X360 might do DX10 too!

[saquib]

okay, based on the dedicated GPU and tri-core CPU inside X360, i always had some feeling that M$ might be hiding their secret weapon (DX10) inside X360 too - well at least to some point this seems to be true.

the game called "Warhound" for X360 shows capabilities just like Crysis running on DX10... this is truely WOW, another factor to put Sony in more pressure. Have a look at these amazing screens, and you'd know what i mean.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/War...d-PC-2824.html

http://forumen.warhoundgame.com/view...e0372a839d1f45

[Pitch]

It can try an emulate it, but pretty sure Xenos can't use the Dx10 API.

[saquib]

ok, DX10 hardware will be geometry shaders and Xenos does not have these: may be its DX9.5? Well looks amazing already... 1 more year of game development and imagine what X360 2008 games might look like! Besides couldnt m$ update there dev kits to be more liek dx10 based games? although 512mb of ram might be the main issue with x360, but i think it can still make a diff since there are not much overhead like in PCs (ow, and PS3 can do so much with just 256mb).

[cadaveca]

you can emulate DX10 on the x1k series cards, and teh xenos is a variant of such. you loose a bit of performance in this emulation, but thanks to the low-latency E-DRAM and a third core, of course the 360 can run DX10!

[tiamat63]

wait. I thought the Xeno wasnt a full USD??

[cadaveca]

not all the work has to be done @ gpu. One of the reasons for doing such on gpu(geometry) is becasue of the latency involved when offloading such work to cpu, as it can be needed before the pixel is fully processed(handed back to geo shader). the E-DRAM of the xenos should allow for such calls to happen without such a large hit as on a standard desktop, depending on the specific function. On the desktop space, this loss amounts to a 15% loss in performance in comparison to doing everything on the gpu itself, and that's a fairly large hit.

However, the xenos is set to specific resolutions, and the XNA platform is pretty homogenous, so coding for this loss should not be that hard, altohugh it is going to limit the image displayed on-screen a fair bit.


oh, and the XENOS is the FIRST USD(unified shader device) in fullscale production for the masses. However, it does not conform to M$'s USD API completely, due to the lack of a geometry shader, AFAIK. Just becasue ATI helped M$ design this API many many years ago does not mean that they have strayed away from sanity in thier development of products that they KNEW were going to have time to shine, however.

Just remember that DX10 and such is still really under NDA...not released as of yet, even though it's part of Vista. What we see now in Vista is just PART of the full DX10 API.

[tiamat63]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

due to the lack of a geometry shader

thats kinda what I was harping on.... thanks for the clear up.

[saquib]

ok, this at least shows that it will be able to do more than the PS3 right?

[cadaveca]

Nope. that's whoel different ballgame, the PS3. At least the 360 uses M$ software,a slightly modified DX9d, and thereby is not very different from a desktop PC in all aspects.

[Daston]

the thing is I notice FPS drops in games like gears of war when lots of things are happening so if they are going to use even more hardware then it might suffer even more in the fps department

[cadaveca]

yes/no. I do beleive that there are usage-limits imposed on developer's @ this point in order to prolong the longevity of teh device. I can hardly imagine them using all of teh available power right now, and maybe not even starting to until the fall. GOW is not really all that great either...highly un-optimized...just enough to make it passable. "stop and pop" may be lots of fun, but it definately does not push the 360 as much as most think!

[Daston]

That is true the 360 has more to offer as does the pc industry it seems strange that programers dont use every thing to there full right away.

However one big question why has the 360 only got 512mb ram when most programs now need 1gb I mean any one seen the loading times on oblivion compaired to the pc's loading time??

[Favu]

The loading time would be due to the fact that the Xbox must read from a disc while the PC has a HDD which will be much faster. Also games consoles are generally much more optimised as there is only one set of hardware the games should run on - PCs have to be very unoptomised so they will run on my 6600 as well as your 8800.

[saquib]

no matter wat ps3 and x360 might have, can ps3 really push itself to be better than x360 with 256mb of memory..... even x360's 512 seems low enough!

[Pitch]

Originally Posted by saquib

no matter wat ps3 and x360 might have, can ps3 really push itself to be better than x360 with 256mb of memory..... even x360's 512 seems low enough!

If devs take the time to fully utilise the Cell CPU? Yes.

If the devs just port game code over? No.

[saquib]

could you guys just give me a simple example on difference between 7 SPUs of Cell, and 3 cores of Xenos - i mean how they are benefitial to a game? ( 7 seems more than 3 right? how come many ppl saying xenos is still better for games?)

[cadaveca]

because the nV gpu in teh PS3 blows chunks.

I mean really, yes, the PS3 is resource starved, to a degree. Memory is DEFINATELY going to be the limiting factor for this platform, IMHO. The gpu strikes me as odd as well, but whateva.

However, the software that will fully use the PS3 WILL be a work of art. Seriously. It ain't no easy thing!

[Daston]

I think a console is only as good as the games. Take the Wii the developers poored all their effort into making it fun and left the graphics till later. However the 360 seems to have the feel of "lets make it cutting edge visual wise and leave gameplay for later" take oblivion for example how many people thought that the gameplay in morrowind was better

[Pitch]

Originally Posted by saquib

could you guys just give me a simple example on difference between 7 SPUs of Cell, and 3 cores of Xenos - i mean how they are benefitial to a game? ( 7 seems more than 3 right? how come many ppl saying xenos is still better for games?)

Cell = PS3 CPU
RSX = PS3 GPU (based on G70 but with half the bus width)

3.2GHz PPC = X360 CPU
Xenos = X360 GPU (Unified Shader design with 10MB eDRAM.)

For the PS3 to really shine, it requires alot more time and effort from the developers to really get the most out of it, if they can utilise the full power of Cell, then things don't looks so bad for the PS3. However, don't expect any games to do that anytime soon, and even then, not many devs outside Sony's studios will really put the effort in, especially if they are planning on multiformat launchs.

[Aedan]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

because the nV gpu in teh PS3 blows chunks.

Who needs a GPU when you've got a number of SPUs? The SPUs are quite capable of handling just about all the GPU functions quite happily. In terms of GPGPU functionality, the SPUs can outrun a 7800GT by about five times (1)

In seriousness, the PS3 is following a similar model to the PS2. The PS2 GS (Graphics Synthesiser - the 'GPU' in the PS2) is not capable of the graphics that the machine turns out. However, splitting the work load across the vector units (mostly VU1) and the GS results in far more performance than just the GS on it's own.