Rebel Strike gone GOLD!
- Thread starter overclocked
- Start date
- Status
overclocked said:
Nono, the Geeko's are the people who sit around discussing the intricacies of Nintendo's engine all day long.
Because Zurich, there are no software examples of either the EE nor the NV2A approaching those numbers, (including particle effects, AI, self-shadowing, 12mpps, extensive bumpmapping, per-pixel lighting & shadowing, 60fps, etc.) & there are no shortage of SW games on either console. I would just like to see a comparative software example.
Tagrineth said:
Indeed, an unaltered 733mhz Celeron CISC processor vs. a native RISC PowerPC 750CXe microprocessor with the addition of close to 40 new gaming specific instructions. Due to the fetch/decoding stages of the pipeline, a RISC clocked at 400mhz is equivalent to a Pentium clocked at 700mhz or above, not to mention the difference in GPRs. So where is the advantage exactly?
marconelly!
Veteran
I don't know how is tie supposed to be animated to begin with, but ZoE2 on PS2 displays probably a lot more than 120 enemies on the screen at the same time, all with huge explosions and various effects. However, they are not animated either, and are quite simple looking.
DeathKnight
Regular
I think there have been tests done and the Xbox's CPU is indeed more powerful than Cube's CPU (people still cling to the RISC vs CISC garbage). The fact of the matter is is that the Xbox and PS2 don't have to fall back on their general-use CPU's for heavy vertex manipulaton and processing whereas the Cube does. Making the Gekko perform numerous vertex processes eats up precious clock cycles that could be better spent on things like phyiscs, AI, and game-code execution.
overclocked
Veteran
If my memory not fails me i think the GC`s cpu is clocked at 485Mhz/256KB L2 and the Celeron is at 733Mhz/128KB L2. And the RISC over CISC debate has gone forever and could do here too so we just leave it there. There have been this talked on very old threads so you can look there.
If i back a step and say that both cpu´s are equal and then answer why Gekko would "chocke" as the qustion was. I say it´s because Gekko has to do the nasty vertexmanipulation in cost of AI and sending geometry information too Flipper etz etz.. Wheres Xbox cpu "just" need to do AI, and let the vertex pipeline do the rest(simply speaking of course).
Can we now please go on and talk about Rebel Strike
Thoose pictures OMG
Yeesh. I'm not saying that the Tie's SHOULD be animated, I'm saying that they aren't, hence the insane number of them at a slick framerate. Perhaps if there were 100+ Zaku's on screen going to town with their Heat Hawk.. now that'd be something!
Anyhow, my original point was that the demo disc left me horribly unimpressed and it'll probably be a renter, even if that. I'm talking serious 5/10 in the gameplay department here heh.
Anyhow, my original point was that the demo disc left me horribly unimpressed and it'll probably be a renter, even if that. I'm talking serious 5/10 in the gameplay department here heh.
DeathKnight said:
Those tests may not have been using paired singles... they more or less double the Gekko's processing power. Basically Gekko can do two 32-bit operations in parallel, not just one. 8) Or at least, that's what I've always understood of its operation, I may have misunderstood something down the line.
overclocked said:
And I say that any vertex manipulation Gekko has to do isn't "nasty" because counting the paired-singles, the vertex compression and the memory latency, it was designed to, and is in a very good position to do it.
Of course I would say that the Xbox vertex shaders have an undeniable advantage in many vertex operatons over any spare power of the Gekko, but in the case of the PS2 at least I don't thinks its fair to compare the Gekko to the VU* since that isn't counting that they are doing things the fixed T&L of the Flipper would mostly be handling.
overclocked
Veteran
Yes it´s pretty good "relative", but you can´t compare a CPU to dedicated hardware aka nV2A´s vertex pipes. And secondly i atleast think that "most" vertex handling by the Gekko is "nasty" but when we have guys like Factor 5 that pushes the GC´s hardware to the limit as Rebel Strike does i think that comparing Cpu1/Cpu2 don´t do anything justice as we cannot know more of limitations if F5 don´t tell us.
Agreed, it´s up to the programmers to make best use of the hardware and i must say that there are few that really does.
First, i have to say RS3 is definitly a must have for me (ouch, the vids & images are terrific).
Second, the technical debate is interesting (even if we had it for 1000 time on this forum ! )
But look, at a moment i say : enough !
The fact is RS3 is on GCN, so the question of knowing if it would be better on another console is pointless !
More, as we can view now, it certainly won't be surpassed this gen on any console in this genre (anyone knows a project that could do better !?). And it is on GCN.
My point is : when console are launched, we all can have debate (and are definitly legitimate) on their power with very technical points (ah ERP's and Faladala's posts ...) to try to guess which will have the best potential to give us cute games.
But now we have games of 3rd (and even 4th gen on PS2) and the quality of the games certainly won't improve much as from now.
I think PS2 is not far from its "real world" limit and that GCN and Xbox have still a little progression in front of them.
To sum up, i'd say that discussions like "this console does that better, etc." are pointless from now because we simply can look at the games to build a scale of value ... Theory is fine when you don't know what to expect, but know we have the "real" world ...
Second, the technical debate is interesting (even if we had it for 1000 time on this forum !
)But look, at a moment i say : enough !
The fact is RS3 is on GCN, so the question of knowing if it would be better on another console is pointless !
More, as we can view now, it certainly won't be surpassed this gen on any console in this genre (anyone knows a project that could do better !?). And it is on GCN.
My point is : when console are launched, we all can have debate (and are definitly legitimate) on their power with very technical points (ah ERP's and Faladala's posts ...) to try to guess which will have the best potential to give us cute games.
But now we have games of 3rd (and even 4th gen on PS2) and the quality of the games certainly won't improve much as from now.
I think PS2 is not far from its "real world" limit and that GCN and Xbox have still a little progression in front of them.
To sum up, i'd say that discussions like "this console does that better, etc." are pointless from now because we simply can look at the games to build a scale of value ... Theory is fine when you don't know what to expect, but know we have the "real" world ...
- Status
