Why do current consoles use X86?

PS3 was too powerful for its own good.

>PS3 was too expensive for its own good
fixed that for you

>documented only in varying quality engrish
You honestly think Microsoft, Sony or IBM for that matter would be giving out shit documentation on there own products?
No doubt there is a treasure trove that can explain what every little register does on an Xbox 360 but that info was never meant to meet the eyes of any plebeian that didn’t absolutely have to see it

On a release date basis the original xbox was the most of powerful computer for the price by a longshot.

it's cheap.

I think it’s because it will be easier to do backwards compatibility later on, the PS3 had a proprietary architecture CPU and now it’s hard to do backwards compatibility.

What were the most visually impressive Xbox games?

Attached: ghost.jpg (1920x1080, 535K)

youtube.com/watch?v=x0KSJg2sqJM

nope. similar to ps4 design chips running windows.
no drivers though.

Amd Jaguar Cpus

It's not like they could stuff the highest end i7 in their for that price

>tfw ryzen cpu + navi gpu on ps5
>tfw 60fps on everything.

The PS3 _did_ have very impressive computing power on paper but programming it was such a hassle that nobody wanted to do it. I suspect many of the worse performing games barely did anything on the fancy SPE compute core things and just used the single PowerPC core for just about everything. Its GeForce 7000 series GPU also became obsolete within a year or so when the GeForce 8800 shipped.
The 360 was a much more conventional design (~3 PowerPC cores with HT?) but from what I've read it was much easier to program, both hardware and development tools wise. Its early Radeon HD-like GPU was also more powerful. And a total housefire that overheated circuit boards until they bent and snapped their solder joints.
Both consoles were also severely crippled by the pathetic amount of RAM on them.

Doom 3 looked pretty great, along with Halo 2 and Half Life 2. Halo CE was a launch title and doesn’t look nearly as good as later releases.

I don't know about the Xenon but the Cell's PowerPC core had 2-way SMT.

That Chinese console and a PS4 are not comparable as a PS4 is not an actual PC capable of running IBM PC compatible software. You will never get native x86/x64 Windows running on an Xbox One or PS4 unless it’s actually compiled to run on those systems breaking tons of shit in the process

This. Back in the 90s the NEC PC98 had the same 486s as an IBM-compatible PC but the hardware architecture and memory layout was different enough that very little software could run on both as-is.

theyre not that custom man, the only custom thing the drm chips. the actual gpu is essentially a modified 470 but not that modified, and the cpu is just jaguar

>>tfw 60fps on everything.
If only, dumbass devs still go for 'muh cinematic' so expect more bloom and particles up the ass

Microsoft didn't

This user gets it. Even with quantum computers devs will find a way to barely crank out 45fps.

Here is something you don’t realize, PCs operate on decades of legacy compatibility dating back to the original 8086 and lots of that stuff is still used to this day that both the PS4 and Xbone doesnt have.
Not only that it’s not just ‘a little custom’ there is a metric fuck ton of custom bullshit Sony has done to the PS4. The closest thing to a PS4 acting like a PC is when attempting to run Linux on it and even then Linux had to be told it wasn’t running on a PC to just boot and then nearly everything had to be rebuilt just to work around all the custom junk for basic functionality

Processor doesn't matter for games they'd be fine using ARM cores or anything, it's the GPU that matters, and since MS/Sony went to AMD for GPUs they got their x86 CPUs as part of the package (same as Nintendo got ARM going with Nvidia)

Microsoft went with AMD GPUs last time on the 360 but they still went with powerpc as they wanted something powerful. There only doing an AMD x86 soc now as it’s cheap and they want to actually make some money

1. Performance
2. Price
No other CPU architecture offers as good performance for the price.

Kinda nah...
RTX2080ti is response for Sony/M$ who wanted
something groundbreaking for their nextboxstation, AMD will provide another cheap, stable alternative.
Shit's still 50/50 what will go into next gen consoles...

Witcher 2 is most beautiful X360 game, by far.
That's all I know about Xboxes

You have to be smoking crack if you think Microsoft or Sony is going to splurge on a cutting edge GPU for their next system. They will continue to use the AMD APU setup because it fuckin works and is cheap.

Because there's nothing else to use that would work well if at all.
Firstly because developers would again have to get used to a special snowflake arch, secondly because PCs use x86(-64).
What, you think your trashy CELL was any good at all?

yep bloat for incompetent devs

Because current devs only know x86

Yes. The PS2, PS3, GCN, Wii and WiiU were a pain in the ass to program for.

Because it's the only reasonably-priced high-performance CPU architecture available today.
It's just isn't profitable to do custom shit like in the past.

Is it worth it to buy PS4 and install Linux on it?

No.

You're out of your mind. Navi is literally a bespoke design for Sony's PS5 getting back-ported to PC. Similarly, the primitive rasterization in Vega was an attempt to accelerate in silicon a set of rendering techniques used in PS4/Xbone titles' pre-rasterization compute shaders to improve geometry throughput. AMD and MS/Sony are probably tied together through at least PS6/Xbthree generations at this point.

At the same time, Nvidia's whole consumer graphics plan is to bolt on features frequently enough that they can obsolete their own customers' GPUs no less frequently than every 2 years, so beefy consoles with a 5-6 year lifespan taking away relevance from PC gaming is directly against their interest.

They needed the memory addressing afforded by a 64bit processor, but at the time 64bit arm wasn't an option. Had the arm A57 come out a year earlier there would have been ARM processors in the consoles.

Last time Microsoft and Sony went for a cutting edge GPU they sold consoles at a loss for half their life time. The PS4/XBone are a direct reaction to that, with their cheap laptop tier hardware. And seeing how sales haven't been affected, and in the PS4 case even increased, neither of them are going back.

Watch the PS5 ship with a mobile Ryzen plus a bunch of Vega cores.

I played quake with realtime colored lighting on my saturn.

Attached: 5293fo009511-127903524.jpg()(9572F2599C69CB1F7096F39183C5AC44).jpg (1559x1177, 217K)

When will Apple revolutionize the gaming console industry?
>2-3 times the the price of its competitors
>Glossy white with Apple logo in centre
>No upgradable storage, premium cloud storage available.
>Apple game store downloads only, no physical disk.
>controllers optional extra
>controllers with non replaceable batteries
>2 usb c ports to accommodate the many dongles
>No 4k support until 3rd or 4th version of console
>will stream games to your phone and tablet as part of subscription based service
>obsolete within 4 years, forced to upgrade to newest console
>iGame Onions

It'd be funny if they just stop making consoles and just made games available through an online service for PC. Imagine a future where gamers get their games from Steam, PSN, and/or MS Live. And there's already things like UPlay. Maybe the future is every company having their own online distribution software.

Nintendo I don't think has ever done it this way, hence part of why their stuff's never focused on the power of the machine anymore.

They will just update their AMD APU setup to Zen+ and Vega for next console, that's all.

They can call it Pippin 2

Attached: Apple-Pippin-Atmark-Bandai-video-game-console-JAP.png (570x504, 149K)

consoles use the cheapest most worthless cpus of the era that they can get for like 5$ cost a core.

amd had some shit jaguar laptop apus literally no one wanted so both sony and xbox used then.

they didn't go x86 for ease of ports or development they both don't care about that shit.

PS5/xbox4 will use what ever is the most cheap as shit cpu they can find it wont be ryzen it will be some thing far more random and unsuccessful.. im guessing ARM or Qalcom or some literal random Chinese knockoff cpu that failed and no one heard about.

people who think its ryzen are delusional sure a sony dev updated a binary for ryzen support but that's for the developer tools to run on ryzen computers not for the actual dev kits or consoles to have ryzen inside.

just you wait. no one was buying AMD laptops in 2012 what ever no one buys in 2018/2019 will be what's in them.

Because porting everything to unique chipsets with a lot of quirks [see: EE, Cell] is a burden on developers. They are going to develop for the mass market [x86] and leave generally shitty porting jobs to the specialized hardware.

Also price and availability.

Retarded hardware choices almost killed Nintendo [N64] and would have killed Playstation were it not for the sheer size of Sony and the amount of loss it could absorb.

so yer maybe RTX

that whole porting to PS3 was hard thing was a meme the reason devs complained about PS3 and made excuses is that it was too expensive and wasn't selling well.

software/hardware programing isn't as hard as you think or expensive. that's just the excuse they make when they say... well the PS3 version runs like shit and looks bad because only 1/7th of our customers use that.

would a console made a great multimedia and browsing experience?

It really wasn't, the cell cores were useless for anything that wasn't floating point. The CPU only had one general purpose core. IIRC it also completely lacked any kind of branch processing, relying instead in "smart compilers".

Games cost so much to develop they want then remakes to be less work.
Keeping it all on x86 makes it easier.
iPhone games are the perfect example.

So, the reason they didn't do it was for the reason they stated they didn't do it?

If it was trivial to do, it would have been trivially done.

Will the next gen of consoles be 60 fps? Or will they chase resolution and stick with 30?

All you're going to get from here on out are sharper images of the garbage at lower frame rates, barring some unforeseen leap in computing.

>No one has checked these digits

>controllers with non replaceable batteries
Isn't this already how it's been since wii/ps3/x360?

gonna be the same architecture because muh backwards compatibility. Microsoft got so many customers back with it that no way will Sony ignore it again.

I want BC just for the fact that I don't have to clutter my TV shelf with useless plastic crap. If PS5 plays PS4 games (no reason it shouldn't unless it uses different processor architecture) I'm selling my PS4.

360/bone controllers have replaceable batteries with optional rechargable battery packs (which can be replaced once they run down). xbone even allows you to use any micro-usb to a cable and connect to the console with no batteries at all

dude. sega saturn. was a nightmare to work with. contributed significantly to sega's problems and eventual bankruptcy.

I imagine sony going nvidia for gpu and amd for cpu next gen and microsoft sticking with amd both cpu and gpu.

>sold at a loss
>ps4: image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/39/1/1537810567-tmp-27828-img-20180924-1935404013577609986566485.jpg

>I imagine sony going nvidia for gpu
sony and amd work together on Navi.

A new one? no

An old one? Not yet

I'm not even sure what Linux it runs. Like Red Ribbon Linux for the PS3 is basically Debian Jessie, what the heck even is PS4 Linux?

nigga u dumb or what? amd already told to their shareholders they gonna power the next gen cücksoles.

Consoles regularly sell at a loss, the only biggest loser was the PS3 because of all the resources they poured into it.

+1200$ entry price for consoles? can't wait !!

They have been claiming "our next gen console will run everything at 60fps" at least since oriignla Playstation to buidk hype.

That said, industry will look back to Subor as complete game changer nobody saw coming. I am already consulting local game businesses to move away from Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft and focus on Subor clones.

>Shit's still 50/50 what will go into next gen consoles...
It's going to be AMD again, it's already been confirmed that Sony is co-developing Navi with AMD and given AMD already made new APUs for the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, their position is all but certain for both next-gen consoles.

Nvidia introduced a permanent hardware flaw into 18 million of Nintendo's consoles leading to widespread piracy within a year of the console's release. Nvidia would probably have to make a really, really solid deal for anyone to consider them.

>consoles use the cheapest most worthless cpus of the era
Not true at all. Sony used the Cell processor for the PS3 and that was expensive as fuck.

Sony spent far too much money trying to make their own CPU for the PS3, so they said fuck it, let's just ask AMD to make us a CPU + GPU in one chip instead. It'll be far easier.

SoC is pretty much the only future for consoles unless you have need of truly monstrous computing power (which you don't since you'd never get that into a sensible price point without selling at a massive loss) anbd for X86 cpus only AMD can offer such a setup...for now. Intel's igpu is shit, IBM cannot into anything other than mainframes and lol VIA.