-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
IGN Posts Up More Project Cafe Hardware Power Rumors
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
SneakyStephan
Banned
Elixist said:
http://www.power4pc.be/webshop/accessoires/desktops/oem_power4pc_best_buy_gaming_pc_p4pbbgp04.html
You ask, we serve.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Look a few posts up I linked it.Elixist said:
Only suckers buy HP or Dell.
That store is where I shop and where I bought my current hardware.
It's not even the cheapest, but they offer good service and they'll build your pc for free too if you order seperate parts. (but this is a pre built set up that they offer).
ps I have never bought a pre built, but a pre built price is more dramatic obviously
IchigoSharingan
Member
Elixist said:
I don't care for prebuilts. You can get much better $/performance for grabbing the parts and building the PC yourself. The point is that you can get a goddamn good build for a very reasonable budget. His links and mine serve the same purpose in that regard.
But I digress. This ultimately means in a year the price of a 4850 should also be incredibly reasonable and within reach of Nintendo's build capacity.
The screens are not small. They're rumored to be in the 800x500 range (some time ago I suggested them to be 960x540 so that 4 of them would be exactly 1080p), and rendering an additional nearly-1080p screen always split in four is going to eat some significant resources.IchigoSharingan said:
Someone will still argue they can do it by using NANOMACHINESantonz said:
SneakyStephan
Banned
Elixist said:
I wish conversion worked that way for hardware and software in the EU.
They replace the dollar sign with a euro sign and call it a day.
Console games cost 60-69 euros, steam games cost 49 euros (some 59 like ubisoft and activision shit), ps3 on release was 599 euros..., gtx580 is 530-550 euros , sammy spinpoint f3 hdds are 65 euros etc etc.
Items that get a proper conversion rate are few and far between, and usually only due to sales or overstock.
My current pc was a 600 dollar build(give or take a few) on newegg and I paid 58x euros for it over here (yay for cpu being on sale).
Oh and that was back when the euro was worth over 1.5 dollars... so depressing.
Needless to say importing anything that wasn't nailed down was hugely popular then, including cars, hardware, dvds etc.
IchigoSharingan
Member
Jocchan said:
of course, but Nintendo has put tons into R&D, so it's safe to assume they have addressed this issue
IchigoSharingan
Member
E3 really is coming fast, eh? I always block it out of my mind otherwise it takes forever to show up.
Iwata is preparing quite the bomb this time around.
Iwata is preparing quite the bomb this time around.
Nintendo wouldn't release a system heavily unbalanced or fatally crippled by easily noticeable bottlenecks.IchigoSharingan said:
If anything, we can expect some of the more resource-intensive games to only use the controller screens marginally (if not leaving them off entirely), or to render both them and the main screen at lower res if needed.
DeFiBkIlLeR
Banned
szaromir said:
Wrong....
When it comes to GPU performace, fill rate and memory bandwidth is king.
Xbox Gpu has a fill rate of about 6 Billion pixels per second, a 4850 is 10 Billion pixels per second.
Xbox Gpu memory bandwidth is about 22Gb per second, a 4850 is 60Gb per second.
These are the figures for my 4850 to illustrate my figures...
So taking into account both fill rate and bandwidth, a 4850 is a minimum of twice as powerful as a 360 no doubt, but nowhere near 5x as powerful.
It should be noted, that i currently run a PC with a Phenom II Triple Core 720 @ 3.8Ghz with a 1Gb 4850, so i probably have a Gaming PC as close to the new Nintendo console in terms of capability as anyone does on NeoGaf...
And generally speaking i can run 'any' current 360/PS3 port at maximum settings with 2 or 4xAnti Aliasing @1080p with frame rates in the 30-60 range, depending on how well the game has been ported...
Having a triple core CPU like the 720 has been great this gen, seeing as it matches the capabilities of the 360's triple core PPC CPU so closely....
SneakyStephan
Banned
When exactly does it start?
New 3d mario, new starfox, sequel to windu waika, metroid cafe, F zero reboot, Goldeneye, turok.
Oh and I'll have a coffee refill and extra fries with that.
And here's what the bandwidth would look like with gddr5 instead of ancient gddr3. KaPOW.
Btw my phenom II 720BE is (only) clocked at 3.2 ghz atm to keep down fan noise, so I'm closer to the specs.
Look at that glorious bandwidth , despite lower memory clock.
GDDR5 or bust nintendo.
New 3d mario, new starfox, sequel to windu waika, metroid cafe, F zero reboot, Goldeneye, turok.
Oh and I'll have a coffee refill and extra fries with that.
And here's what the bandwidth would look like with gddr5 instead of ancient gddr3. KaPOW.
Btw my phenom II 720BE is (only) clocked at 3.2 ghz atm to keep down fan noise, so I'm closer to the specs.
Look at that glorious bandwidth , despite lower memory clock.
GDDR5 or bust nintendo.
DeFiBkIlLeR
Banned
SneakyStephan said:
But that wont deliver twice the performance desipte it showing 115gb compared to my 60gb, the difference in performance between a 4850 and a 4870 is roughly 20%, and 40% compared to a 4890.
SneakyStephan said:
Lets split the difference..
seeing as the leaks say its a higher clocked version of the Xbox CPU...)Graphics Horse
Member
Jocchan said:
Of course, but 3DS games haven't tended to put significant resources into the bottom screen so far. The opportunity is there of course, but I don't think games rendering 5 different 3D viewpoints at once will be the norm.
It might be that a 4 player game would force you to reserve an extra 4.5MB of frame buffer RAM no matter what you chose to show, limiting the image quality of the TV screen, but it's too early to say.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Well yeah, because the fillrate isn't much better and the core clock isn't much higher.DeFiBkIlLeR said:But that wont deliver twice the performance desipte it showing 115gb compared to my 60gb, the difference in performance between a 4850 and a 4870 is roughly 20%, and 40% compared to a 4890.
Lets split the difference..
20 percent is still a significant difference though.
I'd kill for 20 percent more performance for my card right now, it would tie me over for another 6 months till the next batch of cards come, instead of probably finally feeling inadequate when witcher 2 comes out.
Pixel Fillrate these days is a useless figure for determining performance. It hasn't been a determining factor of Card performance since around 2003.
Bandwidth is certainly important but so is the FLOPs that can be handled. Stock 4850 easily falls into the 3-4x Xenos area. If Nintendo upgrades it to DDR5 it easily moves to the 4-5x overall performance.
I will say if Nintendo does stick with DDR3 it would be gimping performance of the GPU long term.
Bandwidth is certainly important but so is the FLOPs that can be handled. Stock 4850 easily falls into the 3-4x Xenos area. If Nintendo upgrades it to DDR5 it easily moves to the 4-5x overall performance.
I will say if Nintendo does stick with DDR3 it would be gimping performance of the GPU long term.
Graphics Horse
Member
antonz said:
It sure would be nice to have enough fillrate to pull off nice alpha effects though.
http://www.s314kba.co.uk/images/lukesr/GT5/Autumn Ring_7.jpg
Pixel fill rate will be about 2.5x Xenos capability. Xenos does 4 gigapixels a second.Graphics Horse said:
Im not going to lie and say Nintendo couldn't have picked a beefier GPU cause they could have. The difference is the gaps between the cards these days are no where near the gap of overclocking a card from the 90s and competing against GPU from 2005.
Risk Breaker
Member
1GB RAM, 3.2ghz tricore ibm aka 360.0 and an 4800... Absolutely won't buy. By the time the hardware is used properly, the other two will be out and will be significantly better. Pass.
That's pre-patch. Not nearly that bad now.
Graphics Horse said:
That's pre-patch. Not nearly that bad now.
Hot Coldman
Banned
OK, now this is more fucking like it!
Nope.Mr_Brit said:
5870: 2TFLOPS @ 151W
6870: 2TFLOPS @ 151W
480: 1.5TFLOPS @ 250W
570: 1.4TFLOPS @ 219W
And just for shits and giggles:
4770: 960GFLOPS @ 80W
5770: 1TFLOPS @ 86W
6750: 1TFLOPS @ 86W
Nvidia managed to improve efficiency a bit, but still looks pretty bad compared to AMDs offerings in that regard.
Foliorum Viridum
Banned
I would be pretty damn happy with those specs.
SneakyStephan
Banned
I was about to post this but you beat me to it.Mr_Brit said:
Raw computational power may be the same per watt , but the new cards are a lot better at using it. (hence efficiency)
A 6850 performs better than a 4890, yet in reviews you see total system power at (same cpu obviously) at 230 watt full load for the 6850 and 280+ watt for the 4890.
That's a lot less power draw / performance.
And therefore I'm guessing a lot less tdp/performance too.
That's a terrible comparison, both 480 and 570 are a lot faster than the 5870 yet have lower TFLOPS. Also, the 6870 uses less power than the 5870 so I don't know where you got these numbers from. Also, the 5000+ series are DX11 compliant so need a lot more transistors to support those features which is why their TDP is higher than you'd expect.wsippel said:
Edit: Going by your chart, the 5770 uses 6W more but is significantly faster than the 4770 which proves my point.
Risk Breaker
Member
Uchip said:
My decision wouldn't be based solely on the specs comparison. I don't like the way Nintendo handles things like (external) memory, dvd/bluray playback, stores and online in general, and first party Nintendo that interests me (mostly Zelda) is not what it used to be (for me). I highly doubt that suddenly Nintendo will be the king of third parties, and the controller doesn't seem to be more than an expansion of the DS concept and I already have a DS (which I play a lot even with its shitty specs, thank you) so...
Of course I OBVIOUSLY know this is only an unconfirmed rumor, but I don't think this level of specs is unlikely. And I think it would be a huge error on Nintendo's part, but time will tell.
neoanarch said:
Precisely, I think 3-4 years in the future, next MS and Sony consoles will have around THREE TIMES, minimum two times the amount of RAM. That's a lot. The Wii 2 will be the most powerful console by far for a year or two, and then will be left behind, by far. I don't think that's good :/ And yes, Sony/MS don't need to break the bank to do something significantly more future-proof (lol) than this rumored specs, look at the NGP vs 3DS. At least that's what I think, I repeat.
To the others: yes I know this is a rumor, the console is not out yet blahblah. But there's the 3DS' and Wii's precedent. I'm just being pessimistic based on previous experiences. Anything wrong with that? Just like I want NGP to be $300, but I pessimistically await 350 or even 399, knowing Sony's recent consoles pricing. At least in Sony's case you can see that they lowered their prices in other segments, like TVs and laptops.
It's the only sane comparison, because it completely excludes code and driver level fuckups or one sided optimizations which are way to common on the PC ("The Way it's Meant to be Played"). Also, the 4770 achieves 12GFLOPS/W, the 5770 11.7GFLOPS/W. The 5770 is less efficient.Mr_Brit said:
Terrible comparison, use cards that have similar power instead of cherry picking examples. Using your example I could say that a 5200 card is more efficient than a 6900 card which would be strectching the truth even if it is true. Take the 6870 and 5870, nearly the same power but the 6870 uses quite a bit less power.wsippel said:
80W and 86W are as similar as it gets. I did compare cards with similar power levels. Also, we're talking about consoles here. Driver optimizations or code optimizations have no place in this discussion.Mr_Brit said:
EDIT: No idea what "5200" you mean, but: 5450: 5.4GFLOPS/W. 6970: 10.8GFLOPS/W. Low end GPUs are less efficient due to the overhead, but there's a ceiling at ~11GFLOPS/W.
SneakyStephan
Banned
edit why are we even comparing them, isn't the 5770 40 nm, the 4770 is still a 55 nm die right?
Who says their gains are anything to do with improved drivers? 5870 and 6870 are practically identical, drivers wouldn't be able to substantially improve the 6870 and not do the exact same for the 5870. Also a 4770 and 5770 aren't the same power, as you increase in power, your efficiency always goes down which is why you should only compare cards that are very close to each other in performance.wsippel said: