Nintendo Revolution specs leaked?
By Ryan Block 
posted Jun 13th 2005 4:45PM
posted Jun 13th 2005 4:45PM
We're not ones to say whether these are the real deal (oh, but wouldn't we like to be!), but operating under the assumption that they're not, we'd like to have a bit o' fun with Nintendo's forthcoming Revolution, whose specs maybe just possibly might include a dual-core 1.8GHz PowerPC-based setup with 512KB L2 cache, 1.2GHz FSB, 600MHz ATI graphics chip with 12MB SRAM, 128MB "main storage" SRAM (for GPU and sound L3 cache), 256MB main DRAM, 7.1 surround sound, and some 6GB dual-layer HP/Panasonic disc format. Well then, if these do indeed have any truth to them (and we're by no means saying they do), it looks like the Revolution will be spending more time sparring specs with the 360 than the PS3—not that you should be very surprised.
Cool, I'm getting this and the 360.
what about a hard drive? how will the nes, snes, etc. games be downloaded and played?
Not sure why you say it will be compared to the Xbox 360. From the looks of it, this will be very far underpowered compared to both Xbox 360 and PS3. The latter two are looking pretty much identical in real horsepower and the Revolution looks like a very distant poor relation.
wait, so how is this in relation to the others!?!
whats with the PPC chips all of a sudden...apple abandons ibm, but MS and now (presuembly) nintendo pick em up...
waht ever...
wah ti reallt want to know is what the controllr looks like.
Fake, no hard drive since its got 512mb of flash memory and an sd card slot for the old games
It doesn't have a HD, but it does have 512Mb flash internally, and 2 (I think) SD card ports.
In comparison to the others, it probably works out about the same, since the Revolution won't be doing HiDef. If it were HD you'd likely notice a difference, when there's loads of poly's onscreen.
Since it's not... 99% un-noticable.. I think!
you mean, i won't get to play kung-fu in 1080i?
Sorry, it doesn't actually mention an HDD in that spec, does it? Just flash memory and whatnot. The 6GB thing is the optical media they're using.
Jesus juice for everyone tonight!
Isn't the Revolution coming out 6-12 months after the ps3? The specs are believable, since those components might be cheaper by then.
Why no hard drive? Who wants to keep track of memory cards? If a key selling point of your system is downloadable content, would it not make logical sense to have a hard drive? I must be crazy. I really want to like you Nintendo, but come on ....
Personally, I think Nintendo is shooting themselves in the foot again, and probably don't have much chance at the number 2 spot this time around. However, I think they can maintain their niche if they continue to deliver quality, family friendly games in their major franchises and keep the system low priced. Those go down best with non-gamer parents.
"it looks like the Revolution will be spending more time sparring specs with the 360 than the PS3"
Since the 360 is currently "sparring specs" with the PS3, apply the transitive property, why wouldn't the revolution also "spar" with the PS3 as well as 360?
Real, or not real, it doesn't really matter at this point in the game. Even if it is severly underpowered in comparison to the other systems which will be on the market it may end up not mattering at all. Nintendo hasn't released what the "revolutionary" factor will be yet. We can safely assume that it won't be the backwards compatibility, nor some notion of gyroscopics, seeing how both have been done, and neither are truly, "revolutionary." So, depending on what the revolutionary factor is, and how amazing it truly is, may determin how rather or not power will even play into this factor.
A company as big, and with pockets deep enough, could obviously blow the specs we see above out of the water; and with the outpouring of information about what the new systems are touting they have had plenty enough time in advance to match them. Obviously they feel this stategy will work.
I don't think there is any need to fret or worry over the specs until we see what they truly have to offer us in the line of gaming. A game isn't made by how great it looks, it's defined by much, much, more. And just as a game isn't defined by it's graphics, nor is a system. Look at the good ol' Atari Jaguar. The Jaguar had the best graphics at it's time, but that didn't guarantee it anything.
It's still too early in the game to determin what the next Nintendo product will be, and look like, and until Nintendo themself show us A) There Revolutionary factor, B) Their in-game play, C) There final designs, D) What we'll be using to play the system with; will we be able to determin what the system is really made up of.
"sparring specs with the 360 than the PS3"
WTF? Bias anyone?
Agreed. I've never had the impression that the PS3 blows the 360 away. It's common knowledge now that the PS3 videos from E3 were pre-rendered and touched-up.
Doesn't anybody realise that you can use your pc to store most games, and just have a few games stored on the revolution. Then transfer between the two using SD cards.
Also, it doesn't matter if the Revolution is slightly inferior spec wise, as it will be MUCH more efficient, so games will look similar to XBOX360 and PS3.
nintendo = #1
NO, if Xbox is sparing with PS3 it doesn't mean Nintendo can spar with PS3. Just think a really good light weight boxer(Nintendo) fighting some middle weight(Xbox360), while the Middle weight(Xbox360) fights with a Heavy weight(PS3), clearly, the light weight(nintendo) would be thumped by the Heavy Weight. Fool.
It's probably also worth noting that only an incredibly small percentage of people will have high definition TVs when the 3 systems are released, let alone high definition media to watch on them. If the revolution is actualy less powerful than the other two, then it *will not* make a difference if it is not outputting high def, since that requires exponentially greater graphics power. And they're the only one of the three to use 1T SRAM which they did with the gamecube.
Rubbish, i thought it was announced at E3 that the revolution would just use standard DVD's. :s
Although a Panasonic deal is possible, they are good friends.
"pointfour":
Also, it doesn't matter if the Revolution is slightly inferior spec wise, as it will be MUCH more efficient, so games will look similar to XBOX360 and PS3.
First of all, how is dual core 1.8 ghz "Slightly" inferior to 3.2 Ghz, 3 or 8 processors.
Second of all, I am curious to see what you base your statement on the Revolution being "MUCH" more efficient. Unless you know something everyone else doesn't, Xbox 360 will be at least twice as powerful, and the PS3 closer to 4X the speed.
Also, a 1080p resolution does not look the same as Standard Definition (SD).
Don't just assume that because you like it more, it will be as good as the others.
When I say the PS3 is better than the Xbox360 (I'm buying both), I at least have some supporting numbers.
Yea, pointfour, I highly doubt that the revolution will be able to connect to your computer at all, as that would be a giant step toward facilitating the pirating of games. Any game files on removable media will likely be heavily encrypted, only able to be viewed on the revolution, (until some kid breaks the code)
Actually it does not say Dual-Core 1.8... it says it has 2 1.8 processors... that's not the same. But actually it does not matter because it may not be even real since it may not be even real.
Complete and utter bollocks. If you will remember, the specs were already leaked. Dual 3.2GHz 970s and 512MB flash memory for games, remember?
@post 7.
The Revolution will be capable of doing high definition. But it won't be required of all the devs like Microsoft is doing. It will be up to the developer whether or not they want to. Nintendo isn't gonna force the developers to make games in hi def because it's not a focal point. Their main focus is to make the Revolution a system that a non-gamer would want. Something for everyone to really salivate over.
That being said, I don't think the specs are nearly as important as everyone makes them out to be. They'll all be near enough that it won't even matter. These systems haven't even come out yet, and already everyone is casting their vote for whatever system they think is most powerful. Let's see the games for the systems, then we'll find out what's the best console for everyone.
What I find interesting is how many of you say the Rev is severely underpowered in comparison to the Xbox 360 and the PS3, especially in the graphics department. Let's say these specs are right (more likely than not, but for the sake of arguement, let's say they are). Yes, the Rev's CPU clockspeed is a lot lower than the Xbox 360's and the PS3's. BUT, it doesn't need to have a high clockspeed because it is, for all intents and purposes, a machine dedicated to gaming; the Xbox 360 and PS3 are designed to be gaming machines and media centers, so logic would say they need to have more power because they have more operations to perform. That, and it seems that (in regards to those consoles) they might have a lot more power than what is actually practical (why stick a V10 engine in a car when all it needs is a V6?).
Going into graphics, if the specs are right, the Rev might be able to compete with the 360. The 360's GPU clockspeed is 500 MHz, and the PS3's GPU is 550 MHz, while the Rev's (based on the "specs" above) is 600 MHz. Give or take, they're using close to the same graphics card guys.
Getting off of that, I'm surpised that none of you have thought of this; IBM produces a few of the goodies for the Rev, 360, and PS3. As such, IBM has a vested interest in seeing that each console is a commerical success. If one of the consoles drops out of the market, IBM loses the money it put into that particular console.
And there are other things that I'm not gonna mention (like the PS3's and Rev's L2 cache being the same) because this post is already too damn long. Anyway, I'm going to get all 3 consoles when I have the money so it doesn't really matter to me :)
Well considering 360 degrees == 1 Revolution I'd say they were identical on name alone. ;)
John wins.
"When I say the PS3 is better than the Xbox360 (I'm buying both), I at least have some supporting numbers."
PS3 is better than xbox, both of them are better than the revolution...you forgot to add that we are just comparing graphics power.
You people don't realize that the processor is not really that important, it is the graphics processor (and the revolution has a blazing fast 600MHz)Processing power is good for AI, but doesn't play too much of an integral role in putting the pretty pictures on the screen.
BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER PEOPLE!!!
HD RESOLUTION, PIXEL SHADING, blah blah blah
that's great if it is rendering dog feces:
"WOW look at that screen, in total HD, that feces look so real! OMG!"
"Yeah, who cares about games, I am just amazed about how totally real that looks! Dude, it is totally awesome"
Do really any of you think like that?
You say no!!!
Well your comments say differently, you act as if Revolution is an underpowered 98 pound weakling compared to the glorious 500-lb woman who belches out half-a$$ed games, and you worship her like the goddess Aphrodite.
When will you people wake up and realize that it is not about how good the game renders teletubbies in 10000000 fps with pixel shading and crap, but that when you are playing a game, you focus on (this might surprise some of you) the game play!
(Rabid Sony fanboys are fainting)
>> 256MB main DRAM, <<
They're using 1TSram from mosys -- that was officially announce already -- so I'm going label these specs as fake.
"You people don't realize that the processor is not really that important, it is the graphics processor (and the revolution has a blazing fast 600MHz)Processing power is good for AI, but doesn't play too much of an integral role in putting the pretty pictures on the screen."
You forget developers are already going to be spending months designing these super realistic models. "Pretty pictures" don't just come from the graphics processor, the reason MS is putting three 3.2 ghz PPC's and Sony put so much effort into the Cell is because they need raw power to do realtime physics.
ps3 and xbox360 are just so boring I dont understand how anyone could be interested
note to person who said "dual layer 6 gb panosonic = teh proof that this is fake..." read the stuff about e3 where they say that the revolution will use dual layer dvds. Now lets think about this... there are about 3gb on a regular dvd, wouldn't you agree? now... are you still with me? you take 3... after 2 and before 4, 3... then multiply that number, three by two, the number of layers if you forgot. Now I may not be perfect in math, but that equals 6gb... the fact that this particular dual layer dvd is made by panasonic is irrelevant.
There are 4.7 GB on a standard DVD.
Ever since Virtual boy, Nintendo has been turning out vastly inferior products in comparison to its competition.
The last great example on Nintendo brilliance was GOLDENEYE on N64.
I hate to admit it but Nintendo isn't going anywhere and it is certainly going to be vastly inferior to the Ps3 and the XBOX. Nintendo may maintain a fan base against the less violent minded, porn DVD shorted youth but, adults aren't going o take a chance on this one.
The big winner of the console wars is going to be SONY PS3 (though I'm gonna buy an XBOX360 first).
WHY?
#1 Japanese don't support non-Japanese video game consoles (or cars for that matter).
Japan's market is highly important to video game console sales.
#2 Microsoft/ XBOX doesn't give people in the mainstream titles they demand fast enough.
For example, I'm still waiting for a C&C game, I'm still waiting for GTA games which aren't sold on each system simultaneously and I still have to wait for some of the better shooters that appear on the PC first.
#3 SONY has an EXCELLENT fanbase in America with the success of the Playstation, the overnight success of the PS2 and now the pre-ordained success of the PSP.
If SONY creates the PS3 to have special advantages when used with the PSP, then you can bet people are going to flock to it.
I most def agree with Jon. Nintendo's performance has been lackluster in regards to its last few consoles.
3rd party developers have dumped exclusive deals with Nintendo. Big example - Capcom and Resident Evil 4.
I can easily see them going for a niche market this time around. They can still make a profit manufacturing a cheaper console and marketing it towards children. Unfortunately im not going for that. PS3 and the 360 seem like the ticket.
Why are you all arguing about this? People are taking these figures seriously, like they're cast in stone or something. People are stating "Nintendo have no idea, really they don't if they're going to make a system this powerful..." and "If a key selling point of your system is downloadable content, would it not make logical sense to have a hard drive?" - I think everyone's missing the point.
One of the recent key sellers (and we ALL have to agree here) of the XBox is that it is very easy to copy software should you have the right mods done on your machine. I have friends that bought one for this reason. In a sense, it encourages software piracy - something Nintendo has been avoiding right from the start (carts for the N64 for example). If we want to take all these details as facts then fine - Nintendo are not having a HD in their machine. On the other hand they MAY introduce one. We don't know.
Are people out there really buying systems for the specs? I bought myself a Gamecube last year for Metroid Prime, Windwaker, and Resident Evil 0/1/4. Metroid is one of the best games ever made, on any system, and Resident Evil 4 is regarded as the best survival horror game ever made. I'll be stuffed if these games don't look any good (read ANY review on those two). If you asked me for the specs of the system I really can't tell you, but I can tell you they're as good-looking as any console games. However, this doesn't affect the fact that these are some of the best games ever made. Yes, I've got a Playstation. Yes, I have played a lot of games on other systems. Nothing has really taken to my fancy, regardless of the countless games released (except maybe Doom 3 collector's edition - but I've got my PC for that)
I personally think 3rd party games are going to be an issue with the Revolution just like they have been for the past 2 Nintendo systems. I'm saying now if the GAMES on the 360 or PS3 are better than the Revolution's then I'll buy one of them, or both if I'm rich :D. For now... let's just wait and see what the developers have in store.
Don't beleive the figures. They aren't necessarily true. If they are - how does this affect the games?
"whats with the PPC chips all of a sudden...apple abandons ibm, but MS and now (presuembly) nintendo pick em up..."
Clues for the clueless, Nintendos GameCube already uses PowerPC. Now Sony and MS are wising up to the fact.
Revolution seems to be the only next-gen console with any kind of interest for me. PS3 and xb36 can slug it out for the polygon counters all they want. Me, I like games.
well considering gamespot is reporting that the revolution won't have hd cabability, its off my shopping list. Its retarded to not include this cabability. Then again Nintendo hasn't seemed to have made a good decision in about 10 years.
To Matt, post #20, while its true that there aren't a lot of hd sets out there right now, its increasing exponentially. Basically you have to be dirt poor or a fool or both to buy a non-hd ready set today. Besides, the life of the revolution will take it to around 2010. How many hd sets do you think will be in homes by then??
re: post 36:
"pre-ordained success of the PSP"
that would be the PSP that's getting it's ass handed to it by an ugly underpowered Nintendo DS?
The sales figures back me up, where's your evidence for preordained success? ;)
Any stone tablets with 'Commandment the 11th: The PSP must be purchased by all'?
No matter the (low) specs of the revolution nor the "revolutionary" controller yet to be unveiled, I certainly don't wanna play all those Mario sh*ts.
Mario golf, Mario tennis, Mario Kart, Mario paper, Mario 128, Mario.... even with a neural plug or a telepathic receiver, I'm fed up with this stupid character (and his stupid friends too).
Revolution without me, except if there are new (interesting) franchises. *bigdoubt*
rip: "How many hd sets do you think will be in homes by then??"
By 2010? Prices will drop, of course, but I honestly don't think that many more will be in homes than now. Maybe that's because I fall into the dirt poor category. My regular, very non-HD TV works just fine and my games look great on it in my opinion. Ignorance is bliss, I reckon. I also don't know anyone who'd go out and buy an HDTV just to enhance their gaming experience. Maybe I need richer, more generous friends.
Revolution doesnt need Hd since the display doesnt seem to be a big deal and it will have plug ins for your monitoir , beside by 2010 there will be a whoe new round of consoles but right now in 2005 not all cable is HD not all movies are HD
So an Hd Tv is little more than a fril for the next couple years
HD little more than a frill? You sir, are delusional. First of all, you clearly don't watch sports: I can assure you, most of my Superbowl party this year was taken up with "Wow, I can't believe how good that pictures is!" statements. Watching baseball and NASCAR racing in HD? Actually makes them worth viewing. Watching shows like Lost, CSI:NY and Battlestar Galactica in HD? Brilliant. Playing games like God of War, Halo 2, and Resident Evil 4 in 480p? Awesome.
You can now get an EDTV for well under $1000, and a full-blown HDTV for only a little more. This trend is only going to continue as the technology gets cheaper. Add in financing options, and HDTVs will be expanding everywhere very soon.
I personally hope that the Revolution can handle HD, even if it doesn't require it of developers; I think the opposite would be a serious mistake on their part.
As for Resident Evil 4 no longer being exclusive...this is standard for plenty of games, these days. The PS/2 version is coming out over 6 months after the 'cube version...and it LOOKS LIKE ASS. The huge polygon count drops and the lower resolution make it look like it was put through an 'ugly' filter. The essential core gameplay should be the same, making it singularly awesome, but it's clearly inferior to the Gamecube version, due to graphic limitations.
i have been on many boards and read many comments on the whole next gen scene. my opinion if its worth anything is that in the case of nintendo it is not listening to the consumer. I worry that they think more about profit margines than fighting a battle that is there wether they like it or not they will be compared to ms and sony there is no niche market that they love to go on about. they need to come in fighting, software may be the key and the most important aspect but technology drives sales the more capabilites you have the more consumers you reach. nintendo need to start researching what the consumer wants and not telling us wat we want as there is a difference, all i say is listen to the ms and sony fanboys and the increasing amount of ninty fanboys who want somthing to shout about dont listen to ninty fanboys stuck in the past where they would take any rubbish given to them. in the end i want ninty to be great again and lead the market not jus be a bit part player in the next gen wars as iam a massive ninty fan
#17 -- Sorry, but it's also common knowledge that all of the "running" XBOX 360 demos were from Power Macintosh G5 desktops hidden in cabinets under the empty-shelled consoles. The 360 is supposed to hit stores in November, while the PS3 has a 4-6 month longer window to retail.
This is to everyone who thing PS3 are 360 are somehow close in specs: They're not. PS3 is at least twice as good as, and in many cases several times better than, 360. For example:
2 Teraflops v 1 Teraflop
256MB 3.2 GHz XDRAM & 256MB 700MHz DDR3 RAM v 512MB 700MHz DDR3 RAM
35GB/sec video pipe v 22GB/sec video pipe
7 3.2GHz processors (1 core, 7 secondary processors with 2 instructions per cycle) v 3 3.2GHz cores with 2 threads each
50GB disc v 9GB disc
1x1080p or 2x1080i v 1x1080i
Dual HDTV support v single HDTV support
10/100/1000 Ethernet v 10/100 Ethernet
192Khz 24-bit audio v 48Khz 16-bit audio
7 wireless controllers v 4 wireless controllers
6xUSB 2.0/1xSD/1xCF/1xMemory Stick Standard, Pro, and DUO v 3xUSB 2.0
In fact, the only places where PS3 and 360 are similar are in the memory bus bandwidth (25.6GBs v 22.4GBs) and their wireless networking speeds (802.11g for both). In nearly every other regard, PS3 outperforms 360 by huge margins.
Staying on point, though, these Revolution specs are far below 360.
Natiahs
The thing everyone is forgetting is that Nintendo has released comments that the Revolution will be 2 to 3 times more powerful than the Gamecube. PS3, on the other hand, will be 35 times more powerful than its predecessor. Revolution will likely be able to play games similar to those on the other systems at the systems' launches, but in a few years, when the hardware is really being pushed, it will have to cut back things like polygon count or sacrifice frame rate, something that is being done to RE4. It's port from the GC to the PS2, as mentioned above, is requiring serious reduction in quality, and the release dates are 10 months different (Jan GC, Nov PS2). Don't expect Nintendo to be able to keep up completely in terms of graphics. But, gameplay is not all graphics, and Nintendo has even said that the Revolution, while replacing the GC in marketing, is not the TRUE gamecube replacement (because next gens usually have many times the technological power as their predecessors).
Nintendo will continue to find the niche market. Although their marketing is to develop "new" ways of playing games, which is all well and good, I'm not particularly interested in the Donkey Konga Bongos or having to have a GBA or DS to play the best features of my games. If this is their "new and exciting" technology, count me out.
That being said, I will certainly purchase a Revolution when my favorite games come out, specifically the next gen LoZ. Nintendo will make sure to keep their prices as low as possible. $200 for the system is a good deal for a launch, especially if PS3 tops $400 (although it is a possibility for $300).
With XBOX360 and PS3 using the new technology, game prices are likely to go to $60. Revolution may keep theirs at $50.
Although I don't feel HD is a necessity for next gen, it is definitely a plus. Playing RE4 in widescreen (or any other game that supports it for that matter) truely gives a better gameplay experience, IMO. I bet playing in high res glory, especially will all the extra pixels, is a mindblow.
On a sidenote, the US gov has passed legislation that all tv broadcast must be digital by Jan 1, 2008, so expect to see cheaper high-def sets hitting the market in the next few years. Whether they make this deadline or not is open for discusion, as the last deadline was Jan 1, 2006, which they moved back cause we are obviously no where near making it.