"2x the power of the GC," can someone clarify what this means? (ERP)

[Li Mu Bai]

Are they referring to strictly raw CPU processing power here? Because no one has yet to mention the dedicated GPU (Hollywood) nor any of its abilities. Even though Baumann said that it would be capable of DX9 level shader effects, & ATi has said that its architecture is indeed new & not based upon its predecessor the Flipper. (as so many here incorrectly surmised that it would be) What of Gekko's added SIMD functionality? So 2x the 6-12 million fully lit, fully textured polygons/sec. in-game? (yes, I know its conservative & has been surpassed) How comprehensive is this power statement, as it seems not to acknowledge any type of feature set capabilities, only raw processor output? Would this be correct ERP? (or any other dev. with Rev kits as well)

 

[Megadrive1988]

funny you should make a thread about this -- I was almost going to add a post to my own thread -- along the lines of me thinking that Rev CPU, Broadway, might be a 2x leap in performance but that the GPU, Hollywood, might be a ~5x leap or more in performance.

looking at N64 to Gamecube, the bigger leap was in the graphics processors rather than the CPUs.


another line of thought, and this isn't really about guessing that Revolution is alot more powerful than we're being lead to believe..... at least we're going to have a little box that has more performance than a NAOMI 2 board, with a comparable amount of RAM.

 

[Urian]

Perhaps the 12 milions of polygons number it was the number of polygon/sprites that the GPU could draw with all effects but without the the FSAA and 6 milion with the FSAA.

Remember that one of the GCN bottlenecks is the fillrate.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

funny you should make a thread about this -- I was almost going to add a post to my own thread -- along the lines of me thinking that Rev CPU, Broadway, might be a 2x leap in performance but that the GPU, Hollywood, might be a ~5x leap or more in performance.

CPU limmeted games aplenty than

 

[Shompola]

I dont think you should look too deep into it.. I think it is a casual observation. Snes was stated to be 2x Nes in peformance from a lot of sources simple because of the amount of "bits" it could push per clock cycle. The Rev comments are probably similiar, i.e. just an arbitrary number, can be difference of clock cycles, transistors etc or just a casual observation.

 

[pc999]

Why would they make the cansole this way this would make every Rev game CPU bound and personally it seems that this gen the best things will come from the CPU (physics, AI, voice control, processoral work ie things that really affect gameplay) hings that IMO most GC games already fail.

I think that Rev just ask for more power eg a tenis games in Rev only make sense if you can indeed move your arm to control the ball but for that you should have 1) (many?) more animations to look good 2) a real reaction from the ball (ie physics based) in every thing it touchs but this will also lead to a greater variety of technics to play and the AI will need to be able to do the job. This is the only way of making sense to get a Rev and it seems that such a game would need more power than current ones on corrent consoles and still this is example more simple I can get one can easly think on great things for more complex games (it should be great for physics) but all of them will need more power.

Anyway I personally think they will use the Moores Law and within that they could easly (if 90 nm) put versions of (just to give examples): a X1600 or half Xenus (ie 24 ALUs 4 ROPs 5Mg etc...), and for the a 1Mg L2 Core Duo or even 2 PPE with 512 of cache and it would be more than enought to at least play any game realeased on the PC till 2007 (end?) and all at the same die size/price than GC, ie 99$.

If they fail to present us games that are at least as improved as the example I gave then I personally think that they will fail in presenting a new console that it is completely innovative to a more ninch market thing simple because it will only be able to explore a (tinny) fraction of its potencial and that is a shame.

 

[London Geezer]

Funny, i was thinking about a Core Duo too lately, these little buggers seem to be very cool and powerful at the same time. They certainly do what they need to do and more, on laptops. Guess they're a bit expensive though.

 

[dukmahsik]

anyone else thinks it's suspicious that 4-5 years after GC's launch we only get a console with "2 times" the perf of GC?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

anyone else thinks it's suspicious that 4-5 years after GC's launch we only get a console with "2 times" the perf of GC?

It all depends on the price point they are targetting, and what other features are included OOTB (like WiFi....)

 

[NANOTEC]

Personally I hope it's more than 2x because if you take the best looking GC game RE4, doubling the performance would only get you 60fps with same quality or 30fps with twice the rendering quality. That's not that great relatively speaking. I want at least double the framerate and double the rendering quality.

 

[dukmahsik]

It all depends on the price point they are targetting, and what other features are included OOTB (like WiFi....)

I totally understand that point, but 5 years after and all they want is 2x the perf? I just don't buy it. I also don't buy it can only do 480p.

 

[function]

Personally I hope it's more than 2x because if you take the best looking GC game RE4, doubling the performance would only get you 60fps with same quality or 30fps with twice the rendering quality. That's not that great relatively speaking. I want at least double the framerate and double the rendering quality.

Don't buy a Revolution then.

 

[NANOTEC]

Don't buy a Revolution then.

I already plan on buying one regardless if it meets my wants or not.

 

[Ragemare]

I dont think you should look too deep into it.. I think it is a casual observation. Snes was stated to be 2x Nes in peformance from a lot of sources simple because of the amount of "bits" it could push per clock cycle. The Rev comments are probably similiar, i.e. just an arbitrary number, can be difference of clock cycles, transistors etc or just a casual observation.

I think this just about sums it up. Whoever said it (I can't remember) might have just meant the games look twice as good, which is completely subjective. There are people here who would say Xbox360 games look twice as good as Xbox games.

 

[function]

I already plan on buying one regardless if it meets my wants or not.

But if it doesn't match even the bare minimum of what you want (which is what you stated) why on earth are you buying one? It's an entertainment device that doesn't do what you want so why do you want it?

 

[Rodéric]

But if it doesn't match even the bare minimum of what you want (which is what you stated) why on earth are you buying one? It's an entertainment device that doesn't do what you want so why do you want it?

I can only guess that he means that the Console hardware doesn't meet his expectations but that the games &| controller is enough to make him choose to buy it anyway...

 

[NANOTEC]

I can only guess that he means that the Console hardware doesn't meet his expectations but that the games &| controller is enough to make him choose to buy it anyway...

You mindreader!:smile:

 

[pc999]

Funny, i was thinking about a Core Duo too lately, these little buggers seem to be very cool and powerful at the same time. They certainly do what they need to do and more, on laptops. Guess they're a bit expensive though.

See for your self, from a P4/D vs CD POV I dont think it will end that much.

Edit: saw some PD930 (still slower than X2) prices and probably it would get lower than it.

http://www.shopping.com/xFS?KW=Core+Duo+&FN=Processors&FD=1719
http://www.shopping.com/xFS?KW=pentium+d&FN=Processors&FD=1719

 

[Tim]

Personally I hope it's more than 2x because if you take the best looking GC game RE4, doubling the performance would only get you 60fps with same quality or 30fps with twice the rendering quality. That's not that great relatively speaking. I want at least double the framerate and double the rendering quality.

2x the performance is just silly - if that was the case it should be out now and NINTENDO should make a profit on every console selling it at $99.

 

[Megadrive1988]

Personally I hope it's more than 2x because if you take the best looking GC game RE4, doubling the performance would only get you 60fps with same quality or 30fps with twice the rendering quality. That's not that great relatively speaking. I want at least double the framerate and double the rendering quality.

naturally I agree with you. and if you doubled the framerate of RE4 while keeping the same level of graphics detail & quality, many would say there's no improvement at all.