Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Xbox 360 performance equivalent to..?, Xbox 360 vs PC

views
     
ikanayam
post Jan 23 2008, 01:48 PM

there are no pacts between fish and men
********
Senior Member
10,544 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: GMT +8:00

Since no one seems to have actually answered the original question, i would put the 360's hardware performance as such:

GPU - R580 clocked at about 400-450mhz
CPU - Core 2 duo, around 2.4-2.8ghz

kthxbai.
ikanayam
post Jan 28 2008, 09:36 AM

there are no pacts between fish and men
********
Senior Member
10,544 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: GMT +8:00

QUOTE(Endless9930 @ Jan 27 2008, 08:35 PM)
TS , how about comparing games ?

Since both plaform have the same game Gears of war , why dont you guys state out what is the min spec that can play the game in high settings with a constant framerate of at least 60?

Since console are made to have 60 FPS , then apply this to pc too

Well , i cant give opinion because i am using  8600 GT with duo core 2.0 , and have the gears running at most at 40 FPS and most of the time drop to 17 FPS

This is indeed playable , but its lag...........

Put aside games like crysis , only focus on games out on both platform

I know people are going to argue about the games on difference platform are totally difference , but whats the point knowing what spec equivalent to 360?

Its the games we are talking about, and surely , even you know that , you will need more juice to play games smoothly on pc even if they are the same game on difference platform.
*
I wonder where you get your ideas about consoles from...
ikanayam
post Jan 31 2008, 12:07 AM

there are no pacts between fish and men
********
Senior Member
10,544 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: GMT +8:00

QUOTE(Demonic Wrath @ Jan 27 2008, 10:13 PM)
I thought GoW on X360 running at 30 FPS?

For X360, Microsoft requires the games to have 30 FPS minimum. So the console is not designed for 60 FPS.

Consoles have fixed HW, so in time the dev will probably optimize what they can put in the games - better coding = better performance.

Anyway, for TS:-
Processor -> Tri-Core Power-PC @ 3.2GHz each w/ 2 threads. Faster than Core 2 Duo, I think.(Notice that current Core2Duo proc has 1 thread for each core only)

GFX: Probably based on ATi 1900XT, but customized with eD-RAM. According to MS, it enables free 4xAA. But in reality, 10 MB of eDRAM is not enough to support 4xAA @ 720p resolution.

RAM: 512MB GDDR3 RAM - less than PC's, hence there's some low-res texture in games. It's used as main RAM and Graphic RAM.
*
The processor is not faster than a Core2Duo. The cores are only 2 issue in order. C2D is a 4 issue out of order core which is really beefy. In most things the C2D would probably win out quite easily.
About the graphics and all, my earlier post already described it.


QUOTE(Endless9930 @ Jan 28 2008, 06:18 AM)
Oh is it 30 ?

Because the Modern warfare are said to have constend of 60 on both 360 and ps3 , anyway , we wont see a difference between 30 and 60

Well , the question comes back

What min spec is required to play Gears , Blacksite , Stranglehold etc at min 30 fps?

Well , for those who have 8800 GT , is it enough? or 8800 GTX Sli is needed( I think this is way too high )?

As for ram and the processor etc......
*
No one designs games to work at a constant frame rate, because that would be just retarded and you're probably just underutilizing the hardware most of the time because you'd just be capping the frame rate.

Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0128sec    0.39    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 26th November 2025 - 02:10 AM