The most Detailed Tech Information on the Xbox360 yet

whats the size of the cell and the x360 cpu ?

 

I think he was being tongue-in-cheek from a stylistic viewpoint.

 

I am a noob...

But it seemed like Microsoft is totally glamourizing(sp?) the 10MB embedded RAM in their GPU.

Something they heavily bashed Sony before... about the PS2 for having only 4MB of embedded RAM in their GPU.

 

According to ATI the transistor counts for Xenon graphics heard so far are wrong. As best I can figure out that 150M figure may just be for the EDRAM/ROP unit.

 

Umh..50/60 Mtransistors just for ROPs..mhhh.

 

Well, the Shader core is 232M transistors.

 

What about those figures of 332M transistors, 232 for Xenos and 100 for the EDRAM module ?

 

232 + 150 = 382 Mtransistors! woooow!
It' just like RSX + edram

 

Ahem, RSX is 300 Million + 2 Billion (gotta account for VRAM ).

 

You right, me dumb! Call me Forrest...

 

bring me some lasagne, stat!

 

You should be sleeping or mas... I mean... sleeping .

 

While I believe the X360 to be very close to PS3 graphically (within the 80% to 120% range depending on how everything pans out), this MS PR release is pretty hilarious.

Nevertheless, the early impression at E3 was that PS3 > X360. It's in MS's best interests to put something out that contradicts that and throws confusion on the whole issue. MS doesn't really care if journalists believe that X360 is as powerful as PS3, just that they are confused enough that they stop talking about hardware altogether.

 

The differences are arising because only MS were allowed to talk about anything previously, and they are not geared up to marketing hardware. ATI have been unfettered a little more now because they know more about their hardware and they also know how to market it better. I think there are certain factions within MS that realised they bungled a little on how they talked about the hardware.

 

Something I don't really understand....

- Xbox2 has insanely wide bandwidth to 10MB of EDRAM. This will give them free 4xAA in HDTV resolutions + other really incredible performance benefits
- PS2 had 4MB of EDRAM with insanely wide (in 1999 standards) bandwidth. Having any kind of AA in PS2 games seemed to be a major pain in the ass for developers. Also, judging by the games, I fail to see what kind of killer features, compared to Xbox1 technology, PS2's EDRAM offered? (just a man-of-the-street's view of that, my technical knowledge in the subject is real weak)

So how come Xbox2's EDRAM seems to have much bigger benefits than Ps2's EDRAM?

 

ATI should have been at the press conference with slides and demos to show off what they designed for MS. That way all this would have been put to rest.

In many ways what Sony does better is that they have a unified information stream... their PR guys know more about the hardware and its capabilities while MS' PR guys are basically advertise guys who just hit taglines over and over and over with no clarity...

 

Early impression on what?CG graphics and easy-win comparisons?

 

Whether the material was CG or not is debatable. At least Sony put some excitement on the table. What a huge disappointment it would be if everyone walked away from E3 with only some slide photos and PR talk. Put on a good show, entertain people. The best they can do is not some lame messageboard fodder material. GOW started them off with a bang, and that's what the people want. There will be plenty of opportunity for the people to talk about the specs and what it is capable of .. don't spoonfeed lies. Its the games that will ultimately flesh out the potential for the consoles as a whole, and not some voodoo math.

 

Why does everyone go on and on about KZ? GOW looked damned fine too IMO, but the thing that most impressed me about PS3 were the Cell demos. The Getaway for example. It's not like pre-rendered concept images (or bald-faced lies depending which side of the fence you sit on) were the ONLY thing Sony showed

 

Gawd, now I got that "fuzzy math" hoopla stuck in my head again. Thanks a lot!