Topic: Xenon specs leaked again and confirmed.

[KDR_11k]

Article

While you might have read that leaked specsheet a while ago already (maybe slightly different), now the sheet has been confirmed as being mostly correct. The Xenon is claimed to sport a triple core PPC chip at 3.5 GHz (not known whether each core is clocked like that or that's all three added together) and 256MB of RAM. Microsoft stated they will up the RAM should Sony offer more than 256MB in the PS3(apparently they're going for numbers, not power). The graphics card is a 500MHz ATI and has direct access to the CPU's L2 cache. Microsoft is still going with the unified memory approach.
They claim a real maximum of 500M triangles per second and claim that it can be reached with certain shader programming.

I don't care that much, the most powerful machine still doesn't mean anything.

[manunited4eva22]

Access to the L2 cache?  Wow, cache coherency is going to go down the drain, stupid idea.

[Bill Aurion]

"Microsoft stated they will up the RAM should Sony offer more than 256MB in the PS3(apparently they're going for numbers, not power)"

That hurts my head... >_<

[Ian Sane]

What's the deal with this line?

"Interestingly, the outline acknowledges that developing games which take advantage of the system will be 'a daunting task,' going on to explain that 'writing multithreaded games is not trivial.'"

So MS is admitting that the Xenon will be hard to program for as if it's a good thing?  Maybe they think that's why the PS2 stayed on top.

[Koopa Troopa]

Yikes...

[mouse_clicker]

I wonder why Microsoft is confirming the specs so early- If Sony or nintendo want to pull what Microsoft did this generation they just have to make their specs higher than MS's, since they have more time to do so. Being secrective may have bitten Nintendo in the ass before, but this is one area where it's good not to go blabbering.

[manunited4eva22]

The thing that makes me mad about what microsoft is doing is the shared memory, and now shared cache.  There are very few ways to do something that stupid, espeically sharing cache, because it just never has worked and is very, very hard to pull off.

The reason cache is fast is because it is so close to the CPU, and well guess what if the L2 cache is going to have to support another lane to the gpu, it would probably be slower than tha video card memory, that is of course is they do decide to go with something that can meet the GPU this time.

sfad, if these are the specs then I am very dissipointed.  Gee, a stripped down r420 core, and 3x 3.5ghz powerpc970 cores. Sorry, I am just incredibly underwhelmed.  That is pretty much guarenteed to be asynchronous cores, just going to be a complete pain in the ass to work on.  Oh well, Microsoft is playing with a loaded shotgun and seems intent on shooting their foot.

[Metaphysical Spirit]

And plus, How much is this going to be?

[Bill Aurion]

I guess that depends on whether they are going with an HD or not this time around...(which was a stupid idea in the first place)

[odifiend]

It is rumored that the Revolution has a hard dirve...

[BlackNMild2k1]

It is rumored that MS is to have an addon hardrive that will mostlikey be sold as a LIVE/backwards compatibility bundle, to keep cost down and make a little more profit.  

It is also said that they will have it so the the Xenon will be able to hook up to your PC and use your already existing Harddrive.

[Metaphysical Spirit]

Sounds to me like an early jump start to have copied and pirated games.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Well,  you gotta remember that MS is a PC oriented company thrying to get a foothold in the livingroom.  If they can pull your computer into the living room or you back to the computer then they will be one step closer to their ultimate goal........

[Darc Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Article

While you might have read that leaked specsheet a while ago already (maybe slightly different), now the sheet has been confirmed as being mostly correct. The Xenon is claimed to sport a triple core PPC chip at 3.5 GHz (not known whether each core is clocked like that or that's all three added together) and 256MB of RAM. Microsoft stated they will up the RAM should Sony offer more than 256MB in the PS3(apparently they're going for numbers, not power). The graphics card is a 500MHz ATI and has direct access to the CPU's L2 cache. Microsoft is still going with the unified memory approach.
They claim a real maximum of 500M triangles per second and claim that it can be reached with certain shader programming.

I don't care that much, the most powerful machine still doesn't mean anything.

Yeah I already read this article. As I've said in another thread MS is really killing themselves. The X-box finally has momentum and seems to actually be more popular than PS2 at the moment. All MS is doing is killing of X-box when it is actually doing well. Shoving an inferior system out the door, and pissing of the customers that just got the X-box. Don't they realize that Nintendo has same partners? Despite there anti technology ramblings, Nintendo will have superior hardware. Sony will definately trump MS this time around. So it seems PS3 and Revolution will be battling for the strongest hardware.

Whats up with the Xenon CPU? It doesn't seem to be G5 based. It just says Power PC based. Even the G5 hasn't hit 3Ghz yet. I'm curious as to how they could launch next year with a G5 based chip at such a high clock rate. I won't even start on the lack of RAM. MS isn't gonna get by with that amount of ram. To top things off, their GPU looks quite unimpressive. Well enough of my babbling. If this holds true, its gonna be a Sony and Nintendo battle.

Darc Requiem

[Metaphysical Spirit]

So I think I'm confused here. Are they using multiple processors to reach a goal of 3.5 GHz? I also agree with Darc Requiem on the RAM. To me, RAM is a HUGE part of a computer/system and how technology is going, you will need a lot of it. Though RAM is expensive, then again what kind of RAM are they using? I Use Rambus Memory (RDRAM) and thats mad expensive for me to upgrade it, so Im still at 512 unfortantly. I also wonder how it will connect to your PC, hopefully USB or some high technology that both a Mac and PC user can use. They still have another year and technology can improve quickly. I'm sure there is still room for improvements to come, still I have my doubts about  the system.  

[manunited4eva22]

Your using RIMMs *cringes*

DDR ram is not as expensive as your RDRAM, just because people are actually supplying it, but there are a lot of variables in how much the ram will cost.

G5 is PowerPC based, or technically its Power based, and PowerPC is Power based, but oh well, same difference.  Will this core be similar to G5?  Yes, probablly so, except it probably won't have the altivac.  I doubt they are just adding up the cores to 3.5ghz, and I doubt that is the actual number, probably just what they are wanting to get to.  Honestly though, if they were just 1.16ghz, that would be a very slow computer, in fact,  3 cores at that speed would be just about useless.  3.5ghz, is their goal, though I doubt they will achieve it.

Ram type, My bet is on DDR2-800, possibly some XDR (yellowstone, ya the same thing on PS3) form.  They may go with GDDR3 1600, but thats still up in the air, but I am doubting they will.

FSB on these processors I would expect to be 1ghz, with a total theoretical bandwith of 8gb/s.  DDR-2 in dual channel can pump 12.8gb/s (again theoretical).

GDDR3 can pump 25.6gb/s in dual channel, 51.2gb/s in 256bit arrays.  That is up to what is promised by XDR, and is currently planned on being used in this generation of video cards.  However, this is going to be expensive, and a 256bit setup will require atleast a 6layer PCB, so this is going to make for an expensive motherboard if this is what they choose.

There are a lot of options available to the makers, but I would expect this system to rival a high end system today, just because of the what is known of the gpu, and when it arrives a mid range system.  

[Syl]

Something that I'm figuring shall happen.
Microsoft releases first, without backwards compability.  
Sony and Nintendo are going to be within a week of eachother roughly a year later, Nintendo's machine is going to be more affordable, probably on par/better than microsofts, but Sony is going to be ahead in the technology realm...however, its going to cost a fuckload.

Either way, I think nintendo has a damn good chance next generation to be ontop if they play things right, but i'll try to reserve judgements till next E3, thats going to be one amazingly important E3 for all of them.

Its obvious who the clear winner of the next gen consoles are though.
ATI and IBM.

[Burning Excalibur]

Nintendo only stands a good chance if they keep their damn mouths shut, unlike MS and Sony who are comparing specs before they can even bring them out. Meanwhile, Nintendo IS playing it smart, seeing the competition destroy itself, making empty promises to each other.

[couchmonkey]

I agree that Microsoft is being stupid to release this information so soon, but I think we're all beginning to make too much out of specs.  Having the "weakest" system hasn't had too much of an impact on Sony at all.  That's not to say that Microsoft will be okay after giving it's specs away, especially since one of Xbox's biggest selling points was power, but it doesn't mean certain doom either.  We could all be eating our words in a couple of years when Sony and Nintendo launch in a market where Microsoft has already sold a few million consoles and gained a lot of momentum!

[Darc Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
I agree that Microsoft is being stupid to release this information so soon, but I think we're all beginning to make too much out of specs.  Having the "weakest" system hasn't had too much of an impact on Sony at all.  That's not to say that Microsoft will be okay after giving it's specs away, especially since one of Xbox's biggest selling points was power, but it doesn't mean certain doom either.  We could all be eating our words in a couple of years when Sony and Nintendo launch in a market where Microsoft has already sold a few million consoles and gained a lot of momentum!

Well I really don't think its gonna happen. I mean honestly, developers have a choice. They can either divert millions from PS2/XB/GC development for the launch of Xenon or they can continue to reap the benefits of the current generation and wait for Sony and Nintendo to launch. While backwards compatibility isn't a big deal for PS2 now. It got PS2 over the hump for the first year and half. MS is not gonna have that luxury. MS is not gonna have the bottomless bank account to buy 3rd party support this time. MS expects the Xenon to make a profit, so they will have much more restrictive budget similar to what PS3 and Revolution will have. You won't see them spend money like water.

MS is approaching the next generation as if they are the market leader and as if they set the tone. Sony sets the tone, Sony could get away with a 2005 launch. Neither MS nor Nintendo could get away with an early launch. Microsoft's best chance IMO is to launch at the same time with Sony and Nintendo. MS has a good deal of momentum right now. The X-box has a chance to continue to build this momentum which would lead to a really good launch for them. I mean lets be honest here, if things continue the way they are now. MS will pass Nintendo in worldwide sales. Unless MS is dumb enough to launch in 2005. I hope MS is that stupid. It will only benefit Nintendo. Now if Sony can do something really stupid like did with the PS2 launch.....

Darc Requiem

[manunited4eva22]

Microsoft won't have a bottomless bank account?  Are you insane?

[odifiend]

Well they will, but it won't all be for the xenon

[Darc Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
Well they will, but it won't all be for the xenon

Thanks Odifiend. I should have clarified. MS isn't gonna give the Xenon the blank check that the original X-box received.

Darc Requiem

[couchmonkey]

I do think launching so early is a mistake for Microsoft, but I don't think that lower specs are going to be the one thing that kills the Xenon.   I think something like a shortage of third party games as you suggested, Darc Requiem, will have a bigger impact.

I still think the system has a chance of taking Microsoft further than the Xbox, too, but I admit that it's a big gamble.  Maybe Microsoft figures it has to gamble if it wants to become a major, profitable player in the industry.

[manunited4eva22]

Clarification or not, they will give it more than it will ever need.  They don't expect it to make a profit until very late in it's life, they still have not reached number one, and they won't back off until they do.

[nickmitch]

Look to me its all about what games are comming out.
The only time numbers should apply in video games is HIGH SCORES!!!!

[Darc Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: manunited4eva22
Clarification or not, they will give it more than it will ever need.  They don't expect it to make a profit until very late in it's life, they still have not reached number one, and they won't back off until they do.

No not really. There are factions in MS that wanted to kill the X-box because of how it hemorraghed money. The Xenon is not gonna get anywhere near the budget of the X-Box. I mean MS has spent at least 2 or 3 billion on X-box and thats not including the money they lose on each unit. Xenon won't get near as much. The X-Box was expected to break even late in its life. The Xenon is expected to make a profit. Thats why MS is gambling on the early release.

Darc Requiem

[manunited4eva22]

Bill Gates could fund this project 8 generations out of his own pocket.  2 to 3 billion dollars over 4 years?  For what will most probably be a viable replacement for desktops in several years?  That is more than a fair bill.  I stand on how much I think they will spend on this.

[Darc Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: manunited4eva22
Bill Gates could fund this project 8 generations out of his own pocket.  2 to 3 billion dollars over 4 years?  For what will most probably be a viable replacement for desktops in several years?  That is more than a fair bill.  I stand on how much I think they will spend on this.

Bill Gates could give every man, women, and child in the US $200 a piece doesn't mean he should or will. Bill Gates is a billionaire for a reason. Throwing away money isn't one of those reasons. Gates okayed the X-box because he thought it could add to his billions. The X-box was supposed to break even. All of the money spent on X-box was supposed to lay the groundwork for Xenon. They expected to compete favorably with PS2 and then go on to dominate the market with Xenon. Well thats not what has happened. Despite MS trying to dictate the pace of the video game market. The leader dictates the pace. MS in third place and they early launch will likely cost them second place in this generation and Xenon profitability in the next.

Darc Requiem

[KDR_11k]

All I want is that the Xenon includes the intro to the game Galax.

"My name is Xenon. I am a ruler of this planet."

[manunited4eva22]

Microsoft knows that it takes time to build a brand, and considering how long they pumped money into webtv, palm pcs, and their always dire need to get into the hardware business, I think they will still put out the money to get close to/in the lead.

[KDR_11k]

Oh, btw, Microsoft already stated "Microsoft thinks in long time terms" when asked about the profitability of the Xenon. I wonder how they think they're going to get all that money back. Hehe, wouldn't it be ironic if the Xenon took a big loss but dominated the industry and when MS finally makes a profitable device noone buys it? THAT'd be funny...

[couchmonkey]

I think Microsoft will continue to pour a lot of money into making Xenon successful, but there are signs that the company is going for profitability too: releasing first with (probably) the least powerful hardware and especially taking out the hard drive.  I think Microsoft will take a more conservative approach this time, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's still the most aggressive competitor in the market.

[NintendoSoldier]

Xbox 2 will suck hard a Revolution is coming .

[elementc]

Nintendo Soldier, please stop being a mindless fanboy, I like nintendo games too, but that doesn't mean I have to worship the ground they walk upon.

I'd like to point some things out to everyone who says "hardware doesn't matter", please take into acocunt the following. For a game to look good, sound good, and play well, you need good hardware. Hardware is only as good as the games on it, of course. Yet at the same time games can only be as good as the hardware that runs them. Making good games requires a lot more than most people seem to think. People like consoles because they are cheaper than computers in most cases. Unfortunatly, to make the prices so low they have to leave out certain things. For example, the average computer user runs their display at 1024 by 768 pixels (this number is rising). The xbox, on the other hand, displays images at 640 by 480 pixels. As big as xbox happens to be, the PC is is still much larger. Sound quality is also a big difference between the two categories. The xbox offers 5.1 surround whereas the maximum a computer offers is 7.1 surround. The maximum RAM for a computer is also another massive dividing factor. The maximum RAM depends on the computer but I do know it goes at least up to three gigabytes on some motherboards. I don't claim that any of these numbers are exact. If you want exact specifications look them up yourself. I'm too lazy for that. I haven't gone through every important difference here, but I do have one last thing to point out to everyone who reads this. Right now three 3.5 gigahertz processors may seem like a lot of power, and it is, but by the time the next generation consoles come out, computers will have PCI Express, and 64 bit processors running at speeds beyond four gigahertz. The maximum RAM limit will be raised once again, hard drives will have even greater storage capacity, and who knows what else might happen.

The next Zelda game looks amazing, but if they're telling the truth about it running at 100% of the Gamecubes power, all that tells me is that it will not look as good or run as smoothly could have if Nintendo had released better hardware. Half Life 2, Unreal Engine 3, and whatever else already have better graphics. Please don't argue with me unless you've watched the tech demos for both of those. Regardless of the graphics though, I am still looking forward to the next Zelda game a lot more than most other games (the graphics are amazing, especially considering the fact that it's on the Gamecube). All I'm saying is that it could still be better.

Once again, I request that none of you kill me in my sleep.

P.S.

Does anyone know where I can download the music from the Zelda trailer?!

NOTE : The above numbers for computer hardware are for games only. Certain proffesional applications require more than the average computer can handle.

[NintendoSoldier]

Quote
Text Nintendo Soldier, please stop being a mindless fanboy, I like nintendo games too, but that doesn't mean I have to worship the ground they walk upon.

Lol don't tell me what to do hypocrite because you are obviously and xbox fanboy the xbox 2 will suck and not sell very well because  it will not be the most powerful system out and that was a selling point for the xbox because it was the most powerful system people are so feeble minded that anything that has the most power they buy it to boast . Xbox sucked and was complete garbage that has only one decent game  halo which is overrated .

[king admin]

Quote
Originally posted by: NintendoSoldier
BLAH BLAH BLAH

IM BANNING U CUZ UR STUPIED AND XBOX RULEZ  

[KDR_11k]

elementc: The point is that we're approaching the point where it doesn't make a difference. Sure, at some point in time we can throw 30000 polygons at the face alone, but what will we do with them? Sure, we can do hair simulations some time in the future, but who's going to notice that at 60m? The difference in technology next gen won't be that big. Sure, UE3.0 looks nice, but honestly, do you think that one nextgen console will be able to run it and another won't? Just because Nintendo doesn't shout "Hey, look at our latest 128-core CPU!" doesn't mean they use inferior technology. They didn't shout about their technology when they introduced the Gamecube, yet it is superior to the PS2 despite Sony bragging about their technology left and right.
Besides, what Iwata meant with his "Graphics don't matter" talk is that we can develop graphics all we want, if we don't improve the gameplay more than marginally between yearly releases we're runing a risk of people thinking "I have ten games like that, why do I need THIS game, too?". The thing is, we can do everything with the current hardware short of a few graphcal gimmicks. If you can think of a game idea, it's very likely you won't need new hardware for it. With previous generationas this was not so. You couldn't have vast landscapes or large crowds on the PS1, Pikmin for example wouldn't have worked on the N64, but now you can do it. That's why Nintendo is searching for new reasons to make new consoles. Why would you want to develop some game for Xenon instead of XBox? Better graphics. Why would you want to develop some game for DS instead of N64? New control options.

[manunited4eva22]

Unreal 3 engine?  Are you begging for me to laugh?  Unreal 3 crawls on the new dual 6800 SLI crap, what makes you think that an engine that is still a year out means anything?

Your comparing apples with oranges.

By the way, a 32 bit pc can address 4gb memory, 64 bit can theoretically address 16 exobytes, but most limit that to 1 terabyte.

[elementc]

I already said my numbers probably weren't accurate.

Anyway, I'd like to point something out here. Eventually graphics will reach a point where they look exactly like real life or whatever else you could possibly want a game to look like. Hopefully we will get to a point where everything is all matrixy like but better (no giant needle in the back of your head). Whatever, forget the argument. You guys think whatever you want because as much as you want it to be true, it will not change anything. People are way to deadset in thinking they are right, even when they are so completely wrong it makes you want to puke. I could be wrong too, but I don't care. I'm not claiming to be an expert on the subject.

<rant>
But I do have a message for Nintendo Soldier... ARE YOU BLIND?! What makes you think I'm an xbox fanboy?! The biggest hint that I'm not is that I talked about computers, not the xbox. Ooh, another big one, I own a Gamecube!! Wow, would a mindless xbox fanboy own a Gamecube?! Yeah, that wouldn't make sense to me either. Jeez, not to mention you need spelling lessons. Would anyone like to know the number one reason I called Soldier a "mindless" fanboy?! Because he didn't state ANY REASONS whatsoever when he said that the xbox is a bad system. C'mon, at least come up with some reasons, even if they are really bad one. Nope, you're too lazy to even bother.
</rant>

Onto a slightly different subject. Nintendo is a buisness. It is in their best interest to please fans so they can keep making money. They are seemingly far less greedy than other big corporations (I think they are far less greedy myself). But my point still stands, they exist to make money for themselves. Certain people their are not in it for the money, of course. Most of them are probably there just to make money and have fun in the process. Then again, I could be completely wrong about everything. Maybe I'm just a little pink bunny having hallucinations while being dunked in a pool full of bleach.

Why do I even bother?! There are more important things in life than arguing over this type of thing!! From now on I'm not going to make any more comments. I'm just going to read. Unless of course someone states something that has been proven false.

[manunited4eva22]

Right, having a discussion on something means that we obviously think we are in complete knowledge of the truth, because obviously here at planetgamecube, everyone is blessed with an apocolyptic power that allows us to say the truth, as we see fit.

If your going to have a discussion on this, try not to progressively get more mad over nothing.

Will graphics eventually look like real life?  I'm sure, but there is a very fine line when you do that.  When you watch movies, how often do you actually think that the movie is happening?  You may get into a movie, but it is obsurdly rare that you actually believe it to be real.

Video games looking like real life is going to require a very long time for not only the hardware to get there, but for software to be able to do that efficiently. It's nice to say well we cay do xxxx polygons per model, but if one were to realistically do every polygon in a model, especially for say a human or a tree, it would take years just to finish that.

The whole, well it will be perfectly realistic arguement is stupid.  Just because something can be realistic doesn't mean it always should.  Do you get mad at cartoons because they don't draw everything in proportion?  Do you get mad at a game because it's premise is absurd, but the game is still fun?  Will there be a place for realistic games farther down the road?  Yes, there always have been, but then again, the next generation isn't going to do all that much for graphics.  It will be a big jump, but the difference is exponentially smaller than the last generation.

I guess rockstar in the future will be able to make Manhunt seem less stupid if it looks more real.

[couchmonkey]

To elementc: It's fun to bother because this is how we get our feelings and opinions out!  But I know how you feel, after heavy posting, especially on one thread, you start to feel like you're talking in circles!  Hope you don't completely disappear on us!

The thing about power is not that people don't care, I think they do, but I also think we're getting to the point where distinguishing between generations is going to get a lot harder.  Anyone on the street could tell you whether Super Mario 64 or Super Mario Sunshine looks better.  I don't think the difference will be so obvious between Gamecube and next-gen systems, and as such, casual consumers may see the next generation consoles as a rip off.  It's not that the new systems won't be more powerful, they certainly will.  The question is will people pay to play games that look like Doom 3 instead of Resident Evil 4?  Doom 3 is definitely the better looking game, but is it $300 better looking?  Yes, Xenon will probably be capable of even better graphics than Doom 3, but will those look $300 better?  

I don't know!  That's a question that consumers will have to answer, but I think it's a tougher question than, "Does the PS2 looks $300 better than the PSOne?".


Edit: addressed top part of post directly to elementc

[couchmonkey]

One quick thought: There's a lot of debate over whether computer graphics will ever reach "true" realism.  Some people theorize that recreating the human face is impossible (or darn close to it) because our brains have evolved such powerful facial recognition tools.  But who knows?  I think it's very interesting.

[Ian Sane]

"There's a lot of debate over whether computer graphics will ever reach "true" realism. Some people theorize that recreating the human face is impossible (or darn close to it) because our brains have evolved such powerful facial recognition tools. But who knows?"

I think it's stupid to even bother with that sort of realism.  How does having a face look exactly like a real person's help games in any significant way?  That's just eye candy and wouldn't improve gameplay in any way.  There will be a point where even if we can improve on the graphics from a game design point of view there would be no need to because creating those graphics would take so much work it would better to have inferior graphics on a finished game that's selling and making money.  I don't think it's next gen that we'll hit that wall but I don't think improving graphic models is going to add much to games.  Framerate and draw distance and the amount of characters on screen are the sort of visual improvements that will improve games.  Once we can't noticably improve on those aspects then improving graphics won't be very necessary anymore.  The artist will define a game's beauty at that point.

[manunited4eva22]

How about a war game where the goal is realism?  There is a place for human emotion there.

[Koopa Troopa]

Quote
all that tells me is that it will not look as good or run as smoothly could have if Nintendo had released better hardware. Half Life 2, Unreal Engine 3, and whatever else already have better graphics. Please don't argue with me unless you've watched the tech demos for both of those. Regardless of the graphics though, I am still looking forward to the next Zelda game a lot more than most other games (the graphics are amazing, especially considering the fact that it's on the Gamecube). All I'm saying is that it could still be better.

Guy, you're comparing Zelda to games which require hardware that a small margin of gamers actually have. Hardware that most gamers probably won't have for some years to come, this especially applies to Unreal 3. So, I guess I'm just trying to see your point; of course games are going to look better in years to come, but what has that to do with now?

[ThePerm]

lol have you ever noticed that any post on planetgamecube is 3 times as long in content(i dont count enormous signatures and flashing signature banners) then in other forums. Quite frankly iv been here since the opn2000 days and this is still the best forum ever.

[elementc]

Couchmonkey, you're right. I'll still post, but I'm not going say anything that the people here generally disagree with. I'm going to keep my mouth shut about that kind of thing.

Also, about my last couple of posts, I'm sorry. I didn't think about how much that hardware costs. Hehe, I guess I'm just lucky to have such a nice computer. I payed less than most people though. I'm so glad Newegg exists.

[manunited4eva22]

What are your specs?  Be glad to see what else someone in these forums is running?

My latest cheap project with parts from newegg

380W Antec Truepower
2.4A prescott @ 3.1ghz
2x256MB Mushkin level 1 @2-2-2-6 timings
9800Pro voltmodded to 512/404
MSI PT880 LSR (refurb for 35 dollars, couldnt say no)

Anyway, pc hardware will never be as taken advantage of as consoles.  There is a reason why we never will see a geforce 4 pull of RE4.

[ThePerm]

also that thign about realism...hmm gollum was getting damn close on lord of the rings....in a few years there will be renderors pushing individual faces that have a billion polygons.

[KDR_11k]

What do you want to do with a billion polies? Model the pores, or what?

[manunited4eva22]

Whatever you feel like?  And what's wrong with modelling pores?

[KDR_11k]

Modeling the pores is not only pointless, it's too time consuming to even consider. Such high-frequency detail is best handled with bumpmaps. Hell, the models used in movies don't go far beyond 20 million polygons subdivided. Cut down on the subD levels since they're usually meant for closeups and you might have a 1M model for game usage (at least three generations from now). First we should see things like realtime radiosity lighting implemented, though.