Matching the 360

Always made me curious.... to wonder what PC would match the xbox 360?

im going to say a duo core @ 2ghz/9800 GTX +/2gb ram

whatta you think?

Always made me curious.... to wonder what PC would match the xbox 360?

im going to say a duo core @ 2ghz/9800 GTX +/2gb ram

whatta you think?

AcesTranquility

not sure about the graphics card, but doesn't the 360 have 3 cores?

[QUOTE="AcesTranquility"]

Always made me curious.... to wonder what PC would match the xbox 360?

im going to say a duo core @ 2ghz/9800 GTX +/2gb ram

whatta you think?

Daytona_178

i was only guessing lol.... but i guess your right a bout the medium settings.

[QUOTE="Daytona_178"][QUOTE="AcesTranquility"]

Always made me curious.... to wonder what PC would match the xbox 360?

im going to say a duo core @ 2ghz/9800 GTX +/2gb ram

whatta you think?

AcesTranquility

i was only guessing lol.... but i guess your right a bout the medium settings.

The graphics card that is in the 360 is a pre 1900 XTX from ATI. Just to give you an idea there have three additional generations since then (2900 XTX, HD 3870 and the current HD 4870). In other words, in terms of technology, Xbox 360 is older than dirt.Gooeykat

[QUOTE="Gooeykat"]The graphics card that is in the 360 is a pre 1900 XTX from ATI. Just to give you an idea there have three additional generations since then (2900 XTX, HD 3870 and the current HD 4870). In other words, in terms of technology, Xbox 360 is older than dirt.-GeordiLaForge-

you seem to know what your talking about.... what do you think would match a 360?

What part was wrong, about the card being 2 or 3 generations old? The fact remains that any card you purchase today or last year or hell even late 2007 surpasses the Xbox 360. The X1900 XTX came out 6 months after the Xbox 360 was released and it was based on that technology. Not saying it was the exact same architecture but it was very similar. When the 8800 GTX was released, that was then end of the console dominance in terms of graphics. That was late 2007. Gooeykat

[QUOTE="Gooeykat"]What part was wrong, about the card being 2 or 3 generations old? The fact remains that any card you purchase today or last year or hell even late 2007 surpasses the Xbox 360. The X1900 XTX came out 6 months after the Xbox 360 was released and it was based on that technology. Not saying it was the exact same architecture but it was very similar. When the 8800 GTX was released, that was then end of the console dominance in terms of graphics. That was late 2007. -GeordiLaForge-

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="Gooeykat"]The graphics card that is in the 360 is a pre 1900 XTX from ATI. Just to give you an idea there have three additional generations since then (2900 XTX, HD 3870 and the current HD 4870). In other words, in terms of technology, Xbox 360 is older than dirt.AcesTranquility

you seem to know what your talking about.... what do you think would match a 360?

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="Gooeykat"]What part was wrong, about the card being 2 or 3 generations old? The fact remains that any card you purchase today or last year or hell even late 2007 surpasses the Xbox 360. The X1900 XTX came out 6 months after the Xbox 360 was released and it was based on that technology. Not saying it was the exact same architecture but it was very similar. When the 8800 GTX was released, that was then end of the console dominance in terms of graphics. That was late 2007. Gooeykat

[QUOTE="Gooeykat"]What part was wrong, about the card being 2 or 3 generations old? The fact remains that any card you purchase today or last year or hell even late 2007 surpasses the Xbox 360. The X1900 XTX came out 6 months after the Xbox 360 was released and it was based on that technology. Not saying it was the exact same architecture but it was very similar. When the 8800 GTX was released, that was then end of the console dominance in terms of graphics. That was late 2007. -GeordiLaForge-

The 360 isnt as powerful as you think Geordi, http://www.gamespot.com/features/6154261/p-3.html

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="Gooeykat"]What part was wrong, about the card being 2 or 3 generations old? The fact remains that any card you purchase today or last year or hell even late 2007 surpasses the Xbox 360. The X1900 XTX came out 6 months after the Xbox 360 was released and it was based on that technology. Not saying it was the exact same architecture but it was very similar. When the 8800 GTX was released, that was then end of the console dominance in terms of graphics. That was late 2007. Dr_Brocoli

The 360 isnt as powerful as you think Geordi, http://www.gamespot.com/features/6154261/p-3.html

04dcarraher

[QUOTE="Gooeykat"][QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]The Xenos is nothing like the x1900 xtx. Like I said, that is just a myth. It's much more closely related to the 8800 GTX, since they both execute 2 shader ops per cycle, and both use a unified shader architecure. This ensures that all of the pipelines are being used btw, which DX9 cards cannot do. The PS3's RSX on the other hand does indeed use old technology.-GeordiLaForge-

The 360 isnt as powerful as you think Geordi, http://www.gamespot.com/features/6154261/p-3.html

[QUOTE="Gooeykat"][QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]The Xenos is nothing like the x1900 xtx. Like I said, that is just a myth. It's much more closely related to the 8800 GTX, since they both execute 2 shader ops per cycle, and both use a unified shader architecure. This ensures that all of the pipelines are being used btw, which DX9 cards cannot do. The PS3's RSX on the other hand does indeed use old technology.-GeordiLaForge-

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="Gooeykat"] LOLOLOLOLOLOL Yeah, okay, the 8800 GTX was probably 3 or 4 times more powerful than the Xenos. Maybe the architecture was similar in terms of unified shader design, but in terms of raw power, it isn't even close.Gooeykat

[QUOTE="Dr_Brocoli"][QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]You lol'ed, but then admitted I was right? :| I never said that the Xenos is as powerful as the 8800gtx, but it's alot better than you make it out to be. The Xenos has less shader pipelines, but the 192 FP processors (which are linked to their own RAM and the GPU using an insane amount of bandwidth btw) make up for it. Like it or not, the Xenos is still pumping out better and better graphics every year...-GeordiLaForge-

[QUOTE="Dr_Brocoli"][QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]You lol'ed, but then admitted I was right? :| I never said that the Xenos is as powerful as the 8800gtx, but it's alot better than you make it out to be. The Xenos has less shader pipelines, but the 192 FP processors (which are linked to their own RAM and the GPU using an insane amount of bandwidth btw) make up for it. Like it or not, the Xenos is still pumping out better and better graphics every year...-GeordiLaForge-

ok i got a 360 when it first came out and yea it looked great but dont forget about SLI with pc.... a high spec pc back in 2007 wouldloose to the Ati Xenos graphics

[QUOTE="Gooeykat"][QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]You lol'ed, but then admitted I was right? :| I never said that the Xenos is as powerful as the 8800gtx, but it's alot better than you make it out to be. The Xenos has less shader pipelines, but the 192 FP processors (which are linked to their own RAM and the GPU using an insane amount of bandwidth btw) make up for it. Like it or not, the Xenos is still pumping out better and better graphics every year...-GeordiLaForge-

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="Dr_Brocoli"]AcesTranquility

ok i got a 360 when it first came out and yea it looked great but dont forget about SLI with pc.... a high spec pc back in 2007 wouldloose to the Ati Xenos graphics

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="Dr_Brocoli"]AcesTranquility

ok i got a 360 when it first came out and yea it looked great but dont forget about SLI with pc.... i really dont think that a high spec pc back in 2007 would have loose to the Ati Xenos graphics

[QUOTE="Gooeykat"][QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]You lol'ed, but then admitted I was right? :| I never said that the Xenos is as powerful as the 8800gtx, but it's alot better than you make it out to be. The Xenos has less shader pipelines, but the 192 FP processors (which are linked to their own RAM and the GPU using an insane amount of bandwidth btw) make up for it. Like it or not, the Xenos is still pumping out better and better graphics every year...-GeordiLaForge-

360 games looked better than PC games for a while after it was released. And how are the graphics laughable? I'm a PC gamer, but I'm not afraid to admit that 360 games look great...-GeordiLaForge-

ok i got a 360 when it first came out and yea it looked great but dont forget about SLI with pc.... a high spec pc back in 2007 wouldloose to the Ati Xenos graphics

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]"360 games for a while after it was released. And how are the graphics laughable? I'm a PC gamer, but I'm not afraid to admit that 360 games look great.." No they didnt my old geforce 6600 back then had 2x the texture detail,draw distence and effects. -GeordiLaForge-

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="Gooeykat"] Oh please, give it up. You said Xenos is nothing "like" the x1900 xtx it's more like "like" the 8800 GTX. The implication there is that you were referring to performance. Since...you know, that is kinda what this whole thread is about, not architecture design. The R600 (2900 XTX) is a direct evolution of the Xenos and it didn't even match the 8800 GTX. Since this is the case I would put the PERFORMANCE of Xenos at about overclocked X1900 XTX, maybe somewhat better. The Xenos only has to deal with resolutions of 720P (or even less in the case of games like Halo 3 and CoD4). And my original statement stands, in terms of computer technology, the Xenos is an ancient piece of hardware.Gooeykat

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"]"360 games for a while after it was released. And how are the graphics laughable? I'm a PC gamer, but I'm not afraid to admit that 360 games look great.." No they didnt my old geforce 6600 back then had 2x the texture detail,draw distence and effects. 04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]Maybe in a poor pc port? Play the release exclusives before you try to argue that point...-GeordiLaForge-

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"] I have.....04dcarraher

Geordi, you're probably one of those people who believes AMD an NVidia have top secret video cards 10 years ahead of time only the NASA has access to.

Well think again. That type of hardware doers not evenexist. Even if it did, it would costs millions and console manufacturers don't put million dollar chips into consoles, quite the contrary. They put in the cheapest parts and mass manufacture them to cut the costs. The Xenos iscomparable to a X1900 chip, which was the best thing available on the drawing boards at the time the console specs were finalized.

The thing isn't even close to a 8800GTX. The only reason early 360 games looked better than PC games at that timeis because unlike console games, pc games are not (typically) made to take advantage of the latest videocards. Instead they aim for a more common technological standard 2 or 3 years behind current high-end tech.

Oh boy...here we go.

The Xenos is similar to the 1900 and 2900 from ATI. It was a precursor to the R600 GPU and based off of the R580 GPU. It has 48SP, just like the X1900, only 8 ROPs, compared to 16 in the X1900, pixel fillrate of 4 GP/s, compared to 10 GP/s of the X1900, 500MHz core clock compared to 625MHz from the X1900, 240GFLOPS processing power, which is about the same as the X1800. The Xenos runs on a 65nm process though and the X1900 ran on a 90nm process. The Xenos is about the same graphics-wise as an X1900. The reason game look good on the 360 is because they are specifically optimized for the hardware. When you design a game for the PC, it has to work on so many different hardware setups that it will never be as optimized as games for consoles. Also, as mentioned earlier, the 360 outputs 720P max, and the 1080P is just scaled up, not actually running at 1920x1080. If you want the proof, it's all right here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenos_(graphics_chip)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_ATI_Graphics_Processing_Units#Radeon_R500_.28X1xxx.29_series

And for a comparison to the 7 series and 8 series:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geforce_7_series#GeForce_7900_Series

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geforce_8_series#Technical_summary

Oh, and the PS3's RSX is based off of the NV47 architecture that's used in the nvidia 7800.

wow, the 360 graphics are equivalent to pc games from 2004. Games like COD 4/5 dont even run at 1280*720, I would say the xbox 360 is equivalent to a gtx 7800 and a 1.8 ghz dual core (the 360s three cores are each single threaded.)

Geordi, you're probably one of those people who believes AMD an NVidia have top secret video cards 10 years ahead of time only the NASA has access to.

Well think again. That type of hardware doers not evenexist. Even if it did, it would costs millions and console manufacturers don't put million dollar chips into consoles, quite the contrary. They put in the cheapest parts and mass manufacture them to cut the costs. The Xenos iscomparable to a X1900 chip, which was the best thing available on the drawing boards at the time the console specs were finalized.

The thing isn't even close to a 8800GTX. The only reason early 360 games looked better than PC games at that timeis because unlike console games, pc games are not (typically) made to take advantage of the latest videocards. Instead they aim for a more common technological standard 2 or 3 years behind current high-end tech.

Gog

wow, the 360 graphics are equivalent to pc games from 2004. Games like COD 4/5 dont even run at 1280*720, I would say the xbox 360 is equivalent to a gtx 7800 and a 1.8 ghz dual core (the 360s three cores are each single threaded.)

TerroRizing

[QUOTE="TerroRizing"]

wow, the 360 graphics are equivalent to pc games from 2004. Games like COD 4/5 dont even run at 1280*720, I would say the xbox 360 is equivalent to a gtx 7800 and a 1.8 ghz dual core (the 360s three cores are each single threaded.)

04dcarraher

Geordi, you're probably one of those people who believes AMD an NVidia have top secret video cards 10 years ahead of time only the NASA has access to.

Well think again. That type of hardware doers not evenexist. Even if it did, it would costs millions and console manufacturers don't put million dollar chips into consoles, quite the contrary. They put in the cheapest parts and mass manufacture them to cut the costs. The Xenos iscomparable to a X1900 chip, which was the best thing available on the drawing boards at the time the console specs were finalized.

The thing isn't even close to a 8800GTX. The only reason early 360 games looked better than PC games at that timeis because unlike console games, pc games are not (typically) made to take advantage of the latest videocards. Instead they aim for a more common technological standard 2 or 3 years behind current high-end tech.

Gog

Oh snap, when Go1em gets involved you know the topics serious! :P

240GFLOPS processing power

GuitarFreak2

[QUOTE="Gog"]

Geordi, you're probably one of those people who believes AMD an NVidia have top secret video cards 10 years ahead of time only the NASA has access to.

Well think again. That type of hardware doers not evenexist. Even if it did, it would costs millions and console manufacturers don't put million dollar chips into consoles, quite the contrary. They put in the cheapest parts and mass manufacture them to cut the costs. The Xenos iscomparable to a X1900 chip, which was the best thing available on the drawing boards at the time the console specs were finalized.

The thing isn't even close to a 8800GTX. The only reason early 360 games looked better than PC games at that timeis because unlike console games, pc games are not (typically) made to take advantage of the latest videocards. Instead they aim for a more common technological standard 2 or 3 years behind current high-end tech.

TerroRizing

Oh snap, when Go1em gets involved you know the topics serious! :P

Daytona_178