Revolution Tech Details Emerge ( Xbox1+ performance, 128 MB RAM )
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
Well, I think some of us would be upset. If the Revolution is only a 2x Gamecube why don't they just start selling Gamecubes in packs of 2 with the new controller?ERP said:
I doubt Nintendo gave IBM and ATi money to overclock the chips they already had. It sounds like in an attempt to get alpha development kits out the door before Broadway and Hollywood were finalized they just beefed up some Gamecube kits and shipped them off.
ERP said:
Yes, it may not be made to compete directely with those but I am sure that is not to compete with current/last gen too.
The facts are that specs remain important till some place here they can both affect gameplay and be atractive to the gameplay to me it seems that most games would be nice if played with a eg UE3/QW level gfx in FPS (and the equivalent to others genres) at least I cant remember right now of new features that would affect gamplay, from the WoW effect that we will need much more yet I think we can live without that. In terms of CPU I think we will need always more as big and complex living worlds, new features, AI forms, physics forms (ie no Newtonian etc...)advanced interfaces (voice,EyeToy like) that can always moddifie gameplay and add a lot to the gaming experince a lot (like MotorStorm).
I think that gfx will become meaningless after this next gen and meybe even CPU power (at least for todays conventional uses) so this probably will be the last console gen based in controler-TV so I want all I can get of it and if they can give us the full packge then I will be very upset in getting only half of that when it should be (relatively) very easy to do a much more powerfull one, with all that the controler can give it is somewhat like put analog stics in a SNES or a Saturn ie it will only have very very limited aps at the same time it could have much more (I want a guy with telekinesys and make a enemy "dance" inside of a bunch of enemys while they do whatever they can to survive both try to kill me or make their partner in a lot of litle parts so he cant hurt him) varieted apps and possibilitys.
OtakingGX said:
I agree, plus the article isnt very clear some times I wonder if he really now what he is talking about.
The things is that all the signals points toward the 3x the power of the GC scenario, especially for the CPU.OtakingGX said:
If Nintendo plans to have something else, the only ones who knows about it are the Nintendo guys in Kyoto. Why would they send incorrect informations about the true capabilities of the final hardware to the developers?
I've never really been convinced that it won't compete with 360/PS3 graphics (competing not being the same as being exactly as powerful). Then again I don't really care what graphics 360 or PS3 have in comparison, so competing isn't so important. As far as graphics go all I want from Revolution are next generation visuals (just like I've had every generation from Nintendo).
Graphics certainly aren't everything but they definitely do have an effect on immersion so they are important to a degree IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
We've only heard from an anonymoys developer or two, many other developers (especially the big ones) could know more about the system and not be willing to talk about it.
They've done it before remember, "GameCube is capable of 6 to 12 million polygons per second"..
Who knows maybe Nintendo have gone insane and started throwing piles of money at companies like ATI and IBM for basically nothing at all, I just seriously doubt it.
Last edited by a moderator:
There's informal talk out there. And this informal talk corroborates IGN claims. So...Teasy said:
And they add: Assuming actual game conditions with complex models, fully textured, fully lit, etc.Teasy said:
You know, and that's just speculation, but I'm not certain that the Revolution we'll get is what it was planned to be from the start of its RnD, a few year ago.Teasy said:
Vysez said:
No the thing is that all the signals point for 3xthe GC in the DevKits but for some reason
there is a osmose between that and Rev specs in the IGN article, just like if someone has that XB360 dev kit had a 9800 then XB360 will have a 9800, there are others that say it will be much more advanced (eg the blog a few pages ago, latest "info" sugest it is from ubisoft) but many dont belive in them (personally I think it does have chances of being real).Vysez said:
Maybe not, but that'd be an awful lot of wasted money to throw all the tech away, especially when cheaper system costs could be accomplished just by having slower and less memory than the other systems. The other systems are using 512MB of high speed memory, 128MB of slower speed memory on Rev would save a lot of money, though quite possibly be more limiting than even a slower cpu or gpu would be.
Rev docs or dev kits docs
How much early XB360 had been released before final dev kits/chip completention(xenus is ready since 2004, from what we know only now there are prototipes of Rev chips)
I doubt that unless some quote directely (or himself) Nintendo or a big dev (EA,UBI...) we could know and be certain of Rev specs.
How much early XB360 had been released before final dev kits/chip completention(xenus is ready since 2004, from what we know only now there are prototipes of Rev chips)
I doubt that unless some quote directely (or himself) Nintendo or a big dev (EA,UBI...) we could know and be certain of Rev specs.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
pc999 said:
No, the signals point to the final hardare as described to developers in documentation.
No, the architecture is certainly finalized, though final clocks / tweaks likely aren't. In any case, nintendo HAS to give as accuarate guidance as they can as to the performance of final hardware, because devs need to take that into account when making the software. They need to ship games in less than a year...
Joe DeFuria said:
Not necessarily, historically Nintendo has always been very protective of their hardware, not allowing other devs access to certain information about it. I'm sure not every Gamecube dev had full documentation of all the secrets of the TEV, and the N64 had its 'dream team'.
Ty said:
You would think so, but with GameCube they also said they were making development easier, but they still withheld information.
And the Rev really seems like a system designed by Nintendo for Nintendo imo, 3rd party games are not going to play a large factor in its success or failure.
Fox5 said:
Is it possible that people with dev kits are under NDA until the hardware is finalized? Maybe the developers know more than we do?
I think 3rd party games will always be a large factor in success or failure. Either this new controller will attract developes, or push them away. If Rev doesn't have enough good games, it will die. I'm pretty sure Nintendo will want as many devs on board as possible.
While it would seem reasonable to assume that developers should have a decent idea about the capabilities of the Revolution by now, I still fail to see that this information has leaked to the public in any shape other than "roughly 3 times the power of the gamecube", and "not as powerful as the XBox 360 or the PS3 but still pretty good".
That's it, as far as I have seen. (The "RV530 tweaked for the purpose" rumor was a bit too weak, even though the general direction of it was believable.)
What does those "3x" refer to? General game code? If so, how fast is the Cell at general game code? Some developers would say "slightly slower than a 733MHz Celeron".... The point being that a single such number says next to nothing, you'd need a description of the overall architecture to make any kind of decent predictions.
The rumours that do refer to the total system says: "pretty spiffy, but not as powerful as the 360 or PS3". Now, even assuming those rumours are correct, how do they take into account that the Revolution seemingly will only need to output one third of the pixels?
The information in the wild is just too thin and regurgitation doesn't make it thicker. Someone needs to leak a preliminary spec sheet or even a schematic a la the 360 before there is any possibility of going forward.
That's it, as far as I have seen. (The "RV530 tweaked for the purpose" rumor was a bit too weak, even though the general direction of it was believable.)
What does those "3x" refer to? General game code? If so, how fast is the Cell at general game code? Some developers would say "slightly slower than a 733MHz Celeron".... The point being that a single such number says next to nothing, you'd need a description of the overall architecture to make any kind of decent predictions.
The rumours that do refer to the total system says: "pretty spiffy, but not as powerful as the 360 or PS3". Now, even assuming those rumours are correct, how do they take into account that the Revolution seemingly will only need to output one third of the pixels?
The information in the wild is just too thin and regurgitation doesn't make it thicker. Someone needs to leak a preliminary spec sheet or even a schematic a la the 360 before there is any possibility of going forward.
Says who? The devs quoted said they didn't even know what Hollywood was and so were treating it as a higher clocked Flipper at the moment until they get details (since that's what the dev kit has). Which rules out the idea that these dev kit documents detail the final system.
Last edited by a moderator:
There's a lot of informal talk out there, some corroborates IGN's claims and some doesn't.
Correct, but it was still overly conservative, since GC surpassed 12 million pps in a complex game at launch and went well past that later in the generation. 60 million pps in game could be seen by a developer as 3 times GC's performance. But if that number was given out by Nintendo and is as conservative as GC's initial estimate it could be more like 100 million in reality. Hopefully we'll hear something more concrete from some developers with proper dev kits (with Broadway and Hollywood inside) in the next month or two.
Last edited by a moderator: