Where's bboynecko?
I wouldn't understand a thing he might say, but it would be cool to read anyway.
Video Game Systems. Which is better? Help!
by BeautifulGarbage 36 Replies latest social entertainment
-
-
Simon
To get a PC capable of what the XBox delivers would cost considerably more than the price of an XBox itself - that's why they make a loss on every one they sell (it actually costs Bill money when you buy one!)
To play PC games I would have had to buy a new graphics card (straight away more than the XBox) and also a new soundcard (to pump out 5:1 surround sound) and *still* I would not have a system that I could just turn on and play - while the PC is great for games it is complicated because it's a PC and games have to support such a variety of hardware (combinations of components and drivers) that it's really amazing anything works as well as it does.
The XBox is a decent powered PC for a cut down price and games can get the best out of it because the developers knwo exactly what chipsets will be available instead of having to write for a myriad of combinations.
The online gaming capability built into it is what will really set it apart though when it launches - there is nothing quite like playing against other human opponents!
-
DCs Ghost
Mr Gates is getting his Xbox built in a factory in mexico!!!!
in order to save money!!!! hardly likely that this brilliant entrepeaneur would care to lose any possible income from his loyal pc heads,f you have access to WIRED Magazine, check out the XBox write up a few months back
(actually i will scan and post it for ease of convenience)dont buy the hype boys and girls, why would he choose to loose money? when he doesn't have to
"we do not see the world as it is,
we see the world as we are. . ." Anais Nin -
Simon
It's a fact that console makers loose money on the hardware but make it on the software licensing - people typically have to buy 3+ games for them to start making money.
Sony looses money too which is why they fought so hard to stop unofficial games.
Y'know you can get a playstation emulator for the PC? Wanna know who would fight the hardest against one appearing for the XBox?
Microsoft!
Sony would love to have their profit making games running on the loss making XBox hardware.
It's the reason the games cost £40 - £45 compared to PC games which maybe £20 - £30
-
DCs Ghost
Y'know you can get a playstation emulator for the PC? Wanna know who would fight the hardest against one appearing for the XBox?
Microsoft!---simon
of course he/they (gates/microsoft) would!!!
it would only make sense that he would oppose an emulator that would prevent him from making Xtra cash on his box,
the market for PC sales has stalled because just about every home has one, or even 2 and sometimes 3, profit is mostly generated from hardware sales for upgrades to the systems already in homes/businesses and software sales, granted yes PCs are being sold but those who have them save money by upgrading as they can afford to,
in order to create new revenue he "created" the Xbox (simply a motherboard with a suped up vid card and audio card) this way he could get his foot in the gaming market and offer a so called "new product", thus picking up lagging sales in the PC market,
Gates is a business man and a marketer, who can read a trend and has the money to invest and make more money, it is not so much that he is a computer genius, he simply knows what is going on in the tech world and has the proper connections to make things happen,btw how do i post a scan?
"we do not see the world as it is,
we see the world as we are. . ." Anais Nin -
slipnslidemaster
Simon wrote:
It's a fact that console makers loose money on the hardware but make it on the software licensing - people typically have to buy 3+ games for them to start making money.
Simon, I realize that is a popular misconception, however companies generally are in business to MAKE money not lose it. The margins may be razor thin but still make money.
Read this article. It was quite the eye opener.
http://red-mercury.com/mmceo/mmceo_current.html
Slipnslidemaster:"There are no facts, only interpretations."
- NietzscheUnseen Apostate Directorate of North America
-
Xander
MODIFIED NV25
Picking a nit, but the XBox GPU is the NV2A, which is a modified NV20. The GeForce4 is an NV25, and the next-gen card due in August is NV30.
as well as 4 simultaneous pixel shaders
But no Z-compression or Z-occlusion! And, that's were the biggest slowdown is in PC graphics today.
Matrox Parhelia is also interesting
Well, for what is rumored to be a $500+ card, I'd hope so.
apparently supporting PS1.4 (only the ATI 8500 does this ATM), which is a very flexible pixel programming language compared to PS1.1 (as implemented by NVidia),
Parhelia - ??? (but it does have vertex shader 2.0 support)
ATI R8500 - PS 1.4
GeForce3/4 - PS 1.3
ATI Radeon - PS 1.0DX8.0a specs call for PS 1.1 support at least. No one ever used PS1.0 in any app to my knowledge.
The PC market is heating up, but the AGP bus bottleneck is still present nonetheless.
The AGP bus is only a bottleneck for the PC because the CPU are now up in the 3 GHz+ range, and can generate vertex's like mad.
EDIT: Cleaned up some.
XBox CPU to RAM: 0-1.06 GB/s
PC CPU to RAM: 2.7 GB/sXBox GPU to RAM: 5.34-6.4 GB/s (shared w/ audio and nic, etc.)
PC GPU to GPU RAM: 10.4 GB/s (GeForce4 4600)Also note that the XBox has 64 MB of shared RAM (CPU and GPU share it).
Most PCs have at least 256 MB of RAM for CPU and the GeForce4 brings 128 MB of RAM for the GPU.
That Max Payne runs faster on PC than XBox is slight proof of this case. You could argue, of course, that as it was designed for the PC, there might be some bias here.
I'm not aware of any highly demanding XBox->PC ports yet, so I guess the final verdict awaits.
At the very least, it is certainly true that the PC that could compete with an XBox certainly costs a LOT more.
Xander F
(Unseen Apostate Directorate of North America - Ohio order)A fanatic is one who, upon losing sight of his goals, redoubles his efforts.
--George Santayana