PS3 and Xbox2 Graphics

[Death.Trap]

In case you have not noticed the XBOX 2 will feature an ATI R500 graphics chipset that exceeds what an X800XT is capable of.

And a new video card taht exceeds THAT will be out for the PC by the time xbox 2 comes around.

 

[sHaDdoW]

i can not belive some of the crap some people are saying. people think the console is going to out perform the pc when the console is based on a pc wtf , the pc will always be the ultimate

 

[[Matt]]

And a new video card taht exceeds THAT will be out for the PC by the time xbox 2 comes around.

Yes... its the R520 core and its only slightly better than the xbox2's GPU However I wouldn't say it would exceed the xbox2's rendering power as they are almost identical. However the CPU on the Xbox 2 CPU would surpass an AMD FX-55 running at nearly double the speed. Just looking at the anandtech stats it looks like it will take a good year for a PC to even catch up. Look at all that bandwidth available!!!

 

[ryanmw]

Yes... its the R520 core and its only slightly better than the xbox2's GPU However I wouldn't say it would exceed the xbox2's rendering power as they are almost identical. However the CPU on the Xbox 2 CPU would surpass an AMD FX-55 running at nearly double the speed. Just looking at the anandtech stats it looks like it will take a good year for a PC to even catch up. Look at all that bandwidth available!!!

please post where you came up with this ludicrous statement.....so your saying it will beat an AMD FX-55 overclocked to twice its original speed??? LOL....wait hold on a second...lemme catch my breath.....ok.....LOL

 

[[Matt]]

please post where you came up with this ludicrous statement.....so your saying it will beat an AMD FX-55 overclocked to twice its original speed??? LOL....wait hold on a second...lemme catch my breath.....ok.....LOL

You didnt read the technical one sheet on anandtech did you... :|

 

[ryanmw]

You didnt read the technical one sheet on anandtech did you... :|

i just asked u to post it...didnt i

 

[blackeye]

about the xbox 2 hard drive but I believe that microsoft will be using a Flash Based Media instead of a hard drive. I found this while surfing the net looking for what the possible

memory speeds of xbox 2 might be.

http://www.armchairempire.com/videogame-news/Xbox/Febraury-2004/m-systems-microsoft.htm

But anyways to sum up the article microsoft signed a deal with m-systems to create "customized memory units" for xbox 2. Howevor microsoft is not obliged to purchase any memory under the agreement. When I scrolled down to the bottem of the article the words Fast Flash Disk Caught my eye. Upon looking it up I realized that these "fast flash disks" could be a inexspensive and logical replacment for what microsoft could put in the xbox 2 instead of your regular mechanical hard drive.

Why I think these would be a good replacment and why microsoft may choose them. (The following was all found on the m-sys.com website)
-Withstand exteme temperatures, shock and vibrations without compromising data integrity. (this would cut down on warrenty and keep the money in microsoft's pockets in the long run)
-Eleminates seek time, latency and potential failures inherent in conventional rotating disks.
-Non-Volatile memory. (def for Volatile is: tending to vary often or widely)
-Down to 8mm in height. (this is good if microsoft want to make the console smaller one the the big problem in japan)
-Up to 100.0 MB/sec burst R/W rates
-Up to 45.0 MB/sec sustained Read rate
-Up to 40.0 MB/sec sustained Write rate
-Access time <0.02 msec (A maxtor DiomandMax 10 16mb cache has about 9.0/s seek time)
-up to 128 gb capacity.
-No moving parts
-There are more but im to lazy

Now I was on gamespy And I saw the screen shot that says xenon launcher and then at the top right hand corner it says 106.79 gb's free. M-systems website say they have drives that are 106496mb's and 114688 mb's but they dont have any that are 106.79 gb's. And yes I took into account the 1gb = 1024 mb's But if m-systems is making "customized memory units" it is possible that they drives specification could be different then anything that is posted on m-systems website.

Now here is the bad news. I have no idea what these things cost, but I think they would be exspensive.


Now onto the debate about the processors again.

From what I understand with the bencmarks I have seen, If the program doesnt utilize the extra cpu's and the fact that it is 64 bit over 32 bit (which I believe the xbox2 will be 64 bit) the program will actually not have any performance increase and may actually be slower in some cases.

Take for instance this bencmark.

Bencmark: (Bibble/MacBibble) This bencmark converts RAW files into a more popular format such as the TIFF. The test convertes 85 photos to a TIFF. These conversion are almost entirely CPU dependent. This test supports multi threading. This will give and advantage to the p4 and G5.

System One Athlon fx-51
system two Intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.2 Ghz
System Three Apple G5 dual cpu each at 2ghz.

The atlon fx-51 finished the benchmark in 451 seconds
The intel pentium 4 extreme edition finished in 354 seconds
The Apple 35 finished in 240 seconds.

As you can see the G5 is clearly the winner

Basically in all the other test that were run the G5 only won 4 out of 12 tests. But the point I am trying to prove is that if the program takes advantage of more then one CPU or Dual core CPU it can be a huge advantage. (Just note the p4 had hyper threading which helped a little in this test but it is much different the actually having seperate cpu's) I do not know if this bencmark took advantage of the fact that the G5 has 64 bit cpu's or not. I know for a fact that it did not take advantage of the FX's 64 bit capability because the tests were run on a 32 bit version of windows xp. The benchmarks for the mac where run on osx 10.5 which I am not familar with either so I am not sure if its 64 bit capable. I think jaguar is though.

Now also keep in mind that the CPU that is used in the xbox will be similar to what the G5 is using but it will only be a single cpu with 3 cores and a much higher frequency.

Just to compare what we know about the G5 cpu in the benchmark to what is coming out for

xbox 2.

Apple G5.
CPU: PowerPc 970 Dual cpu system (seperate)
Clock Speed: 2 ghz
L1 Cache:32k
L2 Cache:512k
Process:130nm
System Bus: 1 ghz

Xbox 2 (mostly speculation from unverified sources)
Cpu: Based of the Power Pc technology, 3 independent cores on a single die.
Clock: 3.5Ghz
L1 Cache: 32k for each core
L2 Cache: 1 mb shared by all 3 cores
Process:?
System bus:?
Other Things:

The chip for Microsoft’s future console was designed by IBM in close consultation with the Xbox team, leading to a number of revolutionary additions, including a dot product instruction for extremely fast vector math and custom security features built directly into the silicon to prevent piracy and hacking.

Each core has two symmetric hardware threads (SMT), for a total of six hardware threads available to games. Not only does the “Xenon CPU” include the standard set of PowerPC integer and floating-point registers (one set per hardware thread), the microprocessor also includes 128 vector (VMX) registers per hardware thread. This astounding number of registers
can drastically improve the speed of common mathematical operations, according to the document.
Each of the three cores includes a 32KB L1 instruction cache, a 32KB L1 data cache and share a 1MB L2 cache. The L2 cache can be locked down in segments to improve performance. The L2 cache also has the very unusual feature of being directly readable from the GPU, which allows the GPU to consume geometry and texture data from L2 and main memory simultaneously.

Sorry if there are alot of spelling mistakes or it sounds rush but i typed this up really fast.

 

[SkylineGT-R34]

One word - AMAZING
Need for Speed
Madden NFL

Source: http://www.the-magicbox.com/0412/game041202c.shtml

Are you new ?? none of these are in-game.

 

[<RJMC>]

why you people are so anyoing?

WHEN THE PS3 AND XBOX2 WILL COME OUT THEY WILL HAV BETTER GRAPHICS THAT ANY PC BUT SURE IN 1 YEAR OR LESS THE PC WILL GET THE SAME GRAPHICS SO EVERYBODY IS HAPPY,BUT YOU PC FANBOYS JUST CANT ACCEPT THAT A CONSOLE CAN BE A GOOD GAMING MACHINE LIKE A PC, BTW I LIKE PC AND CONSOLES SO DONT THINK I AM A TROLL, AND PLEASE PC FANBOYS LET THE CONSOLES PLAYERS IN PEACE

Edit:That's better.

 

[SkylineGT-R34]

Wow, get a life.
You obviously have hard time accepting the fact that no console in the world would match any decent PC's graphics and gameplay.

 

[blackeye]

Wow, get a life.
You obviously have hard time accepting the fact that no console in the world would match any decent PC's graphics and gameplay.

No that is not true. There have been many games on the console that look very similar to what is found on pc. Maybee the consoles have lower resolution but it still can look just as good as it does on pc. Rember Metal Gear? As for gameplay many people would argue that it is completly different and the consoles have more original gameplay. But it could also be argued the other way saying pc's have more original gameplay.

Anyway I think we should keep this conversation civil so it doesnt get locked.

 

[<RJMC>]

Wow, get a life.
You obviously have hard time accepting the fact that no console in the world would match any decent PC's graphics and gameplay.

get a life?

lol

so I dont hav life cuz I am not saying PC is better than consoles?

READ THAT AGAIN, do I am saying a console is better that a PC, NO

cuz you can do much others things whit the PC BUT I like consoles too,infact I like everyway to play videogames,even arcadesmachines ,but are hard to find here

also I am not tryng to convince everybody whats is best I am just saying my opinion

 

[<RJMC>]

No that is not true. There have been many games on the console that look very similar to what is found on pc. Maybee the consoles have lower resolution but it still can look just as good as it does on pc. Rember Metal Gear? As for gameplay many people would argue that it is completly different and the consoles have more original gameplay. But it could also be argued the other way saying pc's have more original gameplay.

Anyway I think we should keep this conversation civil so it doesnt get locked.

IMO gameplay in consoles is more confortable cuz is in a simple controller ad in PC is more complex cuz you hav a keyboard whit many buttoms,but the true sometimes I prefer play whit a contrroller cuz the keyboard can be a bit stresing

 

[Cole]

Games can be fun on a PC or a Console.

whit a contrroller cuz the keyboar

You no true pc fan! You no har about pc versions of console controllers! Plus much more! You bad! You die!

I doubt it will take 1 year for a pc to meet console graphics. Infact, Pc's will have reached those graphics as graphics are designed upon the Pc. Thus the PC must be campabile of themselves. Now the games currently out might not have them, but that does not mean that a pc cannot reach them. All it means is the games that will have those graphics are currently being worked on.

I would not be suprised if a console had UE3 graphics. Why? Consoles are just technically PC's made for gaming. As a calculator is like a pc onsept for doing calculations and showing them to the user. Pc's will always rule? Why? Because calculators and consoles, and anything really can in essence be considered a PC as it is just a fragment of what makes up a pc. So how does this relate to the "unsuprising". When consoles come out they will be just as fast as pc's, because they are technically a Pc, even if they are a fragment.

 

[destrukt]

Wow, get a life.
You obviously have hard time accepting the fact that no console in the world would match any decent PC's graphics and gameplay.

gameplay ? you took it too far. graphis, pc's are updated more regularly etc, but gameplay, you need to shutup about that.

there was a news item a long time ago, about the company making the storage for xbox 2. and yes, it was flash/usb based.

 

[SkylineGT-R34]

gameplay ? you took it too far. graphis, pc's are updated more regularly etc, but gameplay, you need to shutup about that.

there was a news item a long time ago, about the company making the storage for xbox 2. and yes, it was flash/usb based.

Why dont you shut up since you have no clue wtf you are jabbring about, anything on PC is a hell of alot better then any console, unless you have a shit PC.

 

[blackeye]

Personally I think for the first 6 months that the xbox2 will be more powerfull for games than a PC just because it can actually take advantage of all the stuff the console has to offer. A pc cant do that. A console can fully take advantage of the GPU and CPU right from the start while with a PC it can take a year or two. From what I understand the GPU that ATI is going to release sometime in 2005 will just be the same as what is in the xbox2 maybee more maybee less. Granted if the 7800's came out in SLI they would probably have more power then whatever is in the xbox but it would never get used to its full potential for a long time. Same thing with processors. Even if you build a dual opteron machine for a gaming systems the dual CPU's will never get used because the majority of the public do not have them. But with xbox 2 everyone will have the exact same system specs.

So what I am trying to say is.
No the xbox 2 might not be faster then a minority of computer today but it will be utilized to its capability a lot more then a pc will. In raw CPU power I would probably give that one to the xbox2. GPU power I would say is a tie between the two systems even if you count in SLI. But what no one thought of yet is the fact that the GPU on xbox might actually be a dual core chip also. (Highly unlikly but possible). Two 6800 ultras in SLI might not be faster then a the xbox GPU and nvidia might not be putting anything forward next year as a successor to the 6800. So the only viable alternative is the ATI gpu. But like I said earlier both chips are going to perform relatively the same from what I understand. Howevor as we see the processor speeds increase on the PC then we might actually see the SLI configuration start to overtake the xbox2. Maybee Maybee not. I say we all just wait untill the xbox 2 is released to see or when gates announced the specs in vegas in january.

why dont we all just agree to disagree.

Thread Closed.

 

[The Terminator]

The new Generation systems like Xbox 2 and PS3 and whatever nintendo is cooking up(maybe not) will have better graphics then PC games out at the same time. This isnt dependant of the PC or the Xbox nesseciarly, they just output shit. It up to the game makers to produce the grpahics that youll be seeing. You could make a 2D game on an Xbox and compare that to Half life 2 and of course HL2 would be better, and vice versa of course. Point being the Xbox will be able to produce better graphics/and good framrates, more so then the PC will be able to do at the same point in time. My 2 cents.

 

[destrukt]

whatever nintendo is cooking up

I'm interested in what they have planned, but all we really know is that it'll be called Revolution and will have a large online multiplayer side.

 

[ryanmw]

ok...once again..why are people talking about gameplay...please read the title of this thread....ok w/ that said.....i would like to point out to blackeye that although u provided information saying the G5 is the fastest...u did not compare it to an FX-55 which blows the FX-53 outta the water which blows the FX-51 outta the water..u put the G5 up against the FX-51....try it against the FX-55.....

ok on another note....someone said that they think the xbox2 would run UE3...well i sure hope so cause PC's are runnin it right now...and its not even optimized...UE3 will be old news (in PC terms) by the time xbox2 comes out...another engine will have already be in the works

the fact is...when xbox2 is built...it has to use equipment that is already a couple months old by the time it hits shelves...once it hits shelves PC will have the upper hand not only cause of better equipment...but because of overclocking...dont forget that...so in terms of graphics PC will always be better but in terms of gameplay who knows..but thats not what were talking about

 

[blackeye]

ok...once again..why are people talking about gameplay...please read the title of this thread....ok w/ that said.....i would like to point out to blackeye that although u provided information saying the G5 is the fastest...u did not compare it to an FX-55 which blows the FX-53 outta the water which blows the FX-51 outta the water..u put the G5 up against the FX-51....try it against the FX-55.....

Ok we can do that but While we are at it why dont we upgrade to what apple is offering right now also. That would be a 2.5ghz dual cpu system. I can guraurantee you 100% the g5 would still beat the fx-55 if the same bencmark and operating systems were still used. Keep in mind the original bencmarks were done months ago and there was no such thing as a fx-55.

But anyway I think it is time for ASUS to close this thread because it is getting absolutly no where.

the fact is...when xbox2 is built...it has to use equipment that is already a couple months old by the time it hits shelves...once it hits shelves PC will have the upper hand not only cause of better equipment...but because of overclocking...dont forget that...so in terms of graphics PC will always be better but in terms of gameplay who knows..but thats not what were talking about

Didnt you read what the terminator wrote? The hardware that powers the graphics may be better. But it is up to the developer how well the texturing and so forth are done. The xbox will be able to reach those graphical capabilities far befor the pc also. Atleast thats how I interpreted it.

 

[destrukt]

Why dont you shut up since you have no clue wtf you are jabbring about, anything on PC is a hell of alot better then any console, unless you have a shit PC.

so your saying, every console game's gameplay is bad and that if something is on the computer, it's automatically better ? your a complete idiot and you have no clue wtf you are jabbering about.

nb: i have a good computer btw.

 

[ryanmw]

Ok we can do that but While we are at it why dont we upgrade to what apple is offering right now also. That would be a 2.5ghz dual cpu system. I can guraurantee you 100% the g5 would still beat the fx-55 if the same bencmark and operating systems were still used. Keep in mind the original bencmarks were done months ago and there was no such thing as a fx-55.

But anyway I think it is time for ASUS to close this thread because it is getting absolutly no where.



Didnt you read what the terminator wrote? The hardware that powers the graphics may be better. But it is up to the developer how well the texturing and so forth are done. The xbox will be able to reach those graphical capabilities far befor the pc also. Atleast thats how I interpreted it.

ill take you up on that bet about the G5 and the FX-55....since they came out bout the same time.....ill be looking for reviews

wait...why again will xbox be able to reach those capabilities before pc?...because to my knowledge theres already a game in the works using the UE3 engine...very similar to what the xbox will pry use...plus..i dont think youve ever played a game on console that was ported for both PC and Console....trust me...the console version always sucks ass even when they come out at the same time....take MOH for example....go play it for PS2 then for PC..and tell me which utilized their capabilites better....the game was a complete joke when i played it on ps2...so you once again havnt validated your arguments...also...one more thing

show me a press release directly from Microsoft stating the specs for the xbox2....everything else is hearsay....until it comes from the source..so until you post that..this whole conversation is moot

 

[blackeye]

ill take you up on that bet about the G5 and the FX-55....since they came out bout the same time.....ill be looking for reviews

wait...why again will xbox be able to reach those capabilities before pc?...because to my knowledge theres already a game in the works using the UE3 engine...very similar to what the xbox will pry use...plus..i dont think youve ever played a game on console that was ported for both PC and Console....trust me...the console version always sucks ass even when they come out at the same time....take MOH for example....go play it for PS2 then for PC..and tell me which utilized their capabilites better....the game was a complete joke when i played it on ps2...so you once again havnt validated your arguments...also...one more thing

show me a press release directly from Microsoft stating the specs for the xbox2....everything else is hearsay....until it comes from the source..so until you post that..this whole conversation is moot

Again I am back to the metal Gear solid 2 thing. In its day it looked great, far better then anything you would see on the pc. As for MOH i have no idea it could have just been a bad port, like halo was for pc (infact I never played MOH so I have no idea when it came out for ps2 and when it came out for PC) . Sure halo had more hardware features in it then xbox but it came out a long time after the original did for xbox. When a console is first released it always has better graphics then the pc does for about a year or so. It is up to the developer how it implements it. And because a developer doesnt have to worry about varrying system specs it can go right ahead and use the full potential of the system. Pc's can upgrade their hardware while and xbox cant.

And as for showing you a press release from microsoft I guess you dont realize that this whole thread has been half speculation and half truth. Maybee you didnt read my comment about we will have to wait untill january when gates releases the specs. But my guess is the link I have posted to for xbit labs is accurate.

Oh and the game you are talking about using the unreal 3 engine it is for xbox2 and it is being made by bioware. But im sure there are more.

Now why dont we just end this pointless conversation because Im dont feel like posting anymore. The first unreal 3 game isnt planned untill 2006.

 

[ryanmw]

ok...when xbox2 comes out..im def getting it rather than spending 3,000 dollars to get inferior PC hardware the day its released......oh and thats going w/ AMD..not Intel which is much more expensive.....btw..unreal engine 3 was designed for PC...BioWare is liscencing it for use with a PC title..not xbox....microsoft will have their own engine...anyway you do got a point..this thread blows...we shall see who is right in about a year...