PDA

View Full Version : XBOX2 comparison


Pages : [1] 2

Mith192
04-01-05, 02:15 AM
How do u think the graphics of the Xbox2 will compare to current PC graphics

retsam
04-01-05, 02:25 AM
Think sli in terms of performance.

PikachuMan
04-01-05, 02:40 AM
New consoles always show off better graphics at launch.

Anyway, why xbox 2 specifically? It's not going to be 'most powerful' this time around.

Raje
04-01-05, 02:41 AM
How do u think the graphics of the Xbox2 will compare to current PC graphics

Xbox2 should be much better.

Xbox2 graphics, R5xx based, should be twice as fast when compared with current graphics cards (R4xx and NV4x) or be more detailed (more complex visuals, higher polygon count, etc.) at the same speeds. It's also being fed by 3 really powerful IBM CPUs, so CPU probably won't hold back the GPU.

Not only is R5xx due to have twice the brute force as the R4xx, but Game Designers can optimize for R5xx and the Xbox2 hardware rather than worrying about other hardware. Benefits of optimizing for one hardware platform are many. Just look at the soon to be released Unreal Championship on Xbox. Optimization like that will take a while since it's new hardware and the developers need to learn it's In's and Out's, but it will happen much faster than optimization for the PC.

R5xx for the Xbox2 is rumored to support Windows Graphics Foundation 1.0. Info about WGF 1.0 can be found here (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1629331,00.asp) or here (Power Point: 622KB) (http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/8/f/18f8cee2-0b64-41f2-893d-a6f2295b40c8/TW04079_WINHEC2004.ppt). So that brings new graphics toys for developers.

Raje
04-01-05, 02:48 AM
New consoles always show off better graphics at launch.

Anyway, why xbox 2 specifically? It's not going to be 'most powerful' this time around.

You think PS3's (IBM's) Cell will tip the balance? PS3 has an ATI R5xx GPU as well doesn't it?

Or do you think Nintendo's offering with NV5X (or whatever Nvidia is calling it) graphics will overcome?

SweetLou
04-01-05, 04:31 AM
You think PS3's (IBM's) Cell will tip the balance? PS3 has an ATI R5xx GPU as well doesn't it?

Or do you think Nintendo's offering with NV5X (or whatever Nvidia is calling it) graphics will overcome?
Sony is using an NVIDIA chip in their PS3. I don't think anything is concrete yet for Nintendo, but I would expect them to go ATi again.

swatX
04-01-05, 06:32 AM
Sony is using an NVIDIA chip in their PS3. I don't think anything is concrete yet for Nintendo, but I would expect them to go ATi again.

Nintendo Revolution and Micorsoft Xenon are both going with ATI's GPU. Two very diffrent GPUs though

Sony PS3 "Cell" is going with Nvidia. Possibly NV50?

Toss3
04-01-05, 07:26 AM
Nintendo Revolution and Micorsoft Xenon are both going with ATI's GPU. Two very diffrent GPUs though

Sony PS3 "Cell" is going with Nvidia. Possibly NV50?
Yep a hybrid of the nv40 and nv50 :)

|MaguS|
04-01-05, 08:46 AM
No it wont be NV40 based at all... Its been already stated by Nvidia that the chip they are developing for the PS3 is 100% new. Developers have even been told to think far more powerful then the 6800 line... PS3 should be able to run UT3 based games flawlessly...

Mr_LoL
04-01-05, 09:15 AM
No it wont be NV40 based at all... Its been already stated by Nvidia that the chip they are developing for the PS3 is 100% new. Developers have even been told to think far more powerful then the 6800 line... PS3 should be able to run UT3 based games flawlessly...

So consoles have finally caught up with the PC. The question is how long will they keep up?

|MaguS|
04-01-05, 09:40 AM
Not long considering that PCs are always upgraded, year after year while consoles stay the same for 5 years or so...

But comparing PCs to Consoles is stupid, people who do so becuase of graphics should be beaten with a keyboard. PC's have the genres it excels at and Consoles had the genres it excels at. Sure they try to mix and match but certain genres will never excel on the opposite end... Especially considering that some would force players to purchase a controller for the PC or a keyboard/mouse (or adapter) for the consoles.

If your a "true" gamer then you would have no negative thoughts on either side since great games release for both sides exclusivily.

Mr_LoL
04-01-05, 10:02 AM
Not long considering that PCs are always upgraded, year after year while consoles stay the same for 5 years or so...

But comparing PCs to Consoles is stupid, people who do so becuase of graphics should be beaten with a keyboard. PC's have the genres it excels at and Consoles had the genres it excels at. Sure they try to mix and match but certain genres will never excel on the opposite end... Especially considering that some would force players to purchase a controller for the PC or a keyboard/mouse (or adapter) for the consoles.

If your a "true" gamer then you would have no negative thoughts on either side since great games release for both sides exclusivily.


Looks like I should be beaten with a keyboard then :D

Jocomp10
04-01-05, 10:23 AM
Break out the keyboards :)

|MaguS|
04-01-05, 10:35 AM
Yar!

Buenamos
04-01-05, 10:45 AM
Personally, I think whatever the xbox 2 (or xbox360 or whatever u wanna call it) is going to blow away anything available on current pcs. They can optimize for a specific platform, so you won't have to worry about it running to slow for some users rather than others. I mean geez, they have Halo 2 running on a Geforce 3... :eek:

ChrisRay
04-01-05, 11:06 AM
Not long considering that PCs are always upgraded, year after year while consoles stay the same for 5 years or so...

But comparing PCs to Consoles is stupid, people who do so becuase of graphics should be beaten with a keyboard. PC's have the genres it excels at and Consoles had the genres it excels at. Sure they try to mix and match but certain genres will never excel on the opposite end... Especially considering that some would force players to purchase a controller for the PC or a keyboard/mouse (or adapter) for the consoles.

If your a "true" gamer then you would have no negative thoughts on either side since great games release for both sides exclusivily.

I dont think its such a bad thing to compare graphic fidelity. I mean I look at it this way. If games look "better" on a console than a PC and are of a comparable genre. Theres a problem with the PC market. Assuming the PC market has better hardware anyways.

ViN86
04-01-05, 01:26 PM
the Cell chip for PS3 is insane. i cant wait to see how it compares with the XBox2.

as for graphics of consoles vs. PC's, its really hard to compare the two. consoles are designed SOLELY for graphics and game performance, while PC's are made to run an OS, multipe programs, 2d graphics and 3d graphics. even though after reading these specs on the cell chip, i cant believe it. its supposed to make an FX-55 look like an AthlonXP 3200 :eek:

but i digress. for PC's and consoles, its like comparing apples and oranges to me ;)

PikachuMan
04-01-05, 03:13 PM
You think PS3's (IBM's) Cell will tip the balance? PS3 has an ATI R5xx GPU as well doesn't it?

Or do you think Nintendo's offering with NV5X (or whatever Nvidia is calling it) graphics will overcome?

Well, Microsoft themselves made a comment along the lines of "bruce lee rather than brute force" to describe their approach.

I'm hoping Nintendo btw, that would be fun. Pokemon looking better than Grand turismo and stuff. :)

Salamandar
04-01-05, 04:22 PM
New consoles always show off better graphics at launch.

Anyway, why xbox 2 specifically? It's not going to be 'most powerful' this time around.

Power means nothing without control....errrr no wait that's from Pirelli ad.

Back to the subject, Xbox was much better than PS2 in terms of power and eye candy, that didn't make it the number one console.

circuitbreaker8
04-01-05, 04:36 PM
So consoles have finally caught up with the PC. The question is how long will they keep up?

Well since PC fanboys cant use the "low resolution" BS anymore, I think the next gen consoles will be a huge competition for PC. I donno about you, but i'm sick of paying 500$ ( and now they want me to waste 1k for SLi :rolleyes: ) to play 1-3 games..Screw that. I'm only gonna upgrade when my computer NEEDS it from now on! I'm saving up all my money for PS3+XB2 :D Imainge Halo 3 @ 1080i or 720p with Unreal 3-like graphics on a 42" Pioneer Elite HDTV plasma! :eek:

circuitbreaker8
04-01-05, 04:38 PM
I dont think its such a bad thing to compare graphic fidelity. I mean I look at it this way. If games look "better" on a console than a PC and are of a comparable genre. Theres a problem with the PC market. Assuming the PC market has better hardware anyways.


Gran Turismo 4 would look better than ANY PC racer if it was @ a higher resolution + AA/AF. Somethings deff wrong.

OWA
04-01-05, 07:19 PM
Well since PC fanboys cant use the "low resolution" BS anymore, I think the next gen consoles will be a huge competition for PC. I donno about you, but i'm sick of paying 500$ ( and now they want me to waste 1k for SLi :rolleyes: ) to play 1-3 games..Screw that. I'm only gonna upgrade when my computer NEEDS it from now on! I'm saving up all my money for PS3+XB2 :D Imainge Halo 3 @ 1080i or 720p with Unreal 3-like graphics on a 42" Pioneer Elite HDTV plasma! :eek:

Well, they can until everyone upgrades to HDTV. What good will all this power be if most people are using a regular TV to display it. Maybe this will spur sales of HDTVs though helping to lower the prices.

Heh, you're upset about paying 1k for SLI but are okay with spending 3k to 5k+ for a good HDTV?

TeaEtchSee
04-01-05, 09:21 PM
man screw these next gen consoles..

my Atari Jaguar owns all :afro:

Nv40
04-01-05, 09:59 PM
Xbox2 should be much better.

Xbox2 graphics, R5xx based, should be twice as fast when compared with current graphics cards (R4xx and NV4x) or be more detailed (more complex visuals, higher polygon count, etc.) at the same speeds. It's also being fed by 3 really powerful IBM CPUs, so CPU probably won't hold back the GPU.

Not only is R5xx due to have twice the brute force as the R4xx, but Game Designers can optimize for R5xx and the Xbox2 hardware rather than worrying about other hardware. Benefits of optimizing for one hardware platform are many. Just look at the soon to be released Unreal Championship on Xbox. Optimization like that will take a while since it's new hardware and the developers need to learn it's In's and Out's, but it will happen much faster than optimization for the PC.

R5xx for the Xbox2 is rumored to support Windows Graphics Foundation 1.0. Info about WGF 1.0 can be found here (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1629331,00.asp) or here (Power Point: 622KB) (http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/8/f/18f8cee2-0b64-41f2-893d-a6f2295b40c8/TW04079_WINHEC2004.ppt). So that brings new graphics toys for developers.

Biggest disadvantage of the Xbox2 will be its Memory. If the console ship with only 256 megs of ram ,as many have said. the console will be heavily behind of PC games in a year from release or more ,because PC games lately need at least 512 MEgs ,to next generation games. it is true ,that the console OS will be integrated , so no need to dedicate ram for it.. but still 256megs is very low ,for a console that is supposed to last 5 years at least. Unreal3 engine games will need 1GB of memory in its highest quality for comparison. :)

Xbox2 will also support 3 Cpus , but it will be very dificult to program games that split the work equally on all three Cpus. in many cases only 1 will be doing most of the work ,while the others will be iddle ,doing few task or doing nothing at all.it will be far better a 4-5ghz CPU than 3 cpus running at 3ghz. Microsoft Operating system have bad reputation of being very weak handling memory and taking advantage of more than 1 cpu. Linux, OS X and IRIx are much better for parallel computing , and multiple processing ,and probably that and the stronger security are the reasons why other Operating System still exist today.. others than WindowsXp.

circuitbreaker8
04-01-05, 10:00 PM
Well, they can until everyone upgrades to HDTV. What good will all this power be if most people are using a regular TV to display it. Maybe this will spur sales of HDTVs though helping to lower the prices.

Heh, you're upset about paying 1k for SLI but are okay with spending 3k to 5k+ for a good HDTV?

Lol...the TV in our HT room costed 10k. You can make the game play in any resolution you like. If you have a HDTV, you can choose to run the game in 720p or 1080i...if not, you can run it in normal mode.

Thats not the point though. I wouldn't mind going SLi if there were some really good lookin' games coming out, but as of now, pc gaming has been dry as hell, and it doesn't look like its changing. Give me BF2 and i'll be good to go for a WHILE. If I cant play BF2 @ 1280x960 4xaa 8xaf highest details then i'll get the R520.