Xgp Xgpmini Spec


Vimacs posted on Mar 19 2006 at 06:32 PM said:
im more aiming towards the mini :)

well unreal tournament and quake 3 would be very good handheld. and who's to say xgp won't get better games made for it? psp games are commercial and there is a lot of support.. but none of them look fun to play.

even so, i won't be able to justify gettign another handheld console apart from the gp2x, i don't think. i just don't care that much about gaming. a quick 30min fix on the bus is enough for me :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Vimacs posted on Mar 19 2006 at 08:24 PM said:
not that "just xx mhz more, we can reach that with overclocking as well" argument, dont forget that its highly likely that the xgp is overlockable as well.
Also with its aim towards 3d there are some chances that it could have a fpu, wich would give a serious boost.

Somehow I got the feeling they use the same processor as the GP2X main one, which would mean you would only be able to overlock as high as the GP2X can get, meaning 280-300MHz, which is not a real performance gain if you compare:

(I am not sure about the XGP's graphics processor tough)

GP2X: 2x 200 - 2x 266-300 = + 30-50%

XGP: 1x266, 1x133? - 1x300, 1x166? = +15%, +25%
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Paradox posted on Mar 19 2006 at 06:52 PM said:
contents_xgp_002.jpg


whats that game?

Just a tech demo probably.

greven posted on Mar 19 2006 at 07:16 PM said:
Radek posted on Mar 19 2006 at 03:30 PM said:
The 320x240 resolutions at 2.2 inch screen is puzzling me thought. I know that LCD can have very high pixel densities but so far there weren't too many appliances with such screens.
If i am correct i saw such screen in sharp cellphone ( 2 inch)
http://www.sharp-phone.com/products/featur...24&featureid=44

Very impressive!! However what yields (read how many dead pixels) will it have at average? We will see but I'm already stunned but the screen could be a bit bigger...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bagmouse7 posted on Mar 19 2006 at 07:48 PM said:
This has got to be pure B.S.
"WinCE optional"
I was wondering that aswell, but it could be possible, there was wince for gp32.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
aapje89 posted on Mar 19 2006 at 02:23 PM said:
bagmouse7 posted on Mar 19 2006 at 07:48 PM said:
This has got to be pure B.S.
"WinCE optional"
I was wondering that aswell, but it could be possible, there was wince for gp32.
I dont think its BS. Gamepark can get WinCE easily. Didn't the Dreamcast use that as well?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bagmouse7 posted on Mar 19 2006 at 11:48 AM said:
This has got to be pure B.S.
"WinCE optional"
I caught that too, and it's a bad idea. Assuming the device is commercial, developers and publishers would likely want a uniform spec for the machine. With WinCE being optional, some people will get it and some people won't (I know I wouldn't). That means that commercial games might not be compatible across all XGPs. And for homebrew, a divided platform means a lot of extra crap to support. Not a good idea, they're better off having one standard OS/firmware and having a unified platform.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is very odd. I thought GPH ditched GP because they wanted to make a device more focused on homebrew and the community. But the XGP and Mini look very capable of that, with plenty of power, linux, SD cards, etc. If they hadn't had left, we'd all be supporting the XGP right now, without any real complaints. Did they really just leave because they wanted to take the market for themselves? Because GP is really digging themselves a hole right now.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if that bit of information is different than how we are interpreting it.
 
WineCE..HA HA!

That 'OS' (more like library stack) was used into only one or two early dreamcast games.

IMHO not worth the 0's and 1's on whatever media its written to.

Its more of what SDL+OpenGL is to Linux than a 'real' os. Am I right?
 
BenRoshi posted on Mar 19 2006 at 11:49 AM said:
This is very odd. I thought GPH ditched GP because they wanted to make a device more focused on homebrew and the community. But the XGP and Mini look very capable of that, with plenty of power, linux, SD cards, etc. If they hadn't had left, we'd all be supporting the XGP right now, without any real complaints. Did they really just leave because they wanted to take the market for themselves? Because GP is really digging themselves a hole right now.

Yeah, they shoulda just stuck together, pooled their resources, and gave the GP2X's 2nd processor a got damn memory cache......geez-ZUS!! <_<
 
Last edited by a moderator:
aapje89 posted on Mar 19 2006 at 09:30 AM said:
Vimacs posted on Mar 19 2006 at 06:22 PM said:
Paradox posted on Mar 19 2006 at 05:52 PM said:
whats that game?
looks unrealenginish, would make sense as they claimed to have ut and q3 on there.

lets wait for e3!
woot :D


I'm going too.....JEEYEAH!! :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Knoxximus posted on Mar 19 2006 at 09:23 PM said:
aapje89 posted on Mar 19 2006 at 09:30 AM said:
Vimacs posted on Mar 19 2006 at 06:22 PM said:
Paradox posted on Mar 19 2006 at 05:52 PM said:
whats that game?
looks unrealenginish, would make sense as they claimed to have ut and q3 on there.

lets wait for e3!
woot :D


I'm going too.....JEEYEAH!! :lol:
LUCKER!!!!

Can I come with you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well personally, I like the gp2x for a couple of reasons.

1. The screen size is just right. Big enough to play games and videos , small enough to not have to have stretching and make the gp2x too big.

2. Double AA's are key. Lets face it GP is not a really popular company so replacements will be hard to come by. Good luck replacing the batteries for 50 bucks.

3. Unlike the xgp mini, the gp2x is more versatile because its suited for emulation and video functions. xgp can play videos but not emulators well. xgp mini can emulate, but sucks for video (if it can even play them).

I'll admit wifi is a nice plus, but its only really useful in your home or a specific hotspot. chances are you'll do most of your browsing on a computer.

On top of all that they might start going down the "commercial" path so who knows. I'm just sticking with the gp2x since it seems to be right in the middle of the two extremes.
 
Why do people keep saying the xgp looks like crap? I beliieve it looks nice. Also, people say that the xgp/mini wont have a performance advantage. Won't the gpu 2d accelerator sort of, I don't know, ACCLERATE the flame rates or something a bit? or am I missing something?
 
Back
Top