x360 using only 20% of it's potential?! idk

[VirusType2]

Although demos of Xbox 360 launch titles have impressed many, gamers can expect more “next-gen” looking titles from the second generation of Xbox 360 games and beyond, as developers become better acquainted with the subtleties of programming for the new console.

Historically, first-generation games for any new console don’t fully utilize the console’s improved hardware and processing power.

Well duh!
But, I for one, would like to see these games using all the system has. Its a shame that games like Perfect dark, which came out as one of the last titles released for the N-64, won't be using nearly all of the potential of the xbox360, since it was programmed on an entirely new system. Lets Hope they make a Perfect Dark Zero2 getting the framerate to 60. But regardless this game seems quite polished and I'd love to have it.

during a talk on multithreaded programming, a Microsoft speaker mentioned that all first generation Xbox 360 games will not take advantage of the Xbox 360’s two other cores. This probably isn’t worrying Microsoft too much, since they’ve given developers plenty of time to perfect their games before the PS3 and Revolution launch sometime next year.

my opinion? Either the "Microsoft speaker" (i mean come on, they didn't even give a name here) Apparently either being mis-quoted, not really a Microsoft employee or Microsoft apparently doing a little misleading of their own here :hmph:
This seems to have been mis-interpreted as ALL first gen games not using all three cores, when it really means "NOT ALL" will use all three cores.

Part of the reason for this may lie in the software development community’s apparent lack of experience with multithreaded programming.

thankfully Oblivion will be using all three cores

oblivion: elder scrolls 4

According to this interview with an Elder Scrolls developer, Oblivion will be multithreaded on both PC and 360:
(great interview)
http://www.elitebastards.com/page.php?pageid=12316

quote:

Gavin Carter: The game’s code takes advantage of the multithreaded nature of the Xbox 360 and multithreaded PCs to improve just about every aspect of the game. The primary function is to improve framerates by off-loading some work from the main thread to the other processors. We do a variety of tasks on other threads depending on the situation – be it sound and music, renderer tasks, physics calculations, or anything else that could benefit. Loading also gets spread across hardware threads to aid in load times and provide a more seamless experience for the player.


IM not sure if the following 3 quotes are credible Take this info with a grain of salt (may not be accurate)

each of the 3 cores has 2 strands, which means it can process 2 diffrent things at one time with the same amount of speed. so in a way there are actualy 6 cores, and they are only using half. the ram they are using can do the same thing as well. trust me, the next gen will look at least double what we are seeing now.

what he is saying is if they do only use one core, that means they are only using 2 out of 6 threads. or (33% of the systems full processing potential) in addition he is saying that the ram can do the same as well. although I don't have any info on if they are using the ram to its potential or not.

Actually, since each core can execute two threads, the launch games are not even fully using one core, let alone leaving the other cores idle. Pretty interesting, considering how good some of the launch games seem to look...

even if they are then there is 80% more power to tap in the xbox360

In conclusion I think we are definately going to want to check reviews of games before buying them.
Sounds it's quite possible like some of the first games comming out aren't going to be using but 1 core (2 out of 6 threads) or 33% processor and possibly not all of the RAM capability.

more info can be found at the sources:
http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000890065328/
and here:
http://www.xb360info.com/xbox/news/201#more-201

 

[DrDevin]

Yes, most first generation games will use only 1 core on the 360. The first gen games are basically showing off the GPU and DX9 effects.

I wouldent go as far as saying they are using only 20% because they are tapping the GPU already, which is what really makes the game look good. I can see much improved AI and physics though.

As always more optimizations will allow the games to keep looking better as time goes by. It will be interesting to compare second gen games on the 360 to first gen ones on PS3.

Developers would have had time to play with the 360 but the PS3 will be untested. Even if the PS3 ends up a lot faster, 360 games could look better because developers have had time to optimize for it.

 

[Synthos]

Shouldn't buying a game be about fun? Why is everything now about performance now a days?

 

[Gargantou]

Yup, compare say Halo 2, Chronicles Of Riddick and Doom 3 to Halo 1, imo they all look WAY better.
Hopefully we'll see the same graphical difference in second gen games for the 360.

 

[VictimOfScience]

This really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has been around for this generation of consoles. Devs have only relatively recently begun to really push current consoles to their limits and the results have been amazing!

IMHO, there's no need for the next generation to come around so quickly when the full potential of the current gen is still largely untapped except by a few choice developers. The only reason it is coming on so strong so early is that Microsoft saw this as the only way they could gain any sort of marketshare from Sony. If they launched the 360 at the same time as the PS3, they would fail and they know that, so they are doing the only thing they can in order to improve their percentage.

Still, I suppose the quicker devs learn how to multi-thread their apps, the quicker we can start enjoying some really terrific games with much more complex AI and physics than we have seen heretofore. Hopefully that will translate into much more involved and diverse gameplay as well.

 

[Icarusintel]

Look at the differences between the first games on PS2, then MGS2, Killzone, MGS3, Shadow of the Colossus, and finally Black - the progression naturally happens over time, so really these first games aren;t that impressive, consoles are like fine wine, they get better with age

 

[DigiQ8]

Yes, most first generation games will use only 1 core on the 360. The first gen games are basically showing off the GPU and DX9 effects.

I wouldent go as far as saying they are using only 20% because they are tapping the GPU already, which is what really makes the game look good. I can see much improved AI and physics though.

As always more optimizations will allow the games to keep looking better as time goes by. It will be interesting to compare second gen games on the 360 to first gen ones on PS3.

Developers would have had time to play with the 360 but the PS3 will be untested. Even if the PS3 ends up a lot faster, 360 games could look better because developers have had time to optimize for it.

wtf 360 use DX9 ?!

 

[Warbie]

^ agreed, Victim.

Also, by the time the PS3 comes out, along with it's first generations of titles, developers will have had a good while to get the hang of working on the 360 and should be releasing some very promising software.

Considering developers only got finished 360 hardware just a few months before launch, we should expect future titles to run and look considerably better than this first batch. It's amazing that the games looks as good as they do at the moment.

 

[VirusType2]

Shouldn't buying a game be about fun? Why is everything now about performance now a days?

Because I can have fun on a Super Nintendo.

People thinking about buying an next gen console or thinking of upgrading their PC want to know which direction to go.

Besides you can say beauty is only skin deep all day long, but imagine (asuming you like girls) the most attractive girl you have ever seen, and having to choose between her and someone who was equally fun but was only slightly attractive.

With the insanely attractive broad, we are assuming that the fun is a given.

 

[Icarusintel]

wtf 360 use DX9 ?!

haha... microsoft hopefully implemented at least partial DX10 support, or else the PC will be ahead once again by a year or so

 

[Gargantou]

Icarus, the PC'll then be ahead by a HALF YEAR, atleast I think so, DX10 will release along with Vista in Summer 2k6 most likely, ofcourse most games'll probably use it in late 2k6 tho, as you implied.

 

[Icarusintel]

Icarus, the PC'll then be ahead by a HALF YEAR, atleast I think so, DX10 will release along with Vista in Summer 2k6 most likely, ofcourse most games'll probably use it in late 2k6 tho, as you implied.

i didn't think DX10 cards were going to be out til late next year, but of course i haven't heard much about them beyond that rumor
but yes, games will take a little bit before they start using DX10, but I can;t wait to see what new features they'll be implementing

 

[Gargantou]

Yeah, the DX10 CryEngine demo was beautiful tho, great physics, HDR, DYNAMIC volymetric clouds, far more beautiful than say FS2004s.
I want a GTA with those graphics damnit!*Cries*

 

[Cole]

This is wrong.

It uses most of the graphic processing power thus graphics wont get better, but really the only thing that can get better is the processing power. But the graphics card needs 2 of the cores for itself.

 

[destrukt]

minerel, are you going to throw out the examples of graphics/performance becoming much better on consoles (read: ps2/xbox) and the fact that developers are generally only using 1 core because they don't have enough experience, AND claim that it's all wrong ? .. good luck.

 

[VictimOfScience]

Icarus, the PC'll then be ahead by a HALF YEAR, atleast I think so, DX10 will release along with Vista in Summer 2k6 most likely, ofcourse most games'll probably use it in late 2k6 tho, as you implied.

Ha! I'd love to see them release Vista by Summer of next year. Hopefully they learn from the horrendous VS 2005 launch that earlier doesn't necessarily mean better. Next year they'll just be getting around to patching VS 2003 and they've already got a Service Pack going for 2005--that should tell people something about the way they view software releases.

VS 2003 SP1 is scheduled for April 2006. We have done much of the work for this release already, and are anxious to get it to you.

VS 2005 SP1 is scheduled for the first half of 2006. We will be more specific about the date in a few months, once we have more customer data.

Source.

And just as with any new technology, its going to be a little while before its implemented well, so 2007 or so for good DX10 games I say.

 

[VirusType2]

This really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has been around for this generation of consoles. Devs have only relatively recently begun to really push current consoles to their limits and the results have been amazing!

IMHO, there's no need for the next generation to come around so quickly when the full potential of the current gen is still largely untapped except by a few choice developers.
Still, I suppose the quicker devs learn how to multi-thread their apps, the quicker we can start enjoying some really terrific games with much more complex AI and physics than we have seen heretofore. Hopefully that will translate into much more involved and diverse gameplay as well.

While I agree that particularly Gamecube and Xbox still have the ability to improve some and push the consoles to their limits, more games are still being released for all 3 systems. So they haven't been abandoned, regardless of what Microsoft is doing.
A brand new game--RE4 for playstation, while not as good as the Gamecube version, looks to be pretty impressive for a PS2 game.

My brother has Grand theft auto:san andreas for PS2 and The graphics are so entirely horrible, i can't even stand to look at it whithout cringing with disgust. I wouldn't quite call THAT amazing.

So IMHO, bring on the next gen!

 

[Gorgon]

Getting FX60 can pwn Xbox360 cpu power.

 

[Kangy]

Sure, it'll "pwn" it, but y'know, you're spending the same amount on 1 CPU as the whole console costs, and at the end of the day, many the same games will come out for it, if not more.

So why do I care about having the latest and greatest PC, again?

 

[Icarusintel]

Sure, it'll "pwn" it, but y'know, you're spending the same amount on 1 CPU as the whole console costs, and at the end of the day, many the same games will come out for it, if not more.

So why do I care about having the latest and greatest PC, again?

so you can have the biggest e-penis around, of course

 

[dream431ca]

This is wrong.

It uses most of the graphic processing power thus graphics wont get better, but really the only thing that can get better is the processing power. But the graphics card needs 2 of the cores for itself.

May I remind you on How computers work:

The graphics card does not need the cores or processors. The graphics card take a lot of the load Away, from the cores, so the cores can process more stuff and be more productive. The graphics are determined by the graphics card. The cores provide everything else, and a bit of graphical power, but that's mainly for the graphics card.

The X360 is the closest console ever to an actual Computer, it's nearly identical to one. So it works relatively the same way.

 

[Gorgon]

Sure, it'll "pwn" it, but y'know, you're spending the same amount on 1 CPU as the whole console costs, and at the end of the day, many the same games will come out for it, if not more.

So why do I care about having the latest and greatest PC, again?

good point, do you think I m crazy enought to pay £670 for a CPU, all i m going to pay is £350 for it when it comes out. how ? read more down

Look at sig, I bought it off the blackMarket for half the price,

I know friends at the blackMarket who make dodgy deals with offcial shops, and sell the parts for half the price,

My pc 3 months ago = £2450 I got it from the blackMarket for £1200

I can get anything I like (Electronics only) for half price.

:thumbs: :thumbs:

 

[Gargantou]

Good for you Gorgon..^^
You're still really paying more for the CPU, the standard XB360 package costs 299 bucks.

Also, I assume it must feel helluva good bragging.
Too bad it makes you look like a pig.

Also, do consider, we're talking ordinary people here I think?
I.e. generally, so if you were just an "ordinary guy" you'd be paying twice what the standard XB360 costs, for ONLY a CPU.

 

[Gorgon]

Good for you Gorgon..^^
You're still really paying more for the CPU, the standard XB360 package costs 299 bucks.

Also, I assume it must feel helluva good bragging.
Too bad it makes you look like a pig.

Also, do consider, we're talking ordinary people here I think?
I.e. generally, so if you were just an "ordinary guy" you'd be paying twice what the standard XB360 costs, for ONLY a CPU.

Pig ? LOOLZ nah, you are wrong.

And yeah the price of the xbox vs the pc with the same power output =

to the ratio of 3:12 hmmm its really amazing how they packed all that power in £300....:cheers:

 

[StardogChampion]

I don't believe all this "only utilizing 20%" crap. Later games do look better, but not that much better.

 

[Warbie]

I think you'll be suprised. Compare early PS2 games to what we're getting now. The difference in quality is roughly equivalent to the improvement i'd expect from your average pc upgrade (new ram, cpu, gpu etc)

20% is certainly an exageration, but 360 games in 2-3 years will look and run much better than its launch titles.

 

[Gargantou]

Pig ? LOOLZ nah, you are wrong.

I didn't mean to offend you, I'm just jealous you know..;p
What with being stuck with my ATI Radeon 9800Pro and 2.5Ghz processor til I buy a new PC late next year, after the release of Vista.;(

 

[Top Secret]

I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit on this one. It's like driving a ferrari on the interstate vs. a ford pinto. Sure, the ferrari could drive 200~ miles per hour (3 cores) but the speed limit is 65 (GPU). The Pinto represents the utilization of the first wave of Xbox360 titles, the Ferrari represents the waves of titles later on.

I don't care if it has 8 more cores, it's still going to be GPU limited.

 

[Gargantou]

So, a console GPU gives better performance than it's PC GPU equal usually, you know, the XB1 has a GeForce 3, I'd love to see say, Chronicles Of Riddick, running on a PC with a 733 Mhz processor and a GeForce 3, under like what 64 MBs of Ram, and still looking as good as the XB vers, what with all that bumpmapping, shadows, etc..:dozey:

 

[Cole]

The graphics card does not need the cores or processors. The graphics card take a lot of the load Away, from the cores, so the cores can process more stuff and be more productive. The graphics are determined by the graphics card. The cores provide everything else, and a bit of graphical power, but that's mainly for the graphics card.

Fine I'll go dig up the F*cking article just for you.

 

[Cole]

http://theinquirer.net/?article=27359

There you go!

No doubt these games will be able to be optimized for eveyr little thing, but those games are the ones that are only going to be coming out on 1 console. Because when it takes a shitload of money and time to optimize the hell out of it for one console, you can be sure your publisher dosn't want you to have to go back and recode half the ****ing thing with new optimizations and then do that one more time. Time consuming, they want your game out before the next generation of consoles. With games going to take at least 3/4 years you can be sure publishers might get a bit bitchier.

The X360 is the closest console ever to an actual Computer, it's nearly identical to one. So it works relatively the same way.

No, the Xbox is, the Xbox 360 isn't exactly like a computer it has some major differences.

 

[Warbie]

Getting FX60 can pwn Xbox360 cpu power.

Hardware isn't what the pc lacks, Gorgon

Buy whatever hardware you want, you'll still be stuck with the same games as the rest of us.