6th December 2005, 11:58 AM
You know, the article says 'it's like a souped up xbox' and 'the "two to three times better than GC" thing looks accurate'... yet the xbox is barely more powerful than GC, as Lazy said, so something isn't right there... and I'd put my bets on "just a souped up xbox". :)
I thought GC had 40MB, making their math kind of odd...
As for these reports, it's possible. I mean, it's quite possible that it's got just 128MB of RAM, and is only a couple times more powerful than an Xbox and is well behind PS3 and X360... but Nintendo has said that on a normal TV you won't be able to tell much difference. And you know what? Going by X360 screenshots, that shouldn't be hard... X360 doesn't really look much better than current-gen systems until you up the resolution, it seems. Of course, it does look better, and Revolution is going to be quite a bit more powerful than this generation's systems, but still... I wonder if, by focusing on standard definition, they can make graphics that look better on a normal TV than X360 graphics do, despite the greater power of the X360...
Quote:If their sources can be trusted the reason it doesn't do 720p is because it can't. The Revolution won't have more than 128mb of RAM.
I thought GC had 40MB, making their math kind of odd...
As for these reports, it's possible. I mean, it's quite possible that it's got just 128MB of RAM, and is only a couple times more powerful than an Xbox and is well behind PS3 and X360... but Nintendo has said that on a normal TV you won't be able to tell much difference. And you know what? Going by X360 screenshots, that shouldn't be hard... X360 doesn't really look much better than current-gen systems until you up the resolution, it seems. Of course, it does look better, and Revolution is going to be quite a bit more powerful than this generation's systems, but still... I wonder if, by focusing on standard definition, they can make graphics that look better on a normal TV than X360 graphics do, despite the greater power of the X360...