Some real Xenon info...

[saunders45]

The guys at Gamespy got a 2 part series on the next xbox. go check out part 1.
http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-xbox/594331p1.html?fromint=1

[GFLPraxis]

Finally, some real information.

The only thing I'm still skeptical on is the three core PowerPC. I'd like to know what kind of PowerPC processor this is. Surely they aren't normal G5's- either they're stripped down in some other way (cache, pipelines, you name it), or its gonna cost a fortune.

But regular DVD's? lol...

MS is gonna get burned. They're making some of the same mistakes Nintendo did: No hard drive built in, inferior media (I mean, these aren't even 9.4 GB disks, they're only 7 GB- PS3 will have Blu-ray, and the Nintendo Revolution is supposed to have HD-DVD). They're also alienating their previous audience, since before they had the people who wanted the hard drive and the best graphics, and now they'll have no HD and the worst graphics.

Their only hope is that they can pull a PS2 and grab the market before the others come out. But the PS2 had a full years' lead over the others, while the XBox 2 will only have a couple of months.


EDIT:
For those of you just tuning in to this thread, I HIGHLY recommend you read the second page before you start posting. We cut through the XBox 2 hype and figure out how fast it is, realisticly.

[Mord]

most ps2 and xbox games come on CD's let allone DVD's this is no where near as importent as the cartridge Vs optical debate.

[GFLPraxis]

most ps2 and xbox games come on CD's let allone DVD's this is no where near as importent as the cartridge Vs optical debate.

Uh, PS2 and XBox use DVDs, GameCube uses mini-DVD's at 1.6 GB.
PS1 used CDs.

[benpatient]

mmmhmmm. all PS2 and xbox games are DVD. Even if they are tiny demo discs.

I think it's interesting that they didn't say the 3 cores were 64-bit capable...

that could be a big part of the affordable equation.

Also, it says that the cores will be able to do 2 operations per clock...is that something the current G5 does? I wasn't aware.

[GFLPraxis]

mmmhmmm. all PS2 and xbox games are DVD. Even if they are tiny demo discs.

I think it's interesting that they didn't say the 3 cores were 64-bit capable...

that could be a big part of the affordable equation.

Also, it says that the cores will be able to do 2 operations per clock...is that something the current G5 does? I wasn't aware.

Other places I've seen (TeamXBox) claimed it was a POWER5 based processor.
This actually makes sense. Remember, the Cell is supposed to have a POWER5 processor at 4.6 GHz, but its EXTREMELY stripped down and gets much less performance per MHz and has no AltiVec. If THIS is what MS is using, then it all makes sense. They run at 3 GHz, but get much less performance per MHz than a G5. So its kinda like having a high-clocked three-core G3 w/64-bit than a three-core G5.

[ddtlm]

benpatient:

I think it's interesting that they didn't say the 3 cores were 64-bit capable...
There's no reason for them to be. Games are not something that benefits from large integers (and clearly the Xbox isn't going to to have a lot of RAM.)

Also, it says that the cores will be able to do 2 operations per clock...is that something the current G5 does? I wasn't aware.
G5's can do more than 2 ops per clock, as can most modern desktop processors.

[Mord]

Uh, PS2 and XBox use DVDs, GameCube uses mini-DVD's at 1.6 GB.
PS1 used CDs.

i'm too old school, remember the N64 when the ps1 and the sega saturn were out?

mmmhmmm. all PS2 and xbox games are DVD. Even if they are tiny demo discs.

no they are not, demo disks tend to be as they have multiple game engines and high quality movie's, look at the disks and you can tell the difference between a cd one and a dvd one, the earlyer the game the more likly it'll be on a cd, if you dont belive me try one in a mac's cd drive.

[andrewfee]

In response to the above post, that's correct; some PS2 games are still on cd (blue bottomed discs) but I believe all Xbox games are on DVDs.

Something that is annoying me though is that, although they've been told that they must use 720p and anti-aliasing, they've been told to ignore framerates and v-sync, which is worrying to say the least. Sure, good developers will care about framerate regardless, but what about the rest of them?

Ever since Xbox developers were told that they could disable v-sync a while back, 99% of the games released since have had it disabled. :(

[Mord]

i know what you mean with the framerate issues, i cant play halo 2 on co-op at 720p without framelag.

[andrewfee]

i know what you mean with the framerate issues, i cant play halo 2 on co-op at 720p without framelag.
Halo 2 only supports 480p ;)
But tons of Xbox games have framerate issues; developers try to push the system too hard. (and it has quite a few design flaws, even though it has a lot of power)

[Mord]

well it still looks fantastic on my tv.

[oingoboingo]

i'm too old school, remember the N64 when the ps1 and the sega saturn were out?

I'm feeling old now. I remember getting an Atari 2600 for Christmas. Not the smaller, sleek reissued version either. The original clunker, with the ribbed plastic top and the fake wood grain front strip.

[Symtex]

I'm feeling old now. I remember getting an Atari 2600 for Christmas. Not the smaller, sleek reissued version either. The original clunker, with the ribbed plastic top and the fake wood grain front strip.

Those were the gool ol' days. I also remember the coleco that came out afterward. It was all about donkey kong and burger time.

[saunders45]

Cell processor.... biggest joke of all time. The thing is, the "cell" processor is also going to have to handle video, sound, and normal processing in the PS3. It isn't going to have a dedicated GPU. Think of it as an emachine 4.6 celeron w/ intel integrated video, and sound. Yeah, there's your PS3.

No blu-ray or HD-DVD. Whoopty freakin' doo. First, it'll cost a fortune, second, nobody knows which format will become standard. third, who cares. How many blu-ray/hd-dvds do you have. Also, how many of you actually own an HD-TV. See what i mean? Most people dont.

256 mb ram? You have to remember, thats a crapload for a console. the xbox has 64mb, the ps2 has 32 and the gamecube has 48. Geez, the freakin' N64 had 4MB. All this means is that apple will have to include 512 in all their systems now. Can't have an xbox having more ram now, can we?

;)

[Stike]

I wonder really about the heat/power consumption/cooling issue.
This CPU here is called a three-core PPC... ever heard of this? Why three and not 2 or 4? Three sound so... odd... :o

I also wonder what PPC was the father of this... the G3? G4? G5? Power 4 or 5? Hmmm... any ideas?

[dubbz]

Cell processor.... biggest joke of all time. The thing is, the "cell" processor is also going to have to handle video, sound, and normal processing in the PS3. It isn't going to have a dedicated GPU. Think of it as an emachine 4.6 celeron w/ intel integrated video, and sound. Yeah, there's your PS3.


Uhm.. what? I'm pretty sure NVIDIA is doing the GPU (http://ps2.ign.com/articles/571/571460p1.html?fromint=1) for the PS3.

[TDM21]

I'm feeling old now. I remember getting an Atari 2600 for Christmas. Not the smaller, sleek reissued version either. The original clunker, with the ribbed plastic top and the fake wood grain front strip.

I still have my sisters Atari 2600, the exact one you describe. The machine still works flawlessly, even better then my NES. I remember games like Combat, Pac-Man, and Pole Position... Those were the days.

[ddtlm]

Stike:

This CPU here is called a three-core PPC... ever heard of this? Why three and not 2 or 4? Three sound so... odd... I also wonder what PPC was the father of this... the G3? G4? G5? Power 4 or 5? Hmmm... any ideas?
Also, they share an L2 cache, something which most multi-core products appear not to be doing. The only other stats we know (from that article) are that it clocks at 3ghz and can do 2 ops per cycle (per core I presume). The clockspeed pretty much rules out anything that bears much resemblance to a G3 or G4, but only 2 ops per clock is much weaker than a G5 core. IBM may have cooked up a special "lean" G5/power4 core. (Actually they must have, how else can it possibly run cool enough for a console?) Overall this sounds pretty strange to me.

[GFLPraxis]

Cell processor.... biggest joke of all time. The thing is, the "cell" processor is also going to have to handle video, sound, and normal processing in the PS3. It isn't going to have a dedicated GPU. Think of it as an emachine 4.6 celeron w/ intel integrated video, and sound. Yeah, there's your PS3.

There is no official word on that- the PS3 is supposed to have an NVidia GPU.

No blu-ray or HD-DVD. Whoopty freakin' doo. First, it'll cost a fortune, second, nobody knows which format will become standard. third, who cares. How many blu-ray/hd-dvds do you have. Also, how many of you actually own an HD-TV. See what i mean? Most people dont.

HD-DVD and Blu-Ray don't have to do with HDTV, it has to do with the amount of space on the disks.

30 GB (HD) vs 54 GB (BR) vs 7 GB?

The NR and PS3, both of which are coming out in 2003, will have HD-DVD and Blu-ray, respectively.

Since they're going to run at 720p resolutions, textures will be HUGE compared to previous gen consoles, and ingame movies will also take up tons of space.

7 GB is going to be a HUGE bottleneck.


256 mb ram? You have to remember, thats a crapload for a console. the xbox has 64mb, the ps2 has 32 and the gamecube has 48. Geez, the freakin' N64 had 4MB. All this means is that apple will have to include 512 in all their systems now. Can't have an xbox having more ram now, can we?

;)

Nintendo has supposedly been debating whether to use 256 MB or 512 MB.

When you're dealing with textures this huge, 256 MB is reasonable, not a crapload.

[raggedjimmi]

"liek ZOMG! M$ suxxors. PS3 will haev teh best!!!11 video and fasterst brian!"

all im bothered about is good games which puts me in the minority of game players.

if something as downright amazing as Halo 1 struts its stuff on the Xbox 2 then w00t, ill buy for that game alone (all i bought Xbox 1 for).

Sony and Microsoft REALLY need mascots though. pretty much every PS2 game winds up on a nintendo machine of some sort nowadays (metal gear, splinter cell, GTA, final fantasy etc...) EDIT: Tekken is theirs.

whatever Zelda, Metroid and dare i say Mario, Pokemon and Animal Crossing come out for i will buy that machine.

[saunders45]

Uhm.. what? I'm pretty sure NVIDIA is doing the GPU (http://ps2.ign.com/articles/571/571460p1.html?fromint=1) for the PS3.

But its integrated. The Cpu will still be doing a most of the graphics processing. My moms emachine has an Nvidia geforce 4 mx, integrated. The CPU does all the processing, and it shares the system ram.

Also, this 4.6GHz number, still speculation. I justt don't buy it. Sounds the same as apple when they said 3 ghz G5 in a year.

[benpatient]

wow. you are flat ignorant about this aren't you?

:)

You could have an "integrated" GeForce Ultra 6800 on your motherboard, and it would scream.

being "integrated" doesn't make it bad by default....it's WHAT has been integrated that matters...and a GeForce 2mx with no dedicated texture memory isn't much to look at.

I'm not really surprised by the speeds, just that they are possible to achieve in high enough yields that the consoles will not cost 1000 dollars or more.

As to the developers being told not to worry about framerates, that sounds to me like the developers aren't working on machines that will be as fast as the finished console. OOOR, it could mean that there will be "upgrades" to the console that will provide better performance...For example, something that "enables true 720p support" or something like that. An HD Add-on kit. If the games are written to acknowledge 720p, then you jest need an adapter that goes into a slot/port of some kind...like the PS 2 HD slot. They're already saying that the HD in the xenon will be optional...meaning you can buy one later on as an upgrade...sounds like they are having a tough time getting the price down...

[kuyu]

The system sounds quite impressive. As for the processors, I wouldn't think that the cache or instruction cycles will act as a bottleneck. When an OS is specifically designed for a piece of hardware, it runs MUCH faster than one that is not. Case in point: Apple OSX verses XP. My 700Mhz G4 is more responsive than my AMD Athlon 64-bit 3000+.

The gfx chip should do amazing things. My gaming PC has an X800 Pro, and it looks phenomenal. I run HL2 at 1280x1024 anti-aliased with high framerates. Go look at some nvidia screen shots of Far Cry with Shader 3.0... Unbelievable.

The choice to go with DVD instead of HD-DVD or Blu-ray is smart, IMO. One of those formats will become standard. It's kind of silly to choose one now and hope that it wins the media battle. They can always sell USB2.0 add-on drive later, if they want.

Also, using the HDD as a buffer for game data is a REALLY smart move. I wonder where they got this idea... (Modded Xbox's load games from the HDD about twice as fast as normal games).

My only gripe is that their's no mention of 802.11a/b/g. This could be a deal breaker. Note to Microsoft personel reading this thread: The only reason I cancelled my Live subscription was the inconvienence on running all that cat-5 cable. My cable modem is in the office, not the living room.

For those who are interested, here are some early builds of the kind of graphics we can expect from Xenon.
http://www.microsoft.com/xna/multimedia.aspx

[GFLPraxis]

You could have an "integrated" GeForce Ultra 6800 on your motherboard, and it would scream.
As long as the integrated card has VRAM, I agree.

[GFLPraxis]

The choice to go with DVD instead of HD-DVD or Blu-ray is smart, IMO. One of those formats will become standard. It's kind of silly to choose one now and hope that it wins the media battle.

Does it actually MATTER which one wins?

Okay, you choose HD-DVD for your games. Blu-ray wins and becomes the standard for high def DVD MOVIES. So your console doesn't play HD movies. Big deal. You still have 30 GB disks for your games!

You choose normal DVD, you can't play HD movies either, AND you can't put more than 7 GB on the disks.

The one that wins is the one that becomes standard for movies. It doesn't matter which one wins when it comes to game consoles.

[GFLPraxis]

But its integrated. The Cpu will still be doing a most of the graphics processing. My moms emachine has an Nvidia geforce 4 mx, integrated. The CPU does all the processing, and it shares the system ram.

Also, this 4.6GHz number, still speculation. I justt don't buy it. Sounds the same as apple when they said 3 ghz G5 in a year.

Dude, ALL the consoles have integrated chips.
As long as the integrated chip has VRAM it should perform exactly the same as a normal chip. If it doesn't have VRAM, but the system has more RAM than it needs and its VERY fast RAM, it should also do good.

I actually believe the 4.6 GHz number. But remember, this is a new POWER5 core, that only does 2 calculations per clock, has no on-processor cache, and has no AltiVec.

So its more of a high-clocked cacheless 64-bit G3 that does less calculations per clock cycle than even a normal G3.

So while its 4.6 GHz, its certainly not going to perform like a 4.6 GHz G5.
But its only one of the cores, remember.


I don't especially care.

In terms of graphics, PS3 will have the best, Nintendo Revolution 2nd, XBox 2 third. Thats judging from the order they come out in (and all three are using IBM procs anyway, so there shouldn't be that big a gap).

I'm buying the NR unless Nintendo finds some way to completely screw it up (doubtful, from the way they've commented on every mistake they've made with the GameCube and have specificly stated that they have plans to rectify each one- and from the rumors, it looks like they've done it right), because Nintendo games rule.

If I have a lot of money after buying a HDTV (member of immediate family works at Best Buy...) and a Nintendo Revolution, I may later on buy a PS3.

[saunders45]

wow. you are flat ignorant about this aren't you?

:)

I'll ignore that. :rolleyes:

You could have an "integrated" GeForce Ultra 6800 on your motherboard, and it would scream.

Not if the cpu is being is being used for all other functions. Give me two identical systems, only difference being that one has the video chip onboard, and it will be slower.

[Mord]

if the gpu has access to vram of equal speed it will be the same speed.

[GFLPraxis]

if the gpu has access to vram of equal speed it will be the same speed.

Like Hector says.

If the GPU has its own VRAM, it doesn't matter if its integrated (aka built into the motherboard- Integrated does not mean it uses system ram, it just means its built in to the mobo) or uses an AGP slot.

All consoles use integrated cards. All of them. Because its cheaper to have the card as part of the motherboard (and takes less space).

[DavidLeblond]

Does it actually MATTER which one wins?

Okay, you choose HD-DVD for your games. Blu-ray wins and becomes the standard for high def DVD MOVIES. So your console doesn't play HD movies. Big deal. You still have 30 GB disks for your games!

You choose normal DVD, you can't play HD movies either, AND you can't put more than 7 GB on the disks.

The one that wins is the one that becomes standard for movies. It doesn't matter which one wins when it comes to game consoles.

Nothing really to say about the console wars, but in regards to the DVD vs HD-DVD vs Blu-ray... remember when a "large game" was a game that came on more than one floppy disk?

And after that, I remember getting 7th Guest for the PC and going "this game must be HUGE... its on TWO CDS!!!!"

Now I'm reading about 7 GB DVDs being a "bottleneck."

I'm going to go play King's Quest I.

[saunders45]

I doubt that we will be filling HD-DVD's and blu Ray DVD's for games anytime in the next, oh 5 years. Thats why using regular DVD-9's is a smart move. Plus, most consumers don't care. Most still think Madden is new and innovative year after year. Hence the business side of it all. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[TEG]

Excuse Me!

*Pulls Soap Box from Behind Desk*

*Steps on top of Soap Box*

X-Box live is a Rip-off!!!!
I have used X-Box Live, and PS2 Online Games, and find a much better experience using the PS2 Games Online vs. the X-Box Live Games.

1) Online Gaming on PS2 is Free, $0, Nada
2) Better game Options Except HALO, but really I enjoy my Socom Online
3) Not Microsoft!!!!!

*Steps off Soap Box, Picks it up and throws it at Bill Gates, breaking his glasses*

Anyway, Nintendo will again mop the floor in terms of technology, it may not be *AS* popular, but it will rock, and I will own one.

TEG

[TDM21]

Excuse Me!

*Pulls Soap Box from Behind Desk*

*Steps on top of Soap Box*

X-Box live is a Rip-off!!!!
I have used X-Box Live, and PS2 Online Games, and find a much better experience using the PS2 Games Online vs. the X-Box Live Games.

1) Online Gaming on PS2 is Free, $0, Nada
2) Better game Options Except HALO, but really I enjoy my Socom Online
3) Not Microsoft!!!!!

*Steps off Soap Box, Picks it up and throws it at Bill Gates, breaking his glasses*

Anyway, Nintendo will again mop the floor in terms of technology, it may not be *AS* popular, but it will rock, and I will own one.

TEG


Whoah, take it down a notch.

Actually, I think xbox live was a good idea. You have deddicated servers for all the online games being ran by one company in one location (ok putting it that way really makes it sound like something could go wrong, but it hasn't). Sure there is a subscription fee ($60 a year) but most people pay that much for broadband a month to use the service. Also Have you noticed how many people play with xbox live compared to playing PS2 online? There is no comparison. Microsoft hit it right with xbox live. The PS2 and NGC really missed the online community (except for those few people playing MMORPGS and some EA titles) requiring the game makers to run their own servers.

[saunders45]

Whoah, take it down a notch.

Actually, I think xbox live was a good idea. You have deddicated servers for all the online games being ran by one company in one location (ok putting it that way really makes it sound like something could go wrong, but it hasn't). Sure there is a subscription fee ($60 a year) but most people pay that much for broadband a month to use the service. Also Have you noticed how many people play with xbox live compared to playing PS2 online? There is no comparison. Microsoft hit it right with xbox live. The PS2 and NGC really missed the online community (except for those few people playing MMORPGS and some EA titles) requiring the game makers to run their own servers.

I agree.

How one could say that the ps2 online service is better than xbox live is mind boggling. Xbox live is the reason I sold my PS2. I can't count the number of crappy games of madden, Socom, and everquest that have just sucked online. Xbox live is completely superior in all aspects, expecially cheating. I don't know how many times in Socom 1 and 2 I saw guys running around with scoped and silenced m60's, glitching through walls, and simply being retards ruining it for everyone else. And don't even get me started on lag. way to many modem users on Sony Online, screws everyone over.

[AppleAce]

I still have my sisters Atari 2600, the exact one you describe. The machine still works flawlessly, even better then my NES. I remember games like Combat, Pac-Man, and Pole Position... Those were the days.

Combat is the best! Well, except for Air-Sea Battle, Steeplechase, and Warlords

[GFLPraxis]

Nothing really to say about the console wars, but in regards to the DVD vs HD-DVD vs Blu-ray... remember when a "large game" was a game that came on more than one floppy disk?

And after that, I remember getting 7th Guest for the PC and going "this game must be HUGE... its on TWO CDS!!!!"

Now I'm reading about 7 GB DVDs being a "bottleneck."

I'm going to go play King's Quest I.

For next generation HD designed games, it is.

Remember when Billy said nobody will ever use more than 600k?

[GFLPraxis]

I doubt that we will be filling HD-DVD's and blu Ray DVD's for games anytime in the next, oh 5 years. Thats why using regular DVD-9's is a smart move. Plus, most consumers don't care. Most still think Madden is new and innovative year after year. Hence the business side of it all. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

People said the same thing when the GameCube was using 1.6 GB disks vs 4.7 for everybody else.

[GFLPraxis]

Excuse Me!

*Pulls Soap Box from Behind Desk*

*Steps on top of Soap Box*

X-Box live is a Rip-off!!!!
I have used X-Box Live, and PS2 Online Games, and find a much better experience using the PS2 Games Online vs. the X-Box Live Games.

1) Online Gaming on PS2 is Free, $0, Nada
2) Better game Options Except HALO, but really I enjoy my Socom Online
3) Not Microsoft!!!!!

*Steps off Soap Box, Picks it up and throws it at Bill Gates, breaking his glasses*

Anyway, Nintendo will again mop the floor in terms of technology, it may not be *AS* popular, but it will rock, and I will own one.

TEG

True, true. I don't have to pay a dime for my PC games online, nor do PS2 and GameCubers who go online have to pay (I have never hooked up a console online, if the Revolution has wireless it will be my first).

I detest pay-to-play schemes like XBox Live.

[ddtlm]

GFLPraxis:

I actually believe the 4.6 GHz number. But remember, this is a new POWER5 core, that only does 2 calculations per clock, has no on-processor cache, and has no AltiVec.
Totally unrealistic, on many levels:
1) The Power5 does not clock anywhere near that speed and there's nothing to indicate that it could.
2) The current 970fx needs liquid cooling at 2.5ghz, for just a single core, and thermal ouput increases faster than clockspeeds.
3) A processor without on-die cache would be insane in this day and age.
4) They say the Xbox chip does two ops per cycle. The Power5 is way above that. Why would they base this on a Power5, then?
5) The Xbox needs something cheap, that can be cooled cheaply and powered cheaply.

So its more of a high-clocked cacheless 64-bit G3 that does less calculations per clock cycle than even a normal G3.
So that makes it not a G3 at all. Also, what would be the point of 64-bitness in a gaming console?

So while its 4.6 GHz, its certainly not going to perform like a 4.6 GHz G5.
At this insane clockspeed its gona be molten, yet performance is gona be lame. They would have had to have designed it like this custom, since no existing core anywhere can clock that high without cooling systems that make the one on the 2.5ghz G5s look conventional. Anyone possessing a passing familiarity with CPUs can see that Intel has shown super-clocking is not the correct direction. Massively long pipelines require massive hardware to keep them busy, and the whole thing seems to end up looking like a train wreck.

But its only one of the cores, remember.
Yeah, so that multiplies your cooling problems.

[eXan]

"Anyway, Nintendo will again mop the floor in terms of technology, it may not be *AS* popular, but it will rock, and I will own one."

Remember how Macs are good and then remember their market share :D

PCs are VERY popular, which doesn't make them be better than Macs :)

[takao]

True, true. I don't have to pay a dime for my PC games online, nor do PS2 and GameCubers who go online have to pay (I have never hooked up a console online, if the Revolution has wireless it will be my first).

I detest pay-to-play schemes like XBox Live.

i second that...thats the reason i simply ignored world of war craft or any other MMPORPG games where you have to pay per month ...

[Tuttle]

Combat is the best! Well, except for Air-Sea Battle, Steeplechase, and Warlords

Playing Warlords for cash is the most intense gaming experience I ever had. Four people put their cash down, last man alive takes it.

[GFLPraxis]

GFLPraxis:


Totally unrealistic, on many levels:
1) The Power5 does not clock anywhere near that speed and there's nothing to indicate that it could.
2) The current 970fx needs liquid cooling at 2.5ghz, for just a single core, and thermal ouput increases faster than clockspeeds.
3) A processor without on-die cache would be insane in this day and age.
4) They say the Xbox chip does two ops per cycle. The Power5 is way above that. Why would they base this on a Power5, then?
5) The Xbox needs something cheap, that can be cooled cheaply and powered cheaply.

Ugh, I'm getting PS3 and XB2 mixed up again.

PS3 is POWER5 based.
XB2 is just some custom PPC processor with a mere two ops per clock cycle.


So that makes it not a G3 at all. Also, what would be the point of 64-bitness in a gaming console?


The fact that its a custom PPC processor based off the G5 gives it 64-bitness.


At this insane clockspeed its gona be molten, yet performance is gona be lame. They would have had to have designed it like this custom, since no existing core anywhere can clock that high without cooling systems that make the one on the 2.5ghz G5s look conventional. Anyone possessing a passing familiarity with CPUs can see that Intel has shown super-clocking is not the correct direction. Massively long pipelines require massive hardware to keep them busy, and the whole thing seems to end up looking like a train wreck.


Yeah, so that multiplies your cooling problems.



Ouch.



BTW, Apple claims a 2.5 GHz G5 can output 9 gigaflops.
Since these PPCs are 2 calcs per clock cycle, I'd assume that each of these 3 GHz cores get 2x3 = 6 gigaflops, correct?

6x3 = 18, so collectively, they get about 18 gigaflops.

Thats about the same as a dual 2.5.

Of course, SMP overheads, cache, bus speed, possibly lack of AltiVec (I can't remember if it was the PS3 or the XBox 2 which lacked AltiVec), and the fact that the XBox 2 won't have an audio processor (so that'll have to go to one of the processor cores) will all make a difference, so while the theoretical numbers are the same, overall the XBox 2 will probably be a little slower than a dual 2.5 GHz G5.

Yay! We've successfully cut through the hype.

I found another site claiming TERAFLOP outputs for the XBox 2 :eek: :rolleyes:

Rumor (completely rumored, nothing official at all) has it that the Nintendo Revolution will have dual 1.8 GHz G5's. I wonder how that will compare...

[Mord]

can i just hammer it into everyone's head, the 2.5GHz G5 dose not need watercooling apple used it just to be quiet rather than haveing annother MDD noise problem on there hands, the 2.5GHz 970fx dissipates the same amount of heat as the 2GHz 970, 50w just over a slightly smaller surface area.

[TrenchMouth]

You know what's funny? For all the complaining and fanboyism that comes out of some console loyalists when you look at the three of them...they all perform on the same level. Yes, the Xbox is technically the most powerful, but take a look at Resident Evil 4, or GT4, or Tekken 5. All of these machines are capable of pumping out some crazy good stuff.

I expect the next generation to be the same. They are going to be light-years beyond the three currently out there, and while one will technically be the most powerful, they will all be capable of amazing things. I am excited about Nintendo's next console having computer monitor compatibility (am I the only person that heard about that? I assume not.) and all three should be heavily integrated with some sort of online account. If there were an online community of Animal Crossing players, and they could chat, and whatnot, I would be instantly sold.

Whatever the case, remember how much hype there was about the Emotion Engine in the PS2. It really doesnt matter what they say it will do. What it comes down to for me is media, and online connectivity. Support for Live being manditory is pretty awesome. Using DVDs, not so awesome, but not THAT big of a deal. HD-DVD and Blue-Ray sound great, and from what I understand, they will also be faster in terms of data transfer. Granted there will be more to transfer, this is still pretty cool. Load times bother me, and Nintendo pretty much seemed to nail that one this time around the best out of the three.

[ddtlm]

GFLPraxis:

Ah, good you were thinking PS3 not Xbox2. I guess we're OK then. ;)

Hector:

You can engage in pointless conjecture about what sort of massive copper heatsink and fan could have worked instead, but the fact is that Apple had to water cool the thing in order to meet people's idea of an acceptable desktop machine. No matter what spin you put on it, we're still talking about record-setting thermal densities. Presumably not all 2.5ghz G5's need water cooling, and presumably the number that do has been dropping, but the fact remains that you're wasting your time argueing against it.

So, lemme say it again for you. "The 2.5ghz G5 needs watercooling."

[GFLPraxis]

Hector:

You can engage in pointless conjecture about what sort of massive copper heatsink and fan could have worked instead, but the fact is that Apple had to water cool the thing in order to meet people's idea of an acceptable desktop machine. No matter what spin you put on it, we're still talking about record-setting thermal densities. Presumably not all 2.5ghz G5's need water cooling, and presumably the number that do has been dropping, but the fact remains that you're wasting your time argueing against it.

So, lemme say it again for you. "The 2.5ghz G5 needs watercooling."

Especially when you consider that a set-top console is supposed to be much smaller than a PowerMac.
That would be even harder to cool.

Unless the XBox 2 is going to be a gigantic paperweight again, like last time. That thing was ridiculously big. :( Sony and MS need to take a hint from the GameCube in terms of size, weight, and form factor.

[Abstract]

Does it bother anyone that this new XBox, probably being sold at a loss, might be faster than a brand new expensive Mac? :eek:

[GFLPraxis]

Does it bother anyone that this new XBox, probably being sold at a loss, might be faster than a brand new expensive Mac? :eek:

About equal speed to a brand new PowerMac, and better graphics card.
But remember- no hard drive, less RAM, no expansion slots, no upgradeability, none of the ports, and no burners.

And its not coming out until the end of this year, so by the time it comes out the current PowerMacs will be outdated :)

Not faster than, though. My calcs above show that its theoretical maximum is the same as a dual 2.5 GHz G5, and its actual speeds will probably be considerably less less due to SMT overheads, the fact that it does the audio processing instead of having a sound card, and other factors.

[nagromme]

Alpha 2 developer kits currently have two cores instead of three.
Would those dual-PowerPC developer kits happen to be... Power Macs by any chance? :D


Does it bother anyone that this new XBox, probably being sold at a loss, might be faster than a brand new expensive Mac? :eek:
And faster than a more-expensive PC too. But unable to run Windows or Mac software, so I'll call it a game machine :)

[ddtlm]

nagromme:

Would those dual-PowerPC developer kits happen to be... Power Macs by any chance?
Well you can bet they didn't invent a new processor to play development kit. ;)

GFLPraxis:

Yeah IBM has their work cut out for them, getting a 3-cored PPC running at 3ghz within a reasonable thermal ceiling. I'll be very interested to see what they come up with. I wonder if its the sort of chip (in dual cored form) that could end up in an Apple laptop. Hmmm.

[stephenli]

ok now the question is...
which one would have better performance? Cell or CPU for XBox2 or CPU for Nintendo Revolution? All are from IBM!!!

[Evangelion]

But its integrated. The Cpu will still be doing a most of the graphics processing.

You REALLY have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

My moms emachine has an Nvidia geforce 4 mx, integrated. The CPU does all the processing, and it shares the system ram.

So what's the point in having the GF4 MX in there if the CPU does all the work? Seriously, you are not making any sense and you are just embarrasing yourself!

And there's nothing wrong with sharing system-RAM as such. Problem has been that dedicated RAM has been so much faster than system-RAM has been. But that fact hasn't bothered Xbox or PS2 one bit. Xbox seems to be doing just fine, even with shared RAM. Why wouldn't PS3 (with alot faster RAM) do worse?

Let me explain this to you:

PS3 will have Cell-processor. And it will also have NVIDIA-made GPU. The GPU will handle the graphics, while the Cell handles the CPU-tasks. Now, you could theoretically use the Cell for some graphics-related tasks, but why should you since it already has a dedicated GPU?

[Evangelion]

Not if the cpu is being is being used for all other functions. Give me two identical systems, only difference being that one has the video chip onboard, and it will be slower.

So you claim that the system with dedicated hardware to handle graphics will be slower than a system that does not have such hardware? O....K..... By that logic, surely software-rendered 3D-game is faster (and more pleasing to the eye) than very same game that uses hardware 3D-acceleration instead?

[Abstract]

And faster than a more-expensive PC too. But unable to run Windows or Mac software, so I'll call it a game machine :)

Yes, but my point was that despite not having a sound card or ports, those things aren't exactly the most expensive parts of a PowerMac. I mean, it just goes to show you that a dual 2.5Ghz PM can be made much cheaper, and probably a bit smaller. A PM is just an XBox with ports, an HD, and an audio card. The expandability of a system is not really an expense to them. Its a choice. Apple CHOSE not to let users do much with a Mac Mini. If you pay them money, they'll allow you to spend more money and upgrade your system. Its like paying for air.

Again, if the only truly major differences are a bunch of ports, an HD, and RAM upgradeability, it says alot about this XBox (ie: it's frickin sweet!). And this thing will probably cost $1000- $1500 less than a PM. That's the price we pay for a few ports and an HD and RAM slots in a PowerMac.

[Yvan256]

Their only hope is that they can pull a PS2 and grab the market before the others come out. But the PS2 had a full years' lead over the others, while the XBox 2 will only have a couple of months.

Remember that the PS2 is also backward-compatible with the PS1. The Xbox2 isn't backward-compatible, last time I heard.

[wPod]

sounds like a powerful machine. i wonder how long it will be until people have created mods and set up pretty powerful unix machines on them (that is adding a little more than the 256MB RAM that is speculated to be in them!!)

[Tuttle]

Powerful? I don't think so.

Now that the real specs are finally coming out, it should be obvious to everyone why MS has been so desperate to try to downplay performance in their public comments. The PS3 is going to obliterate this thing.

[Symtex]

Powerful? I don't think so.

Now that the real specs are finally coming out, it should be obvious to everyone why MS has been so desperate to try to downplay performance in their public comments. The PS3 is going to obliterate this thing.

Based of what ? Sony's hype ? LMAO ! Do you believe in Santa Claus too ?

[SPUY767]

Would those dual-PowerPC developer kits happen to be... Power Macs by any chance? :D



And faster than a more-expensive PC too. But unable to run Windows or Mac software, so I'll call it a game machine :)

I am in the loop so to speak. Dev Kits are dual 2G G5s. A little known fact is that the Gamecube actually produced the best graphics of the three systems, one exception being less disk space resulting in more highly compressed textures and thus producing jaggies at high scale rates. (see the "curved" lines on samus' suit in metroid). As far as PPS (polygons per second) and TPS(texels per second) the gamecube was slightly ahead of both the PS2 and the XBOX.

[1macker1]

The new Xbox will have a removable hard drive. So if you want to spend the extra bucks you can. I wall be getting a full featured one a few months after it's released. I think the console wars will be close this time, Sony isn't gonig to have the same advantage they had last time. The playing field is level....let the best console win.

PS
256M is HUGE for a gaming console.

[Tuttle]

Based of what ? Sony's hype ? LMAO ! Do you believe in Santa Claus too ?

Based on my over a decade of work in the console biz.

Go away little fanboy.

[Symtex]

I am in the loop so to speak. Dev Kits are dual 2G G5s. A little known fact is that the Gamecube actually produced the best graphics of the three systems, one exception being less disk space resulting in more highly compressed textures and thus producing jaggies at high scale rates. (see the "curved" lines on samus' suit in metroid). As far as PPS (polygons per second) and TPS(texels per second) the gamecube was slightly ahead of both the PS2 and the XBOX.

Lack of RAM and disk space didn't help gamecube. Also the gamecube didn't support Digital 5.1 sounds. The machine itself was very good. had no complaint with that.

[Symtex]

Based on my over a decade of work in the console biz.

Go away little fanboy.

Let me guess, you still believe that PS2 is more powerfull then xbox also ? I've read all documents regarding the "Cell processor" . If you think that PS3 will be leaps and beyond more powerfull then xbox2, you are wrong. Will it have more teraflops, it is possible in theory, I think that both console will have similar tech specs. Except for the Blue-ray dvd players.

[1macker1]

This still doesn't back up your statement.
Based on my over a decade of work in the console biz.

Go away little fanboy.

[joshua_msu]

Are there any tentative/theoretical dates that the new Xbox might come out?

[Tuttle]

Let me guess, you still believe that PS2 is more powerfull then xbox also ? I've read all documents regarding the "Cell processor" . If you think that PS3 will be leaps and beyond more powerfull then xbox2, you are wrong. Will it have more teraflops, it is possible in theory, I think that both console will have similar tech specs. Except for the Blue-ray dvd players.

Ok, you believe that.

:confused:

[Yvan256]

As long as the integrated card has VRAM, I agree.

The question is: can the ATI or nVidia GPUs share memory with anything at all? Doesn't ATI or nVidia GPU implies dedicated memory?

[Yvan256]

Not if the cpu is being is being used for all other functions.

What exactly do you mean? Of course the CPU always does "all other functions"! Having your GPU and VRAM on an AGP card or soldered on the motherboard doesn't make any difference as long as the specs are the same!

Give me two identical systems, only difference being that one has the video chip onboard, and it will be slower.

If the two systems are identical (same GPU, same VRAM, same bus, same everything), the two system will be exactly the same speed.

[sinisterdesign]

Those were the gool ol' days. I also remember the coleco that came out afterward. It was all about donkey kong and burger time.

donkey kong JUNIOR, baby. i LOVED my coleco. that was the closest thing to arcade quality at the time. anyone else get that bruise in their palm just above their thumb from those damn joysticks??

i can't wait to see what kind of graphics these next gen systems are going to be capable of. i'm still amazed at what comes out of my 3 year old Xbox on the high-def widescreen Wega.

maybe they'll bring back donkey kong junior... :p

[corywoolf]

The system sounds quite impressive. As for the processors, I wouldn't think that the cache or instruction cycles will act as a bottleneck. When an OS is specifically designed for a piece of hardware, it runs MUCH faster than one that is not. Case in point: Apple OSX verses XP. My 700Mhz G4 is more responsive than my AMD Athlon 64-bit 3000+.

The gfx chip should do amazing things. My gaming PC has an X800 Pro, and it looks phenomenal. I run HL2 at 1280x1024 anti-aliased with high framerates. Go look at some nvidia screen shots of Far Cry with Shader 3.0... Unbelievable.

The choice to go with DVD instead of HD-DVD or Blu-ray is smart, IMO. One of those formats will become standard. It's kind of silly to choose one now and hope that it wins the media battle. They can always sell USB2.0 add-on drive later, if they want.

Also, using the HDD as a buffer for game data is a REALLY smart move. I wonder where they got this idea... (Modded Xbox's load games from the HDD about twice as fast as normal games).

My only gripe is that their's no mention of 802.11a/b/g. This could be a deal breaker. Note to Microsoft personel reading this thread: The only reason I cancelled my Live subscription was the inconvienence on running all that cat-5 cable. My cable modem is in the office, not the living room.

For those who are interested, here are some early builds of the kind of graphics we can expect from Xenon.
http://www.microsoft.com/xna/multimedia.aspx


just buy the linksys wifi card for it or get the expensive $100 microsoft one. ms one is 802.11g while the linksys is 802.11b

[racolvin]

If the Xbox2 is PPC based, will that make it easier to port those games to a Mac?

[GFLPraxis]

nagromme:


Well you can bet they didn't invent a new processor to play development kit. ;)

GFLPraxis:

Yeah IBM has their work cut out for them, getting a 3-cored PPC running at 3ghz within a reasonable thermal ceiling. I'll be very interested to see what they come up with. I wonder if its the sort of chip (in dual cored form) that could end up in an Apple laptop. Hmmm.

That'd be horrible. It'd cause terrible customer confusion with the MHz Myth (remember, each of these 3 GHz chips are slower than a 1.8 GHz G5).

It'd Apple just use normal, higher performance per MHz, lower clocked dua core G5s.

[GFLPraxis]

ok now the question is...
which one would have better performance? Cell or CPU for XBox2 or CPU for Nintendo Revolution? All are from IBM!!!

Yep, tough one.

ACCORDING TO RUMOR, Nintendo is supposed to be using normal G5's (dual 1.8, according to completely uncomfirmed rumor).
XBox 2 is using super stripped down G5's, but ramping up the clock speed.
PS3 will probably be the most powerful, for the SIMPLE REASON that it is the last to come out.

Here's something funnier:
Both the XBox 2 and Nintendo Revolution are using ATi Graphics chips AND IBM CPUs!

I'm not sure which will have the better CPU, but I suspect the Nintendo Revolution will have a better graphics card simply because, they're getting the same thing only Nintendo's is coming later, so it'll have a newer version.

[GFLPraxis]

Remember that the PS2 is also backward-compatible with the PS1. The Xbox2 isn't backward-compatible, last time I heard.

It doesn't really seem possible, does it?

IBM has changed almost every chip in the system.

They removed the sound card.
They changed the graphics card from NVidia to ATi.
They changed the processor architecture from x86 (Intel) to PowerPC (IBM).
They removed the hard drive (making it impossible to run games that utilize it).

They'd have to emulate nearly every single chip on the XBox 1 to run XBox 1 games. With a mere 256 MB of RAM. And the hard drive would still pose a problem.

So I'm suspecting no backwards compatability.

[midifarm]

No blu-ray or HD-DVD. Whoopty freakin' doo. First, it'll cost a fortune, second, nobody knows which format will become standard. third, who cares. How many blu-ray/hd-dvds do you have. Also, how many of you actually own an HD-TV. See what i mean? Most people dont.
;)

I don't think it's a point of immediate usefulness. I think people expect that the next generation gaming console be at the forefront of technology. They want it to be capable of anything allowable by hardware standards. The limitation should be the programming not the processing power.

Think about it this way, the cooler and more hardcore these consoles can become, the less need for Windows. Face it, gaming is what is keeping M$ Windows alive. Office is cross platform now, so what else is there?

Peace

[GFLPraxis]

Based of what ? Sony's hype ? LMAO ! Do you believe in Santa Claus too ?

Not based on Sony's hype, based on the legitamite information we have.

Lets just PRETEND the Cell processor is going to be equal to the others (even though we can reasonably assume it will be better for the simple fact that hey, it won't be out until six months later!).

It will have a newer graphics card.

It will have 7.7 times the disk capacity (7 GB DVDs vs 54 GB Blu-ray).

The Cell processor runs like a normal processor for calculations (the main use for the processor is for physics and AI calculations, so I don't even know why the Cell is going to make such a huge difference), but the one thing it should RIP through like butter is sound processing, so Sony won't need a sound card and shouldn't have the same impact on performance as the XBox 2 will have.


Heck, even the Nintendo Revolution is going to have higher capacity (30 GB vs 7 GB) disks and probably a faster graphics card. And its rumored to have a hard drive. And we KNOW it has wireless.


No, MS is gonna get stomped, unless as I said above, they can pull a PS2. And since they don't have as much of a timeframe advantage, AND don't have backwards compatability, sorry MS.

[GFLPraxis]

The question is: can the ATI or nVidia GPUs share memory with anything at all? Doesn't ATI or nVidia GPU implies dedicated memory?

I believe it has 128 MB VRAM. But some motherboards have integrated Geforce 2s with shared memory, or integrated Radeon 9000s on some laptops.

If the Xbox2 is PPC based, will that make it easier to port those games to a Mac?

Not really, since it will still be running the Windows NT kernel :s

[GFLPraxis]

Let me guess, you still believe that PS2 is more powerfull then xbox also ? I've read all documents regarding the "Cell processor" . If you think that PS3 will be leaps and beyond more powerfull then xbox2, you are wrong. Will it have more teraflops, it is possible in theory, I think that both console will have similar tech specs. Except for the Blue-ray dvd players.

He never SAID the Cell processor will cause Sony to stomp all over the XBox 2. He just said that the other consoles will. AND HE'S RIGHT.

Don't put words in his mouth, he never claimed that the Cell processor was going to be that uber incredible.

The Cell processor will provide some small boosts to rendering (and I mean small, a dedicated GPU is much better at that task), a very good replacement for a sound processor, and absolutely no boosts to physics and AI calculations (which a processor is needed for).


I want to see a game console using those new PPUs (Physics Processing Units) instead of CPUs :)

[Symtex]

Not based on Sony's hype, based on the legitamite information we have.

Lets just PRETEND the Cell processor is going to be equal to the others (even though we can reasonably assume it will be better for the simple fact that hey, it won't be out until six months later!).

It will have a newer graphics card.

It will have 7.7 times the disk capacity (7 GB DVDs vs 54 GB Blu-ray).

The Cell processor runs like a normal processor for calculations (the main use for the processor is for physics and AI calculations, so I don't even know why the Cell is going to make such a huge difference), but the one thing it should RIP through like butter is sound processing, so Sony won't need a sound card and shouldn't have the same impact on performance as the XBox 2 will have.


Heck, even the Nintendo Revolution is going to have higher capacity (30 GB vs 7 GB) disks and probably a faster graphics card. And its rumored to have a hard drive. And we KNOW it has wireless.


No, MS is gonna get stomped, unless as I said above, they can pull a PS2. And since they don't have as much of a timeframe advantage, AND don't have backwards compatability, sorry MS.

I can't argue on disk space. That is a valid argument against MS.

I'm going to go on a limb here and predict that the "dev kit" for PS3 is going to be very complicated. They are already posting on major gaming site that "PlayStation 3 to be easy on developers".
link here : http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/03/09/news_6120123.html .

They are already trying to convince people that it will be easy. This is where I think Sony might failed. Developping tools for Sony playstation have always been very complicated to work with in order to obtain the maximum capabilities of the hardware. Microsoft XNA is going to bring alot of developpers. Some major japenese company that refused to develop on xbox are now switching side.

ATi R500 video card is going to be very comparable to Nvidia Geforce6 card. To believe otherwise is pure none-sense.

[Tuttle]

I can't argue on disk space. That is a valid argument against MS.

I'm going to go on a limb here and predict that the "dev kit" for PS3 is going to be very complicated. They are already posting on major gaming site that "PlayStation 3 to be easy on developers".
link here : http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/03/09/news_6120123.html .

They are already trying to convince people that it will be easy. This is where I think Sony might failed. Developping tools for Sony playstation have always been very complicated to work with in order to obtain the maximum capabilities of the hardware. Microsoft XNA is going to bring alot of developpers. Some major japenese company that refused to develop on xbox are now switching side.

ATi R500 video card is going to be very comparable to Nvidia Geforce6 card. To believe otherwise is pure none-sense.

My god. You are the poster child xbox fanboy.

[GFLPraxis]

ATi R500 video card is going to be very comparable to Nvidia Geforce6 card. To believe otherwise is pure none-sense.

True that they are comparable, except when the NVidia Geforce 6 card is 6 months newer than the ATi R500 card...then the Geforce 6 is probably gonna be more powerful.

[Symtex]

My god. You are the poster child xbox fanboy.

instead of yelling fanboy why don't you come up with some valid argument. I'm not an xbox fanboy,I have all 3 consoles at home.

[SiliconAddict]

God. I only read to page 2 but already I’m amazed. I can’t believe the pissing contest in this thread. Look. Cell, POWER5, dual core, single core, integrated GPU, dedicated VRAM, shared memory architecture, DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-ray, etc.
It’s all BS in the end. The fact of the matter is barring a major f-up; Nintendo, Sony, and MS are all going to deliver systems with jaw dropping graphics, features, and games. It’s sort of like comparing a 50 megaton nuke to a 100 megaton nuke. You are still getting one heck of a result from either even though the numbers are drastically different. Ditto with these consoles. They all are going to deliver some serious gaming in some form or another. The big difference isn’t specs. Its content. It’s always been about content. Nintendo has Mario, Zelda, Metroid. PSX has er been out of loop for a while. Don’t really know what content is PSX only. And obviously you have the Halo gaming console. (There are other games on the X-Box other then Halo? :eek: )
The point is that this hardware discussion is a moot point. Each console is going to have its pros and cons. There hasn't been such a thing as the perfect console up til now and there never will be.
Each manufacturer has a different group of people their console is targeting and consequently builds their consoles to cater to that group of users.

Nintendo has historically focused on kids. Also up til now their systems are pure gaming systems. They haven't tried doing the home entertainment center thing.

Sony and Microsoft are focusing on the adult gamer. Microsoft with XBox 1 tried pushing the home entertainment thing with their offering while Sony just dabbled in it. The fact that you can hook up your X-Box to a home network and access it from your computer is something unprecedented in the industry AFAIK and I expect this to be a major feature in the SP3 and XBox 2. (How XBox 2 is going to get away with not having a HD is beyond me though.)


Question. *checks to make sure he's on a Mac site and not gamespot.com* We are getting a tad off topic don't think?

[Object-X]

I'm feeling old now. I remember getting an Atari 2600 for Christmas. Not the smaller, sleek reissued version either. The original clunker, with the ribbed plastic top and the fake wood grain front strip.

Pong on a black and white TV. :rolleyes:

[SiliconAddict]

instead of yelling fanboy why don't you come up with some valid argument. I'm not an xbox fanboy,I have all 3 consoles at home.

Remember this is an Apple site.
Its a prerequisite to call you a fanboy because you actually like a MS product. :rolleyes:

I like Microsoft mice and joysticks.
*waits for someone to call him a fanboy* :p

[Symtex]

Remember this is an Apple site.
Its a prerequisite to call you a fanboy because you actually like a MS product. :rolleyes:

I like Microsoft mice and joysticks.
*waits for someone to call him a fanboy* :p

I realize that. I always said it was because of Microsoft that I was able to afford my HDTV, My sounds system, 3 gaming console, My PM G5. If Windows XP didn't have all of the flaws I would be out of work.

back to subject :
Microsoft is using a G5 processor has their CPU. I thought that Apple fanatic would be happy about that.

[Richter]

But regular DVD's? lol...

MS is gonna get burned. They're making some of the same mistakes Nintendo did: No hard drive built in, inferior media (I mean, these aren't even 9.4 GB disks, they're only 7 GB- PS3 will have Blu-ray, and the Nintendo Revolution is supposed to have HD-DVD). They're also alienating their previous audience, since before they had the people who wanted the hard drive and the best graphics, and now they'll have no HD and the worst graphics.there's no need to move to HD-DVD or Blu-Ray format. Most XB game disc are still using single layer DVDs. Having a new format into a console this early will only drive up the development (and eventually retail) costs. What would you rather have, a game that comes with 2 dual layer dvds @ $50 or a single disc BR game @ $70?

[JesterJJZ]

ok now the question is...
which one would have better performance? Cell or CPU for XBox2 or CPU for Nintendo Revolution? All are from IBM!!!

I live near the IMB Fishkill plant in NY, I know one of the guys that works there. I asked him about how IBM is making the CPUs for all three systems. He told me that they have completely separate teams working on developing the CPU for each console. It's almost like an in-house competition they are running over there. Just imagine the sneaking and spying that must be happening during lunch breaks. :D

[pmd]

I doubt that we will be filling HD-DVD's and blu Ray DVD's for games anytime in the next, oh 5 years

Sorry, but you're totally wrong there. We developers have been banging up against the limit of DVD for, well, years. The PS2 game I'm working on won't fit on 2 DVDs at the moment - we're having to reorganise our data system to make it fit onto a single DVD.

Games developers will use everything you give them. That's the nature of the industry.

[Symtex]

Sorry, but you're totally wrong there. We developers have been banging up against the limit of DVD for, well, years. The PS2 game I'm working on won't fit on 2 DVDs at the moment - we're having to reorganise our data system to make it fit onto a single DVD.

Games developers will use everything you give them. That's the nature of the industry.

Space is a legitimate concern. The cost of the console too. I think the only things preventing those technology to be release at lauch.

Maybe will have PS3 BR edition and Xbox 2 HD edition for those who wishes to pay an extra $ to have the technology available to them.

[pmd]

Also, what would be the point of 64-bitness in a gaming console?


What, you mean like the PS2? Well, actually the PS2 has 128-bit registers.

What do we use them for? 128-bits is enough to store a nice 4-component vector for you, like a vertex or object position. Or a floating-point RGBA colour value.

64-bits? How about a flags field in a structure where you have more than 32-bit flags. They're very useful.

Of course we don't need 64-bit addressing, but that's not the only reason to have more than 32-bit capability.

[LimeiBook86]

I'm feeling old now. I remember getting an Atari 2600 for Christmas. Not the smaller, sleek reissued version either. The original clunker, with the ribbed plastic top and the fake wood grain front strip.

The sleeker version is the Atari 2600 Jr. which I happily own :D

Just to clear some things up:

Genesis, SNES, NES, GameGear, MasterSystem (and flash cards), ect...use cartridges
Nintendo 64 - Cartridge (up to 32mb)
Sega CD used 500mb (usually limited in space in early games) CD-ROMs had no copy protection ( :eek: )
Sega Saturn used CD-ROMs (650mb)
Sony PlayStation used CD-ROMs (650mb)
Sony PlayStation 2 uses DVD-ROMs (4.4gb formated)
Xbox uses DVD-ROMs (4.4gb formated)
Xbox 2 (The next Xbox) Will probably use the new 'Blue-Ray' type DVD discs or new high-compacity DVDs because the games will most-likely be very large. ;)

[Raveny]

OMG,
since when are consoles as fast or faster than Macs or PCs?

Take a look at the xbox:
it was released on 11/01 and had a 733 stripped down Celeron CPU. Intel had P4 with over 1.5 Ghz.

Gamecube:
release in Japan on 09/01. G3 450 Mhz IBM CPU. This time Apple had 867Mhz processors and a 2x800 G4 processors

PS2:
297 Mhz Emotion Engine, released on 03/00. Intel used to have P3 with 1 Ghz.

etc.
So why is the Next Gen "more powerful" than most PCs or Macs?
I know why! because it's all rumors...
Even IBM servers don't have 3 Ghz Power Processors.. why should a 400$ console have this thing, even if they don't make money of it?!?

[maxvamp]

I know that this is a gaming thread ( on a Mac site ), but I am absolutely intrigued on how versatile the PPC architecture is, and how easily IBM is able to tap dance over the MHz Myth.

I think we are seeing a relatively similar experience to that of the PIV vs. the P-Mobile.

All of this speculation with the Cell vs. 970 vs. whatever this xBox proc will be called continues to lead me to speculate that Apple has a lot of possibilities available to them in yet to be announced processors for future Mac products.

Now, where is my PowerXBoxBook ?? <grin>

Max. :rolleyes:

[PixelFactory]

Think about it this way, the cooler and more hardcore these consoles can become, the less need for Windows. Face it, gaming is what is keeping M$ Windows alive. Office is cross platform now, so what else is there?

I think this is why Microsoft is pushing so hard in the console biz. This generation of consoles really narrows the gap between it and PC gaming.

[Ktulu]

I'm feeling old now. I remember getting an Atari 2600 for Christmas. Not the smaller, sleek reissued version either. The original clunker, with the ribbed plastic top and the fake wood grain front strip.

I still have that very system. It's connected to my bedroom TV right now and still works great. :D

[deputy_doofy]

I still have that very system. It's connected to my bedroom TV right now and still works great. :D

Sadly, my brother took the Atari 2600 and the 200+ cartridges.
However, thanks to Stella (especially the newest version - 1.4.2), I can still play. :D
Emulate (http://emulation.net/)

[sw1tcher]

Remember, the Cell is supposed to have a POWER5 processor at 4.6 GHz, but its EXTREMELY stripped down and gets much less performance per MHz and has no AltiVec. If THIS is what MS is using, then it all makes sense. They run at 3 GHz, but get much less performance per MHz than a G5.

Oh, I see. Kinda like the Pentium 4... :D

[GFLPraxis]

God. I only read to page 2 but already I’m amazed. I can’t believe the pissing contest in this thread. Look. Cell, POWER5, dual core, single core, integrated GPU, dedicated VRAM, shared memory architecture, DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-ray, etc.


Actually, I highly recommend you finish reading Page 2, because we figured out everything about the processor type. Its not POWER5, just a three core 3 GHz PPC-based processor that gets far less calculations per MHz than normal processors.

The integrated GPU thing was just one person who was very, very confused :p and the VRAM and shared memory thing was about that.

[sw1tcher]

In response to the above post, that's correct; some PS2 games are still on cd (blue bottomed discs) but I believe all Xbox games are on DVDs.(

You are correct. All XBOX games are on DVD, even the demo games. I have an XBOX and subscribed to XBOX magazine the first year and all the demo disks that came in the magazine were DVD.

[saunders45]

WE all know that what really matters is what the" Developers, Developers, Developers " do with that hardware. As long as we don't end up with Catwoman HD, I think we will be ok.

Right steve?

*ducks and runs*

[Col. Panic]

Yes, but my point was that despite not having a sound card or ports, those things aren't exactly the most expensive parts of a PowerMac. I mean, it just goes to show you that a dual 2.5Ghz PM can be made much cheaper, and probably a bit smaller. A PM is just an XBox with ports, an HD, and an audio card. The expandability of a system is not really an expense to them. Its a choice. Apple CHOSE not to let users do much with a Mac Mini. If you pay them money, they'll allow you to spend more money and upgrade your system. Its like paying for air.

Again, if the only truly major differences are a bunch of ports, an HD, and RAM upgradeability, it says alot about this XBox (ie: it's frickin sweet!). And this thing will probably cost $1000- $1500 less than a PM. That's the price we pay for a few ports and an HD and RAM slots in a PowerMac.

I think that you are missing one important fact. Apple is a hardware company. They make a lot of other products to help push their hardware. For instance: iLife, OS X, iSync, Rendesvous, Firewire.

All these products cost money to create and many of them are sold at a theoretical loss. (How much would iLife cost if a company other than apple sold it?). The reserach and development money needs to come from somewhere. So we pay a little more for Apple hardware but the extras that come with it more than make up for the difference in my opinion.

[Kal-EL]

Think about it this way, the cooler and more hardcore these consoles can become, the less need for Windows. Face it, gaming is what is keeping M$ Windows alive. Office is cross platform now, so what else is there?

While I agree that games do make the Windows OS more attractive than the Mac for some people, I really doubt it's what's keeping it alive.
What's keeping Windows alive is that the majority of computers are running it and those computers owners are comfortable with what they know. Forget the virus and spyware problem because a lot of these folks just assume that's a part of the headache of computer ownership.
Having tried repeatedly to convert friends/family/co-workers and whoever will listen to me to the Mac platform I can tell you that there are a great number of people out there that have absolutely no idea that Microsoft makes a version of Office for the Mac. They have no reason to know. Microsoft doesn't advertise this on TV and the only ads I've ever seen are in computer/tech magazines and as banners on like minded websites. Most casual Windows users never read computer magazines or go to tech websites. I also doubt that they ever venture into the Apple Store Within a Store at their local CompUSA either, unless it's to oogle at the 30" Cinema Display for two minutes. As purchasing a Mac is the furthest thing on their minds, they won't even venture in to look at the available software.
I would say most Windows users have two major issues concerning Macs: Macs SUCK! or Macs are too expensive.
1. Macs SUCK.
This is one of the hardest myths for Windows users to overcome. I think the whole issue came about when Windows took off and dominated with market share. In a lot of peoples eyes less software = YOU SUCK! Forget that the Mac OS has always been superior. The phrase Macs suck has been so over used in the Mac vs. PC argument that a lot of people believe that it's true. You say it enough and people begin to believe it. One of my biggest arguments when trying to convert someone is to ask the person when the last time was that they actually used a Mac for real computing purposes;not just playing around with a computer store floor model. Most of the answers I get are either never or back in school (what was that, like OS 6.?).
So most of the Macs suck mentality is just heresay passed from person to person. But like I said, you tell enough people enough times and they begin to believe it without any first hand experience. I then turn the aurgument around and reverse the question. I ask them to hypothetically take a cross section of home Mac users and ask these Mac users when the last time was that they used a PC. I argue that the majority of the Mac owners would probably answer something like "everyday at work" So then I say, "why do you think it is then, that all these people (the home Mac owners), who are very familiar with both OS's chose Mac for their personal life over Windows?" Maybe because they don't suck...
2. Macs are too expensive.
Hopefully the introduction of the MacMini will help squash this perspective somewhat, but the fact remains Macs are traditionally more expensive. Too expensive in many cases for the casual user. When I bought my 2 gig dual processor G5. I remembered some people choking at the price I paid, and that's with the Gov't. discount. I would try to explain as Steve Jobs had done at the MW Expo how a comparably equipped Dell would be more expensive. But I began realizing that that was a stupid argument. True it was more $$, but how many casual home users, when searching dell.com for a PC at home were likely looking to get a Dell Precision with Dual Xeon processors? Not many I'd bet.
And comparing Apple's marketshare with that of BMW and Mercedes, as Steve has done? While it's nice to prove a point, it also proves that price is definately a factor in marketshare. While there are a lot of people that have been slowly realizing the Macs Suck thing isn't true, they'd rather go for price over quality. Because while BMW and Mercedes may make great cars with all the best features, most people aren't likely to buy one due to price and are happy with their Accords and Cavaliers. And for people who have invested many $$ in software, they're reluctent to have to spend more on top of their computer purchase to get all new versions.

As for Office being cross platform; while that's great and very necessary for Mac, there are a lot of people needing more than just Office. A co-worker of mine recently commented on how most of the engeneering programs he works on as a computer science major in college are Windows only. There are a lot more programs like that that are keeping some people on Windows because it is true that there are many more programs available for PC. And although a lot of them have a Mac equivatent, many don't. Games are a part of the equation, but in my opinion, far from the main thing keeping Windows alive. Most buisnesses today (where gaming is non-existant) run their offices on some variant of Windows. And how many of these places would want the hassle of re-writing their entire Microsoft Access (Windows only) Database in File Maker Pro or some equivalent? That sounds like a nightmare.

Sorry for the incredibly long post. And as always, what you see here is merely my opinion and I respect your right to disagree with anything I've said...

[GFLPraxis]

Yes, but my point was that despite not having a sound card or ports, those things aren't exactly the most expensive parts of a PowerMac. I mean, it just goes to show you that a dual 2.5Ghz PM can be made much cheaper, and probably a bit smaller. A PM is just an XBox with ports, an HD, and an audio card. The expandability of a system is not really an expense to them. Its a choice. Apple CHOSE not to let users do much with a Mac Mini. If you pay them money, they'll allow you to spend more money and upgrade your system. Its like paying for air.

Again, if the only truly major differences are a bunch of ports, an HD, and RAM upgradeability, it says alot about this XBox (ie: it's frickin sweet!). And this thing will probably cost $1000- $1500 less than a PM. That's the price we pay for a few ports and an HD and RAM slots in a PowerMac.
I think that you are missing one important fact. Apple is a hardware company. They make a lot of other products to help push their hardware. For instance: iLife, OS X, iSync, Rendesvous, Firewire.

All these products cost money to create and many of them are sold at a theoretical loss. (How much would iLife cost if a company other than apple sold it?). The reserach and development money needs to come from somewhere. So we pay a little more for Apple hardware but the extras that come with it more than make up for the difference in my opinion.

That's not quite true.

People are forgetting that the Xbox 2 isn't coming out until the end of this year.

If it was released now, it would probably cost $1000. It would still lack all the software, the sound card, the ports, and the HD.

[GFLPraxis]

The phrase Macs suck has been so over used in the Mac vs. PC argument that a lot of people believe that it's true. You say it enough and people begin to believe it.


NO KIDDING.
I was talking to an older lady last year, and mentioned I had a Mac. "Don't Macs suck?" she said. It was completely unexpected.

[AP_piano295]

THREE PROCESSORS NAAA cant be

[SiliconAddict]

I am in the loop so to speak. Dev Kits are dual 2G G5s. A little known fact is that the Gamecube actually produced the best graphics of the three systems, one exception being less disk space resulting in more highly compressed textures and thus producing jaggies at high scale rates. (see the "curved" lines on samus' suit in metroid). As far as PPS (polygons per second) and TPS(texels per second) the gamecube was slightly ahead of both the PS2 and the XBOX.


No one needs to be "in the loop" this was announced almost 8 months ago on every major game site.

[GFLPraxis]

THREE PROCESSORS NAAA cant be

Read the part about calculations per clock cycle, three processors with middling performance. It's reasonable with multicore processors coming soon.

[stephenli]

So I'm suspecting no backwards compatability.

thats why MS bought Vitural PC.....

[GFLPraxis]

thats why MS bought Vitural PC.....

It's not that easy.

Remember, EVERY XBox 1 game is single threaded. So they can't use more than one processor.

So only one of those 3 GHz processors can be used.

Now remember, that 3 GHz core does only 2 calculations per MHz, so its a mere 6 gigaflops. Thats less than a dual 1 GHz G4 got IIRC. And less than a 1.8 GHz G5 IIRC (Apple claims a 2.5 GHz G5 gets 9 gigaflops).

Can a 1.8 GHz G5 with 256 MB of RAM run VirtualPC very well? Enough to outperform a 733 MHz P3? Not really.

Further, every single chip in the XBox 2 has changed. No sound card (the XBox 1 games will look for the exact hardware of the XBox 1, remember), different brand of graphics card (ATI instead of NVidia, and remember, VPC doesn't even use graphics cards), no hard drive (goodbye games that use it), etc.

[Kal-EL]

The sleeker version is the Atari 2600 Jr. which I happily own :D

Just to clear some things up:

Genesis, SNES, NES, GameGear, MasterSystem (and flash cards), ect...use cartridges
Nintendo 64 - Cartridge (up to 32mb)
Sega CD used 500mb (usually limited in space in early games) CD-ROMs had no copy protection ( :eek: )
Sega Saturn used CD-ROMs (650mb)
Sony PlayStation used CD-ROMs (650mb)
Sony PlayStation 2 uses DVD-ROMs (4.4gb formated)
Xbox uses DVD-ROMs (4.4gb formated)
Xbox 2 (The next Xbox) Will probably use the new 'Blue-Ray' type DVD discs or new high-compacity DVDs because the games will most-likely be very large. ;)

Don't forget the Atari Jaguar 64 bit system. I still have one and it works great.
Atari Jaguar 64 Bit - Cartridge
Jaguar CD - Add on unit that plugged into the Jaguar cartrige slot.- Played standard audio CDs and CD+G disks. CD unit had 790mb of storage capacity.

[IVIIVI4ck3y27]

Cell processor.... biggest joke of all time. The thing is, the "cell" processor is also going to have to handle video, sound, and normal processing in the PS3. It isn't going to have a dedicated GPU. Think of it as an emachine 4.6 celeron w/ intel integrated video, and sound. Yeah, there's your PS3.

*BUZZER*

Sony is working along with NVidia. PS3 will have a GPU.

http://www.ga-forum.com/archive/index.php/t-28900.html

[GFLPraxis]

*BUZZER*

Sony is working along with NVidia. PS3 will have a GPU.

http://www.ga-forum.com/archive/index.php/t-28900.html

Yeah, we already smacked that post down twenty times ;)

[IVIIVI4ck3y27]

Office is cross platform now, so what else is there?

Office has been cross platform since the 1980's. The GUI-based MS Word shipped on Mac before it ever released on PC. Excel was on Mac first as well. Access still isn't part of the Mac release and never was. Powerpoint wasn't even developed by Microsoft in the first place but it's been a staple of the platform as well.

[IVIIVI4ck3y27]

Yeah, we already smacked that post down twenty times ;)

Thanks GFL, I realized that after the fact but it wouldn't let me delete it.

I was going to post in reaction to the integrated vs. non-integrated debate but I figured trying to preach to a fanboy is like trying to turn water into wine. If I could do it, I could put the Italians out of business. :D

Here's a hint though... it's not integrated that's bad, it's "HOW" and "WHAT" you integrate that makes the difference. Most integrated video on PC is very similar to running an S3 Video card in terms of the chipsets used. This chipset is so "blazing" ::laughing:: that it typically isn't fast enough to even warrant an AGP 2x bus, and most often is run out of a simple slow PCI slot.

[GFLPraxis]

Thanks GFL, I realized that after the fact but it wouldn't let me delete it.

I was going to post in reaction to the integrated vs. non-integrated debate but I figured trying to preach to a fanboy is like trying to turn water into wine. If I could do it, I could put the Italians out of business. :D

Here's a hint though... it's not integrated that's bad, it's "HOW" and "WHAT" you integrate that makes the difference. Most integrated video on PC is very similar to running an S3 Video card in terms of the chipsets used. This chipset is so "blazing" ::laughing:: that it typically isn't fast enough to even warrant an AGP 2x bus, and most often is run out of a simple slow PCI slot.

Yep, there's nothing wrong with being integrated. It's even better, since it takes up less space.

The problem is that most of the integrated cards just suck. 99% have no VRAM, and 99% are slow cards (I have never seen a mobo with an integrated Geforce 6800 Ultra w/256 MB VRAM). But if someone made a mobo with a good integrated card, it would be good. And thats what the consoles have.

[combatcolin]

The xBox2 WILL be combatible with the xBox, bit stupid to call it that if its not yes?

[tliptak]

The xBox2 WILL be combatible with the xBox, bit stupid to call it that if its not yes?

Just because its a Mac doesnt mean it runs OS 9 :p

[GFLPraxis]

The xBox2 WILL be combatible with the xBox, bit stupid to call it that if its not yes?


Okay, tell me HOW.

It's not as simple as waving a magic wand.

The XBox 2 has three 3 GHz cores, each do 2 calculations per clock cycle. That makes each one APPROXIMATELY equivilant to a 1.8 GHz G5, though I don't believe the XBox 2's have AltiVec so it may be even slower, and the bus speed isn't mentioned.

Firstly, lets consider the difficulties that could be overcome without too much work.

1) The XBox 2 no longer has a sound card. XBox 1 games will try to output to the sound card. The XBox 2 has to have some kind of special software setup to redirect output to second or third PowerPC core for it to do the sound processing.
2) The XBox 2 uses an ATi card. XBox 1 uses an NVidia card. As a result, there are all kinds of optimizations for the NVidia card. This might cause some difficulties, though the sheer greater power of the ATi card might overcome it unless the developers are using some kind of NVidia-specific calls.
3) The XBox 2 has no hard drive. Though one could be bought. This means extra $$$ for backwards compatability.

Lets consider the hard part...
PowerPC processors don't run x86 binaries.
Meaning you can't run any XBox 1 games.

MS could use VirtualPC for emulation, but would it be enough?

Now, the biggest difficulty.
Well, EVERY single XBox 1 game is single threaded, so that means that it can only run on ONE PROCESSOR.

So only one of those 3 GHz, 2 calcs per Hz, processors can run it. (though another could go for sound processing, to replace the XB1's sound card)
Each of those processors does *about* the same amount of calculations per clock as a 1.66 GHz G5 However, there is no mention of the XBox 2 having AltiVec in the tech specs! Nor is there mention of the bus speed. And there's always SMT overheads.

So it'll probably be a bit lower.

Can a slower-than-1.66-G5 w/ 256 MB of RAM emulate a 733 MHz P3?

[combatcolin]

The xBox 2 will have more power than Jim Carrey in Bruce Almighty.


So emulation will not be an issue.

NEXT!! :)

[Drgnhntr]

Another article on IGN, summing up xbox next info.
http://xbox.ign.com/articles/595/595535p1.html

Here is an excerpt regarding the HD and backward compatibility:

Hard Drive: Xenon's hard drive is optional. It's not built in like the current Xbox. A total of 2 GB of the drive will be used as game cache. The final drive size is still being determined. The Hard Drive will be a 2.5" form factor and sold separately. Microsoft's current plan is to require you to buy the hard drive to enable backward compatibility with current Xbox games. This way, Microsoft recovers the cost of its hard drive, plus it is most likely to give hard drive buyers Xbox Live subscriptions.

[GFLPraxis]

The xBox 2 will have more power than Jim Carrey in Bruce Almighty.


So emulation will not be an issue.

NEXT!! :)
Are you joking? Or did you completely skip page 2?

XBox 1 games are single-threaded, so only one processor can be used for emulation.

I pointed out that each of those 3 GHz processors get 2 calculations per Hz. Thats less than a Pentium 1! WAY less than a G5. I ran some math, that makes it about equivilant to Apple's numbers for a 1.6 GHz G5, except it doesn't have AltiVec, so its even SLOWER than a 1.6 GHz G5.


Can a 1.6 GHz G5 emulate a 733 MHz P3? I don't think so.

[GFLPraxis]

Another article on IGN, summing up xbox next info.
http://xbox.ign.com/articles/595/595535p1.html

Here is an excerpt regarding the HD and backward compatibility:

Hard Drive: Xenon's hard drive is optional. It's not built in like the current Xbox. A total of 2 GB of the drive will be used as game cache. The final drive size is still being determined. The Hard Drive will be a 2.5" form factor and sold separately. Microsoft's current plan is to require you to buy the hard drive to enable backward compatibility with current Xbox games. This way, Microsoft recovers the cost of its hard drive, plus it is most likely to give hard drive buyers Xbox Live subscriptions.

Current plan, assuming its possible.

I recall reading somewhere that the question was whether it was possible or not. If it was possible MS would use the HD for backwards compatability. If it is not possible MS will not have backwards compatability. And MS wasn't sure if it could be done or not.


That makes sense; they'll somehow have to get VirtualPC to:
1) Emulate a 733 MHz P3 on a processor with the raw gigaflops of a 1.6 GHz G5, and possibly without the altivec optimizations (maybe, no articles have even mentioned AltiVec being in the XB2, but maybe it will). This will require considerably better performance than we get now.

2) Actually use the graphics card and DirectX. Virtual PC has 0 support for gaphics cards and 0 support for DirectX.

3) Emulate the sound card. XBox 1 games will attempt to access the XBox 1's sound card, and the XBox 2 doesn't have one. They'd have to trick the software into redirecting the sound to one of the unused processors.

They have their work cut out for them.

[combatcolin]

Are you joking? Or did you completely skip page 2?

XBox 1 games are single-threaded, so only one processor can be used for emulation.

I pointed out that each of those 3 GHz processors get 2 calculations per Hz. Thats less than a Pentium 1! WAY less than a G5. I ran some math, that makes it about equivilant to Apple's numbers for a 1.6 GHz G5, except it doesn't have AltiVec, so its even SLOWER than a 1.6 GHz G5.


Can a 1.6 GHz G5 emulate a 733 MHz P3? I don't think so.

How much memory does Windows aor Mac OS take up when you load it.

A fair bit, yes. many mnay megabytes.

The xBox OS requires 512K.

How many things does a AMD or Intel or Motorola or IBM have to co-ordinate on a MB?

AGP, PCI, Memory, USB, Serial, Parrel, Mouse, ATA, SATA, Floppy Discs etc the list goes on.

How many things does an xBox CPU have to con-ordinate?

4 Joypad ports, DVD - Rom and the ethernet port.

The xBox is streamlined, not as streamlined as the Gamecube which is a design masterpiece but a lot more than a PC or Mac.

NEXT!!

[GFLPraxis]

How much memory does Windows aor Mac OS take up when you load it.

A fair bit, yes. many mnay megabytes.

The xBox OS requires 512K.

How many things does a AMD or Intel or Motorola or IBM have to co-ordinate on a MB?

AGP, PCI, Memory, USB, Serial, Parrel, Mouse, ATA, SATA, Floppy Discs etc the list goes on.

How many things does an xBox CPU have to con-ordinate?

4 Joypad ports, DVD - Rom and the ethernet port.

The xBox is streamlined, not as streamlined as the Gamecube which is a design masterpiece but a lot more than a PC or Mac.

NEXT!!


I don't really care about the rest of the hardware- I care about the raw speed of the processor. No emulator has ever had that kind of efficiency.

EDIT: My apologies, I miscalculated.

My math was right that 2 x 3 billion = 6 billion calcs per second, or 6 gigaflops.

But apparently...http://www.clubmac.com/clubmac/shop/detail~dpno~351017.asp
a 2 GHz G5 is 9 gigaflops, not 2.5.

http://www.softjam.co.uk/acatalog/Boxed_Apple_Xserve_G5.html

This claims that a dual 2.3 is 35 gigaflops. Divide by 2, divide by 2.3, you get that 1 GHz = 7.something gigaflops.

Not sure which is right, but by the first one, the XBox processor (one of them) is = to a 1.2 GHz G5, but the second its equal to slightly below 1 GHz.

That makes sense, since if a Pentium Pro gets more performance per MHz, this proc shouldn't get half that of a G5.

Anyone know what the exact performance of any G5 is in gigaflops?

[combatcolin]

OK, lets look at it from another point of view.

The xBox came out in 2001, the xBox will be out in 2005.

4 years of computing power progress.

Another point of view is that while the xBox is by and large simply off the shelf parts with a little customistation on the graphic card in order to get the thing out quickly, the xBox 2 will be very well designed and part of that design will be pointed at emulating orginal xBox games.

Sony broke the mould with the PS2, making a console that was backwards combatible with what came before it.

That is the future, the only downside is, where all stuck with either the PS and xBox names on our kit for years to come, exotic names such as Megadrive/Saturn/Dreamcast or NES/SNES/N64 will be a thing of the past.

The new Nintendo machine, which is also backwards combatible will at least not be called Gamecube 2.

[GFLPraxis]

OK, lets look at it from another point of view.

The xBox came out in 2001, the xBox will be out in 2005.

4 years of computing power progress.

Another point of view is that while the xBox is by and large simply off the shelf parts with a little customistation on the graphic card in order to get the thing out quickly, the xBox 2 will be very well designed and part of that design will be pointed at emulating orginal xBox games.

Sony broke the mould with the PS2, making a console that was backwards combatible with what came before it.

That is the future, the only downside is, where all stuck with either the PS and xBox names on our kit for years to come, exotic names such as Megadrive/Saturn/Dreamcast or NES/SNES/N64 will be a thing of the past.

The new Nintendo machine, which is also backwards combatible will at least not be called Gamecube 2.

Gotta disagree again.

The PS2 and PS1 both used MIPS processors (and the PS2 was exactly 10 times faster and with 16 times the RAM). There is no indication that the PS2 is fast enough to emulate the PS1.

XBox 2 has it even worse. While it's "only" about 10 times more powerful than the XBox 1 (maybe less!), it has the awkward situation of having 3 processors and having to run SINGLE THREADED GAMES from the XBox 1.

So it can only use a third of its power.

Meaning in terms of how much speed it can devote to emulating and running XBox 1 games, it is only 2 to 3 times faster, and has to EMULATE it with that speed.

With architecture transitions there has never been a console that was able to emulate its predecessor.

The Nintendo DS has a GBA processor to play GBA games. The GBA has a GameBoy Color processor to play old GameBoy games, even! And the GBA had 5 years' advantage over the GameBoy Color.

There has NEVER been a console fast enough to emulate its direct predecessor at full speed.

[orangedv]

Arguing the toss over which of these next gen consoles will be the best is interesting. I personally think the PS3 will win, becuase of the blu ray disk player. Here in Europe next spring tv broadcasts are going to start mainstream in High Def, current dvd technology was not designed for handling the increase in data. The BBC already has some pilot programs recorded in High Def, but I cant see a normal dvd player handling the info. Blu Ray is designed in part to go hand in hand with high def tv, and buying a ps3 will put a blu ray player in your living room. But I digress, the real problem the next gens are going to generate is THIS;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4349117.stm

[GFLPraxis]

Arguing the toss over which of these next gen consoles will be the best is interesting. I personally think the PS3 will win, becuase of the blu ray disk player. Here in Europe next spring tv broadcasts are going to start mainstream in High Def, current dvd technology was not designed for handling the increase in data. The BBC already has some pilot programs recorded in High Def, but I cant see a normal dvd player handling the info. Blu Ray is designed in part to go hand in hand with high def tv, and buying a ps3 will put a blu ray player in your living room. But I digress, the real problem the next gens are going to generate is THIS;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4349117.stm


Maybe, maybe not!

I'm not sure if you participated in the recent HD-DVD vs Blu-ray debate, but there are two competing standards for next generation DVD.

HD-DVD is backwards compatible with normal DVDs, way cheaper to make (Disks and players, but especially disks), can be produced at current DVD fabrication plants, still uses a blue laser, and has a 30 GB capacity for a dual layer disk.


Blu-ray is NOT backwards compatible unless you add a second laser (meaning, PS3 either won't be able to play DVD's and PS2 games, or its going to be very expensive), is CONSIDERABLY more expensive than HD-DVD, can NOT be produced at current DVD production facilities, and has a 54 GB capacity.

So its 54 GB vs cheaper price/backwards compatability/30 GB.

HD-DVD will be available first and will be much cheaper and can still play old DVD's, so that gives it an advantage in the format wars (not talking about which is better, just which may win). If HD-DVD is ratified as the standard, that means all movies would be on HD-DVD disks, and would not play in Blu-ray drives. The Nintendo Revolution is rumored to have an HD-DVD drive BTW.


So its 54 GB in a PS3 vs 30 GB (rumored) in the Nintendo Revolution vs 7 GB in the XBox 2.

The sheer cost of Blu-ray drives is going to drive the PS3 up a pretty penny. Those things are DANG expensive, way more than HD-DVD drives. A burner is estimate to be $300 in 2007!

So while the PS3 will put a Blu-ray player in your living room, if Blu-ray loses the format wars to HD-DVD, it'll be useless.

Either way, the cool thing I see here is that both the PS3 and Revolution should be capable of having full-length movies IN ADDITION to the games. That would be awesome if developers did that. I wouldn't mind paying $60-$70 for SpiderMan 3 on a disk if I get the game AND movie.



Personally, I think it'll be a tossup between the PS3 and Nintendo Revolution. The PS3 will have the best graphics since, hey, it's the last to come out, and probably the best processor because of Cell (not that the processor matters much).

The Revolution will have the 'revolutionary' gameplay Nintendo is being so secretive about. Whether Nintendo tops Sony will depend on whether the Revolution is any good or not. Nintendo's games are awesome, we'll just have to see what the new gameplay is.

The XBox 2 is going to get great holiday sales for Christmas 2005, then the sales will PLUMMET like a rock when the other systems come. The PS3 will blow the XBox 2 away like the XBox did to the PS2, and even the Revolution will trod over it. The Revolution should launch a few months after, preventing it from getting TOO much of a lead, and the PS3 will snag both the "I want the best graphics!" fanboys and Playstation fanboys.

XBox 2 will only get the early adopters, and will probably make another loss for MS after the first year is over.

[combatcolin]

Just because in home computer land you need a fast CPU to emulate it does not mean that this is the only way to do it.

Now the xBox may not have a sound card, but it does have a graphic card that is , you know, between you and me ;) - a little but more powerful than the xBox.

More than one way to skin a cat etc.

Another intresting point of view.

How many bedroom coders work on most emulation software?

A few at best, normally only 1 on his own though.

How many people would be working on ensuring 100% xBox combatibilty?

Um, how big is your average Microsoft department! 15, 25, 50?

And free of the awful constraints of windows that hampers everything Microsoft make for the PC, these people will really be able to prove there worth.

[Mord]

may i remind you all that there was an emulator for the dreamcast that let you play ps1 games it was called bleemcast or somthing.

[takao]

well lets wait until may...so far it's way to early to say if the next xbo or xenon or what ever is backwards compatibel to the XBoX....

concerning PS1 emulator on the dreamcast: don't forget that the dreamcast used an MIPS based CPU as well but with 6 times the cpu speed...and it had 6 times the RAM as well ... with both even having the instruction length fixed at the same lenght (16bit compared to the normal 32bit mips cpus)
emulating a mips prozessor with another mips prozessor is different to emulating a x86 with a powerpc

but i dont say it won't work... it _might_ but it requires a lot more work than sony needed from ps1 to ps2 (both mips) or now nintendo with the oncoming revolution (both powerpc+ati graphics)
they don't have the big-little endian problems as well

edit:spelling
and concerning MIPS assembly code i would recommend it to anybody interested in learning assembly as first try... with SPIM there is rather good emulator out there for simply programms...

[Symtex]

Maybe, maybe not!

I'm not sure if you participated in the recent HD-DVD vs Blu-ray debate, but there are two competing standards for next generation DVD.

HD-DVD is backwards compatible with normal DVDs, way cheaper to make (Disks and players, but especially disks), can be produced at current DVD fabrication plants, still uses a blue laser, and has a 30 GB capacity for a dual layer disk.


Blu-ray is NOT backwards compatible unless you add a second laser (meaning, PS3 either won't be able to play DVD's and PS2 games, or its going to be very expensive), is CONSIDERABLY more expensive than HD-DVD, can NOT be produced at current DVD production facilities, and has a 54 GB capacity.

So its 54 GB vs cheaper price/backwards compatability/30 GB.

HD-DVD will be available first and will be much cheaper and can still play old DVD's, so that gives it an advantage in the format wars (not talking about which is better, just which may win). If HD-DVD is ratified as the standard, that means all movies would be on HD-DVD disks, and would not play in Blu-ray drives. The Nintendo Revolution is rumored to have an HD-DVD drive BTW.


So its 54 GB in a PS3 vs 30 GB (rumored) in the Nintendo Revolution vs 7 GB in the XBox 2.

The sheer cost of Blu-ray drives is going to drive the PS3 up a pretty penny. Those things are DANG expensive, way more than HD-DVD drives. A burner is estimate to be $300 in 2007!

So while the PS3 will put a Blu-ray player in your living room, if Blu-ray loses the format wars to HD-DVD, it'll be useless.

Either way, the cool thing I see here is that both the PS3 and Revolution should be capable of having full-length movies IN ADDITION to the games. That would be awesome if developers did that. I wouldn't mind paying $60-$70 for SpiderMan 3 on a disk if I get the game AND movie.



Personally, I think it'll be a tossup between the PS3 and Nintendo Revolution. The PS3 will have the best graphics since, hey, it's the last to come out, and probably the best processor because of Cell (not that the processor matters much).

The Revolution will have the 'revolutionary' gameplay Nintendo is being so secretive about. Whether Nintendo tops Sony will depend on whether the Revolution is any good or not. Nintendo's games are awesome, we'll just have to see what the new gameplay is.

The XBox 2 is going to get great holiday sales for Christmas 2005, then the sales will PLUMMET like a rock when the other systems come. The PS3 will blow the XBox 2 away like the XBox did to the PS2, and even the Revolution will trod over it. The Revolution should launch a few months after, preventing it from getting TOO much of a lead, and the PS3 will snag both the "I want the best graphics!" fanboys and Playstation fanboys.

XBox 2 will only get the early adopters, and will probably make another loss for MS after the first year is over.

You have respond with a typical mac user post. The hate for microsoft is deep in you. Let me try to play devil's advocate

in 2001, I remember all the playstation fan saying that xbox will not last a year. That Xbox live was a stupid idea to be only available to broadbad users.
I can go on and on about what was said and still being said against xbox. Just look at the facts. Did you ever remember a North American console company who sold 18 millions unites as a new comer ? You can say that they sold they console at lost and it was a very good strategy.

Now that they have penetrate the market, they will be able to improve the product. I think the xbox was only made to be a test machine. To test the market, learn from their mistake. The xbox2 is really the console MS wanted to launch. With all the japanese develloper who have announce to create game for xbox2 is a very good sign that the console will be good.

On the other hands, Sony sure has build alot of hype around the PS3. The recent changes in Sony's management sure is disturbing. They have replace a high-profile CEO that brought the playstation platform to worldwide sucess by an unexperience low-profile CEO. Some of the "rumors specs" of the PS3 is true, would make the console unaffordable for casual end-users. Blu-ray techonology is still very expensive and not adopt by the movie industries. Alot of things can go wrong.

As far as Nintendo is concern, no ones knows. Being radically different could be bring your company to pure success or pure failure. Either gamers will love it or really hate it. Nintendo will still focus on the aspect of pure gaming console and kiddy image. The lack of information on "Nintendo revolution" prevents us from making any real judgement. I will reserve some of my comments for E3.

So as you can see, it's easy to portrait the downfall of companies like Sony and Nintendo. The only company that might stuggle is terns of sales will probably be Nintendo because of his radical differences. I think Sony will still do very good. they have a strong fanbase that is loyal to the brand.

[GFLPraxis]

Just because in home computer land you need a fast CPU to emulate it does not mean that this is the only way to do it.

Now the xBox may not have a sound card, but it does have a graphic card that is , you know, between you and me ;) - a little but more powerful than the xBox.

More than one way to skin a cat etc.

Another intresting point of view.

How many bedroom coders work on most emulation software?

A few at best, normally only 1 on his own though.

How many people would be working on ensuring 100% xBox combatibilty?

Um, how big is your average Microsoft department! 15, 25, 50?

And free of the awful constraints of windows that hampers everything Microsoft make for the PC, these people will really be able to prove there worth.

So you're trying to say they'll find some magical way to do emulation faster, just because? :rolleyes:

I've pointed out that it will be EXTREMELY difficult (maybe or maybe not possible) for backwards compatible. Your response: "They'll find a way!!!"

[GFLPraxis]

You have respond with a typical mac user post. The hate for microsoft is deep in you. Let me try to play devil's advocate

You again...here we go :rolleyes:



in 2001, I remember all the playstation fan saying that xbox will not last a year. That Xbox live was a stupid idea to be only available to broadbad users.
I can go on and on about what was said and still being said against xbox. Just look at the facts.

I don't really care. I wasn't one of them.


Did you ever remember a North American console company who sold 18 millions unites as a new comer ? You can say that they sold they console at lost and it was a very good strategy.

It was a very good strategy. But it doesn't work like you think. They lost tons of money overall.

The strategy is this:
You're the newcomer. Everyone has PS2 or will buy a GameCube. If you release a console just as good as everybody else, but without the same brand name, or third party support, of the others, nobody will buy it.

How do you get people to buy it and third parties to support it?

Make a console that is more powerful than the others. Charge almost the same price. Lose HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS on it, but it establishes a fanboy club that things, "MS has the best hardware!"

You still take a loss because you were last, but people now get the impression that you have the best hardware.

Next generation you sell the console with the intention to make a profit (aka, you DON'T make it more powerful than the other consoles), but you sell it first (So people assume it will be the best and buy it) and hype it up severely.

Brilliant strategy on MS's part. It'll probably work- they'll probably get a bunch of suckers at Christmas who buy it thinking it'll be the best in terms of graphics. :rolleyes:

Then the others come out six months later, but hey, everyone already has an XBox 2 with much weaker graphics, making it hard on the others.

Now that they have penetrate the market, they will be able to improve the product. I think the xbox was only made to be a test machine. To test the market, learn from their mistake. The xbox2 is really the console MS wanted to launch. With all the japanese develloper who have announce to create game for xbox2 is a very good sign that the console will be good.

The XBox 1 was to establish a reputation of MS having the best hardware so people would buy the XBox 2. See above.

On the other hands, Sony sure has build alot of hype around the PS3. The recent changes in Sony's management sure is disturbing. They have replace a high-profile CEO that brought the playstation platform to worldwide sucess by an unexperience low-profile CEO. Some of the "rumors specs" of the PS3 is true, would make the console unaffordable for casual end-users. Blu-ray techonology is still very expensive and not adopt by the movie industries. Alot of things can go wrong.

Yep, Sony is the HypeMaster. But their console will definitely have the best graphics, they're launching last.

As far as Nintendo is concern, no ones knows. Being radically different could be bring your company to pure success or pure failure. Either gamers will love it or really hate it. Nintendo will still focus on the aspect of pure gaming console and kiddy image. The lack of information on "Nintendo revolution" prevents us from making any real judgement. I will reserve some of my comments for E3.

Absolutely.

So as you can see, it's easy to portrait the downfall of companies like Sony and Nintendo. The only company that might stuggle is terns of sales will probably be Nintendo because of his radical differences. I think Sony will still do very good. they have a strong fanbase that is loyal to the brand.


And just the same for MS. If MS gets lucky and grabs the early adopters through hype, they win. If people reserve judgement and wait for the other two to come out, MS loses. Because the XBox 2 just isn't going to be as good as the other consoles, judging from the info we already have.

1) No hard drive
2) No backwards compatibility in all likelihood; if it somehow does, you'll be required to pay more money for a HD for it.
3) Most games won't support the hard drive since its optional
4) Camera support? Can you say people putting porn pictures on their characters in multiplayer?
5) Pay to play online. No thanks.
6) The processor and graphics cards are just slower versions of what will be in the Revolution, since they're also using IBM and ATi but coming out months later.
7) 7 GB DVD's. 'nuff said.

[Mord]

But their console will definitely have the best graphics, they're launching last.

thinking like that made the dreamcast and the betamax fail even though they were the better systems.

[GFLPraxis]

thinking like that made the dreamcast and the betamax fail even though they were the better systems.

I should point out that the GameCube and XBox launched in that order after the PS2 and were, in that order, faster.

How big was the time gap between Dreamcast and PS2?

And Betamax didn't fail because people didn't think it was good, it failed because Sony had an iron grip on it and the others wanted a cheaper and more open format.


One thing, though: the PS3 is rumored to be $400 or $500 (not for certain, just rumor and predictions). That'd make sense, with Cell, a brand new NVidia card, and a Blu-ray drive. If that is true, it could hurt sales a lot.

[Symtex]

1) No hard drive - It will have a flash drive which is faster then a regular HD
2) No backwards compatibility in all likelihood; if it somehow does, you'll be required to pay more money for a HD for it. I still have my xbox. no need for BC

3) Most games won't support the hard drive since its optional again flash drive will be use internally for caching.
4) Camera support? Can you say people putting porn pictures on their characters in multiplayer? I agree. Video camera is lame
5) Pay to play online. No thanks. if you would of played xbl once in your life, you would understand. it's 10x better then ps2 online
6) The processor and graphics cards are just slower versions of what will be in the Revolution, since they're also using IBM and ATi but coming out months later. Actually Nintendo will have the slowest of them all.
7) 7 GB DVD's. 'nuff said.It's actually 9 gig and it's more then enough for games.

get your facts straight before posting. Xbox live is better then anything available right now as far as online gaming experience.

[PixelFactory]

1) No hard drive
2) No backwards compatibility in all likelihood; if it somehow does, you'll be required to pay more money for a HD for it.
3) Most games won't support the hard drive since its optional
4) Camera support? Can you say people putting porn pictures on their characters in multiplayer?
5) Pay to play online. No thanks.
6) The processor and graphics cards are just slower versions of what will be in the Revolution, since they're also using IBM and ATi but coming out months later.
7) 7 GB DVD's. 'nuff said.


1) True, no built in HD (never heard of this Flash drive being included)
2) The HD add on will enable backwards compatablity. Maybe there is more harware than just a hard drive in this unit. I would think this would cost about $99-$150
3) Microsoft will make sure all games support the HD unit. They will want this to drive sales.
4) Have to agree. I don't get it. MS and its digital hub.
5) Xbox live works and it is selling. I wouldn't be suprised to see Nintendo andy Sony to follow suit.
6) The graphic capabilities of the current systems is pretty close. Next gen consoles look to be pretty close in specs also. It will be content that drives sales. Look for MS to get a few more excusive titles.
7) 7GB, 9GB? I know its a cost reducing thing. Only time will tell if developers will avoid the system due to space constraints.

[Symtex]

This is a nice article to give some information on xbox 2

http://editorials.teamxbox.com/xbox/860/The-Xbox-2-Inside-and-Out-Part-II/p1#intro

some of this might be wrong but some of it might be true.

[PixelFactory]

This is a nice article to give some information on xbox 2

http://editorials.teamxbox.com/xbox/860/The-Xbox-2-Inside-and-Out-Part-II/p1#intro

some of this might be wrong but some of it might be true.


That article is 8 months old. Here is a recent article (http://xbox.ign.com/articles/595/595535p1.html)

[combatcolin]

So you're trying to say they'll find some magical way to do emulation faster, just because? :rolleyes:

I've pointed out that it will be EXTREMELY difficult (maybe or maybe not possible) for backwards compatible. Your response: "They'll find a way!!!"

The point i was trying to make and don't seem able to grasp is:

Most Emulation software= low budget, low manpower enterprise.

xBox 2 Emulation = Enormous budget and Enormous manpower in comparison.

Can you understand this very simple concept that i am trying to explain? :eek:

And once you understand this very simple concept you will see clearly that emulation will simply not be an issue to be concerned about.

[Kal-EL]

Most Emulation software= low budget, low manpower enterprise.

Ok I see now, that makes perfect sense. I mean why would Microsoft have an enourmous budget for Virtual PC for Mac? What possible good would it do to make the program so that even high end PC games were playable on the Mac? That would be just plain stupid. Who would want to pour enormous amounts of cash into R&D on a program like that. Think about it, if Microsoft released a verson of Vurtual PC on which Half Life 2 were actually playable, what would they gain? I mean besides the huge boost in VPC sales and the fact that they would have Windows on vurtually every home computer on the planet, be it Wintel or Mac?

You make a good point combatcolin. Thanks for clearing the debate up. I'm certain Microsoft wouldn't want to pour money into something whose end result would be to have Windows installed on the majority of Macs out there.

[GFLPraxis]

get your facts straight before posting. Xbox live is better then anything available right now as far as online gaming experience.

1) It will have a flash drive which is faster then a regular HD
2) I still have my xbox. no need for BC
3) again flash drive will be use internally for caching.
4)I agree. Video camera is lame
5) if you would of played xbl once in your life, you would understand. it's 10x better then ps2 online
6) Actually Nintendo will have the slowest of them all.
7) It's actually 9 gig and it's more then enough for games.

Okay, you're about to get a smackdown, Mr. Facts Straight.
Don't accuse someone of not knowing what he's talking about unless YOU DO. Which you OBVIOUSLY don't.

http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-xbox/594331p1.html
^official specs according to the developers^

http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-xbox/595060p1.html
^Q&A^

1) WRONG. This was speculation. By the official specs developers have given out, there IS NO FLASH DRIVE.
Furthermore, using a Flash Drive for caching would be the stupidest idea in history for one simple reason. Unlike hard drives, Flash drives have a limited amount of times you can write to them before they wear down. Thats no problem for, say, the iPod shuffle, where you add a new song once in a while. But it's a MASSIVE problem if you're trying to use Flash memory for caching, because its CONSTANTLY writing. It would take an extremely short time for the Flash memory to die.

2) Good for you, but that means you have to have more items by your TV, and not everybody has an XBox. This is still a point against it.

3) Again, if this is true it would be the stupidest idea Microsoft has had yet. It would die really fast. A Flash Drive could be used for SAVING, but according to the specs, there isn't one.

4) Good, something we agree on.

5) I never said anything about PS2 online. I have never bothered to use PS2 online. I'm talking about stuff like XLink Kai, an XBox Live replacement. You get the same functionality including stuff like voice chat, for FREE, on the XBox. The only thing missing is the ability to download maps because they're not the game developers. Nintendo is unrolling a free XBox-Live type service, so we'll see. Thing is, you don't have a CHOICE with XBox Live. If you're low on cash, you can't choose the option of not having the extras but going free.

6) Okay, I haven't insulted you before this. But this comment is just RIDICULOUS. Nintendo is going to have the slowest system...just because? WHY is Nintendo going to have the slowest system? Because you want them to?...The Revolution is coming SEVERAL MONTHS after the XBox 2, and using newer versions of the same processor and graphics card. It won't be slower.
Heck, the GameCube launched before the XBox and was $100 cheaper, and still has almost the exact same graphics performance (the only difference being that the XBox is capable of certain types of glows the GC can't).

7) Incorrect. "While the media is the same as that of the current Xbox, the usable space on each disc is up to 7 GB. The drive is slated to run at 12X. " 7 GB usable space. The rest is probably error correction or some type of piracy protection.
As for being 'more than enough', it most certainly is not. Some XBox games are already on dual layer DVD's. Now that games are going to be in HD, at minimum 720p, textures are going to need to be at least 5x to 6x larger, if not MORE. Characters will require more detail than ever, as well ingame movies (7 GB? lol, thats what, an HOUR of HD resolution video? Two?).


Wrong on almost every point. I highly suggest you read the official information instead of combating them with rumors.

[GFLPraxis]

Originally Posted by Symtex
This is a nice article to give some information on xbox 2

http://editorials.teamxbox.com/xbox...art-II/p1#intro

some of this might be wrong but some of it might be true.

That article is 8 months old. Here is a recent article (http://xbox.ign.com/articles/595/595535p1.html)

Very good. The one Symtex posted is all speculation based on a vague comment.

The flash drive thing has NO indication whatsoever that its anything more than a memory card.

Your IGN article has the official specs that the developers were given.

[GFLPraxis]

The point i was trying to make and don't seem able to grasp is:

Most Emulation software= low budget, low manpower enterprise.

xBox 2 Emulation = Enormous budget and Enormous manpower in comparison.

Can you understand this very simple concept that i am trying to explain? :eek:

And once you understand this very simple concept you will see clearly that emulation will simply not be an issue to be concerned about.

I understand the simple concept you are trying to explain very well, and the concept is WRONG.

Emulation will not magically get better just by putting more money into it.

If Microsoft has had the capability of having this kind of BREAKTHROUGH emulation performance, WHY HAVEN'T THEY APPLIED IT TO VIRTUAL PC ALREADY?

[Symtex]

Okay, you're about to get a smackdown, Mr. Facts Straight.
Don't accuse someone of not knowing what he's talking about unless YOU DO. Which you OBVIOUSLY don't.

http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-xbox/594331p1.html
^official specs according to the developers^

http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-xbox/595060p1.html
^Q&A^

1) WRONG. This was speculation. By the official specs developers have given out, there IS NO FLASH DRIVE.
Furthermore, using a Flash Drive for caching would be the stupidest idea in history for one simple reason. Unlike hard drives, Flash drives have a limited amount of times you can write to them before they wear down. Thats no problem for, say, the iPod shuffle, where you add a new song once in a while. But it's a MASSIVE problem if you're trying to use Flash memory for caching, because its CONSTANTLY writing. It would take an extremely short time for the Flash memory to die.

2) Good for you, but that means you have to have more items by your TV, and not everybody has an XBox. This is still a point against it.

3) Again, if this is true it would be the stupidest idea Microsoft has had yet. It would die really fast. A Flash Drive could be used for SAVING, but according to the specs, there isn't one.

4) Good, something we agree on.

5) I never said anything about PS2 online. I have never bothered to use PS2 online. I'm talking about stuff like XLink Kai, an XBox Live replacement. You get the same functionality including stuff like voice chat, for FREE, on the XBox. The only thing missing is the ability to download maps because they're not the game developers. Nintendo is unrolling a free XBox-Live type service, so we'll see. Thing is, you don't have a CHOICE with XBox Live. If you're low on cash, you can't choose the option of not having the extras but going free.

6) Okay, I haven't insulted you before this. But this comment is just STUPID. Nintendo is going to have the slowest system...just because? WHY is Nintendo going to have the slowest system? Because you want them to?...The Revolution is coming SEVERAL MONTHS after the XBox 2, and using newer versions of the same processor and graphics card. It won't be slower.
Heck, the GameCube launched before the XBox and was $100 cheaper, and still has almost the exact same graphics performance (the only difference being that the XBox is capable of certain types of glows the GC can't).

7) Incorrect. "While the media is the same as that of the current Xbox, the usable space on each disc is up to 7 GB. The drive is slated to run at 12X. " 7 GB usable space. The rest is probably error correction or some type of piracy protection.


Wrong on almost every point. I highly suggest you read the official information instead of combating them with rumors.


We will talk again after E3 and see who's wrong or right. Gamespy information is shady and coming from unknown sources. I do believe there will be some type of flash drive around the size of 1g or 2g that will be use for caching / xbl downloadable content. If you want more, you are going to buy the hD add-on.

Gamespy is speculating way more then teamxbox. The day the news was posted at gamespy, some the of admin from teamxbox were shaking their heads. Of course they are unable to say anything yet.

[GFLPraxis]

We will talk again after E3 and see who's wrong or right. Gamespy information is shady and coming from unknown sources. I do believe there will be some type of flash drive around the size of 1g or 2g that will be use for caching / xbl downloadable content. If you want more, you are going to buy the hD add-on.

Gamespy is speculating way more then teamxbox. The day the news was posted at gamespy, some the of admin from teamxbox were shaking their heads. Of course they are unable to say anything yet.

Wrong.

1) "Gamespy information is shady and coming from unknown sources"?

Incorrect. Those numbers are at several sites, and they come from the official specs that Microsoft gave to the game developers when telling them what to program for. While it's not the release info and not finalized, its the closest to official you can get because it's straight from MS.

On the other hand, the TeamXBox article is almost 100% speculation, because it's nearly a year old. And IGN (who owns the TeamXBox site) has an article with the same info on xbox.ign.com.


2) Dude, Flash drives CAN NOT BE USED FOR CACHING. They wear down. NO ONE in their right mind would use a flash drive for caching. Storing content, maybe, but not caching.

And a 1 GB flash drive costs more than a 20 GB hard drive, so it STILL makes no sense.

[combatcolin]

I understand the simple concept you are trying to explain very well, and the concept is WRONG.

Emulation will not magically get better just by putting more money into it.

If Microsoft has had the capability of having this kind of BREAKTHROUGH emulation performance, WHY HAVEN'T THEY APPLIED IT TO VIRTUAL PC ALREADY?

One big memory and hardware hogging resource (Mac OS X) emulating an even bigger memory and hardware resource (Windows)

Clear now?

And as i've said on multiple postings, the xBox will be built from the ground up taking advantage of well designed hardware and software in order to emulate the xBox with ease.

And where do you think the actual code for the emulation is going to be stored?

In ROM.

Which is how fast?

Clear Now?

[takao]

And as i've said on multiple postings, the xBox will be built from the ground up taking advantage of well designed hardware and software in order to emulate the xBox with ease.

in which way building from the ground up, with _different hardware architecture_ , an advantage for emulation ?


And where do you think the actual code for the emulation is going to be stored?

In ROM.

Which is how fast?


not fast enough for the cache and the cpu ;) and not really faster than RAM
(were other software is stored)
unless you store the information directly in onchip memory (which drives up the cost) you will still get hurt by lots of memory access penalties...sure multiple cores might help you with that but emulation might no be as trivial to multithread as you think
as said before: the architectual differences between powerpc and x86 aren't small...heck one counts from left to right and the other from right to left ... ;)

i suggest a book about computer architectures

[Symtex]

And a 1 GB flash drive costs more than a 20 GB hard drive, so it STILL makes no sense.

1gb flash cost more for comsumer not company like microsoft. They'll probably cost around 18$ a pieces.

[Anarchy99]

1gb flash cost more for comsumer not company like microsoft. They'll probably cost around 18$ a pieces.
it would be way less then 18 a piece if used they would be bought a such quantity or at-least it would be granteed they would be $2 a piece max

[Mord]

1gb flash cost more for comsumer not company like microsoft. They'll probably cost around 18$ a pieces.

the same price reduction probably applies to HD's.

[GFLPraxis]

1gb flash cost more for comsumer not company like microsoft. They'll probably cost around 18$ a pieces.

MS would get discounts on hard drives just as easily as Flash drives.

[GFLPraxis]

One big memory and hardware hogging resource (Mac OS X) emulating an even bigger memory and hardware resource (Windows)

Clear now?

So WHAT? It's the emulation that's the problem. If you put 1 GB of RAM in a Mac, it solves all the RAM problems (256 MB for OS X, 256 MB for Windows, 512 free).

And as i've said on multiple postings, the xBox will be built from the ground up taking advantage of well designed hardware and software in order to emulate the xBox with ease.

This is a DETRIMENT, not a bonus. The architecture change in EVERY SINGLE COMPONENT in the XBox 2 makes emulation MORE difficult.


And where do you think the actual code for the emulation is going to be stored?

In ROM.

Which is how fast?

Clear Now?


So? How does this make the processor run faster?

[PixelFactory]

What if the Hard Drive addon is basically an xbox without ports (no controller, video/audio out, ethernet). Is this a technical option?

[Symtex]

MS would get discounts on hard drives just as easily as Flash drives.

I agree but I think size might be an issue. 2.5'' HD are more expensive then 3.5'', even for giant evil corporation.

[Drgnhntr]

What if the Hard Drive addon is basically an xbox without ports (no controller, video/audio out, ethernet). Is this a technical option?

I was thinking this also. It would be like the gameboy player is to the gamecube. Ports and video out are handled by the cube, software is taken care of in the player.

I think it makes more sense financially for Microsoft to do this. Why spend money on software engineers for emulation when you can use backward compatibility/HD upgrade to sell additional add-ons for the xbox.

[GFLPraxis]

What if the Hard Drive addon is basically an xbox without ports (no controller, video/audio out, ethernet). Is this a technical option?

Interesting thought! They wouldn't need anything except the processor. Now, that would make the HD hot and a bit expensive, but all they'd need to do is put a 733 MHz P3 and a hard drive as an addon.

The P3 can use the new XBox 2 graphics card, and they can have a software hack or something so that the PowerPC processor does the audio processing.

[PixelFactory]

Heat may not be as much of an issue, with inly the P3, HD and probably some controller chips, there is a lot of stuff that is romoved from the heat part (graphics chip, sound processor, dvd drive)

How much more would it cost? Retail P3's are about $20. What will MS pay for them? $5/$10 each? Plus they will most likely include a game with the kit (ala Sony and FFXI). I still see about a $100 price tag.

[combatcolin]

Holding the software code in ROM would bypass a slow hard drive.

Of course not really relevant here as the xBox will won't have one as standard.

Every heard of a British computer called an Acorn Arcemedies?

RISC based CPU before Apple and OS held on ROM.

Tad fast to say the least, of course it died out but the design was fantastic.

[takao]

Holding the software code in ROM would bypass a slow hard drive.

looks like it's time for me to unsuscribe from this thread....have you even read my answer ?
in which way exactly is ROM better or faster than RAM ?

and holding software in ROm isn't really a brand new thing ... has been kinda popular for embedded systems for some time (yes even game consoles... like the PS2,GC and xbox so whats new here ?)


Tad fast to say the least, of course it died out but the design was fantastic.
as fantastic like the first Xbox-LaserJet 4 sized controller ? ;) sorry couldn't resist ...

[Drgnhntr]

Does anyone know if xbox live will require the HD upgrade?

[GFLPraxis]

Does anyone know if xbox live will require the HD upgrade?

I would guess it would require the HD to download extra content. Although if the memory cards go up to a gigabyte, that might not even be necessary.

[GFLPraxis]

Holding the software code in ROM would bypass a slow hard drive.


Huh? That will only affect loading time, NOT emulation speed.

When you launch Virtual PC on the Mac, the time it takes for the window to pop up is time time it takes for the system to copy it from the hard drive to the RAM.

Once it is in the RAM, it runs from the RAM, not the HARD DRIVE.
How will the ROM be faster than the RAM? Have you even been reading this thread?


Of course not really relevant here as the xBox will won't have one as standard.

Every heard of a British computer called an Acorn Arcemedies?

RISC based CPU before Apple and OS held on ROM.

Tad fast to say the least, of course it died out but the design was fantastic.

That would increase loading times by like 10x (turn it on it boots in ten seconds ;) ), and if the machine was RAM starved and using the hard drive for caching, would give it a boost, but not make the actual PERFORMANCE any better. Though the instant loading times would seem insanely fast.

[GFLPraxis]

Heat may not be as much of an issue, with inly the P3, HD and probably some controller chips, there is a lot of stuff that is romoved from the heat part (graphics chip, sound processor, dvd drive)

How much more would it cost? Retail P3's are about $20. What will MS pay for them? $5/$10 each? Plus they will most likely include a game with the kit (ala Sony and FFXI). I still see about a $100 price tag.

That's realistic. It's still hefty though, because by 2005 that'll be the cost of an entire XBox 1. Meanwhile Revolution owners get backwards compatability free.

[combatcolin]

Like the way you quote me and then cut the part about bypassing a slow hard drive.

Give it 6 months, or maybe until E3 when the Box 2 is likely to be demoed, and you'll be eating your words.

[combatcolin]

looks like it's time for me to unsuscribe from this thread....have you even read my answer ?
in which way exactly is ROM better or faster than RAM ?

and holding software in ROm isn't really a brand new thing ... has been kinda popular for embedded systems for some time (yes even game consoles... like the PS2,GC and xbox so whats new here ?)


as fantastic like the first Xbox-LaserJet 4 sized controller ? ;) sorry couldn't resist ...

Um, the original xBox controller was so bloody large because the Amercan testing team found out that Americans wanted a big controller.

I find the design okay, i do prefer the B +W buttons on top of the 4 main buttons - the weird jewel style effect that i don't like.

The sticks are the best i've ever used, but why a 3M cable

You buy a Japanese console and the cable is too short!
You buy an american console and the cable is too long!

[takao]

Um, the original xBox controller was so bloody large because the Amercan testing team found out that Americans wanted a big controller.

i seriously doubt that they tested the controller at all (well and if they tested them,then i doutb that those guys still work for microsoft), heck i can't reach half of those buttons and i'm a rather normal sized 21 year old guy


I find the design okay, i do prefer the B +W buttons on top of the 4 main buttons - the weird jewel style effect that i don't like.

The sticks are the best i've ever used, but why a 3M cable

You buy a Japanese console and the cable is too short!
You buy an american console and the cable is too long!

hmm well perhaps instead of making hard to reach buttons leaving them simply out would have been a smarter idea ...

personally i'm gonna get perhaps one wavebird controller for my nintendo the next months ... wireless controllers are definetly a must for next generation consoles

[GFLPraxis]

Like the way you quote me and then cut the part about bypassing a slow hard drive.

Because I AGREED WITH YOU ON THE "It doesn't apply though" point! Why should I reply to the part I agreed with? I didn't actually cut out any of your arguements!

Geez, pay attention, man...


Give it 6 months, or maybe until E3 when the Box 2 is likely to be demoed, and you'll be eating your words.


You still fail to show any way Microsoft could possibly emulate the XBox 1 (other than including a P3 processor). We'll see who eats their words :D

[Mord]

what we need is a dual 2.5GHz G5 owner to do some benchmark with VPC against a 700MHz celeron (the xbox has 128kb cache AKA a celeron)

i happen to have a 700MHz celeron pc sitting next to me so we can settle this.

[GFLPraxis]

what we need is a dual 2.5GHz G5 owner to do some benchmark with VPC against a 700MHz celeron (the xbox has 128kb cache AKA a celeron)

i happen to have a 700MHz celeron pc sitting next to me so we can settle this.

I've been doing a little research, actually, it gets worse :(

I was basing it off someone in I think this thread or maybe another board who told me Apple claims 9 gigaflops for the 2.5 GHz G5. But Google reveals all...

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2004/jan/06xserveg5.html
http://www.softjam.co.uk/acatalog/Boxed_Apple_Xserve_G5.html
http://www.apple.com.au/pr/library/2004/jan/06xserveg5.html
http://www.techbuilder.org/news/59201445


Yep. A dual 2 GHz G5 XServe is 30 gigaflops. Not 9 for 2.5.

Everything I keep finding agrees with that. I can only find one site (a non Apple site) that claims 9 gigaflops, and it claims this for double precision floating point math (what's the difference?) and claims lower scores for the Opteron and Xeon than Intel and AMD do.
http://www.clubmac.com/clubmac/shop/detail~dpno~351017.asp


So I'm going to have to go with Apple and its pages.
A dual 2 GHz G5 is 30 GFlops, and 2.3 is 35. Simple math reveals that a 1 GHz G5 is 7 gigaflops (I guess a G5 gets 7 calculations per clock cycle, eh? Hm, interesting since a P4 gets 6 I believe).

So we know that the XBox 2 gets 18 gigaflops. How fast is that in terms of a single processor? Equivilant of a SINLGE 2.5 GHz G5, minus SMP overheads. (18 divided by 7)

However, remember that XBox 1 games are single threaded. Therefore, for emulation, the XBox 1 games can only use ONE PROCESSOR.

How much is one of the XBox 2's cores? 6 gigaflops. Or the equivilant of a 857 MHz G5.

Yeoch.

I'm even more confident in no backwards compatability unless a Pentium 3 core is included (which is a very real possibility, Nintendo included a GBA processor in the Nintendo DS).

[Mord]

or the emulator is SMP enabled and uses all three cpu's to emulate one celeron.

i know someone with a dual 1.8GHz G5 i'll do some benchmarks and follow up.

[GFLPraxis]

or the emulator is SMP enabled and uses all three cpu's to emulate one celeron.

Interesting thought, but that'd be weird. If the XBox game only has one thread sent, how would it be distributed on all three CPU's? Dunno, it'd be tricky. Maybe possible though.

i know someone with a dual 1.8GHz G5 i'll do some benchmarks and follow up.

TY.
Sounds good.

[Mord]

it dosen't go directly to all three cpu's, the three cpu's make a virtual pentium 3, they emulate the hardware not the software that is the difference between VPC and other windows emulators that failed commercially. that means a single thread can be run in this virual enviroment running on three cpu's

[GFLPraxis]

it dosen't go directly to all three cpu's, the three cpu's make a virtual pentium 3, they emulate the hardware not the software that is the difference between VPC and other windows emulators that failed commercially. that means a single thread can be run in this virual enviroment running on three cpu's

It's a question of if that can be done. There are some lag times communicating between the processors, so it's questionable whether the three can act as one at full speed.

I'm not sure what you mean with "the difference between VPC". VPC does not emulate any software, it only emulates the hardware, and that's why you have to install a full version of Windows into it.

If VPC only emulated the Windows software I wouldn't be able to install Linux into it, would I? :D

[Mord]

that was what i ment.

as i said three do not run as one at full speed three work at emulating the one at emulation speed.

[Mord]

ok the dual 1.8GHz G5 comes out as a 528MHz P3 which by consulting a few benchmarks is about as fast as a 700MHz celeron and this is synthetic, celerons generally do better in synthetic also VPC in it's current state is not SMP so thats one 1.8GHz G5 that is capable of emulating an xbox 1 cpu

[GFLPraxis]

ok the dual 1.8GHz G5 comes out as a 528MHz P3 which by consulting a few benchmarks is about as fast as a 700MHz celeron and this is synthetic, celerons generally do better in synthetic also VPC in it's current state is not SMP so thats one 1.8GHz G5 that is capable of emulating an xbox 1 cpu

The XBox uses a P3 with reduced cache, not a Celeron.

So a 1.8 doesn't reach the XBox CPU's.

[Mord]

the P3 with a reduced cache is a celeron they are the same core design, the only difference is the P3 had a 256KB on die cache (bar the slot version but the xbox uses the coppermine P3, and the celeron has a 128KB cache otherwise they are identical bar bus speed which is lower in the xbox thus it is a celeron.

[GFLPraxis]

the P3 with a reduced cache is a celeron they are the same core design, the only difference is the P3 had a 256KB on die cache (bar the slot version but the xbox uses the coppermine P3, and the celeron has a 128KB cache otherwise they are identical bar bus speed which is lower in the xbox thus it is a celeron.

Incorrect.

http://anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=1561&p=2

The CPU that powers the Xbox is a Coppermine based Pentium III with only 128KB L2 cache. While this would make many think that the processor is indeed a Celeron, one of the key performance factors of the Pentium III that is lost in the Celeron core was left intact for this core. The Coppermine core was left with an 8-way set associative L2 cache instead of the 4-way set associative cache of the Celeron. Based on what we've seen with the Coppermine and Coppermine128 (Celeron) cores we estimate that the 8-way set associative L2 cache gives this particular core a 10% performance advantage over the Coppermine128 core of the Celeron.

The fact that Intel decided to go with a 128KB version of the Coppermine core indicates that there is a way of disabling half of the L2 cache without modifying the mapping associativity. We fully expect the Xbox's CPUs to be nothing more than Coppermine processors with half of their 256KB L2 cache disabled.

They say its a common misconception and they thought it themselves too at first, but it is, in fact, a Pentium III and is faster than a Celeron.

[combatcolin]

Because I AGREED WITH YOU ON THE "It doesn't apply though" point! Why should I reply to the part I agreed with? I didn't actually cut out any of your arguements!

Geez, pay attention, man...



You still fail to show any way Microsoft could possibly emulate the XBox 1 (other than including a P3 processor). We'll see who eats their words :D

Apart from the technial reasons i argued? Increase in CPU Speed, increase in GPU speed, increse in memory, vastly better hardware design, streamline and small OS, multi million $$$ emulation department budget etc.

Anyway, as we disagree there is a simpler way to explain why the xBox 2 will be able to lay Box games.

A Toys R Us, any where in the world.

Man walks in intrested in the new xBox 2 console, he bought his children an xBox a few years back and now wants to buy an xBox 2 for a birthday gift.

His children also have a PS2, which he bought understanding that it would play all the orginal games bar a few weird ones that his children say were only released in Japan so not to worry.

He asks the assiatant

"and does this play the original games"

FREEZE FRAME

Imagine your Bill Gates

Now if the sales assitant says "Yes the xBox 2 will play all your original xBox games" would that make the customer more or less likely to buy the xBox 2?

Simple really, now as i've said in my previou post, Sony have broke the mould by making the playstation 2 console combatible with the original Playstation.

And because of this Nintendo and Sony have been put under pressure to do the same.

Of course now playing PS games on your PS2 isn't that important and in no way could be considered as a selling point so far into the platforms life, but at the beginning it was very widly advertised.

And this is why xBox 2 will play xBox games.


Right, your turn! ;)

[Symtex]

Apart from the technial reasons i argued? Increase in CPU Speed, increase in GPU speed, increse in memory, vastly better hardware design, streamline and small OS, multi million $$$ emulation department budget etc.

Anyway, as we disagree there is a simpler way to explain why the xBox 2 will be able to lay Box games.

A Toys R Us, any where in the world.

Man walks in intrested in the new xBox 2 console, he bought his children an xBox a few years back and now wants to buy an xBox 2 for a birthday gift.

His children also have a PS2, which he bought understanding that it would play all the orginal games bar a few weird ones that his children say were only released in Japan so not to worry.

He asks the assiatant

"and does this play the original games"

FREEZE FRAME

Imagine your Bill Gates

Now if the sales assitant says "Yes the xBox 2 will play all your original xBox games" would that make the customer more or less likely to buy the xBox 2?

Simple really, now as i've said in my previou post, Sony have broke the mould by making the playstation 2 console combatible with the original Playstation.

And because of this Nintendo and Sony have been put under pressure to do the same.

Of course now playing PS games on your PS2 isn't that important and in no way could be considered as a selling point so far into the platforms life, but at the beginning it was very widly advertised.

And this is why xBox 2 will play xBox games.


Right, your turn! ;)

I think that BC is not a essential option . How many times have you played a ps1 game since you had your ps2 ? My older xbox won't become unusable once I get my xbox2. I do not understand the BC supporter. Nintendo as never made anything BC aside their handheld.

I said it's better to scrap the BC and go forward.

[Kal-EL]

Apart from the technial reasons i argued? Increase in CPU Speed, increase in GPU speed, increse in memory, vastly better hardware design, streamline and small OS, multi million $$$ emulation department budget etc.

With the exception of the "small OS" comment, the above statement could easily be used to describe the Power Mac G5, yet Half Life 2 is still unplayable under VPC. You throw all of these technical reasons around but the truth is, Microsoft, whom I believe has an enourmous VPC for Mac budget, hasn't been able to tweak the emulation enough to make it a viable PC gaming platform. What makes you think they'll be able to do this with Xbox 2 regarding Xbox games?
As I've stated before, increasing VPC performance so that it is capable of playing Half Life 2 and the like, not only greatly increases sales of VPC, but adds the side effect of increasing the number of computers worldwide with Windows installed; and that, is one of the major goals of Microsoft. They'll do anything they can to increase VPC sales and I don't think they haven't tried to make VPC a good gaming platform, I just think they're not able to yet. And if they can't do it for VPC, I don't think they can do it for Xbox2 as the principles are the same.

[Mord]

there are two reasons HL 2 wont run on VPC first is VPC dose not support direct X the second is that HL2 requires a 1.2Ghz cpu which no powermac can emulate, if a 1.8GHz G5 runs like a 533MHz P3 then how do you expect it to run?

[GFLPraxis]

Apart from the technial reasons i argued? Increase in CPU Speed,

I believe I showed that the XBox 2's CPU is slower than today's PowerMacs...therefore it should be not fast enough to emulate the XBox 1.

increase in GPU speed,

This is assuming MS gets VPC to support DirectX, which it currently doesn't.

increse in memory,

256 MB of RAM is certainly less than most PowerMacs have.



vastly better hardware design,
With completely different architectures, making emulation more difficult

streamline and small OS, multi million $$$ emulation department budget etc.

MS has ALWAYS had multimillion $$$ budgets, and it was NEVER able to ramp up VPC performance by the sheer amount you think they can.




Anyway, as we disagree there is a simpler way to explain why the xBox 2 will be able to lay Box games.

A Toys R Us, any where in the world.

Man walks in intrested in the new xBox 2 console, he bought his children an xBox a few years back and now wants to buy an xBox 2 for a birthday gift.

His children also have a PS2, which he bought understanding that it would play all the orginal games bar a few weird ones that his children say were only released in Japan so not to worry.

He asks the assiatant

"and does this play the original games"

FREEZE FRAME

Imagine your Bill Gates

Now if the sales assitant says "Yes the xBox 2 will play all your original xBox games" would that make the customer more or less likely to buy the xBox 2?

Simple really, now as i've said in my previou post, Sony have broke the mould by making the playstation 2 console combatible with the original Playstation.

And because of this Nintendo and Sony have been put under pressure to do the same.

Of course now playing PS games on your PS2 isn't that important and in no way could be considered as a selling point so far into the platforms life, but at the beginning it was very widly advertised.

And this is why xBox 2 will play xBox games.


Right, your turn! ;)


Just because MS would WANT it to be backwards compatible doesn't mean they can do it if its not possible.

[Mord]

the triple core 3.5GHz ppc in the xbox 2 will be able to emulate a 700MHz celeron, even if it can only complete 2 instructions per clock, also when was the last version of VPC released, ages ago i think Microsoft can optimize it quite a fair bit to run on the xbox 2

[GFLPraxis]

the triple core 3.5GHz ppc in the xbox 2 will be able to emulate a 700MHz celeron, even if it can only complete 2 instructions per clock, also when was the last version of VPC released, ages ago i think Microsoft can optimize it quite a fair bit to run on the xbox 2

It's a P3, not a celeron, see Anandtech quote above.


I ran calculations (BTW, its tri-core 3 GHz, not 3.5 as rumored), remember?

It's the equivilant of a tri-core 850 MHz G5. Since XBox 1 games are single threaded, they can only use one processor.

That's an EXTREMELY rough idea- it's not really a G5 at all, and is designed much differently from the G5. See my quotes below; the design is so completely different from the P3 that emulation should be ridiculously hard.

Sorry, your "multithread the emulation" idea doesn't work, on stardestroyer.net some programers/Linux nerds suggested it and discussed it and decided it wouldn't work at all.


Some quotes:

You are utterly revelling in your ignorance. First of all, Multiple cores are absolutely useless in emulating a single CPU, period You can only use ONE of those 3 cores.


Compared to the p3 733mhz processor which is considerable slower.

You would have to be terminally stupid not to be able to emulate a processor when you have 3 times the number of processors and probably close to 3 times the raw preformance.


You're being terminally retarded to talk of your ***. You have no idea what you are talking about. The much shorter pipelined out-of-order and wider P3 will likely have a similar if not superior IPC, and in some case will simple OWN the PPC because of it's out-of-order nature. Learn what out-of-order execution means, it's history, etc. It's a very important aspect of a CPU.



I think that there will be no backwards compatibility. No HD = no emulation of Xb1 games that uses it. On top of that they changed practically every single chip in the system (CPU, GPU, media chip, etc). Feels to me like they'll have one helluva time emulating Xbox1.





The original XBox chip is a single celeron 730mhz processor. The Xbox2 is a 3ghz 3 core PPC chip. PPC chips have a high IPC compared to the equivelent intel x86 chip, and the one in the xbox2 is so much better than the xbox it isnt funny.

Minor point: Xbox has a halved-cache P3, not a Celeron.





The original XBox chip is a single celeron 730mhz processor. The Xbox2 is a 3ghz 3 core PPC chip. PPC chips have a high IPC compared to the equivelent intel x86 chip, and the one in the xbox2 is so much better than the xbox it isnt funny.

Seeing how you know so little about CPU designs I'll let this go. But in short, you're wrong, period. You're not looking at a PPC 970 (the G5 in the Mac), not even a G4. No, you're looking at a very simplistic 2-way in-order CPU. The last "2-way in-order" intel chip was the original Pentium (the "586"), a 15 year old chip. All modern CPUs (like the P3) are all at least 3-wide and are out-of-order processors. Hard as it is to believe, the "celeron" in the Xbox1 is technologically more advanced that the PPC chip in the Xbox2 with the exception of much higher attainable clockspeeds and use of SMT for the PPC chip. Unfortunately, SMT is useless in emulated single-threaded processes, and so is the multi-core aspect of the X2-CPU.

IPC for the X2-CPU isn't much superior than the X-CPU if not in fact worse. If you had to pick a CPU to emulate a P3 the PPC chip in the Xbox2 is perhaps the worst choice you could possibly pick; They're totally different chips with totally difference design philosophies. The X2-CPU was really meant for great multi-thread apps whereas the P3 was meant for blazing fast single-threaded apps. The wide, out-of-order nature of the P3 means it is very good at integer computations, in fact in somes cases possibly better than the PPC, whereas the PPC was really meant for huge float point computing power with weak integer. It's one hell of a mismatch, then put an emulator on top of this. Can you say "ouch"?


Not that it damn well matters much. Microsoft already knows how to write a reasonable high proformance emulator for a PPC processer to emulate a x86 chip (VirtualPC)

Not even the greatest emulator could function well on such a mismatch.




And here's one for combatcolin:

Lets not let the minor fact that Microsoft produces some of the better virtual machine emulators around, and that they migh have had some ISA changes to help emulation(they are going to be ordering in bulk remember).


So what? You're trying to emulate a 3-way, out-of-order execution x86 chip with a (relatively) short pipeline (what the P3 in the Xbox is) with a 2-way in-order deeply pipelined PPC chip (what the CPU in the Xbox2 is). Let me explain. The CPU in the Xbox2 is a very simple design and is "skinny," meant for very high clockspeeds, but will have bad IPC (instructions per clock). The P3 on the other had is a much wider design and is more complex, slower in clockspeed (theoretically, since they're different generations of chips) but has good IPC. Somethings will be very suited to the first way but other things will be much more suited on the second CPU. In short they're fundamentally difference designs, and even though the PPC may be moving at 3Ghz and the P3 at 733Mhz, there should still be some cases where the P3 will win. Emulating this will be an ugly, buggy mess I seriously doubt they can do.




Read the explanations, they make good sense. Basicly, the XBox 2 CPU is nothing like a G5 other than the PowerPC architecture. It should get great floating point calcs and very weak integer calcs, while the P3 gets really great integer calcs. It's a complete mismatch, so trying to use a processor that has terrible integer calculations to emulate one that does integer calculations very well is extremely tough, ESPECIALLY when the one you're trying to emulate does more instructions per clock cycle (meaning it takes you three clock cycles to do one of theirs).

And you can't use more than one processor for it.
It's fine for games, but it's almost useless for emulation- in the case of emulating a Pentium 3, using this processor is probably the WORST choice you could possibly make.

[Kal-EL]

there are two reasons HL 2 wont run on VPC first is VPC dose not support direct X the second is that HL2 requires a 1.2Ghz cpu which no powermac can emulate, if a 1.8GHz G5 runs like a 533MHz P3 then how do you expect it to run?

I'll give you the first reason because we are talking about HL 2, but there are a lot of other games unplayable in VPC that do not support direct X.
Your second reason is my point exactly! I don't expect it to run because the CPU emulation of the P3 by the Powermac is too slow, just as you pointed out. So if Microsoft is unable to emulate acceptable speeds for gaming with VPC, how will they be able fix this problem for Xbox 2?

the triple core 3.5GHz ppc in the xbox 2 will be able to emulate a 700MHz celeron, even if it can only complete 2 instructions per clock, also when was the last version of VPC released, ages ago i think Microsoft can optimize it quite a fair bit to run on the xbox 2

The last version of VPC (and first version compatible w/the G5) was released in October. It wasn't all that long ago. Actually Macworld printed it's review of the release only 2 months ago in January. And I remember that the release was delayed quite a bit too. Microsoft purchased VPC from Connectix in February of 2003, the G5 was announced in July, 2003 and it wasn't until October, 2004 that a G5 compatible version of VPC began shipping. Makes me think they had problems optimizing for the G5. That probably includes CPU emulation speeds. Don't know if they've perfected speed optimization yet. Time will tell...

[GFLPraxis]

The last version of VPC (and first version compatible w/the G5) was released in October. It wasn't all that long ago. Actually Macworld printed it's review of the release only 2 months ago in January. And I remember that the release was delayed quite a bit too. Microsoft purchased VPC from Connectix in February of 2003, the G5 was announced in July, 2003 and it wasn't until October, 2004 that a G5 compatible version of VPC began shipping. Makes me think they had problems optimizing for the G5. That probably includes CPU emulation speeds. Don't know if they've perfected speed optimization yet. Time will tell...

Not to mention that this is a new processor, not a G5 (so they have to start optimizing all over again, and it doesn't have the advantages of the G5 like AltiVec), and its completely different from any other PPC and even harder to use for emulation of x86 due to the 'skinny' design.

[Mord]

the is no way VPC can play any proper games as it dose not have any 3D acceleration at all no open gl no directx no nothing, only software rendering.

[Kal-EL]

the is no way VPC can play any proper games as it dose not have any 3D acceleration at all no open gl no directx no nothing, only software rendering.

I understand all of these things. Again I wonder though, why is this? Do you think Microsoft intentionally left all of these things out of VPC? Perhaps they did with direct X, but the other things? Microsoft is in the business of making money. Why would they intentionally leave things out of product development that would increase sales immensely? Unless they had problems implimenting these things and havent figured out how solve the problems. If that's the case, I see the same issues implimenting emulation on Xbox 2.

[combatcolin]

The big problem with forums sometimes is by the time you want to post your side of the debate theres been a billion posts in between.

I was going to say something and then went downstairs for some muncies and now have forgotton.

Ah! that was it!, Memory, yes, most macs only have 256MB of RAM and they do have issues with emulation of windows but MAC OS takes up a bloody big chuck if not all of that before virtual RAM deals with apps etc.

xBox OS needs 512K, in other words bugger all and as the OS is very streamlined you don't have the problem of a big bloated OS emulating another big bloated OS.

Better system design means everything gets faster and easier to work with, which would also benefit emulation.

Right, back to WOW.

[jared_kipe]

People said the same thing when the GameCube was using 1.6 GB disks vs 4.7 for everybody else.

Indeed, and yet I grimace at the cheesy music and computer generated choral parts in Zelda Windwaker.

[Kal-EL]

The big problem with forums sometimes is by the time you want to post your side of the debate theres been a billion posts in between.

I was going to say something and then went downstairs for some muncies and now have forgotton.

Ah! that was it!, Memory, yes, most macs only have 256MB of RAM and they do have issues with emulation of windows but MAC OS takes up a bloody big chuck if not all of that before virtual RAM deals with apps etc.

xBox OS needs 512K, in other words bugger all and as the OS is very streamlined you don't have the problem of a big bloated OS emulating another big bloated OS.

Better system design means everything gets faster and easier to work with, which would also benefit emulation.

Right, back to WOW.

You do have a point there, but if memory were the only issue, then people with large amounts of ram should see vast improvements in VPC where games are concerned and they don't. Even a Powermac G5 running the max alowable 8 gigs of ram woldn't be a viable VPC gaming machine. There's a lot more involved than just bumping up the memory...

[GFLPraxis]

The big problem with forums sometimes is by the time you want to post your side of the debate theres been a billion posts in between.

I was going to say something and then went downstairs for some muncies and now have forgotton.

Ah! that was it!, Memory, yes, most macs only have 256MB of RAM and they do have issues with emulation of windows but MAC OS takes up a bloody big chuck if not all of that before virtual RAM deals with apps etc.

xBox OS needs 512K, in other words bugger all and as the OS is very streamlined you don't have the problem of a big bloated OS emulating another big bloated OS.

Better system design means everything gets faster and easier to work with, which would also benefit emulation.

Right, back to WOW.

Bumping up the memory isn't going to increase processor speed.

[combatcolin]

VPC is naff because:

A: It still based around Panther and so is not taking advantage of all of a G5's CPU power.

B: Dosn't matter if you have 1,2 4 or any number of CPU's in a computer, if the program is only talking to one of them then its not performance city is it?

C: Direct X.

However you would think that as a G5 can have the same Graphic card as a PC, so not emulation is required - then OpenGL, which is cross platform, would make a big difference.

And does VPC still have the 2GB limit bug?

[GFLPraxis]

VPC is naff because:

A: It still based around Panther and so is not taking advantage of all of a G5's CPU power.

B: Dosn't matter if you have 1,2 4 or any number of CPU's in a computer, if the program is only talking to one of them then its not performance city is it?

C: Direct X.

However you would think that as a G5 can have the same Graphic card as a PC, so not emulation is required - then OpenGL, which is cross platform, would make a big difference.

And does VPC still have the 2GB limit bug?

Did you COMPLETELY skip my post with all the programmer quotes???


A: So what? Why is it not taking advantage of all of a G5's CPU power by being programmed for Panther? This makes no sense.

B: Wrong. Emulation can only use one processor. If a 1.8 GHz G5 runs like a 533 MHz P3, then a dual 1.8 GHz G5 would run like a dual 533 MHz P3 (each emulating one P3), NOT a 1 GHz P3. Since XBox 1 games are single threaded, they can only make use of one processor.

To refresh your memory:
You are utterly revelling in your ignorance. First of all, Multiple cores are absolutely useless in emulating a single CPU, period You can only use ONE of those 3 cores.


The XBox 2's processors are too slow to even approach these scores, as well.
Did you even read my above post? The XBox 2's processors DESIGN is way different from a G5, and should make it even harder to emulate.


Remember?

Seeing how you know so little about CPU designs I'll let this go. But in short, you're wrong, period. You're not looking at a PPC 970 (the G5 in the Mac), not even a G4. No, you're looking at a very simplistic 2-way in-order CPU. The last "2-way in-order" intel chip was the original Pentium (the "586"), a 15 year old chip. All modern CPUs (like the P3) are all at least 3-wide and are out-of-order processors. Hard as it is to believe, the "celeron" in the Xbox1 is technologically more advanced that the PPC chip in the Xbox2 with the exception of much higher attainable clockspeeds and use of SMT for the PPC chip. Unfortunately, SMT is useless in emulated single-threaded processes, and so is the multi-core aspect of the X2-CPU.

IPC for the X2-CPU isn't much superior than the X-CPU if not in fact worse. If you had to pick a CPU to emulate a P3 the PPC chip in the Xbox2 is perhaps the worst choice you could possibly pick; They're totally different chips with totally difference design philosophies. The X2-CPU was really meant for great multi-thread apps whereas the P3 was meant for blazing fast single-threaded apps. The wide, out-of-order nature of the P3 means it is very good at integer computations, in fact in somes cases possibly better than the PPC, whereas the PPC was really meant for huge float point computing power with weak integer. It's one hell of a mismatch, then put an emulator on top of this. Can you say "ouch"?

Not even the greatest emulator could function well on such a mismatch.

That's right- the XBox 2 is NOT using G5's. It's a completely new processor based on the PowerPC architecture- NOT the G5.

The design of it is completely the opposite of the way the Pentium 3 was designed, and as a result, emulation should be nearly impossible unless the Xbox 2's processor was IMMENSLEY more powerful than it is.

and



So what? You're trying to emulate a 3-way, out-of-order execution x86 chip with a (relatively) short pipeline (what the P3 in the Xbox is) with a 2-way in-order deeply pipelined PPC chip (what the CPU in the Xbox2 is). Let me explain. The CPU in the Xbox2 is a very simple design and is "skinny," meant for very high clockspeeds, but will have bad IPC (instructions per clock). The P3 on the other had is a much wider design and is more complex, slower in clockspeed (theoretically, since they're different generations of chips) but has good IPC. Somethings will be very suited to the first way but other things will be much more suited on the second CPU. In short they're fundamentally difference designs, and even though the PPC may be moving at 3Ghz and the P3 at 733Mhz, there should still be some cases where the P3 will win. Emulating this will be an ugly, buggy mess I seriously doubt they can do.


Understand now?

Emulation is OUT OF THE QUESTION.

The only possibility is MS including a Pentium 3 in the XBox 2, or as an addon. Which might very well happen, Nintendo did it with the GameBoy and with the DS.

[combatcolin]

My last post was about a Mac emulating a PC, which is much harder to do and more complex than an xBox 2 emulating an xBox.

And finally,

An add on unit for emulation my arse!

As i've said before, when Sony released the PS2 it chaged everything, now all machines will be backwards combatible if they have the same name as their predessors.

Of course, also like the PS2, this feature will only be a selling point in the first year of a console life.

[Symtex]

DirectX is an APi that allow programmer to design game regardless of hardware as long as it's DirectX compatible. Before, each game has to be program for specific hardware.

Xbox games are programmed using DirectX API. So it's fair to say that in THEORY in games that run on xbox would be able to run on xbox2 natively without any emulation. The problem reside in the nvidia specific optimization that i've might have been program in each xbox games that causes an issue. This is the part where xbox2 need to emulate / translate unless that ATI Chipset is able to run those nvidia specific instruction natively.

The other [problem that might occur in running an xbox game on an xbox2 would be again the specific instruction that i've been implemented for the Digital 5.1 sound controller. This is theory could be simulate easily by the xbox2 CPU.

VPC does not support directx API and i don't think that microsoft plan to do so. What they need to work on, like I mention earlier in my post, is to emulation / translate the specific nvidia instruction to run on the ATI chipset. HAL / DirectX will take care of the rest.

[Mord]

i dont think that directx lets you run games on a ppc and x86 cpu i think it's weather a game can run on AMD intel Cyrix and VIA cpu's with all there different vector units ect.

[Symtex]

i dont think that directx lets you run games on a ppc and x86 cpu i think it's weather a game can run on AMD intel Cyrix and VIA cpu's with all there different vector units ect.

Directx has to be modified in order to meath those vector units differences. That is why DirectX will still be use for Xbox2 even thought it's PPC Processor

[Mord]

obviously but it wont let you play xbox 1 games without cpu emulation.

[GFLPraxis]

My last post was about a Mac emulating a PC, which is much harder to do and more complex than an xBox 2 emulating an xBox.

Incorrect, you COMPLETELY skipped my post! It's MUCH, MUCH harder for the two-way processor in the XBox 2 to emulate the XBox 1, than for a Mac to emulate a PC. MUCH harder. Go back and read it before you respond or I'll take your next post to be a concession.


And finally,

An add on unit for emulation my arse!

As i've said before, when Sony released the PS2 it chaged everything, now all machines will be backwards combatible if they have the same name as their predessors.

Of course, also like the PS2, this feature will only be a selling point in the first year of a console life.


Gee! That clinches it! They have the same name, therefore they must be backwards compatible! :rolleyes:

[GFLPraxis]

I was talking to someone today and he said he just saw some info, that the XBox 2 would include a chip on the hard drive that would enable backwards compatibility.

Can anyone find this anywhere?

EDIT:

Or perhaps not (He could have been reading a speculation site). Or maybe I just can't find it.


http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=dev&aid=3645

According to this news site, MS has confirmed no backwards compatability. That doesn't rule out an addon, but it confirms my suspicion- emulation is not possible.

[combatcolin]

Gee! That clinches it! They have the same name, therefore they must be backwards compatible! :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]


YES!!

DO YOU NOT SEE?? :confused:

Ignore the technical hyperbole and look at it from Joe Public's point of view.

xBox 2 = xBox 1 but a lot better!!

DO YOU NOT SEE??? :confused:

[XboxEvolved]

Hi guys, I run an Xbox website so I get a lot of these questions all the time. The Xbox 2 will be able to play Xbox games although MS did not originally intend for it to do so. The reasoning is, like with PS2 playing PS1 games, is it takes some power away from the system. The system will do so though, especially with the other two hardware developers having it.

As for the harddrive, it is a pretty cute scheme MS has going. To get the one with the HD, you will pay $300--for the one without HD it will be between $200-250. The thing is, MS will push the HD alot in order to coax these people thinking they got a good deal into buying one, ultimately creating more profit for Microsoft. As for if the system will be profitable or not, it is nothing but profit. I found out long ago that MS intends to make pure profit, especially with a "buy parts as they go" deal with all partners creating the system. This is the same deals Nintendo had and why they only lost $67 every system for a year, and from there was nothing but profit (according to their Director of Finance). By a year, GC broke even, and this is what will probably happen with Xbox 2, if not faster.

Not being a fanboy though, I honestly think MS will win this next console gen, and Nintendo will just go deeper in the public's view. While they might not lose any profit, they will end up becoming the Disney of videogames literally. Like Disney, they will come out with a few hits for the family, with the majority of it being from the best studio within the company (like Disney does with Pixar). PS3 will still be very popular, but by the time it comes out, they would have lost a lot of ground--this isn't Drecast were tlaking about with a company that has to take out major loans to even make a system launch happen--this is Microsoft.

[GFLPraxis]

YES!!

DO YOU NOT SEE?? :confused:

Ignore the technical hyperbole and look at it from Joe Public's point of view.

xBox 2 = xBox 1 but a lot better!!

DO YOU NOT SEE??? :confused:

Uh, you mean XBox 2 > XBox 1 :p

But it doesn't necessarily mean they have to be backwards compatible. Especially if its IMPOSSIBLE :rolleyes: They're capitalizing on the brand name, because the XBox has the 'cool factor' going for it. So they want XBox fans to pick up the XBox 2.

[GFLPraxis]

Hi guys, I run an Xbox website so I get a lot of these questions all the time. The Xbox 2 will be able to play Xbox games although MS did not originally intend for it to do so. The reasoning is, like with PS2 playing PS1 games, is it takes some power away from the system. The system will do so though, especially with the other two hardware developers having it.

As for the harddrive, it is a pretty cute scheme MS has going. To get the one with the HD, you will pay $300--for the one without HD it will be between $200-250. The thing is, MS will push the HD alot in order to coax these people thinking they got a good deal into buying one, ultimately creating more profit for Microsoft. As for if the system will be profitable or not, it is nothing but profit. I found out long ago that MS intends to make pure profit, especially with a "buy parts as they go" deal with all partners creating the system. This is the same deals Nintendo had and why they only lost $67 every system for a year, and from there was nothing but profit (according to their Director of Finance). By a year, GC broke even, and this is what will probably happen with Xbox 2, if not faster.

Not being a fanboy though, I honestly think MS will win this next console gen, and Nintendo will just go deeper in the public's view. While they might not lose any profit, they will end up becoming the Disney of videogames literally. Like Disney, they will come out with a few hits for the family, with the majority of it being from the best studio within the company (like Disney does with Pixar). PS3 will still be very popular, but by the time it comes out, they would have lost a lot of ground--this isn't Drecast were tlaking about with a company that has to take out major loans to even make a system launch happen--this is Microsoft.

Your entire post is very flawed.

Firstly, MS confirmed there is not multiple versions of the XBox 2, I'm fairly certain. You buy the XBox 2, then buy the optional hard drive if you want it.

The Xbox 2 will be able to play Xbox games although MS did not originally intend for it to do so. The reasoning is, like with PS2 playing PS1 games, is it takes some power away from the system. The system will do so though, especially with the other two hardware developers having it.

HOW? How will this be done when it is not possible to do? Short of MS putting a Pentium 3 processor in the XBox 2, there is NO WAY this could be done.

The PS2 and PS1 shared the same processor architecture (MIPS).
The GameCube and Revolution share the same processor architecture (PowerPC).

The XBox 1 and XBox 2 do NOT share the same processor architecture. Further, the XBox 2's processor is the furthest from the XBox 1's design as you could possibly GET. Did you read my above posts?

Basicly, the XBox 2 being able to emulate the XBox 1 is a virtual impossibility. It can not be done. I don't care what MS wants to do, if they can't do it, they won't. :rolleyes:

And how did the PS2's running PS1 games take power from the system? They had the same hardware, just faster version of it. That's why it had backwards compatability. No taking power from the system there.

Same thing for the next Nintendo.

XBox does not have that advantage.

So unless MS includes a Pentium 3 processor, OR makes it a BC addon, there is no possible way they could include backwards compatability.



As for MS winning. LOL. With all the crap in the XBox 2? Normal DVD's! No backwards compatability without an addon! No hard drive without an addon (one reason people liked XBox)! Worst graphics of the lot (another reason people liked XBox)! They're alienating their own crowd.

[Lord Blackadder]

I wonder why the console makers all chose some variation of the PPC theme over an x86 architecture or other CPU for their hardware. Microsoft in particular is going to some lengths to adapt its software to accommodate the IBM processors.

It seems that the IBM POWER family of CPUs has a pretty bright future.

[combatcolin]

Uh, you mean XBox 2 > XBox 1 :p

But it doesn't necessarily mean they have to be backwards compatible. Especially if its IMPOSSIBLE :rolleyes: They're capitalizing on the brand name, because the XBox has the 'cool factor' going for it. So they want XBox fans to pick up the XBox 2.

NO NO NO.

Right, lets start again.

Sony changed everything by making the PS2 work with the then current range of playstation games, thereby enticing owners of Playststions into buying the next generation console without losing out on their current kit.

THIS HAD NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE!

Sony cemented the then current "next gen" console war.

Of course a lot of people simpy kempted their Playststions anyway, and the selling point of backwards combatible gaming would only last a year before it fizzled out.

Microsoft want to rule the console ring the same way they have dominated the home computer market, and if by making the Xbox 2 combatible with the xBox means extra sales like the PS2 had - they will do this.

Remember, Joe Public, the person who dosn't care about gaming as much as you or I but is the make or break factor in a consoles products life sees it very simply...

PS2 = PS but better.
xBox 2 = xBox but better.

And as for cool factor, the PS2 has spades more than the xBox.

Right, see you TM when i wake up and switch my PC on :p
Although at this rate we'll still be banging on up untill the xBox is released ;)

[XboxEvolved]

Your entire post is very flawed.

Firstly, MS confirmed there is not multiple versions of the XBox 2, I'm fairly certain. You buy the XBox 2, then buy the optional hard drive if you want it.

MS never confirmed this, but from what I understand talking to developers, and from what major players such as the president of EA has been saying, the Xbox 2 will have two options. Many think a third option, a computer Xbox 2 hybird of sorts will be offered about the time PS3 shows up but I highly doubt that.


HOW? How will this be done when it is not possible to do? Short of MS putting a Pentium 3 processor in the XBox 2, there is NO WAY this could be done.

The PS2 and PS1 shared the same processor architecture (MIPS).
The GameCube and Revolution share the same processor architecture (PowerPC).

The XBox 1 and XBox 2 do NOT share the same processor architecture. Further, the XBox 2's processor is the furthest from the XBox 1's design as you could possibly GET. Did you read my above posts?

Basicly, the XBox 2 being able to emulate the XBox 1 is a virtual impossibility. It can not be done. I don't care what MS wants to do, if they can't do it, they won't. :rolleyes:

And how did the PS2's running PS1 games take power from the system? They had the same hardware, just faster version of it. That's why it had backwards compatability. No taking power from the system there.

Same thing for the next Nintendo.

XBox does not have that advantage.

So unless MS includes a Pentium 3 processor, OR makes it a BC addon, there is no possible way they could include backwards compatability.


Honestly, I don't know how MS could do it, I don't care. I don't even know how Xbox can do all the crazy stuff it can do despite being very underpowered to today's standards. The thing is, why would Microsoft offer less than what is expected? Microsoft isn't doing this because they want to fail horribly, they are doing it to control the market, that is what Microsoft does, they control markets. I'm sure your a smart guy and understand how it works, but I think you doubt Microsoft a little to much.

As for MS winning. LOL. With all the crap in the XBox 2? Normal DVD's! No backwards compatability without an addon! No hard drive without an addon (one reason people liked XBox)! Worst graphics of the lot (another reason people liked XBox)! They're alienating their own crowd.

Who said it would be worst graphics of the lot? If anything chances are it will have the best. Or maybe you haven't seen screens of what it will be able to do? Anyways, as for DVDs I don't see how that is a big problem. Not one game on Xbox has taken up a full 5 GB DVD, so with 8GB dvds on the next Xbox they should be fine. While Blu-Ray and HD DVD are all fun and good neither is 100% endorsed by all the major players. Why would MS take the risk, when the safest, cheapest for them and the consumer is a DVD? Also keep in mind, DVDs were around since (someone correct me if Im wrong) 1995-1997 range in US and finally become big in about 2001. Those two new formats haven't even been introduced in the US so what are the chances it will matter?

[GFLPraxis]

NO NO NO.

Right, lets start again.

Sony changed everything by making the PS2 work with the then current range of playstation games, thereby enticing owners of Playststions into buying the next generation console without losing out on their current kit.

THIS HAD NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE!

Sony cemented the then current "next gen" console war.

Of course a lot of people simpy kempted their Playststions anyway, and the selling point of backwards combatible gaming would only last a year before it fizzled out.

Microsoft want to rule the console ring the same way they have dominated the home computer market, and if by making the Xbox 2 combatible with the xBox means extra sales like the PS2 had - they will do this.

Remember, Joe Public, the person who dosn't care about gaming as much as you or I but is the make or break factor in a consoles products life sees it very simply...

PS2 = PS but better.
xBox 2 = xBox but better.

And as for cool factor, the PS2 has spades more than the xBox.

Right, see you TM when i wake up and switch my PC on :p
Although at this rate we'll still be banging on up untill the xBox is released ;)

Look, I DON'T CARE what Sony did with the PS2. It's IMPOSSIBLE for the XBox 2 to run XBox 1 games without a Pentium 3 processor anywhere on the system. It simply cannot be done at this point.

[GFLPraxis]

MS never confirmed this, but from what I understand talking to developers, and from what major players such as the president of EA has been saying, the Xbox 2 will have two options. Many think a third option, a computer Xbox 2 hybird of sorts will be offered about the time PS3 shows up but I highly doubt that.

MS released the specs to the developers and said the hard drive would be a sold-seperately addon.

The XBox 2 computer hybrid was an obvious lie, because it claimed it would be capable of running modern PC games, yet obviously the system only has 256 MB of RAM and would have to be running Windows in VirtualPC! That was made up from the get-go.



Honestly, I don't know how MS could do it, I don't care. I don't even know how Xbox can do all the crazy stuff it can do despite being very underpowered to today's standards.

Oh, it's quite simple. Games are optimized to the XBox hardware. The XBox only has to render at 640x480 (TV) resolution, while computers need to render at anywhere from 800x600 to 1280x1024 or higher, so you get much better performance. The XBox doesn't have a big OS, so it requires less RAM.


The thing is, why would Microsoft offer less than what is expected? Microsoft isn't doing this because they want to fail horribly, they are doing it to control the market, that is what Microsoft does, they control markets. I'm sure your a smart guy and understand how it works, but I think you doubt Microsoft a little to much.

They've already said they're not sure if they'll have backwards compatability, so obviously it's not being expected.

The only way it could be done would be by having a Pentium 3 processor on the XBox 2. There's no way, from the hardware layout, that the XBox 2 could emulate the XBox 1 on its own.



Who said it would be worst graphics of the lot? If anything chances are it will have the best.

What? This is just silly. Look historically at it- the first system to come has ALWAYS had the worst graphics, the last system always has had the best.

The XBox 2 is coming as much as six months ahead of the other consoles. The next Nintendo is using the same type of graphics cards, so obviously, will have a newer version of the same thing. And the PS3 is coming last, with the Cell processor and the newest graphics card (remember, late 2005 for XBox 2, mid 2006 for PS3, big difference), so obviously having the best hardware.


Or maybe you haven't seen screens of what it will be able to do? Anyways, as for DVDs I don't see how that is a big problem. Not one game on Xbox has taken up a full 5 GB DVD, so with 8GB dvds on the next Xbox they should be fine.

Not true. Textures will have to be in much higher resolution for HD format. Videos will take up much more space in HD format. Every character and level will have many more polygons than ever before.

No N64 game ever took up a full gigabyte, so was Nintendo smart to go with 1.6 GB disks on the GC? No.

And according to GameInformer, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas already nearly fills up a dual layer disk.


While Blu-Ray and HD DVD are all fun and good neither is 100% endorsed by all the major players.

So? The console companies make their own disks. Since you're not going to be using XBox 2 games in ANYTHING but an XBox 2, why does it need to be an open standard? Look at Nintendo's disk, it's not endorsed by anyone. The disk don't matter, except for space.

HD-DVD is backwards compatible anyway, so you could still play DVD movies if that's all you're worried about.

Why would MS take the risk, when the safest, cheapest for them and the consumer is a DVD? Also keep in mind, DVDs were around since (someone correct me if Im wrong) 1995-1997 range in US and finally become big in about 2001. Those two new formats haven't even been introduced in the US so what are the chances it will matter?


Because the other two consoles will have them. It's NOT a risk at all. If MS went with HD-DVD, which is almost as cheap as normal DVD, they could fit nearly four times as much on each disk! And still play normal DVD's!

And it doesn't matter which one wins the format war, since MS would make their own disks. Since HD-DVD is so cheap to make, it'd make the most sense.

MS is launching the system too early. As a result, it's going to be significantly slower and missing several key defining features of the next gen consoles. Dude- we're talking about all games being designed for HD, but MS is the only one without the storage to hold everything in HD. It's just ridiculous.

They're making a mistake by launching too early, though they'll probably get all the early adopters.

[combatcolin]

Look, I DON'T CARE what Sony did with the PS2. It's IMPOSSIBLE for the XBox 2 to run XBox 1 games without a Pentium 3 processor anywhere on the system. It simply cannot be done at this point.

Just because you don't care dosn't mean its not going to happen.

Oh, and so you own a GBA, GBA SP or DS?

See where i'm going yet?

Going back to emulation, while it is going to be tricky going from RISC to CISC (AND NOT MIPS! Thats a defintion of processing power!) you are over playing the issue.

Also the xBox had a 733Mhz Celeron CPU, not a speed demon by any defination and not that difficult to emulate.

Lets look at the graphic card on the xBox 2, Microsoft have had years to perfect a low cost but very powerful card, while the original had a slightly modified GeForce 2 because of a very short development timescale, which leads me to..

CORE VIDEO

Intresting Apple technology we have all read about, involves shoving as much work towards the Graphic Card as possible and away from the CPU.

See where i'm going yet?

[Mord]

Just because you don't care dosn't mean its not going to happen.

Oh, and so you own a GBA, GBA SP or DS?

See where i'm going yet?

Going back to emulation, while it is going to be tricky going from RISC to CISC (AND NOT MIPS! Thats a defintion of processing power!) you are over playing the issue.

Also the xBox had a 733Mhz Celeron CPU, not a speed demon by any defination and not that difficult to emulate.

Lets look at the graphic card on the xBox 2, Microsoft have had years to perfect a low cost but very powerful card, while the original had a slightly modified GeForce 2 because of a very short development timescale, which leads me to..

CORE VIDEO

Intresting Apple technology we have all read about, involves shoving as much work towards the Graphic Card as possible and away from the CPU.

See where i'm going yet?

nope your chatting BS.

from now on can we refer to the xbox's cpu as a celerion or penteron as it's like a demi pentium demi celeron.

also the xbox one used a geforce 3, geforce 2's are DX 7 gpu's and xbox has DX 8 (vertex shaders ect.)

[takao]

Going back to emulation, while it is going to be tricky going from RISC to CISC (AND NOT MIPS! Thats a defintion of processing power!) you are over playing the issue.

*grasp*
google: "MIPS"
1st link:
www.mips.com

and perhaps more interesting for you :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIPS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIPS_architecture

MIPS is a lot more nowadays ...and seriously the MIPS number you mean is absolutly irrelavant because it ignores other key aspects from computer architecture so it's othing more than perhaps a marketing number

(speaking of the PowerPC as a RISC CPU is kinda strange as well... how many instruction does it have ? 150 ? 200 ? sure less than the modern pentiums but still more than other RISC CPUs ...sure the whole thing is based on a RISC design but they still got a lot of additional instructions over the years)

[raggedjimmi]

i dont care if the Xbox2 wont play Xbox1 games... i have an Xbox 1 and a couple of spare Scart ports too. me=not arsed.

i just wanted to say, Night and Day has a screenshot of an Xbox 2 game, it does look mightily good but as Gameboy beating down its visually better rivals, PS1 doing greater than its visually better rivals... graphics mean bugger all.

that is to say until recent years where PSP owners seem to slam down the DS because of its 'weaker graphics' hmm... Sony finally have the upper hand but the fans sure make use of this opportunity :D

I will get an Xbox 2 with the HD, provided its not extortionate like Sony's memory magic stick thingy. And it wont be until months if not years after the release. I will certainly get a Revolution (i am not missing out on Mario, Metroid [the Prime series is just too amazing], Zelda etc). speaking of which, has anyone heard about Mario 128? Apparently it has some new uber-amazing form of gameplay and Ninty are not telling anything. coupled with thier tight-lipped-ness and their love for innovating gameplay, they really do sound like Apple :D

i dont care for online gaming and uber real graphics. if its got addictive and its ,above everything, fun, then i will buy it. after all i just want to have fun.

[GFLPraxis]

Just because you don't care dosn't mean its not going to happen.

Oh, and so you own a GBA, GBA SP or DS?

GBA SP and DS.

The GBA and GBA SP has a z80 processor from the original Gameboy and GameBoy Color, to run the older games.

The DS has a 33 MHz ARM7 processor (the GBA had a 16 MHz ARM7 processor) to run GBA games in addition to the main ARM9.

So each of those systems had the processor from the previous system, because the main processor was a different architecture.

The PS1 and PS2 had the same architecutre. The GameCube and Revolution have the same architecture. The XBox 1 and XBox 2 do not. So either:
A) MS includes a Pentium 3 processor in the XBox 2, or as an addon.
or
B) No backwards compatability.


See where i'm going yet?


Nope. :rolleyes:


Going back to emulation, while it is going to be tricky going from RISC to CISC

You don't know a lot about processors, do you...
RISC vs CISC isn't even that big an issue anymore. The line is rather blurred- the newer RISC processors are much closer to CISC than the older ones, and the newer CISC processors have enough RISC features that they are referred by some as CRISC (Complex-Reduced Instruction Set).

You really don't have to worry too much about RISC vs CISC in this. The emulation problems between PowerPC and x86 occur for two reasons;
1) They are different architectures, duh
2) PowerPC is big-endian and x86 is little-endian

Now, VirtualPC gets decent speed in spite of both of those (the G4 had a feature called pseudo-little-endian mode to take care of that problem, the G5 does not but makes up for it in raw speed).

Well, there is one more problem to worry about.

3) The XBox 2 processor, which is not a normal G5, is a simple two-way processor that is designed for extremely fast floating point calculations and the P3 is meant for fast integer calculations. The P3 is meant for single threaded apps while the X-2 is meant for multithreaded apps. It's a MASSIVE mismatch, and as a result emulating performance will be worse than ever.

(AND NOT MIPS! Thats a defintion of processing power!)

WHAT? MIPS is a processor architecture. There's ARM, x86, PowerPC, MIPS, etc. Do you even know what you are talking about?


you are over playing the issue.


To the contrary! You are! I am curious if you even read my post. I give you technical information showing why it cannot be done, and you retailiate with, "The processor is better, it must be able to!" :rolleyes:


Also the xBox had a 733Mhz Celeron CPU, not a speed demon by any defination and not that difficult to emulate.


Um...completely wrong.

A 733 MHz PENTIUM 3 (not Celeron) is quite difficult to emulate, in fact. Remember, a 1.8 GHz G5 can only approach a 533 MHz Pentium 3 in Virtual PC (before you say Mac OS X slows it down, the only speed hinderance by OS X is RAM, and that does NOT affect the speed of the emulated proecssor).

Emulation can only use one core, and each X-2 core is considerably less powerful (about half) than a 1.8 GHz G5.

So it can't emulate a P3 worth beans. That's not even counting the fact that the design of the processor should make it nearly impossible. The X-2 is NOT a G5. It's WAY less advanced.


Lets look at the graphic card on the xBox 2, Microsoft have had years to perfect a low cost but very powerful card, while the original had a slightly modified GeForce 2 because of a very short development timescale, which leads me to..

CORE VIDEO

Intresting Apple technology we have all read about, involves shoving as much work towards the Graphic Card as possible and away from the CPU.

This is just stupid. Core Video works great for rendering the desktop and video and stuff. But graphics cards are designed for the sole purpose of rendering. Normal calculations? No. EMULATION? Certainly not. Especially when it has to be rendering graphics at the same time!

See where i'm going yet?


Yeah, you're giving me a great laugh...
Look, let me post this again, because you're obviously NOT READING IT.

Seeing how you know so little about CPU designs I'll let this go. But in short, you're wrong, period. You're not looking at a PPC 970 (the G5 in the Mac), not even a G4. No, you're looking at a very simplistic 2-way in-order CPU. The last "2-way in-order" intel chip was the original Pentium (the "586"), a 15 year old chip. All modern CPUs (like the P3) are all at least 3-wide and are out-of-order processors. Hard as it is to believe, the "celeron" in the Xbox1 is technologically more advanced that the PPC chip in the Xbox2 with the exception of much higher attainable clockspeeds and use of SMT for the PPC chip. Unfortunately, SMT is useless in emulated single-threaded processes, and so is the multi-core aspect of the X2-CPU.

IPC for the X2-CPU isn't much superior than the X-CPU if not in fact worse. If you had to pick a CPU to emulate a P3 the PPC chip in the Xbox2 is perhaps the worst choice you could possibly pick; They're totally different chips with totally difference design philosophies. The X2-CPU was really meant for great multi-thread apps whereas the P3 was meant for blazing fast single-threaded apps. The wide, out-of-order nature of the P3 means it is very good at integer computations, in fact in somes cases possibly better than the PPC, whereas the PPC was really meant for huge float point computing power with weak integer. It's one hell of a mismatch, then put an emulator on top of this. Can you say "ouch"?

Not even the greatest emulator could function well on such a mismatch.

And btw:
http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000990037579/

[combatcolin]

My Apologies for regarding MIPS diffirently from you.

For as long as i can remember (late 80's Amiga, Super Famicom etc) MIPS has been a measurment of CPU processing power, with CISC and RISC describing how CPU's work in the wake of the PowerPC.

ARM is also RISC chip, (remembering off the top of my head) thats neither here nor there as its aportable low powered affair.

First time i've seen CPU's directly called MIPS anyway, and the first time in over a year i've seen it anywhere in Macrumors, agree completly that simple overall speed is only one aspect of a CPU's power.

My Apolgies also about the CPU in the xBox, Microsoft came in for a lot of stick for using a Celeron instead of a Pentium, but GPU over compensated for this.

I do remeber something about Microsoft changing the CPU, but as i wasn't intrested in the xBox back i didn't really read more at the time.

CORE VIDEO

The aspect i was trying to explain is that Apple are using the Graphic Card in different ways to accieve more, as GPU's have been outstripping CPU's in processing advancments, and as the Graphic card in the xBox 2 will be very powerful indeed it is only logical for Microsoft to do the same.

PROGRAMMING ADVANCES

The wonderful thing about computing is that there is no set way to do things, as long as the end result is stable, structured and will enable others to understand and continue the work then anything goes.

Same with Emulation

CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS

As i've said before, people bought the new Game Boys and PS2's (And PC Engines if you want to really go back!) because they could play there old games on them, the buying public won't accept not being able to play their old games when other console's they have bought can do the same.

and finally...

MICROSOFT AND THEIR OPERATING SYSTEMS

First and foremost on Bill Gates's mind is that each Windows OS must be
combatible with what came before within reason.

Bill understands this better than anyone, no point in having a brand new super OS if nothing works on it, so as many people as possible can run their old software on the new OS and the eventually buy the newer versions.

Of course while this does slow things doen using a mixture of the old and new, it expands and sustains the market in which you can sell your product.

THE HARD DRIVE

Now i would agree with you that not having a HD will stop some games running, Halo and Halo 2 for example, but you can easily seeing Microsoft selling 2 packs (NOT VERSIONS!) of the xBox 2, a standalone and one with an external HD for a discounted price.

But external storage has never been that succesful in consoles, the N64 had the modified ZIP and the PS2 has its own Hard Drive that i've never seen in the flesh despite many PS2 owning friends.

But if Microsoft go with big 1GB flash card memory storage the card will be as fast as the Hard Drive anyway.

BUGGER ME!!

I'm turning into you Praxis!, waffling for pages on end ;)

[GFLPraxis]

My Apologies for regarding MIPS diffirently from you.

For as long as i can remember (late 80's Amiga, Super Famicom etc) MIPS has been a measurment of CPU processing power, with CISC and RISC describing how CPU's work in the wake of the PowerPC.

ARM is also RISC chip, (remembering off the top of my head) thats neither here nor there as its aportable low powered affair.

First time i've seen CPU's directly called MIPS anyway, and the first time in over a year i've seen it anywhere in Macrumors, agree completly that simple overall speed is only one aspect of a CPU's power.


I checked Google, and we're apparently both right.

MIPS = Million Instructions Per Second, or one Megaflop.
MIPS also = a processor architecture. There's x86, PowerPC, ARM, and MIPS. MIPS is in PS1, PS2, and PSP. ARM7 is in GBA, ARM9 is in DS, PowerPC in Macs and GameCubes and all the next gen consoles, and x86 in XBox and Windows PCs.
There's even a MIPS version of Linux and Debian.





My Apolgies also about the CPU in the xBox, Microsoft came in for a lot of stick for using a Celeron instead of a Pentium, but GPU over compensated for this.

I do remeber something about Microsoft changing the CPU, but as i wasn't intrested in the xBox back i didn't really read more at the time.


The XBox 1 uses a Pentium 3 with half the cache. A lot of people seem to think this is a Celeron, but in fact, it is not. I POSTED THIS ALREADY, but you don't seem to read my replies since you never actually refute any of my points :rolleyes:

http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=1561&p=2

"The CPU that powers the Xbox is a Coppermine based Pentium III with only 128KB L2 cache. While this would make many think that the processor is indeed a Celeron, one of the key performance factors of the Pentium III that is lost in the Celeron core was left intact for this core. The Coppermine core was left with an 8-way set associative L2 cache instead of the 4-way set associative cache of the Celeron. Based on what we've seen with the Coppermine and Coppermine128 (Celeron) cores we estimate that the 8-way set associative L2 cache gives this particular core a 10% performance advantage over the Coppermine128 core of the Celeron."

It's about 10% faster than a Celeron.

Faster than a Celeron, slower than a normal P3 (due to less cache), but its technically a P3.


CORE VIDEO

The aspect i was trying to explain is that Apple are using the Graphic Card in different ways to accieve more, as GPU's have been outstripping CPU's in processing advancments, and as the Graphic card in the xBox 2 will be very powerful indeed it is only logical for Microsoft to do the same.

No, because when the graphics card is ALREADY BEING USED it's stupid to shunt extra data to it ;)

Graphics cards are extremely optimized for certain types of work. Therefore, you can't shunt normal CPU tasks to the GPU, because it will SUCK at them. Emulation is one of those things.

Core Video shunts things like rendering the desktop, playing video, etc- thinks the graphics card can do well- to the graphics card. It does NOT do this for thinks only the CPU can do, like emulation and physics calcs, etc.

PROGRAMMING ADVANCES

The wonderful thing about computing is that there is no set way to do things, as long as the end result is stable, structured and will enable others to understand and continue the work then anything goes.

Same with Emulation


So what? This doesn't magically mean MS will find some better way than everyone else in the world.

I've showed you why it is technologically impossible. You can't take a processor that sucks at integer calculations (The X-2 processor) and make it emulate a processor that ROCKS at integer calculations (The P3). It's too much of a mismatch.

And even if the X-2 was a G5, not the stripped down thing it is (it's a 2-way processor, vs the 8-way processor in the Pentium 3!), benchmarks have shown it would NOT be fast enough to emulate the P3.

And historically, NO SYSTEM HAS EVER been fast enough to emulate its direct predecessor. EVER. The PS1 and 2 had to share the same processor. The DS couldn't emulate the GBA, so they included a GBA processor.

There is only one way we can get backwards compatability, and that is if MS includes a Pentium 3 processor.


CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS

As i've said before, people bought the new Game Boys and PS2's (And PC Engines if you want to really go back!) because they could play there old games on them, the buying public won't accept not being able to play their old games when other console's they have bought can do the same.


So MS will probably have an optional XBox package that includes an HD and Pentium 3 processor, for backwards compatability. Or they'll include a P3 in the system like Nintendo did on the DS and GBA.

It's impossible to be done with emulation. ACCEPT IT. If a 1.8 GHz G5 can't emulate a 533 MHz P3, then neither can the X-2's processor which will be nearly impossible due to the integer calculations problem.


and finally...

MICROSOFT AND THEIR OPERATING SYSTEMS

First and foremost on Bill Gates's mind is that each Windows OS must be
combatible with what came before within reason.

Bill understands this better than anyone, no point in having a brand new super OS if nothing works on it, so as many people as possible can run their old software on the new OS and the eventually buy the newer versions.

Of course while this does slow things doen using a mixture of the old and new, it expands and sustains the market in which you can sell your product.


See above.


THE HARD DRIVE

Now i would agree with you that not having a HD will stop some games running, Halo and Halo 2 for example,

Actually, almost all XBox games, because most XBox games use the HD for caching.

but you can easily seeing Microsoft selling 2 packs (NOT VERSIONS!) of the xBox 2, a standalone and one with an external HD for a discounted price.

If that package includes a P3 processor, then that works fine.

But external storage has never been that succesful in consoles, the N64 had the modified ZIP and the PS2 has its own Hard Drive that i've never seen in the flesh despite many PS2 owning friends.

But if Microsoft go with big 1GB flash card memory storage the card will be as fast as the Hard Drive anyway.


Flash card is a no no. Firstly, a 1 GB flash card costs more than a 40 GB hard drive. Secondly, flash memory wear out if you read/write to them too often, and most XBox 1 games use the HD for caching.


There's still one more big problem. XBox 1 games have security on them- if you try to play online with ANY modified hardware, they refuse to run.

That might make playing XBox 1 games online even harder.

[GFLPraxis]

DirectX is an APi that allow programmer to design game regardless of hardware as long as it's DirectX compatible. Before, each game has to be program for specific hardware.

Xbox games are programmed using DirectX API. So it's fair to say that in THEORY in games that run on xbox would be able to run on xbox2 natively without any emulation. The problem reside in the nvidia specific optimization that i've might have been program in each xbox games that causes an issue. This is the part where xbox2 need to emulate / translate unless that ATI Chipset is able to run those nvidia specific instruction natively.

The other [problem that might occur in running an xbox game on an xbox2 would be again the specific instruction that i've been implemented for the Digital 5.1 sound controller. This is theory could be simulate easily by the xbox2 CPU.

VPC does not support directx API and i don't think that microsoft plan to do so. What they need to work on, like I mention earlier in my post, is to emulation / translate the specific nvidia instruction to run on the ATI chipset. HAL / DirectX will take care of the rest.

C++ is very similar to that. What you don't understand is this:
You code it in DirectX. THEN you compile it, and when you compile it, it becomes a binary designed to run on whatever processor you compiled it for.

Porting it is effortless- you just compile it for the other processor- but you can't run the x86 binary on the PPC machine.

The XBox 1 games are all x86 compiled, therefore, can NOT run without emulation.

[combatcolin]

Hmmm, seems i was right about the CPU in the xBox, but in a different sort of way. ;)

Back to Core Video and Emulation.

Or the C64 explination

?

There was a game out years ago on C64, i can't remember the title as i was a Spectrum man :) that was rumored to have an intense, for the time, amount of parrelax scrolling and colours on screen, this rumor even made it to the designers of the machine who siad it couldn't be done and this was just silly marketing.

Said game is released and designers say it still can't be done and can't explain how the games programers done it.

The point i am trying to make?, whenever someone says it can't be done some smart sod comes along and does otherwise.

The intense improvment in CPU and GPU advancement coupled with an overall better design will enable Microsoft to put the extra power on tap to good use.

Now i think were going to have to agree to disagree and leave i at that, otherwise we'll still be banging on come christmas and these poor Macrumors members have this topic forced into their postbox's eash morning!

It would be appriecated if you also did the same.

Fun will it lasted an :D yway

[Mord]

C++ is very similar to that. What you don't understand is this:
You code it in DirectX. THEN you compile it, and when you compile it, it becomes a binary designed to run on whatever processor you compiled it for.

Porting it is effortless- you just compile it for the other processor- but you can't run the x86 binary on the PPC machine.

The XBox 1 games are all x86 compiled, therefore, can NOT run without emulation.

i just realised somthing, it was said that you needed the HD to run xbox 1 games, what is to stop them putting the complier on the xbox 2 and store the recompiled binary on the HD?

[GFLPraxis]

i just realised somthing, it was said that you needed the HD to run xbox 1 games, what is to stop them putting the complier on the xbox 2 and store the recompiled binary on the HD?

You need the source code to compile a binary. I HIGHLY doubt any developer would include the source code on their game disks :D

[combatcolin]

You need the source code to compile a binary. I HIGHLY doubt any developer would include the source code on their game disks :D

Well, not for a few years after retail release anyway.

[GFLPraxis]

Well, not for a few years after retail release anyway.

Right, and everyone has the RETAIL XBox disks, right?

[combatcolin]

Here we go again! :rolleyes:

I as implying the decision of Softcos' to release their old game titles for free, for example off the top of my head Marathon and the original GTA, normally they have a download of the games, and as its been A FEW YEARS SINCE THE RETAIL RELEASE the download is normally quite small by todays standards, normally less than a 100MB.

There are many many more games thaat end up as freeware, with the softco's recieving no income but retaining copywrite control but you get the picture.

[Mord]

the xbox 360 is officially backwards compatible, so there you suck i rule hahahahahah :D

[takao]

the xbox 360 is officially backwards compatible, so there you suck i rule hahahahahah :D

well they confirmed that it is backwards compatible with "certain" games that could mean you have to download the xbox360 version if you own a legit copy of the game for example
or downloading patches etc. to get them to work

[GFLPraxis]

On backwards compatability:
At the very least Microsoft can just recompile the "top selling xbox games" and then dump the executable code onto the harddisk and have the OS detect when you put in a xbox DVD and load the code off the harddisk instead of the actual DVD.

And since Live connectivity is free, they can ship updated copies of the game's code when ever they feel like it and have it picked up.

That doesnt require any tricky software or hardware emulation nor does it require licensing the patents which NVidia hold on the GPU algos the xbox used.

NVidia was not happy with the deal with Microsoft over the xbox. And NVidia holds key patents over the algos used to implement a number of features in the xbox GPU core.

It seems impossible to have them playable off the disks due to incompatabilities with the NVidia and ATi graphics cards, the x86 and PPC processors, the hard drive, etc, etc... :confused:

[combatcolin]

So Praxis, who was right?

Market forces, you could play ps game on your ps2 and THAT CHANGED EVRYTHING.

If i may quote Kryten, "Ah, Smug Mode!"

[takao]

So Praxis, who was right?

actually neither.. it's far from "no" or "full" compability

Market forces, you could play ps game on your ps2 and THAT CHANGED EVRYTHING.

on the other side: statistics showed that few people really played the old ps1 games on their ps2

you know many people bought it as a dvd player ...

[GFLPraxis]

So Praxis, who was right?

Market forces, you could play ps game on your ps2 and THAT CHANGED EVRYTHING.

If i may quote Kryten, "Ah, Smug Mode!"

"Microsoft refuses to comment on backwards compatability".

So far the most they've said is that it will be backwards compatable only with "top selling" XBox games. My suspicion is that you can download recompiled binaries if you have the disk.

[Tech^salvager]

I don't think they would screw people over like that in backwards compatibility. I think MS is smart enough to get backwards comaptibility running with normal game disks. but will to wait for more info to come out to fidn out.

[GFLPraxis]

I don't think they would screw people over like that in backwards compatibility. I think MS is smart enough to get backwards comaptibility running with normal game disks. but will to wait for more info to come out to fidn out.


"smart enough" doesn't let you do the impossible.

[Tech^salvager]

"smart enough" doesn't let you do the impossible.
lets wait it out and see GFLPraxis, lets see how they achieve backwards compatibility.
I think its possible.
but will see in the end how they get it to work.

[takao]

I don't think they would screw people over like that in backwards compatibility. I think MS is smart enough to get backwards comaptibility running with normal game disks. but will to wait for more info to come out to fidn out.
well time is running _against them_ when wil lthey release ? end of november ? how long to you take to produce the amount of hardware needed for launch ?

how many months do they have left for development of the basic system ? 4 ? 5 ? or perhaps only 3 ? and they are leaving a lot of that space for 'suddenly apearing bugs' (hey i'm studying CS so that's nothing unknown ;) ) and testing etc.

edit: well their playable demos don't even run on their 'showed' hardware
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2420&p=5
only a single box with a converted self running demo...
looks like they have still plenty work ahead

[combatcolin]

actually neither.. it's far from "no" or "full" compability



on the other side: statistics showed that few people really played the old ps1 games on their ps2

you know many people bought it as a dvd player ...

True.

But i have also been saying that for a while and someone didn't listen did they? ;)

Backwards combatibility will be a selling point in the 1st year of the new consoles life, just as it was with the PS2, but will fade very quickly asfter that.

Theres no reason why ALL xBox games couldn't work, true - sorting the code out is not an overnight job but its not that hard, a few bods but crack it over a week, and Microsoft would offer a database of new game code free to magazines, therefore giving off line xBox players a means to play there old games.


And let me be the 1st to ask this vvery crucial question..

If the joypads are wireless, just how much grief will they take when people throw hissy fits and then the joypads???!!!??? :D

[GFLPraxis]

Theres no reason why ALL xBox games couldn't work, true - sorting the code out is not an overnight job but its not that hard, a few bods but crack it over a week, and Microsoft would offer a database of new game code free to magazines, therefore giving off line xBox players a means to play there old games.


This is incredible. I've been debating you on this for weeks and you say there is "no reason"? I mean, you're not just arguing your view. That's perfectly fine. You're acting like I've never even talked to you! :confused:


It's EXTREMELY hard. Like I said, NVidia has the rights to several features/API's/whatever of their GPU that ATi doesn't have, and XBox games are optimized to take advantage of those and won't run at all on the ATi graphics card. It's not just a matter of processor emulation. The graphics cards are TOTALLY incompatable, and they'd have to pay NVidia royalty fees to make the cards compatable!

To make things worse, emulation would be insanely difficult. Remember, it could only use one of the processors for emulation. To make it worse you're trying to emulate a processor that is GREAT at integer calculations (Pentium 3) with a processor that SUCKS at integer calculations and rocks at floating point. It's a TERRIBLE mismatch and very likely can't be done.

The way I see backwards compatability being done is, you put in your disk, and download a patch from Microsoft that contains a PowerPC binary. That binary uses all the resources off the disk so you just download that patch and you can play the game on the X360. But you can only play the games they release patches for. THAT is the only solution I can think of that makes sense... or else the rumor is true and the X360 includes a remake of the Halo games on the hard drive.

[combatcolin]

Er, have you read my post?

Theres no reason why all games cannot be changed from 86 to PPC code.

I was commenting on the poster who said that only a few would be done, it wouldn't be that expensive.

I can imagine you destroying your keyboard in anger there Praxis!

"Someone disagreed with me! That cannot be allowed! EXTERMINATE!!"

[Symtex]

Put an end to the rumors :

http://www.majornelson.com/

Ok, let’s stop this right now. There is some serious wrong information floating around, so I need to clear this up. I grabbed my favorite PR dudes, and they are saying what I was telling a few of you in email:

“We’re not sure where this came from, and is incorrect. At launch, Xbox 360 will be backward compatible with the top Xbox games. Our goal is to have every Xbox game work on Xbox 360. You will NOT need to purchase a new ‘version’ — your original games will work on Xbox 360.”

Case closed. Now, let’s get back to that Killzone demo discussion..

[takao]

Put an end to the rumors :

http://www.majornelson.com/

Ok, let’s stop this right now. There is some serious wrong information floating around, so I need to clear this up. I grabbed my favorite PR dudes, and they are saying what I was telling a few of you in email:

“We’re not sure where this came from, and is incorrect. At launch, Xbox 360 will be backward compatible with the top Xbox games. Our goal is to have every Xbox game work on Xbox 360. You will NOT need to purchase a new ‘version’ — your original games will work on Xbox 360.”

Case closed. Now, let’s get back to that Killzone demo discussion..

hehe whole discussions lies in in the difference between "At launch, Xbox 360 will be backward compatible with the top Xbox games."
and "Our goal is to have every Xbox game work on Xbox 360."

you know first it's "will be" and "top games" then it's "goal" and "every game"

so it pretty much confirms my thoughts that recopiled are needed and will be offered free to download .. perhaps automatically once you put in your discs or something
or they put all the binaries from all xbox games ever released on the hard disk ;)

i think the top games will be ou of the box and the less popular with an download

after all they had _one_ running xbox at E3 which still was using prototype chipsets and that thing wasn't able to play any games at all

edit: the case will be closed when it's available in stores not when somebody posts another split message on a blog

[Symtex]

hehe whole discussions lies in in the difference between "At launch, Xbox 360 will be backward compatible with the top Xbox games."
and "Our goal is to have every Xbox game work on Xbox 360."

you know first it's "will be" and "top games" then it's "goal" and "every game"

so it pretty much confirms my thoughts that recopiled are needed and will be offered free to download .. perhaps automatically once you put in your discs or something
or they put all the binaries from all xbox games ever released on the hard disk ;)

i think the top games will be ou of the box and the less popular with an download

after all they had _one_ running xbox at E3 which still was using prototype chipsets and that thing wasn't able to play any games at all

edit: the case will be closed when it's available in stores not when somebody posts another split message on a blog


Did you read the whole article ? The title is : No, you do not need to recompile your Xbox games.

Case close

[Tech^salvager]

Put an end to the rumors :

http://www.majornelson.com/

Ok, let’s stop this right now. There is some serious wrong information floating around, so I need to clear this up. I grabbed my favorite PR dudes, and they are saying what I was telling a few of you in email:

“We’re not sure where this came from, and is incorrect. At launch, Xbox 360 will be backward compatible with the top Xbox games. Our goal is to have every Xbox game work on Xbox 360. You will NOT need to purchase a new ‘version’ — your original games will work on Xbox 360.”

Case closed. Now, let’s get back to that Killzone demo discussion..
thanks for the link Symtex, I hope MS xbox 360 has backwards compatibility with all xbox games.

[takao]

Did you read the whole article ? The title is : No, you do not need to recompile your Xbox games.

Case close

did i say that ? no did the guy in this "article" mentioned how they gonna solve it ? no that was jsuta lousy blurp on a blog hardly official or anythin and still the "article" has been how sentences ? i posted the important stuff : and from that you can't say if _Microsoft_ has to recompile or not

from that small blurp i say that they are doing porting game for game which isn't "backwards compability" as i understand that word

sure the home user won't have to recompile (how could they without sources ;) ) but microsoft has to do something...either make additional binaries for each game (which includes lots of looking through code sometimes) or running emulation etc.

[Symtex]

did i say that ? no did the guy in this "article" mentioned how they gonna solve it ? no that was jsuta lousy blurp on a blog hardly official or anythin and still the "article" has been how sentences ? i posted the important stuff : and from that you can't say if _Microsoft_ has to recompile or not

from that small blurp i say that they are doing porting game for game which isn't "backwards compability" as i understand that word

sure the home user won't have to recompile (how could they without sources ;) ) but microsoft has to do something...either make additional binaries for each game (which includes lots of looking through code sometimes) or running emulation etc.

Do you know who is Major Nelson ? If one of the chief engineer of Xbox live. If he says you won't have to recompile you won't. They have enough power to run emulations.

[combatcolin]

Major Nelson sounds like a early 80's pop band.

I'll wait untill Microsoft announce something properly.

Or until i read it in Edge.