You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Xbox 2 specs, translate please.

Posted: Mon, 28th Jun 2004, 11:29pm

Post 1 of 39

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

http://forums.xbox-scene.com/index.php?showtopic=231928

I understand about half of it. Maybe Schwar wants to jump in and tell us how PS3 will be better. smile


Oh, and it might be fake, I know, but it has neither been denied or confirmed by microsoft.
Posted: Mon, 28th Jun 2004, 11:39pm

Post 2 of 39

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

There is already a lot of developer information out about Xbox2 and GC2 - much less about the PS3.

What we do know is that IBM is making and designing the CPU for all three this time. The Xbox2 and GC2 will be out first apparently using a single 3.XGHz G5 type chip with three cores - not all that different from the chips inside the PowerMac G5. As both these machines also use ATI video hardware you can assume they are both going be be very similar spec.

The PS3 is using a next generation CPU which Sony is making with IBM - the so called cell chip. With many cores (some people say over 25) it should utterly lay waste (maybe 10-20 times faster) to the "old-technology" inside the rival consoles. Although this sounds great, there are possible problems such as high cost and it may take an extra year or more after Xbox2/GC2 for the PS3 to arrive.
Posted: Mon, 28th Jun 2004, 11:40pm

Post 3 of 39

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

It's all about gameplay man, not power. Don't you read maddox?
Posted: Mon, 28th Jun 2004, 11:41pm

Post 4 of 39

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Oh, if you get the whim, can any of you try to translate the info into a more basic english?

Ah Schwar, thanks for the timely response.
Posted: Mon, 28th Jun 2004, 11:47pm

Post 5 of 39

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

I hope they get Dual 4+GHz multi core G5 or G6 Macs out by mid 2005 - would be rather annoying if and Xbox has more power then the top of the range PC or Mac biggrin

I also hope IBM are quick to add their cell processor research in to their computer CPU line. A 6+GHz 25 core-per-cpu dual G6 in 2006 - we can wish.
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 12:51am

Post 6 of 39

CoolKabe

Force: 1559 | Joined: 26th Nov 2001 | Posts: 413

Windows User

Gold Member

schwar wrote:

I hope they get Dual 4+GHz multi core G5 or G6 Macs out by mid 2005 - would be rather annoying if and Xbox has more power then the top of the range PC or Mac biggrin

I also hope IBM are quick to add their cell processor research in to their computer CPU line. A 6+GHz 25 core-per-cpu dual G6 in 2006 - we can wish.
Amen...

Anyways, on to the translating:

Basically, if this system was a PC, or MAC, you'ld be plotting thousands of ways to get your hands on it. The video card alone (500Mhz) Is enough power to display real-time graphics at pretty much ILM strength quality. I'm talking no more need to have a "pre-rendered" scene. Do a search for "Unreal 3 engine" and you'll probably find the E3 demo of the most advanced graphics ever. Here: http://www.jamesbambury.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/unreal3_0002.wmv 10,000 pollys a character. 1,000,000 pollys per room. That barely runs on the newest video card out right now. That new 6800 card is actually slower than the "projected" specs of he Xbox 2 chip. eek

And well... If you don't understand what that tech sheet is saying, long story short, it'll own your a$$ for a long time. It's more powerful than a lot of $3,000+ high-end PCs, or MACs. The Xenon processor is one of the fastest available to the market. It's super-computer powerful. You know those big render farms at ILM, or Weta? Yeah, Xenons. A lot of them, too. biggrin But yes, it's going to be a beast if it's even half the power that this sheet claims!

-Hope that helps,
Adam twisted
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 12:53am

Post 7 of 39

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Oh, I've seen the Unreal 3 demo. So you think these specs will make better looking graphics, or about the same?
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 12:55am

Post 8 of 39

CoolKabe

Force: 1559 | Joined: 26th Nov 2001 | Posts: 413

Windows User

Gold Member

I've read in magazines, (Interviews, not rumors.) That the PS3 will be utilizing it's new processor chip to be approxamitly equal to about 1000 Pentium 4's. Not sure if that's 100% accurate, but that's what the head of Sony has said! biggrin

-Adam twisted
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 12:57am

Post 9 of 39

CoolKabe

Force: 1559 | Joined: 26th Nov 2001 | Posts: 413

Windows User

Gold Member

Depending on the company who makes thae game, much better. Halo on the Xbox right now runs certain visual effects almost impossible to run on a lot of PCs. Why? It's proprietary video chip is designed to handle insane rendering modes. I've got the PC version, and on my GForce 5600+ it still won't run at 100% quality and 30 frames per secoond. So I think that Microsoft will be designing a special chip to do effects here-to-for unseen...

-Adam twisted
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 1:01am

Post 10 of 39

CoolKabe

Force: 1559 | Joined: 26th Nov 2001 | Posts: 413

Windows User

Gold Member

What part specifically are you having trouble translating? It might help me if you gave me an idea of what you need to know.

-Adam twisted
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 1:02am

Post 11 of 39

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Holy cow pie! Photorealistic games are closer than I thought!
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 1:10am

Post 12 of 39

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Well, I see all these numbers, and I know they're a lot higher than they used to be...But in the end, does it end up being about 5 times better than the Xbox? Are the graphics going to be around 10 times better? If you were running Halo on it, could you have 100 enemies on screen, with it still running smoothly? 200? ONE MILLION!?

What kind of lighting simulation do these specs allow? How many polygons can be on the screen, generally, with it still running smoothly?

That kind of stuff is what I want to know. Comparisons to the technology we have now, and examples of what we could see.
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 1:26am

Post 13 of 39

CoolKabe

Force: 1559 | Joined: 26th Nov 2001 | Posts: 413

Windows User

Gold Member

Alright, I'm no "aleet" programmer, but let's say that you turn on you copy of Halo-Xbox, ok? (Do so right now, class.) Now on the co-op campaign, load the level "The Silent Cartographer." After you clear-off the first beach, melee each other on the back of the head as many times as you can. The Xbox will continue to render each MasterChief until you both die. So you can go on forever. Litteraly. Now at about 35-40 dead chiefs, your scrren will start to lag, due to the amount of pollygons. The Xbox 2, if I'm reading this right, will be able to support about (turns on claculator) 10 to 15 thousand more Master chiefs using the Halo 1 engine. Does that help?

Also, do you remeber the first Jurassic Park film? (Of cource you do.) Well, the T-rex had not millions of pollys, but about 75,000. The new processor chip and graphics card would allow for models many times larger than that T-rex on the screen. I'm talking 150 to 200 thousands polly per character, if the game engine is made right. Obviously, I don't really know, but what I've written sounds about right.

I would suspect that the polygon cap would be about 9-10 times greater than the Xbox or so. Maybe maxing out at around 2-2.5 millions polygons per frame. That's just my guess, of cource. smile

But basically, it could render using a high-end, real-time engine, almost 100% pre-rendered quality images without breaking a sweat. Seriously. The Xbox 1 can render some very high-end graphics without even using the processor. Add the processor in, and you can get Halo 2 quality. cool However, it will take some time for this Xbox 2 to become a reality. If it came-out today, it's pricetag would be insane. Maybe 3.5-4 thousand dollars, maybe even more. eek

I could go into the next Nintendo system, but it'll be almost exactly the same. (Same chip maker, same graphics card maker, ect.) Expect to want to upgrade your computer when these come out. wink

-Adam twisted

PS: Thank you for reading my longest. post. evah. biggrin
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 2:05am

Post 14 of 39

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Two possible consoles: (either the N5 or Xbox2):

The first option has a single 2.7GHz IBM G5 PowerPC processor, 512MB of RAM and a 600MHz graphics chip. Option two has dual 1.8GHz IBM G5 PowerPC processors, 256 MB DDR main memory, 128 MB GDDR3 Video memory a and 500 MHz graphics chip.

That's what I've heard. Also, the next Xbox won't have a hard-drive, whereas the PS2 and N5 will.
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 2:09am

Post 15 of 39

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rumours are the the Xbox 2 will be green...
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 2:11am

Post 16 of 39

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm going to place a nice firm believe that all the over the top specs that have been flown around the internet are exactly that - over the top. My above post with the dual dual 1.8GHz IBM G5 PowerPC processors sounds the most likely.

In most ways, its all about the games.
NOT the power smile
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 2:21am

Post 17 of 39

CoolKabe

Force: 1559 | Joined: 26th Nov 2001 | Posts: 413

Windows User

Gold Member

er-no wrote:

In most ways, its all about the games.
NOT the power smile
I smell a MAC and Nintendo fan here... Smells like, VICTORY!

-lol,
Adam twisted
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 2:58am

Post 18 of 39

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Erm? No, you smell a gamer who likes good games.

Point of a video games console - gaming.
I'll have great games over raw power anyday. Look at the current XBox - lots of power - but with only a few good games (and you can get them for the PC anyways).

Last edited Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 3:27am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 3:24am

Post 19 of 39

CoolKabe

Force: 1559 | Joined: 26th Nov 2001 | Posts: 413

Windows User

Gold Member

I'm not sure if I'm reading you wrong, but I was giving you a compliment. Not an insulting reply.
(Did you notice the "VICTORY" part? lol )
-Adam twisted

PS: I agree with the above statement. biggrin
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 3:53am

Post 20 of 39

Hajiku_Flip

Force: 3786 | Joined: 2nd Jun 2002 | Posts: 1669

Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I don't care what anyone says, PS3 will NOT be 10-20x faster than Xbox, or any other console for that matter. You don't see us going from 2ghz to 20ghz the next year, technology doubles every year, not quadrupling, octupling, or twentyupling like you suggest...

I respect Schwar in every way possible EXCEPT for the video-game realm. I think he has no sense in that redface
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 5:20am

Post 21 of 39

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Hajiku Flip, back from retirement, folks!

Er-No, did you read that Xbox spec sheet?
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 8:22am

Post 22 of 39

Ice_Man

Force: 1390 | Joined: 26th Nov 2002 | Posts: 1208

Windows User

Gold Member

I'm all about backwards compatability. which is why I bought a ps2.


but then let it sit for more than a year. god, it's been ages since I've had the time or inclination to sit and play video games on a console. . . .
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 8:39am

Post 23 of 39

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

Halo on the Xbox right now runs certain visual effects almost impossible to run on a lot of PCs.
This isn't true at all - any GPU from the GF4 (and I mean a real GF4) can do all the Xbox can and much more. You also need to remember that if you are using a monitor you are running probably well over twice the resolution of a TV. Any GF5 (real GF5 smile ) should be able to handle Halo at 640x240 at 60 fields a second.

That the PS3 will be utilizing it's new processor chip to be approxamitly equal to about 1000 Pentium 4's.
The 1000 P4s quote from Sony does seem a bit optimistic but maybe 100.

Flip - it would appear you didn't understand a word I said. Your support for a the Xbox platform seems to be controlling your mind - I'm not talking fiction about the speed of the PS3. Firstly, I didn't say it will have a 20GHz chip. Secondly, the technology I'm talking about is being made now - its not fiction.

If you look at the new IBM chip going in the Xbox2 it has 3 cores - this pretty much means it has 3 CPUs rather than 1. Therefore the Xbox is a three CPU 3.XGHz machine.

The PS3 has a cell processor - something they Sony have been working on with IBM. This processor can basically have many more cores than has been possible before. Anywhere from 25 to more than 100 cores is possible. The simple fact is that 25 x 3.XGHz (although they could run it at 1GHz and it would still be faster) is a lot more power than 3 x 3.XGHz. This is also the same technology IBM are using in their new super computer - apparently it will be the fastest in the world and be no bigger than a washing machine.

This is not made up stuff - its the future of CPU design in both consoles and home computers. IBM hold all the technology cards at the moment so its good that all 3 consoles are using IBM chips. You really shouldn't be surprised if the PS3 has a way faster CPU than the Xbox2, but the GPU won't have this kind of avantage, although it will be faster. This new technology is widely known to be in the next PS Flip - which is why it will probably be delayed for quite a bit and Xbox2 and GC2 will come out as soon as they can. The only way they'll start to invade the PS market share if they come out early enough and take the sales why PS have an old console on the market - you never know it could work (although it hasn't before).

Just as a final note - you don't think they will get to 20GHz in the next couple of years? IBM already sell a 60GHz chip and have had 100+GHz going up for sale soon. You are right that CPU speed tends to double every year, but every 4-5 years there is normally a bigger jump - when IBM introduced the PowerPC for instance or Intel with some of the Pentium lines. These years can see larger jumps.

You also appear to be looking at only the console world. When the PS2 came out it was pretty much the most powerful GPU and CPU around, including home computers. When the Xbox came out is was always old technology with a CPU which couldn't even keep up with the PS2 (although it had a much faster GPU).

In 2005 there will be dual or even quad 3+GHz G5 machines about - running multiple cores which will be faster than the Xbox2 by a long way. The introduction of cell processors (maybe only 10 cells to start) will mean that machines don't need multiple CPUs cause each CPU has multiple cores - or they can have multiple CPUs with multi cores for huge speed. As Sony has developed this technology with IBM (unlike Microsoft and Nintendo who are using cut about versions of stock IBM chips) they will get to use it very early on, and I expect for just a little while it will be faster than almost all desktop machines.

The cool thing is all of the machines should be able to handle the Unreal 3 engine (which even the new GF6800 can only just cope with).
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 12:16pm

Post 24 of 39

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

sidewinder wrote:

Hajiku Flip, back from retirement, folks!

Er-No, did you read that Xbox spec sheet?
Yeah? Doesn't matter diddily. Remember Microsoft's tech video back in 1999 that boasted massive specs far beyond what are in its current Xbox.

It's all a load of hype. We know nothing until the console is revealed next year at E3.
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 1:25pm

Post 25 of 39

Hajiku_Flip

Force: 3786 | Joined: 2nd Jun 2002 | Posts: 1669

Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1


If you look at the new IBM chip going in the Xbox2 it has 3 cores - this pretty much means it has 3 CPUs rather than 1. Therefore the Xbox is a three CPU 3.XGHz machine.

The PS3 has a cell processor - something they Sony have been working on with IBM. This processor can basically have many more cores than has been possible before. Anywhere from 25 to more than 100 cores is possible. The simple fact is that 25 x 3.XGHz (although they could run it at 1GHz and it would still be faster) is a lot more power than 3 x 3.XGHz. This is also the same technology IBM are using in their new super computer - apparently it will be the fastest in the world and be no bigger than a washing machine.
Yes, but hardly anyone is buying the fact that Microsoft is going to release a triple-core machine with 3gig proccessors for less than $400. Nobody can see it happen and if it does, it'd be one hell of a economical miracle.

Now you're saying Sony is going to release BRAND NEW technology that runs at twice or even triple the speed of this already unhead of 3core-3gig processor tech for about the same price? Ick, we'll see.... tard

Just as a final note - you don't think they will get to 20GHz in the next couple of years? IBM already sell a 60GHz chip and have had 100+GHz going up for sale soon.
No, I meant that when the 2ghz machines came out, they did not straight double to 20ghz the next year. I know the original comparison was with overall hardware tech, but I was just showing in the case of ghz and even ram, things do not tend not do more than triple. That is why I have a hard time believing in these 'ps3' specs.

You also appear to be looking at only the console world. When the PS2 came out it was pretty much the most powerful GPU and CPU around, including home computers. When the Xbox came out is was always old technology with a CPU which couldn't even keep up with the PS2 (although it had a much faster GPU).
You always make claims that the Xbox is less powerful then the PS2. Then why do you not see games like Ninja Gaiden and Riddick run smoothly (or even at all) on the PS2? How come many more developers are jumping ships and joining Microsoft's side because the PS2 hardware is aging. If the PS2 really is in fact as powerful as you say, they shouldn't be lagging behind in the graphical department (and even the sales department now) due to old hardware...

And if you say the Xbox hardware isn't as good as the PS2's, but its easier to develop and work with, well then it should have no trouble dealing with Sony's superior hardware next year as well. wink
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 2:07pm

Post 26 of 39

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

Rating: +1

I don't think you are reading what I'm saying razz

Yes, but hardly anyone is buying the fact that Microsoft is going to release a triple-core machine with 3gig proccessors for less than $400. Nobody can see it happen and if it does, it'd be one hell of a economical miracle.

Now you're saying Sony is going to release BRAND NEW technology that runs at twice or even triple the speed of this already unhead of 3core-3gig processor tech for about the same price? Ick, we'll see....
The three core IBM chip running at over 3GHz is confirmed to developers (think its 3.5GHz). Making the processors at a low cost isn't going to be that hard to see in a years time. They went for a version of a PowerPC chip for that very reason - the development costs are already mainly sorted. There are already 3GHz+ G5s running its just the yields are not that high - give it a year. The three core PowerPC is hardly an amazing step - the Pentium 4 HT already has 2 cores.

You need to remember its IBM who are playing the major part in all these designs, but where Microsoft and Nintendo have very little to do with the design of their chips Sony is partner in the cell technology. Sony and IBM together are a very skillful bunch - the PS2 CPU was way ahead of everything when it came out. Still, I have no doubt the PS3 chip will be way more expensive than the one inside the Xbox2 - I expect Sony will sell at cost or even a loss to start with.

No, I meant that when the 2ghz machines came out, they did not straight double to 20ghz the next year. I know the original comparison was with overall hardware tech, but I was just showing in the case of ghz and even ram, things do not tend not do more than triple. That is why I have a hard time believing in these 'ps3' specs.
Well the PS3 will be atleast a year later than the Xbox 2 I expect. Buts let look at CPU tech to see how far its off.

2004 - Dual 2.5GHz G5 (5GHz PowerPC power or about 7.7GHz of P4 power)
- double that -
2005 - Three core 3.5GHz G5 (10.5GHz PowerPC power or about 15GHz of P4 power)
- double that -
2006 - 10+ core 2GHz Sony/IBM (maybe 20+GHz of PowerPC type power)

If they stick only 10 slow cores in it the its not far off your "double every year" idea (neither is the Xbox2 processor). The difference is that cell technology is predicted to accelerate processor speed a lot, even allowing IBM to add hundreds of cores to one chip in the future. The hundreds of P4 statements sounds crazy optimistic - but then nobody could believe the PS2 was going to be as fast as it was. I hope that cell technology really does deliver both for the PS3 and future computers.

You always make claims that the Xbox is less powerful then the PS2. Then why do you not see games like Ninja Gaiden and Riddick run smoothly (or even at all) on the PS2? How come many more developers are jumping ships and joining Microsoft's side because the PS2 hardware is aging. If the PS2 really is in fact as powerful as you say, they shouldn't be lagging behind in the graphical department (and even the sales department now) due to old hardware...
You don't seem to know the difference better CPU and GPU - its the GPU which does most of the work for the graphics you see on the screen. The reason graphics run faster on the Xbox is the GPU, not the CPU. As I stated the Xbox does have a faster GPU than the PS2, but its CPU is slower.

The PS2 GPU was complex but very fast when it came out and its predicted that the PS3 will show a similar performance jump. Saying that its not going to be like 10 times faster than the ATI inside the Xbox2 - it would be impressive if it was even twice as fast.

And if you say the Xbox hardware isn't as good as the PS2's, but its easier to develop and work with, well then it should have no trouble dealing with Sony's superior hardware next year as well.
The current Xbox is easier to code on than the PS2 thats true, but as for the Xbox2 we'll have to wait and see. As its not longer a Pentium type chip things are very different - who knows how similar all these IBM developed chips will be on that front. I expect the PS3 will still be harder to code due to its custom GPU compared to the almost ATI item in the Xbox2. I also expect (just like the PS2) developers will make the effort, not only because of market share but because the machine will have the power to do things that the other just can't do.
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 2:57pm

Post 27 of 39

PhLogan

Force: 490 | Joined: 1st May 2004 | Posts: 290

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

I didnt read this whole thread - or the entire XBOX article posted, but I did find this article on another forum:
http://money.cnn.com/2004/05/26/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/index.htm

It says that the XBOX2 might be made to be able to play PC games. That would be AWESOME IMHO. But im an XBOX fan. And sorry if that was already said earlier.
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 3:06pm

Post 28 of 39

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

That is strange - but could well be true thinking about it...

Microsoft purchased the software VirtualPC which lets you emulate PC software and Windows on the Mac. In the next version coming to the Mac soon can apparently handle all DirectX stuff in hardware for the first time meaning that their is a lot less emulation to do (had to do the CPU and the GPU in previous versions).

Apparently on a dual 2GHz G5 they are getting near 2GHz Pentium speeds in games. I wonder if this is just a start - if they can make PC games run this fast on a current G5 with graphics running in hardware then the three core 3.5GHz G5 type chip in the Xbox2 could get some even more tasty emulation going - probably like a 3GHz+ P4 type speeds.

That will be interesting...
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 5:29pm

Post 29 of 39

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

What would be cool would be if they could get a Mac emulator working faster. Then we could run a mac emulator running Virtual PC running a mac emulator running VirtualPC smile
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 5:35pm

Post 30 of 39

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

The shark has eaten too many cottage pies (he's got that kind of expression). If he did that, the pc would sink to the bottom of the ocean, even if it were fast enough. Too much memory usage, or oxygen in his case. wink

The Xbox 2 sounds powerful. But it wouldn't be more powerful than a pc?
Posted: Tue, 29th Jun 2004, 5:37pm

Post 31 of 39

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Yeah I was joking smile
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jul 2004, 1:58pm

Post 32 of 39

TAP2

Force: 1128 | Joined: 8th Jan 2003 | Posts: 1848

Windows User

Member

Surely PCs will allways be ahead of consoles, well I hope so anyway.
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jul 2004, 2:17pm

Post 33 of 39

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

er-no wrote:

Point of a video games console - gaming.
Exactly.

Abou the next gen consoles, all will be backwards compatible, GCN 2 with GCN, XBox2 with XBox, and PS3 with PS2 and PS1.

But, er-no's statement, that just said it all. I can't wait to see GCN 2's spec because Nintendo has invested literally billions of money to make it, no joke. Not counting mass production, or distribution.
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jul 2004, 3:33pm

Post 34 of 39

Hajiku_Flip

Force: 3786 | Joined: 2nd Jun 2002 | Posts: 1669

Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Serpent wrote:

er-no wrote:

Point of a video games console - gaming.
Exactly.

Abou the next gen consoles, all will be backwards compatible, GCN 2 with GCN, XBox2 with XBox, and PS3 with PS2 and PS1.

That isn't neccesarily true. There is a chance that Xbox2 will not be BC due to the fact that they are switching providers. They would have to pay nVidia a royalty per system to use their old chip in conjunction with the new ATI chip. Or they could try to emulate the old software, which might cause other features to be axed due to less development time. I don't really care, just because I'm getting a next-gen Xbox doesn't mean I have to throw away my old one. It's not a video game rental, you should know you don't have to trade you're old system in to get a new one. razz
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jul 2004, 4:28pm

Post 35 of 39

TAP2

Force: 1128 | Joined: 8th Jan 2003 | Posts: 1848

Windows User

Member

The reason I dislike consoles is because,

They are ALL the same.

With computers, EVERYONE has something different, and that's the whole fun of it.
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jul 2004, 4:47pm

Post 36 of 39

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Good point...they all have the same games, with similar gameplay (given, their controllers are a little different). The advantage is they're really fun to play multiplayer with your mates though, whilst PCs are a bit crap for this (for non-online multiplaying). The PS2 is good fun & I'm looking forward to seeing what the PSP's gameplay will be like.
Posted: Sat, 3rd Jul 2004, 11:45pm

Post 37 of 39

boffa86

Force: 890 | Joined: 18th Jun 2003 | Posts: 641

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

i have a URL here from gamespy. there is info of everything they know about xbox 2 and a screenshot of the new dashboard.

http://xbox.gamespy.com/articles/527/527245p1.html?fromint=1

biggrin
Posted: Sat, 7th May 2005, 8:47pm

Post 38 of 39

boffa86

Force: 890 | Joined: 18th Jun 2003 | Posts: 641

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

i dont wanna start a new thread about the xbox 360. just wanna say that i have found a picture of the console and the controller
Here
Posted: Sat, 7th May 2005, 8:56pm

Post 39 of 39

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Looks like some sorta Apple.
That image has been leaked on the net for a while now.
Still look to see if its official in the coming ten days.

All three consoles will be announced and shown. Should be pretty sweet. smile