More Revolution specs uncovered! Rev to be 99-149 bucks?

**Shrinnan** · 12-07-2005

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.

Source: http://revolution.ign.com/articles/673/673799p1.html

Man, if it was that much then that would mean gaming bliss...Can't wait for the confirmed price now.

**Nikorasu** · 12-07-2005

We still dont know a lot about the specs... and those numbers, while important, can be enhanced more by the numbers we still dont know yet... not to mention any propiatary filters Nintendo may design.

Remember, if someone says something like "oh its only twice as powerful as GC" I'd have to remind them that a system like 360 doesn't look much beyond 3 times better. =/ But those kinds of comments are very misleading.

We still dont know a lot, and the real truth wont be available till E3...

But at least we can count on the Rev being cheap! XD which would be awesome.

**PeanutButterMunky** · 12-07-2005

That's sounds very depressing, but I'm still going to wait on official (and final) information.

**Fedos** · 12-07-2005

I thought Nintendo said that they'd release more info concerning the Revolution by the end of the year? Man, I really would like to see what the new Mario game looks like. Hopefully Luigi is present in the game. Hey, just because he has his own game now doesn't mean he can't play nice with Mario.

If this news is true then like the author says Nintendo is taking a very big gamble assuming that gamers won't want a beefed up graphical console. And with this is mind (assuming the system is only about two times as powerful as Gamecube) how long on the market will it last with specs like that? I hope Nintendo is throwing us a curve and this thing actually ends up being a very capable system. I'll be getting it either way but I think the casual lot will become disillusioned with the Big N if this turns out to be the case...

**Amadeus** · 12-07-2005

Everybody's turned off by the "104 MB Ram" part. . .

And the DVDs can only hold like, 4 gig of space? And people complained that The 360 can hold *only* 9 gigs per disc?? lol] But, Judging by this recent announcement, those supposedly leaked revolution screenshots made on PC hardware seem like an average game for this sytem.

I by no means hold any bias towards anybody just for the sake of having a bias, but I feel that this will be Nintendo's final game system.

**DeputyDon** · 12-07-2005

Yeah 9 gig per disk space isn't enough, for an HD game. HD textures take up alot more space than just normal textures. Like I have said before, the NR will have the same exact graphics as an xbox 360 on a standard def television.

Oh and those screenshots of the NR game, they are actually really good. I just think everyone is used to games with extremely great graphics and no one is willing to except a game that hasn't been done in a while.

The game is looking like an overhead shooter but in 3d. In my opinion that is just awesome, and the graphics really aren't bad at all.

**Lp Chris XII** · 12-07-2005

And the DVDs can only hold like, 4 gig of space? And people complained that The 360 can hold *only* 9 gigs per disc??

Actually, the Xbox 360's discs can only hold a maximum of 7GB, that is what's left for developers. This was stated back in the summer, before TGS.

I don't think the Revolution will stand up to the 360 or PS3 in terms of raw power and graphics, but like I've said before, who's gonna be worried about low-res textures when you're swinging your arm around to counter your enemy's attacks?

In fact, I think that these leaked specs (if they turn out to be real) are a blessing. It makes it possible for people like me to afford two console at once, right off the bat. And as for console bugs/errors, the Revolution could set a new record for lowest bugs in their console at launch if they keep specs like these.

**wahey42** · 12-07-2005

If the above information is true then development should be really easy since the system architeture is alot like the Gamecube. There shouldn't need to be much special software or hardware for running Gamecube games and programing for the two systems should be extremely similar. I expect that Revolution optimized versions of Gamecube games will be available at launch, it would be awesome to see beefed up versions of Mario and Zelda.

**Lefein** · 12-07-2005

1. The Revolution doesn't need more than 8GB discs because it won't be loading HD textures. In all likelihood, Rev games will be 480p compatible, which will look very nice to most people.

2. 104MB of RAM will be fine for non-HD textures. This is a console, not a PC or a high performance monster.

3. Did the GameCube really look that bad to anyone?? RE4 was jaw dropping and to think that Nintendo could deliver a console that doubles the performance for around $200 sounds like a square deal if I ever heard one!

4. There is absolutely no way to tell what the performance of the GPU will really end up like. Noones come out and said that Nintendo will be using WGF, DX9, DX10, Open GL, or Open GL ES... So, whatever kind of power that Nintendo puts in that console will most certainly be used and quite well I suspect. They hold patents on some rather interesting graphical technology after all.

5. Many companies are coming forward and saying that the Rev controller is a really great innovation. Innovation is what powers a Nintendo console, not the sum of its parts. In this respect, the Game Cube was the black sheep of the family and Nintendo fully recognizes this themselves.

6. Rev will have FREE online! Bam, said, done... That's something people will certainly want!

7. Last, but not least, Shiggs said at a recent convention that the Rev has "a secret function" that noone knows about save himself and a handful of Nintendo engineers I suspect. Remember how the controller hit us like a ton of bricks? Well, apparently, Nintendo hasn't let the cat out of the bag completely.

So, yeah, the graphics wh()r3s are going to take cheap shots at the Rev... Those arent exactly the breed of gamer Nintendo is looking for or has EVER looked for to bring into their fold. The Revolution is very real and continues to impress people on a weekly basis. If it's good enough for Valve, Ubisoft, Square Enix, Hideo Kojima, and countless others then it will most certainly be good enough for me!

**Shrinnan** · 12-07-2005

Originally Posted by Lefein

1. The Revolution doesn't need more than 8GB discs because it won't be loading HD textures. In all likelihood, Rev games will be 480p compatible, which will look very nice to most people.

2. 104MB of RAM will be fine for non-HD textures. This is a console, not a PC or a high performance monster.

3. Did the GameCube really look that bad to anyone?? RE4 was jaw dropping and to think that Nintendo could deliver a console that doubles the performance for around $200 sounds like a square deal if I ever heard one!

4. There is absolutely no way to tell what the performance of the GPU will really end up like. Noones come out and said that Nintendo will be using WGF, DX9, DX10, Open GL, or Open GL ES... So, whatever kind of power that Nintendo puts in that console will most certainly be used and quite well I suspect. They hold patents on some rather interesting graphical technology after all.

5. Many companies are coming forward and saying that the Rev controller is a really great innovation. Innovation is what powers a Nintendo console, not the sum of its parts. In this respect, the Game Cube was the black sheep of the family and Nintendo fully recognizes this themselves.

6. Rev will have FREE online! Bam, said, done... That's something people will certainly want!

7. Last, but not least, Shiggs said at a recent convention that the Rev has "a secret function" that noone knows about save himself and a handful of Nintendo engineers I suspect. Remember how the controller hit us like a ton of bricks? Well, apparently, Nintendo hasn't let the cat out of the bag completely.

So, yeah, the graphics wh()r3s are going to take cheap shots at the Rev... Those arent exactly the breed of gamer Nintendo is looking for or has EVER looked for to bring into their fold. The Revolution is very real and continues to impress people on a weekly basis. If it's good enough for Valve, Ubisoft, Square Enix, Hideo Kojima, and countless others then it will most certainly be good enough for me!

I, more or less, agree with what you just said. I actually think that Nintendo made the right choice by not going to HD just because HD, at least this is what I think, won't be mainstream until at least 2010. Anyhow, this will definitely save space for the Rev and it won't need a next gen format, one thing the 360 should have went with, but Nintendo's strong point is innovation and I think they'll come through. I just have one question for people who don't like the controller and it is, can I borrow your time machine? I need to...erm..check up on a few things.

Completely forego the twisted face, you can always trust me!

**Lefein** · 12-07-2005

LOL! Yeah, no kidding. Unlike most Nintendo fans, I don't believe Sony will rip them off on this one. They have a good thing going with the Eye-Toy. I get the feeling Im going to fall in love with the revo controller once I get one though

I'm eagerly awaiting the "secret function" too!

**air_chompers** · 12-11-2005

Is displacement mapping the last secret?
Browsing for more clues concerning the Revolution´s last secret, I came across the issue of displacement mapping, an improved version of bump mapping, if you will. This cropped up briefly in relation to the Nintendo Revolution some months ago, but I believe it has not been given enough attention. But before we go into that, let´s understand what this technique is about.

1. What is displacement mapping?

Wikipedia has this to say about displacement mapping:

Hardware displacement mapping can be interpreted as a kind of vertex-texture mapping, where the values of the texture map do not alter the pixel color, but change the position of the vertex instead. Unlike bump mapping and normal mapping, displacement mapping can in this way produce a genuine rough surface.

Let´s look at the diagram accompanying that article and allow me to repeat the above in my own words.Rather than altering the colour of the pixels, the displacement map alters their height, actually raising or lowering the mesh. The obvious advantage over bumb mapping is that it actually creates a rough surface. Bump mapping only creates the illusion of one. Whereas the effect of bump mapping depends on how you look at the rendered object (the effect will be lost in a profile view, i.e. from the side), this technique works irrespective of viewing angles.

The following image is an example of what this technique can do, courtesy of ZBrush.
Displacement mapping allows you to can create elaborately detailed objects with a low polygon count. Here´s a comparison between the various mapping techniques, taken from Johannes Hirche´s 2004 Ph.D. thesis Adaptive sampling and tessellation for displacement mapping hardware, which focusses on ´efficient rendering of such displacement maps, mainly targeted at graphics hardware architectures´.I am sure you can tell that it is a significant step up from the previous techniques. However, it comes at a price. While the poly count is significantly lower, there is some strain on the CPU. Johannes Hirche writes:

Rendering displacement mapped surfaces is a process that involves a significant number of geometric and arithmetic operations. When applied to a triangle mesh, it involves prior retessellation of the base domain surface and transformation of the vertices and normals. Even on fast CPUs, it is a time consuming operation, wasting bandwidth and processing power.

This is why displacement mapping has not been widely used in real-time graphics. However, new and refined techniques allow for displacement mapping to be implemented in real-time. Again, Johannes Hirche writes:

The main focus was to explore new techniques suitable for hardware implementation in order to reduce the bandwidth strain on the system bus by moving the tessellation process onto the graphics subsystem. (...) A possibility to overcome these problems is to tessellate the individual triangles sequentially and to adaptively add triangles where necessary, until a desired level of accuracy is
reached. (...) With only minor user interaction or conservatively predefined input parameters the sampling schemes produce adaptive tessellations with very low error measures.

The above covered the immediate advantages of displacement mapping and some current problems with it, as well as how they may be overcome. Let´s see why this is relevant to Nintendo and, perhaps, the Revolution.

2. Why could displacement mapping be Nintendo related?

Firstly, there is a Nintendo patent that has caused this topic to crop up in this community before. It is entitled Method and apparatus for efficient generation of texture coordinate displacements for implementing emboss-style bump mapping in a graphics rendering system.Its abstract is a bit of a mouthful, unfortunately. Read my highlights, though:

A graphics system including a custom graphics and audio processor produces exciting 2D and 3D graphics and surround sound. The system includes a graphics and audio processor including a 3D graphics pipeline and an audio digital signal processor. Emboss style effects are created using fully pipelined hardware including two distinct dot-product computation units that perform a scaled model view matrix multiply without requiring the Normal input vector and which also compute dot-products between the Binormal and Tangent vectors and a light direction vector in parallel. The resulting texture coordinate displacements are provided to texture mapping hardware that performs a texture mapping operation providing texture combining in one pass. The disclosed pipelined arrangement efficiently provides interesting embossed style image effects such as raised and lowered patterns on surfaces.

This proves that Nintendo has not only been interested in this technique but is a patent holder. The section entitled ´cross-reference to related applications´ references 25 separate provisional patent applications that are thereby incorporated into the patent. Almost all of them date back to 2000. This would suggest that it is an important patent that has kept Nintendo busy but doesn´t date back too far to be cutting edge.

Secondly, relating back to making the process of displacement mapping more efficient and less of a strain on the CPU, one way of adaptive tessellation might actually be the last Nintendo patent I talked about in great detail, called Three-dimensional image generating apparatus, storage medium storing a three-dimensional image generating program, and three-dimensional image generating method. A number of readers pointed out that the patent had nothing to do with actually visualising graphics in 3D, but rather optimizing a 3D world to be viewed on a 2D display. Then, that patent made little sense to me. But in the context of trying to reduce the computational strain on the CPU involved in displacement mapping, this may make perfect sense.

Lastly, whether the Revolution´s graphics chip will turn out to be based on the R520 or R530, it will be Radeon technology. And its manufacturer ATI has the following advice for developers on their Designing for Radeon development support page:

Use multi-texturing effects for realistic low polygon primitives. For example, you can use emboss style bump mapping to achieve the illusion of a bumpy surface that would take a lot more polygons to approximate otherwise. Similarly, other intelligent use of texture maps can reduce the polygon count of your mesh designs.

This may not be unusual, since nVidia will undoubtedly have similar advice on their development support pages, but at least it shows that ATI is also very concerned with this technique. In fact, ATI supported this technology earlier than nVidia, it seems. While the Radeon 9500/9700 was capable of displacement mapping, the GeForce FX was only partly so. The Radeon 9700 Pro already supported adaptive tessellation. In fact, ATI has an exclusive technology called ´Truform 2.0´, which is a kind of tessellation.

Now, there have been numerous rumours about Nintendo having discovered some kind of secret development technique. This may not be secret per se, but it would make sense if Nintendo had discovered a way of implementing displacement mapping efficiently. They have a patent relating to this technology and they have a strong ally who has some expertise in this field.

It may explain why Nintendo have not yet talked about the graphics chip or shown any real game footage yet. It would also explain why the basic hardware features that have been suggested seem to be underpowered at face value, yet Nintendo maintains that their graphics will be on par. This may yet turn out to be the Revolution´s last secret.

This came from
http://nintendo-revolution.blogspot.com/
Go there to see the pictures but at this point the rev is just to different to compeate. Think about it in a gamers mind it is just to seperated to a hardcore gamer walking in to circut city to compare it I mean a cool motion senitve controller online, $150 for me thats 25 hours of work. And it brings all the games I was too young to play/ enjoy think about revisiting SNES also N64 like zelda ocrania of time and gamecube disk playable how can you go wrong. To me it looks like this
PS3- Top of the line if you want power its the 3
360- Avarage m$ made it somthing its not and you know what it cant be. MS says powerhouse I say BS they say avarage I say yes
Rev- You want a new experiance all togeather? and/ or your cheep Rev and think about it even my mom and dad can play

**Voice Of A Riot** · 12-11-2005

With that kind of price range I might be picking up a Revolution before the PS3. At the moment I'm more excited about the revo more than any other next gen console and they still haven't released any substancial news on the specs front!

I'm not too worried about it not being a powerhouse as long as I have free online and a back catalogue of all the old Ninty games, I'll be happy. Besides I think games will still look great on the revolution, they will be slightly better than this gen but thats good enough for me. Its all about innovation, and I can't wait to enjoy a completely different gaming experience with the revo.

**Nikorasu** · 12-12-2005

air_chompers, thats a very interesting article...

That kind of mapping, seems a lot like what Project Offset is using to map their walls and floors... gives the true feel of a 3D high detailed surface, while keeping polygon count low.

I am hoping Nintendo has developed something like, or simmilar to this technique.

**sevendesigns** · 12-13-2005

I don't understand one thing. Why is it everybody is hard on Micro-soft for releasing the Xbox360, claiming it's not 'next-gen'. But when it comes to the Nintendo Revolution, it's a whole different story? Why? Because of the price, weak specs, and that 'remote'? Make up your mind. I know everyone here (besides me) is excited about the Revolution. But you gotta admit, you're pretty hard on a console (Xbox360) that's light years more powerful than Nintendo's next gen console. It doesn't make sense to me.

Bye

**c.a.p** · 12-13-2005

Originally Posted by sevendesigns

I don't understand one thing. Why is it everybody is hard on Micro-soft for releasing the Xbox360, claiming it's not 'next-gen'. But when it comes to the Nintendo Revolution, it's a whole different story? Why? Because of the price, weak specs, and that 'remote'? Make up your mind. I know everyone here (besides me) is excited about the Revolution. But you gotta admit, you're pretty hard on a console (Xbox360) that's light years more powerful than Nintendo's next gen console. It doesn't make sense to me.

Bye

That's because Nintendo has been saying that Revolution will be less powerful than the competitors since the beginning while Microsoft claimed to have the most powerful console of the next generation.

**DeputyDon** · 12-13-2005

Originally Posted by cap_826

Originally Posted by sevendesigns

I don't understand one thing. Why is it everybody is hard on Micro-soft for releasing the Xbox360, claiming it's not 'next-gen'. But when it comes to the Nintendo Revolution, it's a whole different story? Why? Because of the price, weak specs, and that 'remote'? Make up your mind. I know everyone here (besides me) is excited about the Revolution. But you gotta admit, you're pretty hard on a console (Xbox360) that's light years more powerful than Nintendo's next gen console. It doesn't make sense to me.

Bye

That's because Nintendo has been saying that Revolution will be less powerful than the competitors since the beginning while Microsoft claimed to have the most powerful console of the next generation.

That and the fact that after the gamecube not have the greatest graphics but the greatest gameplay (half of the time) we, like gamers should, respect that they choose gameplay over graphics.

Xbox 1 had great graphics but lets face it, they didn't have many killer apps. Halo was just about it. Graphics was just a plus to the system, along with Xbox Live. The games themselves sucked.

**Mr. Solanky** · 12-17-2005

That and the fact that after the gamecube not have the greatest graphics but the greatest gameplay (half of the time) we, like gamers should, respect that they choose gameplay over graphics.

Xbox 1 had great graphics but lets face it, they didn't have many killer apps. Halo was just about it. Graphics was just a plus to the system, along with Xbox Live. The games themselves sucked.

Amen Deputy, Amen. I really think all the Xbox had was Halo, and that came to PC a year later. And all the good games are ported from PC.

**xbox360pla7a** · 12-18-2005

$149-$99 bucks? wow, i would definetelly get one! i wanna like play and swing links sword with the new controllers, and swing a lightsabre!

**StrikeMaster Ice** · 12-19-2005

I would get one too if Revolution is going for $99-149.

**jesusmcrighteous** · 12-19-2005

Here's my own quickie/BS estimated cost comparison. For the sake of the Xbox fanboys, I picked realistic prices for the Microsoft stuff and inflated the prices of Nintendo components. Note that most Nintendo figures are my own awesome guestimations based on past nintendo pricing and Revolution news.

Xbox 360 (system, headset, hard drive): $400
two new games: $60 X 2 = $120
online play: $50/year, online wireless requires $100 adapter
two Xbox Live Arcade games: $20
one extra wireless controller: $50
Cost (not including wireless adapter): $640

Revolution: $200 (I added $50 to the highest developer estimate)
two new games: $50 X 2 = $100
online play: free (and free wireless)
two online SNES games through download service: $20
one extra controller (wireless standard): $35 (note: I guestimated this because I couldn't see nintendo charging more than this for one controller. Their Wavebird is $30, so I don't see this as unrealistic)

Total cost: $355

PS3: I'm not even going to try to compare...

I gave Nintendo the shaft with console pricing and left out the 360's wifi component, and its still a $285 difference. If you include a wireless adapter on the 360's list, that difference goes up to $385. You could almost buy another 360 with that

Conclusion: you can't beat the price.

**c.a.p** · 12-19-2005

Originally Posted by jesusmcrighteous

Here's my own quickie/BS estimated cost comparison. For the sake of the Xbox fanboys, I picked realistic prices for the Microsoft stuff and inflated the prices of Nintendo components. Note that most Nintendo figures are my own awesome guestimations based on past nintendo pricing and Revolution news.

Xbox 360 (system, headset, hard drive): $400
two new games: $60 X 2 = $120
online play: $50/year, online wireless requires $100 adapter
two Xbox Live Arcade games: $20
one extra wireless controller: $50
Cost (not including wireless adapter): $640

Revolution: $200 (I added $50 to the highest developer estimate)
two new games: $50 X 2 = $100
online play: free (and free wireless)
two online SNES games through download service: $20
one extra controller (wireless standard): $35 (note: I guestimated this because I couldn't see nintendo charging more than this for one controller. Their Wavebird is $30, so I don't see this as unrealistic)

Total cost: $355

PS3: I'm not even going to try to compare...

I gave Nintendo the shaft with console pricing and left out the 360's wifi component, and its still a $285 difference. If you include a wireless adapter on the 360's list, that difference goes up to $385. You could almost buy another 360 with that

Conclusion: you can't beat the price.

Very nice estimates, they seem very realistic to me. I'm also guessing $200 for Revolution.

**Kanon** · 12-22-2005

well it's specs aren't everything, if people are worried about revolution being visually weaker then the other 2 next gen consoles, then don't worry, there are ways to achieving god-like graphics without crazy cpus and gpus, in this case i think the revo specs are good enough to do displacement mapping, for those of you do not know what displacement mapping is, it's kinda like a better version of "bump-mapping" which makes the mesh actually look 3D from all angles unlike bumb mapping which only affects only some angles. you can have a character model comprised of 200 polygons and make it look like it is made out of 2 million. pretty impressive stuff. ( correct me if im wrong on any of this, since i may not know what im talking about ). i would dare to say, that revolution might even sprout better gfx then 360...........

**The Chocobo Kid** · 12-22-2005

I might get it for the online play but I would still wait for a price drop. I very upset with nintendo for letter me down this gen.

**Eddiesm213** · 12-23-2005

Thank you Nintendo.

There giving us a system that play all games back to Nes(possibly with better graphics), online support, has xbox-level visuals, and at only $99.

So what if it's not the latest graphics, Nintendo has plenty of games and ideas to back up the Revolution.