Oblivion Press Demo 02/22/06 Chicago

[superguy]

Well, why did ATI do the respective diagrams that way?

I suppose you're going to tell me it's only a way to conceptualize things? Ah well.

Look I know little about these cards. Regardless R520 kept the same amount of logic as R420 in double the number of transistors. Meaning they put a LOT of other stuff in. The ring bus was huge we know that from the die. That and other things aren't in Xenos.

Dont mention dynamic branching ALU either. We know from R580 shader pipes are simply not that much logic.

 

[overclocked]

Think MS has infiltrated B3D with some moles.

 

[TurnDragoZeroV2G]

Well, why did ATI do the respective diagrams that way?

I suppose you're going to tell me it's only a way to conceptualize things? Ah well.

Look I know little about these cards. Regardless R520 kept the same amount of logic as R420 in double the number of transistors. Meaning they put a LOT of other stuff in. The ring bus was huge we know that from the die. That and other things aren't in Xenos.

Dont mention dynamic branching ALU either. We know from R580 shader pipes are simply not that much logic.

Read my message again. R420 doesn't have a thread dispatcher. But Xenos has to have logic serving the same function as the thread dispatcher in R520. Otherwise, it's wasting around 19 million transistors on register files for "threads" that.... don't do anything. What Xenos is missing is stuff you've already mentioned. The equivalent of a thread dispatcher is not among them, however, and that's the only point I was addressing.

But while that ringbus did eat a considerable amount of transistors, don't forget that going from 24bit precision to 32bits also ate into everything as well.

 

[Griffith]

Think MS has infiltrated B3D with some moles.

think that some people are 'little' (ironic) biased against 360, they don't believe ATI official statement, they don't believe oblivion's developers official statement...
They came in thread as this just to derail the topic and trash the facts saying "gneh, I don't believe!" making transistor count comparison and never understanding how different are the gpu that they are comparing.
I think that is time for moderators to lock the thread.
Job accomplished as usual, Haters.

[Moderated]

 

[pjbliverpool]

you are not sure about the reliability of that translation?
this is pretty laughable, because I'm italian, I speak italian from 30 years ago, if there're others italians, they will confirm, you seems pretty desperate trying for a unknown reason to downplay xenos

Im not saying your translation is technically wrong, im saying you added false context:

""x1900 is powerful in theory, but in practice performance on games it is comparable to Xenos, so it's right to say that X1900 is very near as being a 'xenos of PC' "

This differs from the direct translation only slightely but with a significantly different meaning:

"Today we produce a GPU (X1900) that it is theoretically more powerful than Xenos and in the games offers a confrontabile experience. I suppose that it is right to say that the X1900 is much neighbor to what Xenos for PC would be one"

Yours makes it sound like they are saying the X1900 isn't really more powerful despite theoretical specs while the direct translation makes the far more sensible claim that X1900 has more power and offers a comparable experience in todays games. Did you really expect an ATI rep to say they just made a horribly inefficient GPU that despite having bags more power performs no better than another one of their smaller, cheaper, cooler GPU's?

ATI says that at HD resolutions, Xenos is faster than X1800, at higher than HD resolution, X1800 is faster
this makes sense, when they came to say that in game practice experience @hd resolutions, xenos is very similar to X1900, if it's faster than x1800

Thats hardly a technical comparison. X1800XT is faster than Xenos is every way apart from its shader power which was lower. Thats what ATI highlighted in that Toyshop comparison. X1900XTX triples the X1800XT's shader power allowing it to rocket past Xenos by 78%. So it is now much more powerful than Xenos in the one area where it used to fall behind. Saying that its the nearest (ATI) PC equivilent to Xenos is fair enough if your looking for the first GPU that can match Xenos's shader power but its not the same as saying they are very similar. They clearly are not.

I don't think that GTX offers comparable experiences as X1900, show me how it performs with hdr fp and msaa 4x, both enabled
and don't forget to show me how x1900 performs with those enabled @ 1280, please

It offers a very comparable experience for the purposes of a rough comparison like the one in that interview. And once again I'll say stop quiting check list figures - compare games on the same platform at the same settings if you really want too. There are plenty about.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Bro, take of the blinders. I know you have a 360 so I don't what the problem is, be happy about it.

My problem is people wanting to believe that Xenos is more powerful and so taking any kind of quote from the web no matter how out of context to prove it. For example:

" the Xbox 360 framerate was much smoother than the PC version."
^ this quote from gaming trend was written by a guy who playtested for 8 hours, 4 on PC, and 4 on 360. The IGN playtest was done by 2 different guys, who then got together to compare notes.

Why no mention of the fact that he also said earlier that the framerate differences were negligable and the PC version was running at a higher resolution?

Almost every preview said the 360 was 'smoother', IGN is actually the exception, and I believe the IGN reviewer who stated that never played the 360 version. It seems, for now, that the framerate will be a little bit better on the 360 version, the majority of previews that mention framerate, have it being smoother on 360.

I havn't read all the previews, I have only looked at the list you posted summerising them and I only counted 2 saying it was smoother, one of which has been invalidated above. And again, why get so excited over something that A) isn't final and B) you have no idea what the comparative settings are? The reviews will be out soon, better to hold your council until we know how the X1900XTX really performs under known settings with the final version.

 

[function]

And once again an Oblivion thread goes down the toilet.

The game looks great. Predicatably, the console version runs similarly to a high end PC. That'll do, trying to read anything about the precise level of relative power that hardware has isn't going to do anyone any good.

 

[Rodéric]

I think that is time for moderators to lock the thread.

! DZING !
Your wish as been granted...