Xbox 360 GPU Features Revealed

The smart 3d ram, which sits on the same substrate as the GPU is very exciting. Being able to apply 4x anti-aliasing without any hit to the GPU is very good news. A data exchange rate of two terabytes is mind boggling.
 
Very good review. It's exciting to see some real innovation in 3d technology. The smart ram and pipelines that can do vertex and pixel shaders are very impressive. The way the memory interface works between GPU CPU and memory is different for sure. Too bad you guys didn't get some good pics of the guts of the Xbox 360!
 
Jonsey said:
Very good review. It's exciting to see some real innovation in 3d technology. The smart ram and pipelines that can do vertex and pixel shaders are very impressive. The way the memory interface works between GPU CPU and memory is different for sure. Too bad you guys didn't get some good pics of the guts of the Xbox 360!
Click to expand...

We were actually promised pics but they never materialized. We haven't given up on getting some either but we have to work with what we have ;)
 
Great review.... You didn't happen to pick up any info on R520 while you were there did you? It would be nice to put some of the random rumors and speculation on it to rest.... Or atleast it would be nice to know that you know something even if you can't tell us what you know yet. :)
 
bonkrowave said:
The smart 3d ram, which sits on the same substrate as the GPU is very exciting. Being able to apply 4x anti-aliasing without any hit to the GPU is very good news. A data exchange rate of two terabytes is mind boggling.
Click to expand...
This generation is going to be incredible. These numbers just keep climbing. ;)
 
OK, in the specs you list 500MHz core clock, 48 shader-enabled pipelines and two shader ops per clock. So I figure thats 48B shader ops/sec (what MS said). How'd you guys get 96B? Maybe I missed something...
 
First off, we reported on page 2 in our chart that the capable “Shader Performance” of the Xbox 360 GPU is 48 billion shader operations per second. While that is what Microsoft told us, Mr. Feldstein of ATI let us know that the Xbox 360 GPU is capable of doing two of those shaders per cycle. So yes, if programmed for correctly, the Xbox 360 GPU is capable of 96 billion shader operations per second. Compare this with ATI’s current PC add-in flagship card and the Xbox 360 more than doubles its abilities.
Click to expand...

there you have it incase you missed it
 
4xMSAA with no impact on performance is a good thing! No more jagged lines when playing on large screen tvs, yay.
 
"it does not look like Smart 3D Memory will be one of the things that make the crossover, at least immediately" da@! dam! :mad:
 
An amazing insight into the world of tomorrow's graphics that's here with us today. So, baically what you have is a separate chip that does AA, in HD, leaving the GPU to worry about other stuff. Couple this with the upcoming Physics processor, and you have the possibility of something phenomemal.

I wonder if the XBOX 360 already has this in its sights, although with 3 cores running @3.2 GHz each........
 
doormat said:
I read that, I want to know what math they did to come up with to get 96B.
Click to expand...
Umm... 48B (ops per sec) * 2 (shader ops per cycle) = 96B shader ops per sec.

Perhaps I am just not understanding what you trying to ask??
 
Great review, but while reading it I kept constantly wondering "yeah, but how does it fare against the 'RSX'?" The RSX sounds much more a traditional graphics processor, as opposed to ATi's progressive gpu, but either way they both sound like brutes (300+ million transistors? Damn.) I wish there was some way to benchmark the two systems against eachother.

P.S! Check out this hilarious article by anand-
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2420&p=5


I'm now proud to be typing this up on a g4 pbook :D
 
SDragon42 said:
Umm... 48B (ops per sec) * 2 (shader ops per cycle) = 96B shader ops per sec.

Perhaps I am just not understanding what you trying to ask??
Click to expand...

I'm thinking the 2 shader ops per clock are already included in the 48B (per my math above), thats why I question Kyle's figure of 96B.

Edit: the math again
500MHz core clock x 48 pipes x 2 shader ops per clock per pipe = 48B shader ops/sec.
 
robble said:
"it does not look like Smart 3D Memory will be one of the things that make the crossover, at least immediately" da@! dam! :mad:
Click to expand...

Yeah, that part was very dissapointing. I wonder if Nvidia is locked into the same situation. I really hope this deal with Microsoft doesn't prevent ATI from releasing parts with equal or better performance for the PC. With the shift to widescreen hi-res gaming that we are currently seeing we could use the extra horsepower. It would be nice to see such a giant leap in performance and visual quality in a video card for the PC.

Maybe, just maybe the FPS and RTS games on the XBOX360 will support the keyboard and mouse combo so. If that happens I will convert!
 
You Guys said:
So yes, if programmed for correctly, the Xbox 360 GPU is capable of 96 billion shader operations per second.
Click to expand...

Oh God *Drools*!

Very good article, gets rid of the "10000 pixil shaders PI via 12MDRam by the X-900 Super mem-CPU-eggconroler chip etc" fud, and makes it make sense.

This chip sounds really kickass,

You guys said:
The Xbox 360 also makes using curved surfaces possible in-game, meaning that it can calculate the polygons from the proper curved surface math in order to draw it on your screen “correctly.”
Click to expand...

I've ben waiting for this for years, Finally, TRUE Curved surficas

This seams like the first TRUE innovation in years
 
Arkham said:
Funny! This is going to stir up a whole new bees' nest among all fanbys.
Click to expand...

Let's keep the thread on track, but yeah, I suppose it will give ammo to the fanatical. With everyone else, not really. All the development kits are Apple based, so a company showing off the game on the same kind of box they built the game on is no biggy. When games developed for the original Xbox were shown running on developer consoles and PCs, the same thing was said.


What do the people think the PS3 games / demos are played on? Developer kits. It's not like all PS3 game developer have actual Cell processor based machines to make their games on.

Anyhow, I trust everyone will keep this thread on track, and flames under control.
 
eightyd said:
Great review, but while reading it I kept constantly wondering "yeah, but how does it fare against the 'RSX'?" The RSX sounds much more a traditional graphics processor, as opposed to ATi's progressive gpu, but either way they both sound like brutes (300+ million transistors? Damn.) I wish there was some way to benchmark the two systems against eachother.

P.S! Check out this hilarious article by anand-
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2420&p=5


I'm now proud to be typing this up on a g4 pbook :D
Click to expand...

I hope your clothing and or work space is fireproof in case that battery blows up on ya! J/K I had to get that out.

I don't think it matters if the ATI solution is faster than Nvidia's or vice versa. I think it will boil down to how easy it is to take advantage of the entire system's features.

All this new tech is great but how much of a learning curve is involved with programming for these new systems. It would really suck if we have to wait a year or two before high quality titles start appearing for the system. The Xbox360 supports about what, six threads in hardware and Sony has 7 cores and one for redundancy? I have never seen a game designed for multiprocessor/threads besides the Quake games and those didn't even perform that much better with added processors so I wonder how long it would take for game developers to master this programming technique and make quality games that take advantage of this wonderful feature.

I don't hate Macs by the way. I have one right next to me. I just wouldn't trust an Apple product with a battery in it. ;-)
 
Some thoughts and ideas.
I get the message that the 360 is one big video card that will be future proof for many years down the road. If what i'm seeing about the new consoles is even remotely true then it looks like I won't have to update my PC anymore or my kids PC's. All my money spent was always to improve gaming and since my son is to young to work other then arround the house, it cost me twice for video cards, I make sure he has the same as mine, so he won't be using my PC :) .
If Microsoft plans on selling millions of these boxes won't Valve and some of the other top gaming companys get on board if they use Directx for their games or port them over for the sales they can achieve.
Since I like the visuals in gaming I'm pretty sure the the price of the games will be going up also for the Xbox. That is going to be one of the best selling features.
In your brief you mentioned that MS owns the tech to the Xbox, what part if any can ATI transfer over to the next gen. video cards for PC's without infringing on any patents that MS might have aquired. You stated that the GPU has been put together for the last two years from the ground up.
I find it hard to see video cards for PC's improving much over the Xbox when the traces are hard wired so close together vs the route the imformation has to take on the busses of a PC.
The only thing left now is to get another HDTV for my Son if all the hype is true :) .
 
I find it ironic that the Unreal engine 3 stuff was first shown at the nv40 launch a year ago, PC hardware by nVidia. Now we find out all those assets in the demos are from Gears of War, a console "exclusive" on ATI hardware. Bungied?

It's sad that we won't see the embedded cache on their PC parts this round, do the Bit Boys own that idea? Looks like it will be doom and gloom for PC games for a couple years until the consoles start looking dated again, I hope it can make it.
 
These are certainly exciting times - I mean how long has it been since consoles have offered any REAL competition to PC hardware? Some great innovation for sure. This can only be a good thing, as healthy competition keeps everyone on their toes. What with the PhysX add-ins for PC gamers & dual core just round the corner, things are looking fantastic all round I'd say. :)
 
jellyhead said:
These are certainly exciting times - I mean how long has it been since consoles have offered any REAL competition to PC hardware?
Click to expand...
Every time a console is released?
 
damn i like microsoft and nvidia.

whats a !!!!!! to do ? :(
 
pr0pensity said:
Every time a console is released?
Click to expand...

Don't be cynical - we're looking at completely different architecture here - namely cell for PS3, which IS exciting - unless you're dead, of course. :p
 
jellyhead said:
Don't be cynical - we're looking at completely different architecture here - namely cell for PS3, which IS exciting - unless you're dead, of course. :p
Click to expand...
the cell is virtually worthless if your gonna suck a vector cpus cock and say its exciting the CRAY chips would do better,a cell can only handle general purpose data at %20 speed of a true general purpose processor. basically sony is creating another system that can push beaitful toy story graphics but it wont even be a game,just a tech demo. the origanal ps2 can make toy story graphics but its problem was there other processes in a game then graphics this is why the ps3 will fall short in the place of its forefather the ps2. if you wanna buy games that are %100 realtime cutscenes usiing an engine go right ahead and devolope for ps3 cause thats what it would do best
 
Atleast the cell processor is pushing progress of new technology, not using high-end stuff we have now
 
Hmmm...

I am very excited by both the XBox 360 and the PS3. Programming games for multiple processors sucks (I know...). This is mostly due to the fact that noone is really doing it. With PC and consoles all going multi-proc it will get a lot easier pretty quickly. All of the middleware tools will support (they will have too).

As for new tech vs current. Hmm..the Xbox 360 is 3 PowerPC cores which can run 2 hardware threads each. The three cores I would imagine are similar to a dual core AMD/Intel chip but with 3 instead of 2 cores. Add to this the ability to run 2 threads on each core (in hardware). This is hardly 'current tech'. I don't see where you can even get a PC with that sort of capability (unless your hitting 30,000 dollar server space). Calling it 'current tech' is a pure marketing gimick...

The ATI card is definitly NOT current tech. There isn't anything to compare it too that is out now...

For the PS3 we have one core, with 7 helper chips (limited instruction sets). This is definitely new tech, but it will have a price. Noone is going to have a clue how to develop for it anytime soon. It will have the same problems the PS2 had, very long and steep learning curve.

The video card on the PS3 seems like a 24 or 32 pipeline 6800 Ultra. Not sure entirely what all is involved in it since they aren't releasing a lot of info on it.

Pros and Cons. I think in pure game terms they will both be equally powerful. Even the weakest part of each machine is pretty strong. I think both machines will be so far above the current consoles that people aren't going to care which one is more powerful. They both will do just fine. However, the PS3's biggest problem is going to price (around 500).

I know many game developers that are drooling to work on either one..and the games are going to be astounding for either one. It truly is going to be a great to be a gamer (or a game developer)...
 
Ballz2TheWallz said:
the cell is virtually worthless if your gonna suck a vector cpus cock and say its exciting the CRAY chips would do better,a cell can only handle general purpose data at %20 speed of a true general purpose processor. basically sony is creating another system that can push beaitful toy story graphics but it wont even be a game,just a tech demo. the origanal ps2 can make toy story graphics but its problem was there other processes in a game then graphics this is why the ps3 will fall short in the place of its forefather the ps2. if you wanna buy games that are %100 realtime cutscenes usiing an engine go right ahead and devolope for ps3 cause thats what it would do best
Click to expand...

If you're going to label me a cock sucker, at least have the decency to use proper English/spelling/grammar whilst doing so. Thanks!

p.s. I don't agree with any of your comments. Have a nice day.
 
MS and Sony payed a lot to get it first, all that tech'll be on a PC in a few months though.
 
Why these technologies don't come down to the PC level ?

It's cuz of all of us tech geeks, only we will buy this technology and USE it. If dell buys out a hundred thousand vid cards, great!, if they don't have proper marketing, that hundred thousand sale won't repeat itself. Plus, we geeks are heavy price shoppers, and all PC hardware components for the most part at retail level has small amount of mark up, once again, cuz of heavy price matching/ease of price matching by us.

So you say, 'microsoft is selling x360 console hardware for free" not that it is, but it could, if it could sap money in (royalties?) from game developers. Sell the rights to the console, and take the money on each game sold. If the console's cheaper, more will be in the market, more games will be also bought by the market. And of course, if they develop the game themselves, then they don't need to worry about loosing developer support since they don't have to rape them.

So anyway, that's why we're screwed ... this could all be in my twisted mind, but who knows, I think this is the new way of companies making money. It's a cell phone strategy, give the phones for free, charge for service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top