Revolution Horsepower Revealed 774
Revo writes "IGN.com unveiled leaked specs for Nintendo's upcoming Revolution console today. The system really is about twice as powerful as a GameCube and a far cry from the Xbox 360 and PS3. Of course, the focus is on the innovative controller and the affordable price."
Hardware isn't everything.... (Score:5, Insightful)
The original Xbox is, on paper, much more powerful than the GameCube and yet for my money (and I own many games on both of these systems), nothing on the original Xbox looks nearly as good as Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube.
I'm a lot more excited about the Revolution than either of the other next-gen systems (though I'll probably buy an Xbox360 when more good games come out for it)... in the meantime I'll keep trying to boost my online ranking in Tetris DS.
MHZ myth (Score:5, Informative)
The rule of thumb was that if you could do it on the Xbox, you could do it on the GameCube and you would probably have to shave it down to get it to work on the PS2. The problem child you have to worry about in a cross-platform title is always PS2.
I don't know where Casamassina is getting his assertion that GC polygon peaks were less than the PS2. Does he mean untextured polys? Again the PS2 is generally the platform that you have to optimize for.
Using MHz numbers to compare the speed of different processors is like comparing the speed of cars by looking at how much gas they consume. There is a relationship there, but it isn't the primary one. And it isn't the one you care about.
There are all sorts of reasons for performance numbers, such as the PS2's surprisingly fast cache but low ram, etc. I hope someone will do a detailed technical breakdown, because I really should remember this stuff. And also financial pressures play a part: you add optimization time for the Xbox if you think you will sell in North America, and optimization time for the GameCube if you have the possibility of Japan sales. But in general, the Xbox and Game Cube are similar in power, and the PS2 runs to catch up.
I can't really talk about the Revolution, partially because I don't have one, but I've heard other developers use the "2x more powerful than the GC" figure. That puts it somewhere between the Xbox 1 and the Xbox 360.
Re:MHZ myth (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree with everything else tho. The GC was a shade less powerful than the Xbox, but as we've been shown again and again, its 20% hardware, and 80% how you use it. The Rev is plenty stronger than the Xbox.
Re:Hardware isn't everything.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hardware isn't everything.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's face facts here. There are a lot of gaming fans who work tech during the day and play games at night. They have money to burn. Or perhaps the children of such people.
But there is a LOT more people out there where the family is struggling to make ends meet. Christmas comes around, and junior wants a game system. What do the parents buy:
1) Game system which costs $400 or more and $60 games.
2) Game system which costs $200 and games are around $40.
In a case like this, specs don't matter. You buy what you can afford. For this reason and this reason alone, Revolution will sell well.
Re:Hardware isn't everything.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The essence of the article is that the direction that video games are moving in can't hold up much longer. Sure, Call of Duty 2 [xbox.com] on the Xbox360 looks beautiful. You can see slightly better fog effects than previous generation consoles, and you can see beads of sweat dripping down the enemy soldiers' faces, but does this really make it a better game? For about 10 minutes your jaw hangs open at the realism of the game, but then you get used to it and realize it's exactly like every other first person shooter ever made. OK, instead of shooting demon possessed aliens from another dimension, you are shooting nazis, but does that really make the game any different once you adjust to your surroundings? Or, even more to the point, does it make it better than the last CoD title that you played?
The bottom line is that Nintendo is trying to do something that's actually different. They're betting the farm on the fact that gamers like myself are getting tired of shelling out more and more money for consoles that are less and less innovative. It's a gamble, and it's possible that they could be doing this too early, but they have proven in the past that they have a pretty good sense about the industry. I, for one, will stand in line to buy my Revolution, even if the fog effects aren't quite as good as the significantly more expensive Xbox360.
Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly I think it's most likely the Revolution will be the weakest of the three next gen consoles, but I'll believe this when I see , and after the rabid and rapidly decaying lack of journalistic integrity shown by Matt Casamassina in the last couple of years, I personally refuse to believe anything I read on revolution.ign.com at all.
You can feel free to believe what you want of course.
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:5, Interesting)
If there specs are real, Matt Cassissippi is endangering people in his company bound by NDAs. It doesn't matter if they told him or not. If the specs aren't real, he appears to be misleading his readers, because someone at his company knows.
I think it is irresponsible for him to report this either way.
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:3, Funny)
IGN works with Nintendo on some of the aspects of the DS online service. As you may recall, the online infrastructure of N's consoles closely resembles two cans connected by a string.
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:5, Insightful)
"IBM's "Broadway" CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube's Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox's CPU was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz."
and
"Revolution's ATI-provided "Hollywood" GPU clocks in at 243MHz. By comparison, GameCube's GPU ran at 162MHz, while the GPU on the original Xbox was clocked at 233MHz."
and
"Clearly, numbers don't mean everything, but on paper Revolution's CPU falls performance-wise somewhere well beyond GameCube and just shy of the original Xbox."
THE MAJORITY OF HIS COMPARISON IS BASED ON CLOCK SPEED. Yet he's comparing completely different architectures. Gamecube had an IBM flipper chip (some sort of Power-based core), Xbox had an x86, X360 has 3 simplified Power-based cores running at high clock speeds. Gamecube had an ATI graphics, XBox had NVIDIA graphics. You can't just throw random MHz numbers out there and draw any type of conclusion. Ok, I suppose there's one type: an invalid one.
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't a case where ATI bought a team just to slap a sticker on the cube; they bought a team and actually integrated it into their development process, and actually used their tech.
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't see what's wrong with what he reported. I don't find it hard to believe that a writer for IGN might be close enough with a few revolution developers to be able to get some basic info such as clockspeeds on the revolution.
Besides, if you read the article, he isn't trying to make the point that revolution is likely a POS that can't compete with the other next gen consoles. He's simply making a point about their strategy, which clearly isn't trying to design the most powerful console of the three. Even if the architectures are drastically different, the difference in clockspeeds and available memory is very significant.
I know some of you fanboys might feel emasculated by these specs, but your own assumptions and criticisms of the article are totally off base. I mean, why are those numbers complete crap? How do you know they're crap? Are you a close acquaintance with someone who's working on the revolution? And did the author suggest that the architectures were the same for all the platforms, or that the hardware performance of the system can be perfectly and accurately extrapolated from the clockspeeds? No, he simply gave information that he had, which were the clockspeeds in this case. He leaves it up to the reader to extrapolate what they will by comparing them with the numbers for gamecube, and other consoles, and the author in fact states "numbers don't mean everything."
So don't rip on the author for simply reporting the information that he has. If hearing the specs for the revolution pisses you off, then just don't read articles reporting on them.
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:5, Insightful)
You need to rethink hardware corporation methods (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why are you misquoting? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. (Score:3, Funny)
Just like old times (Score:5, Interesting)
GameCube controller == Dual Shock (Score:3, Funny)
The company has ALWAYS been about revolutionizing controllers - from the NES, to SNES up through the 64 & Gamecube.
I'll give you NES, Super NES, and N64, but not GameCube. The GameCube controller is just the Dual Shock with no L1, L3, R3, or Select buttons, and the D-pad and left stick are switched, and the L2 and R2 are analog like on the Dreamcast controller and Dual Shock 2.
Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock (Score:5, Funny)
Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock (Score:5, Insightful)
Better games are the real important issue. (Score:5, Insightful)
i think it will hold true to this console. i still like pokemon and zelda. call me childish all you will, but they were good games, regardless of the system it was run on.
Seriously, i look at the xbox 360 games, and theres nothing there that excites me. just all this stupid crap that tries to emulate real life. thats not why i play video games, i play them to excape from real life. at least nintendo has an art style.
What are you smoking? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not sure about the life you live but i sure as hell don't get to drive tanks, fight funny creatures and morph into different characters and go on epic journeys in lush forrests and such.
Nobody cares (Score:5, Interesting)
1) It was cheap (only $100 with controller and a game, if I recall correctly)
2) It had some fun games (Metroid, Zelda, Mario, the usual)
I knew next to nothing else about the thing. I think more about ordering a meal at a resturant than I did about this purchase. Now, my PC is a different story, but consoles are for recreation. Keep it simple, cheap, and fun please.
Innovation (Score:5, Insightful)
SFW? (Score:5, Interesting)
Coin? Ha! B'ding! B'ding! B'ding!
Dave
Re:SFW? (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is, HD isn't going away. It is in ten to fifteen per cent of households now.
When Walmart positions the X-Box 360 as the natural compliment to the big screen home theater experience it's just possible that the console market is changing.
Clock Rates Aren't Horsepower (Score:5, Informative)
The article is mostly crap. It's just telling us that the clock speed of Nintendo's apples isn't as fast as Microsoft's oranges.
Re:Clock Rates Aren't Horsepower (Score:5, Interesting)
The SNES had its unique "color math" capabilities and the famous Mode7 affine matrix transformation mode.
I believe the N64 let you re-write the microcode in the GPU for custom needs.
The Gamecube, had lots of unique graphical capabilities like an indirect texture unit. SGI workstations are about the only machines that had indirect texturing. You can do lots of cool effects like fake light refraction and psuedo-3D geometry.
Re:Jaguar: DO THE MA+H (Score:3, Interesting)
Genesis specs I'm not too
Quality technical writing. (Score:5, Insightful)
We're dealing with a real technical powerhouse here and he's giving us some insighful hardware analysis.
Different processors (Score:5, Informative)
On paper clock speed doesn't put the Revolution between the Gamecube and Xbox. It easily puts it above.
Also, if I recall correctly, the 360 and PS3's processors need to be passed data sequentially, and because of that it makes it much harder to avoid bottlenecks and lag in code, whereas the Revolution's does not.
It could just be me, but looking at stats on paper mean nothing when you're comapring different architectures and chipsets.
Re:Out of order (Score:3, Insightful)
Pixels to push (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit (Score:5, Interesting)
It is the big screen experience that sells.
This is the sci-fi technology Popular Science has been promising the television audience since the 1950's. Television as The Jetsons know it, televison as The Incredibles know it.
We don't have flying cars but we do have this. In color, high definition and in multichannel theater sound. Interactive and affordable. $1700 at Walmart.
I think Nintendo has badly underestimated what HD brings to the market.
Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem with HD now, is that there isn't one standard. People have lots of different TVs that do HD at different resolutions.
And that just part of the market. About 10% of people now have HD displays. Yes, this can only grow, but the time isn't right for Nintendo.
I'm sure, that, by the time of Xbox 1080 (they jumped 720), Playstation 4 (Sony is boring) and Nintendo Apocalypse Now (People like ominous trademarks!) come, Nintendo will suppor
Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit (Score:5, Insightful)
Nintendo doesn't take risks on things that don't fundamentally enhance gameplay.
DS and Revolution do this. HD does not.
Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit (Score:3, Insightful)
We geeks are tech-savvy, not drug addicts. HDTV can wait.
this is crap. (Score:3, Insightful)
Whether or not Revolution is, in fact, a vehicle for the new freestyle controller or not, systems specs rarely tell the whole story. We would remind readers that during an era when polygon numbers meant everything, GameCube's polygon peaks were lower than PlayStation 2 and Xbox. However, few would disagree with the assertion that Resident Evil 4 - a title developed from the ground-up for Nintendo's system -- was one of the prettiest games of the generation.
That is blatantly untrue. GameCube's published specs were lower, but they weren't the same theoretical specs that MS and Sony spewed out. Reportedly Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike had the highest polygon count of the current generation at something like 18 million/sec.
The same argument... (Score:3, Insightful)
before bashing the controller... (Score:5, Informative)
Ergonomics? (Score:3, Insightful)
Burning question: (Score:5, Funny)
I am of course referring to the completely objective discreet units of fun, per billion.
I know a guy who was roommates with one of the head girlfriends of the 2nd assistant director of ALL OF NINTENDO and they said its a lot. Like, at least ... 9Gf. And it is scientifically proven that the original Xbox only rated a 2.3 Gf (and only with Halo), so this is, like, way better.
Plus, the console itself sort of reminds me of those power crystals that Superman used to control his arctic fortress of solitude, and that's about all the reason I really need to buy one. If I'm being perfectly honest with myself.
Re:Burning question: (Score:5, Funny)
lack of imagination (Score:4, Interesting)
Asking the wrong question (Score:4, Insightful)
News, MS and Sony fanbois...the answer is "no". Better games come out of better design which are sensitive to the kinds of passtimes people want to pursue.
But, um, Nintendo fanbois? There's another side to that. Hardware horsepower makes it far easier to build games with a wider scope for play. Remember the Halo grenade hacks? Those were damned fun, and, from talking to the dev manager on the product, I can assure you that nobody expected them or planned for them. They made heavy use of the fact that there was physics in the game -- and that depended on the hardware horsepower of the XBox.
So game design isn't
Re:Asking the wrong question (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Asking the wrong question (Score:5, Insightful)
Also consider the genre of first-person shooters (which are also popular in the US). Graphics are important not just for creating atmosphere, but HD graphics are going to be great for multiplayer maps (you can see farther with more detail). CPU power is going to be critical to feed the advanced physics and AI engines that modern games are sporting. Take a game like F.E.A.R, whose great animation, physics, and AI really add to the experience, and shoe-horn it into the revolution, and you lose a lot of the specialness of the game.
Or consider RPGs. Console RPGs depend on a great degree on the ability to tell a story. Good graphics and animation are critical in conveying the epic feel of an interactive story. I mean, what would LOTR be without the sweeping views of the New Zealand countryside, or the huge, detailed shots of giant armies?
It seems very clear to me that the Revolution is destined to be another Gamecube: basically, a console only good for playing Nintendo's first-party titles. Sure, most of those are very good games, but how much is really in that library for a sports, RPG, or FPS fanatic? Because between the tastes of Japan and the United States, these are the genres that are really important to gamers. Of course, you could argue that Nintendo is aiming at a completely different market with the Revolution (eg: "The Sims" market), which could very well be true, but in that case, Nintendo isn't really competing in the same sphere as Microsoft and Sony.
Re:Asking the wrong question (Score:5, Insightful)
Umm... a really good book?
Revolution the most interesting development yet (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyways.
Will Revolution be as powerful as XBOX360 and PS3, no, it can't handle highdef and this should tell a lot.
Thing is, once you remove high-def support, you suddenly have a lot horsepower left to render great imagery on a 480p / 480i device. So we can't say that Revolution games will look worse than XBOX360 games on an NTSC/PAL TV which most people have out there.
But scrap even that.
Do you think Nintendo accidentally missed the fact their console is slower? And what means this for a game anyway? Does it mean worse gameplay or experience? Nintendo apparently is confident in their vision, enough so not to get into the dick length comparison game Sony and Microsoft are doing with their machine specs.
I mean, they support NES/SNES/Genesis titles for Christ's sake, were those games crappy? They look GREAT on a TV screen, and some titles have gameplay unparalled in modern titles.
Also it has enough power and innovation for great new content, what could a gamer want? Value and entertainment or silly spec numbers?
yahoo serious? (Score:5, Funny)
Is there a mhz for "is it fun"? (Score:5, Interesting)
Illustrates Nintendo's point. (Score:5, Insightful)
This article is completely misleading, and further illustrates why Nintendo didn't care to publish their specs. None of these specs have anything to do with whether the Revolution is fun or looks good. For that, we have to wait until E3 when Nintendo shows off the console to the public. Until then, it's all just meaningless dick measuring.
Bzzzt (Score:4, Informative)
DS vs. PSP (Score:5, Insightful)
On paper the PSP is vastly more powerful. It has a 333MHz CPU with 32 MBs of main memory. The DS, in comparison, has an ARM 9 running at 67 MHz and an ARM 7 running at 33 MHz. On the RAM side it has 4 MBs of system memory as well as 32K of processor RAM for both ARM 7 and ARM 9, and 656K of VRAM. This should totally blow the DS out of the water and admittedly the PSP looks very, very nice.
Yet, the DS is well on it's way to making the PSP little more than a portable video player that offers a few games. While there are endless areas of speculation (e.g. the much higher cost of the PSP, the unique controls of the DS) I feel it really comes down to the games. Quite simply the DS has much, much better games and a pretty good library of them. The PSP has... uh... Lumines, GTA:LCS, Mega Man Powered Up and I've heard good things about Daxter. Even among the games available most of them haven't really seemed to inspire people to talk about them nearly as much as the DS's library.
Sure a few games work because they use the unique aspects of the DS (e.g. Kirby: Canvas Curse, Nintendogs) but the vast majority don't. A few (e.g. Castlevania, Phoenix Wright) aren't even first-party titles... though admittedly almost all of the top titles are.
It's just that when it comes down to it the system that people tend to prefer is the one with better games. Not flashier graphics, not more raw power on paper. I can't say that sales figures will necessarily back this up because, honestly, Sony and Microsoft both have their fans and a good enough stranglehold on the market at this point that they aren't likely to be upset very easily. But in the end this battle of specs over games has already more or less been won and the victor clearly seems to be the less-powerful, but more enjoyable machine from Nintendo.
Funny, isn't it? (Score:4, Insightful)
Let me say this - graphics are important. Of course gameplay is more important, but there's no reason that we can't have both. I want a system that can push an HDTV. I want a system that can push loads of special effects and maintain a constant 60fps. I want more realistic characters, larger environments, and smarter AI.
The Gamecube is a fine system. I one one myself. When the Revolution ships, I'll probably get one - I like the idea of playing 20 years of games on a system. I think that the controller will be cool, and while I'm not sure if it will be practical, I'm willing to bet taht the Big-N will come up with some cool applications. But I do not for a second believe that the Revolution is a replacement for the XBOX 360 or the PS3. I'm glad that Microsoft and Sony are pushing graphics forward. And I'm disappointed that Nintendo isn't doing the same. Having an affordable system is important, but why is the Revolution limited to 83MB of memory? How much does 256M of DRAM really cost? And why can't it output at least 480p? Even my Gamecube could output 480p.
It's looking more and more like the Revolution is just an updated Gamecube. But by the time the Revolution ships, the 'Cube will be more than 5 years old. Can't Nintendo do a little better?
Re:Funny, isn't it? (Score:3, Informative)
But 480p isn't dual 1080p at 120Hz like the PS3 can do, so it must be complete shit!!!!1
I have an HDTV and seriously just having the big screen and the higher dot pitch makes
it worthwhile playing PS2 and Gamecube games compared to a standard TV. The better color
definition from the component output gives a new lease of life to Metroid Prime, and even We 3 Katamari.
People forget that most people are running the older consoles through Composite or S-Video to their TV a
Re:Funny, isn't it? (Score:3, Informative)
You have to remember, this is 1T-SRAM.
A.K.A. Static RAM.
Which is faster than DRAM.
Still the only 'next gen' ill buy (Score:5, Insightful)
Pikmin
Monkey Ball
Legend of Zelda
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance
Just because the graphics aren't the most optomized to play the latest disposable first-person-shooter, doesn't mean it's inferior.
Developers? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is no one talking about developement tools for the Revolution, or for any of the other consoles for that matter? I heard that it was/is very difficult to develope for the PS2 for example. That (among licensing issues) forced out smaller developers. Maybe Revolution will have a very good, fast and easy developement platform and we will see many inovative titles from independent shops? Or they took a turn at Sony, or Microsoft ported Visual Basic?
Anyone got a clue? I clicked on comments to get some.
Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because a game gets an "E" rating doesn't mean people over 13 can't play it...
Re:What is this susposed to imply? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What is this susposed to imply? (Score:5, Insightful)
But yeah, people like me are probably a better market. And I could care less what kind of horsepower it has. As long as it has good games I'm in. Nintendo must understand this at some level.
Cheers.
Re:What is this susposed to imply? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's all in the article. This article is interesting because you can see exactly how the revolution is going to match up in terms of power. The fact that you're non-plussed says more about you than nintendo, or this article. It's just saying what's been said all along. we've just got numbers now.
And for the record, i'm nearing 27, and i'm really interested in seeing what's gonna happen on the revolution.
Re:What is this susposed to imply? (Score:5, Insightful)
It might. Wasn't it weird when they came out with a touchscreen on the DS? That's selling huge (fastest ever to reach 5 million in Japan), and creating entirely new genres, including Nintendogs, which sold a quarter-million in the first week, and the new Brain Age game which has done incredibly well with people who have never played a video game in their life.
I suppose Nintendo is trying to either fill or a niche market or impress a disappointed crowd.
They made the most money in the last console wars. This time around, Nintendo might be mass-market while Sony and MS are forced into the comparatively "niche" hardcore gamer market.
Re:What is this susposed to imply? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nintendo do something Sony and Microsoft don't get. You'll shit yourself when you ehar what it is.. because it's like EARTH SHAKINGLY AMAZING. Nintendo make fun games, games you can pick up and just play, enjoy them and be done with them. They don't need Mario to be super realistic, or 12 hours of FMV per 3 minutes of gameplay. They just make good games.
If you can't see this or think that's "lame". I suggest you stop playing games and start watching films. Fun comes before the latest greatest graphics engine. If you'd look beyond your biast to maybe try Mario kart or something like billy hatcher you may enjoy something.
I'd also like to point out RE:make, RE0, RE4 and quite a few other games on the cube arn't aimed at children. The cube just happens to be a good console which is afordable and so suitable for games aimed at the new and old. Maybe you should check the PS2 release list and see the 5 million children's games released each year for the thing.
Re:What is this susposed to imply? (Score:5, Informative)
It worked for the DS. And unlike the Xbox 360 and PS3, you don't have to buy an expensive new TV to get a significant difference compared to the old system.
IIRC, the last I heard from the big cheese at Nintendo is that they are working with augmented reality for their next generation of consoles,
Don't know where you heard that. Probably some random rumor site before Nintendo said anything. The rumor sites predicated practically everything but what Nintendo actually ended up doing.
and now we are getting a speed bump and a hard to use, tiny controller?
Nintendo has been saying for the past few years that we don't need more powerful machines. The controller is small because it's one handed. Once you realize that, it seems to fit well in people's hands - at least in the pictures. As to hard to use, everyone who's tried it has said it was great. Do you know something no one else does?
Is Nintendo still doing the whole "this console is for kids" thing?
Still doing? They never did. Bright colors does not mean kids game. Try something like Mario Sunshine sometime. The difficulty level is way to high for most kids. Things like Smash Bros & Mario Kart are big college dorm games. Pokemon, and to a lesser extent Kirby, are the only major things Nintendo really aims at kids.
Nintendo's primary demographic is .... (Score:5, Insightful)
Do I think it will be the best selling console in the US? No. But when you can't buy a goddamn DS in japan except USED and for a higher price than retail, I'd say they're doing something right, at least where they are...
Re:Innovative? (Score:3, Informative)
It's Link dammit, not Zelda.
Re:Innovative? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Innovative? (Score:5, Informative)
I think what you meant was "and that's because Nintendo leads the way every time."
Control Stick? That was Nintendo. Rumble [pack]? That was Nintendo. Next to add to that list? Wireless controllers with motion sensors using a nunchuck design.
Re:Price Point (Score:5, Insightful)
As we all know, from the big AMD vs Intel war, clockspeed isn't everything. Also keep in mind, that IBM usually develops PPC chips - and PPC chips generally are faster per clock speed than PC chips.
Also keep in mind that the revolution won't need to fill a 1024i or whatever resolution - just a standard dvd resolution. So it doesn't need as much power to do the same quality of graphics (in terms of what it's rendering, not what resolution it's rendering at).
My prediction? The step between platform graphics is going to be similar to how the dreamcast fared last time around - ie, somewhere between the two generations of graphics. But also keep in mind that graphics aren't all the revolution is bringing to the table, meaning it probably won't fare the same as the dreamcast did.
Re:Price Point (Score:5, Informative)
And the fact that the architectures are identical to the Gamecube ones. That means the CPU is basically a 730MHz Gecko and the GPU is a 240 MHz Flipper. The per clock performance of the Gecko chip (which is basically a G3 with integrated cache and the ability to use its 64-bit FPU as a 2x32-bit SIMD engine) is probably quite a bit better than the Xenon, but enough to make up for the enormous clockspeed difference.
The G3 is a very ancient chip. It has almost no OOO capability. Per-clock, its probably going to be faster than Cell, but considering that the per-clock of the PIII-based core in the XBox is in line with the G4, it won't match up even to the older console in CPU performance. As for graphics chips --- clockspeed times the number of pipelines is an excellent predictor of GPU performance. Only in a relatively small number of cases (eg: the Geforce FX debacle for NVIDIA), has pure fill-rate proved to be a poor predictor of overall performance in the case of conventional GPUs. The integrated memory helps the Flipper chip quite a bit, but given that it h as about the same clock-rate and the same number of pipelines as the XBox GPU, I wouldn't expect much more than that level of performance out of it. Overall, expect the Revolution to perform somewhat like a slightly improved XBox. Between the 1T-SRAM and the familiarity of developers with the GC architecture, Revolution developers should be able to wring substantially more out of the Revolution than they did out of the XBox, but I'd be surprised if the improvement was more than 50%.
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Price Point (Score:5, Funny)
yea, that's what all guys with a low clockspeeds say.
Re:Price Point (Score:5, Insightful)
What's even better for Nintendo is that these chips are custom built for Nintendo's needs, and a chip designed for a purpose always performs very well against generic processors (even if the generic processor is supposed to be several times faster). I mean noone would expect their P4 to match up against any modern Nvidia or ATI GPU for graphics performance, thats just how it is. Nintendo also knows how to squeeze performance out of its hardware (i.e. the often cited Resident Evil 4, if I can get graphics twice as good as that on this new console, then really Sony and Microsoft will have nothing to stand on). The cell processor doesn't even have a good compiler yet, and its developers don't know how to effectively use its resources, same thing goes for the XBox (but not to as bad of an extent). By the time the XBox and PS3 are being effectively used, it'll be time for the 4th gen consoles. I am betting that Revolution will be capable of graphics on par if not better than PS3's release titles.
And as a final point, this is only a dev box we are talking about and not final production specs, so the whole argument is pointless.
Regards,
Steve
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Insightful)
I have had funniest experience with Intel itself.
P4 v. Pentium Dual Core: one core at 2.2GHz beats 3.5GHz P4.
P4 v. Pentium M/Centrino: at several benchmarks the notebook chip at 1.5GHz had beaten by 2 times 3.2GHz P4
If you have ever programmed in assembler and read even single spec for CPU and code optimization (Intel has good tradition of releasing such specs) you would definitely know that clock speed itself has only modest influence on overall performance. (To put it simply: exec'ing user'
..Additionally. (Score:5, Insightful)
This may sound a little bit zealotly but I back up nintendo's formal commentary that we've(as consumers) have sufficient hardware for quite a while to produce stunning looking, great playing games.
After all when something gets too detailed, you can just pre-render the object onto a more primitive figure (3d users are already familiar with this technique called amongst other titles "surface sampling"). Additionally there are newer 3d engines that use depth based calculations to determine how heavy a polygon should be I.e close up models are polygon rich, further models are not.
With the algorithm advancements we've had in the 3D sector, it's no surprise that the raw performance of the nintendo console hasn't increased significantly.
One final point to make is that nintendo games are usually highly stylised. So for the majority of their bread & butter titles programmers+designers are not seeking photo realism.
Re:Price Point (Score:5, Interesting)
My view on this whole Sony/MSFT vs Nintendo war is that Nintendo is trying to be a console, while Sony/MSFT are trying to be full blown entertainment devices. And I think Nintendo has chosen the right niche. Personally, I don't see myself buying an XBox360, or PS3, but I do see myself buying a Revolution. Nintendo has openly said that it will have emulation ability, so that you can play your old games (ie super mario, etc) on the revolution. I see this as the killer app. If the revolution costs 100USD, I'll buy one, just to have the ability to play older nintendo games on my nice tv. I assume they will recompile or do some graphics magic to make it look good on a 16:9 set, and so this is a 'good thing'.
Nintendo has a HUGE library of very entertaining games, and if you look at the demographic, the people who played super mario and had the original NES and SNES are now in the position of making purchases, and they will buy the Revolution. I know that I don't have the time to sit down and play Halo, but I do have the time to sit down and poink around with Mario Cart, or even Contra. The reason those simple Atari games you see at walmart are selling is because people want simple games again.
I guess I'm getting old (I'm 23!!!) but games sure aren't what they use to be.
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you are right about positi
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Interesting)
The whole Sony catalogue is a false argument. Yes, it is compatible, but no, it i
Re:Price Point (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Informative)
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Nintendo has said that their system will not support HD. This includes 16:9 mode. There will be no component cables for the Revolution. It's weird because the GameCube had them, so it's a step back. With no 480p, all of those games with on/off flashing for 1 frame will look really terrible interlieved on a progressive display. I know because PS2 games still do it, and it looks ugly. Sma
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Price Point (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, Revolution will be quite capable of 16:9, as is the current GameCube hardware:
Source [ign.com]
Nope, You ARE a Gamer! (Score:4, Insightful)
Gaming has temporarily (yes, Temporarily!) gone mainstream, just as it did in the early 1980's. This too, shall pass, Sony and Microsoft will fall, but Nintendo will remain, cranking out profitable quarter after profitable quarter. The mainstream audience demands tits and ultraviolence, so that's what Sony and Microsoft deliver, but the mainstream is fickle, and doesn't really give a damn about any one type of entertainment fundamentally. This era is going to come crashing down just like the Atari 2600, and Nintendo will be there, AGAIN, to pick up the pieces and move on.
Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer! (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it is more accurate to describe the situation as the Video game market crashed so hard, the then miniscule, but still growing, Personal Computer market came to dominate for a short period of time. After all, the Personal Computer market goes back even further than the home PONG machines that predated the 2600.
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Insightful)
And considering that at least one controller will come with the system, and the development cost alone of that technology, your conclusion is fallacious.
Spec Point... Re:Price Point (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't like the Intel/AMD argument, because each of the chipsets has a different ISA
It isn't necessarily true that every command executed in the 3.2GHz cores of an XBox 360 will
constitute one clock cycle. In fact, I'm sure that a method of achieving those awesome frequencies
is by removing as much functionality as possible from each command the 'core' of the CPU performs.
The ON-GPU memory is really significant. 3MBs of in chip memory is more valuable than 15MBs of off
chip memory. It immediatly means that the GPU is able to concurrently manipulate the 3MBs of memory
as close to 'free of charge' as possible.
Since it's a gaming machine and doesn't need an independant os for much more than thread management,
This also means that those 3MBs will probably be dedicated to what is currently on screen.
From a texture memory perspective, one texel (texture pixel) is 4 bytes, assuming 32 bit color with
no compression. This means theres room for a million pixels in that memory at one time, or just shy
of a 1024x1024 pic. That memory can be manipulated quickly too!
For clarification, that is a REALLY COOL THING!!! That is the amount of data that can be played
with for FREE internally.
I don't know about anyone else, but judging by the 'spec' comparisons in the past, Nintendo plays
their resources to the fullest, and compared to the price tags of the other machines, I'm still
thinking Nintendo's box is probably going to be pretty nuts.
On a side note, I'm still not sure I like the idea of the controller...
I'm a 'reality' gamer, so if my natural habit of diving around while playing is a bad thing to have
while using a SDoF controller, the system is going to really let me down...
We'll find out, this is up for grabs for me
Re:Price Point (Score:3, Interesting)
My guess is that they're planning a portable around it as well for the 45nm generation.
Re:A leak? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think Nintendo probably doesn't want this published, but they can't really do anything about it because they have to give the information to third party game developers. In that sense, it is kind of a "leak", but it's mainly just information that was inevitably going to be released anyway.
Re:Mirror? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:From 1080i to 480i (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:2X?! (Score:5, Funny)
===================Super Mario Bros.=================
You've emerged from a giant green pipe. A large castle lies in the distance. Giant blocks with question marks painted on them float mystically in mid-air. A large turtle with a green shell is approaching you from left. From your right, what appears to be a giant mushroom with eyes and legs approaches.
>_
Re:2X?! (Score:3, Funny)
Screw this, I'm loading up tintin++.
Re:2X?! (Score:5, Funny)