1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

ATI's GPU for Xenon-Xbox2

Discussion in 'ATI' started by Xenon, Oct 19, 2004.

  1. Xenon

    Xenon Guest

    an unofficial description of ATI's graphics architecture for Xenon aka Xbox2

    quote:

    "The Xenon GPU is a custom 500+ MHz graphics processor from ATI. The shader
    core has 48 Arithmetic Logic Units (ALUs) that can execute 64 simultaneous
    threads on groups of 64 vertices or pixels. ALUs are automatically and
    dynamically assigned to either pixel or vertex processing depending on load.
    The ALUs can each perform one vector and one scalar operation per clock
    cycle, for a total of 96 shader operations per clock cycle. Texture loads
    can be done in parallel to ALU operations. At peak performance, the GPU can
    issue 48 billion shader operations per second.

    The GPU has a peak pixel fill rate of 4+ gigapixels/sec (16 gigasamples/sec
    with 4× antialiasing). The peak vertex rate is 500+ million vertices/sec.
    The peak triangle rate is 500+ million triangles/sec. The interesting point
    about all of these values is that they're not just theoretical-they are
    attainable with nontrivial shaders.

    Xenon is designed for high-definition output. Included directly on the GPU
    die is 10+ MB of fast embedded dynamic RAM (EDRAM). A 720p frame buffer fits
    very nicely here. Larger frame buffers are also possible because of
    hardware-accelerated partitioning and predicated rendering that has little
    cost other than additional vertex processing. Along with the extremely fast
    EDRAM, the GPU also includes hardware instructions for alpha blending,
    z-test, and antialiasing.

    The Xenon graphics architecture is a unique design that implements a
    superset of Direct3D version 9.0. It includes a number of important
    extensions, including additional compressed texture formats and a flexible
    tessellation engine. Xenon not only supports high-level shading language
    (HLSL) model 3.0 for vertex and pixel shaders but also includes advanced
    shader features well beyond model 3.0. For instance, shaders use 32-bit IEEE
    floating-point math throughout. Vertex shaders can fetch from textures, and
    pixel shaders can fetch from vertex streams. Xenon shaders also have the
    unique ability to directly access main memory, allowing techniques that have
    never before been possible.

    As with Xbox, Xenon will support precompiled push buffers ("command buffers"
    in Xenon terminology), but to a much greater extent than the Xbox console
    does. The Xbox team is exposing and documenting the command buffer format so
    that games are able to harness the GPU much more effectively.

    In addition to an extremely powerful GPU, Xenon also includes a very
    high-quality resize filter. This filter allows consumers to choose whatever
    output mode they desire. Xenon automatically scales the game's output buffer
    to the consumer-chosen resolution."

    http://www.xbox-scene.com/xbox1data/sep/EplZAyukEVDWcUicJE.php

    It seems that Xenon-Xbox2's GPU will be a preview of ATI's next-next
    generation R600, rather than R500 which is built on R300 technology like the
    R420 was.

    according to the above, Xenon-Xbox2 will go beyond DX9's Shader Model 3.0
    but not all the way to Direct X Next / DX10's Shader Model 4.0 - one of
    the cool things is, the on-chip graphics memory. this is one area that the
    Playstation2 and Gamecube both have the advantage over the current Xbox.
    uber fast graphics bandwidth. it allows things to be done that would choke
    the Xbox's 6.4 GB/sec bandwidth. I'm glad Microsoft & ATI have seemingly
    decided to correct this major flaw in the current Box.

    not much longer until everything is revealed. between CES and GDC we should
    have all or most of the Xenon-Xbox2 details.
     
    1. Advertising

  2. Xenon

    Xenon Guest

    quick correction-

    It seems that Xenon-Xbox2's GPU will be a preview of ATI's next-next
    generation R600, rather than R520 which is built on R300 technology like the
    R420 was.


    where I wrote R500 in my original post, I meant to write R520.
     
    1. Advertising

  3. sTuFf

    sTuFf Guest

    > where I wrote R500 in my original post, I meant to write R520.

    Oh you naughty boy! You must be punished!
     
  4. Cheddar

    Cheddar Guest

    Xenon wrote:
    > quick correction-
    >
    > It seems that Xenon-Xbox2's GPU will be a preview of ATI's
    > next-next
    > generation R600, rather than R520 which is built on R300
    > technology
    > like the R420 was.
    >
    >
    > where I wrote R500 in my original post, I meant to write
    > R520.


    I wonder how this will compare to the latest PC gaphics
    cards that will be around when the XBox 2 is released.

    Does anyone have a roadmap for the next gen cards due out in
    the next few years for the PC?
     
  5. MS

    MS Guest

    Well, current PC games hardly use all features of GF4 generation
    cards...that's one thing that makes consoles better for gaming - the games
    actually use the features, and are optimized for the hardware.

    On pc, developers don't really optimize their code, so when the code doesn't
    run smoothly, the simply throw more memory, faster cpus and gpus at it until
    it does.

    > I wonder how this will compare to the latest PC gaphics
    > cards that will be around when the XBox 2 is released.
     
  6. Tom Brown

    Tom Brown Guest

    "MS" <> wrote in message
    news:417775e5$0$24215$...
    >
    > On pc, developers don't really optimize their code, so when the code

    doesn't
    > run smoothly, the simply throw more memory, faster cpus and gpus at it

    until
    > it does.
    >



    In case you haven't noticed, the code isn't "optimized" for the consoles
    either. They just use smaller textures and create very small levels.
    Unfortunately, we in the PC world see that all too often in games designed
    for both platforms at the same time... we get levels that are ridiculously
    too small for a PC game (Deus Ex: Invisible War, for example), thanks to the
    limits of the console version...
     
  7. msgs

    msgs Guest

    -Sure, this is the case sometimes, but there isn't as good game as PGR2 for
    PC. Not a single driving game for PC comes even close. And I enjoyed (and
    still do) Halo more on XBox than on a more powerful pc.

    > In case you haven't noticed, the code isn't "optimized" for the consoles
    > either. They just use smaller textures and create very small levels.
    > Unfortunately, we in the PC world see that all too often in games designed
    > for both platforms at the same time... we get levels that are ridiculously
    > too small for a PC game (Deus Ex: Invisible War, for example), thanks to
    > the
    > limits of the console version...
     
  8. hg

    hg Guest

    > > In case you haven't noticed, the code isn't "optimized" for the consoles
    > > either. They just use smaller textures and create very small levels.
    > > Unfortunately, we in the PC world see that all too often in games

    designed
    > > for both platforms at the same time... we get levels that are

    ridiculously
    > > too small for a PC game (Deus Ex: Invisible War, for example), thanks to
    > > the
    > > limits of the console version...

    >
    >

    "msgs" <> wrote in message
    news:tHQdd.254$...
    > -Sure, this is the case sometimes, but there isn't as good game as PGR2

    for
    > PC. Not a single driving game for PC comes even close. And I enjoyed (and
    > still do) Halo more on XBox than on a more powerful pc.
    >


    That's coz the PC version was coded by buffoons. Anyway it's all pointless
    talking about PC hardware Vs every other console's hardware at this moment
    in time, coz the current console's can all be emulated by powerful enough
    2004-5 PCs. All the emu's are coming along nicely and should all be playable
    in 2005. What the real difference between PCs and consoles when it comes
    down to it is the people who make the games. All the 'arcadey ' developers
    are on the consoles hammering away at coding cool stuff, whereas PC gamers
    only get to play a couple of outstanding true arcade games a year. A few
    weeks ago somebody asked a question in one of the videocard groups asking
    why most console games never get ported to the PC. A simple question that
    was surprisingly hard to answer - a lot of good responses were given and I
    don't want to repeat them, but I will point out something that was missed.
    In the late nineties Sega converted a string of arcade games to the PC and
    then they gave up on the PC, round about the time PC 3D accelerators started
    getting some serious power rendering power. I guess just _one_ of the
    reasons why they gave up was that the conversions - if coded properly -
    would actually look better than the arcade games on which they were based.
    Same is still true today, and I'm just thinking about what flawless arcade
    eclipsing conversions of hits like Tekken 4, Virtua Fighter 4 could be
    programmed on PC's equipped with the latest DX9 cards. But it ain't gonna
    happen coz 1) The developers aren't on the PC to begin with 2) The business
    model is not there to convert and enhance arcade games, rather a straight
    port that'll save the bosses cash and 3) The public won't buy these arcade
    games unless they are clearly superior to the console/arcade versions, which
    is kinda a vicious circle back to the beginning IMHO.
     
  9. Wblane

    Wblane Guest

    Huh? Ever play Far Cry or Doom3?

    >Well, current PC games hardly use all features of GF4 generation
    >cards...that's one thing that makes consoles better for gaming - the games
    >actually use the features, and are optimized for the hardware.


    Optimized for what? Compilers these days will auto-magically perform most code
    optimizations of the past. How do you know developers don't optimize their
    code? R u telling me Id doesn't optimize their code? LOL. Idiot.

    >
    >On pc, developers don't really optimize their code, so when the code doesn't
    >run smoothly, the simply throw more memory, faster cpus and gpus at it until
    >it does.



    -Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
     
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Xenon
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    257
    Xenon
    Jan 6, 2005
  2. shootemup
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    216
    shootemup
    Apr 6, 2005
  3. a link to the past
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    239
    Jim Campey
    Apr 28, 2005
  4. R500 Xenon
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    306
  5. a link to the past
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    229
    Jim Campey
    Apr 28, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page