IGN has published some technical details of the Nintendo Revolution -- which Nintendo is keeping very quiet about -- gleaned by talking to developers. It warns:
Readers are advised to make two notes before continuing with this article. The first is that developers are still working with incomplete Revolution hardware. Most studios are, in fact, developing on "GameCube-based kits," according to major software houses we spoke to, which have asked to remain anonymous. The second is that developers are still without final specifications for Revolution's ATI-developed graphics chip, codenamed Hollywood.
None the less, it's clear that Nintendo is not going to compete with the Xbox 360 or very similar PS3 in the power stakes, and it doesn't even support HD.
"To be honest, it's not much more powerful than an Xbox. It's like a souped up Xbox," a major third party source revealed to us. "But it's the controller that makes the difference and the controller is really nice."
The IGN story continues with More Revolution Specs Uncovered, as more developers open up. This says:
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."
The main advantage is 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."
Comment: If IGN is right, the Revolution is less of an improvement on the GameCube than the Xbox was on the PlayStation 2. Of course, even being significantly more powerful does not guarantee success -- witness the old Xbox's failure to supplant the PS2, or the Atari Lynx's failure to supplant the original GameBoy. However, in both these cases, an entrenched, established system (with loads of games and millions of users) was fighting off an alien invader (with few games and no users). I suspect it's going to be much harder to challenge two established systems (Xbox 360, PS3) with an underpowered invader like the Revolution. Even if all the GameCube fans buy one, it's still likely to be a distant third.... unless, of course, it really can find a new market that doesn't take its lead from the early-adopter hardcore gaming fraternity. That's probably in the toy department.
