By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - How do the visuals on the Nintendo Switch compare to those of the Xbox 360 & PS3?

 

The Nintendo Switch hardware is...

A big leap over 7th gen 71 40.11%
 
A minor leap over 7th gen 72 40.68%
 
About the same as 7th gen 24 13.56%
 
Actually WORSE than last gen 10 5.65%
 
Total:177
Pemalite said:

Sadly it wasn't on the market long enough to see those extra capabilities fully realized.

More like it didn't sell well enough for developers/publishers to put in the effort.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
zorg1000 said:
Pemalite said:

Sadly it wasn't on the market long enough to see those extra capabilities fully realized.

More like it didn't sell well enough for developers/publishers to put in the effort.

WII u main problem was it's CPU, and it wasn't the lack of effort, its gpu was about the same as 360, slightly more efficient, but it's cpu was a problem, and it showed through out the whole generation in ports. you think switch ports get a ton of effort, they don't but hardware superiority shows because its clearly superior.



quickrick said:

there so much things going  in a game engine, that you have no idea which one is technically more demanding, it really is impossible to tell.

That is a rather large assertion. Are you confident in that statement?

quickrick said:

As for wiiu part, i disagree, GPU advantage is minuscule, and the cpu disadvantage is big, based on the ports, and the developer telling us the cpu is weaker then 360ps3 where its a problem.

The CPU has it's Pro's and Con's. Thanks to it being an Out-Of-Order design with branch prediction, relatively short pipeline and so on... The Wii U's CPU can handle "dirty" code far better than the Xbox 360 or Playstation 3.
Overall though the CPU is a disadvantage.

The biggest limitation last generation was simply Ram. Developers had to resort to excessive streaming of textures and meshes from Optical and Mechanical disk last generation to make effective use of every byte. The WiiU doesn't have that same disadvantage to the same degree. It still exists, sure, but a doubling of workable memory is still a doubling.

As for the GPU... The advantage is actually fairly sizable thanks to it's VLIW roots.
It's simply a more modern, more efficient design that is capable of more modern effects.
Granted... It's not as efficient as say... Maxwell or Graphics Core Next, but it's a step up from the R580 derived GPU in the Xbox 360.

zorg1000 said:
Pemalite said:

Sadly it wasn't on the market long enough to see those extra capabilities fully realized.

More like it didn't sell well enough for developers/publishers to put in the effort.

That too.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
quickrick said:

there so much things going  in a game engine, that you have no idea which one is technically more demanding, it really is impossible to tell.

That is a rather large assertion. Are you confident in that statement?

quickrick said:

As for wiiu part, i disagree, GPU advantage is minuscule, and the cpu disadvantage is big, based on the ports, and the developer telling us the cpu is weaker then 360ps3 where its a problem.

The CPU has it's Pro's and Con's. Thanks to it being an Out-Of-Order design with branch prediction, relatively short pipeline and so on... The Wii U's CPU can handle "dirty" code far better than the Xbox 360 or Playstation 3.
Overall though the CPU is a disadvantage.

The biggest limitation last generation was simply Ram. Developers had to resort to excessive streaming of textures and meshes from Optical and Mechanical disk last generation to make effective use of every byte. The WiiU doesn't have that same disadvantage to the same degree. It still exists, sure, but a doubling of workable memory is still a doubling.

As for the GPU... The advantage is actually fairly sizable thanks to it's VLIW roots.
It's simply a more modern, more efficient design that is capable of more modern effects.
Granted... It's not as efficient as say... Maxwell or Graphics Core Next, but it's a step up from the R580 derived GPU in the Xbox 360.

zorg1000 said:

More like it didn't sell well enough for developers/publishers to put in the effort.

That too.

yes i'm sure about that assertion, unless we are talking about a big difference in hardware power it's impossible, but if both games are impressive and the hardware is close, its impossible, there are many tricks to get games to look amazing, and many calculations thats impossible to see with he human eye. considering  simple things like nice AA, or just a simple  resolution will cause games to run like crap. comparing halo 4 to uncharted 3 and saying one is more technically demanding is  impossible , same thing for forza horizon vs mario kart, or mario 3d world vs gears of war 3.   

SO let me this straight developers that work on porting games for a living can't take advantage of the gpu, and struggle with the cpu, yet you say the gpu is a bigger advantage... ok  if the GPU is a step up you can be  sure most developers will know how show it's advantage, reality its not a step up at all, and the cpu was a bigger disadvantage i think the ports prove this, its a undeniable fact developers were struggling with CPU.  even a developer working on wiiu said it was a problem for him to get many enemies on screen compared to 360/ps3.  

Last edited by quickrick - on 03 February 2018

quickrick said:

yes i'm sure about that assertion, unless we are talking about a big difference in hardware power it's impossible, but if both games are impressive and the hardware is close, its impossible, there are many tricks to get games to look amazing, and many calculations thats impossible to see with he human eye. considering  simple things like nice AA, or just a simple  resolution will cause games to run like crap. comparing halo 4 to uncharted 3 and saying one is more technically demanding is  impossible , same thing for forza horizon vs mario kart, or mario 3d world vs gears of war 3.   

SO let me this straight developers that work on porting games for a living can't take advantage of the gpu, and struggle with the cpu, yet you say the gpu is a bigger advantage... ok  if the GPU is a step up you can be  sure most developers will know how show it's advantage, reality its not a step up at all, and the cpu was a bigger disadvantage i think the ports prove this, its a undeniable fact developers were struggling with CPU.  even a developer working on wiiu said it was a problem for him to get many enemies on screen compared to 360/ps3.  

Did you even bother to read my post?



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
Pemalite said:
quickrick said:

yes i'm sure about that assertion, unless we are talking about a big difference in hardware power it's impossible, but if both games are impressive and the hardware is close, its impossible, there are many tricks to get games to look amazing, and many calculations thats impossible to see with he human eye. considering  simple things like nice AA, or just a simple  resolution will cause games to run like crap. comparing halo 4 to uncharted 3 and saying one is more technically demanding is  impossible , same thing for forza horizon vs mario kart, or mario 3d world vs gears of war 3.   

SO let me this straight developers that work on porting games for a living can't take advantage of the gpu, and struggle with the cpu, yet you say the gpu is a bigger advantage... ok  if the GPU is a step up you can be  sure most developers will know how show it's advantage, reality its not a step up at all, and the cpu was a bigger disadvantage i think the ports prove this, its a undeniable fact developers were struggling with CPU.  even a developer working on wiiu said it was a problem for him to get many enemies on screen compared to 360/ps3.  

Did you even bother to read my post?

I read your post and i'm in disagreement, Wii U CPU, simply was a huge disadvantage, that resulted in most games running  worse, and the ram, and minuscule GPU difference didn't make most games run better, and that's all that matters, superior hardware runs most games better, it's as simple that. oh, and i read what you said about the CPU, but ill take the word of a actual developer that worked on the hardware, and real world results.

Last edited by quickrick - on 03 February 2018

quickrick said:
Pemalite said:

Did you even bother to read my post?

I read your post and i'm in disagreement, Wii U CPU, simply was a huge disadvantage, that resulted in most games running  worse, and the ram, and minuscule GPU difference didn't make most games run better, and that's all that matters, superior hardware runs most games better, it's as simple that. oh, and i read what you said about the CPU, but ill take the word of a actual developer that worked on the hardware, and real world results.

Clearly you haven't.

For one you made a false assertion without any evidence to support your hypothesis that I am unable to tell which game/game engine is more demanding, despite my knowledge of a games rendering pipeline.

Secondly. I actually agreed with you that the Wii U CPU is a disadvantage. (Hence my statement asking whether you read my post or not.)
So essentially with you saying that you disagree with me and would actually "take the word" of an actual developer is hilarious and stupid, you are disagreeing with yourself now.

Thirdly. Prove that the WiiU GPU is only a minuscule improvement. Do it. I dare you.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
quickrick said:

I read your post and i'm in disagreement, Wii U CPU, simply was a huge disadvantage, that resulted in most games running  worse, and the ram, and minuscule GPU difference didn't make most games run better, and that's all that matters, superior hardware runs most games better, it's as simple that. oh, and i read what you said about the CPU, but ill take the word of a actual developer that worked on the hardware, and real world results.

Clearly you haven't.

For one you made a false assertion without any evidence to support your hypothesis that I am unable to tell which game/game engine is more demanding, despite my knowledge of a games rendering pipeline.

Secondly. I actually agreed with you that the Wii U CPU is a disadvantage. (Hence my statement asking whether you read my post or not.)
So essentially with you saying that you disagree with me and would actually "take the word" of an actual developer is hilarious and stupid, you are disagreeing with yourself now.

Thirdly. Prove that the WiiU GPU is only a minuscule improvement. Do it. I dare you.

reading your conversation with fatslob and calling  ports shit, shows you have very little knowledge, and i have seen developers that work on games say the same things i said, that's it basically impossible barring a huge gap in hardware power.

I read what you wrote about the CPU, you made it seem like a small advantage for 360, but it clearly was a bigger problem for developers.

thirdly the games speak for themselves ,when it comes to WIIU GPU, it doesn't even one port running at a higher resolution or with more detailed AA, that should say enough. from what i understand it also has less GFLOPS, then 360, but this is not about the WIIU, so you can PM if you want to continue the conversation. 

Last edited by quickrick - on 03 February 2018

RolStoppable said:
It's a huge leap. Some games look even better than anything on the PS4.



Gotta love quickrick, gonna get in a heated argumemt about hardware specs with this sites most knowledgeable specs guy.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.