Revolution = RevoNOTHIN!

[Shayne]

While im sure a few of you want the nostalgic gaming that the Revolution will offer (some of us just download the ROMS to our modded Xbox) or the workout that the pointer device can offer (some of us just visit a gym a few times a week) the revolution stats have been sorta-released.

Insiders stress that Revolution runs on an extension of the Gekko and Flipper architectures that powered GameCube, which is why studios who worked on GCN will have no problem making the transition to the new machine, they say. IBM's "Broadway" CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube's Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox's CPU was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz.

Alright, so no advanced AI or physics coming from that crippled unit.

Revolution's ATI-provided "Hollywood" GPU clocks in at 243MHz. By comparison, GameCube's GPU ran at 162MHz, while the GPU on the original Xbox was clocked at 233MHz. Sources we spoke with suggest that it is unlikely the GPU will feature any added shaders, as has been speculated.

Alright, so this is the reason for the lack of HD support and the reason that next gen on the Revolution will look like the current gen at the end of its lifecycle.

The overall system memory numbers we reported last December have not greatly fluctuated, but new clarifications have surfaced. Revolution will operate using 24MBs of "main" 1T-SRAM. It will additionally boast 64MBs of "external" 1T-SRAM. That brings the total number of system RAM up to 88MBs, not including the 3MB texture buffer on the GPU. By comparison, GameCube featured 40MBs of RAM not counting the GPU's on-board 3MBs. The original Xbox included 64MBs total RAM. Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 operate on 512MBs of RAM.

So much for large textures and short load times, but without HD no large textures are needed, and how much memory is really required for a goldeneye ROM?



Depressing.



Source: http://revolution.ign.com/articles/699/699118p1.html

[Mr. Analog]

Since it doesn't exist yet, much like the PS3, I won't reserve judgement until the actual release...

[Darren Dirt]

Sometimes gfx and cpu power aren't what makes a game, nor makes a game system.



Example: I just picked up the Gamecube version of "Intellivision Lives!" My 7 and 10 year old kids played "Word Rockets" for almost 10 minutes; the gfx are of course 20+ year old blech, but it was *fun* for them.



And hey didn't someone in the original posting say something about downloading MAME roms? Why would they be playing such ancient artifacts...



'Nuff said.

[Shayne]

Im sure to many of you MAME ROMS and puzzle games are all the rage, however for me Oblivion, Perfect Dark Zero, Call of Duty 2, etc are gaming that i enjoy.  I cant get immersed in a puzzle game or a top down shooter like 1942

[Mr. Analog]

I like old and new games, obviously some are better than others but when the bottom line is "fun" it doesn't matter for me what platform things are on.



Thinking about it this morning, Nintendo's strategy might be to buy cheap ass parts and sell their next gen system at "rock bottom" (i.e. parent friendly) prices.

[Cova]

And all those numbers are virtually meaningless.  Take the CPU power for instance - it's comparing a completly unknown CPU at 729Mhz (the revolution), against a P3-733 in the xbox, and the 3.2Ghz tri-core custom 360 chip.  Now most of us know that the 360s chip is a modified PowerPC core - or a modified G5 if you like apple terms.  What is not as well known is the amount of stuff that was removed from that processor to make the xbox version, most importantly all of the stuff related to out-of-order execution.  Anyways, with all this stuff removed from the chip, performance is significantly decreased.  I would guess that a single core of the 360's chip is around as fast as an unmodified PowerPC at a little under 1Ghz.  And while future games will get better, also keep in mind that most 360 games that are out now are hardly touching that CPU's capabilities.  It can run 6 threads at a time, but current games are likely only using 1 or 2.



The same arguement applies to the graphics chip - we know nothing about the number of pipes, shaders, memory bus width, etc.  Knowing the clock speed those things run at without knowing how many there are doesn't actually tell us anything useful.



I expect the revolution will have plenty of very modern, very nice looking games.  I'm still impressed at times by what the original xbox can do - Black for instance looks and sounds damn good.  And I'm sure the revolution will have no problems keeping up with anything the original xbox can do - just give the devs a little time after its release to learn the hardware.

[Adams]

Well, my .000002 cents.  

Most of the PowerPC Chips are RISC and as such are clocked at a slower speed. You have to take a look at the MIPS before we can say anything otherwise All AMD chips would be considered slower since the clock speed is significantly less then Intels chips.



Memory, now I know all the developers out there will complain about this but if you develop a game and do it right you should not need 512MB of memory. 88MB is quite small I would have had a minimum of 128, 64 for textures and 64 for System but allow it to be shared so that a game with more AI or more textures can use more of the "systems" resources.



Graphics... I don't even want to get into graphics.



I think I am done for my rant... please ignore all of the above.

Thank You.

[Shayne]

Keep in mind that the powerpc chips cant bail on their paths until the path is complete unlike AMD and Intel CPUs that have this ability.  While I can agree that the chip speed might mean nothing, but when you see developers already complaining about running advanced AI and physics through a triple core 3.2 ghz or the Cell chip you really have to wonder what kind of problems they will run into on a chip that is a fraction the horse power.



If you develop a game with small texture or procedural graphics then sure the memory could be a little less restrictive.  Seeing as how PS3 and 360 run HD the last thing i want to see is the same texture repeated over a small surface.  Memory also helps in load times.  When Microsoft announced the move from 256 to 512 developers rejoiced.



Graphics, you dont want to go into that, yet you have a SLI setup?  Hippocrate.  More technology in GPUs then CPUs could even dream of, for showing ROMs im sure it will be more then great, for updating the current gamecube franchises im sure it will be great as well, but attracting bleeding edge development is gonna be rough.  Take at the very least the Madden franchise, its one of the TOP SELLING FRANCHISE OF ALL TIME and consistantly sells MILLION of copies, will it run the current look of 2006...maybe, but the 360 already has issues with it (lack of optimize).



I think its a great strategy for Nintento in that current studios (mostly internal) barely have to learn a thing to keep making new games, where as PS3 is a whole new setup and the 360 is now multi-threaded (still DirectX).



Revolution in my mind is not a next gen, its sort of its own generation, which is rather interesting in that it will basically have its own market.

[Darren Dirt]

here's some flamebait for some of you (and you know who you are )





Wii? Wha? It was "Revolution". Now it's one of the most stupid things I've ever heard. As if I want to wee Wii on my TV.





http://revolution.nintendo.com/ -- it's apparently pronounced "We" as in "WHEEEEE!!!"

[Mr. Analog]

Either way, people are talking about it a lot more.

[Lazybones]

I thought Wii = Why? as in the common WiFi.



Don't like the name, but I can't wait to see if it is a hit or flop.