Matt-IGN to reveal some Revolution technical specs tonight ?

Megadrive1988 said:
yes I know -- so I am holding out hope that *I* am wrong, and will be able to enjoy a delicious plate full of CROW.


mmmmm crow, I would like to eat some right now :/

You might as well keep that crow in the frig. Less than 100MB of RAM? Nintendo could of had at least 128 MB. Nintendo better hope that the eyetoy doesn't catch on at all. They better hope that devs keep making games for it as if it was on the PS2.
 
Nicked said:
http://revolution.ign.com/articles/699/699118p1.html

Figures, just figures ;)

I don't know whether to believe.

Seems more underpowered than anyone could ever have believed. On the one hand I can't imagine Nintendo being THIS tight, but on the other hand, it may have something to do with their method of BC (pure and simply overclocked GC chips). Really surprising.

At those clock speeds, I'd say a gamecube would beat xbox (lower latency memory by far afterall) in both cpu and gpu performance.....but wow those are low. Essentially they just rereleased gamecube in a new casing. I couldn't believe those specs, I felt like I was in the year 2000 again reading over a brand new system's specs. Geez, they could have integrated all of this onto a single chip.

Revolution is more or less what the Dolphin was going to be. yes, I am well aware that Dolphin was the codename for Gamecube. what I meant was, Revolution's specs are more or less what the reported specs for Dolphin were, pre-Gamecube announcement.

Just like DS was Atlantis? Anyhow, Dolphin was basically gamecube so ....ugh, why would they bother? Why not just make revolution an ad campaign and a new controller for gamecube?

As pointed out@GAF,243mhz=1.5 times 162mhz and 729mhz=1.5 times 485mhz

I think it's an april fool.........

It was a limitation of the original gamecube design that the gpu and cpu had to be kept in certain clock ratios of each other. (and the memory)

Always a possibility. But unless they have some enormously funny tie-in article ready for April 1, then posting something like this 2 days early is just...lame.

I think IGN has posted april fool's articles early before.
That, or Nintendo should launch this for $100 with a few free games.

BTW, wasn't epic porting the UE3 engine to revolution? I would think that would mean at least a dx9 baseline.

The Gekko is an out of order proc right?

With like 3 stages.

Maybe there's the possiblity that the rev will have two processors and two gpus for backwards compatibility.

... or maybe they will surprise us all by throwing in a 3rd processor (possibly physics)... hey, one can hope!

after all, it doesn't say anything about overall system power or design. just clock speed of cpu and gpu.

A physics processor wouldn't make sense with the graphics so underpowered.
And this seems to imply it uses the same architecture. Would be interesting if it turned out to be like a 72-core gecko or something.
 
Somehow, there will still be pretty games on the system.

THe system will certainly lack in physics and detail though.
 
Megadrive1988 said:
well, whether Revolution is a 1.5x, 2x or even 3x leap over Gamecube, I do hope that Nintendo's next-next generation HDTV console is the leap over Revolution in power that Gamecube was over Nintendo 64.


with that said, I still end up getting at least one Revolution this year, maybe two. I'm not actually biased, I own all the major consoles.

did the gamecube increase resolution from the 64? Since rev is operating at the same resolution, doubling or tripling the power should be pretty signifigant no?

I don't understand why everyone assumes it's so similar to the XBOX just because of clockspeed. XBOX uses a 5 year old GPU, why would they even be close in performance?

btw: don't get me wrong, i'm not gonna buy a rev, nor am i interested in N's brand of games(except zelda & metroid :D ), I'm just seeing some strange assumptions in this thread.
 
scooby_dooby said:
did the gamecube increase resolution from the 64? Since rev is operating at the same resolution, doubling or tripling the power should be pretty signifigant no?

I don't understand why everyone assumes it's so similar to the XBOX just because of clockspeed. XBOX uses a 5 year old GPU, why would they even be close in performance?

btw: don't get me wrong, i'm not gonna buy a rev, nor am i interested in N's brand of games(except zelda & metroid :D ), I'm just seeing some strange assumptions in this thread.

The gamecube sort of increased resolution. N64 standard was 320x240, with 640x480i as high. Gamecube was 480p more or less standard.
They would be similar in performance since flipper is a 5 year old gpu too, though I think flipper would get better performance clock for clock in many things. (and worse in some too)
Anyhow, if revolution actually does make 2x-3x performance of gamecube, that puts it in roughly the same generation as gamecube as far as power is concerned. N64 was like 2x-3x the power of playstation, and ps2 2x-3x the power of dreamcast.
 
On another board someone made a very good point.

How much processing power will the Revmote use on the CPU? I ask because certain devs said that they couldn't do certain things on the PS2 with eyetoy due to the system capablities.
 
mckmas8808 said:
On another board someone made a very good point.

How much processing power will the Revmote use on the CPU? I ask because certain devs said that they couldn't do certain things on the PS2 with eyetoy due to the system capablities.

Well doesn't eyetoy use an image/gesture recognition system? Like MS's new camera?Whereas GC just uses some sort of hardware sensors placed on the TV? The image processing would obviously be much more CPU intensive.
 
mckmas8808 said:
How much processing power will the Revmote use on the CPU? I ask because certain devs said that they couldn't do certain things on the PS2 with eyetoy due to the system capablities.

The system capability may also refer to accuracy ... probably Nintendo's new controller is able to capture motion more accurately for use as input for games.
 
mckmas8808 said:
On another board someone made a very good point.

How much processing power will the Revmote use on the CPU? I ask because certain devs said that they couldn't do certain things on the PS2 with eyetoy due to the system capablities.

Nintendo's not doing a camera though. Gyscopic controllers were available for DOS PCs and even the Sega Genesis. Plus, the gamecube dev kits have revolution controller setups.
 
what are the chances of this being the specifically Rev remote devkit they released for devs to start working on the remote mechanics only. they said it was basically the Cube dev kit only with a wired remote so that devs could start on figuring out ways to use the remote and test them.
 
dukmahsik said:
man revolution is like to the GC what DS is like to the GB SP

If those specs are true (and I'm strongly leaning toward BS, if only for the GPU featureset), then it's a much much smaller jump than GBA->DS... Not even in the same ballpark.
 
dukmahsik said:
man revolution is like to the GC what DS is like to the GB SP


I totally disagree,

DS is a massive leap over GBA / GBA SP (btw GBA SP is the same hardware as GBA)


the closest comparison would be more like..... GameBoy to GameBoy Color... not a perfect comparison, but a better one. forget the color added to CGB... just focus on small or modest boost in processing power that GameBoy Color had over GameBoy. That is *roughly* (very roughly, not precise) the kind of leap we are seemingly going to get from Gamecube to Revolution.
 
Legend said:
what are the chances of this being the specifically Rev remote devkit they released for devs to start working on the remote mechanics only. they said it was basically the Cube dev kit only with a wired remote so that devs could start on figuring out ways to use the remote and test them.


and that Revolution is a more modern architecture with significantly more power.... I understand what you are suggesting....and one can only hope.....but I'm not counting on it.


Corwin_B said:
Didn't an ATI rep confirm a DX9-level feature set for Hollywood ?


possibly, if you are talking about comments from 2003. but I think that was 2nd-hand or 3rd-hand information.

if you're talking about something direct from ATI that's more recent, I don't remember. do you mean from Richard Huddy ?


edit: gathering some comments about the ATI GPU for Nintendo GCN2 ~ Revolution


March 2003 link

ATI Announces Technology Development Agreement with Nintendo

Tuesday March 4, 2003

MARKHAM, Ontario – ATI Technologies, Inc. (TSX: ATY, NASDAQ: ATYT), a world leader in the design and manufacture of innovative 3D graphics and digital media silicon solutions, announced today that it has entered into a technology development agreement with Nintendo Co., Ltd. Under the agreement, ATI and Nintendo are developing technologies for use in Nintendo products. No other details regarding the nature of this agreement are being made available at this time.

"ATI has had an excellent relationship with Nintendo for many years," said David Orton, President and Chief Operating Officer, ATI Technologies Inc. "We are pleased to enter into this major technology development agreement with Nintendo."


March 2003 link

As for consoles, he hopes to leverage ATI's separate east and west coast graphics design teams to snag deals to provide chips both to Microsoft's as well as Nintendo's next-generation consoles. (ATI already provides graphics technology in Nintendo's current GameCube, a deal Orton won as chief executive of ArtX, which ATI purchased nearly three years ago.)

"Anyone who wants to hit 2005 with a new console better make some decisions quickly. We think they need to decide soon or wait until 2006 to ship," Orton said.



July 2003 link

Dear Matt, What have you found out, if anything, about the successor to GameCube?
Matty

Matt responds: A fine question. Well, I don't have enough to run with a news piece, but after talking to several insider pals around the industry here's what I've been able to come up with:

* The console is being referred to as GameCube 2 internally
* ATI has been in development with a graphics chip for "GCN 2" for more than a year; it's supposedly coming along very nicely
* Several games are already being designed with the system in mind, though no hardware is yet available
* The hardware is expected to ultimately ship at a $299 price point -- directly against Xbox 2 and PS3


August 2003 link
Don't expect the graphics capabilities of future Nintendo and Microsoft products to be exactly the same, however, the ATI spokesman said. "Yes, we have different design teams working on them, with different requirements and different timetables," the spokesman said.


September 2003 link

ATI gave some infomation on video cards market pentration data, and had a quick gloat about being in both Microsoft's and Nintendo's next gen console, no real info on them (obviously) except for one tiny snippet, that we should expect at least Dx9 level shaders on both. Wether or not its the same basic core being used in both they didn't say.


November 2003 link


FiringSquad: ATI has announced agreements with both Microsoft and Nintendo. Are two separate development teams tackling these projects, and if so, do you anticipate spreading yourself a little too thin?

Dave: We haven’t yet announced what we’re working on for either Microsoft or Nintendo. However, when you move into a new business, you need to establish an advantage. We’re looking at the console market as an opportunity to help drive the 3D experience. We have both East and West coast development teams that are able to work on different projects. It has actually created even more focus.

January 2006 link

Nintendo has gone on record saying that graphics are not their number one concern. A bold statement considering the graphical prowess of it's next-gen competitors, the PS3 and XBox 360. That doesn't mean, however, that Nintendo is completely negating their graphics.

In a recent interview with revolutionreport.com, John Swinimer, ATI's Public Relations Manager for Consumer Products, spoke on several aspects of ATI's relationship with Nintendo. Swinimer says the new ATI card for the Nintendo Revolution will be a console specific model and not a card based off of any of their PC models or their Flipper chipset.

"It's not, for example, like we took a PC design and said 'oh, you know what? If we tweak this and test this, it will work in a console.' [That's] not the case," Swinimer said.

On the topic of issues with the Revolution's size and the possiblity of heat problems, Swiminer said that this has been taken into consideration.
"The form factor design of even some of the newer consumer electronics devices are getting smaller and smaller, and we are taking that into great consideration, all across the board. I don't know if you are aware of this, but ATI has graphics chips in Motorola RAZRs. ATI has graphics chips inside many consumer electronic designs and heat is definitely a consideration, so we definitely take that into consideration when we are designing new chips."

The lingering question on Nintendo's statement on graphics still hangs in the air, however. Is this an indication that ATI's chipset will be relativly less powerful than other next-gen consoles? "What I can say is that ATI is focused, as is Nintendo, in making [Revolution] a great, gaming entertainment platform. I know that a lot of journalists are very focused on specs. It's the big thing; as a geek, I look for that too. The key thing to keep in mind is that Nintendo, with ATI's help, is trying to create a game console where you don't have to look at [specs]," said Swinimer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top