Question on GameCube Specs.

Can someone tell me, what\'s the good and the bad things about these specs. Is it faster than PS2?  

System Specifications
Specs come from Nintendo.com

Official Name NINTENDO GAMECUBE
MPU("Microprocessor Unit")* IBM Power PC "Gekko"
Manufacturing Process 0.18 Microns Copper Wire Technology
Clock Frequency 405 MHz
CPU Capacity 925 Dmips (Dhrystone 2.1)
Internal Data Precision 32bit Integer & 64bit Floating-point
External Bus Bandwidth 1.6GB/second(Peak)
External Bus Bandwidth 1.6GB/second(Peak) (32bit address, 64bit data bus 202.5MHz)
Internal Cache L1: Instruction 32KB, Data 32KB (8 way) L2: 256KB (2 way)
Internal Cache L1: Instruction 32KB, Data 32KB (8 way) L2: 256KB (2 way)
System LSI "Flipper"
Manufacturing Process 0.18 microns NEC Embedded DRAM Process
Clock Frequency 202.5MHz
Embedded Frame Buffer Approx. 2MB
Embedded Frame Buffer Approx. 2MB Sustainable Latency : 5ns (1T-SRAM)
Embedded Texture Cache Approx. 1MB Sustainable Latency : 5ns (1T-SRAM)
Texture Read Bandwidth 12.8GB/second (Peak)
Main Memory Bandwidth 3.2GB/second (Peak)
Color, Z Buffer Each is 24bits
Image Processing Function Subpixel Anti-aliasing, Multi-texture Mapping/Bump/Environment, MIPMAP, Real-time Texture Decompression, Real-time Decompression
Other Real-time Decompression of Display List, HW Motion Compensation Capability

*The Gekko MPU integrates the power PC CPU into a custom, game-centric chip.

(The following sound related functions are all incorporated into the System LSI) Sound Processor Special 16bit DSP
Instruction Memory 8KB RAM + 8KB ROM
Instruction Memory 8KB RAM + 8KB ROM
Data Memory 8KB RAM + 4KB ROM
Clock Frequency 101.25 MHz
Maximum Number of Simultaneously Produced Sounds ADPCM: 64ch
Sampling Frequency 48KHz
System Floating-point Arithmetic Capability 13.0GFLOPS (Peak) (MPU, Geometry Engine, HW Lighting Total)
Actual Display Capability 6 million to 12 million polygons/second (Display capability assuming actual game with complexity model, texture, etc.)
Actual Display Capability 25 million polygons/second (Display capability assuming 1 vertex color + 1 light + 1 texture.)
Actual Display Capability 33 million polygons/second (Display capability assuming no vertex color +1 texture)
Actual Display Capability 40 million polygons/second (Display capability assuming 1 vertex color + no texture {gouraud shading}.)
System Main Memory 24MB Sustainable Latency : 10ns or lower (1T-SRAM)
A-Memory 16MB (100MHz DRAM)
Disc Drive Data Transfer Speed 16 Mpbs to 25 Mbps
Media 8cm NINTENDO GAMECUBE Disc based on Matsu****a\'s Optical Disc Technology
Media 8cm NINTENDO GAMECUBE Optical Disc Approx. 1.5GB Capacity
Input/Output Controller Port x4
Digicard Slot x2
Analog AV Output x1
Digital AV Output x1
High-Speed Serial Port x2
High-speed Parallel Port x1
Power Supply AC Adapter DC12V x 3.5A
Main Unit Dimensions 150mm(W) x 110mm(H) x 161mm(D)

The IBM gekko 405 mhz chip is the G3 apple chip, which is equivalent to about 800-900 mhz pentium chip.
So the Emotion Engine is still faster, but when it comes to textures the GC is going to rock.

i would say the GC and PS2 are graphically the same...
its all about the games...
the EE is about 4 times faster than x box\'s cpu.. 766 pentium 3

[nO-One]

I don\'t think that this is a G series chip.
Putting a updated G3 would be stupid because they are getting too old.And the console needs to be cutting edge.

It\'s not a G4 since Motorola own the rights to AltiVec which is an essencial part of the G4 (basically what makes it the G4)

It\'s most likely another PowerPC variant,since both IBM and Motorola have rights to that architechture.

Yeah those are definitely faster because the PIII calculates the graphics for the Xbox!

Originally posted by Faithdies
The IBM gekko 405 mhz chip is the G3 apple chip, which is equivalent to about 800-900 mhz pentium chip.

Nope. Probably more on par with a PIII-600MHz at best!

Originally posted by Falcon4
the EE is about 4 times faster than x box\'s cpu.. 766 pentium 3

No, it\'s twice as fast as a PIII-733Mhz (3 times as fast as a PIII-500Mhz).

However, the EE is also responsible for all the graphics calculations on the PS2, whereas the GPU\'s in the GC and XBox handle this task, leaving their main processors free to handle gamecode, physics, AI etc!

E3 is just a week away, and I have to say that both the GC and XBox will demonstrate graphics way beyond the PS2. The PS2 will have it\'s share of awesome games too and I\'m especially interested in whatever Jason Rubin has to offer (after all the talk ).

Based on specInt \'95 and specFP \'95 obtained both independently and through IBM\'s site, the Gekko is well below Xbox\'s 733Mhz celeron/PIII variant in performance.

Motorola G3 400Mhz : 18.0/12.7 specint/specfp
Intel Celeron 400Mhz : 15.1/10.9
Intel PIII 450Mhz : 18.6/13.6
Intel PII 600Mhz : 24.0/15.9
IBM 750cx 450Mhz w/ 256KB internal cache : 17.4/11.7
IBM 750 450Mhz w/ 512KB external cache : 19.2/13.1

From the die size, Dhrystone MIPS figure, and cache configuration Gekko seems to be a customized IBM 750cx PowerPC chip. That would make is roughly on par with a PIII 450Mhz or a Celeron 500Mhz.

Sources:

http://www.chips.ibm.com/products/powerpc/perform.html

http://www.macspeedzone.com/4.0/WinvsMacSPECint.html

Both of my sources may or may not be biased but even if they were, it\'s in their best interest to show the highest G3 performance figures. So for my particular argument, they will do just fine.

Originally posted by Dr Yassam




E3 is just a week away, and I have to say that both the GC and XBox will demonstrate graphics way beyond the PS2.

ummmm....   how would you define way?

as in "the Doc\'s ass is way out on a limb here"?

I can wait until after E3 for a real answer. Hope it doesn\'t involve having to have bumpy textures and realtime lighting effects pointed out to me so\'s I kin understand

Originally posted by Heretic
ummmm....   how would you define way?

I think Nintendo and Microsoft are going to try real hard to make sure their announced games look a lot better than Sony\'s launched and announced games. Which "shouldn\'t" be that hard.(I say that because the GC and Xbox are supposed to be somewhat more powerful than the PS2 and they are supposed to be easier to develop for.)