Rikimaru
Veteran
Portables were always about "rethinking withered technology".
Nintendo GOing Forward.
- Thread starter Wynix
- Start date
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
In late 2016, 2 consoles will have meant 10 years of underperforming hardware.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Architectures back then were too different so it was difficult to make valuable direct comparisons, but at least in multiplatform titles the Gamecube could achieve at least visual parity with the PS2 if not better graphics on certain ports (e.g. Resident Evil 4). The XBox was in a whole other league by using a much more modern NV2x GPU, a Pentium III and 64MB of UMA though.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rikimaru
Veteran
Gamecube had major disadvantages to PS2.
DVD: Textures and content had to be dialed back.
-2 buttons. I know a game where GC version does not have center camera functionality.
24 bit colour. Banding and strange lines in progressive scan.
Interesting info I learned recently: "Fun fact: PS2 can do sqrt() faster in wall time than the PPC970FX based cores...
"
https://twitter.com/lance_gilbert/status/657345899861970944
DVD: Textures and content had to be dialed back.
-2 buttons. I know a game where GC version does not have center camera functionality.
24 bit colour. Banding and strange lines in progressive scan.
Interesting info I learned recently: "Fun fact: PS2 can do sqrt() faster in wall time than the PPC970FX based cores...
"https://twitter.com/lance_gilbert/status/657345899861970944
Gamecube wasn't exactly "high end", it was decently efficient middle of the road, which gave it OK performance, but its odd memory layout undoubtedly held it back (super-slow A-RAM, and then three separate pools of fast RAM of different small or small-ish sizes, out of which GPU could only texture from one of them (the smallest.
)Gamecube was so good that in 15 years they only managed to double it's power! :O
Annyway I had a gamecube, enjoyed it, and remember that almost any multiplatform had better texture compared to ps2.
The minidvd has been a problem at one point, but granted better seek times and decent transfer speed.
Rikimaru
Veteran
I remember otherwise.
Not only GC had mini DVDs, also 24MB of RAM whereas PS2 had 32MB.
I'm sure GC vs PS2 vs XB is well discussed elsewhere. Hint hint.
east of eastside
Newcomer
Current best guess at NX specs:
IBM had some stuff cooking with 14nm (I guess GF has it).
Why wouldn't it be? If regular DRAM scales this low, then why not this also? Anyway, it wouldn't have to be eDRAM, it could just as well be an Intel "crystalwell" type separate die, hooked up by something akin to wide I/O.
It's harder to do with making it CMOS compatible i.e. the embedded part.
It's probably a bit more feasible for Intel to do since they make it themselves (also better selling price).
Last edited:
Regular DRAM and eDRAM have very different structure. Regular DRAM has a huge capacitor built on top of the (very thin) metal stack, away from the silicon. This is incompatible with a tall metal stack needed for logic. Modern eDRAM typically drills the capacitor into the silicon substrate.
Yes, well, we can't have everything can we?
Anyway, Nintendo have done MCMs since the Wii first came out ages ago now. It's not a big step, nor, a crazy expensive one either I would think.
And that is incompatible with shrinking?
