Graphics: Gamecube vs. Xbox vs. PS2 vs. Dreamcast

[zarx]

lilbroex said:

THe 200 mhz PowerPC processor got 3 times the perfrmance on a full scale Pentium 3 clocked at 300 mhz overall. The processor in the Xbox isn't even s full scale pentium 3.

 

http://macspeedzone.com/archive/4.0/g4vspent3signal.html

lilbroex said:

The one in the GC is close to 3 times as powerful so I would set the one in the Wii at a little over 4.

Remember that the on top of the 3 processes per cycle, their prcoessor were also 64 bit while the Xbox1 is 32 bit. That allows it to read and right twice as much data per cycle alone. Then add in the extra features like the velocity engine and other special instruction sets. Then add in the larger processor cache.

I would place the Wii's CPU at being at least 4 times as strong as the one in the Xbox1.

The Wii also dumped the auxillary DRAM and moved to faster 64 MB GDDR3 which is also what the 360 uses(albeit, its a lot faster in the 360) and it a faster variant of the 1T-SRAM from the GC.

Its sad that 99% of the Wii's libraby doesn't even look as good the games on the GC. The Wii was capable of so much more than what was done with it.

lilbroex said:

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 link you posted was compairing a Freescale PowerPC G4 @ 500MHz with a PIII at 600MHz. In a benchmark done by Apple to show off the AltiVec VPU mind you. 

The AltiVec is what was later added to the Power 5 and used up to the Power 7 CPUs from IBM. It is capable of 4-way 32-Bit floating point calculations per cycle, on top of that the G4 has the same 64-bit FPU that can do 2 32-Bit FP instructions on it's own as the Gekko does, meaning it can perform 6 floating point ops per cycle. The G4 also has 1MB of L2 Cache vs the Gekko's 256KB. The G4 makes the Gekko look like a joke they are not in the same league, it's easilly 3x as powerful.

Also the Xbox CPU had SSE so could proccess 4 32-Bit (it couldn't do 64-Bit numbers like the Gekko could tho) floating point numbers per cycle (half that of a full PIII) via a single instruction. The Gekko could do ether 2 32-Bit numbers or 1 64-Bit number so is actually less capable on paper, but had some specialist instructions that helped a lot in real world performance, especially helping boost poly counts vs the Xbox. The Gekko also uses a SIMD FPU so it couldn't proccess more than one instruction per cycle. The weakness of the Xbox is it's low FSB clock, and having half the cache vs the Gekko. 

Both the Xbox CPU and the Gekko are 32-Bit CPUs FYI, the only 64-Bit component is the FPU, the main interger unit is 32-Bit just like the Xbox. The PS2 was the only system to use a true 64-Bit CPU last gen, it could also proccess 3 instructions per cycle with it's 2 seperate VPUs and per cycle crushes both competitors on paper but it was clocked at just 299Mhz (147.456 MHz for the VPUs), and had a pethetic amount of cache meaning a lot of it's theoretical power was wasted.