Posted by
michael
on from the soon-to-be-illegal dept.
Tauvix writes: "AnandTech is running an in-depth article on the hardware of the X-box as compared to a PC, the PS2, and the Gamecube. There's some very interesting suprises and commentary on what was done right, and what could have been done better."
From the article:
Microsoft has yet to announce their official plans for taking the Xbox online and unfortunately by default the Xbox's Ethernet port is not set to receive an IP from a DHCP server
Perhaps there some sort of Xbox ISP in the works exclusive to MS? A XMSN, if you will? If so, are Xbox owners need a membership to play games remotely?
Interesting Look
by
r.suzuka
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I read through the article and perhaps I did not understand it completely but I believe the writer may have been missing the points overall.
In Japan, the market for consoles is perhaps much greater than it is in the United States. Many people have a computer but not as many as have a console. Instead of looking at the Xbox as a console, I believe it was looked at as a dedicated gaming computer. Does that make sense? Please correct me if I am unclear.
I believe that the writer missed many of the reason for the popularity and technical strength of consoles. For a console, a developer of course knows what sort of hardware his program will be running on, and he has specialized tools from the console maker to help him in his development. That is not found so much with a computer (though it is with the Xbox). Quite a bit can be done without enormous quantities of RAM as consoles through out history have shown. If you remember the Zelda game for the Nintendo 64, it would run on only 4 MB of RAM. I would like to see PC games do that ^_^
I also did not see a comparison of the Xbox to the Nintendo GameCube. I have had a GameCube since it was released two months ago and I am very pleased with it so far. I may even enjoy it more than my PlayStation 2. I believe that the GameCube is a worthy competitor to the Xbox.
I am making the point that consoles are not meant to be personal computers and they should not be judged in that way. The Xbox is a impressive dedicated gaming PC in many respects if developers will learn to fully utilize its power, but as a console, I do not prefer it.
Thank you for reading this long post of mine. Once again please correct me if I am not clear in what I say. Thank you.
R. Suzuka
Re:Interesting Look
by
Eil
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Right, in the PSX's day, 2MB was a huge amount of memory for a console. Prior to that, much less memory was typically used because the storage medium of choice, the ROM cartrige, could be accessed extremely quickly.
But I've always had the impression that video game manufacturers have always had the right idea. They make the hardware extremely simple and let the programmers have free reign over how it's used. If you've ever read up on console hardware design, the first thing you'll notice is how much it resembles the basic layout of examples used in Computer Science classes. The only two things that a video game console needs to are push pixels and be able to move data around very quickly. The first is usually met with some special graphics rendering hardware and the second is achieved by giving the hardware an extremely simple but flexible and fast design.
Because of this, I initially believed the X-Box was doomed to fail simply because it was based on PC hardware. Typical PC hardware is so overly complex because the kind of software that runs on a PC... it wouldn't surprise me to hear that a modern PC game goes through a dozen or more layers of software (and hardware, think of the CISC -> RISC tranlation in modern Pentiums) before you get to the point where you're actually shooting at the bad guys.
But despite its PC origins and also despite my typically anti-Microsoft attitude (:P), I believe the X-Box is a pretty nifty piece of kit and will do quite well on the market.
I just hope M$ doesn't use the same business tactics with its console that it does with its operating systems... though I have a feeling that Nintendo and Sony would be much more difficult adversaries than Apple, Netscape, etc. I look foward to seeing how this three-way war turns out.
What was done right:
The xbox acts as a cooker itself! no need to buy a microwave to warm up that pizza, just put it on the xbox!
Expensive heating is now cut down thanks to the myraid of heat exhauts on the Xbox
Balance your Tv, VCR and kitchen sink on the xbox's overly large service
Use the controller as an inexpensive door stop: big enough for even the heaviest of doors.
With all the versetile uses of the x box, we say use this common daily appliance in your every day life, coming soon: a hack to reverse the exhauts so the xbox doubles as a vacum!
P.s. for those with no humour, yes, this was a joke post.
-- Microsoft IIS is to webserving as KFC is to healthy eating
Wonderfull Design, but Perhaps Unflexable
by
zulux
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The XBox has some fantastic hardware, but it puts the developer in a DirectX 8.1 sandbox. If the game is a 3D, with textures and snazy vertex shading, then the Xbox hardware is wonderfull.
If the programmer needs somthing else: like generateing all the textures using algorithms, or simulating deformable shapes on a per-pixel basis, that the design like the massivly parrallel and massivly flexible PS2 really shines.
Anand had a great example of this: Electronic A rts just used one of the the PS2 vector units to encode Dolby 5.1. sound. Thats flexible.
It's kinda like compairing the Atari 2600 to the ColecoVision - the Atari was really felxible but limited in processing power, but Coleco had a wonderfull sprite chip and a great processor.
Unfortunatly the Coleco design was inflexable, and Atari programmers were able for move the 2600 from being a pong macheine, into generating alomost thoushands of colors and thousands of sounds. The Coleco had decent games, but nobody was able to coax anything truly unique out of it.
Perhaps the PS2 will do a likewise transformation.
--
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
Re:Wonderfull Design, but Perhaps Unflexable
by
TheMoog
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
If the programmer needs somthing else: like generateing all the textures using algorithms, or simulating deformable shapes on a per-pixel basis, that the design like the massivly parrallel and massivly flexible PS2 really shines.
...it shines if you like programming an almost impossible-to-debug multiprocessor system. Orchestrating four separate processors with DMA accesses flying over limited bus power is tricky. Plus Xbox, though DX8-based is not just DX8, it's superficially similar but greatly optimized and tailored specifically for Xbox.
Xbox has UMA too, which means the CPU can get in and address textures directly itself, unlike on the PS2 where DMAs have to be set up to talk to texture memory, so in fact it's easier on Xbox to generate the textures using algorithms, as you describe.
As for 'simulating deformable shapes on a per-pixel basis' I've been in the graphics trade for five years, and have never heard such a made up bunch of junk. You want deformable shapes? Cool; you can either dump polys completely and write your own renderer, in which case Xbox will beat PS2 as it has a faster processor, and none of the specialist rendering hardware in either box can help you. If you mean deformable as in morphing/procedurally modified vertices, then both machine are equal. If you mean procedural generation of geometry, then granted, the PS2 shines here, though it's not as if Xbox can't do it. As for anything 'per-pixel' the PS2 can render a single texture per-pixel at a time. Only Xbox and GameCube can do anything like arbitrary per-pixel operations.
Anand had a great example of this: Electronic A rts just used one of the the PS2 vector units to encode Dolby 5.1. sound. Thats flexible.
Granted, that is cool; but you are of course giving up 30% of your processing power to do something Xbox does in hardware. All credit to them though!
Re:Wonderfull Design, but Perhaps Unflexable
by
Osty
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
However, I agree that the PS2 has not reached anywhere near its full potential yet, whereas the XBox is using well-known hardware, and thus will be already achieving much closer to its full potetial from the start. Which means great games at launch, but they will not improve as much as the PS2 has.
I agree that the XBox has well-known hardware, in the sense that much of it is standard PC components. However, to say that the XBox has pretty much maxed its potential with its launch titles is pretty short-sighted. Sure, DOA3 is freakin' awesome, but even it has room for improvement (I don't know how it could be improved visually, but I'm sure Tecmo will do it). Shrek is a very good example of the bump-mapping and texturing capabilities of the XBox (everything is bumpmapped, with multiple detail textures), but its gameplay isn't quite up to snuff. Halo is awesome, graphically and gameplay-wise, but it could use some work with the Dolby 5.1 audio. And on top of all of that, few developers have actually started using vertex and pixel shaders in PC games, and that's where the real power of the GF3 and XBox comes into play. Being programmable, you can do anything from skinning models with vertex shaders, to vertex shader-based animation, to per-pixel reflection and refraction for perfectly simulated water effects, or cloth effects (you can see some of this already, such as in DOA3 where you can tell the difference between a silk dress and a leather belt, or in NFL Fever 2002 where you can see the satiny sheen on jerseys before they get dirty). As well, no games utilize the XBox's native 2x, 4x, or Quincunx (a sloppy-4x AA, if you will) anti-aliasing, so visual quality can be improved even more still. And non-visually, since the XBox offloads much of the graphics work (all T&L, vertex and pixel shaders), there's more CPU time to do AI, physics, and other gameplay elements.
Also, what is the effect of Embedded WinXP+DX8 on the usable memory of the XBox? The GameCube may have less memory overall (but it does have very low latency 1T SRAM!), but it doesn't have to deal with possibly large operating systems...
First, a small nitpick -- the XBox is based on a highly-customized windows 2000 operating system, which doesn't do much more than provide access to the hard drive. It's a very light layer. In fact, it doesn't even do any virtual memory handling, so if you need to swap out the hard disk, you'll have to program that yourself. As far as DX8 goes, it's also been highly customized. Because the hardware isn't going to change, DX8 is now little more than a very thin layer over the graphics hardware. And what's more, developers need not use DX at all. As with the PSX, where Sony originally provided a C API but developers eventually wrote their own assembly routines (thus prompting Sony to not provide a C API for PS2, which caused the bitching and moaning about PS2 being hard to program, and effectively locked smaller dev houses out of the PS2 market), expect XBox developers to create their own in-house libraries for talking directly to the hardware. What DX allows is quick time to market, thus allowing developers to get a game under their belts (and the corresponding money), so that they can spend their time working on in-house libraries for game #2. It also allows for less up-front investments to get into XBox development (through Microsoft's grassroots program, interested developers can get the necessary information to begin development on qualified PCs, and once they obtain a publisher, will get the necessary XBox development hardware. At least one game scheduled for release within the next few months has gone through this process). Small dev houses that can't afford to target the PS2 can target the XBox instead.
Earliest computer entertainment devices?
by
WowTIP
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
From article: But although PC gamers have taken the lime light recently, every true PC gamer and most PC users in general can trace their roots back to the earliest of computer-entertainment devices: videogame consoles.
Most people I know started out on Commodore 64, Sinclair or some of the other early home computers. In fact, I think most people that started out on computers are still gaming on computers (PC). Those that started out on consoles still pretty much run consoles.
But that's just my buddies... Might differ...
--
--
"I'm surfin the dead zone
In the twilight, unknown"
Re: Xbox fire
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I find it hard to believe the XBox you mention caught on fire... And please, if it's serious, do you have any evidence? I can hardly believe microsoft would knowingly kill their reputation by selling dangerous equipment.
I agree, I find it unlikely, and I find exceedingly unlikely that microsoft would delibrately sell dangerously defective units (as if they don't have enough problems).
On the other hand, I had a computer power supply go up in smoke once, does that mean that computers are too dangerous, and I should never buy another computer?
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps there some sort of Xbox ISP in the works exclusive to MS? A XMSN, if you will? If so, are Xbox owners need a membership to play games remotely?
I read through the article and perhaps I did not understand it completely but I believe the writer may have been missing the points overall.
In Japan, the market for consoles is perhaps much greater than it is in the United States. Many people have a computer but not as many as have a console. Instead of looking at the Xbox as a console, I believe it was looked at as a dedicated gaming computer. Does that make sense? Please correct me if I am unclear.
I believe that the writer missed many of the reason for the popularity and technical strength of consoles. For a console, a developer of course knows what sort of hardware his program will be running on, and he has specialized tools from the console maker to help him in his development. That is not found so much with a computer (though it is with the Xbox). Quite a bit can be done without enormous quantities of RAM as consoles through out history have shown. If you remember the Zelda game for the Nintendo 64, it would run on only 4 MB of RAM. I would like to see PC games do that ^_^
I also did not see a comparison of the Xbox to the Nintendo GameCube. I have had a GameCube since it was released two months ago and I am very pleased with it so far. I may even enjoy it more than my PlayStation 2. I believe that the GameCube is a worthy competitor to the Xbox.
I am making the point that consoles are not meant to be personal computers and they should not be judged in that way. The Xbox is a impressive dedicated gaming PC in many respects if developers will learn to fully utilize its power, but as a console, I do not prefer it.
Thank you for reading this long post of mine. Once again please correct me if I am not clear in what I say. Thank you.
R. Suzuka
Welcome to the Xbox, a nerds best friend:
What was done right:
The xbox acts as a cooker itself! no need to buy a microwave to warm up that pizza, just put it on the xbox!
Expensive heating is now cut down thanks to the myraid of heat exhauts on the Xbox
Balance your Tv, VCR and kitchen sink on the xbox's overly large service
Use the controller as an inexpensive door stop: big enough for even the heaviest of doors.
With all the versetile uses of the x box, we say use this common daily appliance in your every day life, coming soon: a hack to reverse the exhauts so the xbox doubles as a vacum!
P.s. for those with no humour, yes, this was a joke post.
Microsoft IIS is to webserving as KFC is to healthy eating
The XBox has some fantastic hardware, but it puts the developer in a DirectX 8.1 sandbox. If the game is a 3D, with textures and snazy vertex shading, then the Xbox hardware is wonderfull.
o mbat.JPG
If the programmer needs somthing else: like generateing all the textures using algorithms, or simulating deformable shapes on a per-pixel basis, that the design like the massivly parrallel and massivly flexible PS2 really shines.
Anand had a great example of this: Electronic A rts just used one of the the PS2 vector units to encode Dolby 5.1. sound. Thats flexible.
It's kinda like compairing the Atari 2600 to the ColecoVision - the Atari was really felxible but limited in processing power, but Coleco had a wonderfull sprite chip and a great processor.
Unfortunatly the Coleco design was inflexable, and Atari programmers were able for move the 2600 from being a pong macheine, into generating alomost thoushands of colors and thousands of sounds. The Coleco had decent games, but nobody was able to coax anything truly unique out of it.
The Atari 2600 went from Combat http://outerspace.terra.com.br/special/historia/c
to psudo 3D Poleposition http://www.whimsey.com/z26/POLEPSN.GIF due to it's fexibility.
Perhaps the PS2 will do a likewise transformation.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
From article:
But although PC gamers have taken the lime light recently, every true PC gamer and most PC users in general can trace their roots back to the earliest of computer-entertainment devices: videogame consoles.
Most people I know started out on Commodore 64, Sinclair or some of the other early home computers. In fact, I think most people that started out on computers are still gaming on computers (PC). Those that started out on consoles still pretty much run consoles.
But that's just my buddies... Might differ...
--
"I'm surfin the dead zone
In the twilight, unknown"
I agree, I find it unlikely, and I find exceedingly unlikely that microsoft would delibrately sell dangerously defective units (as if they don't have enough problems).
On the other hand, I had a computer power supply go up in smoke once, does that mean that computers are too dangerous, and I should never buy another computer?