Jump to content


Photo

How Many Ghz Do You Think


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 danolimitpro

danolimitpro

    X-S Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 88 posts

Posted 28 January 2005 - 11:42 PM

since the ps3 is going to have 4.6 ghz how fast do you think the xbox 2 is going to be


#2 krappy

krappy

    X-S X-perience

  • XS-BANNED
  • PipPip
  • 415 posts
  • Location:Reppin Da @-Town
  • Xbox Version:v1.4

Posted 28 January 2005 - 11:44 PM

smile.gif tongue.gif rotfl.gif rolleyes.gif pop.gif love.gif biggrin.gif beerchug.gif muhaha.gif 10.2ghz........

#3 danolimitpro

danolimitpro

    X-S Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 88 posts

Posted 28 January 2005 - 11:47 PM

im gonna say around anywhere from 6-8

#4 Dangerously_Cheesy

Dangerously_Cheesy

    X-S Freak

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,308 posts
  • Location:Tacoma, Washington
  • Interests:What doesn't interest me? :P
  • Xbox Version:v1.0

Posted 28 January 2005 - 11:59 PM

You guys fail to see that CPU clock speed does NOT translate to performance!

Don't seem suprised if it only has a 1.47-2.5GHZ processor and if then it could easily compete with a 4.6GHZ chip.

#5 Deftech

Deftech

    X-S Transcendental

  • XS-BANNED
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,917 posts
  • Xbox Version:v1.4
  • 360 version:v1 (xenon)

Posted 29 January 2005 - 12:06 AM

QUOTE(Dangerously_Cheesy @ Jan 28 2005, 07:30 PM)
You guys fail to see that CPU clock speed does NOT translate to performance!

Don't seem suprised if it only has a 1.47-2.5GHZ processor and if then it could easily compete with a 4.6GHZ chip.

View Post



well as of now its got the trio of 3.5ghz G5's on a single core. A 2 or 3ghz G5 would rock inside a console.

Dangerously_Cheesy is right. It all matters as to how the gpu/vpu, cpus and everything communicate to one another and how fast and how efficiently it can be done.

the next gen systems will all be insanely fast and powerful. Itll be the dev tools and sofware that sets them apart.

#6 dmnall

dmnall

    X-S Enthusiast

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 29 January 2005 - 01:30 AM

Well it would be sweet to see the xbox2 have an Athlon 64 CPU. That is all I have to say.

dmnall

#7 jaroc

jaroc

    X-S Freak

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,047 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario (Canada)
  • Interests:Xbox and Sports
  • Xbox Version:v1.0
  • 360 version:v1 (xenon)

Posted 29 January 2005 - 01:35 AM

isn't it gonna be 4.5 ghz? that's what i heard.

#8 Kesler

Kesler

    X-S Young Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 33 posts

Posted 29 January 2005 - 02:29 AM

The Xbox 2 and PS3 CPUs will be many times more powerfull than any Athlon 64 CPU.

#9 Deftech

Deftech

    X-S Transcendental

  • XS-BANNED
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,917 posts
  • Xbox Version:v1.4
  • 360 version:v1 (xenon)

Posted 29 January 2005 - 02:42 AM

QUOTE(Kesler @ Jan 28 2005, 10:00 PM)
The Xbox 2 and PS3 CPUs will be many times more powerfull than any Athlon 64 CPU.

View Post



agreed.

Id much rather have a G5 than a athlon 64. G5's primary goal is for rendering and it will kick ass inside a console.

its already known that the cpu will definitely be a G5 derivative. now its just a matter of time until we see if they really get 3 of them on the same core. They'll need a way to keep it all running cool.

#10 whet1134

whet1134

    X-S Freak

  • XS-BANNED
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,033 posts
  • Xbox Version:v1.0

Posted 29 January 2005 - 03:02 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the 4.6Ghz that Sony is claiming and effective clock speed? The processor is a cell chip (duh.) comprised of at least 3 cores. So each core will be running at a maximum of 1.53Ghz. The problem Sony/IBM were having with cell is keeping the heat down. I'll have to find the article. Appearently they settled on either more cores (4 would bring them down to 1.2Ghz each), which would cost more, or they are going with 3 and hoping the damn thing doesn't melt. laugh.gif

MS is doing the same thing with Xbox2, but not as advanced. Now, where is that article......

My bet for MS? 4Ghz.

#11 Deftech

Deftech

    X-S Transcendental

  • XS-BANNED
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,917 posts
  • Xbox Version:v1.4
  • 360 version:v1 (xenon)

Posted 29 January 2005 - 03:41 AM

if all 3 cores of the cell equal 4.6 Ghz, then all weve heard about xbox 2 thus far means all 3 cores added up equal 10.5ghz.

CPU
The Xenon CPU is a custom processor based on PowerPC technology. The CPU includes three independent processors (cores) on a single die. Each core runs at 3.5+ GHz.


Ofcourse none of that has been officially announced like the Cell has, but thats all we have to go on for now.

I dont see how they could get even half that into a box without having serious heat issues.

Regardless of what cpu's run at, Im more excited about the graphics cards inside. The ati card in the xbox is said to do the following...

Ati R500, is a customized version of the top end R520 chip ATI is readying for pc owners.

Atis R500 promises to be 10 times the polygon power and 4 times the pixel power of Ati's Radeon X800 XT chip, in other words, around 5 billion triangles per second. and a 30 billion pixel per second fill rate, give or take some billions.


Current ati and nVidia cards push 600 million triangles a second. If the xbox 2 can honestly even do half of what its said to do, thats 2.5 billion a second.

any compaints out of anyone here? didnt think so biggrin.gif

#12 Deftech

Deftech

    X-S Transcendental

  • XS-BANNED
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,917 posts
  • Xbox Version:v1.4
  • 360 version:v1 (xenon)

Posted 29 January 2005 - 04:16 AM

by the way, everytime I look for cell info, it says its got 4 cores. Ill keep looking though.

I wish it was May already so we could find out whats in the damn xbox 2 tongue.gif

#13 chris_kalan

chris_kalan

    X-S X-perience

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Xbox Version:v1.1

Posted 29 January 2005 - 04:52 AM

I think the speed of a next gen console should be comparable to a PC with the following specs:

4GHz CPU with 1600MHz FSB
512MB RAM
Video RAM should be separately allotted at a minimum of 256MB

The console would be pricey (around $600 CDN / $480 USD) but it would be well worth it if even a few developers utilized as much as they could. I'm sure Tom Clancy Studios, Bungie, and MS Games, not to mention others, would definitely utilize all the power of the console.

#14 lordvader129

lordvader129

    He Who Posts Alot...

  • Head Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,752 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, USA
  • Xbox Version:v1.1
  • 360 version:v5.0 (360S - trinity)

Posted 29 January 2005 - 05:41 AM

QUOTE(chris_kalan @ Jan 28 2005, 10:23 PM)
I think the speed of a next gen console should be comparable to a PC with the following specs:

4GHz CPU with 1600MHz FSB
512MB RAM
Video RAM should be separately allotted at a minimum of 256MB

The console would be pricey (around $600 CDN / $480 USD) but it would be well worth it if even a few developers utilized as much as they could.  I'm sure Tom Clancy Studios, Bungie, and MS Games, not to mention others, would definitely utilize all the power of the console.

View Post


remember though that a console with speeds "comparable" to that would have lower specs, since consoles have no OS overhead, and games are coded specifically for their hardware profile, a console could probably have half those specs and still runs games just as well, in fact i think half that is right where xbox2 will be

#15 Deftech

Deftech

    X-S Transcendental

  • XS-BANNED
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,917 posts
  • Xbox Version:v1.4
  • 360 version:v1 (xenon)

Posted 29 January 2005 - 06:10 AM

the cpu will be plenty fast, as will the Ati card, I pray they slap 512 megs of memory in there though. Id gladly pay a few more $$ to get a system that has 512. 5 years from now, game engines will have progressed and devs might find that 256 was not enough over time.

Thats the only drawback to the xbox, if it had 128, FSAA could be used more(less jaggies) and more games could utilize 720p and 1080i more than they do now.

I better not see jaggies on xbox 2 games. There will be absolutely no excuse to not use FSAA at all times with all that power on tap.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users