Faster xbox with 1.4GHz processor!

rabidrabbit said:
http://www.polygonmag.com/news/index.php?id=812

Xbox Goes Turbo

By Dennis Day, News Editor
Published September 22, 2003 -- 05:20 pm CDT

Japanese retailer OverTop, known for their wide selection of import games and unique gaming peripherals, has announced plans to offer an upgraded version of Microsoft's Xbox console. Modified by FriendTech, the upgraded Xbox will boast a 1.4 ghz processor and 80GB harddisk. Although scheduled for release in November, pricing for the new model remains undisclosed. The finished version of the upgraded Xbox will reportedly include a "turbo switch" which will allow players to run the console using default settings. When operated in turbo mode the prototype loaded data at nearly twice the speed of a retail Xbox. Below are several pictures of the prototype.
It seems totally useless
 
rabidrabbit said:
Jabjabs said:
If they could put in a second GPU, a second disc drive and another video out it would be cool to run two xbox games on one machine and two TV's.
Eh :) wouldn't it would be more practical to just buy two xboxes :?

Yeah, but then you'd have to buy an all new house to fit BOTH Xboxes! :oops: :oops: :p :p ;) ;)
 
I wonder how much discover would cost.....and isn't it the same thing as the phantom, but I assume disc based instead of broadband based?
 
I rather like this line:

DISCover's patented technology makes it the only video game console able to play PC games

You mean... because it's a PC?

A PC without networking even. So pretty much a crippled PC?
 
The Mobile Celeron with Intel S-Spec SL5SP is a close relative. But the XBox CPU (SL5SN) inherits the Pentium III's 8-way set associative L2 cache. The Celeron is limited to 4-way.

Bzzzt... SL5SP also has the 8-way ATC L2... Celeron and PIII are for all intensive purposes marketing labels (features do change)...
 
Little more info on the Xbox mod from the Inq: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11748

A FIRM on the show floor here in Taipei is offering the chance to buy an Xbox that uses a Celeron 1.4GHz/256K cache chip rather than the feeble 733MHz Pentium III that ships with the console.

Friendtech is also offering a mod for the Xbox which provides S-Video and A/V output, 5.1 surround sound and a hard disk upgrade.

The package it sells includes the console, a gamepad, an S-Video AV cable, a bag, a power cable and manuals. The chip inside this machine can be switched from a so called ?standard speed? of 740MHz to a ?turbo? speed of 1480MHz.

The company claims that its mod of the Xbox doesn?t affect people who buy its FT-XBX2. It says it buys its machines from Microsoft or through authorized resellers, and that allows it to change the specs of the console. The mods cause it to lose its warranty rights, but provides its own 90 day warranty on the machine.

But in its product literature it says because the FT-XBX2 can read DVDs and MP3s from all regions it provides a ?Media Key? with the machine which means users must agree not to use it for illegal purposes. That includes copying games and pirated movies. µ
 
cthellis42 said:
I rather like this line:

DISCover's patented technology makes it the only video game console able to play PC games

You mean... because it's a PC?

A PC without networking even. So pretty much a crippled PC?

Good point, and pointless especially how cheap PC's are getting, I got my son a system from Ibuypower for $389 that has the current best motherboard in it, the only weak part was the video card, which he swapped out with his birthday money, and now he is just in love with the machine. PC's attract a different type of gamer, and they are not going to win console gamers to these games by putting them on a console.. The thing with PC is that it offers much more than just gaming. My oldest boy is into making maps on halflife, though not very good at it, he gets a lot of joy out of making his own little worlds and just walking around in them afterwards.. there is just something to that , that I feel will always make PC stand ot in a class of its own.. both the PC and the Console world are great, but they stand apart for various reasons, I and I feel they always will(and always should)
 
cthellis42 said:
Little more info on the Xbox mod from the Inq: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11748

A FIRM on the show floor here in Taipei is offering the chance to buy an Xbox that uses a Celeron 1.4GHz/256K cache chip rather than the feeble 733MHz Pentium III that ships with the console.

Friendtech is also offering a mod for the Xbox which provides S-Video and A/V output, 5.1 surround sound and a hard disk upgrade.

The package it sells includes the console, a gamepad, an S-Video AV cable, a bag, a power cable and manuals. The chip inside this machine can be switched from a so called ?standard speed? of 740MHz to a ?turbo? speed of 1480MHz.

The company claims that its mod of the Xbox doesn?t affect people who buy its FT-XBX2. It says it buys its machines from Microsoft or through authorized resellers, and that allows it to change the specs of the console. The mods cause it to lose its warranty rights, but provides its own 90 day warranty on the machine.

But in its product literature it says because the FT-XBX2 can read DVDs and MP3s from all regions it provides a ?Media Key? with the machine which means users must agree not to use it for illegal purposes. That includes copying games and pirated movies. µ

Doesn't xbox already offer svideo+av+5.1 surround sound out? I assume they just standard plugs on the back of the xbox, rather than using microsoft's special cables.
 
archie4oz said:
lol, because even though the GPU in it is outdated, it performs better than the Ultra

that's so unbeleivable that it actually true

That's because it's not... :rolleyes:

well, being the Xbox GPU is more GF3 than 4 I guess that could be true..
but I hope you know, the GF4 TI4600 outperformed the FX Ultra 5900 on Direct X 9 benchmarks.

the FX series is brilliant, a DirectX 9 card that cant handle DirectX 9
 
LisaJoy said:
the GF4 TI4600 outperformed the FX Ultra 5900 on Direct X 9 benchmarks.

Excepting that they cannot really do so much with, uh... the whole "DX9" bit, since the GF4 series can't handle it.

If you want to consider the GF4's "best shader performance" versus the FX's "best shader performance" in some games, then that indeed can end up being the case. (Which is still with the not good.) Heh...
 
cthellis42 said:
LisaJoy said:
the GF4 TI4600 outperformed the FX Ultra 5900 on Direct X 9 benchmarks.

Excepting that they cannot really do so much with, uh... the whole "DX9" bit, since the GF4 series can't handle it.

If you want to consider the GF4's "best shader performance" versus the FX's "best shader performance" in some games, then that indeed can end up being the case. (Which is still with the not good.) Heh...
Well considering that the 5900ultra gets beaten by the 9600pro in halflife 2 benchmarks and the 9600pro uses dx 9 and the 5900ultra uses a mix mode (dx9 and dx 8.1) I would say the card is slow esp since sometimes the geforce 4600 beats the fx in mix mode . Not very fast for a 500$ card huh .
 
jvd said:
Well considering that the 5900ultra gets beaten by the 9600pro in halflife 2 benchmarks and the 9600pro uses dx 9 and the 5900ultra uses a mix mode (dx9 and dx 8.1) I would say the card is slow esp since sometimes the geforce 4600 beats the fx in mix mode . Not very fast for a 500$ card huh .

No question, jvd, I just can't let all comparisons like that rest when they ain't quite in the right. Heh... GF4 has been around and coded for for a while, and doesn't even do DX8.1, so it's pretty damn good at doing what IT does right now.
 
cthellis42 said:
jvd said:
Well considering that the 5900ultra gets beaten by the 9600pro in halflife 2 benchmarks and the 9600pro uses dx 9 and the 5900ultra uses a mix mode (dx9 and dx 8.1) I would say the card is slow esp since sometimes the geforce 4600 beats the fx in mix mode . Not very fast for a 500$ card huh .

No question, jvd, I just can't let all comparisons like that rest when they ain't quite in the right. Heh... GF4 has been around and coded for for a while, and doesn't even do DX8.1, so it's pretty damn good at doing what IT does right now.
Well considering in every dx 9 benchmark nvidia looses to the radeons I would say that its not good with dx 9
 
Unless you have seen 5900Ultra benched with DX8 path (not DX8.1 or mixed or full-DX9) you can't compare the cards.
 
Back
Top