You did ask for one developer earlier

To be fair, they did try to port it to Xbox but couldn't do it to a satisfactory degree where they'd put so much time and effort into optimising the Gamecube code.

They're the only developer who ever grasped the Gamecube's potential fully, so they're the only ones really qualified to talk about it's true power.

they will not listen

those screens show very littlee and they are both orange :)) nothing to see really

oh yea

The Xbox was also hurt by the fact that MS at the time didn't really understand how console development worked and refused to give devs direct access to the hardware until after launch. Most games on Xbox were just using PC engines optomised just enough to get everything to run smoothly and called it a day, or up ports as most games led on PS2. There are only a handful of games that pushed what the system could really do, like Team Ninja who did more at 60fps than most Xbox games did at 30

There were quite a few games that I felt made decent enough use of the hardware. I can't imagine many PC engines required much in the way of optimisation considering the hardware was essentially made up of off the shelf PC components. Personally I thought Halo 2 and Far Cry pushed the system byintroducing normal mapping and then there were games like Riddick and Splinter Cell which had excellent lighting. Didn't it also have a lot of Unreal Engine 2 games?

well that is what most developers seemed to think as well.

As for Normal Mapping the Xbox GPU had mormal map support built in, it was a trivial effect to implement on Xbox. Which is why a lot of games that used it looked like crap on gamecube as devs instead of just implementing Bump mapping, EMBM or using a hack to implement it using TEVs/EMBM hardware. 

I don't understand why this argument is still going on, the Xbox's GPU has better features if taken advantage of with better storage capacity, and is basically shit in other areas compared to GC is really about it. It's always been that the fix functions would run like a monster on the TEV and you can customize more on the Xbox. They are about the same overall, if the GC had Xbox's GPU and full size DVD support though, it would have been pretty much GG Xbox.

What areas does the Gamecube beat the Xbox?

This article covers some of it:

http://www.purevideogames.net/blog/?p=479

A few quotes for people that don't want to click:

1. Xbox’s system bandwidth isn’t a true 6.4GB/sec, considering any info from the CPU to the GPU and vice-versa is bottlenecked at 1.02GB/sec; one-third of GCN’s overall system bandwidth in realtime.

2. Xbox claims to have more effects than GameCube, and better texturing ability in its GPU, when the XGPU can only do 4 texture layers per pass, and only 4 infinite hardware lights per pass (8 local lights can be done, also). GCN, on the other hand, boasts 8 texture layers per pass, and 8 infinite hardware lights and local lights per pass, all realtime.

3. Tecmo said “was impossible on any system other than Xbox” due to the amount of polygons onscreen, is a 9-10mps game, tops. The character models (which were also claimed to be an impossibility elsewhere) consisted of 9,000 polygons each- the same amount of polygons in characters in StarFox Adventures, Eternal Darkness, and even in Luigi’s Mansion (end boss). Resident Evil 0, however, boasts the highest polygonal “low-end” model to-date- a whopping 25,000 poly character. Now why is this possible (even against prerendered backgrounds) on a “less techincal” console? Why isn’t Xbox smothering GCN to death with games that are impossible to be done on any other console?

4. On CPU performance: GameCube, having this architecture, has a significantly shorter data pipeline than Xbox’s PIII setup (4-7 stages versus up to 14), meaning it can process information more than twice as fast per clock cycle. In fact, this GCN CPU (a PowerPC 750e IBM chip) is often compared to be as fast as a 700mhz machine at 400mhz. So GCN could be 849mhz compared to Xbox’s 733mhz machine performancewise.

5. Rare was contacted, and confirmed that StarFox Adventures does indeed display massive amounts of bumpmaps, and realtime reflection/refraction effects by directly manipulating GCN hardware. When asked about one of the largest areas in the game (Krazoa Palace) regarding fillrate and polygonal display, Rare actually stated this was one of the easier levels to get running on the GCN.

6. Some Xbox fanboys I’ve run across have even been sore enough to say Xbox has faster loadtimes. I then point to Luigi’s Mansion and Metroid Prime, which are impossible on Xbox because they HAVE NO LOADTIMES (the game is constantly streamed from the GameCube disc in burst packets).

7. And summarises with: Either way, neither console can be proven more powerful than the other unless benchmarked properly, since the machines are so totally different from each other.

Basically they're just different.