StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://xbox.ign.com/articles/433/433741 ... ?fromint=1

Well, its finally set in stone. I just hope this doesnt prevent them from making a backwords compatible system for Xbox 1 games.

If the programmers used a bunch of nVidia-extensions exclusively, there could be problems. OTOH, if they just coded Direct3D for it there shouldn't be too many issues if XBox2 remains on the x86 ISA and the new OS is backwards compatible.

This is bad news for nVidia - a lot of their profits lately have been been from NV22 parts.

This is bad news for nVidia - a lot of their profits lately have been been from NV22 parts.

In know. It seems that no matter what nvidia does, ATI seems to always gain the upperhand even if its just by a bit. I personally love my GeForce 4 and nvidia's driver support is excellent. But from what I have heard ATI's drivers have also improved quite a bit as well. It'll be interesting to see how things play out.

If anyone here has a newer ATI card what are their drivers like now? I havent had one for 2 years so im not sure how much their quality has improved.

I'm still using Catalyst 3.1, IIRC, and it's good - except that it tends to forget my gamma settings. I probably should grab the latest version.

Icehawk wrote:http://xbox.ign.com/articles/433/433741 ... ?fromint=1

Well, its finally set in stone. I just hope this doesnt prevent them from making a backwords compatible system for Xbox 1 games.

Knowing Microsoft, backwards-compatibility is probably a no-no.

Shinova wrote:

Icehawk wrote:http://xbox.ign.com/articles/433/433741 ... ?fromint=1

Well, its finally set in stone. I just hope this doesnt prevent them from making a backwords compatible system for Xbox 1 games.

Knowing Microsoft, backwards-compatibility is probably a no-no.

Your joking right?

Windows XP is perfectly compadible with well written MS-DOS programs. The biggest problem is most MS-DOS programs, and most win32 programs arent well written at all.

Microsoft made their business on backwards-compatibility with their previous OSs.

The Xbox->Xbox2 isnt going to be like the move from win9x to winNT derivitives, but more like the move from Win2k -> winXP.

This makes me wonder... ATI also did the graphics for the GameCube. I wonder if they'll do graphics for Nintendo's next console, too.

Could be interesting to see ATI compete with itself in console sales.

Also, a lot of DOS programs that were well written relied on mode extenders that were not very well written - hence their inability to run in XP's Virtual Machine.

McNum wrote:This makes me wonder... ATI also did the graphics for the GameCube. I wonder if they'll do graphics for Nintendo's next console, too.

Who knows? Though one should remember that ArtX designed the GPU for the GameCube; ATI bought ArtX out later.

An ATI card on the X-Box 2?

Great, now it'll cost at least $600. That was a jab at the high prices of ATI cards compared to the prices of nVidia chips, if you didn't catch it.

There was never any serious disparity between prices of ATI and nVidia cards. The top of the line one is always around $400 when it comes out, then it drops to something more reasonable and a new $400 replacement for it comes out. This is what both companies do.

Seggybop wrote:There was never any serious disparity between prices of ATI and nVidia cards. The top of the line one is always around $400 when it comes out, then it drops to something more reasonable and a new $400 replacement for it comes out. This is what both companies do.

Not here. New ATI: ~ $600. New nVidia: ~ $400.

The price of the overall card is not the important thing for such integrated products, but rather the price of the chip.

At any rate, Newegg shows the most expensive R9800 Pro and GFFX 5900 Ultra varients at $500.