(Shot down assumption.)

Processing Power.

The Xbox 360 has a processing power of one teraflop (10 ghz) and the PS3 has processing power of Two teraflops. Only a handful of quad cores have that sort of power, and the amount that the processors in either system have to compute must be gigantic. Using the euphoria engine each individual has their own AI it has to deal with. In GTA 4, each individual must react to every punch, shove, car jacking, shot, explosion, and everything else around them. If you played GTA 4 then you would also notice that the police officers may chase down random crimes committed by these NPC's. Take all that into account and every building, person, and car, it will take an extremely powerful machine to even run it on minimum. This is not the same as last generation when you saw consoles that were clocked under 1 GHz. Right now consoles have more processing power then most PCs, and since it's a closed system, it will be all that harder to put the game on a PC that is also running stuff like MSN, Xfire, AntiVirus, and various apps in the back ground.

My two cents on this anyways.

P.S: I think you will see GTA 4 come to the PC but at a much more later date.

A console game that PC's can't handle? Let me think about that one... Okay, I'm done. No.

It's a completely ligidiment reason. If you see it this year, it's going to be Assasins Creeded. Meaning that your requirements are going to be super, super high.

insanejedi

What? I could run it with a mid-range dual core and a HD3850.

360 has 10 gigs of ram!?

does it really?

Dual Core of what? It's not the graphical power that's holding it back, thats the area where PC specs are naturally higher than the consoles, that and ram. But in this generation, processing power is much higher then most other PC's. insanejedi

O ok, now I see what you're getting at, but like I said, with some tweaking, it's still very well possible.

TerraFLOP?

WTF are you smoking?

The 360 hardly even break 300 GigaFLOPS, let alone a TerraFLOP....

And the PS3 barely breaks half a TFLOP and that is with a dated GPU architecture that isn't nearly as efficient as the newer architectures in the 8800 and the Xenos.

Infact, a SINGLE 8800 GT has as many FLOPS than the entire power of both consoles...

Get facts straight and don't make stuff up.

Just to show you...

360:

Xenos - 240 GFLOPS

Xenon - 115.2 GFLOPS

PS3:

RSX - 364 GFLOPS

Cell - 179.2 GLOPS (25.6 GFLOPS for the PPE and then 25.6 GLOPS for each of the 6 SPE's)

A SINGLE 8800 GT - 504.0 GLOPS.

360 has 10 gigs of ram!?

does it really?

Koalakommander

Ghz is for Processing power/CPU. gigs is for space.

Horrible flaimbait. And if you're actually being serious (god help you)...Crysis.

/thread

I was going to throw in a sarcastic "PC can't handle it", then I read the OP and realized I can't compete :of50p90

TerraFLOP?

WTF are you smoking?

The 360 hardly even break 300 GigaFLOPS, let alone a TerraFLOP....

And the PS3 barely breaks half a TFLOP and that is with a dated GPU architecture that isn't nearly as efficient as the newer architectures in the 8800 and the Xenos.

Infact, a SINGLE 8800 GT has as many FLOPS than the entire power of both consoles...

Get facts straight and don't make stuff up.

Just to show you...

360:

Xenos - 240 GFLOPS

Xenon - 115.2 GFLOPS

PS3:

RSX - 364 GFLOPS

Cell - 179.2 GLOPS (25.6 GFLOPS for the PPE and then 25.6 GLOPS for each of the 6 SPE's)

A SINGLE 8800 GT - 504.0 GLOPS.

horrowhip

CPU, NOT GPU! I'm hella surprised that you know all of that but cannot correlate Processing Power=CPU

teh cell>>>>>xenos>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>any PC CPU

behold teh cow logic

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

TerraFLOP?

WTF are you smoking?

The 360 hardly even break 300 GigaFLOPS, let alone a TerraFLOP....

And the PS3 barely breaks half a TFLOP and that is with a dated GPU architecture that isn't nearly as efficient as the newer architectures in the 8800 and the Xenos.

Infact, a SINGLE 8800 GT has as many FLOPS than the entire power of both consoles...

Get facts straight and don't make stuff up.

Just to show you...

360:

Xenos - 240 GFLOPS

Xenon - 115.2 GFLOPS

PS3:

RSX - 364 GFLOPS

Cell - 179.2 GLOPS (25.6 GFLOPS for the PPE and then 25.6 GLOPS for each of the 6 SPE's)

A SINGLE 8800 GT - 504.0 GLOPS.

insanejedi

CPU, NOT GPU! I'm hella surprised that you know all of that but cannot correlate Processing Power=CPU

Here s bit of info for you:

Out of Order CPU > In-Order CPU.

Horrible flaimbait. And if you're actually being serious (god help you)...Crysis.

/thread

stephant_6

Crysis was a GPU intensive game. I imagine that GTA 4 is a CPU intensive game. Hence why i dont think the Crysis will come to consoles because consoles GPU is not as good as most high end computers GPU.

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

TerraFLOP?

WTF are you smoking?

The 360 hardly even break 300 GigaFLOPS, let alone a TerraFLOP....

And the PS3 barely breaks half a TFLOP and that is with a dated GPU architecture that isn't nearly as efficient as the newer architectures in the 8800 and the Xenos.

Infact, a SINGLE 8800 GT has as many FLOPS than the entire power of both consoles...

Get facts straight and don't make stuff up.

Just to show you...

360:

Xenos - 240 GFLOPS

Xenon - 115.2 GFLOPS

PS3:

RSX - 364 GFLOPS

Cell - 179.2 GLOPS (25.6 GFLOPS for the PPE and then 25.6 GLOPS for each of the 6 SPE's)

A SINGLE 8800 GT - 504.0 GLOPS.

insanejedi

CPU, NOT GPU! I'm hella surprised that you know all of that but cannot correlate Processing Power=CPU

oh... well... in that case you look even worse because FLOPS has nothing to do with what a CPU does to begin with...

And just an FYI, the Intel Core 2 Duo line is better than both the Xenon and the Cell.

And don't pull the GHz or number of cores because it has more to do with architecture than anything.

By default, out-of-order execution is much better than in-order execution.

There is no accurate way to really compare processors because it has so much to do with architecture. And the current Intel Core 2 architecture walks circles around the basic IBM processors in the consoles...

[QUOTE="insanejedi"][QUOTE="horrowhip"]

TerraFLOP?

WTF are you smoking?

The 360 hardly even break 300 GigaFLOPS, let alone a TerraFLOP....

And the PS3 barely breaks half a TFLOP and that is with a dated GPU architecture that isn't nearly as efficient as the newer architectures in the 8800 and the Xenos.

Infact, a SINGLE 8800 GT has as many FLOPS than the entire power of both consoles...

Get facts straight and don't make stuff up.

Just to show you...

360:

Xenos - 240 GFLOPS

Xenon - 115.2 GFLOPS

PS3:

RSX - 364 GFLOPS

Cell - 179.2 GLOPS (25.6 GFLOPS for the PPE and then 25.6 GLOPS for each of the 6 SPE's)

A SINGLE 8800 GT - 504.0 GLOPS.

Nagidar

CPU, NOT GPU! I'm hella surprised that you know all of that but cannot correlate Processing Power=CPU

Here s bit of info for you:

Out of Order CPU > In-Order CPU.

[QUOTE="stephant_6"]

Horrible flaimbait. And if you're actually being serious (god help you)...Crysis.

/thread

insanejedi

Crysis was a GPU intensive game. I imagine that GTA 4 is a CPU intensive game. Hence why i dont think the Crysis will come to consoles because consoles GPU is not as good as most high end computers GPU.

Try running Crysis on a single-core processor,or even a low end-dual core.

Crysis renders huge detailed levels. Obviously it's more GPU than CPU intesnive,but as I said,you can't play it on a single core processor.

If your PC can run Crysis on medium-high,you could max out GTA4.

omg i just bought a 260 dollar q6600 when i could get a ps3 for only 40 dolalrs more, NOOO i got ripped off on my processor.. wait how can sony afford such amazing hardware at low cost?.hmmmm maybe the hardware isnt so amazing?Riki101

THa CELL>>>you

behold

GTA4 isn't as CPU intensive as Crysis, I can guarrantee that.

I mean, it is probably sort of CPU intensive but not THAT CPU intensive. At least no more so than Crysis. Keep in mind, Crysis has way better AI than GTA4, more physics calculations, longer view distances, and more CPU intensive processes(the water simulation takes up a lot of CPU.)

Processing Power.

The Xbox 360 has a processing power of one teraflop Wrong, the Xenon peaks at 115 GFLOPs.

(10 ghz) First off, its an IO Processor and processor ratings do not work like that, you can't just add them up.

and the PS3 has processing power of Two teraflops. Wrong again, the Cell peaks at 218 GFLOPs.

Only a handful of quad cores have that sort of power, and the amount that the processors in either system have to compute must be gigantic. Again, both the Xenon and Cell are IO Processors, they are heavily stripped down compared to desktop processors.

Using the euphoria engine each individual has their own AI it has to deal with. In GTA 4, each individual must react to every punch, shove, car jacking, shot, explosion, and everything else around them. If you played GTA 4 then you would also notice that the police officers may chase down random crimes committed by these NPC's. Take all that into account and every building, person, and car, it will take an extremely powerful machine to even run it on minimum. Again, OoO Processors do things like A.I. and Branch Prediction alot better and easier than an IO processor.

This is not the same as last generation when you saw consoles that were clocked under 1 GHz. Right now consoles have more processing power then most PCs, and since it's a closed system, it will be all that harder to put the game on a PC that is also running stuff like MSN, Xfire, AntiVirus, and various apps in the back ground. Clock Frequency != Power, hell, a Athlon 4400+ x64 Dual Core runs at 2.3Ghz but is rated at 6.6Ghz.

My two cents on this anyways. If I gave you a penny for your thoughts, I'd have change coming back.

P.S: I think you will see GTA 4 come to the PC but at a much more later date.

insanejedi

i cant believe this guy actually thinks the physics in gta 4 is advanced, so much so that a Qx9xxx cant handle it one bit...Riki101

It's not physics, it's AI which makes me think that you wont see it on PC. And the Intel Core 2 arguement may or may not be correct as i have not thought of that. However since they are so hard to compare then me saying this is not as farfetched as you may think. It's just a hypothisis of why i think GTA 4 wont be comming to PC for quite some time.

OMG i can finally see the power, the POWAH!Riki101

GTA4 isn't as CPU intensive as Crysis, I can guarrantee that.

I mean, it is probably sort of CPU intensive but not THAT CPU intensive. At least no more so than Crysis. Keep in mind, Crysis has way better AI than GTA4, more physics calculations, longer view distances, and more CPU intensive processes(the water simulation takes up a lot of CPU.)

horrowhip

GTA 4 has a lot more people on screen reacting to almost everything in their enviroment. Mind you guys that i'm willing to be proven wrong on this, i'm just assuming this off of simple number of ghz.

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

GTA4 isn't as CPU intensive as Crysis, I can guarrantee that.

I mean, it is probably sort of CPU intensive but not THAT CPU intensive. At least no more so than Crysis. Keep in mind, Crysis has way better AI than GTA4, more physics calculations, longer view distances, and more CPU intensive processes(the water simulation takes up a lot of CPU.)

insanejedi

GTA 4 has a lot more people on screen reacting to almost everything in their enviroment. Mind you guys that i'm willing to be proven wrong on this, i'm just assuming this off of simple number of ghz.

I already proved you wrong but you choose to ignore my posts.

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

GTA4 isn't as CPU intensive as Crysis, I can guarrantee that.

I mean, it is probably sort of CPU intensive but not THAT CPU intensive. At least no more so than Crysis. Keep in mind, Crysis has way better AI than GTA4, more physics calculations, longer view distances, and more CPU intensive processes(the water simulation takes up a lot of CPU.)

insanejedi

GTA 4 has a lot more people on screen reacting to almost everything in their enviroment. Mind you guys that i'm willing to be proven wrong on this, i'm just assuming this off of simple number of ghz.

GTA4 has basic AI....every entity has a script is just repeats over and over again...

its not like STALKER where the AI is truly dynamic.

If someone can prove me that the processing power of a reasonable PC motherboard compared to that of the Cell and Xenon is higher. I will put this to rest.

By reasonable i mean like something that is already in peoples computers at there home. High end or not.

If someone can prove me that the processing power of a reasonable PC motherboard compared to that of the Cell and Xenon. I will put this to rest.

By reasonable i mean like something that is already in peoples computers at there home. High end or not.

insanejedi

Do you just choose to ignore posts? Both the Xenon and Cell are In-Order CPU's, that barely match the processing power of an Athlon 3600.

[QUOTE="insanejedi"]

If someone can prove me that the processing power of a reasonable PC motherboard compared to that of the Cell and Xenon. I will put this to rest.

By reasonable i mean like something that is already in peoples computers at there home. High end or not.

Nagidar

Do you just choose to ignore posts? Both the Xenon and Cell are In-Order CPU's, the barely match the processing power of an Athlon 3600.

specs?

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

GTA4 isn't as CPU intensive as Crysis, I can guarrantee that.

I mean, it is probably sort of CPU intensive but not THAT CPU intensive. At least no more so than Crysis. Keep in mind, Crysis has way better AI than GTA4, more physics calculations, longer view distances, and more CPU intensive processes(the water simulation takes up a lot of CPU.)

insanejedi

GTA 4 has a lot more people on screen reacting to almost everything in their enviroment. Mind you guys that i'm willing to be proven wrong on this, i'm just assuming this off of simple number of ghz.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="insanejedi"]

If someone can prove me that the processing power of a reasonable PC motherboard compared to that of the Cell and Xenon. I will put this to rest.

By reasonable i mean like something that is already in peoples computers at there home. High end or not.

insanejedi

Do you just choose to ignore posts? Both the Xenon and Cell are In-Order CPU's, the barely match the processing power of an Athlon 3600.

specs?

Of what? Was that post that hard to understand?

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="insanejedi"]

If someone can prove me that the processing power of a reasonable PC motherboard compared to that of the Cell and Xenon. I will put this to rest.

By reasonable i mean like something that is already in peoples computers at there home. High end or not.

insanejedi

Do you just choose to ignore posts? Both the Xenon and Cell are In-Order CPU's, the barely match the processing power of an Athlon 3600.

specs?

if you actually had any clue as to what you were talking about you would know that clock speed is meaningless when comparing to different series of processors.

[QUOTE="insanejedi"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="insanejedi"]

If someone can prove me that the processing power of a reasonable PC motherboard compared to that of the Cell and Xenon. I will put this to rest.

By reasonable i mean like something that is already in peoples computers at there home. High end or not.

Nagidar

Do you just choose to ignore posts? Both the Xenon and Cell are In-Order CPU's, the barely match the processing power of an Athlon 3600.

specs?

Of what? Was that post that hard to understand?

Like i want comparasons, not words. Like how many calculations can this PC processer make opossed to this Console.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="insanejedi"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="insanejedi"]

If someone can prove me that the processing power of a reasonable PC motherboard compared to that of the Cell and Xenon. I will put this to rest.

By reasonable i mean like something that is already in peoples computers at there home. High end or not.

insanejedi

Do you just choose to ignore posts? Both the Xenon and Cell are In-Order CPU's, the barely match the processing power of an Athlon 3600.

specs?

Of what? Was that post that hard to understand?

Like i want comparasons, not words. Like how many calculations can this PC processer make opossed to this Console.

Read this: Link

And this: Link

EDIT: If you can even understand any of it....

[QUOTE="insanejedi"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="insanejedi"]

If someone can prove me that the processing power of a reasonable PC motherboard compared to that of the Cell and Xenon. I will put this to rest.

By reasonable i mean like something that is already in peoples computers at there home. High end or not.

cobrax75

Do you just choose to ignore posts? Both the Xenon and Cell are In-Order CPU's, the barely match the processing power of an Athlon 3600.

specs?

if you actually had any clue as to what you were talking about you would know that clock speed is meaningless when comparing to different series of processors.

that's pretty much all I know lol. has something to do with design and cache memory right?