Currently Online 
Tyrannical said:
The RSX was an off the shelf PC GPU bolted onto the CELL at the last minute because Sony realized the PS3 would be too weak without it. Kinda of like Sega with the Saturn, if you beleive in Karma. The 360's unified shader Xenos can perform almost twice the in game shader ops then the PS3's RSX. I don't know where you'd get the impression the RSX was more powerful.
|
Another one trying to start it again. First of all, like MikeB already said, the Reality Synthesizer have been developed since the beginning of 2005 by Nvidia. Do you really think that knowing X360 specs because it released earlier Sony would release a weaker console one year after? Yet fans keep thinking they know how to do things better than the whole SCE developing team.
Secondly, the Xenos can do 48 billion shader ops per second while the RSX can do 136 billion per sec.
The RSX can do 24 filtered texture samples per clock and 32 unfiltered. The Xenos can only do 16 filtered and 16 unfiltered.
RSX's fillrate are 4.4 gigapixels/sec and 13.2 gigatexels/sec, while the Xenos fillrate is 4 gigapixels and 8 gigatexels.
However, the eDRAM includes additional logic for color, alpha compositing, Z/stencil buffering, and anti-aliasing called “Intelligent Memory” (eDRAM), giving developers 4-sample anti-aliasing at very little performance cost. That's why earlier multiplat games usually look better on the X360. You should know that since the very first games the consoles GPUs were maxed and graphical improvements are mostly built around the GPU: and guess what, the EDRAM easier to develop to than programming the SPEs to do polygon transformations, lighting, etc.
Essay Pro