darkjak Posted December 10, 2005 Posted December 10, 2005 I think that the Graphs'll be better than 2-3 times that of the GC... But I have an idea on sumtin'... Maybe Nintendo'll throw in an expansion pack later on... So in like, 5 years we'll get an expansionpack that makes the Rev more powerfull than the PS3, at a fraction of the price...
BigTac Posted December 10, 2005 Posted December 10, 2005 I can confirm for my own eyes that PS3 you will see Killzone 2 type graphics.
InfernalEternal Posted December 11, 2005 Posted December 11, 2005 The PS3's Cell chip makes it a beast - it could run Unreal Engine 3 on the Cell alone when the graphics chip wasn't finished (yes it ran on only the CPU, no GPU involved) - so it has tremendous graphical power. The Killzone footage isn't far from what we're going to see. Source? I thought it was running on a prototype CELL with SLi 6800 GT's. Pretty amazing if it were just a final spec CELL.
SpinesN Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 The PS3's Cell chip makes it a beast - it could run Unreal Engine 3 on the Cell alone when the graphics chip wasn't finished (yes it ran on only the CPU, no GPU involved) - so it has tremendous graphical power. The Killzone footage isn't far from what we're going to see. the cell chip is unproven, it could perform like crap in games for all we know. New architecture makes clock cycles irrelevant and the each of its many core only do specific tasks. The cell alone CANNOT run unreal 3 that was run on a workstation with SLI (that means 2 running at once if you were unsure) 6800 ultras and the kill zone video was pre rendered. Please get your facts straight. I say screw video ram, since the revo will be playing games at 640x480 or equivalent textures will be rather small and ram for use on the card will not go to good use. The revo needs more system ram, 128 is far to little to ensure large game settings. The x1600 varient makes sense as it can run anything on the market with decent AA and AF at low res (640x480 is REALLY low) so there should be little if any difference in polygon count.
Shyguy Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 but the killzone was pre-rendered like most of sonys game videos
McPhee Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 the thing i always find wierd is that everyone compares specs assuming that they can be directly compared with n00bish PC knowledge. i dont know a great deal myself but what i do know is that if all we've heard is true then comparing the revos spec on paper would be like comparing the on paper specs of a PowerMac and a Dell XPS (bad example maybe?) im really not arsed about graphics, i mean if they look nice then thats fine but if the games play really well then im gonna get it.anyone think this is a stupid question: How hard is it to input Artificial stupidity? i dont think there is such a thing, alou have to do is make the AI less which would make it 'stupider', so is there such a thing called artificial stupidity? Artificial Stupidity is what games companies are tying to pass off as intelligence these days, im still waiting for a game with intelligent enemies/allies! I think that the Graphs'll be better than 2-3 times that of the GC... But I have an idea on sumtin'... Maybe Nintendo'll throw in an expansion pack later on... So in like, 5 years we'll get an expansionpack that makes the Rev more powerfull than the PS3, at a fraction of the price... No chance of that, it would mean replacing the processor + graphics card and adding extra ram and a hard drive (i.e. you'd basically have created a new console) P.S. I'll stop spamming this thread now
Innovance Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 The PS3's Cell chip makes it a beast - it could run Unreal Engine 3 on the Cell alone when the graphics chip wasn't finished (yes it ran on only the CPU, no GPU involved) - so it has tremendous graphical power. The Killzone footage isn't far from what we're going to see. This kind of thing is why i wonder why they didnt just throw in a second cell to do all the graphics.
DCK Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 Heh, I'm not too sure about what I said about the Cell All I know someone said that the footage Sony showed at the E3 about some Unrealish game (using UE 3) was made when the GPU wasn't finished, and I think someone said it was running on the Cell alone. @ Innovance: The Cell probably costs a fortune, and a GPU is better at doing graphics no matter how you put it (and for a cheaper price). The nVidia RSX (basically the most powerful version of the GeForce 7800GTX) is also very, very powerful.
SpinesN Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 Ya they ran UT 2007 (the only none pre rendered demo) it was running on SLI 6800 ultras since the RSX was not done.
goku21 Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 Bullsh**!!!!!! If this was the GPU, it could do HDTV-out,no? And if you think this ones underpowered...hail I´ve read so many patents of Nintendo...they got Hardware-Parallax-Mapping(Unreal Engine 3 uses it but in software on 360 and PS$)... totally reconfigured T&L and Vertex shading for masseffect creation... putting this together with DirectX specified hardware on one chip... could really do good things... they have so many patents about implementing Hardware effects into the Graphics chip, that are commonly computed by your CPU. Its got intellegent framebuffer-ram (Antialias and other filtering is processed through copy out ) Think ... 360 has a gpu more like a radeon with some enhancements to those cards available for pc´s. The tricore is also a combined Desktop-PC-multicore that will probably never be totally utilized. To Ps3 its similar...chips produced for a wide range of applications... One employee said that the rev is a machine build up only for gaming purposes... Iwata said coding is easy... because GFX is now no problem anymore... its build in and can be used in much more efficient way then big engines provide!! so i think nintendo won´t fall behind in terms of graphics quality.. and with really good antialiasing it should even look really good on a big Plasma or LCD and don´t forget about the coming DLP Beamers and TV´s... they show pictures without pixel per size. It provides a crystal clear Image from it´s physic construction.. doesn´t care about Resolution!
Innovance Posted December 15, 2005 Posted December 15, 2005 Heh, I'm not too sure about what I said about the Cell All I know someone said that the footage Sony showed at the E3 about some Unrealish game (using UE 3) was made when the GPU wasn't finished, and I think someone said it was running on the Cell alone. @ Innovance: The Cell probably costs a fortune, and a GPU is better at doing graphics no matter how you put it (and for a cheaper price). The nVidia RSX (basically the most powerful version of the GeForce 7800GTX) is also very, very powerful. Cell only costs a fortune initially, but their plans for mass production of cell go far beyond PS3 and beyond even just sony, eventually cell is goig to be very cheap - i think.
SpinesN Posted December 15, 2005 Posted December 15, 2005 Cell only costs a fortune initially, but their plans for mass production of cell go far beyond PS3 and beyond even just sony, eventually cell is goig to be very cheap - i think. After the design phase all that is needed is laser etching in silicon, so the size of the chip and the cost of silicon set the price of the chip in mass production.
darkjak Posted December 15, 2005 Posted December 15, 2005 the thing i always find wierd is that everyone compares specs assuming that they can be directly compared with n00bish PC knowledge. i dont know a great deal myself but what i do know is that if all we've heard is true then comparing the revos spec on paper would be like comparing the on paper specs of a PowerMac and a Dell XPS (bad example maybe?) Artificial Stupidity is what games companies are tying to pass off as intelligence these days, im still waiting for a game with intelligent enemies/allies! No chance of that, it would mean replacing the processor + graphics card and adding extra ram and a hard drive (i.e. you'd basically have created a new console) P.S. I'll stop spamming this thread now Yeah. So instead of buying a brand new console, we'll buy an expansion pack. Nintendo did it on the N64, which made it a bit closer to the 64-bit Sega console that was in the making (and then was changed into a 128 bit console called Dreamcast).
cubeboy101 Posted February 4, 2006 Posted February 4, 2006 the developers that leaked that shit were anti nintendo pro microsoft it was a attempt at damaging revolution ign were sucking up to bill gates they do exactly the same wen comparing cube and xbox and the next person to say xbox was higher spec than cube gets there nuts snipped off xbox specs off the shelf celeron cpu (cisc cpu old and out dated) aluminium conectors (old out dated) 64mb slow clunky dram slow dvd drive 4xspeeddvd gpu overclocked geforse 2 with upgraded shaders 4 times texture layers in 1 pass in game colour 16 bit with bottle necking and poor fill rate////right now the better cube custom mpu with better copperwire design micro efficant embedded cpu gamecentric optermized with twice the catch of xbox cpu allso a risc cpu thats way better than cisc that xbox had 1ts ram far far far better and faster than dram flipper gamecentric graphics processor fully optermized for tvs at 480i/p res 3 mb catch 1 ts ram optermized for 24 bit colour and 8 texture layers in 1 pass lightning qick gamecentric mini disc drive 24xspeed spin mini disc and reads from inner edge outwards for ligfhtning fast streaming and loadtimes theres no comparason cube was kick ass gaming hardware xbox was a low spec pc in a box examples better games on cube res evil 0/1 and mmmmm 4///best cell shading ever seen any format wind waker best graphics this gen res evil 4 cube version highest texture pass in game cube only 8 times texture pass xbox hit 4 times best polygon count at 30 frames a sec 24 million cube 12 million xbox best poly count at 60 frames a sec xbox 10 million cube 16million halo 2 naff loadtrimes grey washedout textures pop up and bugs choppy frame rate metroid prime 2 rock solid 60 frames a sec near zero loadtimes thru whole game amasing colour and graphics bug free no bugs slow down or pop up now iv gave the industre facts not anyones mear opinion please stop with the xbox was the most powerfull it clearly was not yes it had a harddrive and a online set up but at graphics loadtimes and polish of the games code its clear cube was better celeron cpus are not something to write home about shiiiiiiiiiiii there naff and based on 1970s cisc tec gekko was based on a 1990s risc power pc no contest
YenRug Posted February 4, 2006 Posted February 4, 2006 I think somebody needs to stop bumping old threads, Fierce_Link already closed the first three threads you bumped and warned you needed to stop doing it. Also, Cubeboy, you might just want to start with the spelling, punctuation and grammar on here, seeing as you claimed you were capable of it on the Cube Advanced comments. You're not likely to be taken seriously, if you just come in with the crap you used there. By the way, did you get banned on there? I noticed a recent comment of yours no longer had your ID on it.
ShadowV7 Posted February 4, 2006 Posted February 4, 2006 Really stop bumping old threads this is like the 5th time if told you ,post in recent threads and not old ones
Fierce_LiNk Posted February 4, 2006 Posted February 4, 2006 Thanks guys. I'm glad to see other people are peeved by these bumped threads. It's just a shame i'll have to lock another thread.
Recommended Posts