New Xbox to have a 6670?

phill1978 said:
someone suggested 2 x 79xx series cards a few pages ago and ive only just wiped the tears of laughter away...
and that was roughly the same time someone also mentioned the need for 802.11ac

:D
Click to expand...

Erm, wireless is crap as it is... what's wrong with wanting 802.11ac? Funnily enough Microsoft updated the wifi dongle when 802.11n came about...
 
TheVoice said:
What's with all the talk of tablets and phones now? They're really only a threat to handheld gaming devices like the 3DS and the Vita because of the casual nature of the games that are available on them. Doesn't matter how powerful tablets become, they aren't going to become a preferred gaming platform over an actual console and it's ridiculous to even suggest otherwise.
Click to expand...

You're right about the games, even if tablets/phones became as powerful as current consoles the games would never be as good because the market will only pay £5 a game not £30 a game. But perhaps it's not because of the games that are available on these devices, but more to do with the hardware; a console has far greater potential for more powerful hardware because it doesn't have to rely on a battery and has more space available for larger chips and cooling solutions.

So if a tablet can catch up to a console's hardware capabilities in a few years after its release, isn't this a sign off said console manufacturer just purely going after profits? Previously, consoles have always sold at a loss in the beginning of their lifespan, with the possible exception of the Wii. This was to draw gamers in with new titles that had markedly better AI, bigger levels, better graphics, superior immersion, etc.

If the rumour of a 6670 equivalent is being is in the next Xbox is true, what it illustrates is a shift of focus from the previous accepted model. One can argue that a company should be able to sell a console at a profit from day one, however it is a bad thing for the consumer because we will be getting less for our money while games will cost the same.

Just look at the Samaritan Demo that Epic released last year, a 6670 class GPU won't get close to those visuals. Yes, we wouldn't need 3x GTX 580s in a console like the PC version needed to run it but it would still need to be a powerful GPU by today's standards.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Before slagging me off, Why not look at your own post. You are the one posting like a 5 year old child that barely know's you're ABC's.

Yet again no one here has commented on the fact that the WII-U is a glorified Tablet console.:o
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? I think you've seen pictures of the controller and mistook it for the actual console. Nice one. :)
 
Bobisuruncle54 said:
.

So if a tablet can catch up to a console's hardware capabilities in a few years after its release, isn't this a sign off said console manufacturer just purely going after profits? Previously, consoles have always sold at a loss in the beginning of their lifespan, with the possible exception of the Wii. This was to draw gamers in with new titles that had markedly better AI, bigger levels, better graphics, superior immersion, etc.

If the rumour of a 6670 equivalent is being is in the next Xbox is true, what it illustrates is a shift of focus from the previous accepted model. One can argue that a company should be able to sell a console at a profit from day one, however it is a bad thing for the consumer because we will be getting less for our money while games will cost the same.

Just look at the Samaritan Demo that Epic released last year, a 6670 class GPU won't get close to those visuals. Yes, we wouldn't need 3x GTX 580s in a console like the PC version needed to run it but it would still need to be a powerful GPU by today's standards.
Click to expand...


well said on the above. xbox is practically doing a "wii" by cutting costs of its components inside to try and build a system that will give them profit from day one by gimping on the components.

The new xbox may just be a xbox 360.5
 
Dont feed the troll(s) guys

As others have said its more than likely its an interim solution for dev kits to allow them to get a headstart on making games for it and understanding its capabilities. No doubt the final release console will be uprated (probable custom) same generation GFX , so perhaps its a bit more useful of our time to discuss that - Im not that au fait with the 6xxxx series, so what are we likely to be be in for?

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
ps3ud0 said:
Dont feed the troll(s) guys

As others have said its more than likely its an interim solution for dev kits to allow them to get a headstart on making games for it and understanding its capabilities. No doubt the final release console will be uprated (probable custom) same generation GFX , so perhaps its a bit more useful of our time to discuss that - Im not that au fait with the 6xxxx series, so what are we likely to be be in for?

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...

there is no point saying which one it's going to be like because as you say they are customized for the console market meaning that they are similar but still very different at the same time to PC counterparts. based on the fact i think the ps3 has only 512MB of ram which is shared by system and video (256MB each).

i suspect the next gen should have a "minimum" of 1GB shared, meaning because they are far more efficient more than twice the power.

if the ps3 already has the capabilities to produce games like uncharted, gran turismo 5, etc. expect to see a huge increase in quality next gen.

if next gen even has 1GB system RAM and 512MB video RAM which still isn't a huge amount by PC standards, my PC isn't top of the range and even it has 512MB video RAM and 8GB system RAM and the GPU is several years old (4850) and my PC can play a lot of games with really high settings.

the 4850 in my pc is old and yet it smokes the x1800xt everyone is talking about in the current gen consoles.

so even if they chose something similar to a 4850 with only 512MB RAM expect to see up to 10 times more GPU power in a console due to how efficient they are. if the GPU is more powerful than a 4850 then it would be an insane increase in power.

the 6670 is slower than my 4850 which is several years old and not even high range when it came out.

http://www.hwcompare.com/10901/radeon-hd-4850-512mb-vs-radeon-hd-6670-oem-1gb/


the 4850 only costs like £50-£75 im assuming now and when the next gen consoles specs are finalized i would expect to see a GPU slightly better than a 4850 tbh, like a 4870. but it wont be a 4870 just similar in power and a custom version of one of the current GPU's out there.
 
ps3ud0 said:
Dont feed the troll(s) guys

As others have said its more than likely its an interim solution for dev kits to allow them to get a headstart on making games for it and understanding its capabilities. No doubt the final release console will be uprated (probable custom) same generation GFX , so perhaps its a bit more useful of our time to discuss that - Im not that au fait with the 6xxxx series, so what are we likely to be be in for?

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...

The potential problem is that if the 6670 is being used in the interim, I don't see it likely being replaced with e GCN based core, more likely a VLIW4 core or even keeping to the same VLIW5 instruction set as the 6670, just with more shaders, memory, higher clock speeds.

Could be wrong, absolutely. Can someone think of what the equivalent would be today? Assuming the info below is correct of course:

First 360 dev kit: X800 XT GPU
Actual 360 hardware: X1900 XT GPU (but with lower clocks and 48 unified shaders not 48 separate pixel shaders and 8 vertex shaders).

First 720 dev kit: 6670 GPU
Actual 720 hardware: ???

It could be a 6900 core perhaps, shrunk to 28nm? It wouldn't be as flexible as a GCN core but it would be more efficient for just graphics.

X800 XT specs:
16 Pixel Pipelines
6 Vertex Shaders
520 MHz Core
560 MHz Memory GDDR3

X1900 XT specs:
48 Pixel Pipelines
8 Vertex Shaders
625 MHz Core
1.5 GHz Memory GDDR3


Psycho Sonny said:
the 6670 is slower than my 4850 which is several years old and not even high range when it came out.

http://www.hwcompare.com/10901/radeon-hd-4850-512mb-vs-radeon-hd-6670-oem-1gb/
Click to expand...

Damn forgot that the 6670 is nearly the same as a 3870 (320 vs 480), not a 4870 (800), d'oh! That's even worse XD
 
Last edited:
OK a further question - considering the probable graphics these new consoles will have (!= 1080p/60fps); how underpowered is the 6670? I think for quite a few (more sensible) people 720p/60fps seems a more likely (minimal) position for these consoles. I guess theres a little room for manoeuvre considering the further efficiencies a console would bring over a PC implement from the get-go.

Also technically what cant the 6670 actually do? Im not talking about graphics horsepower, but what it can/cant accelerate...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
ps3ud0 said:
OK a further question - considering the probable graphics these new consoles will have (!= 1080p/60fps); how underpowered is the 6670? I think for quite a few (more sensible) people 720p/60fps seems a more likely (minimal) position for these consoles. I guess theres a little room for manoeuvre considering the further efficiencies a console would bring over a PC implement from the get-go.

Also technically what cant the 6670 actually do? Im not talking about graphics horsepower, but what it can/cant accelerate...

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...

Well it's a DX11 card:

VLIW5 instruction set
Gen7 Tesselator unit
128bit GDDR5 memory bus
Shader count is almost half of a 4850 (800 vs 480)
Shader cores are more powerful than a X1900s, and it has ten times as many (480 vs 48)

Just seems stingy to me, so much so it isn't a good sign. I mean the cost of this card would be absolutely minimal if produced at 28nm, and use very little power. At 40nm it uses 66w so you're probably looking at around 30-40w at 28nm.
 
Last edited:
The architecture supports:

DirectX 11, OpenGL 4.1 , OpenCL 1.1 , HDMI 1.4a, UVD3, and stereoscopic 3D.

So pretty much everything. The features are not the problem, just the raw speed of the chip.
 
Bobisuruncle54 said:
The potential problem is that if the 6670 is being used in the interim, I don't see it likely being replaced with e GCN based core, more likely a VLIW4 core or even keeping to the same VLIW5 instruction set as the 6670, just with more shaders, memory, higher clock speeds.

Could be wrong, absolutely. Can someone think of what the equivalent would be today? Assuming the info below is correct of course:

First 360 dev kit: X800 XT GPU
Actual 360 hardware: X1900 XT GPU (but with lower clocks and 48 unified shaders not 48 separate pixel shaders and 8 vertex shaders).

First 720 dev kit: 6670 GPU
Actual 720 hardware: ???

It could be a 6900 core perhaps, shrunk to 28nm? It wouldn't be as flexible as a GCN core but it would be more efficient for just graphics.

X800 XT specs:
16 Pixel Pipelines
6 Vertex Shaders
520 MHz Core
560 MHz Memory GDDR3

X1900 XT specs:
48 Pixel Pipelines
8 Vertex Shaders
625 MHz Core
1.5 GHz Memory GDDR3




Damn forgot that the 6670 is nearly the same as a 3870 (320 vs 480), not a 4870 (800), d'oh! That's even worse XD
Click to expand...

That is why i been banging on saying that the 6670 is a joke. its a low end, i repeat, a low end budget 6000 series GPU.
 
Bobisuruncle54 said:
Well it's a DX11 card:

VLIW5 instruction set
Gen7 Tesselator unit
128bit GDDR5 memory bus
Shader count is almost half of a 4850 (800 vs 480)
Shader cores are more powerful than a X1900s, and it has ten times as many (480 vs 48)
Click to expand...
Sorry I meant cant? Trying to understand if they just used the 6670 but then eventually put in a better binned core or more shaders/memory etc if the resulting GFX card would be that far off comparable to what the latest PC GFX cards are capable of doing...

I dont agree with the previous touted argument that MS have done a Wii this time around...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
ps3ud0 said:
Sorry I meant cant? Trying to understand if they just used the 6670 but then eventually put in a better binned core or more shaders/memory etc if the resulting GFX card would be that far off comparable to what the latest PC GFX cards are capable of doing...

I dont agree with the previous touted argument that MS have done a Wii this time around...

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...

Well technically it's just as capable as a 5870, but we all know it doesn't have the horsepower to play BF3 on high settings like a 5870 does, even at 720p, and that's what the problem is. You could have a DX11 card with 8 shader processors, but it wouldn't be able to run anything. The feature set isn't lagging, just the horsepower to make the most of it, is.

As you said and I touched on earlier, they could simply be using a 6670 now and bump up the shader count and whatnot later on, but it's still an architecture which is now 3 generations old. I would be surprised if they bumped up the core to 5870 levels with 1600 stream processors, certainly doable on 28nm.

I'm very curious why they've seemed to go with VLIW5, and not VLIW4 or GCN. Hopefully they'll do sensible things like beef up the Tesselator unit to 6900/7900 levels.
 
HeX said:
That 6670 suggested for the new Xbox is 6 times more powerful than the current Xbox 360 GPU. So your games are sunndely going to be 6x better graphically. That's a helluva bump even if they only stick with the 6670.
Click to expand...

Six times better is not that much when you consider the current Xbox 360 runs most games in upscaled 720P/30fps.

I would have expected the next gen consoles to be aiming for 1080P as standard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom