Dell's flagship XPS 700 fuses Core 2 Duo processing and SLI gaming power in a package guaranteed to turn heads. But is the XPS branding worth the premium price?
Gamerscoreblog , a blog run by members of Microsoft's Games Global Marketing team, hopes to put the GoW for PC rumors to rest.
From the blog:
"Yes, Microsoft provided the image that is published in the Games for Windows cover story in the Holiday issue of PC Gamer magazine.
Yes, this image contains what looks to be box shots of Gears of War with the Games for Windows branding bar on the box art.
NO, this is not a confirmation, leak, tease, or sly viral attempt to announce, confirm, or admit that Gears of War will be published for Windows.
Here's what happened: These images were created using draft templates for the Games for Windows box art and a variety of Microsoft Game Studios cover images. Gears of War was accidentally included by the artist as one of the MGS titles used as examples to show what our retail setup would look like. This DOES NOT indicate a confirmation that Gears of Wars will be a Games for Windows title -- it was a concept image created by a concept artist, nothing more. In fact, if you look closely you'll also see that Age of Empires III and Rise of Legends are also branded Games for Windows, and this is not actually the case (Age of Empires III: The Warchiefs is a Games for Windows branded game, but not the original Age III).
We created this image around the E3 timeframe when we were first preparing to announce and show our Games for Windows retail efforts. Shortly after the insanity that is E3, we noticed the box art, and the image was supposed to be removed from circulation. When we provided the package of art assets to PC Gamer for their cover story, we zipped up a directory of our already-public E3 assets as well as more current images (many of which PC Gamer did not use). Unfortunately, we didn't realize that this image was in that directory, and it just happens to be the one that PC Gamer figured prominently in their story. Our bad.
We're incredibly excited about the success of Gears of War on Xbox 360, but we have nothing further to announce about Gears of War, or any other platforms it might come to, at this time.
Now stop rumor-mongering and get out there and start fragging some Locust!"
"NO, this is not a confirmation, leak, tease, or sly viral attempt to announce, confirm, or admit that Gears of War will be published for Windows."
Fact is, Gears IS COMING to the PC....MS just doesn't want that known while the 360 version is selling so well.
They are not saying that it won't come to windows. They are just confirming that they are not confirming GOW for windows.
Maybe it will, after 2 years or so.. Like the first Halo, which still sucked on PC. You may as well call it an exclusive then...
The only reason it sucked was because of lazy ass Gearbox developers.
It will come with a year or two delay. Microsoft has created a new studio whos job is it only to port xbox games to windows. They are currently working on Halo2Vista and im sure once that ships new year its onto Gears.
It shouldn't bother xbox 360 gamers because it means more console exclusives to xbox 360 and then later showing up on pc, versus showing up on xbox 360 and other consoles.
lol its coming to pc and this article is funny "oh um um someone messed up someone put GOW as cover art and we forgot to remove it" oh yea ok ;) not to mention was the box art even known during E3
Great Exclusive Titles, both first party AND third will be the nail in Pl@y$t@tions coffin.
And the only way Microsoft will TRULY win console dominance.
Costco is selling a racing package that may be the ultimate gaming accessory, or may just be another toy for those with more dollars than sense.
Looked neat at first. But TV and console not included? Seems like I'd be paying for a fancy chair. Mind you, speakers and controllers are included. Not for the typical gamer, but should appeal to hardcore racers and people who spend their paychecks in arcades.
After much fanfare, Intel's first quad-core CPU has finally arrived! The Core 2 Extreme QX6700 packs four processing cores running at 2.66GHz and 8MB L2 cache all in one package. But how well does it perform, and how far have we overclocked it so far? In this article we explore the performance of this CPU, as well as Dell's first quad-core XPS system, the Dell XPS 710.
WOW!!!!!
Who cares? There were CPU's faster than the 360's when it launched, but it all comes down to how much money the majority are willing to spend on a gaming machine
Dont you know that these dumb console fanboys dont know better? And that they think that their beloved systems are god?
...have you seen the benchmarks!? On some of the benchmarks, the framerates of some games like COD2 and FEAR along with apps like DVDShrink 3.2/Adobe Encore DVD 2.+ don't get a whole lot of a boost compared to the C2E X6800! I know that the cpu is faster and takes good care of multi-tasking, but it doesn't seem that much of a difference even with 2 more cores. I think it's just sad how the QX6700 sucks more juice for about 200 Mhz less than the X6800. I know that the games aren't fully dependent of the CPU since the majority of the load is taken off from the GPU. As of now, it seems like the QX6700 is a bit too excessive for home use. Maybe for businesses, yeah this would be perfect for multi-tasking on multiple monitors, but it's just not for everybody.
It's great for running several CPU draining applications at once, like rendering, encoding and such, you're even able to play games at the same time. But like you said, it's more for businesses and not really suited for regular gamers
Four cores doesn't mean faster. The processor is 4 cores at 2.66 GHz (not accurate 10.64). The tri-ppc is 3 cores running at 3.2 GHz (not accurate 9.6). The 2.66 Ghz is on Intel's scale which is known to be over generous when compared to the AMD/PPC scale which always gives a lower GHz but actually performs much higher than the same on an Intel. It was also proven when the dual cores started to come out that a dual core processor with a lower clock speed per core but a higher total speed is actually less powerful than a solo that has a higher clock speed in most situations. The third factor to enter into the equation is the architecture which the IBM (PPC and Cell as well as the very similar AMD design) processors are known to have a better chip design. When you enter those three factors together the two processor types come out equal to slightly better for the tri-ppc (different chip designs must be tested in benchmarks for a truly accurate comparison but numbers can give an estimate) and cell (cell is basically impossible to compare in any form but benchmarks).
don't buy gaming machines until their DX10 with vista, or your gonna be ripped off.
heck, with dell's gaming machines your already being ripped off a lot.