| tripenfall said: I've been looking back at the specs of legacy consoles of late just out of interest and found it difficult to find accurate information on the OG XBOX. While it's true that the numbers vary depending on your sources it seems widely agreed upon that when it comes to the performance of consoles in the sixth generation the floating point performance of the Dreamcast was 1.4 GFLOPS, the PS2 was 6.2 GFLOPS and the GameCube was 9.4 GFLOPS. As for the XBOX, well the wiki tech specs state the NVidia GPU has a floating point performance of 7.3 GFLOPS. Now I know that when it comes to overall graphical fidelity and performance there is way more that you need to take into account than just FLOPS such number of shaders, memory bandwidth, amount of RAM etc but I find it hard to believe that the XBOX comes in less than the GameCube in this area. I always thought the XBOX was a beast compared to the competition. Another article I found puts the XBOX at 20 GFLOPS but this seems too high and potentially inaccurate. https://www.gamespot.com/articles/console-specs-compared-xbox-one-x-ps4-pro-switch-a/1100-6443665/ I was wondering if anyone here on VG Chartz with better technical knowledge then myself can clarify this for me. Was the XBOX the graphical powerhouse I thought it was or is the GameCube actually more powerful? |
The Original Xbox is a 5.8Gflop GPU machine.
But like you said, there is far more to a GPU's capability than mere Flops.
The Original Xbox simply uses a far more efficient GPU architecture than the other consoles of that generation, so it was able to punch well above it's implied weight. (I.E. Better culling, compression, programmable shaders and so on.)
The Gamecube however was a texturing monster, it's TEV was also pretty capable.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
