Insanestalker2 said:
lol, bolded part is true. However, IF you compare the max polygons the two can dish out based on ram, the ps3 much more efficient. 275m for ps3, using 256mb ram. 500m for 360 using 512mb ram. It does look like the 360 can dish out more. However, a developer cannot just use all the ram on the graphics, how about the game. Based on this the 360 would need to use 55% of its ram to keep up with the ps3 in graphics. That leaves 45%, or 230.4mb ram for the game, while the ps3 has another 256mb ram just for this. With a much more superior cpu, theoretically, the 360 can't handle a game that pushes the ps3. Anyways, there aren't many devs that will do this, and to me its just going against making a profit by doing this. Making multiplatform games make more profit if the game is good(or so I believe).
|
WTF! Lol, I just reread this. It doesn't make any sense.
Total Ram - 512 mb unified + 10mb fast EDRAM for the frame buffer which means realistically that ram is worth more than the 522mb indicates. Furthermore theres a hardware tesselator which hasn't been used which can save at least 20mb of video ram (Very conservative)
The PS3 has about 5% less ram once you add the EDRAM and take into account the higher OS useage. Then you have to contend with the fact that the ram isn't unified so can't be used as flexibly. Thats ignoring the tesselator btw.
Thats why a PS3 engine is an easy fit into the Xbox 360 architecture due to the small size advantage for the Xbox 360 memory pool.
Tease.







