The Xbox 720 will use the Radeon HD 6670 card !

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.



wow, you really are an idiot.. nice way to post and try to keep it cival. (nice childish cussing)

#1, no.. i like at least a 460" to play my games on..

#2, that site you linked with the res numbers.. i think i have already linked that site on this forum before, and it has nothing to do with me talking about 60fps games.

#3, Lol at your $350 Turdbox with its "Sandy Bridge Dual core".. plus another $110 GPU and whatever else you want for monitor, and really a $5 mouse and keyboard for gaming?? how about YOU! gtfo..

the Next box will be as i said, 300-350 bucks and have a much better CPU than that thing you linked, it will come with a excellent gaming controller and head set and HDMI cable, and anything else needed to get rolling.. all for just 300- 350 bucks.

oh and just throwing a new GPU in to an old PC wont work, you will probably have to upgrade the power supply and CPU and Ram, to actually advance.. because if you just have an old turd CPU, whats the point of just putting a shiny new GPU in to it?

and a decent CPU is not cheap..

and and even saying something like, "this will crush the Nextbox".. is a bit ignorant, you know nothing of the Nextbox, none of us do.. and to be honest, going by at least half of the way you posted that nonsense... i would go as far as saying, you don't know much of anything really 🙁

EDIT- i forgot to mention this.. Quote me one time where i say the games run @ 1080p + 60FPS..
i quite clearly said there are more games that run at 60FPS than a native 1080p..
 


#1, i doubt it will run the 6670..

#2, IF it does run teh 6670, it will be highly HIGHLY! modded and would be MUCH! better than the normal 6670

#3, it could be out this year.. (doubt it, but why not?).. MS announced the 360 at 2005 E3, and Launched it that November.. what stopping that happening again?

#4, IT WILL NOT RETAIL @ $500! :sol:
 


not a chance.. not with that cpu vs whatever they will custom build for the 720, and please please take in to consideration that the custom variation of the 6670 in conjunction of whatever fancy architecture foundation they come up with to build it around.. would make it probably twice as strong as a regular 6670..
 




I think you quite clearly say it will run 60fps @1080p.




Even with double the power, it will only just run demanding games today at 60fps on low-medium.

You seriously think it will only be 300-350? Right.



You know nothing of the Nextbox, none of us do, yet you say it WILL be 300-350?



It will have a much better CPU you say?




Hmm, you think so?

 
This wasn't even proven though, right?

Consoles can make do quite well even with low specs.
I like that games often need to be more optimized to look good on a console.

Games like Uncharted 2-3 all look pretty good, even when compared to PC games.
That is the thing, I like the PS3 for the exclusives. I don't really care if a great game
runs in 720P, because it is still a great game only available on the PS3.

For those saying that consoles aren't optimized, think about this:

http://www.gamemunition.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Uncharted-3-Screenshot-12.jpg

Sure there are a few issues with this image, mainly the horrible tree model. But this is being done
with a console that is $250, has 256MB Main Ram, 256MB Video Ram, and a 5 Year Old CPU.

(Saying all this even though I was disappointed severely with Uncharted 3)
 


thats a big TV.

they arent going to make the nextbox for under 400. the thing is going to cost at least 500-600 dollars to make and they will take a hit when selling them.



whats this modding you speak of? is it like turning a ferrari into a NASCAR...? i dont see what you think that they can modify.



again this modding you speak of... could i do it to my pc?
 
By Custom 6670, it will probably be a binned 6670 with less memory bandwith, lower clockspeed, and less cores. This is so that it does not overheat inside of that little dinky case. Think of it kind of like a laptop, probably going to be a mobile version of the 6670.
 

you mean that all xbox 360 games are running @ 720p . . and we can play them on a 1080p TV (up scalled to 1080p)
i don't think you will get the same quality of the Xbox 360 if you up scale a game from 720p to 1080 on PC
but why ? . .
 

yes.
Dinky and of course stinky.
 



you pc fan boys are worse than any console fanboy i have ever come across..

the xbox 360's variation of the x1800 is far better than the pc counter part after the customization..
 


Would you care to explain why I have a system that's quite similar to the 360 and it runs very similar frame rates on graphics details that are close to console counterpart then?
 


You keep speaking of this customization... What is it?
 

As I said think of it as a laptop gpu. A gtx 560M is completely different from it's desktop counterpart and performs much slower. The 6670 is already a pretty slow card, add some cuts into the memory bandwith, clockspeed, and cores and you have a even slower card. If you keep referring to us as "fanboys" then I suggest you get off this forum now. :pfff:
 


The 720p or less! And the system can then upscale it to 720p or 1080i, depending on supported outputs, and some TVs and receivers can upscale to 1080i/p. The post I sourced has detailed info on the upscaling process.

On PC you aren't upscaling, you are rendering the game at the higher resolution originally, so it looks significantly cleaner. The only thing a good upscaling does is it removes the blocky-ness, like if you've ever watched a super low res video it's like every pixel is a huge square. But, it's not increasing the resolution.
 
There is NO WAY to directly compare a gaming console and a PC in terms of perforamnce. They are different devices, with different objectives and operating parameters. While gaming is similar, they are very different as well.

While this discussion is interesting, it makes crystal clear the lack of understanding the benefits that a closed console environment has in terms of optimizing the components for optimal use.

If you are a console game developer and you know what exact hardware you have to work with, you can develop your game to take full advantage of that environment. Removing the variability of hardware differences (like found in PCs) allows the developers to focus their efforts much more effectively.

Have fun!!!
 
If you mean by looking directly at the hardware specs, then yes that is fairly true. But you definitely can compare them. You can know the console's resolution and framerate, and you can easily do a screen capture and compare side by side (which is done all the time) to directly compare performance and visuals.

I get that with a "6670" in the 720, you can't automatically say it will perform identical to a 6670 in a PC, though. Chances are it will be able to push a lot harder, maybe 6770 performance in a comparable PC. Still, pretty weak these days. I only recommend 6770 as an absolute minimum for 1080p gaming, though it is much better at 1680x1050.
 
I totally understand that with consoles you get more performance than you would if you have the same hardware on your PC, more 'optimised' since there's only one hardware set you need to program for so you can get the majority of performance out of it among other things.

However, this whole idea of tech being SO much more powerful if it's in a console than a PC? Please. People act like it's going to have the performance of a 6990. Sure it'll be a good chunk better, but more than 50% faster? I doubt it. It's still just hardware, it's not like they have magic wands and all of a sudden they unlock the super secret power that it had all along, which can only be done in a console!
 
This thread is exactly why Valve's concepts of "The Steam Box" and "The Big Picture" are so necessary. We're at a crossroads where PC Gaming has become very affordable, and Console Gamers are beginning to ask the "WHY?" and "HOW?" questions.

How does a game "run" better (e.g. 60 FPS) on a gaming console, but at < 30 FPS on the PC?
- This is an illusion. Take Battlefield 3 for example. It's a very pretty game to begin with (consoles and PCs), but the 360/PS3 versions are running at low resolutions with 4xMSAA. Certain special effects are non-existent I wouldn't be shocked if the next generation of console games use FSAA techniques with a lower 2xMSAA beneath that (allowing for less jaggies without taking a huge hit on performance). There are many articles that made screenshot comparisons of FSAA vs 2xMSAA and 4xMSAA; if you're in the middle of a heated battle, chances are, FSAA is good enough.

Why did Microsoft choose the 6670 instead of a better GPU like the 6870?
- The console manufacturers all sell their hardware at a loss. Production decisions like this are made to mitigate/minimize these losses.

Why don't more PC gamers build/hook up their system to the TV instead of relying on consoles?
- Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo have been keeping these two "worlds" apart for multiple reasons. It's harder to pirate games on a console. They can also milk users on their console online ecosystem (a la Xbox Live Membership, paying for a new outfit, buying the new ), whereas gaming in the PC world is a less controlled environment in terms of mods, maps, add-ons, patches, etc. Also at first glance, building a PC from scratch can be intimidating if you don't follow the latest trends through sites like Tom's Hardware.

That trend is changing though. Gamers are more aware than ever, and Valve recognizes that. PC Gaming developers NEED standards (like "The Steam Box") to balance out the console's controlled environment. That and "The Big Picture" (merging PC Gaming and Console Gaming into one) is going to be the next best thing.

I urge anyone who is still debating the graphical quality/performance of a PC vs Console to go on Youtube and look up "Robbaz" - he makes EXCELLENT PC vs Xbox 360 vs PS3 comparison videos of popular games like Call of Duty and Mass Effect.
 


I keep hearing people say this, but I've never seen proof. The last article I read about the subject was a while back, and as I remember it, Wii has always been sold at a profit, 360 was sold basically break even and is now profitable, and the PS3 is the only one sold at a loss, until they ditched the fat version for the slim, and the slim is sold at a profit now.

I'd love to see some evidence of whether I am wrong about this, though. It's just I see people say it but never read about it in a published article, and I know how people like to regurgitate arguments they've heard before (just look at piracy topics).

I'd also just like to throw it out there that people can and do hook their PCs up the their TVs, the biggest issue being that it's hard/awkward to use a mouse and keyboard sitting on a couch. The second reason for us elitists is that the image quality is *** on a big HDTV compared to a monitor, as monitors generally use much better quality panels and they have a significantly higher pixel-per-inch count.

The only source I can find about games at 60 fps is this one:
http://www.giantbomb.com/60-fps-on-consoles/92-3223/games/?
However, it does not provide any proof. Regardless, that's only 171 games ever made at 60fps.

There is a great list of games though with their resolution and type of AA used (if any). Definitely worth looking at, anyway:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241

BF3 on consoles, for example runs at 1280x704 (MLAA) and probably the equivalent to Low settings. This is not really even comparable to a PC at 1920x1080 Ultra. It's like a shoe beside a Ferrari lol.

Anyway, not all of this is directed at Jamesisaking, just making observations.
 
I just read, somewhere that AMD had a clean sweep of one of the consoles. PS4, maybe? Both CPU and GPU.

I feel dumber for having read this thread. Started off good, and went downhill quickly
 
i dont buy it. I played Skyrim on the PS3 and 360.... loading times were 10x longer, graphics details noticebly lower... Framerates hovered between 5fps and maybe 30 or so....

On my laptop (not even my new beast Desktop) w/ a 1st gen 17 and 5870m GFX card I could run Skyrim on high at over 30FPS at all times and maybe 3 second loading times tops, for smaller enviroments like 1 second.


Yes consoles blow out PCs with the same specs because of all of the aforementioned reasons. But within by the time 720 launches the hardware in it will be lower tiered consumer level. Within a year the hardware in PC terms will obsolete.
 
you pc fan boys are worse than any console fanboy i have ever come across..
Click to expand...

You're talking about yourself right? You're the first person I have ever came across that went onto a PC Dominated arena to argue how great the XBOX is... :pfff: Something you'd see on the Call Of Duty forums and/or Facebook and not on Tom's Hardware.

Besides the PS3 is better; I can play games, watch Youtube and play Blu-ray movies! Oh, and free online multi-player.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom