Karak
Member
Exactly right.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Rumored Chinese Forum Xbox720 specs: 8CoreCPU,8GB,HD8800GPU,W8,640GBHDD
- Thread starter ekim
- Start date
Exactly right.
systemfehler
Member
Too the anonymous source NeoGAF "works" during the weekend - just post it here ;-)
postal chaos
Member
I'm no techie and most of this stuff is way over my head, but if these current specs are true, this jaguar CPU, 8 gb of ram, and a 1.2 tf gpu, would you say this system could run Battlefield 3 on ultra settings like the computer? Better? Worse?
I've watched my friend play it on his computer with these settings and its looks really nice. Just wondering if anyone with more knowledge than me would be able to know if Durango could achieve these same results. Thanks
I've watched my friend play it on his computer with these settings and its looks really nice. Just wondering if anyone with more knowledge than me would be able to know if Durango could achieve these same results. Thanks
Karak
Member
Aiming for a very strict 1080p solution they could run that. I am not sure if all the ultra settings are doable. Not because of the hardware but because I do not know what the Ultra setting gives you.
postal chaos
Member
Thanks for the reply Karak
McHuj
Member
Should be able to do it easily. A 7770 with 1080p Ultra settings can already get around 30fps. In a console, you should be able to get better performance (maybe not 60fps).
Stephen Colbert
Banned
What is MS doing on the VR front? Sony seems to be exploring VR headsets for gaming, why not MS?
Sony could easily partner with (or outright buy) the people making Oculus Rift to make out of the box PS4 support for it at launch a reality.
Sony already has it's own VR headset....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77oCTRIUCk8&feature=player_embedded#!
...though without some of the features Oculus Rift offers that makes the Rift better to use, but there's no reason Sony can't fix those problems and release an upgraded VR headset for the PS4 that is on par with the Rift but at a higher resolution to boot (720p per eye).
If you like this idea, upvote it on the Playstation Blog Share site that Sony developers frequent...
http://share.blog.us.playstation.com/ideas/2012/08/14/oculus-rift-head-mounted-display/
The Blog Share was how fans managed to get Kevin Butler at the E3 conference last year, so there's no reason they couldn't do something similar with the Oculus Rift this year.
Sony could easily partner with (or outright buy) the people making Oculus Rift to make out of the box PS4 support for it at launch a reality.
Sony already has it's own VR headset....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77oCTRIUCk8&feature=player_embedded#!
...though without some of the features Oculus Rift offers that makes the Rift better to use, but there's no reason Sony can't fix those problems and release an upgraded VR headset for the PS4 that is on par with the Rift but at a higher resolution to boot (720p per eye).
If you like this idea, upvote it on the Playstation Blog Share site that Sony developers frequent...
http://share.blog.us.playstation.com/ideas/2012/08/14/oculus-rift-head-mounted-display/
The Blog Share was how fans managed to get Kevin Butler at the E3 conference last year, so there's no reason they couldn't do something similar with the Oculus Rift this year.
Karak
Member
Actually MS has pretty much followed their 3 year old powerpoint so far. And in that powerpoint it not only includes the Illumaroom tech but VR glasses.
So assuming they haven't deviated in that area they will be offering something when the tech is right.
And please don't bring voting stuff into these threads. They should be separate. These are about the overall tech. Not a vote for a playstation showing.
statham
Member
I downvoted.
My take is this; if one is targeted for 1080p at 60fps and the other 30fps I will likely gravitate toward that console. Pretty simple. Especially if say Sony pulls through with that as a target and has BR playback while MS does not. Couple of key deciding factors here.
Had both consoles this gen but dropped PS3 after UC2 and held with the 360. Don't mind switching around next gen.
Software matters at launch too as I have a real soft spot for Alan Wake. The technology is key however.
How average joe makes their choice who knows. Then again I may just stick with my gaming rig and 360 and let things play out for a year or so it get neither.
1080p at 60fps should be target but I'm having some doubts.
Karak
Member
Its talk. Don't attach anything to it other than interesting info.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
IQ is always the first casualty in the console graphics war.
Phonomezer
Banned
I would be underwhelmed if they targeted 60fps and lowered the graphics quality to half for that TBH
I prefer 30fps and more amazing visuals, by far
Same goes for resolution, i prefer to have better graphics in 720p than worst in 1080p
And that is how most developers work, first go for best graphics and then if possible for better fps and they dont bother with resolution, at least for this generation of consoles
Actually 60fps will give worst image quality than 30fps, because you lose half the power to render twice the frames, so you can have less AA, polygons, effects, texture quality, lighting passes/effects etc etc for each frame
Essentially you have to cut back your graphics to half the quality or less if you really want a steady 60fps and not a fluctuating joke that would be way worst than 30fps steady
Plus 60fps is not something you can sell to the avergae consumer, he cant see any difference, so developers will almost always go for the tangible things the gamer can see right away, like polygons, textures, effects, lighting
Proelite
Member
All those 'better graphics' at 30fps might look great in a screenshot on the back of the box, but they all turn to double-image mush once things start moving. A minimum 60fps preserves the clarity of the static image in motion. 30fps does not.
That's why I'll ALWAYS advocate 720p/60 over 1080p/30.
This!
Actually in steady 30fps everything looks rather fine and smooth enough
More than enough if you consider the penalty to do 60fps
The problem is that 30fps is not steady this generation, while next gen could be steady and without tearing
I would prefer a clear 720p and steady 30fps in later games, the first wave could be 1080p/30fps steady probably
Not to me it doesn't. Detail, fidelity and clarity are all lost at 30fps.
Test for you: drive a 60fps racing game and note that you can still read detail on track-side advertising hoardings clearly as you pass them at speed. Now try the same thing with a 30fps racer.
I have played more than 50 consoles games, all in 30fps mainly and never had any major problem with their graphics, all the detail seems to be there and many looked absolutly spectacular (Halo 4, GOW 3, Gears 3, Uncharted 2 etc)
Of course in the car case i would agree, 60fps are needed for such extremely fast moving games, but these are one in a million and mainly racers (which i have no problem be 60fps, since you dont really sit and admire the environments like in say a RPG)
So, for a few games 60fps may be needed, for the majority i would prefer double the graphics quality and 30fps
The trick is the have a steady 30fps and no tearing, that would indeed make a big difference to erratic 30fps and huge tearing to keep fps steady used this gen
Proelite
Member
Deanos got pwned.
For you. For the mass market, it's less of a factor.
How? We still don't know what it has.
I personally think it's unlikely that Sony will put a second kind of ram, but it definitely is a good idea to stack some low cost ddr on top of the southbridge chip, which won't get hot like the APU. It can be used as cache, resident program memory, etc.
I suppose depends on the games you play, if someone plays fast games like shooters, racers or very fast action games etc would indeed benefit from 60fps
For me that RPGs is my thing, with huge detailed worlds to explore slowly and in detail, graphical detail, scale etc is far more important than 60fps and 30fps is fine, even in the cases that there are some drops here and there
Depends on the sacrifice
Would you go back to 480p to get 60fps for example ?
I would sacrifice 1080p for a steady 30fps without tearing in 720p though
I would never argue that 60FPS isn't always better. I'd prefer 60FPS in all games. But, for the average person, they just don't care. And while I might prefer 60FPS, I can play games 30 FPS--- and under--- just fine.
I'd be OK 480P/60FPS. Resolution isn't important to me.
If they take away half the graphics quality, they are not better for me
if you can do them without any scarifice, of course is fine to have, but that is impossible in later waves of games
The average person will see the difference in graphics rather clearly, a game in 60fps can look night and day worst than another in 30fps, since you lose half power for that fps
That's an unrealistc drawback
Not really, when games become far more demanding down the line, 720p/30fps will be the norm
To get 60fps you would have to go subHD, like in many cases in later games this generation
Graphics always take priority and the competition is harse in top titles, noone will scarifice amazing lighting, polygons etc for resolution or fps over 720p/30fps in later games that go for extreme graphics
Will not be much different than how it is now, maybe we see more sub1080p games or even 1080p ones though
Imo the last thing we will see is 60fps
Always talking about games down the line, not the first wave that is essentially old engines, which of course are not as demanding as the ones that will appear after 3-4 years and can be adapted to run in 1080p and 60fps
This is very true. I have a friend who cannot, CANNOT, tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps games. He'd see Borderlands and RAGE both running at the same refresh rate on Xbox 360, and I'm quite jealous of his gimpy eyes. For him, ignorance is bliss.
For me the difference is INSTANTLY and obviously apparent.
Ideally, for me, I'd like the option to run all sub-60 console games at a lower resolution/with less texture detail/with scaled-back effects, if it means they can run at 60fps.
Who knows, maybe scalable detail will be an option for next gen consoles.
Yeah... right.
Well that didn't take long. HAHAHAHAAHAHA. You just got pwned by Proelite. You should go check out the Eurogamer article son -_-.
Like it was said there is no extra RAM module on Orbis.
It seems that Xbox Next will be built in the way that I was thinking that the PS4 would be with something like a custom made fpga/asic that will be used as a co processor to handle tasks that it's better at while taking the load off of the CPU & GPU.
something like a Ray-Tracing Chip that will be used for the Lighting & things like that freeing up the GPU.
something like a Ray-Tracing Chip that will be used for the Lighting & things like that freeing up the GPU.
Proelite
Member
Nothing like that. That's not MS.
They would only use stuff that people would know how to program for, or use stuff that you don't need to program for.
direct link to the event
https://msftopenhousesvc.eventbrite.com/
Sounds mostly like "we show you stuff we already launched, nothing new" beside this part:
mhh, just wait
DR3AM
Member
Seem understated. I say no.
Baconsammy
Banned
Yes, it's time for Surface Pro to be released.
I'm not saying it will be a Ray-Tracing chip I was using it as a example of a co-processor that could be used to take the load off of the GPU for something like Lighting.
A treasure trove of info no doubt. What a tease...
shinobi602
Member
R
Rösti
Unconfirmed Member
What's the source of that, sangreal? I'd like to take a look at the online records (not the files themselves).
Rösti;46641020 said:
PACER. There is a free archive at http://archive.recapthelaw.org/wawd/171570/ but it is incomplete
Similar threads
- Locked