| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (122)

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:03PM copa said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"the hardware will ONLY siphon 10 to 15 percent of the 360's CPU power"

Yet more proof that Natal is being targeted for casuals only. Ask developers of Splinter Cell:Conviction, Mass Effect 2, or Halo: Reach what they think about losing ONLY 15 percent of CPU power for their game. That is an ungodly amount.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:05PM SmilinGoat said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
did you really expect it to be used properly in blockbuster games anyway? its going to be like having a Wii add-on for the Xbox.

maybe they'll actually plan for this from the get go for the next system and have an on-board chip and package it with the next xbox.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:11PM PlatinumSkeet said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I thought it could be a good use for FPS to peak around corners or have your head movement track some of the sights. That's about it though.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:11PM FredFredrickson said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Ungodly... really?

Is it standard practice to utilize 100% of the CPU power at all times? That seems wrong to me.

It'll likely be more a casual thing than anything utilized by "hardcore" blockbuster games - but that will probably be because most of the blockbuster games are multi-platform, and the devs for those games don't have time to implement proprietary motions controls into each version of the game.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
No, they might not use it all of the time. But having one of the CPU cores handling Natal calculations will increase load times, cut back on the physics, and the amount of things a game can do.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:16PM MarkezJM said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
MS saying that Natal uses 10-15% CPU does not equate to saying that any game utilizing Natal will only be using 10-15% of the 360's CPU power.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:28PM phinn said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Yea "only" 15% is quite a large amount for high production games. And Natal *already* was pretty laggy from those E3 videos.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:37PM Captain Planet Planeteer Power said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
EVERYONE PLEASE, STEP OFF YOUR JUMP TO CONCLUSION MATS
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:40PM thisredengine Tweet me said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
...That's the worst idea I've ever heard in my life, Captain Planet.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:50PM sinai said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
while i agree that it is a large amount of CPU time, i don't think i'd want to use natal for any of those games.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 1:03PM limestallc said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
10 - 15% is actually not that much, I even doubt that most games including the graphically intensive ones even use 85 - 90% of the CPU. In a system like the 360 the GPU's capabilities would probably top out way before they could max out the CPU. It also will not increase load times because again the CPU isn't the bottleneck the DVD drive, HDD, and the RAM would all be maxed out before the CPU.In actuality making natal come out at a more accessible price point is most likely a better move for Microsoft than making it $50 more expensive just to save that 30% - 45% of the third core on the CPU.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 2:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Games generally aren't CPU limited.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 2:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@captainplanet

heheheh, was that an office space reference?
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 2:48PM Vcize said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Copa, and everyone voting him up...

1) Start up one of your "blockbuster" PC games.
2) Open your task manager window that shows CPU usage
3) Play said game, and take note of how often CPU usage spikes over 85%

Conclusion: Not very often if at all.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 3:52PM D dogg said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, if you think Natal is a CPU hog, try watching a HD DVD movie on Xbox 360. If memory serves me right, that thing used 100% of Xbox's CPU.

This thing does netflix and allows you to swipe movie box art left and right so stop whining!
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 4:39PM Hyams said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Vcize:

Remember though, this means the CPU can *never* go past 85%.

Yeah, CPU usage isn't at 85%+ all the time, but it may have to happen for the more intensive scenes in games. This 10-15% CPU headway means Natal-implemented games can *never* use all the CPU, and so can't do those epic, intensive scenes.

This is most concerning for Natal-optional games (like Fable III), I think.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 5:02PM FredFredrickson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's most concerning if you're an imbecile who doesn't understand how computers work.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 5:31PM Hyams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The describes me pretty well, actually.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 6:50PM p dot t said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
It has always been our dream to use our console without any controller with Natal, this dream could become a reality. Hopefully it won't be a flop. Project Natal Dream Come True? Details: http://bit.ly/project-natal-will-change-our-world
Reply

Posted: Jan 8th 2010 12:58AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hey at least its like they not putting vista on it.
Reply

Posted: Jan 8th 2010 1:38AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
wow after reading Vcize comment I thought It was time to do a CPU upgrade after 4-5 years of use. I guess theirs still life on my AMD 64 X2 3800 2.01 Ghz.


hm I learn something new today.
Reply

Posted: Jan 8th 2010 6:29PM FordGTGuy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
To think the Xbox 360 uses 100% of its available CPU power at all times is foolish. How do you think it manages to run the on board OS in the background while tracking your friends, letting your message people over msn and stream music from your computer while playing these games. If anything it is unfair to put power strain in the form of percentage as it really doesn't work that way.

There will most likely be a few threads on a single CPU(of the three) to be used in running Natal and hopefully no RAM strain as that is the true bottle neck of the Xbox 360.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:05PM FredFredrickson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
10-15% doesn't seem like that much to me. But I'm glad it'll "force" developers to work on Natal specific titles and not just re-work old games that everyone would just fire up once to try and never play again.

This whole Natal thing is getting more interesting to me, but I'm still anxious to see what the price will be. There's a balance between price and functionality that will make or break Natal.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:12PM PlatinumSkeet said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
10-15% won't force developers that much. Xbox360 is still powerful console and they can take a title that was made 3 or 4 years ago and bring the original concept with taking little to no hit graphically...
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:14PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Don't count on it. Older titles can still use a ton of power, as they may not have been tightly optimized for the hardware.

Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:44PM FredFredrickson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
True enough. I doubt most devs are going to want (or have the budget) to go back and re-work old games anyway.
Reply

Posted: Jan 8th 2010 1:12PM Marco le Polo said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Yea, for example Diablo II crashes on my after I upgraded my PC and Starcraft looks like shit, although that's probably because I need to update/rollback my drivers. I have XP Pro w/8400 GS.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:07PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Yeah, this isn't a good sign.

If they're pulling out chips to make this thing cheaper, just how expensive will it be?

That's one of the things that sounds promising about the PMC-Sony's slated support for the older games on the system. I don't have to buy PMC games to experience my new hardware.

Now Natal's software base will be even smaller. No serious developer will be content with being able to use 85 percent of the Xenon.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:17PM FredFredrickson said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It might mean the difference between a price like $50 and $100 though - and that would definitely make it a more attractive purchase, especially when compared to having to buy Sony's motion controls or Wii controllers for each player, as opposed to using one Natal camera for all four people on Xbox.

Retro support for motion controls in older PS3 games is something that we should wait and see about, I think. Why would you want to re-play the same old games with different controls? And of course, Sony's motion control will take up some of the PS3's CPU power as well - nothing comes for free.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:18PM Ordeith said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
"No serious developer will be content with being able to use 85 percent of the Xenon. "

Serious developers make games for the PS3, seem content to do so.

Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:19PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
The Cell is far more powerful than the watered down version in the 360.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:25PM FredFredrickson said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
You guys are idiots. The CPU inside the Xbox is not a "watered down" Cell processor. The two have completely different architectures, and are not anything you can really compare directly, because they can both be utilized in different ways.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:26PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Both are based off of the Power architecture. The Xenon cores are modified versions of the Power Processing Element inside the Cell.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:39PM oolz said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
You're f'n dumb. Devlopers will sell their children if they have a chance to move a million units of a game. they don't give a shit about there only being 85% of a systems power available when few if any of them have even used 100% of it in the first place. Who gives a shit about old titles. I don't want OLD titles to use something new, I want NEW games. Not hacked in controls for the same old shit.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:42PM FredFredrickson said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Okay, both are microprocessors. But how they accomplish things is very different, and very dependent on the capabilities of the developers utilizing them. So far, I've seen little proof that one is much better than the other.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:42PM Captain Planet Planeteer Power said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I love reading comments where people have absolutely no idea about what the fuck they are talking about.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 1:17PM Duke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Mary, you my friend deserve a slow clap from us all! +1's
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 1:36PM Duke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh wow - I meant Marty! Damn that made me laugh.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 6:07PM iprefermuffins said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
No comment on Bradwart's earlier statements, but his last one on both CPUs being based on the same architecture is correct. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon_(processor) and the two references cited - http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3904/processing_the_truth_an_interview_.php http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123069467545545011.html
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 5:13PM McDuckScrooged said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Marty seriously truthfully honestly , your such a Microsoft FANBOY, seriously for 1 second do a little research. If you bothered doing a little bit of research you would notice one thing the Xenon == 3 x Cell PPE's to put it bluntly..

I was also going to say you do realise that any advantage the Natal had any possibility of this thing being taken seriously has just been thrown out the window.

The NATAL camera is now no more than the PS EYE, thats right folks its just a Microsoft branded Playstation eye, with an added CMOS sensor. They removed the brain, they have bastardised the thing that made NATAL decent, embrace extend and fcuk it up that should be Microsofts moto, they cant do a single thing right..
Reply

Posted: Jan 8th 2010 1:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Xenon is a CPU that is used in the Xbox 360 game console. The processor, internally codenamed "Waternoose" by IBM[1] and "XCPU" by Microsoft, is based on IBM's PowerPC instruction set architecture, consisting of three independent processor cores on a single die. These cores are slightly modified versions of the PPE in the Cell processor which was designed specifically for the PlayStation 3.[2][3] Each core has two symmetric hardware threads (SMT), for a total of six hardware threads available to games. Each individual core also includes 32 KiB of L1 instruction cache and 32 KiB of L1 data cache.

The processors are labelled "XCPU" on the packaging and are manufactured by Chartered. Chartered reduced the fabrication process in 2007 to 65 nm, thus reducing manufacturing costs for Microsoft.

The name "Xenon" was repurposed from the code name for the Xbox 360 in early development.

Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:09PM PlatinumSkeet said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well when you think about a camera tracking a group of 4 people with audio and gestures it does make since. Just don't expect to see for any use in a hardcore game until the next Xbox.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:15PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
That means no backward compatibility with every 360 game made so far. Thas bad right? You said so when PS3 dropped it.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
[banned]
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:35PM spin cycle said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Also, it never really was going to be backwards compatible in any meaningful way anyway. Don't buy into marketing hype. Motion input has different limitations like lack of precision and responsiveness, plus the user can get tired a lot quicker from certain movements than by pressing RB. Because of these limitations it never actually was going to be possible to put some kind hack in that made 100% of older games use Natal in a meaningful way.

Games will have to be designed for Natal, it was true before and it's true now, just the spec has changed a little bit.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 1:06PM Jack Tretton said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Isn't Christmas break over for you toddlers? Why are you commenting on blogs when you should be asleep in school?
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:16PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
[banned]
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:21PM FredFredrickson said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It just means that developers who choose to utilize Natal will have a little less CPU power to play with for other elements of the game. For some games, this could mean less physics elements, for others it might mean the AI isn't advanced. And still for others, it could mean no change at all.

Good developers shouldn't have a problem with it.

But speculating on how this could affect backward compatibility or the power of future games, at this point, is moronic. There's simply not enough information.
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:26PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
[banned]
Reply

Posted: Jan 7th 2010 12:29PM BIGGEN said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
it means that nobody knows what it means. obviously from the myriad of back and forth comments "it's BAD" no "it's GOOD" no "natal sucks now" no "natal doesn't suck now." i love how full of shit these comments are.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW