One problem that comes to mind is that it would be very hard to do a "fair" comparison, being as an XBox uses a stripped down version of Windows 2K, and DirectX.
It's facts like this that make me wonder why XBox emulators aren't all over the place by now...
Overclocking an xbox would lead to the entire game sped up, not a preformance increase. For example, there is a timer in the game counting one second at a time. If you o/c the box the time in the game may count 2 in game seconds for every 1 real life second.
I dunno why there are not tons of xbox emulators over the place yet but I know they have sucessfully got one to work. Although, the only thing that happend was a dirty disk message, it does mean that the emulator read an xbox disk.
i just wanna bench to see how they hold up to todays computer standards...i mean xbox games look NOICE...so im just curious how the normal everyday pc would hold up agains tthe box
I imagine the Xbox probably would not do that well against a new PC. The Xbox has a 733mhz Pentium 3 and a video chipset somewhere between a GeForce 3 and 4. Today we have the 3.2Ghz Pentium 4 and the GeForce FX 5900 (or if you want to talk about a real system, we have the Athlon XP 3200+ and the Radeon 9800 Pro .) Xbox games look nice because it has two inherent advantages over a PC, there is only one Xbox configuration out there, and the resolution you are working with is lower (I believe 640x480 or 800x600) than a typical PC gamer
so why doesnt microft make an official emulator for the PC...and charge like 100 or so...i mean really..their loosing SOOO much money on the xbox...i think theyd actually win with an emulator
Regardless of how stupid it would be, I bet people will still do it.
But on the other hand, how many PS2 emulators have you seen?
I just dont think most PC hardware is up to emulating the current consoles, i.e look at bleem, that still runs like arse for most games (on not exactly up to date hardware).
The games are optimixed for the consoles so the comparison would be unfair. It's the best part about consoles, if you into certain types of games they are much better (in terms of pure gaming) than a desktop. Their lifetime is usually 2-3 yrs and can play all games released for it, without the need to upgrade. The desktop does not match that.
Playing the upgrade game for PCs is far more expensive than buying a new console every 3 yrs.
Slick said Overclocking an xbox would lead to the entire game sped up, not a preformance increase. For example, there is a timer in the game counting one second at a time. If you o/c the box the time in the game may count 2 in game seconds for every 1 real life second.
Since the XBox is a dumbed down PC, I'm sure it operates in a similar fashion to a computer with an internal system timer that does not vary based on clock speed, but rather, maintains a constant 1,000 ticks per second.
Comments
One problem that comes to mind is that it would be very hard to do a "fair" comparison, being as an XBox uses a stripped down version of Windows 2K, and DirectX.
It's facts like this that make me wonder why XBox emulators aren't all over the place by now...
"oOh, my X-Box is fastar than yours!"
"no it isnt"
"yes it is!!!"
And so begins the mass overclocking hyisteria of the X-Box.....
NS
I dunno why there are not tons of xbox emulators over the place yet but I know they have sucessfully got one to work. Although, the only thing that happend was a dirty disk message, it does mean that the emulator read an xbox disk.
"HAHA< LOOKS AT ME, MY XBOX GOES FASTAR!!"
Regardless of how stupid it would be, I bet people will still do it.
But on the other hand, how many PS2 emulators have you seen?
I just dont think most PC hardware is up to emulating the current consoles, i.e look at bleem, that still runs like arse for most games (on not exactly up to date hardware).
NS
Playing the upgrade game for PCs is far more expensive than buying a new console every 3 yrs.
Shouldn't take too long with the recent software hack release.
Sorry.