Anarchist420
Diamond Member
i guess it doesnt really matter now and this is a stupid thread, but anyway... wouldn't gc games have looked a lot better if the color, depth, and texture ram had been outside the flipper?
i experienced some pretty damn good effects in gamecube games, but the RGB6 artifacts were atrocious. i kind of think that they would've been better off using a graphics processor like this:
powervr style depth testing (but fp64 precision instead of fp32)
no less than full trilinear filtering (no brilinear), with clampable lod bias and no hardware texture compression (the cpu's vector units could do texture compression).
VSA-100 style RGSS
ARGB8 back buffer and front buffer
no fixed function hardware for special effects.
perhaps there couldve been 2 texture units, 2 pixel units, and 128 half speed depth test units all clocked at 133MHz (2.66 times the pixel and texel fillrate of the dreamcast); that wouldve allowed for super low TDP, especially since it wouldve used a 180nm node rather than 250 nm like the dreamcast graphics processor did.
then there should've been an external dac like the component cable used (with the d-sub cable connection able to do super high input refresh rates) and a cpu with faster vector fp units that could do double precision... that way, the t&l and other fx would've been fully programmable. then 128 MB of unified ram would've been good which would've been double what the xbox had.
and of course a controller that could do about 500 reports/sec (the GC controller was very noticeably slow just like the N64 controller was)
more durability, the best quality tim wherever tim was used, internal q-shielding behind the controller ports and digital video out (so that there is less emi and for appropriate amount of conductivity) and the very best japan made circuitry, internal power (rather than an external power brick), and a fast 2 ball bearing long life side exhaust fan at least 110 cm that didnt run more than plus or minus 3% off its rated voltage.
as for audio, perhaps it should've used a yamaha dsp just like the dreamcast's except no lossy hardware compression and without it's own controller (to cut costs, the fast cpu would simply control it).
finally, an 12x (cav) top loading dvd drive (with an eject button like the gc's actual optical drive had) with a fast serial interface, large sram cache buffer (2 MB), super low latency (access time?), low tdp, but highly reliable and durable 100% error correcting laser running at low temps with a large operating temp tolerance (running at a maximum of 3/5 the maximum nominal operating temperature but generally cooler than 3/5).
of course, nintendo would never do any of that because so many people are so satisfied with things that are mediocre at best, atrocious at worst.
but i guess the expansion for the broadband and gameboy advance games were pretty good.
i experienced some pretty damn good effects in gamecube games, but the RGB6 artifacts were atrocious. i kind of think that they would've been better off using a graphics processor like this:
powervr style depth testing (but fp64 precision instead of fp32)
no less than full trilinear filtering (no brilinear), with clampable lod bias and no hardware texture compression (the cpu's vector units could do texture compression).
VSA-100 style RGSS
ARGB8 back buffer and front buffer
no fixed function hardware for special effects.
perhaps there couldve been 2 texture units, 2 pixel units, and 128 half speed depth test units all clocked at 133MHz (2.66 times the pixel and texel fillrate of the dreamcast); that wouldve allowed for super low TDP, especially since it wouldve used a 180nm node rather than 250 nm like the dreamcast graphics processor did.
then there should've been an external dac like the component cable used (with the d-sub cable connection able to do super high input refresh rates) and a cpu with faster vector fp units that could do double precision... that way, the t&l and other fx would've been fully programmable. then 128 MB of unified ram would've been good which would've been double what the xbox had.
and of course a controller that could do about 500 reports/sec (the GC controller was very noticeably slow just like the N64 controller was)
more durability, the best quality tim wherever tim was used, internal q-shielding behind the controller ports and digital video out (so that there is less emi and for appropriate amount of conductivity) and the very best japan made circuitry, internal power (rather than an external power brick), and a fast 2 ball bearing long life side exhaust fan at least 110 cm that didnt run more than plus or minus 3% off its rated voltage.
as for audio, perhaps it should've used a yamaha dsp just like the dreamcast's except no lossy hardware compression and without it's own controller (to cut costs, the fast cpu would simply control it).
finally, an 12x (cav) top loading dvd drive (with an eject button like the gc's actual optical drive had) with a fast serial interface, large sram cache buffer (2 MB), super low latency (access time?), low tdp, but highly reliable and durable 100% error correcting laser running at low temps with a large operating temp tolerance (running at a maximum of 3/5 the maximum nominal operating temperature but generally cooler than 3/5).
of course, nintendo would never do any of that because so many people are so satisfied with things that are mediocre at best, atrocious at worst.
but i guess the expansion for the broadband and gameboy advance games were pretty good.
