C1 and X1800XT
- Thread starter Manvol
- Start date
dukmahsik said:
But is slower at high resolution (i.e. 1600x1200 and above - and maybe less)
EDIT: Xenos is probably faster in all shader limited situations while R520 is likely faster when other factors are needed - particularly high resolution.
Last edited by a moderator:
pjbliverpool said:
... Which will never be a problem on the 720p-fixed X360 games.
london-boy said:
But it would be if Xenos were in the PC. i.e. Xenos is better for the X360, R520 is better for the PC.
Swap them round and niether would be as good.
Alpha_Spartan
Regular
The X1800 XT slows down to single digit frame-rates at 3200x2400 resolution.pjbliverpool said:
dukmahsik said:
When he asked how the two compare I must have missed the part were he said "assuming both are running at TV resolution".
Oh wait, no I didn't.....
Alpha_Spartan said:
Im sure that would depend on the game (even if it could render at that resolution at all).
However just because crazy resolutions would bring the R520 to its knees, how does it follow that Xenos is thus faster!?!
pjbliverpool said:
Your point?!
Really, some people will make up arguments just for the sake of it.
pjbliverpool said:
He was being sarcastic and built an argument just like you did.
In the end, Xenos won't run at 1600x1200 just like R520 won't run at 3200x2400.
london-boy said:
I know, why exactly are you arguing with me again?
He asked how the two compare, I told him.
You say im wrong because TV's can't run at 1600x1200? Yes "some people will make up arguments just for the sake of it"
london-boy said:
And R520 isn't designed to be limited to 720p. So why is 720p a more valid comparison resolution than 1600x1200 when comparing the two GPU's?
We can play to the Xenos's stregths but not to the R520's? I understand now.
czekon said:
Except Xenos is plently capable of rendering at 1600x1200, its just not capable of outputting that.
This is crazy, it was one of Xenos's designers who made the 1600x1200 comparison between Xenos and R520! I am merely repeating the information that he provided. Its amazing how touchy some people can get when you say the slightest thing which can be interpreted as not having a religious love of the X360 graphics chip.
The question was how do the two compare, yes?
The answer is one is faster at low res in shader limited situations and the other has less shader power but is faster at high resolutions. Xenos is artificially capped at 720p/1080i by its output chip, but the fact that its slows down above those resolutions is perfectly valid if you want to compare it to a PC chip.
I'm not sure Xenos is actually "not capable" to output higher resolutions than 720p.
It will probably only ever use that res for obvious reasons, but i don't think there is something blocking a higher res if the developer wants to use it? Not sure.
It will probably only ever use that res for obvious reasons, but i don't think there is something blocking a higher res if the developer wants to use it? Not sure.
london-boy said:
I think the output chip is limited to 720p or 1080i. Not sure if it can do resolution in between though. im pretty sure its incapable of 1080p but 1600x1200 is a little lower than that so you never know...
EDIT: And obviously it can also handle the various resolutions below 720p
IMO, C1 was not really designed/intended to push such high resolutions (it would only be ok in certain situations), otherwise they'd have stuck more than 8 ROPs in its design. So they balanced it out focusing on output at 720p and then went for more math processing power.
Similar threads
