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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - L.A. Noire - Xbox360 vs PS3 comparisson. Is this true?

brendude13 on 16 May 2011
Badassbab said:
brendude13 said:
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.

Ahh ok, I get you now.

Just one question:

Why can't everything that is supposed to fit on the EDRAM be put onto the VRAM (shared), like the PS3?

Because the 360 has a dedicated Edram frame buffer set up hardware. It can't use the Vram, it has to use the Edram or tiling for all render targets. While the Edram was a brilliant move the size of it wasn't. If the Edram was say 30MB then it's likely all 360 games would be default 720p with 4xMSAA (the max the 360 GPU allows) all the good bit's like DOF, SSAO etc. I don't think MS foresaw this gen lasting longer then normal. Sony on the other hand did though it too made some bad hardware decisions.

That's what I thought, it's dedicated.

Anyway, I'm surprised Microsoft didn't see that as a future bottleneck, same for SONY aswell. If one component is underpowered then it drags the rest of the system down to it's level, which is a complete waste.

Both SONY and MS should think about that before they launch the next generation of consoles.



Around the Network
brendude13 on 16 May 2011
CGI-Quality said:
ZaneWane said:

http://reflexorbit.com/2011/05/16/worlds-first-la-noire-ps3-vs-xbox-360-screenshot-comparison/

That was confirmed to be fake.

Probably some XBOX 360 fanboys ruffling up some feathers.



Legend11 on 16 May 2011

Funny how some of the people that bashed IGN for one of their previous claims over which game has better graphics suddenly decide that they are the final authority this time around.

That's not to say that they aren't right, I don't know, but I know if the situation was reversed and the 360 had the 2 extra years of development time it probably wouldn't even be close.



Kynes on 16 May 2011
Legend11 said:

Funny how some of the people that bashed IGN for one of their previous claims over which game has better graphics suddenly decide that they are the final authority this time around.

That's not to say that they aren't right, I don't know, but I know if the situation was reversed and the 360 had the 2 extra years of development time it probably wouldn't even be close.


Did you really expected anything different?



Nsanity on 16 May 2011
Doobie_wop said:

So it's in, I would have waited for Lens of Truth or Digital Foundry, but people are pretty blatant about how many issues the 360 version has. Frame-rate issues, graphical glitches, pop in issues and missing shadows, seems to be like what we all imagined might happen with the whole late in the life cycle port issues. 

The reason I brought this up is that we should probably avoid these dodgy screen comparisons before the release of a game, they are most likely always fake and it's sad when the time and effort of some weirdo is taken up to cause controversy and we all eat it up.

PS3 version aint exactly glitch free either.

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/2431/ignlanoire.jpg



Around the Network
Nsanity on 16 May 2011
CGI-Quality said:
ZaneWane said:
CGI-Quality said:
ZaneWane said:

http://reflexorbit.com/2011/05/16/worlds-first-la-noire-ps3-vs-xbox-360-screenshot-comparison/

That was confirmed to be fake.


by whom

Did you actually read through the thread? Have you been reading the reviews?

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=128697&page=1&str=739903919#

To be fair reviewers were talking performance more than anything else and this thread is side by side graphical comparison nothing else.



Nsanity on 16 May 2011
CGI-Quality said:
Nsanity said:
CGI-Quality said:
ZaneWane said:
CGI-Quality said:
ZaneWane said:

http://reflexorbit.com/2011/05/16/worlds-first-la-noire-ps3-vs-xbox-360-screenshot-comparison/

That was confirmed to be fake.


by whom

Did you actually read through the thread? Have you been reading the reviews?

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=128697&page=1&str=739903919#

To be fair reviewers were talking performance more than anything else and this thread is side by side graphical comparison nothing else.

How accurate are these side-by-side comparisons though?


DF in-depth analysis should be up shortly so we will know then.



Doobie_wop on 17 May 2011
Nsanity said:
Doobie_wop said:

So it's in, I would have waited for Lens of Truth or Digital Foundry, but people are pretty blatant about how many issues the 360 version has. Frame-rate issues, graphical glitches, pop in issues and missing shadows, seems to be like what we all imagined might happen with the whole late in the life cycle port issues. 

The reason I brought this up is that we should probably avoid these dodgy screen comparisons before the release of a game, they are most likely always fake and it's sad when the time and effort of some weirdo is taken up to cause controversy and we all eat it up.

PS3 version aint exactly glitch free either.

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/2431/ignlanoire.jpg

That wasn't the point of my post, but it also mentions that the 360 versions issues are more severe and the other reviews I have read (Giant Bomb, Guardian and Destructoid all reviewed the PS3 version) made no mention of performance issues in the game, two of them actually went out of their way to say how it ran flawlessly.

Sorry if I don't take IGN's reviews too seriously, it's just that they haven't got the greatest history in the world when it comes reviewing games and analyzing their perfomance issues, while I trust Giant Bomb and have a liking for Jim Sterling because of how entertaining his reviews are.

We cool, but my point was that comparisons before the game has even come out are ridiculous and it's obvious that the pictures shown earlier in this thread were not trust worthy. I regret posting that picture earlier (even though mine may have actually been real) and I won't be doing it again in the future.



Bet with Conegamer and AussieGecko that the PS3 will have more exclusives in 2011 than the Wii or 360... or something.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

Doobie_wop on 17 May 2011

Damn this site, it loads like a sloth on Panamax and glitches out like the PS3 version of Fallout 3.

This is my first ever double post... I'm no longer a VGhartz virgin.




Bet with Conegamer and AussieGecko that the PS3 will have more exclusives in 2011 than the Wii or 360... or something.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

adriane23 on 17 May 2011

Well, until a proper comparison is done, ppl should just enjoy the game if they have it or do something else if the don't. I took this pic (PS3) with my iPhone. To me it looks better than what the OP depicts, but the game isn't exactly a graphical marvel anyway. I tried to match it with the same scene by the way.

 



I am the Playstation Avenger.