While Microsoft's focus lies with Xbox One X, we're not short on details surrounding the next flagship Xbox consoles. Microsoft's Executive Vice President of Gaming, Phil Spencer, has confirmed it's already architecting new Xbox hardware, with a promise to "set the benchmark" for console gaming. The Xbox 'Scarlett' duo is reportedly on the way, featuring a standard high-end console, and lightweight streaming-focused alternative.
AMD CEO, Dr. Lisa Su, has provided an insight into its work with Microsoft, speaking with Jim Cramer of CNBC's Mad Money. Following up on the firm's recent success, Dr. Su provided an insight into its Redmond partnerships, touching on its ongoing game console efforts and cloud computing investments.
The continued relationship is no surprise, with past Xbox consoles similarly packing AMD hardware. However, with rumors of hardware tailored to Microsoft's upcoming "XCloud" Xbox game-streaming service, AMD may be working closer than ever to deliver these devices.
Reports suggest a hybridized solution is underway for XCloud, merging both local and cloud-based processing. While latency-sensitive aspects would be processed locally, an infrastructure of stripped-down custom consoles would handle graphics-intensive outputs. If the next major Xbox consoles debut in tandem with XCloud, we can expect a heightened collaboration between the companies to build this backbone.
What are your thoughts on the future of Xbox consoles and game streaming? Let us know in the comments section.
See at Microsoft (opens in new tab)
Good to see Xbox take a two pronged approach as not everyone has the internet access for Hi-Fi Xbox Game streaming. I recall about 5 years ago, coming across a tenant who was having internet issues and he was living in a premier development in London (discovery dock) and he was getting 2 Megabits per second lol... When 20 Megabits per second was the norm, there are also some parts in London that are still stuck on dial up as they are in the no-man's land between two exchanges. If that is the case for a city like London (we are only just getting a gigabit internet roll out and it will take about 10 years for it cover a decent portion of the UK - at the current rate it's being rolled), just imagine what it's like in places without adequate internet infrastructure. Good to know AMD are working on the SOCs for the next generation of Xbox and Playstation, as I would rather have AMD on these projects as opposed to Nvidia.
The only reason MS went with AMD over NVidia is that MS demanded to own the IP (Intellectual Property) for any custom APU in the XBOX.
NVidia would not give up it's graphics IP so MS went with AMD which was willing to do so.
Sony went with AMD for the same reason.
NVidia has gone in another direction completely from AMD who are focused on custom SOCs for their IP customers (MS and Sony.) NVidia is focused heavily on AI and Machine Sensors for the Auto and Industrial markets and then using that knowledge in their consumer products. This is where the tech came from for the new RTX series of Ray-Tracing GPUs, from their Industrial Vision products.
I am quite happy to use both my AMD-based XBOX1X and my NVidia 1070 GPU in my PC.
The more competition the better.
Now that Intel has announced they are getting back into the GPU market (after the debacle of their first GPUs back 20 years ago) it will get very interesting on the low-end. They don't stand a chance on the high-end, but with their muscle in the CPU/Chipset/NIC/Wireless markets they will probably take over the low-end-integrated market. That's bad news for AMD who are hoping their new APUs will make a big dent in that market.
Yeah it's the same in Denmark... I am happy things shifted to optic fibre, now its 500/500
An "Xcloud" Console would be smart. And they can offer a bit more of the 2013 vision they had with OG Xbox one. Microsoft was ahead of time by alot and knew where gaming was going when nobody else did or pretended it wouldn't go there. Offering "Xcloud" is a smart way of delivering more consoles to people in a potential cheaper way. Others simply have to follow if it turns out in a success.
Also "Xcloud" can be a precursor to game streaming with mobile devices or via smart tvs through the xbox app therefore increase xbox reach by a massive margin. At the same time they can use this to leverage Films, TV (and If they had Groove... that as well) via the digital Microsoft store on Smart TVs... Soo many leverage points...
it is Microsofts goal to have the ''Play Anywhere'' reach as much devices/platforms possible. and that is a good way to do it.
My only concern is the push for everything to be either streamed or downloaded online. I will always want to own something physical. Already, with the push for everything to be backwards and forwards compatible, we’ve also seen games removed from the marketplace that customers purchased in the past with their access being revoked, along with no refund issued and instead the offer to download garbage like Feeding Frenzy. That in itself is enough to make me say I will never support something that doesn’t play some sort of physical copy of a game. I’m not paying for any sort of timed license to own something online.. I simply want to own it if I purchase it.
I can see it both ways, to generate physical media along with cases there is alot of waste (by products) unless they are made using recycled plastics etc. Also the fact a digital copy is actually more expensive than the physical media is frustrating, I get they get more profits that way but it's just counter intuitive. As you would sell more digital copies if they were cheaper than physical media or at least depreciated in value at the same rate as physical media until a certain point. The issue with licensing and ownership is why I personally I would never spend more than £20 on a digital title. To date I haven't bought a single digital item costing more than £10 - the only one game I bought for about £10 was titanfall.
I can agree to an extent. I love games with gold digital content, and I hardly but triple A titles for that reason. If it is a Blockbuster title, I'm finna waiting a few months for a sale somewhere. I have a One and One X each with their own 4TB HDD, I don't own any physical games, because my son or gf can play on my "home" console and I play on the one X. One purchase, two separate console play at the same time. Xbox live gold capability sharing to play online. So, yeah at times digital is more expensive, but for me the pros heavily outweigh cons. Most games I own are freebies plus dual console access.
@EXboxNick. Fairly good points. Unfortunately almost everyone I know games on playstation due to the fact playing online is free with PS3. However that is changing due to the current direction of xbox and cross play.
If my household was geared towards xbox, I would be jumping on every games with gold title lol. But right now my monthly budget doesn't allow space for either psn+ or xbox live.
PS3? You mean PS4 right? If PS3 then new game argument is moot because there isn't anything (at least of AAA quality) that I am aware that is being released on the older console anymore. And if PS4, playing online for everything (except for F2P like Fortnite) requires paying for PSPlus just like XBL Gold on Xbox.
> One copy multiple consoles.
And if you have a capable Notebook, some games supports XPA. Plus, BC, FC, cross-gen-play and many other features.
Access being revoked after purchase?
Curious, care to share a list? I think you can still DL Scott Pilgrim vs The World The Game and Platinum's TMNT and past Forza Games.
Get the best of Windows Central in in your inbox, every day!
Thank you for signing up to Windows Central. You will receive a verification email shortly.
There was a problem. Please refresh the page and try again.