tonymarraffa said: Looking at pure system specs it's Xbox, Gamecube, Ps2,Dreamcast. |
No, the GC had higher specs. Most don't know how to read the specs.
The Xbox has a 32-bit 733 MHz Pentium 3 based celeron which does 1 process per cycle like all Intel processors.
The GC has a 64-bit 486 Mhz PowerPC processor that does "3" processes per cycle. It also has other enhancement features that the Xbox processor does not possess.
The processor in the GC is over twice as strong as the one in the Xbox.
The Xbox uses a 233 MHz GPU with a shader modal 1.1 variant
The GC uses a 162 MHz GPU with an 8 stage TEV
TEV's can produce much higher level effects at a fraction of the resource cost compared to a standardized Shader Modal. The thing is that TEV's have to be manually programmed with custom made shaders. This is complex, time consuming and expensive to do. That is why most devs didn't use it.
The Wii also posess an 8 stage tev with twice the bandwith. The Wii suffered from the same problem with devs. Most didn't know how to program it and didn't want to spend the money figure it out.
The Xbox had 64 MB DDR SDRAM at 200 MHz
The GC has 24 MB MoSys 1T-SRAM at 324 MHz, 64-bit bus, 2.7 GB/s bandwidth| A 3 MB 1T-SRAM cache| 16 MB DRAM for framebuffer and audio
The GC could load data at a speed that was around 3 time what Xbox could. It simply couldn't load as much which is where the first storage limiation comes in.