-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Xbox 360 Will Have 512Mb Memory
- Thread starter The Faceless Master
- Start date
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
That's some drawing from the press conference invitation, not the logo itself.
Whats with all the jr. member hate around here. I've been lurking for awhile, then it took about a month for my membership to be approved (or so it seemedshpankey said:
)...anyway, I digress, it was definitely the majority that seemed pissed off/irked with there posts. Sure only a few had MS are doomed to Sony, etc. etc. posts, but obviously such an unwelcome 'unofficial announcement' rubbed most people the wrong way.Edit; Didn't happen? You mean people weren't pissed off?
http://ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=38662&page=2&pp=50&highlight=gamespy+xbox
^Thats the kind of stuff I'm referring to.sphankey said:
Striek said:Whats with all the jr. member hate around here. I've been lurking for awhile, then it took about a month for my membership to be approved (or so it seemed
I think his point was that it was NOT obvious - because it didn't happen.
Namomura said:
I just threw up a little.
shpankey
not an idiot
that's fine and all, but that's not what you said. you said: "512Mb used to be seen as the _absolute lower limit_ of what was acceptable."Striek said:^Thats the kind of stuff I'm referring to.
which is not what i said where you have quoted me and not what most people said. saying 256 is too low vs. saying 512 is the "_absolute lower limit_ of acceptablity" are entirely different. just face it, you exaggerated.
p.s. i sure hope that isn't the official logo. ::barf::
Namomura said:
I used to make those all the time with my little paint kit thing that span on a wheel.
super-heated plasma
Member
That really doesn't seem like a logo to me.
Anyway, 512 MB of RAM is well more than I could have hoped for at a price tag of $299.
Anyway, 512 MB of RAM is well more than I could have hoped for at a price tag of $299.
Well tbh, when people are saying that 256Mb is a 'monumental mistake', and it seems that the majority aren't pleased with anything less than 512Mb, and the devs are quoted as saying they hope MS up it to 512Mb etc., its obvious that 512Mb is the lowest limit of whats acceptable to informed gamers + developers (which is mostly what GAF is comprised of, or so it seems). Hence my statement.shpankey said:
Anyway, we are (again unofficially) back at the 512Mb mark, so this is pointless.
Btw; That motif is ugly, from green to green + gold? Aussie aussie aussie, oi oi oi!
(First GAF, then the world :lol )
super-heated plasma
Member
Duckhuntdog said:
I drool just thinking what Bungie can do with a 512 MB XBOX 2.
Pedigree Chum
Banned
Joe said:
Having 512 ram is way more important than having a built-in HDD IMO.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
That would be a baaaad idea for them. Not only Sony could still put more memory (remember, they have at the very least 4-6 months difference) but the early Xbox 2 games would suffer as they would all be targeted for 256MB.
JVD on B3D never said anything of the sort, that PS3 will have 700+ MB of RAM. He said that MS could add even more if Sony decides to put more. He was joking a bit there, I think. He does that sometimes.
The Abominable Snowman
Member
Still, as big of an Xbot I am, the 360 is really underwhelming me hardware-wise 
Here's hoping for some surprises t E3, and some things proven right.
Here's hoping for some surprises t E3, and some things proven right.
The Abominable Snowman said:Still, as big of an Xbot I am, the 360 is really underwhelming me hardware-wise
Here's hoping for some surprises t E3, and some things proven right.
Yeah. So... underwhelming.
*compares top end computers of 2001 to Xbox*
*compares top end computers of 2005 to Xbox 360*
*raises eyebrow*
Pedigree Chum
Banned
DopeyFish said:
You won't be happy until everyone is jacking off to the mere thought of the 360 will you?
soundwave05
Member
The Abominable Snowman said:Still, as big of an Xbot I am, the 360 is really underwhelming me hardware-wise
Here's hoping for some surprises t E3, and some things proven right.
The Playstation 3 is your friend
super-heated plasma
Member
The Abominable Snowman said:Still, as big of an Xbot I am, the 360 is really underwhelming me hardware-wise
Here's hoping for some surprises t E3, and some things proven right.
wow....
Pedigree Chum said:
it doesn't make sense though. It's a silly statement to make.
Xbox had below average ram amounts for the time.
Xbox had a below high end CPU for the time, but had a high end GPU.
Now Xbox360 has a good amount of RAM, a very high end CPU and a high end GPU.
Xbox might have been powerful against consoles at the time but against PC counterparts it was slightly below instead of a bunch above.
midnightguy
Member
going from 64 MB to 512 MB is not a huge increase. only 8x
PS1 (3.5 MB) to PS2 (40 MB) was ~11.5x
N64 (4.5 MB) to GCN (43 MB) was 9.5x
Saturn (4 MB) to Dreamcast (26 MB) was 6.5x
Xbox to Xenon/Xbox360 is more than Saturn to DC, but not as much as PS1 to PS2.
edit: I didn't through in Xenon's eDRAM but it wouldnt make it more than an 8.5x increase (instead of 8x) of memory.
edit 2: obviously if you give Saturn and N64 their respective 4 MB upgrades, the increase in RAM to the next generation (the current one) is smaller.
PS1 (3.5 MB) to PS2 (40 MB) was ~11.5x
N64 (4.5 MB) to GCN (43 MB) was 9.5x
Saturn (4 MB) to Dreamcast (26 MB) was 6.5x
Xbox to Xenon/Xbox360 is more than Saturn to DC, but not as much as PS1 to PS2.
edit: I didn't through in Xenon's eDRAM but it wouldnt make it more than an 8.5x increase (instead of 8x) of memory.
edit 2: obviously if you give Saturn and N64 their respective 4 MB upgrades, the increase in RAM to the next generation (the current one) is smaller.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
midnightguy said:
are you doncale?
The Abominable Snowman
Member
Great CPU. Great GPU. However, no internal hard drive, and my dream of realistic clothes, hair, skin, and whatnot have been pushed back. Nothing really new as far as internal hardware. The Dreamcast introduced internet gaming at that level, the Xbox introduced the amazing Hard Drive, and those were my favorite consoles, partially for their innovation and what developers did with it. There's nothing like that that is apparent so far with the Xenon. All the things rumored to be in the XB360 (Internal HD, PPU, HD Movie playback) seem to be excluded.DopeyFish said:
The Abominable Snowman
Member
Yeah, but I'd rather buy a game or two than a damned overpriced memory card.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Why would anyone compare the average PC's RAM to a new console's RAM? The need for that much memory isn't there. 512 would be pretty amazing, provided that it's fed very quickly by the optical media.
why do you guys expect the hardware to do these things?The Abominable Snowman said:
the hardware is there, it's upto the modelers to make detailed and believable models with rippling clothes and wavy hair.
and since western modelers suck...even in this gen, no matter the hardware, i am betting you wont see believable human models from them.
japanese teams will show whats what in due time.
MightyHedgehog
Member
nitewulf said:
While the above generalization can tend to be true, it would seem that you're precluding western developers from even being capable of such things. Indeed, I expect most of the really impressive graphics to come from the western development scene. Of course, we already knew that the next-gen will bring jaw-dropping visuals regardless...
I'm concerned about the animation end of things...something most games, be it western-developed or not, are generally not-so-hot with.
midnightguy
Member
hooo said:
well the time between releases is pretty well known.
Saturn Nov 1994 - Dreamcast Nov 1998 - 4 years
N64 June 1996 - Gamecube Sept 2001 - 5+ years
PS1 Dec 1994 - PS2 March 2000 - 5+ years
You are kidding me. Even in Australia, the norm is 1gig now.
When i talk about norm, i am talking about RAM in premium priced PCs that is selling. If you thinking about ram that way, the norm for the Xbox was 128Mb at the time it was released.
As for 256<egs of ram being the norm, thats laughable. I can find second hand pc's towers with 256 RAM for $100 easy these days.
When i talk about norm, i am talking about RAM in premium priced PCs that is selling. If you thinking about ram that way, the norm for the Xbox was 128Mb at the time it was released.
As for 256<egs of ram being the norm, thats laughable. I can find second hand pc's towers with 256 RAM for $100 easy these days.
The Abominable Snowman
Member
We've been over that.Still, with games reaching that maximum already, it's going to be worse next generation with high-resolution textures and better audio, and better models, wouldn't it?Fafalada said:
true, it's just that time and time again i have been dissapointed by western modelers. they are capable of fantastic graphics technology, and ambient level structures/design...but for human modeling...argh...they suck. of course things could change, its just a matter of hiring actual artists and talented ppl.MightyHedgehog said:
shpankey
not an idiot
kind of confused why you quoted me and said this, being that is exactly what i said in my quote. heh. unless you meant to quote the other guy i was responding to (?)Marconelly said:
no offense dude but you have unrealistic expectations if those don't impress you. if the rumored specs are true, we as gamers have never seen anything even close to that level for gaming. sure the PS3 will probably end up being a little more powerfull, but you'd have to be crazy not to be wow'ed by those rumored xbox 2 (err 360) specs.The Abominable Snowman said:Still, as big of an Xbot I am, the 360 is really underwhelming me hardware-wise
Here's hoping for some surprises t E3, and some things proven right.
when the xbox came out, the pc had already surpased it in hardware and graphics. it never really wow'ed many of us due to us already seeing better graphics on the pc side of things. but the xbox 360 will be well ahead of even the best gaming pc's (mostly due to the amazing cpu's) when it launches. nobody will have seen those level of graphics in game.
during the playstation/saturn/nintendo 64 era, pc gaming was lightyears ahead of those systems. nothing on any of those systems ever impressed me graphically. b/c voodoo on pc was kicking their asses. this will be the first time in a long time that we as gamers will see something pushing the boundaries on the console side of things first. and until pc gaming switches to 64 bit dual cored higher powered cpu's, console gaming may reign in terms of graphics etc.
Are we talking about PCs? No way in hell 256MB is the norm, especially on an XP system where half of that is taken up by windows.
The norm has been about 1 GB since last summer. Back then people would go "yeah, 512 MB is ok, but with new games like Far Cry you're going to hit Page filing and it'll lag." A few people have gone over to 2 GB but there's very little reason to. I did it because at max settings in Ironforge on World of Warcraft 1 GB of RAM will cause your HDD to grind and lots of lag. That's on my system with a 6800 Ultra a max settings so it'll use more RAM for textures than a typical 9800 Pro system at max settings.
Agent Icebeezy
Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
shpankey said:
Blackcherry
Member
Namomura said:
I'm high! I'm hiiiigh! Ouuuuwiii!!!