An 8600gts RSX instead of a 7800 gtx

This is more of an API/d3d9 issue rather than a hardware one. With console development, there will be lower level access that forego this sort of limitation.

 

In the end, an 8600GTS would probably not really offer a tangible advantage over what the PS3 is equipped with right now. I think you'd need to double the RAM, go 256-bit bus, and go with something like a 9600GT-esque design to really be impressive and dust Xenos. That was just never going to happen.

I think ATI had much more time to put things together than NV did. I actually kinda wonder if the original, unfinished R400 was a major stepping stone to Xenos*.


*hoping to incite extreme speculative conversation here

 

360 Now with HD4550 ? I just built a PC for less than $400 with 4850 (price don't include Windows, a controller, or my time to get it working) But it kinda show how expensive the custom parts in 360 and PS3 really are when prices haven't really go down that much. They really should go for commodities next time around, like how arcade machines are now.

I wasn't even planning to use this PC for gaming (was originally for PVR and encoding) but I was suprised at the performance of the 4850. Its really quite a bargain, IMO. Sony or MS shouldn't tie themself to one providers, they should just shop around, especially if Intel part is also competitive.

 

RSX weaker than 7900GS?

Hey fellows, i saw this at neogaf, Capcom said PS3 has complications running SF4 shaders.

SF4 in the arcades runs on Taito x2 hardware, a quick Google search shows the specs as a very modest C2D E6400, 512MB/1GB RAM, 256MB 7900GS, Realtek embedded audio and Windows XP SP2.


Another thread caught my eyes, GTA4 PC minimum req. against reccomended req.

Is there anything we are use from these information?

 

The GTA4 specs are pretty interesting. They don't tell us much about PS3 performance but they do tell us that we shouldn't expect the game to scale very much considering how close the min and recommended systems are.

 

I wouldn't really say they are close

Your talking about a whole graphics generation leap there. Your also looking at a doubling of the cores on the intel side and an addition of a third core on the athlon side and a cpu gen upgrade.

I think the game will scale pretty well but reviews should be out in a few weeks

 

HD space

Wow! That's a pretty serious install right there! Is 16GB around the norm now for a pc game install?
I remember it was not too long ago when 8GB - 9GB was the usual install size.

 

I think they only chose the Q6600 on the Intel side because its the lowest end multicore CPU Intel makes. That level of CPU isn't actually required if the much slower PhenomX3 is anything to go by.

Most likely the game is looking for 3 threads ala Xenon to run optimally.

And on the GPU side, the jump from a 7900 to an 8600 in performance terms is practically none existant. The ATI jump is bigger but its also a bit unbalanced compared to the NV requirements. Unless the 8600 requirement is a typo and it should actually be 8800.

 

In many respects I agree, the DX9 API imposes a lot of limits on Geforce 7 chips in graphics and therefore we can expect a lot more flexibility when we can use OpenGL or libgcm in a console. Although, when you think about it, the Geforce 8 still has more sophisticated yet more general purpose shader architecture and I think that would be quite a factor in how you can render 3d worlds.