The true unofficial XBox2 GPU specs

Vark said:
Is anyone surprised? I have to say of the big three, MS is *terrible* at keeping stuff under wraps. Which frankly, I sort of like, because it means less waiting for info.
Click to expand...
Or maybe, just maybe, they are really good in giving information early to the developers, and they are the one leaking stuff ? Just a thought.
 
Duckhuntdog said:
I believe this one is a little more... up-to-date.
Click to expand...
Ho really ? Let me see if I can find the old one then :)
Nope, exactly the same as the one posted on xbox-scene on June 23.
 
doncale said:
Panajev, based on the above information on Xbox 2 GPU, how much of a performance leap are we talking about from NV40 ? so the NV40 has 32 shader ALUs for the fragment / pixel processing portion. but it also has 6 Vertex Shaders, entirely seperate, right? so if Xbox 2 GPU has 48 shader ALUs for everything, it does not seem like a huge leap in the amount of processing units compared to NV40. NV40 6 vertex shaders plus 32 pixel processing ALUs (in 16 pipelines) 6 + 32 = 38. XBox 2 GPU = 48 for vertex and pixel.

or am i missing something?
Click to expand...

For NV40 it actually is 12 + 64 = 76 Shader Ops/cycle.

Xbox 2's GPU is 96 Shader ops/cycle.

There are more things that are nto taken into account by the pure Shader ops/cycle number though.
 
Blimblim said:
Ho really ? Let me see if I can find the old one then :)
Nope, exactly the same as the one posted on xbox-scene on June 23.
Click to expand...

Ah, you appear to be right. I confused the docs that are out there.
 
doncale said:
The Xenon game disc drive is a 12× DVD, with an expected outer edge throughput of 16+ MB/sec. Latency is expected to be in the neighborhood of 100 ms. The media format will be similar to Xbox, with approximately 6 GB of usable space on the disk. As on Xbox, media will be stored on a single side in two 3 GB layers.
Click to expand...


I don't quite understand why MS is choosing to only use standard DVD9s when Sony is using BRDs. I think this might hurt MS in the long run. Switching disks is possible but its not exactly convienent. It will be interesting to see how they market this and their motives behind keeping DVD9. Only thing I can think of is cost but how much of a cost are we talking here?
 
Duckhuntdog said:
Ah, you appear to be right. I confused the docs that are out there.
Click to expand...

I cannot wait for E3 :)... PlayStation 3, Xbox 2 and hopefully Revolution... this show should kick some serious butt.
 
Blimblim said:
Or maybe, just maybe, they are really good in giving information early to the developers, and they are the one leaking stuff ? Just a thought.
Click to expand...


What? Developers leaking stuff. Never, I mean, how many Rev leaks do you see? :lol
 
Panajev2001a said:
For NV40 it actually is 12 + 64 = 76 Shader Ops/cycle.

Xbox 2's GPU is 96 Shader ops/cycle.

There are more things that are nto taken into account by the pure Shader ops/cycle number though.
Click to expand...

Panajev: I wasn't talking amount of shader ops, i was talking about the amount of shader ALUs. like you said, Nvidia NV40 has 32 shader ALUs for pixel processing. I agreed, and added that it has 6 vertex shaders units. maybe within those vertex shaders it has 12 ALUs? but more likely each vertex shader can do 2 ops per cycle?

so in general, i was asking about the amount of ALU units in NV40 vs Xbox 2 GPU not the amount of ops per cycle. though that is another thing.


edit: so unless i am mistaken, it is looking like this

NV40: 6 vertex shaders (12 ops/cycle) + 32 shader ALUs ( 64 ops/cycle) = 76 shader ops / cycle

Xbox 2 GPU: 48 shader ALUs for eveything. vertex + pixel. 96 shader ops / cycle.
 
Duckhuntdog said:
Not really, I think I am of the same mind as you, power-wise PS3 >>> everyone else.
Click to expand...

Now, now... where did I state that ;) ? I do not know the specs of the PlayStation 3 GPU, not even rumors about them so I cannot make my mind about what tasks one console will be much better or worse than the other.

I do know that Xbox 2 will not enjoy the power advantage Xbox 1 enjoyed.
 
doncale said:
I wasn't talking shader ops, i was talking shader ALUs. like you said, Nvidia NV40 has 32 shader ALUs for pixel processing. I agreed, and added that it has 6 vertex shaders units. maybe within those vertex shaders it has 12 ALUs? but more likely each vertex shader can do 2 ops per cycle?

so in general, i was asking about the amount of ALU units in NV40 vs Xbox 2 GPU not the amount of ops per cycle. though that is another thing.


edit: so unless i am mistaken, it is looking like this

NV40: 6 vertex shaders (12 ops/cycle) + 32 shader ALUs ( 64 ops/cycle) = 76 shader ops / cycle

Xbox 2 GPU: 48 shader ALUs for eveything. vertex + pixel. 96 shader ops / cycle.
Click to expand...

You got it.
 
Shompola said:
futamidance5jw.gif
Click to expand...

... you gotta
futamidance5jw.gif
 
Panajev2001a said:
You got it.
Click to expand...



ok, so am i also correct in saying that Xbox 2 GPU does not have massively more processing resources than NV40?

it will then come down to the boost in clockspeed ATI can achieve, and more importantly, how powerful/efficient ATI's new ALUs / Shader Units are, compared to Nvidia's.
 
doncale said:
ok, so am i also correct in saying that Xbox 2 GPU does not have massively more processing resources than NV40?
Click to expand...

No ;).

On NV40 you only use 1 Shader ALU per pipeline if you are working with textures (sampling them): you get to co-issue from both only if you are not doing operations on textures.
 
Panajev2001a said:
No ;).

On NV40 you only use 1 Shader ALU per pipeline if you are working with textures (sampling them): you get to co-issue from both only if you are not doing operations on textures.
Click to expand...


oh, ok., cool.

can you PLEASE sum up how much better XGPU 2 / Xbox2 GPU is likely to be overall, in terms of processing resources, efficiency, memory bandwidth, image quality, shader model 3.0 etc etc. compared to NV40, and also R420/R480.

i hear that ATI's implementation of SM 3.0 in R520 and in R500 Xbox2 GPU is alot better than Nvidia's SM 3.0 in NV40.


MORE DETAIL PANAJEV. not just one line or a couple lines. i like reading your posts. more more more

*pounds knife and fork on table* :)
 
doncale said:
oh, ok., cool.

can you PLEASE sum up how much better XGPU 2 / Xbox2 GPU is likely to be overall, in terms of processing resources, efficiency, memory bandwidth, image quality, shader model 3.0 etc etc. compared to NV40, and also R420/R480.

i hear that ATI's implementation of SM 3.0 in R520 and in R500 Xbox2 GPU is alot better than Nvidia's SM 3.0 in NV40.


MORE DETAIL PANAJEV. not just one line or a couple lines. i like reading your posts. more more more

*pounds knife and fork on table* :)
Click to expand...

You gotta pay for me to spend the time on that ;). J/K ;).

Shader Model 3.0... talk about ++... Vertex Texturing is rumored to be MUCH faster on Xbox 2's GPU for example.

I'll take the time to digest more details and write something longer... I am glad you like to read my posts, sorry for these few lines. I should have something up in some days if I can dedicate enough time to actually sit through it and do it... I am lazy :P.
 
Duckhuntdog said:
A sometimes, lack of modesty is your trademark. But it suits you, so don't change it.
Click to expand...

At a first glance... it sounds pretty insulting :P.

I'd rather be known as one who gets VERY excited about technology rather than one who lacks modesty.

Man... people hate my guts here :lol.
 
Panajev2001a said:
You gotta pay for me to spend the time on that ;). J/K ;).

Shader Model 3.0... talk about ++... Vertex Texturing is rumored to be MUCH faster on Xbox 2's GPU for example.

I'll take the time to digest more details and write something longer... I am glad you like to read my posts, sorry for these few lines. I should have something up in some days if I can dedicate enough time to actually sit through it and do it... I am lazy :P.
Click to expand...


exellent. looking forward to it. heh :D
 
When we first saw these specs, everyone just blew them off. That is why nobody seems to recall them. However, we have gotten a lot bits and pieces information over the last 2 months and now these specs echo exactly what we have been told.

There was a big BR vs. DVD debate earlier. Mostly about drive space, but also about transfer rates and seek times. IIRC, a 12X DVD will be slightly faster than a 2X BR drive.

Also, data storage (user storage) looks like it won't be a problem. Hard drive or not, Xenon will offer plenty of avenues for save games, downloadable content, and custom soundtracks.

Controller redesign seems ace. Improve on what you have, don't reinvent the wheel (I'm looking at you Nintendo).

HDTV owners rejoice. My set only does 1080i, so I was definitely worried that I would get screwed by 720p. No need to worry anymore. :)

Technical babble... I'll let pana get all excited about that. All I know, is that Xenon games will look spectacular. IMO, you won't notice any graphical differences between Xenon and PS3. It will all look amazing.

The selling points of next gen consoles will be features and games.
 
Xenon is shaping up rather nicely it seems. I'm glad that MS decided to go with ATI for the GPU. Of course whoever MS chose was going to have the advantage of access to all of MS's next gen work on the DX10 libraries. Looks like ATI is putting that advantage to good use. :)
 
Panajev2001a said:
No ;).

On NV40 you only use 1 Shader ALU per pipeline if you are working with textures (sampling them): you get to co-issue from both only if you are not doing operations on textures.
Click to expand...

So...ignoring clockspeed/efficiency (and heh, I know that counts), looking at those figures, and assuming texture sampling, we can say Xbox2's GPU is roughly 2x the 6800Ultra (or a little less..)? That would seem about right in terms of what you'd expect from a chip coming out x number of months after the 6800 Ultra.

Also, people here love you Pana :P I'd love to read your more in depth discussion of these specs and how they stack up also!
 
I have a 6800U...

I'm just imagining games that look twice as good (at least) as HL2 running at full fidelity on my system... *drool*
 
from the document, it seems xbox 2 will be a very well integrated system, unlike the first one. I think the R500 will most likely be on par or quite close with whatever Nvidia is coming up for next gen in terms of performance, and feature-wise it might or not might not have more features, due to ATI having access to full directx next development.

Cell will obviously have more flops, but i think it will take some time while we start to see games utilizing those. I think it will be a damn close battle between Sony and MS in the west, with Nintendo holding their strong kid appeal but being even more marginalized in the adult market, unless they come up with some new mass-market IPs and stop launching new systems with just Nintendo/Zelda/whatever.

As usual games will have a huge impact, with Halo 3 coming, it is almost impossible that Xbox 2 can be any less successful than Xbox is. It is to be seen if Sony can keep GTA time-exclusive. If Sony/MS can come up with a new killer IP, it can swing the balance quite substantially. Online can also be a wildcard. Western third parties are bound to support both systems 100%.
 
next-generation will the fiercest home videogame console battle that the world has ever witnessed... even bigger than Genesis vs. SNES.

Who will win?

Well, for one, the Gamers.
 
Panajev2001a said:
At a first glance... it sounds pretty insulting :P.

I'd rather be known as one who gets VERY excited about technology rather than one who lacks modesty.

Man... people hate my guts here :lol.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I actively look for your posts on these kinds of threads. In fact, they are often the only ones I'm reading.

blahblahblahPANAJEVSPEAKSblahblahblah...
 
DCharlie said:
i'm just more irked by the "good news for MS" = this is obviously bullshit, followed by "outrageous good news for sony, 59 billlion polys a frame" = true - assness that we will inevitably decend into.

i've no doubt people would believe these as PS3 GPU specs.
Click to expand...

jedimike said:
When we first saw these specs, everyone just blew them off. That is why nobody seems to recall them. However, we have gotten a lot bits and pieces information over the last 2 months and now these specs echo exactly what we have been told.
Click to expand...
Way to generalize, guys. That always goes a long way towards improving the proceedings. These specs have never simply been blown off by everyone, and among the crew that have blown them off or called them bullshit, there's plenty represented from the faction who bought into the Xbox based on its on-paper and in-practice superiority to other consoles, as much as there are other factions represented.
 
kaching said:
Way to generalize, guys. That always goes a long way towards improving the proceedings. These specs have never simply been blown off by everyone, and among the crew that have blown them off or called them bullshit, there's plenty represented from the faction who bought into the Xbox based on its on-paper and in-practice superiority to other consoles, as much as there are other factions represented.
Click to expand...

Will Spin For Sony
Click to expand...

Wow, not kidding.
 
I'd love to hear the explanation for how that's pro-Sony spin to say that not everyone regards the Xenon specs as bullshit or bad...
 
It would indeed SUCK infected monkey testicles if Xbox2 had less memory than the Xbox-based Outrun2 arcade game, a Chihiro board with 512 MB.
 
512 MB would be nice, indeed. Anyhow, I am actually excited about the controller. I liked the S controller, except those b/w buttons. Adding them as shoulder buttons make more sense - my guess would be it will be more like Dual Shock with L2 and R2 being triggers. Good, solid solution, IMHO.

lachesis
 
So basically no new spec info on Xenon/Xbox360/whatever? *yawn* Patents? Leaks?

My assumption is it'll look like those 'Condemned' or 'Elder Scrolls: Oblivion' screenshots you've already seen... no more no less. The Revolution will have a similar spec + some wow.
 
doncale said:
no, if Sony has its way, PS3 is going to have 128 or 256 MB

if developers have their way, PS3 is going to 256 or 512 MB.
Click to expand...

I do not think SCE is even thinking of 128 MB, it is way too low and it would make Xbox 2 software very difficult to port to PlayStation 3 and with Xbox 2 coming out first...

Add 128 MB to the numbers you posted above and I think you would be closer to the jackpot.
 
•Xenon is a big-endian system. Both the CPU and GPU process memory in big-endian mode. Games ported from little-endian systems such as the Xbox or PC need to account for this in their game asset pipeline.

This section got me thinking of a possible Halo2 port for the Xenon and big titles to be released this year on the Xbox. Is it possible the Godfather may not be the only title to see a version created for the Xenon.

That also leads to the question of who develop the Xenon version of Madden 2006, or will it be a super high resolution port, which in a way would suck.
 
OG_Original Gamer said:
•Xenon is a big-endian system. Both the CPU and GPU process memory in big-endian mode. Games ported from little-endian systems such as the Xbox or PC need to account for this in their game asset pipeline.
Click to expand...

Not really. Converting between little and big-endian systems is very easy, and would simply require some conversion tools to shift some bytes around. On the load-time side however, things would be a little different, but that's where the porting difficulty comes into play.
 
That is old news...we saw all this last yr....


The Jun 23 2004, 12:49 AM date of this supposed leak should tell you something.

We will know more soon enough....E3 iza comin!
 
what are rough numbers for peak polygon output of current high end ps2/xbox games?
what factor of improvement are we looking at, since the xenon gpu should be capable of 500+ million triangles/sec (non-trivial shader ops included).
 
Panajev2001a said:
I do not think SCE is even thinking of 128 MB, it is way too low and it would make Xbox 2 software very difficult to port to PlayStation 3 and with Xbox 2 coming out first...

Add 128 MB to the numbers you posted above and I think you would be closer to the jackpot.
Click to expand...


Panajev, while i do think the final PS3 will be 256~512 MB, it would not surprise me in the least that Sony would initally try to get away with 128 MB. they have the history to do something like this. the original Playstation was going to ship with 1 MB of main memory. the PSP was orginally going to ship with 8 MB main memory. but when developers complain, Sony does tend to listen. so there is hope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DF - Nintendo Switch 2 Confirmed Specs: CPU, GPU, Memory, System Reservation + More
3 4 5 6 7
312
11K
Buggy Loop replied
Old GPU choice - which one?
13
264
MrAlwaysRight replied
Digital Foundry: Why We Recommend Buying a GPU Now
2 3 4 5 6
253
454
SoloCamo replied
Threat Intefactive: How Textures & GPU Utilization Make Or Break Optimization
1
71
Gonzito replied
AMD is increasing GPU prices by 10% due to AI demand
Hardware  2 3
108
471
SScorpio replied
Top Bottom