"Air Raid" <AirRaidJet@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1133918260.249530.29080@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> http://revolution.ign.com/articles/673/673799p1.html
>
> More Revolution Specs Uncovered
>
> Developers come forward to reveal new performance details on Nintendo's
> next-generation console.
> by Matt Casamassina
>
> December 6, 2005 - Just yesterday IGN Revolution launched with
> technical details on Nintendo's next-generation console, codenamed
> Revolution. And today more development sources have come forward with
> both clarification and even more tech specs. The latest news begins to
> paint a clearer picture of Nintendo's aim with its next platform.
>
>
> We cannot stress this enough: Revolution is not being positioned as a
> competitor to either Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3. Nintendo has instead
> chosen to design a console that will be very affordable for consumers.
> For that very reason, say developers in the know, the Big N has opted
> out of filling the system with a massive supply of expensive RAM.
> In yesterday's article, we wrote that Revolution would include 128MBs
> of RAM, or possibly less. Developers have clarified the makeup based on
> officially released Nintendo documentation. Revolution will build on
> GameCube's configuration of 24MBs 1T-SRAM and 16MBs D-RAM (40MBs) by
> adding an addition 64MBs of 1T-SRAM. The result is a supply of memory
> in Revolution that totals 104MBs. That number does not consider either
> the 512MBs of allegedly accessible (but hardly ideal) Flash RAM or the
> Hollywood GPU's on-board memory, said to be 3MBs by sources.
>
> Revolution's Broadway CPU, developed by IBM, is an extension of the
> Gekko CPU in GameCube, according to official Nintendo documentation
> passed to us by software houses. The Hollywood GPU, meanwhile, is
> believed to be an extension of the Flipper GPU in GameCube. Since
> developers have not gone hands-on with the GPU, they can only go on
> Nintendo documentation, which is limited.
>
> Exact clock rates were not disclosed, but one development source we
> spoke to had this to say of the Revolution CPU and GPU: "Basically,
> take a GameCube, double the clock rate of the CPU and GPU and you're
> done."
>
> We presented that description to another informed studio, which
> clarified that the clock rates may even fall short of doubling those on
> GameCube.
>
> "The CPU is the same as Gekko with one and a half to two times the
> performance and improved caching," said a source. "Our guys
> experimented with it and think they'll be able to get about twice the
> performance as GameCube."
>
> "It's a gamble for the Big N," said another source. "It's not about
> horsepower for them -- it's about innovation and gameplay."
>
>
> We've also been able to unearth firm details on the storage capacity
> for Revolution discs. Recent rumors suggesting that the discs can hold
> 12GBs of data are false. In fact, Revolution discs can store 4.7GBs of
> data on a single layer or 8.5GBs when double-layered on a single-side.
> This is a massive jump from the 1.5GB capacity of GameCube discs and
> more than enough storage capacity for any non-high-definition game.
>
> Readers discouraged by Revolution's seeming lack of horsepower when
> compared to Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 should remember that Nintendo is
> not interested in competing in the high-definition gaming arena, and as
> a standard-definition console, Revolution is more than capable.
> Capcom's Resident Evil 4 remains one of the most gorgeous games this
> generation and it ran on GameCube, a console at least half as powerful
> according to developer reports.
>
> Software houses we spoke with also waxed on the immediate advantage to
> Nintendo's approach with Revolution, which is, of course, system price.
> Every developer was in agreement that Revolution should launch with a
> price tag of $149 or lower. Some speculated that based on the tech, a
> $99 price point would not be out of the question.
>
> Stay tuned for more as it develops.
>
That doesn't bother me. Gamecube graphics are enough for me anyway.