SEGA runs its own arcades in Japan, it still does and Arcades are still popular in Japan due to the control set ups in custom sitdown cabinets, teens and adults male and female still play at the arcades as opposed to the US where you have to hunt down a multi-entertainment place like Jillians, Dave and Busters or Sega Gameworks out of a haystack since the US is so big their impact is hardly felt.
SEGA's NEW ARCADE HARDWARE...
- Thread starter helvetica bold
- Start date
SEGA runs its own arcades in Japan, it still does and Arcades are still popular in Japan due to the control set ups in custom sitdown cabinets, teens and adults male and female still play at the arcades as opposed to the US where you have to hunt down a multi-entertainment place like Jillians, Dave and Busters or Sega Gameworks out of a haystack since the US is so big their impact is hardly felt.
I think Ridge Racer 7 3D may uses PS3 hardware too but I am not sure.
helvetica bold
Newcomer
I wonder why Sega just didnt you the 360 hardware and up the ram.
Thats what they did with Chirhiro.
Isnt the 360's video card better than whats used in Ringedge?
Either way, I want Border Break for my 360!
Thats what they did with Chirhiro.
Isnt the 360's video card better than whats used in Ringedge?
Either way, I want Border Break for my 360!
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Well, still popular is a bit of a relative term. Compared to the US, it's definitely more popular. Compared to 10 years ago, it's dying. Compared to 20-25 years ago, it's dead...
Sega arcades in many areas of Japan have closed or see drastically lower crowds than they did even 5 years ago which is nothing compared to how it was 10 years ago.
However, that said, in larger metropolitan area's they still do relatively well. Independant arcades have almost entired died out... Oddly enough grocery stores with kid level arcade machines as well as some video rental shops still attract some customers to their machines.
Regards,
SB
Nope, it isn't.
The GPU used in RingEdge looks like its a G92, specifically the 9600GSO. So its quite considerably faster and more advanced than Xenos.
To give specifics:
Full DX10 compliance (SM4, geometry shaders etc...)
165% of Xenos pixel fill rate
330% of Xenos texture capability
110% of Xenos geometry setup
171% of graphics memory bandwidth - dedicated to GPU rather than shared with CPU as it is with Xenos. No edram though so thats the big Xenos benefit (although it does mean you don't need to worry about tiling).
180% of Xenos raw shader capability - however Ringedge will see higher utilisation due to its scalar design.
Last edited by a moderator:
helvetica bold
Newcomer
WOW didnt realize Ringedge was that much more powerful than the 360...
So i guess ports will be tough?
Can't wait to see what AM2 will do with the hardware!
Outrun 3 anyone?
So i guess ports will be tough?
Can't wait to see what AM2 will do with the hardware!
Outrun 3 anyone?
Like for like ports would ne near impossible if the Ringedge GPU it properly utilised (not to mention the RAM).
But it shouldn't be too difficult to scale the arcade versions back to run on the consoles. The're not a million miles apart hardware wise.
But it shouldn't be too difficult to scale the arcade versions back to run on the consoles. The're not a million miles apart hardware wise.
helvetica bold
Newcomer
Im a Mac guy but if i wanted to build a budget gaming PC, how much
would it cost for me to build a PC that follows Ringedge's exact specs?
would it cost for me to build a PC that follows Ringedge's exact specs?
The 32GB SSD probably the expensive part, but you don't really need it. Just get normal hdd instead.
I would estimate the hardware to be about $350 minus SSD, monitor, controllers, speakers and Windows.
Blazkowicz
Legend
the GPU might be the new 9600GSO, which is being released under the geforce GT130 instead. it's G94b with 48SP rather than G92 with 96SP.
It would go well with the low clocked CPU, low power CPU. Similar somewhat to the radeon 4670 I'd say (or between it and the 4650).
I'd say 200€ for the motherboard, cpu, ram, graphics card and PSU.
It would go well with the low clocked CPU, low power CPU. Similar somewhat to the radeon 4670 I'd say (or between it and the 4650).
I'd say 200€ for the motherboard, cpu, ram, graphics card and PSU.
Blazkowicz
Legend
Neo Geo was probably more powerful with add-in chips in cartridges (but SNES games had add-in chips too). But you're right, and gargantuous amounts ROM and memory is what defined it.
The equivalent would be gobs of memory and enormous detail, imagine a system based on a quad core i7 with 3GB ram, geforce GTX 260 with 1792MB and content designed to max all that out.
(that GPU is much, much more powerful than a console GPU though!)
Are you sure? Wouldn't ATI be able to claim 48X5=240 SP's for xenos if they wanted to claim that nomenclature? Of course, the utilization is much better etc on the scalar SP's, but nonetheless..if Xenos was somehow fully utilized..
It depends, if Blazkowicz is corrent that Ringedge is a 48 SP part rather than the 96 that I was assuming (8800GS/9600GS have 96sp's), then the figures would be very different.
Based on a 96sp figure then yes i'm certain, 96sp's at 1.35Ghz = 388.8 GFLOPS compared to Xenos's 216 GFLOPS. Even ignoring the MUL completely you would still get 259.2 GFLOPS for the 8800GS/9600GSO.
If its the GT 130 they are using then the figures would be:
Full DX10 compliance (SM4, geometry shaders etc...)
*150% of Xenos pixel fill rate* - based on 12 ROPs but it may well have fewer than this
150% of Xenos texture capability
100% of Xenos geometry setup
107% of graphics memory bandwidth - dedicated to GPU rather than shared with CPU as it is with Xenos. No edram though so thats the big Xenos benefit (although it does mean you don't need to worry about tiling).
56% of Xenos raw shader capability - however Ringedge will see higher utilisation due to its scalar design.
Blackraven
Newcomer
I guess it's on-par with Taito Type X2 then(???)
http://www.system16.com/hardware.php?id=903
OS: Microsoft Windows XP Embedded
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6400／Pentium 4 651／Celeron D 352 (up to latest Core 2 CPUs supported by the chipset)
Chipset: Intel Q965 + ICH8
Monitor: 720p/1080p/1440p HD LCD Monitor
RAM: DDR2 667/800MHz (512MB/1GB, up to 4GB)
GPU: PCI Express x16-based graphics. Support cards include ATI RADEON X1600Pro/X1300LE or nVIDIA GeForce 7900GS／7600GS／7300GS, up to latest graphic cards (Radeon HD 3800 or Geforce 9800 series)
Sound: Onboard Realtek HD 7.1 channel Sound (supports add-in sound cards)
LAN: 10/100/1000 BASE-T
I/O ports: 1x JVS, 4x USB 2.0 (up to 8), 1x serial (max 2), 1x parallel port, 2x PS/2, 2x SATA
Audio inputs: AKG C535EB Stage Microphone, line-in (Surround 7.1)
Audio outputs: 7.1, SPDI/FX
Expansion Slots: 1x PCI Express x16 (used by video card), 1x PCI Express x4, 2x PCI
Storage: 2x 80 GB 10k RPM SATA Hard Drives
Media: 80 GB 10000 rpm Hard Drive
Really high-spec IMHO (for video arcade gaming standards).
---
Coincidentally, there are some games that have puny arcade specs but still do really well on its own (in terms of gameplay and revenue). Game such as Maximum Tune 3 for instance.
Runs I think on System N2 hardware (crappy system based on the highest-end iteration of Nforce 2 Ultra platform). Basically, highest-end Athlon XP plus the highest end Geforce 4 (possibly Ti 4800) with 512 MB-1 GB system RAM at most.....
Definitely low-end (and sometimes the loading times are worst than its predecessor using Chihiro hardware).....but hey, it sells many, tons of people play it and it is fun and neat.
Currently, the most popular video arcade racing game in the world (edging out Initial D 4 and even the Daytona USA games).
P.S.
In my case, I still play a lot of arcade games (hence why I'm an arcade gamer). And in some cases, I'd rather play the arcade versions of certain games over its PC or console iterations (such as Tekken 6 BR, Wangan Midnight and even Time Crisis 4 to name a few)
Two cents
http://www.system16.com/hardware.php?id=903
OS: Microsoft Windows XP Embedded
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6400／Pentium 4 651／Celeron D 352 (up to latest Core 2 CPUs supported by the chipset)
Chipset: Intel Q965 + ICH8
Monitor: 720p/1080p/1440p HD LCD Monitor
RAM: DDR2 667/800MHz (512MB/1GB, up to 4GB)
GPU: PCI Express x16-based graphics. Support cards include ATI RADEON X1600Pro/X1300LE or nVIDIA GeForce 7900GS／7600GS／7300GS, up to latest graphic cards (Radeon HD 3800 or Geforce 9800 series)
Sound: Onboard Realtek HD 7.1 channel Sound (supports add-in sound cards)
LAN: 10/100/1000 BASE-T
I/O ports: 1x JVS, 4x USB 2.0 (up to 8), 1x serial (max 2), 1x parallel port, 2x PS/2, 2x SATA
Audio inputs: AKG C535EB Stage Microphone, line-in (Surround 7.1)
Audio outputs: 7.1, SPDI/FX
Expansion Slots: 1x PCI Express x16 (used by video card), 1x PCI Express x4, 2x PCI
Storage: 2x 80 GB 10k RPM SATA Hard Drives
Media: 80 GB 10000 rpm Hard Drive
Really high-spec IMHO (for video arcade gaming standards).
---
Coincidentally, there are some games that have puny arcade specs but still do really well on its own (in terms of gameplay and revenue). Game such as Maximum Tune 3 for instance.
Runs I think on System N2 hardware (crappy system based on the highest-end iteration of Nforce 2 Ultra platform). Basically, highest-end Athlon XP plus the highest end Geforce 4 (possibly Ti 4800) with 512 MB-1 GB system RAM at most.....
Definitely low-end (and sometimes the loading times are worst than its predecessor using Chihiro hardware).....but hey, it sells many, tons of people play it and it is fun and neat.
Currently, the most popular video arcade racing game in the world (edging out Initial D 4 and even the Daytona USA games).
P.S.
In my case, I still play a lot of arcade games (hence why I'm an arcade gamer
). And in some cases, I'd rather play the arcade versions of certain games over its PC or console iterations (such as Tekken 6 BR, Wangan Midnight and even Time Crisis 4 to name a few)Two cents
That machine is basically a PC so it can scale from less powerful than RingEdge to much more powerful.
It depends what implementation of the possible hardware combinations is used.
How is software written to target the variable hardware? How do you target your game for either 1 GB or 4 GBs of RAM? Is the market large enough to warrant that, or are these basically PCs for playing PC implementations of games which can then be released directly to PC, thus being standard PC developments? If the latter, this talk belongs in the PC forum!
Arcade devs don't really sell software like PC. They typically sell the whole machine, software + hardware. The first popular one that start selling software only was the Neo Geo. But most arcade machine are dedicated. So they don't really deal with variable hardware for a single software. The only hardware difference is different cabinet types for the same game.
So an arcade would buy one of these machines with a game on it, and that's the only game the machine will play, and the hardware they buy will be spec'd to that game? If you buy a high-end machine, you can't then load up a low-end game, or even if you want to switch to another high-end game for the same hardware, you have to replace the whole thing at considerable cost?
That just seems all kinds of whack! "I'm gonna buy a high-spec PC to play this game, and when the pundits are tired of it and want to play a different game, I'll chuck out the entire system." Unless these boxes are relatively cheap (in which case why does SEGA persist in them? Where's the money?) why buy an arcade? Surely it'd be cheaper to rig up your own custom PC setup, play for free, buy snacks and drinks at the bar... Or are these machines rented, so the console company can reuse hardware and the cost isn't that high?