Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Blue*Omega

Nintendo Vs. PC

This topic is 6544 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I know I''m setting myself up to be flooded with painfully obvious answers but I still would like to get an honest answer. I was surfing the web the other day and came across some pictures of Nintendo''s new system, Gamecube, along with some screenshots from Spaceworld 2000. If you haven''t seen them I recommend going to "Cube.Ign.Com" These screenshots are incredible!!! Quick note here: On the Gamedev.net homepage it has some blurb about the new system being called the "Handbag". Huh?!? Where did THAT come from? Everything else I''ve read says it''s Gamecube. Anyways... Along with the pics it gave some hardware stats. This system is running on a 400 mHz procceser! Wait a moment! How is it that the Gamecube is pumping out these amazing scenes with a 400 mHz when my friends 500 mHz Athalon w/ GeForce 2 and Sound Blaster Live struggles while playing Deus Ex? Why is it that game graphics on the PC are lagging behind when they have obviously superior hardware? Now I know most of you are thinking: "Well, Duh! Game systems are hard wired for graphics, that''s why!" Yes, I realize this. I still think a well equipped 500 mHz should at least be able to match it. Why is it the best graphics a PC user can get are Quake 3 levels? My theory: Game designers wish to make thier games availible to more people so they design their games to run on 233''s and 266''s. This prevents them from getting the really good graphics in. Even if you do have a faster computer all it does is give you a better frame rate at a higher res. Do the models look more realistic? No. I would like to propose that game designers start programming games that require 400-500 mhz and run about 30-40 fps. This would allow SO much more detail! Do you really need your games running at 150 fps? 30 is plenty smooth for me. Anyways... please respond to give your view on the subject. ----------------------------- Blue*Omega (Insert Witty Quote Here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Basically pc procesors have to be compatable with all the legacy procesors. 8086 code will work on a p3 but with a console they can put in exactly what they need and have more physical space on the chip to do neet things to make it run fast. With the p4 is easy to see that features are becoming more important than raw speed. also on pc''s the memory bus is a big problem. also im sure a dedicated os that is made to work on one set of hardware runs much faster than a os that supports everything. also if the console only runs one kind of cpu and one kind of graphics chip they can be designed to play off each other perfectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can give you a few clues as to why the PS2 (which has a 300mhz core processor) can graphically outperform PCS.

First of all, it''s graphics chip is extremely powerful. Theoretical output is 75M polys/sec, about 1 billion pixels/sec.
It also has two processors, one to do the game logic and one to do transform/lighting/etc. The transform/lighting (VU1) processor has 4 FMACs and ALSO always runs two instruction concurrently. Add to the fact that it is directly connected to teh graphic unit, and you see why the graphics are so damn fast.

Basically, MHz is not the end-all measure of performance, consoles have hardware superior to PCs at this current time. This will, however, change with the X-BOX which will have intel inside and more or less a slightly above average video card.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
quote:
Original post by Brad8383

Basically pc procesors have to be compatable with all the legacy procesors. 8086 code will work on a p3 but with a console they can put in exactly what they need and have more physical space on the chip to do neet things to make it run fast. With the p4 is easy to see that features are becoming more important than raw speed. also on pc''s the memory bus is a big problem. also im sure a dedicated os that is made to work on one set of hardware runs much faster than a os that supports everything. also if the console only runs one kind of cpu and one kind of graphics chip they can be designed to play off each other perfectly.


The part you said about everything getting slowed down by the os got me thinking: what if the game was made for linux? It runs faster than windows anyway, plus it can be customized for specific hardware. (I know that compiling is a huge hassle, but to some gamers it would be worth it... and maybe people might start trying to make it easier) What do y''all think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There''s a few basic things to take in to account.

1) Consoles run on tv''s which are low res compared to a monitor... -similar to 640x480. -If you get a GeForce at that res its going to kick major butt. As the tv is crap at display pixels, you get all the anti-aliasing for free. Makes it look nice and smooth. Where as on a monitor it would look blocky..- ever seen a dreamcast plugged in to a monitor? -doesn''t look good.

2) PAL TV runs at 25 Frames per second.... as its interlaced, there''s 50 fields. Each field is every other line of the display.
Whats this mean? If you''ve got a console running at 50 frames per second, it actually generate 50 fields a second. As a field is every other line on the tv, the resolution is 1/2 of the tv resolution. E.g. Pal tv res= 720 x576, 1/2 of that is 360 x288.
So overall your superfast console is generating 50 fields a second at a res of 360x288. No wonder it may appear to be better than a PC.

So you can start to see why consoles aren''t really any faster than PC''s. Especially now we got TnL graphics cards. Try to get the PS-2 to run at anything like 1600x1200 like the Geforce, it wouldn''t happen. Plus the PS-2 has got hardly any texture memory. I.e. not too good.

As for the game cube, I don''t care. Super Mario Kart on SNES is the only game I want to play.

www.razorforce.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"The part you said about everything getting slowed down by the os got me thinking: what if the game was made for linux? "
a console is designed to do just one thing and one thing only and that is to pump triangles onto the screen as fast as possible. a computer cannot compete.
its not gonna make much difference a console will always outperform a computer even if that computer has 5x the hz remember the ps2 is a 128bit machine whilst our intels and amds are only 32bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Don''t forget about bus speed also. The PS2''s 150Mhz bus is 50% faster than the normal PC''s 100Mhz bus. And don''t think the Dolphin''s 200Mhz bus (twice as fast as most PC''s) isn''t going to kick some serious ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing with PC game developers is that they have to serve the lowest common denomenater. They have to anticipate people that don''t have the latest and greatest in PC gadgets. Hence PC games don''t make total use of a system''s full potential. On the other hand, console developers know exactly what they have to work with, since everyone has the same hardware, so they can make full use of the system''s power, and make great games!

=======================================
A man with no head is still a man.
A head with no man is plain freaky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is also something else. Notice that when a new console comes out it more powerful than the average gamers PC. 3 months later the average gamers PC has surpassed the console a fair bit.
I think legacy compatabillity is the biggest drawback in PC hardware advancement. Especially with the old windows code being run not as optimized as it should be on PC''s. And I guess it wouldn''t work very well for Microsoft to begin with a clean slate. Another decade of major bugs for users to put up with. No thanks.
-David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!