Out of all the GeForce graphics cards what is the Xbox 360 graphics equivalent to?
 

I think they're closer to the 7900's but I'm not quite sure.

I was going to say 7800GTX, i'm sure it's around 7800/7900.
 
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenos

My friend thinks they are the same as the GeForce 8800. Is the Xbox 360 close to this?

I have also heard 7800 GTX; there is no way it%u2019s the 8800.  That is why as soon as a console comes out, it%u2019s outdated.  The Xbox 360 graphics is powerful because it gets to run code that has been written exactly like its architecture and so the 8800 is needed to run that code effectively.  It is becoming that when they port the games they just copy and paste the code.

Hello
 
@ Bidybag, if your friend think the Xbox 360 gfx card is the same as an 8800 I presume he thinks they have conjurers over at Microsoft going a few years in the future to equip their machines? Even if he means the equivalent of an 8800 he is wrong, check out theese threads:
http://techreport.com/articles.x/8342
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenos

AFAIK, the Xenos is equivalent to the X1900/X1950 XT cards. So yeah, about as powerful as a 7800/7900GTX.
 
 
 

Trying to compare an Xbox to a PC graphic card is like apples and oranges. An Xbox is highly optimized to do 1 thing, and the games for it are written specifically to work with it. It doesn't need the highest powered graphics hardware to run it's games effectively.

 
Sony's the one with the 7800GTX in their PS3.

The Xbox360 "Xenos" GPU is not comparable to any desktop card. It has 48 unified shaders, tessellation support, and has 10MB of integrated eDRAM. In raw speed it's not as fast as the 8800GTX, but anything programmed for the Xbox360 will be much more optimized than a PC counterpart. The PS3's "RSX" is quite literally a 7900GT clocked to 550MHz with only 8 ROPs. While it would sound as if the PS3 would be at a disadvantage graphically, this is not the case when used correctly as the Cell is very capable of taking on rendering tasks as well, almost like a second GPU.

The 360GPU (Xenos) was designed by ATI, so the GeForce comparisons are pretty far off. I'd say that Xenos sits somewhere between the X1900 series and the HD2900 series, probably closer to the X1900.

Yeah, HY27's got it right, althoguh to add that the RSX also only has half the bandwidth of the GT at 128bit, and of course it's 'shared' memory. And while the Cell is helpful, it still suffers many of the same limitations of the GF7 series and relying on even the CELL to make up fo them is still prohibitive because of the added latency per cycle to virtualize operations that would perform much faster if they were supported in hardware, it's like being able to do HDR+AA by sending the image back through the ROPs a second time, it's possible, but the performance penalty makes it not practical.  
 
Homerdog's got it close, with the Xenos having about the equivalent strength of a X1950Pro-X1950XT but with some extra little bits that would be similar to the HD2900.
 
While the RSX is the same architecture as a desktop part the Xenos is not, and add to that the added variable of eDRAM and there's really nothing similar to it.
 
Features and Performance wise though I'd say it's like an ATi X19xx series with some bonuses, but it definitely falls short of the GF8800/HD2K/3K series cards for both features and performance.

for the 360its a beefed up x1900xt core like the rsx on ps3 is a beefed version of the 7800gtx....but these cores are highly optomised for use on there set platform. short story long....they get more bang for the buck! oh and to a note to the guy's buddy who said a 360 was in line with a 8800gtx...psshhhh rofl not even, close to twice the power in the 8800...not to say a 360 can't hold its own. it is a "platform" so it is designed to do everything this pc doesn't on a hardware/software level, it has an os that runs smooth and error free as possible with little to no cpu over head unlike windows freeing up system reasources for 3d rendering, sound or phyics.

 
The RSX is not higly optimized, it's a GF7900GT with half the bandwidth/ROPs, with no additional architecture benifits.
The Xenos is also not a beefed up X19xx since it came before the X1900 and also have very different architectures that owe nothing to the X1900, their functions are beefed up but the chip is not a 'beefed-up' anything else.
 
Probably the best article ever written on the subject wa by Wavey Dave at B3D;
http://www.beyond3d.com/content/articles/4/

I have a Sapphire x1950GT.  When My computer boots it says x1950GT R500 which from what I understand the "R500" is the same core chip that is in the XBOX 360.  Games look great and I would say it is very comparable to XBOX 360 graphics.
 
Far as a GeForce 8800 that is way beyond an XBOX360.

 
You'd be wrong on asuming they are the same, it is an R500 aka C1 aka Xenos aka son of the never launched R400, but has nothing to do with the R5xx desktop series. Read the article.
 
It (the X1950GT) is an R5xx series chip, RV570 to be exact; but the R500/Xenos and R520/580/RV570 are very VERY different chips/architectures.

It's probably more like 2600xt/8600gt

SOOO... a little off topic but which machine has the potential for better GFX X360 or PS3?