When will I *need* a Directx 9 card?

[Lenny]

That, in turn, is a problem 'cause it makes
it easy to port games from the xbox to PC, but not the other way
around - which means that nearly all new PC games have limitations
imposed by the weak hardware of the xbox (including, but not limited
to, reduced texture size, low polygon count, frequent loading pauses,
and poor controls).

That is patently untrue. For starters, most PC games never see XB ports.
Second, it is relatively trivial to shrink DOWN textures or poly counts for
an XB port (which is what has happened in a number of ports, along with
levels being chopped up in smaller chunks when they weren't in the PC
version etc). As for controls, that's even worse BS than the rest.

Xbox is the new lowest common denominator in pc gaming.

*Cough* Wrong. End of story.

 

[Mean_Chlorine]

That is patently untrue. For starters, most PC games never see XB ports.

True, because it is a biyatch to port in that direction. Like I said.

Second, it is relatively trivial to shrink DOWN textures or poly counts for
an XB port (which is what has happened in a number of ports, along with
levels being chopped up in smaller chunks when they weren't in the PC
version etc). As for controls, that's even worse BS than the rest.

Going from an xbox to a PC is fairly straight-forward as the xbox is
already a PC running a Win2000 core. Going from PC to xbox means
re-writing the AI, physics, and memory handling of the game, and
re-doing the artwork, so it runs & looks good at 640x480 at 30 fps in
64MB of RAM on a 733MHz celeron processor - basically the baseline PC
of 1999.

It is the whole difference between taking something which just fits in
a small box and placing it in a larger box, or taking something which
just fits in a large box, and placing it in a smaller box. Guess which
one is most difficult and causes the most problems?

*Cough* Wrong. End of story.

How can I argue with that?
Well, I guess I could point to KOTOR and Halo.

 

[Mean_Chlorine]

UMA on PCs have all been implementations with much less bandwidth than XB,
and with much MUCH slower graphics chips driven at resolutions (sometimes
far) higher than XB games runs at.

Don't blame the technique when it's the particular implementation that is
sucky.

The reason UMA works on the xbox isn't that it's particularly well
implemented, it's the fact that the demands placed on bandwidth are so
low. You have a very slow CPU, meaning less contention on the bus, and
even though the graphics card is certainly taking a significant hit
due to the UMA, it is still able to crank out 30 fps @ 640x480 (which
simply wouldn't be acceptable in a PC game).

It's the same reason the original Amigas could get away with using UMA
(although the shared address range was called 'slow mem' and you tried
your best not to place code in it), and the same reason later Amigas
couldn't.

It is also worth pointing out that when supplied with integrated
graphics, the nforce1 chipset for PC also used a unified memory
architecture in addition to having two pooled 64bit buses (4.2GB/s
theoretical bandwidth), ie pretty much the same setup as in xbox. And,
yes, the nforce integrated graphics suck.

Again, the technology of the xbox is in no way groundbreaking. It's
simply an adaptation of preexisting PC technology, using a cheap but
standard Celeron CPU, standard memory, and an nforce chipset with
integrated graphics, sound and networking (somewhat modified - perhaps
one can call it nforce1.5).

 

[JAD]

I would agree that the number one difference here, is what is expected of the output of the XB than that of a PC and what kind of
relief does that give the system in regards to load.

 

[apahartaaraM]

I couldn't agree with you more.

I generally wait, and wait, and wait until I can pick one up at the
Salvation Army for $2.99. Next to the Radeon XT will be probably sit a
soda-coated keyboard for $50. They have rather rigorous pricing
system, and I thank them for it.

 

[Joe62]

Of course you don't absolutely need one. Games will run just fine on your
current card, but you won't be able to see some of the fancy eye candy.
Most of that stuff is way overhyped anyway, IMHO.

Prince of Persia is one of the first games that doesn't run on older
card (like the GF2).

 

[Derek Baker]

Prince of Persia is one of the first games that doesn't run on older
card (like the GF2).

Deus Ex: Invisible War also.

But both will run on the OP's GF4Ti..

 

[Darthy]

No it doesn't. Although it's almost damning with faint praise, it *is*
still the best of the consoles.

The only thing I've got against XBox is precisely that it is a
stripped-down cheapo PC. That, in turn, is a problem 'cause it makes
it easy to port games from the xbox to PC, but not the other way
around - which means that nearly all new PC games have limitations
imposed by the weak hardware of the xbox (including, but not limited
to, reduced texture size, low polygon count, frequent loading pauses,
and poor controls).

Xbox is the new lowest common denominator in pc gaming. And THAT
sucks. Ass.

Agreed... this is Microsoft's way of controlling computing...

Windows is becoming more and more nothing more than a "gaming"
platform while business is moving towards Linux.

I think if/when Linux floods the business Desktop market (Linux is
making some big cracks into M$ markets... Ford Motor company has
switched - more will follow) the value and need for having Windows
will go down more so...

Hey, imagine this.... if XBOX kills Windows PC Gaming (which is WHAT
they are doing) And Linux has Desktop Productivity... WTF do you need
Windows for? Funny if it backfires.

Blame M$ for killing HQ games for PC... Crimson SKies 2 is now a piss
ass Low rez Game,... with Console Quality features. Never to be
played on a screen in 1280x1024 or higher...

Also DirectX has locked in many games into that API... Those that use
OpenGL are far easier to port to Linux.

 

[Mark]

Hey, imagine this.... if XBOX kills Windows PC Gaming (which is WHAT
they are doing) And Linux has Desktop Productivity... WTF do you need
Windows for? Funny if it backfires.

This is what has puzzled me: Microsoft reportedly make almost all
their money from Windows and Office, yet they've set up the Xbox to
try to compete against Windows gaming, deliberately pulling PC games
like Halo onto the Xbox instead. Since gaming is about the only reason
why the average home user ever needs a new PC (and, therefore a new
copy of Windows and quite likely a new copy of Office), if the Xbox
'wins', then Microsoft will lose a ton of money.

Mark

 

[Courageous]

I think if/when Linux floods the business Desktop market (Linux is
making some big cracks into M$ markets... Ford Motor company has
switched - more will follow) the value and need for having Windows
will go down more so...

Love Windows, Love Linux, or whatever, this will be a blessing.
Why? Because then interchangeable formats will be a product feature
on all the various platforms.

C//

 

[J.Clarke]

Good morning Darthy;



It depends on what your friend does with his computer and what he
uses
for software. I have Autosketch v6. On my new computer at high
resolution(1280x960), a drawing is displayed virtually all at once.
On my older computer, it will literally draw one line at a time. The
older machine is a 350Mhz K6-2 with a 32Mb video AGP card. It runs
Word Perfect Office just fine.

There's also computational fluid dynamics, finite element stress
analysis, dynamic modelling, any kind of iterative algorithm that goes
for more than a few steps, multibody orbit problems, signal processing,
data reductions of various kinds, cryptanalysis, compiles, the list goes
on and on. Now, admittedly few people do these things, but that doesn't
mean that the ones who do do not need speed. There is a tendency these
days to forget that a computer _computes_.

 

[Darthy]

This is what has puzzled me: Microsoft reportedly make almost all
their money from Windows and Office, yet they've set up the Xbox to
try to compete against Windows gaming, deliberately pulling PC games
like Halo onto the Xbox instead. Since gaming is about the only reason
why the average home user ever needs a new PC (and, therefore a new
copy of Windows and quite likely a new copy of Office), if the Xbox
'wins', then Microsoft will lose a ton of money.

Thats what I was thinking when I read this Thread...

Any piss ass 500Mhz computer can run MS Office, read email and display
pictures just fine.... Speed is only for:

1 - 3D Games (most PCs are not good for gaming)
2 - 3D Applications (rendering) (even less people than gamers)
3 - 2D rendering (Photoshop)
4 - Media Encoding (Video, Audio) (Still less than gamers)

Other than that... what is speed needed for?

I have a friend, he says his system is JUST fine... a 300Mhz Celeron
on Windows98se / 256mb RAM.

 

[Darthy]

This is what has puzzled me: Microsoft reportedly make almost all
their money from Windows and Office, yet they've set up the Xbox to
try to compete against Windows gaming, deliberately pulling PC games
like Halo onto the Xbox instead. Since gaming is about the only reason
why the average home user ever needs a new PC (and, therefore a new
copy of Windows and quite likely a new copy of Office), if the Xbox
'wins', then Microsoft will lose a ton of money.

OOPS posted too quick...

Anyways - ITS in Black and White - Microsoft ONLY makes money off of
Windows so it can RUN M$-OFFICE.

XBox games tend to be shit compared to the PS2 (Yes, the XBOX is more
advanced) in terms of game play and reliability. While Xbox is
barely #2 - combined with the Game cube - there are still about twice
as many PS2 systems out there.

It is rumored that M$ and Nintendo may combine forces against SONY.
ATI & IBM for the technolgy, M$ for the "name", core OS and muscle,
Nintendo for the software. Both Nintendo & XBOX are using ATi for 3D
graphics and IBM for the CPU... hmmmmmmmmm...

I wanna see the XBOX go down in flames...

 

[Nick]

This is what has puzzled me: Microsoft reportedly make almost all
their money from Windows and Office, yet they've set up the Xbox to
try to compete against Windows gaming, deliberately pulling PC games
like Halo onto the Xbox instead. Since gaming is about the only reason
why the average home user ever needs a new PC (and, therefore a new
copy of Windows and quite likely a new copy of Office), if the Xbox
'wins', then Microsoft will lose a ton of money.

Mark

Nothing puzzling about this.

The X-Box is simply the opening volley in a much larger battle to move
M$ from your PC/Bedroom into the Living/Dining room.

The X-Box is stage 1
The HomeStation(X-Box successor) is Stage 2

The idea is to have an M$ 'Box' in every home takinga dominant role in
entertainment(Gaming/TV/Video/Films on demand over Broadband etc)

This was undertaken when M$ was going to be crippled by the DOJ and so
they began to look for alternative revenue streams.

 

[Nick]

I wanna see the XBOX go down in flames...

Then Sony would have the market to themselves and all the usual
behavior of monopolists would ensue.

Higher prices/less choice etc.

If next gen consoles had not been released we would all still be
playing on the PSX.

There would have been no market incentive to change.

Anyone remember the PS2(Tekken) tech demos released just as the DC was
about to debut?

 

[Lenny]

Then Sony would have the market to themselves and all the usual
behavior of monopolists would ensue.

You've obviously forgotten that the market would merely return to the way it
looked BEFORE M$ entered it! Ie, divided up (fairly unevenly) between Sony
and Nintendo.

There wouldn't be any kind of monopoly.

 

[John Fraser]

Good morning Darthy;

Thats what I was thinking when I read this Thread...

Any piss ass 500Mhz computer can run MS Office, read email and display
pictures just fine.... Speed is only for:

1 - 3D Games (most PCs are not good for gaming)
2 - 3D Applications (rendering) (even less people than gamers)
3 - 2D rendering (Photoshop)
4 - Media Encoding (Video, Audio) (Still less than gamers)

Other than that... what is speed needed for?

I have a friend, he says his system is JUST fine... a 300Mhz Celeron
on Windows98se / 256mb RAM.

It depends on what your friend does with his computer and what he uses
for software. I have Autosketch v6. On my new computer at high resolution
(1280x960), a drawing is displayed virtually all at once. On my older
computer, it will literally draw one line at a time. The older machine is a
350Mhz K6-2 with a 32Mb video AGP card. It runs Word Perfect Office just
fine.

The IBM PC as originally conceived wasn't intended for games. It's
software was originally loaded by cassette, 8" disk drive, then later hard
drive. In the amount of time required to load a good typing program from
tape, my new computer will load Win XP, a dozen utilities and Outlook
Express. Is it any faster? Well, it can accommodate a lot more information
at a time.

--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

I had a chuckle about real men using real computers. Yeah, they have
come a long way from the abacus to Big Blue. I recall using a mainframe
nearly 20 years ago. It had a 1 Kw power supply, 1 Mb of memory, tape
drives utilizing 2300' (10") reels, card reader, a 20 Mb disk drive (four
26" platters), managed eight 48K programmable white page terminals, plus an
operator console.
To start it, a 3" card deck was loaded into the reader, 2 system tapes &
3 scratch tapes were readied. A reset was pressing the "Halt, Clear
Terminal, Start Load" buttons on the main panel. A restart meant adding the
latest Journal & History tapes.
That equipment was 1970's technology. Today, you could place a server,
a CD drive, and several hard drives into the space required for a single
tape drive.

Cheers,
John

 

[Nick]

You've obviously forgotten that the market would merely return to the way it
looked BEFORE M$ entered it! Ie, divided up (fairly unevenly) between Sony
and Nintendo.

As I said a monopoly.

Microsoft has a monopoly even though technically it has
alternatives(LINUX/APPLE etc)

The difference as you admit is fairly unevenly to the point that a lot
of X-Box gamers would probably have bought the PS2 for more mature
gaming than the Gamecube and its children-centric games..

This would have made the gap even more pronounced.

There is no such thing as a complete monopoly(Even in communist
countries) so when the word is used it means a near monopoly where
the gap is so vast between 1st and 2nd that the leader can pretty much
do what they like.

I dont believe the market would have returned to just a 2-horse race.
Even with the DC bowing out the games market can sustain a 3rd player.

So someone would have stepped into the ring.

 

[John Fraser]

Good afternoon John;

There's also computational fluid dynamics, finite element stress
analysis, dynamic modelling, any kind of iterative algorithm that goes
for more than a few steps, multibody orbit problems, signal processing,
data reductions of various kinds, cryptanalysis, compiles, the list goes
on and on. Now, admittedly few people do these things, but that doesn't
mean that the ones who do do not need speed. There is a tendency these
days to forget that a computer _computes_.

--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

I quite agree that anything which requires a considerable amount of
calculation in a short period of time requires expedience. Big Blue isn't
simply an icon. I wasn't demeaning faster machines. I do appreciate that a
weatherman doesn't want to wait four hours for a calculation to run for the
weather on the six o'clock news. My point is as you and Darth stated, most
don't need hot rods to do a 1/4 mile in 5 seconds, just a family car which
is capable of exceeding the speed limit to some degree to show a reserve of
power.

In my case, it wasn't speed that necessitated a newer computer, but
coping with more demanding software that did the same job as its
predecessor. My first computer in 1989 had an 8 Mhz 80286 CPU (NexT), 640K
of RAM, 20M hard drive, Hercules video card running MS-DOS 4.01. It was
obsolete when I bought it (80386 was new). Progress being a wonderful
thing, it wasn't long before my computer was the slowest machine on the
block and the least capable. It did everything I wanted it to do and it
served its purpose well. It was as much a learning platform as a tool.
But, it had its limits and moved at a crawl as compared to a 486 which made
its debut about the time it died.

Thanks for mentioning some stuff I overlooked.

Cheers,
John

 

[Courageous]

1 - 3D Games (most PCs are not good for gaming)
2 - 3D Applications (rendering) (even less people than gamers)
3 - 2D rendering (Photoshop)
4 - Media Encoding (Video, Audio) (Still less than gamers)

Production use:
---------------
Engineering.
Mathematics.
Operations Research.
Computational Chemistry.
Various kinds of software development.
Other disciplines involving frequent compute cycles...

C//