Nintendo revolution more powerful than xbox360
- Thread starter Cornman
- Start date
- Status
Nnnnnnoooooo...!
Pleeeeeasse...
Pleeeeeasse...
Thank you.
Don't you think it all depends on what Nintendo are targetting? Audience-wise, gameplay-wise... Many things really.
Not saying you're wrong (no one knows afterall), but If Nintendo decide they want a cheap solution that focuses on gameplay innovation, and the hardware just happens to be "less powerful" than PS3 or X360, i'm sure only specs-freaks will care.
It's like saying: The new Fiat will be released shortly. Must be more powerful than a 1990's Ferrari!
Don't you think it all depends on what Nintendo are targetting? Audience-wise, gameplay-wise... Many things really.
Not saying you're wrong (no one knows afterall), but If Nintendo decide they want a cheap solution that focuses on gameplay innovation, and the hardware just happens to be "less powerful" than PS3 or X360, i'm sure only specs-freaks will care.
It's like saying: The new Fiat will be released shortly. Must be more powerful than a 1990's Ferrari!
Can we just ban Cornman now? With 6 posts I've noticed a definite pro-Nintendo attitude that I don't think is going to be able to partake in any degree of sensible discussion on a technical level.
Having a pro-Nintendo attitude does not get someone banned. Not everoyne on this board is able to participate in technical discussion, that is why we have people here that educate. If we banned everyone like Cornman then half the people who post on this forum would no longer be able to.
I think that it will happen what they said, in spec they will lose but if you see both in a normal tv you will not see a big diference specialy if they can go in 65nm (which they probably can), so IMO they will process less pixels but they will have ~the same power per shader for example the new X1600 look to have a lot of shader power but not good for hi rez, that (or somethingh like a custum, or somethingh completely new, I dont want to ean they will use it) in 65nm should be cheap a use low power thus be a good chip for it and (if a 6600 should be able to be enought in a shader intesive game like UE3) give great visualsfor any game, so IMO it is easy to belibve in them ( and if you think that most games will use UE3)
In a second thought I think that you should concern more with the CPU...
In a second thought I think that you should concern more with the CPU...
Rev will not be as powerful as 360. Even Iwata says so.. but he says that "image" will look the same on screen (probably meaning SD and not HD).
NIntendos mantra for the Rev is the following:
1. Nintendo wants the cheapest hardware out there.
-This is one of NIntendos main points. They have said on several occasions that Rev will *most definatly* be the cheapest of the 3.
2. Nintendo wants to make it easy and cost efficient to make games on Rev.
-This probably equals to a 1 core solution. A CPU, a GPU with lots of hardwired stuff but with programmability would make Rev the easiest of the 3 to work with.
3. Nintendo wants to sell the machine at a profit
-Nintendo is very sensitive on selling their hardware at a profit. NDS is sold with profit, look at the hardware, a "littlebit souped up" N64, tech from 1995. With Rev, it is important for NIntendo to sell it with profit, because they cannot count on the royalties from thirdparty. As it is now, Nintendo has the worst support of the 3 from thirdparty. Nintendo knows this and therefore it is more important for NIntendo to sell the machine at profit from the get go.
Now, with these points in consideration.. forget about Rev being as powerful as the competition. If Rev is as big as NIntendo has announced (like 3 DVD-cases), then it will not be sufficient to put in such a "high powered" tech-stuff.
I have a question about the "same image quality" in SD-res between Rev and 360. It could be that Rev could muster out some nice effects so that it seems that it has the same IQ as the competition, but will it not be apparent in other forms, like in polys, pixels etc?
For example.. a game that pushes LOTS of geometry, maybe it looks the same on Rev and 360 on SD-screens but what should be apparent is maybe the difference in characters on screens, fps and such... or am I off here?
NIntendos mantra for the Rev is the following:
1. Nintendo wants the cheapest hardware out there.
-This is one of NIntendos main points. They have said on several occasions that Rev will *most definatly* be the cheapest of the 3.
2. Nintendo wants to make it easy and cost efficient to make games on Rev.
-This probably equals to a 1 core solution. A CPU, a GPU with lots of hardwired stuff but with programmability would make Rev the easiest of the 3 to work with.
3. Nintendo wants to sell the machine at a profit
-Nintendo is very sensitive on selling their hardware at a profit. NDS is sold with profit, look at the hardware, a "littlebit souped up" N64, tech from 1995. With Rev, it is important for NIntendo to sell it with profit, because they cannot count on the royalties from thirdparty. As it is now, Nintendo has the worst support of the 3 from thirdparty. Nintendo knows this and therefore it is more important for NIntendo to sell the machine at profit from the get go.
Now, with these points in consideration.. forget about Rev being as powerful as the competition. If Rev is as big as NIntendo has announced (like 3 DVD-cases), then it will not be sufficient to put in such a "high powered" tech-stuff.
I have a question about the "same image quality" in SD-res between Rev and 360. It could be that Rev could muster out some nice effects so that it seems that it has the same IQ as the competition, but will it not be apparent in other forms, like in polys, pixels etc?
For example.. a game that pushes LOTS of geometry, maybe it looks the same on Rev and 360 on SD-screens but what should be apparent is maybe the difference in characters on screens, fps and such... or am I off here?
therealskywolf
Regular
Yeah that must be why Nintendo isn't showing Rev specs, and Iwata already said it was weaker.
Yeah that's probably it.
Yeah that's probably it.
The problem is 1 year is not as significant as the process in which the chips are made on.Cornman said:
e.g. both the Sony PS3 GPU (RSX) and Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU (Xenos) are on the 90nm process.
Outside of architecture the only real way to make one chip faster than the other would be to make the chip bigger. This means more heat, more power, lower yields, and significantly higher costs.
Since GPUs are just now hitting the 90nm process and the 65nm process is immature at this point, especially for GPUs, it is almost guaranteed that Nintendo's GPU will be on the 90nm process.
Considering the small size of the Revolution there will be limits to the size of the chip due to cooling. So that either means smaller chips, lower frequency, or better cooling.
Based on Iwata's comments about SD and not being as powerful (but negligable at 480p) I am pretty sure that Rev will not be more powerful.
Further, looking at the GPU market ATI could have released R580 this fall. Yes, that would have 1) cost a lot of money and 2) had poor yields, but it was possible. So time itself is not an estimate of power.
In general, over time, power goes up over time. But there is no hard and fast rule stating a chip released later will definately be faster. We have seen in the PC CPU market this is not always true, and even in the GPU market (e.g. look at XGI and S3, their new chips have a hard time competing).
Process, process maturity, architecture and innovations, bottlenecks, tools, etc... are all much more significant to a consoles "power" than the time it is released. As far as we know Nintendo is waiting until Fall 2006 to ensure they can get the right balance, for them, of cost effectiveness and performance.
CPU:
IBM PowerPC 970FX running at 1.6Ghz or IBM PowerPC 970MP running at 1.4Ghz. We will know the data because this wednesday Apple will show its last computers of the PowerPC line and the rumours talks about a new PowerMac with dual core or a new PowerBook with the 970FX.
GPU:
ATI X1600 running at 525Mhz with a few changes:
-No support for Crossfire
-Avivo is out
-Embedded 1T-SRAM
-The base will be the X1600 but some registers will be from Gamecube Flipper
-It will support 256MB Mosys 1T-SRAM.
-DSP for the sound included.
Main Memory:
-NUMA configuration. 256MB DDR-SDRAM 400Mhz for the CPU and 256MB MoSys 1T-SRAM for the GPU.
IBM PowerPC 970FX running at 1.6Ghz or IBM PowerPC 970MP running at 1.4Ghz. We will know the data because this wednesday Apple will show its last computers of the PowerPC line and the rumours talks about a new PowerMac with dual core or a new PowerBook with the 970FX.
GPU:
ATI X1600 running at 525Mhz with a few changes:
-No support for Crossfire
-Avivo is out
-Embedded 1T-SRAM
-The base will be the X1600 but some registers will be from Gamecube Flipper
-It will support 256MB Mosys 1T-SRAM.
-DSP for the sound included.
Main Memory:
-NUMA configuration. 256MB DDR-SDRAM 400Mhz for the CPU and 256MB MoSys 1T-SRAM for the GPU.
- Status
