• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Xbox 360 Specifications! - LIVE 2 info

Gofreak, we know, probably, maybe that is, or possibly its a 1-8 with 2 of the SPU tied up. What we don't know is the clock speed or how its going to be bolted to the GPU. My best guess and the titbits that have been dropped is that CELL will not be calculating verticies. If thats the case its a straight fight between CELL and Xbox Tri core and the ATI GPU Vs Nvidia GPU. Cell will have the horse power best guess for me around twice that of the tri-core (which I think is knocking 100gflops). As for the GPU Nvidia will have 6 months odd tech on ATI so that will be difference but I think it will be fairly limited. Basically MS has come up with a great machine and anyone worried about the fill rate on the ATI GPU is mad that is with 4XAA at high def levels. God knows what the fill rate is if the AA was removed but it would be high.
 
I always felt ATI was around 6 months ahead of what Nvidia was/is doing and i still feel this way. Honestly...both gpu's in x360 and ps3 will be very similiar in power and quality.

Now the big question is...can sony match 512mb of system ram? To me its the most important factor now. The cpu's in both systems wont really make or break neither as they will both be fast enough to do what next gen games require..i think its now boiling down to amount of system ram, price and blueray in who will be the king of kings
 
Using my iPod to play music on X360 is awesome (can you copy over music from an iPod?).
Click to expand...

Keep your fingers crossed for ipod compabitility. If MS were sensible and consumer focused, they'd support it (or if its just a line-in). But they may choose to be all corporate and just support MTP devices like their 'play for sure' range of WMA portable devices. Wouldn't surprise me.
 
Moegames said:
I always felt ATI was around 6 months ahead of what Nvidia was/is doing and i still feel this way. Honestly...both gpu's in x360 and ps3 will be very similiar in power and quality.

Now the big question is...can sony match 512mb of system ram? To me its the most important factor now. The cpu's in both systems wont really make or break neither as they will both be fast enough to do what next gen games require..i think its now boiling down to amount of system ram, price and blueray in who will be the king of kings
Click to expand...

wise words :)
 
Moegames said:
I always felt ATI was around 6 months ahead of what Nvidia was/is doing and i still feel this way. Honestly...both gpu's in x360 and ps3 will be very similiar in power and quality.
Click to expand...

What makes you think ATi are 6 months ahead of NVidia?

That it took ATi 6 more months to release a chip competitive with the 6800 Ultra, that still didn't have SM3.0?

That they're spreading themselves over 2 console GPUs, a refresh, and their next-generation chip? Versus, for NVidia, a possible refresh, their next-gen GPU, and 1 console GPU?

NVidia should hit with their next-gen chip (their competitor to the R600) before ATi, imo. They've less to worry about. That could bode well for PS3..

There are points to all sides, but I guess my post is to illustrate that you can look at things from different angles and come to very different conclusions.

I would expect NVidia's PS3 chip to be on balance more powerful than the R500, though, even if just on paper.
 
I'm sure that the Nvidia GPU will be more powerful, question is just how much. What I really hope is that the Nvidia GPU has an unified shader architecture as well, that would be just perfect together with the Cell. All in all I expect that the PS3 is about five times faster (peak) than the xbox 360, but harder to get close to the peak, especialy the first two years.

Fredi
 
thorns said:
Looking at those specs, can anyone honestly still believe xbox 360 is only xbox 1.5 :lol
Click to expand...
I can see how someone can, because it's not adding anything really *new* to the console realm, like the Xbox sorta did with the Hard drive. Or at least, MS hasn't shown the new features.

I was hoping for native multi-monitor support myself :P Or a VMU device.
 
Snowman, with that argument the same can be said for PS3, its not going to add anything "new" besides greater power. And Mcfly 5X faster peak, er no chance whatsoever.
 
Pug said:
And Mcfly 5X faster peak, er no chance whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I'm just speculating of course, but the xcpu is about four times slower (peak) than Cell shown earlier this year. Now if the Nvidia GPU is faster as well, than my five times guess is not that far off. I expect the Ram amount to be the same, so on-screen things will most likely not look five times better, but by just comparing peak flops, five times is not unrealistic.

Fredi
 
I also think MS is forcing sony's hand, including 512mb ram and wireless controllers.
No doubt the cpu and ram is cheaper for ms than for sony, including r&d and manufacturing costs. Sony will have to include CELL, top of the line nvidia GPU, blu-ray, 512mb ram, wireless controllers etc. to match the xbox, and all for the same price. Sony was the one controlling pricing this gen, but it looks like things might be different next gen.
 
Everything within the console itself that you named for PS3 is fabricated by Sony Group or OTSS|Toshiba. I find it hard to believe that Microsoft, using TSMC, NEC, UMC, et al... will be able to be economically more viable, nor will they be as aggressive in cost reduction.
 
actually the dreamcast was controlling the pricing points this gen (how easily we forget). After the dreamcast the gamecube was trying to control it. None of it mattered. MS may get cheaper ram n cpu, but sony's get the playstation brand for FREE and THAT is worth more than everything else in this game.
 
Mcfly the 360 cpu is between 80-100 gflops depending if contains an FPU. The CELL is around say 300 gflops depending on clock speed and how many SPU's are available and all the other speculation. Lets say Sony lower the clock speed to make the chip easier to prodcue and 2 SPU are locked for certain reasons (which rumours indicate, although they are rumours) then I reckon your left with a CELL say between 200-250gflops. 2-2.5 faster than 360 cpu. I can't see the Nvidia GPu being 2.5x faster in any respect. PS3 will have a power advantage no doubts, but its not going to be massive.
 
Pug said:
PS3 will have a power advantage no doubts, but its not going to be massive.
Click to expand...

But it could be massive, that was my point. It could be as little as two times, but it could as well be five times. We just don't know, but the possibilities are there.

Fredi
 
Doube D said:
actually the dreamcast was controlling the pricing points this gen (how easily we forget). After the dreamcast the gamecube was trying to control it. None of it mattered. MS may get cheaper ram n cpu, but sony's get the playstation brand for FREE and THAT is worth more than everything else in this game.
Click to expand...

neither dreamcast or gamecube had the games to support their price point. If the gamecube had the software library of ps2 along with a more massmarket design, it would have sold a lot of hardware at its pricepoint.

Don't tell me a low priced xbox 360 + halo 3 isn't going to sell shitloads.

Also manufacturing stuff yourself doesn't help so much when you've already sunk $2+ billion into r&d.
 
Man this is great. Xbox Live silver is perfect for me. I used to play on Xbox Live a lot until school starting taking up a lot of my time while my XBL subscription was going waste. Now I know I can play on weekends without paying. Excellent.
 
Pug said:
Mcfly the 360 cpu is between 80-100 gflops depending if contains an FPU. The CELL is around say 300 gflops depending on clock speed and how many SPU's are available and all the other speculation. Lets say Sony lower the clock speed to make the chip easier to prodcue and 2 SPU are locked for certain reasons (which rumours indicate, although they are rumours) then I reckon your left with a CELL say between 200-250gflops. 2-2.5 faster than 360 cpu. I can't see the Nvidia GPu being 2.5x faster in any respect. PS3 will have a power advantage no doubts, but its not going to be massive.
Click to expand...

It really depends on configuration rather than raw silicon advancement..there are scenarios where visually at least, there would be a noticeable gap, even without massively more complex silicon on the GPU side. Not the most likely ones, it has to be said, but still possibilities.

The gap could be small or "big" (i.e. noticeable, which is my definition of "big" ;)) , but it won't be 5x I'm sure.

Putting mutlipliers on gaps between the consoles "overall" is kinda foggy though ;) You can say it for specifics, but when you start taking the systems as a whole it's tougher.

I think we can say with relative certainty now, however, that PS3's CPU shouldl be "significantly" more powerful than X360's (unless Sony COMPLETELY screws it up). I would consider around 2x the difference to be "significant" - agreed?

Overall, though, let's wait and see what happens.
 
gofreak on Gflop ratings, the CELL will be more powerful for sure. As for significant well to be honest I still reckon the significant aspects will be to do with the GPU's. And with the information we have that difference for me will be the difference you see between two graphics cards released within 6 months of each other. Some will say thats a big difference others will say minor. Of course if CELL is responsible for calculating verticies (big if) and the GPU is just a pixel shader then we could see a big advantage. I just can't for the life of me see how Sony or Nvidia have had time to impliment this and if I was a betting man I would say the GPU for PS3 will be a version of nvidia's PC model modified for the PS3.
 
we know very little about the PS3, and what we 'may' know shows the CPU with a potential advantage.

We know almost nothing about the PS3 GPU, so we cannot make any assumptions on comparitive power there.

We need to know GPU potential, how its laid out, and how it interacts with the CELL before we can even start to make guesstimates of potential difference.

Do we even know how Xbox 360 is laid out? i.e. does the GPU do vertices, or all pixels? Whats the likely method of use?
 
thorns said:
Sony was the one controlling pricing this gen, but it looks like things might be different next gen.
Click to expand...
You can bet on it. Every move made my MS makes me think that 360 will be cheaper to assemble tha PS3 (expecially if it will include Blu-Ray or the new tech being developed with Toshiba), and when PS3 will come on the market 360 will already be prepared for a price reduction. I expect MS doing the same game Nintendo made this gen, price-wise.
 
Pug said:
Of course if CELL is responsible for calculating verticies (big if) and the GPU is just a pixel shader then we could see a big advantage.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...
Question: if X360's GPU takes care of all vertices and shaders, then that leaves the three cores free for IA, physics and i have no idea what else, while, in the case pictured above PS3's CELL would have to share it's MFLOPS between graphics and other "non-graphical" operations. Would it still perform better than a GPU for vertices ?
 
Eh, if the PS3's advantage lies in the CPU alone (as it seems to be largely implied thee days), doesn't that mean we'll get most of the difference in 'behind the scenes' form, ei: wet dream for physics whore, AI whores, etc?

Well, mostly anyway, I'm ure they could use the extra CPU juice for graphics too, but generally I mean, this isn't gonna be visible, but feelable (I guess?)
 
Pug said:
gofreak on Gflop ratings, the CELL will be more powerful for sure. As for significant well to be honest I still reckon the significant aspects will be to do with the GPU's. And with the information we have that difference for me will be the difference you see between two graphics cards released within 6 months of each other. Some will say thats a big difference others will say minor. Of course if CELL is responsible for calculating verticies (big if) and the GPU is just a pixel shader then we could see a big advantage. I just can't for the life of me see how Sony or Nvidia have had time to impliment this and if I was a betting man I would say the GPU for PS3 will be a version of nvidia's PC model modified for the PS3.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think that's more likely. We'll wait and see..

(I wouldn't downplay the significance of a CPU advantage, however..)

mrklaw said:
Do we even know how Xbox 360 is laid out? i.e. does the GPU do vertices, or all pixels? Whats the likely method of use?
Click to expand...

It's a unified shader architecture, it can do both, and will be doing both. One of the X360 patent discusses the use of one of the CPU cores for geometry tasks, but that seemed to relate more to procedural generation of vertices rather than transformation etc. One core certainly wouldn't be enough to handle all vertex work competitively, so, expect the GPU to be doing all, or the vast majority of it.

mr2mike said:
Eh, if the PS3's advantage lies in the CPU alone (as it seems to be largely implied thee days), doesn't that mean we'll get most of the difference in 'behind the scenes' form, ei: wet dream for physics whore, AI whores, etc?

Well, mostly anyway, I'm ure they could use the extra CPU juice for graphics too, but generally I mean, this isn't gonna be visible, but feelable (I guess?)
Click to expand...

Yes...or no....I have theories on this, but I've never checked them against someone else more knowledgeable, so I can't be sure.

In short, with SM3.0 level hardware, the concept of shader length/complexity comes into play - you can leave your GPU rendering for a variable amount of time depending on the length of the shaders you're using. If you have 1/60th of a second to do all your frame processing, with a faster CPU might you be able to leave your GPU more time to execute longer/more complicated shaders? Yes, you could be idling your CPU - usually you'd try and split that frame processing time in half, between the CPU and GPU, so that your CPU and GPU are constantly working in parallel (CPU processes next frame, while GPU renders current one), but if you're willing to let your CPU sit idle, or work on multi-frame calculations, this might be less inefficient. I'm guessing this might not make any sense at all however :lol Anyone want to shoot down that idea? Being able to give more time to the GPU for rendering because your CPU finishes its work x times faster? Instead of just letting the framerate go through the roof, lock it at 60 or 30fps and spend your extra "saved" milliseconds per frame on the GPU/rendering?

That aside, there's still the concept of GPUs being increasingly CPU bound - this is something even MS agrees on.

But definitely, more CPU power will obviously have a direct impact on game behaviour (physical, ai, whatever).
 
"That aside, there's still the concept of GPUs being increasingly CPU bound - this is something even MS agrees on."

I was under the opposite impression...? I mean, they are doing more and more of the work by themelves... or are they so independant only in the post processing stage before output?
 
mr2mike said:
"That aside, there's still the concept of GPUs being increasingly CPU bound - this is something even MS agrees on."

I was under the opposite impression...? I mean, they are doing more and more of the work by themelves... or are they so independant only in the post processing stage before output?
Click to expand...

Others see the opposite happening, greater communication/crosstalk between the CPU/GPU. ..that's one of things IBM pointed out in the their cell presentations, and I believe it's the point MS was making too at GDC with the bus speeds increasing (and look at the bandwidth flexio offers..). I'd have to look it up again to be sure, but in general terms they did talk about games becoming increasingly CPU-bound, IIRC.
 
If X360 plans to use one core for 'dynamic' vertices, with GPU doing static ones, then that gives the PS3 somewhere that the GPU could have an advantage, *if* PS3 will do all the vertex work leaving all GPU pipes doing shading work.

Even then, CELL should have more power than X360 CPU left over for other stuff. Thats where the extra power of CELL could show a graphical advantage
 
Awesome stuff. I think even non-Xbox fans should be happy at these revelations because it most likely means that the competitors (PS3/Rev) will at the least have to copy most of the good features when they come out (Online services, 512+ mb, cpu/gpu power, wireless everything, hdtv support, connectivity, etc. etc.)

IT'S A GOOD TIME TO BE A GAMER!! COMPETITION IS AWESOME!!
 
thorns said:
I also think MS is forcing sony's hand, including 512mb ram and wireless controllers.
No doubt the cpu and ram is cheaper for ms than for sony, including r&d and manufacturing costs. Sony will have to include CELL, top of the line nvidia GPU, blu-ray, 512mb ram, wireless controllers etc. to match the xbox, and all for the same price. Sony was the one controlling pricing this gen, but it looks like things might be different next gen.
Click to expand...


our current Xbox has 512mb RAM but the new Xbox will have 512 MB RAM :lol
 
shit, here we go again... (will explain again below)


Development sources downplay alleged Xbox 360 spec sheet

GamesIndustry.biz staff 09:47 10/05/2005

Close but no cigar, say coders working on next-gen Xbox as new "leak" hits the net

Developers working on the Xbox 360 hardware have expressed doubts at the validity of a "leaked" bullet-point list of specifications purporting to be those of the Xbox 360 next-gen console and the accompanying Xbox Live service.

The console specifications, which were posted to the Internet this week, are largely consistent with previous leaks about the Xbox 360 hardware - but a number of unusual flaws in the document, pointed out by development sources, suggest that this is not an official Microsoft document.

"It's most probably a list made by someone who knows more about the official spec than the average hack, but I doubt it's an official Microsoft spec sheet," we were told by one developer who has experience of the new format.

"It's probably broadly in line with the spec that will be announced, but may be off on some of the finer details," he added.

One example is the mention of a 20GB detachable hard disk, when a 40GB unit is clearly visible in last Friday's leaked photographs.

The hardware spec sheet offers details on the central and graphics processing unit architectures, memory details and bandwidth potential, and claims that Xbox 360 will support a host of CD and DVD derivatives, output in widescreen and the much vaunted high-definition resolutions as standard, boast a trio of USB 2.0 ports, support for four wireless controllers, and the aforementioned detachable 20GB drive.

It will also be "Wi-Fi ready", the spec sheet claims, although whether that is intended to imply that the system actually has Wi-Fi hardware (as is widely expected) or that it's simply ready to plug an additional Wi-Fi module into is not clarified.

The Xbox Live spec included on the sheet is arguably more interesting, mentioning a pair of subscription options (one free, and one paid-for) and some key concepts like the ability to access Live to download premium content without actually being a paid up subscriber who can play games online.

We must stress that Microsoft has made absolutely no comment on this information, and is unlikely to do so if past form is anything to go by. We don't have long to wait, however, with the MTV special which will officially unveil the console planned for Thursday evening in the USA.

For the sake of completeness, that probably-not-official spec sheet in full...
Click to expand...


over a year ago, in April 2004 when the Xenon System Block Diagram came out, developers questioned that too, and IIRC GI.biz ran an article on that.


ah yes, see:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=dev&aid=3364
Alleged Xbox 2 specification sheet debunked by experts

Rob Fahey 15:57 27/04/2004

"Leaked" diagram is a fake or, at best, an out of date internal document

A diagram purporting to be a leaked Microsoft document describing the specification of the Xbox 2 has surfaced on a Chinese bulletin board - but sources close to the console's development say that it is probably a fake.

The block diagram, which appeared on Chinese website GZeasy.com, shows a system architecture which had three 3.5Ghz CPU units, 256Mb of main memory, and a 500Mhz graphics chip with 10Mb of on-board memory.

The schematic also shows the system featuring two memory unit ports, with basic memory unit size being 64Mb, a 100Mbit LAN port and a hard drive - although it notes that it's not been decided whether to build in the drive as yet.

However, a number of sources who are familiar with Microsoft's console development say that the diagram is not an accurate reflection of the information they've received from the company about Xbox 2 - and could easily have been put together by someone with basic hardware knowledge from publicly available information about the forthcoming system.

"It's not impossible that it's a Microsoft document," one expert told us this afternoon. "But some of the figures seem very suspect, and the information included on the diagram looks to me like it reflects the available information about Xbox 2 rather than being a sensible set of information to put on a document for developers."

He voiced particular concerns over the fact that while the document notes "256+ Mb" of main RAM, it doesn't state what kind of RAM will be used - a vital technical point - and also noted that the CPU diagram doesn't mention that the CPUs used will be dual-core (effectively making Xbox 2 into a six processor unit), another important factor.

"There's a lot of detail here about stuff you could just guess or which we already know from public announcements, like some performance information about ATI's graphics chips. And then there's some really surprising missing detail, like the twin-core architecture and a few other really crucial things which Microsoft has already talked to developers about but are missing from this diagram. I'd have to guess it was a fake," he concluded.

Other developers familiar with the Xbox 2 architecture also voiced misgivings about the diagrams, with one pointing in particular at the information about the processor cache on the document as being inaccurate. "We've seen stuff about the cache on those CPUs from Microsoft, and this isn't it," he said. "If this isn't a fake, the only thing I can think of is that it's an old internal document that was a work-in-progress and never meant to be seen outside Microsoft."
Click to expand...

although, in reality, it seems both sets of specs are going to end up pretty close to the final machine. even the old spec says 256+ MB RAM
 
Pug said:
Snowman, with that argument the same can be said for PS3, its not going to add anything "new" besides greater power.
Click to expand...

Then that's a problem with next gen. I mean, really, why hasn't something simple like dual output or something simple along those lines been planned?

I applaud MS' efforts though with the Always-on Live service. That's a step in the right direction
 
when the official Xbox 360 specifications come out, the first post will be updated, but I'll keep the leaked specs there for comparison.


then we'll have to do it again when the final console ships, to see if there were any changes from first *official* specs to final shipping specs :lol
 
midnightguy said:
when the official Xbox 360 specifications come out, the first post will be updated, but I'll keep the leaked specs there for comparison.


then we'll have to do it again when the final console ships, to see if there were any changes from first *official* specs to final shipping specs :lol
Click to expand...
Start a new thread. This forum's gonna be spazzing tomorrow night, and there's really no point wading through 9+ pages to see new posts. PEACE.
 
Pimpwerx said:
Start a new thread. This forum's gonna be spazzing tomorrow night, and there's really no point wading through 9+ pages to see new posts. PEACE.
Click to expand...


well, i could do that yeah, but i could also just put the official specs at the beginning and end of this thread. i was actually gonna do that anyway.
 
midnightguy said:
well, i could do that yeah, but i could also just put the official specs at the beginning and end of this thread. i was actually gonna do that anyway.
Click to expand...

new stickied thread is needed
 
aaaaa0 said:
The hard disk in x360 is probably a laptop or MP3 player drive, not the full size 3.5" one that's in xbox.
Click to expand...

My friends and I were talking about that we think it's a 5400RPM laptop (2.5") HD through some kind of USB 2.0 connector. Size of the XB360 is our basis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Xboxera: Xbox is Dead. Long Live Xbox
Opinion Platform 
18
21
FinalBossWithTheMostPower replied
Tormented Souls 2 Demo Live on PC/Xbox/PS
24
839
Yoshichan replied
The 20 best-selling Xbox 360 games in the US
37
866
PlayStaytion replied
Modern Vintage Gamer - 20 Years of Xbox 360 - Most Memorable Games
18
345
xenosys replied
PS5 Outsells Xbox 360 Lifetime Sales
News Business Sales-Age  2 3
131
454
Artistic replied
Top Bottom