Revolution Tech Details Emerge ( Xbox1+ performance, 128 MB RAM )

[Tahir2]

Edit: Why I say there are 100% fake:

I dont like the way PAL is incorrectly shown as Pal. (Honest).

The last side looks like some kid did it. ATI Toy Demo used as a demonstration for hardware emulation in a next-gen console doesn't jive with me either.

The first two slides don't make sense to me but I think anyone can check the patent no's to see if it is truly fake or not. Knock yourself out guys (I haven't checked).

 

[mckmas8808]

Edit: Why I say there are 100% fake:

I dont like the way PAL is incorrectly shown as Pal. (Honest).

The last side looks like some kid did it. ATI Toy Demo used as a demonstration for hardware emulation in a next-gen console doesn't jive with me either.

The first two slides don't make sense to me but I think anyone can check the patent no's to see if it is truly fake or not. Knock yourself out guys (I haven't checked).

I believe you. I just wanted to know your reason.

 

[Fox5]

Edit: Why I say there are 100% fake:

I dont like the way PAL is incorrectly shown as Pal. (Honest).

The last side looks like some kid did it. ATI Toy Demo used as a demonstration for hardware emulation in a next-gen console doesn't jive with me either.

The first two slides don't make sense to me but I think anyone can check the patent no's to see if it is truly fake or not. Knock yourself out guys (I haven't checked).

Well, those graphics, and even that model in the first frame, look well above what twice a gamecube could use. Probably better than rev can do too, just based on the texture quality and how much ram Rev is supposed to have. (though it probably runs at hi res and with AA on the x1xxx series)

And giving the content that Nintendo makes and the audience they skew towards, the ATi Toy Demo would be a sensible demonstration of Rev graphics.

 

[Tahir2]

Oh I forgot to mention I have some insider knowledge too.
Just pulling your leg guys....

 

[scificube]

I could swear I've seen that creature at the top in a Factor5 pdf recently...I know I've seen it somewhere. In any case I'm highly skeptical of the slides authenticity.

 

[pc999]

I could swear I've seen that creature at the top in a Factor5 pdf recently...I know I've seen it somewhere.

Me too but cant remember here .

 

[TurnDragoZeroV2G]

First two are from the Xenos slides on ATI.com, with some editing in some places

Here (.pdf)

 

[Blade]

The slides are way too imperfect. Misspellings, the "Pal" thing, the windows are of an odd size, and the Nintendo logo is in weird places.

 

[scificube]

First two are from the Xenos slides on ATI.com

Thanks! Slides = fake.

 

[pc999]

This should be enought to prove it as a fake, thanks.

 

[3dcgi]

I could swear I've seen that creature at the top in a Factor5 pdf recently...I know I've seen it somewhere. In any case I'm highly skeptical of the slides authenticity.

Somewhere... Valve maybe.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Are you sure, because while one polygon per pixel is 648x480x60(FPS)=18.432.000p/sec (GC does 10M-12M in game) doenst that depend on the number of visible poligons (like the back of the carachters, cars, AI carachters behind boxs etc...) that should be needed eg for physics (at least that as one of the concerns of Carnnack) so I dont know if the poligons will scale so liniar as that just because with is 480p.

BTW read again Greg_Nearfield I think you did not catch what fearsomepirate is trying to say.

I'm saying that simply based on owning quite a few Cube exclusives and observing that they really don't need tons more geometry. I mean sure, there's still room to grow, but if you look at the geometry in games like Metroid Prime 2, RE4, and Rebel Strike's, you gotta ask yourself how many more polygons you can throw onscreen before the differences become miniscule at 480p.

Teasy, vertex count is dependent on the number of vertex shaders and the clockspeed. Nintendo could very well put only a twof vertex shaders in there, and at a very low clockspeed (~300 MHz), you may very well not get much more than double the Gamecube's in-game vertex output, especially if you double the number of texture layers significantly increase the complexity of the shader effects as well. This would make for a cheaper die, and would also leave room for other stuff (Flipper BC?). Check the theoretical vertex max on the X300: at 325 MHz with 2 vertex shaders, it can only output 163M vertices/sec, which makes it only about 10% more efficient than the GF4 Ti (note that's a theoretical maximum; the only numbers we have for Flipper are in-game numbers--don't recall ever hearing of more than 20m polygons/sec in an Xbox title).

 

[Ty]

I'm saying that simply based on owning quite a few Cube exclusives and observing that they really don't need tons more geometry. I mean sure, there's still room to grow, but if you look at the geometry in games like Metroid Prime 2, RE4, and Rebel Strike's, you gotta ask yourself how many more polygons you can throw onscreen before the differences become miniscule at 480p.

I'm going to have to say, 'quite a bit actually' because most of those games deal with extremely limited draw distances. Yes, they are nicely detailed, but that's because you don't see very far, so you're not eating up polys with lush valleys and rolling hills.

Even discounting that, you are still fairly limited in the amount of character models as well. So no, I'd really prefer to have much more but maybe that due to my MMO background.

 

[pc999]

Considering that a G4 is not (much?) more powerfull than a XB then I think that we both agree it is not enought, not for big landscapes in complex and more detailed worlds, and that not everythings is visible eg the unreal demo from avalache with 600 rocks if you remember you can only see some dozens at time yet they needed to be rendered anyway, the games you speak are good in some ares but they lack in many others.

 

[Teasy]

Your "sources" are beginning to sound like jvd's.

You'd be right for one of the sources.

Do they work in the industry at all?

Yes

 

[Teasy]

Teasy, vertex count is dependent on the number of vertex shaders and the clockspeed. Nintendo could very well put only a twof vertex shaders in there, and at a very low clockspeed (~300 MHz), you may very well not get much more than double the Gamecube's in-game vertex output, especially if you double the number of texture layers significantly increase the complexity of the shader effects as well.

Even two DX9 vertex shaders at 300Mhz should be capable of more then twice the in game performance Flipper could handle surely (in a closed system). I suppose its arguable, but I'd expect numbers in the 45 million range. Anyway I hope Hollywood will be more then a two vertex shader chip at 300Mhz. I'd like to see something more like 4 vertex shaders at 400Mhz.

Check the theoretical vertex max on the X300: at 325 MHz with 2 vertex shaders, it can only output 163M vertices/sec, which makes it only about 10% more efficient than the GF4 Ti (note that's a theoretical maximum; the only numbers we have for Flipper are in-game numbers--don't recall ever hearing of more than 20m polygons/sec in an Xbox title).

Theoretical numbers don't really tell you too much about efficiency though. Who knows what actual real world polygon numbers a 300Mhz X1300 could put out (in a closed system) compared to a G4TI, even with a similar theoretical max polygon rate.

By the way, Flipper could transform and light 32 million polys per second max (1 vertex colour gouraud shading). Not trying to prove a point or anything, just FYI.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Theoretical numbers don't really tell you too much about efficiency though.

By efficiency, I meant how many vertices it can theoretically do in a clock cycle. A Radeon DX9 shader does about 10% more than GF4 Ti's.

By the way, Flipper could transform and light 32 million polys per second max (1 vertex colour gouraud shading). Not trying to prove a point or anything, just FYI.

I'm basically making my estimate off observing that Xbox games didn't push a whole lot more geometry than Gamecube games (heavy pixel shading especailly knocked the vertex count in Xbox games back into last week), and then observing that a 300 MHz Radeon with two vertex shaders can't push a whole lot more geometry than a GF4 Ti, although it's bound to get a lot closer to its theoretical max due to far more efficient shading and texturing.

Yes, they are nicely detailed, but that's because you don't see very far, so you're not eating up polys with lush valleys and rolling hills.

Aggressive and clever LOD can compensate plenty in SD. In HD, you'd be a lot more limited in how you could use LOD without noticable artifacting. Granted, I think games with lots of draw distance won't look nearly as good on the Revolution, but we've already seen Serious Sam, Far Cry, and numerous flight games on current systems, so it won't be an undoable gameplay approach.

 

[Ty]

Aggressive and clever LOD can compensate plenty in SD.

Sure, one of the games I worked on had _6_ levels of LOD. But those generally operate on distance to camera. You'll need some thing else if you're expecting a bunch of characters close to the camera.

Granted, I think games with lots of draw distance won't look nearly as good on the Revolution, but we've already seen Serious Sam, Far Cry, and numerous flight games on current systems, so it won't be an undoable gameplay approach.

And that's all I'm saying. Extended draw distances are something more polygons would be wonderful for. I certainly do NOT want to LOD terrain if at all possible.

 

[Megadrive1988]

Even two DX9 vertex shaders at 300Mhz should be capable of more then twice the in game performance Flipper could handle surely (in a closed system). I suppose its arguable, but I'd expect numbers in the 45 million range. Anyway I hope Hollywood will be more then a two vertex shader chip at 300Mhz. I'd like to see something more like 4 vertex shaders at 400Mhz.

By the way, Flipper could transform and light 32 million polys per second max (1 vertex colour gouraud shading). Not trying to prove a point or anything, just FYI.

agreed.

I'd say 4 Vertex Shaders at 300 MHz would be nice.

 

[ERP]

Would you guys really be all that upset if it really was exactly what IGN described, a faster flipper and a faster Gecco with more memory?

Not that I'm saying it is, but if your already convinced it isn't intended to compete with Xbox360 and PS3 what does the actual hardware really matter?