proposition to consumers.
They’re going to have contract options.
Seems to me that the power of the next gen consoles is going o be way past the capabilities of at least 50% of their audience’s televisions and theater setups. We’re talking some major power with those specs and it would no different than the current gen consoles anything less than a super high end television. I think they should work more on maxing out their current capabilities than always being five steps ahead of what they are capable of making VISUALLY.
Screen resolution (720P and 1080P) are only one small portion of visual fidelity. There’s far more than resolution when determining graphical quality. Resolution won’t change much compared to adding visual effects found in DX 11 (for instance). You could have a great game using DX 11 features even on an SD display. (It would smoke current gen) All resolution contributes is clarity of image. The more lines of resolution, the clearer the image. Still, the next gen will look far superior to this one for other reasons that most people are clueless about.
I wish I could put into words how much better Wii games look on the dolphin player. It’s night and day. When you get to use some of the native functions on today’s nicer GPU’s you get a visual experience that the Wii just can’t do.
This sounds as though it’s going to make development costs sky-rocket…. The industry doesn’t need higher expenses, it needs some financial lenience to encourage more innovation; if this is true, we’re going to be getting plenty of generic titles that consumers tend to put their money behind, and fewer creative risks on consoles.
The cost of optimization has been HUGE this gen. I doubt we’ll see huge differences in the cost of development. In fact, costs could go down or plateau this gen. Just because you have more power doesn’t mean you need to use it all. You’ll get great looking games with LESS effort. The hardware is far more capable than the garbage in the PS3/X360 (going on 7+ years old now).
What’s kinda funny is I was saying months ago that a 14 core wasn’t out of the realm of possibility. Now a 16 core…
Wouldn’t all this make it too expensive? I would expect 8-cores but I suppose 16 isn’t out of the question. I hope the GPUs are radeon 7000 series, anything less would be pointless.
Yowza! 16 cores, that’s a spicy meatball!
i hope when its released it isn’t over $600 but i suspect it will be around $1200 since the PS3 was $1000 on its release and took 2/3 years to go to $500. 4K resolution would be good with a blu ray optical drive. and well if its a mean gaming system that shits all over the competition then ill be happy
Obvious troll is obvious. The Playstation 3 was never $1200. LOL. You’re just an idiot.
Awww, yah, that is so neat. Finaly someone gets it.
i keep laughing at the rumoured specs it aint going to have a 16 core processor and it will have a mid level card other wise this thing going to cost 1000 bucks ahah!!
Juat like last gen eh?
Just*
Honestly I just want to see good games. I don’t give a crap if they look bad as long as they are fun to play and are genuinely good games.
Like, for example, I just bought Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver off of PSN the other day (i would own a disk copy but I couldn’t for the life of me find one). Game honestly looks like crap, just like most games from back on the PS1, but it’s fun to play, and a good game. Even to this day.
To sum up my point and further repeat myself, I think that gamers and game developers should stop caring about how “pretty” a game can look, and rather care about how the game really is.
I want to to put this into an email and send it to activision and also add: STOP MAKING COD
It could easy have 16cores for cheap, just drop two 8 core CPUs in it rather than 1CPU. This would be cheaper and better for programming. What will drive the cost up is the IBM power PC CPU. If they went with an AMD or Intel CPU that is on the market now, the cost would be a lot less. It would also make programming games a hell of a lot easier. Why stop at 4 GB of RAM? RAM will be one of the cheapest components to put in this thing. Make it 8 or 16. 1GB per logical CPU! It will have Blurry because Microsoft wants it to be your media hub. No one will be happy with the price of this thing when it comes out unless they marketed as a Gamer PC replacement. To do that though, they would have to allow for mice and keyboard inputs as well as the standard controller. Along with the ability to play MMOs (wow,rift,SWTOR) on it. I much rather pay $1200 for a console if it was going to replace my gamming PC. No one wants to pay $500 for a console and $1200 for a gamming PC.
hehehehe. No way this would work…
dude, I for one, dont want a console EVER replacing my PC!! I will pay 300$ for xbox and another 300 for ps just for the games you cant get on a PC, then ill work my ass off for a $4,000 Gaming pc for EVERY GAME THATS OUT FOR IT.. If I have a choice between lets say; Prototype 2 on a XBOX, PLAYSTATION and a PC…Im getting it on a PC! even if I have to wait for it!
If a console ever manages to outdo PC for a little while, I will remove my own vertebrae, curl around and EAT MY OWN ASS
It happened in 2005.
If this thing is too expensive, MS will price themselves out of the market. there is no way I would pay that much for a system, no matter how good. I love gaming, but I also have to eat, pay rent, buy clothes. If MS is smart, they’ll keep the price close to 300 and retain their market share. Not only that, but if a system is going to be 5-600 bucks, 75% of the games better be worth buying rather than renting.
I’m very worried that these companies are going to leave us 30+ gamers out in the cold when they price these systems.
hey guess what…you can get a pc platform with up to 96gb of ddr 3 ram and video cards with 3k of cuda cores and SLi 3 of them together …when are you going to start using that power?
Wait, you’re saying it’s as fast as a modern day PC. Well, that doesn’t mean much due to the fact that the “shelf life” for a PC is about 6 months now before it becomes obsolete. So, by the time the Xbox “720″ or PS4 comes out they’re still going to be “behind” whatever the PC’s are running.
Unless both companies continue to update their hardware just before release neither systems will run as fast as their current PC counterparts.
Not true! with the exception of Ram, last generation were better then Top of the line gaming PC’s.
Im still going to stick with my PC!! its no secret, the Pc is the most powerful gaming platform there is.. its always been that way, PC’s TODAY are more powerful than the Xbox 720 that isnt even out yet…. and when it does come out the PC will be at least 1-2 generations ahead..the problem the PC has is in fact just the developers catering to a larger market share in the consoles and developing multi-platform games with no distinct difference in any one title on any one platform..The PC will be sharper and have more fidelity but thats about it now a days except for a few games. I wish we could have a game that makes the current tech melt to keep up with the game..The last time this happend was Crysis 1 in 2007!
Why can’t you people call it by it’s codename? Durango? Sure it’s dumb, but 720 just sounds horrible.
What’s wrong with “XBox 720?” Personally, I like the name, it gives it a sense of tradition.
it would be very nice but im not gonna be spending $400+ for this because of its power. times are tough these days and if they come out with this, thats great, but hopefully they dont price it too high or im gonna be waiting for a good while.
I just hope they can run 64 player battlefield 3. Battlefield is one of the few games that is VASTLY better on pc. I play it on 360 but ive seen it on pc…..helluva lot better