By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Squilliam on 15 May 2011
Edit Thread
Badassbab said:


It'll put it another way.

360 has an Edram memory set up. So you have VRAM, RAM (Both share 512MB) and embedded EDRAM (which is 10MB). The framebuffer (i.e the resolution and AA amongst other things) needs to fit within the Edram (which is 10mb in size). If it doesn't fit in then the programmer either has to downgrade something like for example the resolution until it's small enough to fit or resort to predicted tiling which can in some cases lead to performance issues as it uses CPU resources. However if the framebuffer does fit, then the 360 get's tremendous amounts of bandwidth (278.4GBs vs 48GB for PS3). This is why more 360 games feature higher res transparency effects, computationally expensive shadows, depth of field, motion blur etc.

PS3 has a traditional split memory architecture. 256MB VRAM and 256MB RAM. The frame buffer uses up the VRAM on the PS3. So basically that's 256Mb for the PS3 vs 10Mb for the 360. Because of this the PS3 can be triple buffered. Framebuffers not an issue on PS3. The issue with the PS3 is it's weak GPU but it's ok now because programmers can offload tasked that were meant for the GPU onto the Cell's extremely fast SPU's. Put it this way the 360 has 3 x 3.2Ghz processor cores, PS3 has 1 x 3.2Ghz main processor core but 8 SPU @ 3.2Ghz each, 6 of which can be used for gaming (one is disabled and the other is used for the OS). So basically the PS3 can be 720p with all the bells and whistles due to the traditional memory set up and the Cell processor. 360 could've as well if MS hadn't been so short sighted with only 10Mbs. It really needed to be 30Mb to compete against the likes of Killzone 3.

When talking memory developers by and large prefer the Xbox 360 memory management model over the PS3. It simply has more memory available and more flexibility and more effective bandwidth. People talk of using the Cell to help render but that means additional buffers and additional use of memory.

You can say that on paper the PS3 and Xbox 360 have more or less the same memory however the Xbox 360 OS uses less, ED-RAM saves significant quantities of memory especially with AA and the PS3 needs additional buffers to make use of the Cell to assist with rendering. So Microsoft was not shortsighted in including ED-RAM in the Xbox 360.

The Xbox 360 has advantages, the PS3 has advantages and overall they are extremely similar in overal program performance when you weight the advantages and disadvantages of both against each other. Multiplatform developers say they are about equal and they only show advantages in specific cases where games are designed more towards their relative strengths. So even if the 360 version of L.A. Noire is better it shouldn't surprise anyone who understands the reality of the Xbox 360 and PS3's relative performance and their relative strengths and weaknesses.



Tease.