By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
slowmo on 30 July 2009
Edit Thread
joeorc said:
slowmo said:
@joeorc - The 360 GPU is faster, better or any other metric you choose to measure performance in, that is a proven fact stated by many developers and indeed is proved by what you see onscreen very often by the fact the 360 does AA at so little cost.

I have no doubt when using a properly optimised engine the Cell is a faster solution than the 360 solution but is the cost of optimising the game engine worth it to get that extra performance, most developers are starting to do some extra work thankfully but a few games still are done on the cheap.

There is no doubt we will move over to ever increasing parrallel processing in both CPU and GPU terms but I've always doubted the Cell would win through ultimately. Currently we have Intel working on there Larrabee project which if it works could change the face of GPU's, especially given the change over to ray tracing it could trigger. AMD and Intel are both now heavily pursuing the multi core route and in all honesty they have the marketing and R&D budgets that IBM will not spend to break into the domestic markets. The Cell was a revolution but ultimately like many IBM products over the years I fear it will be a catalyst for other companies successful projects as it will not be pushed enough. Ths is just my thoughts on the situation, I'm not an analyst or expert so think of it what you will.

that's thinking of just the GPU's by itself..which you cannot do without putting out quite a few misconceptions about each systems graphic capabilities as a whole.

the 360's GPU vs's the PS3's GPU just the GPU's by itself .

yes

the xbox360's GPU is faster but its not because of the Mhz.

that's not the reason why it is faster than the RSX

 its faster mainly by its function of unified shader's. and that's only if the code for the game is aligned that it can be ,but that also does not take into account your limited on the ammount of resources that your system has on hand that are free to do so. 

yes GPU to GPU the xbox360's GPU is better than the ps3's GPU

on the same token though the entire graphic's system for each system the PS3 has the better graphics system as a whole over the xbox360

 Which if you take the complete graphic's each system is capable of the PS3 is faster and can reach its upper limits of its shader ops/sec

over the xbox360 due to they way the graphics systems are designed in each system. its easier to get better results in a shorter ammount of time than it is to right now than on the ps3. An that is due to the level of experience and the tool's not as mature for the Cell processor and in its development. IT will not be this way forever though.

the reason why the PS3's entire graphics system is more robust is because of the Cell processor that takes off strain on the RSX for graphics tasks. and thus let the RSX do what it does best and that is draw what you see on the screen.

with the Cell processor helping the GPU in the PS3 the PS3's near upper limit that the RSX can be reached much more than the xbox360 GPU though with the current software APi's not as developed as they are for standard GPU's there is more time needed to attain better results than development on the xbox360 can because the software tool's for the xbox360's GPU are much more mature than the Cell processor's GPU functions that are not as well tweaked yet. there has not been enough time yet.

example:

Hofstee told us that PlayStation 3 plans to use a high-end graphics processor to complement the Cell CPU. "So that concept was there from the very beginning," he said, "that we would complement the more general-purpose processor. Quite clearly, even though Cell can be pretty darned good at pushing polygons, that is not its reason for being in the game console."

Your talking about a system that is in all probability twice as expensive only just having the clout to beat the 360 graphically.  The PS3 was a rushed design that produced a overly expensive product that is inefficient, in the 360's case the rushed design caused the horrendous reliability.  The Cell may bolster the weaker the GPU in the PS3 but for the component costs it should be pushing a lot further ahead by now 3 years into it's shelf life.  The Cell is hampered in the PS3 by most of the other components, memory is way too limiting, the GPU was a bolt on last minute addition as Sony relized the costs were sky rocketing for their original design.

Also I personally hate the smear effect the Cell AA post processing produces, although it would probably be better than jaggies I'd imagine, this isn't bolstering the GPU on the PS3 to surpass the 360 in nearly every multiplatform title even now.  People constantly blame the developers for not getting the most out of the hardware but the bottom line is Sony have produced a substantially weaker SDK than Microsoft and they've built a very complex parrallel architecture that will never be truly cost effective to redesign game engines to get the best from. 

The last home console that was as complex as the PS3 was the Saturn which also used a parraellel architecture (albeit it a bolt together quick fix), it bombed badly on multiplatform titles as it was too expensive to spend all the time to make it work equivalent to the competitor (PS1).  Ultimately Sony have jumped the gun on parrallel processing this generation as developers will take years to get up to speed properly, PC titles having multiple cores for a long time prove this. 

Finally I don't buy Sony haven't had enough time to build a mature SDK, they got their CPU from IBM at almost the same time as Microsoft, they have had exactly the same amount of time to get where we are now, they've just not produced the goods to the standards of Microsoft.  Perhaps Microsoft have a advantage being the software giants they are but that'sfor Sony to have solved by hiring staff not for people to make excuses for them.

 

I'll add some positives to what is a very negative post towards the PS3, imo Killzone 2 and ultimately Unchartered 2 will be the best looking consoles games for a while and that proves with the right developers and a lot of time and money the PS3 can produce the goods the 360 might struggle at.  I happen to agree the Cell is a better CPU than the 360 equivalent also, it's just the packages as a whole that muddy the waters in discussion.