What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
220 Comments
- lnxaddct, on 10/12/2007, -7/+59You have no idea about hardware architecture do you? There is a reason that the Pentium M is under half the clock cycle of the top Pentium 4s, yet the M leaves the P4 in its dust. The Sun UltraSPARC is only 1.2 Ghz, yet it kills all of its competition in the same server market as the T2000, in fact it set a world record for performance. In most cases performing over 3 times faster then the competition (being multi-cored helps, but all of the competition was cored too, and its not the biggest factor). Mhz/Ghz means absolutely nothing, especially considering that both of these chips are custom designed just for Nintendo's purposes. A custom built processor can easily outperform generic processors like the ones in the PS3 and X360 if its designed right, even if the generic processor has 5 times the clock speed. The article also mentioned nothing of busses or many other factors that really affect performance. I'm not concerned at all. Seeing what kind of performance Nintendo got out of the Gamecube (in particular Residnet Evil 4) and knowing that they are now dealing with roughly twice the power... I have no doubt that we'll be seeing graphics on par with that of the PS3 and XBox. This is not just off the shelf hardware, it is custom built, you are severely underestimating the capabilities of this console because of all the things Sony and MS have fed you.
-Steve (http://krenzel.info) - cyrix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+38I agree. I'm slightly dissapointed, but I refuse to let that deter me from getting one. The ability to play from a huge catalogue of older games is a huge hook for the system.
- rhino_rampant, on 10/12/2007, -6/+40Yeah, but the control scheme certainly will
- drwiii, on 10/12/2007, -3/+29Do 67 MHz (primary), 33 MHz (secondary), 4 MB system RAM, and 650KB video RAM make you say "wow"? Because that's all the DS has, and it's made a lot of people say "wow".
- ThePhilomath, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32Obviously Nintendo isn't competing on raw horsepower, nor should they be.
This is about the game people and having fun! That's what it's designed to do, not wow people with specs. - blw1138, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32ever heard of the megahertz myth?
- rageguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24When will people learn that comparing two completely different architectures based on RAM and clock speed, is like comparing a sports cars wheel and engine revs to that of a truck.
Would it surprise anyone to know the PS2 had next to no RAM, around ~33mb including the cache on the CPU?
Surely it would be awful compared to the Xbox with its 64mb of RAM. The reason a PS2 could work so well with such low amounts of memory is the 47 gigabits of bandwidth it had compared to the xboxs FSB that had somewhere just over a gigabit.
This innovative difference can be clearly seen when you put Linux on your PS2, the simple OpenGL pipes screen saver runs extremely slowly, this is because OpenGL is designed to work with large amounts of RAM over low bandwidth bus's. Yet somehow the PS2 could still pump out amazing graphics in game. This is because the games were designed to work with a small amount of RAM and a huge amount of bandwidth.
Let me put it another way, say you run a zoo, and you have a water supply system that delivers water to troughs, and you’re trying to think of the best way to get water to all the elephants in your zoo on a minimum budget. There are two ways you could go about it in this analogy, you could either spend all your money on really big troughs (Lots of RAM) and buy small pipes with the left over money (Small amounts of bus bandwidth), the pipes slowly fill up the trough until its full, then the elephant can drink. The other approach is you could buy really small troughs, like… a pie tray, and spend all your money on huge elephant sized pipes. So the trays have next to no capacity, yet the massive pipes can deliver enough water to the elephant for it not to be a problem.
Directly comparing the amount of RAM the Revolution has, and the clock speed it’s running at, is extremely ignorant. We have no idea how the games will be developed nor is there any data on that website about the rest of the system.
I know it’s a cliché, but you cannot compare apples with oranges. - synaesthesia, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26Wait, so the Revolution wont have 60,000 Jiggahertz? Well then count me out, if I cant make out Mario's nosehairs then I want no part of the Smash Bros Online matches whatsoever.
- Dgen_X, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24well...once you start looking at it compared to the gamecube and xbox specs...it kinda makes sense
the GC produced some graphics (not equal to...) close to what the xbox threw out...and the cpu/gpu speeds and memory weren't close to the xbox
now we have similar archetecture with speeds close to the xbox, and 24MB more memory...we could be seeing some amazing SD graphics out of the rev
(I always need a moment to allow things to sink in) - b-dizzle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+23"why didn't Nintendo just release some screenshots first?"
Because, they didn't release these specs, IGN got them from a dev and put them up to boost traffic.
This is pretty much what everyone expected. If you expect more, go blow $500-2000 on a next gen console or a high end PC. Nintendo's got a good philosophy going: If you're a hardcore gamer, you already have a 360, PS3, or a high end PC. Why would you want another one? But what you would want is a cheap system to play all your favorite retro games, as well as some new ones in a new way. If you're not a hardcore gamer, you're might not know the difference between a GPU and a CPU, but you will know a difference of $200-400. - stogey25, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20well, I seem to remember a long time ago that Nintendo said the Rev would be about twice as fast as GC. This simply confirms that. Personally, who cares all that much about the power difference? I think the "wow" factor of the controller will be able to take care of any concerns about performance. As long as the respone time of the controller isn't noticeable, they should have nothing to worry about.
- metacoola, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20I don't care about any of these specs. The games on it will be made to run efficiently. How good did you thing something this small could be. This is just like ds and psp, and whos totally hauling ass in that war? Not Microsoft thats who. Every game will lose their graphical luster, but gameplay lasts forever.
- geoboy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Sure I've heard of the MHz myth, but I've never heard anything about a RAM myth...
- just2fatty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15i disagree. i own all three current gen systems, and i definitely found that the gamecube was the most powerful graphically, at least in comparing the games that are considered to be the 'best' on each system.
examples would be resident evil 4 and metroid prime series (I also really liked wind waker). halo2 just can't stack up with its flat looking trees and polygonal backgrounds (I really love halo 2, esp multiplayer, but graphically it didn't impress me)
I really have to say, spec numbers are meaningless as architectures are so different. from what I know about the original xbox, it was like a celeron PC box; the gamecube hardware is much more specialized. I wouldn't be surprised if the revolution came with graphical quality similar to xbox360 and ps3, though the 360 has really unbelievable power and effects. - Dgen_X, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17I wouldn't quite call it a 4 year old console...like I said above...look at the graphics difference between the gamecube and the xbox...is it equal to the difference between the numbers on paper? no
now the shader problem is a different story... - TheGalacticFork, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13"At the moment only 15% percent of the population has HD but it is growing very quickly. If somebody has a graph of how HD TVs grows over the time, please post it because I'm curios myself."
Right and when most of the population has HD sets, this console generation will be over and hardware will have advanced to where Nintendo can make it affordable. - tacojohn, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16I don't really care what the specs are- I don't have an HD set. As long as the games support 480p it'll be fine for me.
I'm looking forward to using the controller and the virtual console. Plus the system is just cool looking. I'm sure they'll do fine this generation. The graphics on Resident Evil 4 are great- imaging every game looking this good.
That's fine with me. I'm having much more fun with the my DS than with my PSP (which I sold on eBay). - Buelldozer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12You don't play the specsheet, you play the games.
- antipro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14except Far Cry on the PC of course...
- rhino_rampant, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14PEOPLE NEED TO remind themselves through and through that these specs are completely in-line with what Nintendo has been committed to this WHOLE time.
The number of stars in the sky can't encompass the many, many times I've counted Iwata-san & CO. repeat their stance that the Revolution IS NOT being sold in the same arena as the Xbox360 and the PS3 and this concludes it finally.
Its the radical features of a totally new control style and retro classics spread across years of experience that I'm buying. Not an overpriced PC that is already obsolete in both graphics and gameplay. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Because the artchitecture is very similar to the Gamecube it allows developers to easily develop games without having to learn all new architecture. You can count on studious being able to make games much faster and for cheaper- therefor resulting in more games for the Revolution. Studious can't go wrong if the Revolution is a hit, as the hype is already getting, because they'll be making most likely more money than they are making on the 360 and PS3. Nintendo also has the advantage that they've been around the longest and many of their old 2d titles are hits and therefor many people will use the system for those reasons as well.
The DS is doing fantastic with Wi Fi play and I expect Nintendo to release many online games which will fuel interest even more. Even a pong game based on the controller online would be an instant hit.
Nintendo really can't go wrong here. I've heard great things about the controller and if it's as accurate and fluid as people have said then there is absolutely no way people are going to pass it up once they play it at their local EB... especially with games under 50 bucks and a console for 200. - rspeed, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14"ever heard of the megahertz myth?"
We're practically comparing apples to apples here, though. XBox 360 is PPC, GameCube and Rev are PPC.
"You have no idea about hardware architecture do you"
You're right... except the 360's CPUs aren't generic (though PS3's are). I doubt that the Revolution will come anywhere near the perforance of the 360, but I don't care. I'm certain the gaming experience will be better on the Rev, so that's what I'll buy. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13I'm with you on this. I have said many times before that Nintendo MUST be applauded for not being afraid to innovate. I don't think anyone will disagree with me when I say that the graphics on the GC looked alot better than ANYTHING Sony put out, and it was on par or better than most things on the XBOX. I'll have a Revolution. I can't see spending hundreds on a 360 or a PS3.
- Scriby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Are you guys kidding about the controller requiring lots of processor? It's not like the controller will be sending raw gyro data over the air. It will be converting it to usable data (like the controller moved by (-2, 3, 4) units in the last 5 milliseconds) which will require little more than a memory lookup for the Revolution to process (which is something your dusty 286 could do easily).
It makes sense that SD vs. HD would require less CPU/GPU. The rendering resolution is lower, and as we all know from playing games, the lower your resolution is, the less system requirements you need to play a game. So I wouldn't be terribly worried about these specs. I guarantee you Nintendo is aware of what they're releasing and how it compares to the competition.
This is probably the last console that someone will be able to get away with not supporting HD, but I think there's still plenty of market for SD among the general populus. - ctitze2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Your totally right except with your statement that the Xbox 360 is an inefficient crap. If you ever played that thing, you'll realize that it is anything but inefficient (the interface only takes up 2MB I heard). And don't forget it's only the 1st generation of the 360. At the moment only 15% percent of the population has HD but it is growing very quickly. If somebody has a graph of how HD TVs grows over the time, please post it because I'm curios myself.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14"This is just like ds and psp, and whos totally hauling ass in that war? Not Microsoft thats who."
there's a reason for that ;)
(haha, confused fanboys, gold!) - UprightJoe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Man, I really love the fact that Nintendo has decided to abandon the arms race and produce an affordable console with innovative gameplay. I'm torn on the lack of HD support though. I think it will probably have to at least do 16:9 for me to buy it. I can live with the lower resolution but I get pretty annoyed by all the pillboxes and letterboxes on my HDTV.
I dunno - it's going to be a tough call between the revolution and the ps3 for me. - tokyopimp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7As much as I'd like to admit graphics don't matter, they do... not at the expsense of gameplay of course.
But think about Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter... do you really think that game would have got reviewed as well as it has if it was running on the engine that ran Ghost Recon 2... hell no. The graphics in that game make the enviroment, and the feel of that game leaps and bounds better than last gen.
I'm sure Nintendo will pull off everything it sets to accomplish. But next gen graphics and high defination does matter.
And I think a lot of people just blindly give Nintendo a pass because they are so nostalgic. When in fact Nintendo is the one who doesn't embrace new technology that is becoming standard. Online gaming was non existent on the gamecube, Nintendo also forgoed CD media in favor of expensive cartridges on the 64, and it got beat handily for it by the PlayStation (which we all know is ironic given that Sony was orginally contracted by Nintendo to develop the CD Drive add on for the Super NES).
There is no reason why the Revolution can't output to HD resolutions. It could keep the exact same specs and just make every game at least 720P... there were more than a few hi def games on the regular XBOX, so there is no reason why the Revolution couldn't do it.
I realize there focus is on gameplay, but that's been there excuse everytime someone calls them out. And maybe this time with the new controller and new direction things will change. But I will not sit here and blindly say Nintendo is doing the right thing, just because I love Nintendo, I do... my favorite game of all time I The Ocarina Of Time, and I grew up in the late 80's with Mario and Duck Hunt. - Rhine23, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Do these specs don't really give it much truth the GCN was as powerful if not more powerful than the XBOX because it had much more efficient design. If the Revolution is three times as powerful as the GCN then it must be 3x as powerful of the XBOX even though it has nearly the same specs it wont matter becuase Nintendo makes things hella efficient most people arent gonna notice the difference in SD and I dont care. I have an HD set but dont play games much on it, and seeing as only 15% of the population owns a HD set this won't be a problem until the Rev's life cycle is probably over. You cant compare numbers in this case becuase Microsoft and Nintendo have very differing strategy's MS is "lets throw a bunch of ineffiecent crap in here and sell for a loss" where Nintendo is more like "lets make this run fast and make it cheap"
- diafel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Wow, tons of Nintendo fanboys in this thread. Any negative comment about this negative news seems to be downdigged. I'm definitely intriqued by the Revolution, but these specs are worrisome. Sure, graphics don't win a console war, but Nintendo isn't even trying here. And about keeping the costs low: who cares? The 360 or the Xbox for that matter certainly didn't cost their retail prices, so why is Nintendo exempt? Have they ever heard of the Gillette model in Japan? Sell the razors cheap, and make money off the blades.
- antipro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"I wouldn't be surprised if the revolution came with graphical quality similar to xbox360 and ps3, though the 360 has really unbelievable power and effects."
I believe they will all be quite similar on non HD TVs because theres only so much you can do at that resolution.
Next-Gen graphics can only be appreciated in HD though and because the Revolution does not do HD it is at a loss graphically.
Still a 360, games and an HDTV will run you like $2000. A Revolution and games(you should probably have a normal TV) will run you like $300 - nebunezzar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@shrewd
That's not what he meant at all. We have a bit of a tough choice between the 360 and ps3, and many won't buy both after they get one. The Revolution is so different and hopefully inexpensive that it will be hard for anyone, hardcore or causal, to pass up. - Dgen_X, on 10/12/2007, -13/+18This is still on non finalized Dev hardware...but the numbers don't really make me say "wow"
- merdiesel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7People like me are going to buy the Revolution for the inovative gameplay and are not too concerned with the numbers.
- BinaryJay, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7A few things to comment on regarding the Revolution.
1) I played many more hours on my GCN than my PS2, even though I had the PS2 far longer and paid about 4 times as much for it.
2) Most "PS" targeted games don't interest me. I really don't know who they're targeting with most of the hit titles. PS3 will be more of the same reguritated stuff. This is true of any console, but at least the Nintendo regurgitations tend to innovate a bit more. I find the PSP a very sexy piece of hardware, but even recently when I was searching for a reason to buy it to pass the time on a 14 hour long upcoming flight I just couldn't find any app for it out there that I felt like I would actually care for.
3) At first I thought the DS was a big gimmick that would bomb. I'm beginning to change my mind about it, and a number of titles on it or coming for it look genuinely fun ways to casually pass the time. I'd buy a DS for my flight if it wasn't for the looming Lite factor. The DS is fugly and I'm not going to get stuck with one on the eve of the brighter sibling coming out of the gates. I really don't know what's taking them so long to bring us the DS Lite, it must be putting an absolute standstill on DS sales in North America until it does. A local store is selling a package of the DS with Metroid and a USB Wifi adapter for less than $200CDN and they still can't find any takers. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6specs aren't the be all anymore.
nintendo have said all the features of the N5 (rev) have yet to be revealed, i'd be willing to wager you can chuck all your old favourite gameboy games on there, heck maybe it's even ds-compatable... now that would be fun.... maybe it's got a version of linux up ins, and we'll all be surfing the web from our tv's with a remote.
maybe the controller will come with weights so you can get a high intensity workout while you play, imagine the geek of the world with biceps and abs!? imagine videogaming being considered a high intensity sport.... now your thinking :) - kotatsu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4DS is a wonderful system and market leader despite having far less graphical grunt than the PSP.
It's all about the games, and frankly you need only look at RE4 to put to rest any worries over how good the games will look.
I can't wait to get my hands on one. - SeniorElGuapo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Anyone crying over the supposed low specs is missing the point. The Revolution is not about graphics, it's about game-play.
Think about it. It's obvious that MS and Sony are the top dogs in the console market and both will have to take a hit in the cost of their hardware. Why would Nintendo want to take a hit in hardware costs as well if there is not much of a chance for them to dominate the market and make up the loss from hardware in other means? Instead of taking such a gamble and loosing lots of money, why not make a more affordable system with slower specs that won't sell at a loss? Instead, they'll compete on innovative features. It's a smart business move.
As a long-time PC Gamer, the Revolution is the first Nintendo system that I've wanted to buy since the original NES. If they go high-end, I'd be deciding between an XBox 360 or Revolution. At a low price (say $150), I'd buy it in _addition_ to the 360.
Graphics be damned. It looks to be a fun system. - reaver, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Anyone else think the new comment system is terrible? You can't even state your god damn opinion anymore without a bunch of fanboys burying your comment. It's so ***** annoying.
- Johnny1337h4x0r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Since the revolution will have over Internet multiplayer capabilities, are we gonna be able to play the original Mario and sonic (Sega's titles will be in the service) with a friend over the Internet? What Nintendo could also do is have stats for some of the old games. Like fastest time to beat Super Mario Bros, or most coins collected... etc.
P.S. and MABY just MABY Nintendo will be nice enough to mod duck hunt so you can shoot that damn dog. - zediker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I have to say, the whole HD thing is a real waste of money. From an engineering perspective, you are paying $200 more (for the console) and at least $400 more (for the TV) to only get a slight increase in texture quality. That's it. That is all HD offers. Even then, when stuff is moving around fast on the screen, how often do you pay attention to how detailed a texture is?
"But what about the increase in resolution"
Well 1st off, HD doesn't have a monopoly at running at higher resolutions, so the increased resolution isn't really an engineering selling point for HD. Secondly, resolution can only do so much, applying an Anti-Aliasing filter properly takes away many of the advantages that a higher resolution offers, and you wont have the jaggies that will still exist in a higher resolution. Additionally, you get more power out of the system by running at lower resolutions, even when applying an Anti-Aliasing filter.
"You're just some Nintendo fan boy"
No, no I am not. I'm just pointing out the flaws in the reasoning that Sony and Microsoft are trying to shove down your throats to make you buy one of their new systems. The xbox360 doesn't even support true HD anyway. Everything is rendered at 720p and then up-scaled to 1080i. To truly classify as HD, you must render and output at least at 1080i, not 720p, but preferably 1080p. HD is just a word they fling around to make it seem like they are doing something special.
"Well look at those games, they are gorgeous"
True, some of the new games are very visually enticing, but that is not because of HD, that is because of the artistic work and strength of the rendering hardware, more specifically the shader model 3 type shader programs, which have nothing to do with HD.
So when it all comes down to it, HD doesn't offer much, but a new status symbol (to the ignorant), and slightly sharper textures.
But there is one thing HD does offer, a good laugh to all those in the know when we watch others pay exorbant amounts for something that only slightly increases quality. - AhmedF, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Graphics were weak? Dang, RE4 and Metroid Prime sure were ugly.
- j_bellone, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9The Xbox was harder to code for? What kind of drugs are you smoking? It was an INTEL PROCESSOR using a GEFORCE CHIPSET. They were basically variations of their off the shelf cousins. This console was the EASIEST to code for the last generation especially since DirectX interloped between the PC and the console (albeit not as well as XNA is promising between the new console). I can't believe someone had the audacity to say that, and I can't believe that people actually dugg your comment.
- TheGalacticFork, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Let's say you buy your 360 and you have your 20 minutes of fun(given current library) and you want to try to revolution or have it as a second console in another room, that's one Revolution sold. Let's say you play your PS3, have your fun only to get knocked out by the boomerang controller, want a console that doesn't burn your wallet and it's a little bit different, another Revolution sold. Then there's the people on the budget, with the 360 costing $300(for the wrong version) and the PS3 expected to cost $400 , you they can get the Revolution for $200-, another Rev. sold. Or lets say you just want different style of gameplay, another Rev. sold.
That's Nintendo's strategy, why compete on the hardware level and have your console cost oodles of cash when you can go on a different path and quietly win the war. - erkokite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If you are a decent graphics programmer, and you know how to use your target hardware, you will have no problem creating impressive visuals on the revolution. Impressive graphics can still be done on PS2 level hardware. Take Shadows of the Collossus for example. As opposed to the PS2, the GC actually did have DOT3 bump mapping and rudimentary pixels shaders IIRC, although they were accessed via the actual program code(kinda like nvidia's register combiners or the SH shader language) as opposed to a separate shader program. I'm also willing to bet that even though this article says the rev is unlikely to have added shaders, I think it is unlikely that they didn't update their shader stuff at least to some small degree.
- razmig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3after 30 minutes of gameplay your arms would get tired?
someone needs to hit up the gym... - SeniorElGuapo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Do you have a point photics?
If Nintendo games don't impress you, don't buy a Nintendo. - fa_pa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4That is exactly why the console market is that bad at the moment. Only releases of sequels and prequels. Is it really that hard comming up with something new?
BTW. Before you rate me down that is not a N only problem the same problem exists on all consoles but it is especially present on N. I mean really Mario 128? No thanks! - alai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This is a really lousy article. The get their facts wrong and they jump to misleading and incorrect conclusions. They spend half the article talking about clock speed and how this limits the systems performance. The latest AMD chip clocks at 2.2 Ghz (as opposed to Intel's 3.2) and the AMD spanks the Intel chip. Clock speed means very little.
- Fizzle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5You know, Nintendo isn't even going for ports. They're not looking to compete with the existing high end console. They don't want to be in that game anymore. There's not enough profit in that market. They want to co-exist with the high end console. That means if games can't be ported, oh well. Chances are you already own an XBox360 or a PS3 to play that new shiny game on.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 220 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is