Report of REV being 2-3 more powerful than GC is false!

[Qroach]

um, wasn't this quote of rev being 2-3x more powerful then gamecube a quote made by nintendo?

 

[PC-Engine]

um, wasn't this quote of rev being 2-3x more powerful then gamecube a quote made by nintendo?

Well it was supposedly made by Perrin Kaplan, however, an interview with Miyamoto or was that Iwata said they don't even know how powerful it will be because the apparently the design isn't even completed.

I think maybe they threw it out there to see people's reactions.

Miyamoto comments:

"if you look at the numbers that they're throwing out, are those numbers going to be used in-game? I mean, those are just numbers that somebody just crunched up on a calculator. We could throw out a bunch of numbers, too, but what we're going to do is wait until our chips are done and we're going to find out how everything in the game is running, what its peak performance is, and those are the numbers that we're going to release because those are the numbers that really count."

 

[Guden Oden]

65nm is not being used for CELL because PS3 needs to launch in the 1st qtr of 2006. That doesn't give SONY enough time.

Nintendo is not launching 1st qtr of 2006, that I'm positive about.

I seriously doubt two quarters is going to be the time factor Nintendo bases what process node to target their chips to. You forget Nintendo's an extremely EXTREMELY conservative company. Hell, they were nearly a decade late with using optical media for games. More, if you count the 16-bitters that were disc-based.

Also, GC is still .18u to my knowledge and you say Rev's going to be .065? That's almost worth a lolicon but I'll pass this once. You COULD theoretically be right after all.

Also if MS wants to use 65nm 1 year from launch, they'll do it since they own the IP.

Let's just say I seriously doubt that.

and at whatever process node they deem fit.

Changing process node (or even fab at same node) is not trivial.

 

[PC-Engine]

I seriously doubt two quarters is going to be the time factor Nintendo bases what process node to target their chips to. You forget Nintendo's an extremely EXTREMELY conservative company. Hell, they were nearly a decade late with using optical media for games. More, if you count the 16-bitters that were disc-based.

Well they released the VB which wasn't all that conservative. Also the reason why they stayed with carts wasn't because of being conservative considering they were working on the SNES CD with SONY. They stuck with carts because of loading times. Finally the reason why GCN is still 180nm is probably because it's already so friggen cheap they don't need to shrink it any further. In fact it probably would've cost more to shrink it into a single chip like EE+GS@90nm. Revolution is not an existing chipset that needs further shrinking, unless it's just a souped up GCN chipset.

Changing process node (or even fab at same node) is not trivial.

Well if they designed it from the beginning to be portable then it would be fairly trivial.

 

[Kolgar]

I don't like the fact that, as far as we know right now, the revolution will only play DVDs with an attachment. That's just stupid imo.

na they did it with the xbox . This way nintendo can make more money off the unit if u wnat another dvd player .

Excellent! Because as a consumer, it's important for me that Nintendo makes money!

Anyway nintendo has the advantage of going last so they can make a system around the power of the x360 / ps3 and make it for cheaper

LOL, and here I didn't think Nintendo WANTED the "advantage" of going last this time!

Oh, jvd, you're priceless.

 

[Teasy]

I seriously doubt two quarters is going to be the time factor Nintendo bases what process node to target their chips to.

Erm what does that actually mean?.. IBM's 65nm process will be fully up and running by the first quarter of 2006. Considering Nintendo want to make a very small and quiet system why would they not use IBM's best process?

BTW how do you know what process Gekko or Flipper currently use?

I do not see them competing as home movie devices.

I'll definitely use it as a DVD player. Purely due to its size, I can save so much space.

 

[jvd]

Excellent! Because as a consumer, it's important for me that Nintendo makes money!

so you'd rather as a consumer have nintendo loose money , go bankrupt and then no longer have a third console choice ? which in turn allows sony and ms to be more lax in thier pricing ? Thus everyone spends more on consoles ?

Dunnoabout u but if something is worth it and of high quality i'd rather spend the extra money. But personaly to me with a dvd player and soon a x360 why do i need a 3rd dvd player hooked up to my tv ? Most people now have dedicated dvd players on the tvs they plan to watch movies on .

LOL, and here I didn't think Nintendo WANTED the "advantage" of going last this time!

Oh, jvd, you're priceless.

Na you and your constant trolling is priceless.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each and everything that gets done in life . Why you can't see this I dunno . For you its sony with the advantages and everyone else with the disadvantages . I think you need topen your eyes a bit more

 

[mckmas8808]

I think you need topen your eyes a bit more

I think you need to open your eyes a bit more. Nintendo going last does have some advantages. Yet if you are going to be honest with yourself you do know this is more of a disadvantage than anything. And don't give me that "Nintendo will bring something new to gaming that the others don't want to do" crap. MS and Sony are innovative also, so I say to Nintendo who has been losing market share since the Super Nintendo died out, "Pick your game up!!"
________
GREEN CRACK PICTURES

 

[Evil_Cloud]

Imagine Panasonic making a Nintendo 'R', with a 320GB HDD, more ports, more functionality, a dvd burner, Blu-Ray perhaps even,... Not happening, but one can dream.

 

[Kolgar]

so you'd rather as a consumer have nintendo loose money , go bankrupt and then no longer have a third console choice ? which in turn allows sony and ms to be more lax in thier pricing ? Thus everyone spends more on consoles ?

I don't care if Nintendo makes a profit on hardware. Their finances are not my concern. I am a consumer, so my concern is getting good value for my dollar.

Why should Nintendo make money on hardware at launch anyway? Sony doesn't, and I appreciate that – especially because they don't pull silly stunts like making you pay extra to "unlock" DVD functionality, for example.

Na you and your constant trolling is priceless.

What?

There are advantages and disadvantages to each and everything that gets done in life . Why you can't see this I dunno . For you its sony with the advantages and everyone else with the disadvantages . I think you need topen your eyes a bit more

Yes, I do see Sony with most of the advantages. That's not bias; that's simple observation. Sony's a smart company with brilliant engineers and equally brilliant marketing people. They've built up one hell of a track record, going from 0% share of the console market to 80% in 10 years - while Nintendo has gone from 90% to 20% in the same amount of time.

Do you see why I respect what Sony has accomplished?

***edited***
I decided I'd rather not speculate on when Nintendo will launch Revolution. I'll just say that based on what they showed at E3, and from a look at their history of console launches, I think they'll launch last - which is something they said they didn't want to do.

 

[Megadrive1988]

You forget Nintendo's an extremely EXTREMELY conservative company. Hell, they were nearly a decade late with using optical media for games. More, if you count the 16-bitters that were disc-based.

first console optical disc - 1988

Nintendo console optical disc - 2001

13 year span

 

[Nightz]

Yeah I don't really see Nintendo spending less much less than the competition. I can see them spending more actually. It is well known that Nintendo spent $1 billion on the Gekko alone, while SONY and Toshiba spent only around 500 million for CELL...

Not sure if they spent a billion on gekko R&D. What was announced was that Nintendo signed a deal (Technology Agreement) with IBM worth US$1 billion lasting several years, and exploring the potential use of IBM technology in other Nintendo products. The deal was worth a billion.

 

[Fox5]

Yeah I don't really see Nintendo spending less much less than the competition. I can see them spending more actually. It is well known that Nintendo spent $1 billion on the Gekko alone, while SONY and Toshiba spent only around 500 million for CELL...

I think Nintendo's $1 billion also included the costs to buy the cpus as well, it wasn't just R&D.
I doubt Sony's $500 million includes the costs to build the chips.

BTW how do you know what process Gekko or Flipper currently use?

Because if you open up a gamecube the chips are probably still the same size? For that matter, power consumption of the cube hasn't dropped much since launch.(I believe it was 42W at launch, and is done to like 36W now, which could be accomplished without a process shrink...or maybe a shrink did occur, the cpu and gpu of gamecube used very little power to being with, both are probably sub 10W)

They've built up one hell of a track record, going from 0% share of the console market to 80% in 10 years - while Nintendo has gone from 90% to 20% in the same amount of time.

Both of those numbers are a bit high, sony's around 70% and nintendo is around 10%-15%, not including either company's handhelds of course.

 

[jvd]

I think you need to open your eyes a bit more. Nintendo going last does have some advantages. Yet if you are going to be honest with yourself you do know this is more of a disadvantage than anything.

How so ? Nintendo isn't trying to get a 90million unit installed base . Nintendo is trying to keep making profits each and every quater .

Going last doesn't hurt them in many ways it can help them .

 

[pc999]

Well if they had did great proffits with 20M units imagine with 80M , so yes, I think they want to get first place .

 

[jvd]

Well if they had did great proffits with 20M units imagine with 80M , so yes, I think they want to get first place .

That clearly isn't thier goal and hasn't been for a long time

 

[mckmas8808]

Nintendo isn't trying to get a 90million unit installed base . Nintendo is trying to keep making profits each and every quater .

Well if you put it that way jvd then you're right. If Nintendo is content with being last in every console generation and be happy with hundreds of millions of dollar profits every year then yes they should arrive last. It would give them time to see what the competition puts out so they could change whatever they needed to accordingly. Also if what you say is true then Nintendo obviously must know that they are going to become the backup console to everyone???s home and not the main.
________
Ford mustang ssp picture

 

[pc999]

You are right , they may not want 1 place but they predicted much more than 20M GC sold by now (sorry no link), but to sell more units they need to think in your "enemys", bacause a lot of people dont buy a second console ( a lot cant even afford ) so they cant let MS or Sony to sell to many units before Rev is out, if they do that they would sell less and make less proffit.

 

[jvd]

Nintendo knows they aren't going to be able to out sell sony and ms . So they aren't going to try as trite as it sounds they will just go off in another direction and continue to get thier fan base to buy thier products and if they can sell you nes , supernes and n64 games which the work has already been done on they will make evne more money on a 20 million installed base

 

[DuckThor Evil]

Yes, I do see Sony with most of the advantages. That's not bias; that's simple observation. Sony's a smart company with brilliant engineers and equally brilliant marketing people. They've built up one hell of a track record, going from 0% share of the console market to 80% in 10 years - while Nintendo has gone from 90% to 20% in the same amount of time.

Are you telling us that Snes had 90% of the market, surely that can't be true?.