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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PS3 VS. X360 multi-plat Graphics Comparison

obieslut on 02 July 2008
NJ5 said:
Now NG2 looks like a Xbox game? Only someone who didn't play Ninja Gaiden (Xbox) would say that... The environments are much more complex, there's tons more happening in the screen with more (and more detailed) enemies who don't disappear when dead, blood.

I think some people must have forgotten how the previous generation looked like.

In any case, I agree that Uncharted has more detail than NG2, my point was that NG2 couldn't push as much due to increased framerate and more enemy models on the screen. Another important point is that much of Uncharted's beauty is due to art direction and colourful graphics - in the age of grey/brown "realistic" graphics (such as Gears of War's on MGS4's), that explains why people think Uncharted is so awesome.

As I said - art direction, great... technically, not far above most other big games on either PS3 or 360.

high res textures somes to mind also running at 720p, what was ng running at again, but i cant really say nothing look at HAZE lol

 



Around the Network
Rock_on_2008 on 02 July 2008
Squilliam said:
NNN2004 said:
Squilliam said:
MikeB said:

@ Squilliam

Who cares, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune looks better than anything on the 360 running at 30 FPS as well. Looks != technical impressiveness. Do you take into account the fact that Uncharted uses a lot of the same textures whereas GTAIV uses a lot of different ones and to boot the Xbox360 game is multiplatform. GTAIV is more technically impressive than Uncharted, Uncharted is more artistically impressive.

Ratched & Clank: Tools of Destruction at 60 FPS is technically more impressive than Ninja Gaiden 2. They are different styles of games. YOU ARE NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO COMPARE THEM.

Claims of the 360 being on par with the PS3 technically are false, claims of the PS3 being well more powerful are correct. Funny that the games actually tend to indicate a slight superiority or equality in multiplatform game comparisons on the side of the Xbox360. So theres actually very little proof that the PS3 can show off more powerful graphics.

 

 

???!! show me this superiority in one multiplatform game.

 

Army of Two = 1280x720 (no AA)
Army of Two = 1280x720 (2xAA)

Condemned 2 = 1280x720 (no AA)
Condemned 2 = 1280x720 (2xAA)

Dark Sector = 1152x640 (no AA)
Dark Sector = 1280x720 (no AA)

Fifa Street 3 = 1920x1080 (no AA)

Fifa Street 3 = 1920x1080 (4xAA)

Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter 2 = 1280x720
Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter 2 = 1280x720 (2xAA)

Grand Theft Auto IV = 1152x640 (no AA)
Grand Theft Auto IV = 1280x720 (2xAA)

LEGO: Indiana Jones = 1280x720 (no AA), 960x1080 (no AA)
LEGO: Indiana Jones = 1280x720 (2xAA)

Top PS3, bottom Xbox360.

Frame rates GTAIV : Test1
Old 360: 31.990fps
Old PS3: 26.460fps
New 360: 31.627fps (3.77% torn frames)
New PS3: 26.504fps

Test2
Old 360: 28.624fps
Old PS3: 23.452fps
New 360: 29.233fps (4.26% torn frames)
New PS3: 23.989fps

Test3
Old 360: 35.252fps
Old PS3: 29.041fps
New 360: 35.662fps (2.37% torn frames)
New PS3: 29.523fps

Test4
Old 360: 26.076fps
Old PS3: 26.081fps
New 360: 26.015fps (6.07% torn frames)
New PS3: 25.803fps

Test5
Old 360: 26.712fps
Old PS3: 23.781fps
New 360: 26.507fps (4.9% torn frames)
New PS3: 23.781fps

Test6
Old 360: 33.798fps
Old PS3: 28.313fps
New 360: 33.713fps (2.35% torn frames)
New PS3: 28.313fps

Grid:

Like-for-like comparisons
These tests are taken from the pre-event cut-scenes, generated by the game engine. Aside from the camera wobbling differently, everything is the same.

Test1- BMW Event Intro
360: 30fps (6.72% torn frames)
PS3: 28.226fps (39.52% torn frames)

Test2- Nissan Silvia Event Intro
360: 30fps (no torn frames)
PS3: 30fps (no torn frames)

Test3- Mustang Event Intro
360: 30fps (no torn frames)
PS3: 29.748fps (11.76% torn frames)

In-game tests
Basically the event is allowed to start, car accelerates full throttle until just before it hits scenery. Scenery is like-for-like, car AI introduces a variable here. But with two tests full of cars and AI in effect, it's a decent enough indication of performance cross-platform. Note that in Test5, there are no CPU cars as it's a drift challenge.

Test4- BMW Race Start, accelerate forwards
360: 30fps (v-locked)
PS3: 28.76fps (32.38% torn frames)

Test5- Nissan Silvia Race Start, accelerate forwards
360: 30fps (v-locked)
PS3: 30fps (18.07% torn frames)

Test6- Mustang Race, accelerate forwards
360: 30fps (v-locked)
PS3: 26.722fps (39.79% torn frames)


Methodology then. The fps detector counts the number of duplicated frames in its sample. The actual amount of screen being measured can be preset. To measure a precise fps, only one line of 1280 pixels from the centre of the screen is sampled.

To measure the amount of torn frames, the whole screen is sampled. Dupe frames from this test minus the dupe frames from the one line test are worked out as a percentage of the whole sample. This should work on any 2VBL game, like Race Driver GRID appears to be. Bear in mind that this percentage is of the entire 60fps output of the console, not of the measured frame rate.

In the case of GRID it also appears to be the case that the whole game isn't v-locked on PS3, and the more challenging intro sections on the 360 version can also tear. However, in-game 360 appears to be v-locked.

So how sensitive is the scanner? Will sampling just one line fool the scanner if the actual screen is completely static to the human eye? No, the scanner is actually so sensitive that even when the camera is static and there's no perceived movement at all, we can still detect a 30fps update. Here we are in GRID, at 0mph.

 

According to your analysis the PS3 is superior than the X360. You pwned yourself.

 



Squilliam on 02 July 2008

/Thread.

Evidence wins the day.



Tease.

Squilliam on 02 July 2008

@ rock on, explain PS3 superiority in the context of lower/no AA compared to the Xbox360. Lower RESOLUTION, LOWER FRAME RATES.

Im waiting with baited breath. Really I am.

Proof will set us free.



Tease.

NJ5 on 02 July 2008
obieslut said:
NJ5 said:
Now NG2 looks like a Xbox game? Only someone who didn't play Ninja Gaiden (Xbox) would say that... The environments are much more complex, there's tons more happening in the screen with more (and more detailed) enemies who don't disappear when dead, blood.

I think some people must have forgotten how the previous generation looked like.

In any case, I agree that Uncharted has more detail than NG2, my point was that NG2 couldn't push as much due to increased framerate and more enemy models on the screen. Another important point is that much of Uncharted's beauty is due to art direction and colourful graphics - in the age of grey/brown "realistic" graphics (such as Gears of War's on MGS4's), that explains why people think Uncharted is so awesome.

As I said - art direction, great... technically, not far above most other big games on either PS3 or 360.

high res textures somes to mind also running at 720p, what was ng running at again, but i cant really say nothing look at HAZE lol

 

Uncharted's textures are not particularly high-res compared to other games... They can use them more often in order to cram more detail in each one, but that's a design achievement, not a technical one. 256 MB of graphics memory automatically limits the texture detail you can use, and I'm pretty sure most PS360 games are using all of it.

Regarding resolution, yes NG has slightly lower resolution than Uncharted. When talking about performance, that's trumped by using double the framerate though. NG2 has to calculate ~50% more pixels each second than Uncharted, it's only natural that it has to compensate by using less detail.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Around the Network
Rock_on_2008 on 02 July 2008
Squilliam said:
@ rock on, explain PS3 superiority in the context of lower/no AA compared to the Xbox360. Lower RESOLUTION, LOWER FRAME RATES.

Im waiting with baited breath. Really I am.

Proof will set us free.

 

You mixed them up the PS3 has AA in the games. PS3 has better frame rates than the X360 games. X360 does not use AA it is not technologically advanced enough to use AA. PS3 uses Blu-Ray for rendering and AA to make the graphics look better. X360 just has DVD player that makes graphics look meh.



Squilliam on 02 July 2008
Rock_on_2008 said:
Squilliam said:
@ rock on, explain PS3 superiority in the context of lower/no AA compared to the Xbox360. Lower RESOLUTION, LOWER FRAME RATES.

Im waiting with baited breath. Really I am.

Proof will set us free.

 

I mixed them up the Xbox360 has AA in the games. Xbox360 has better frame rates than the PS3 games. PS3 does not use AA it is not technologically advanced enough to use AA. PS3 uses Blu-Ray for rendering and AA to make the graphics look better. X360 just has DVD player that makes graphics look just as good if not better than the PS3.

Fixed.

 



Tease.

NNN2004 on 02 July 2008
Rock_on_2008 said:
Squilliam said:
@ rock on, explain PS3 superiority in the context of lower/no AA compared to the Xbox360. Lower RESOLUTION, LOWER FRAME RATES.

Im waiting with baited breath. Really I am.

Proof will set us free.

 

You mixed them up the PS3 has AA in the games. PS3 has better frame rates than the X360 games. X360 does not use AA it is not technologically advanced enough to use AA. PS3 uses Blu-Ray for rendering and AA to make the graphics look better. X360 just has DVD player that makes graphics look meh.

 

 from where u get ur info Rock_on ??? everybody know that 360 have better resolution & better AA then ... where is the power of ps3 ur talking about ???



makingmusic476 on 02 July 2008
Squilliam said:
@ everyone. Its ironic that the PS3 fanboys have to prove graphical superiority in their own eyes to win the argument whereas the Xbox360 guys only have to prove graphical parity.

@ making music, thats quite an apples/oranges comparison. Uncharted is rendered at 30fps whilst Ninja gaiden runs at 60fps. The comparison is like taking crysis and benchmarking it one an Nvidia 8800gt and then comparing it to an AMD 4850 running COD 4 at a lower resolution running COD IV at 60fps. Its apples to oranges, at least use the same genre to make a comparison with games running at a similar FPS and with similar art styles. So a Halo 3 vs Killzone 2 comparison is out because of the different lighting system used in Halo 3 and the different rendering resolutions whereas Killzone 2 vs Gears 2 is more apropriate since they both render a similar style at the same resolution and frames per second and they both use a depth of field effect to increase the detail of close in objects.

Since both games look amazing and they both haven't been released yet I think that comparison can wait, no?

 

NGII is 585p.  Uncharted is 720p.  That also has its effect on things.  And he brought up the Uncharted vs NGII bit first.

@NJ5: Uncharted has the best textures of any ps3 game I have yet played, by a wide margin.  I'm not sure what it is, maybe it's the texture streaming system they used, but they are damn detailed.  Yes, the ps3 only has 256mb of ram for the GPU, but not all games use it equally.  All games probably use all of it, but that doesn't keep some games from looking better (in this case much better) than others.  For example, Resistance versus Resistance 2.  The first was definitely maxing the ps3's ram, but the second looks much better.

The textures in Uncharted really are amazing.  You really have to play the game and and aim at stuff to see how damn good they are:

And the screen I posted above also highlighted the awesome textures.  Uncharted's beauty comes from more than just art style.



NNN2004 on 02 July 2008
makingmusic476 said:
Squilliam said:
@ everyone. Its ironic that the PS3 fanboys have to prove graphical superiority in their own eyes to win the argument whereas the Xbox360 guys only have to prove graphical parity.

@ making music, thats quite an apples/oranges comparison. Uncharted is rendered at 30fps whilst Ninja gaiden runs at 60fps. The comparison is like taking crysis and benchmarking it one an Nvidia 8800gt and then comparing it to an AMD 4850 running COD 4 at a lower resolution running COD IV at 60fps. Its apples to oranges, at least use the same genre to make a comparison with games running at a similar FPS and with similar art styles. So a Halo 3 vs Killzone 2 comparison is out because of the different lighting system used in Halo 3 and the different rendering resolutions whereas Killzone 2 vs Gears 2 is more apropriate since they both render a similar style at the same resolution and frames per second and they both use a depth of field effect to increase the detail of close in objects.

Since both games look amazing and they both haven't been released yet I think that comparison can wait, no?

 

NGII is 585p.  Uncharted is 720p.  That also has its effect on things.  And he brought up the Uncharted vs NGII bit first.

@NJ5: Uncharted has the best textures of any ps3 game I have yet played, by a wide margin.  I'm not sure what it is, maybe it's the texture streaming system they used, but they are damn detailed.  Yes, the ps3 only has 256mb of ram for the GPU, but not all games use it equally.  All games probably use all of it, but that doesn't keep some games from looking better (in this case much better) than others.  For example, Resistance versus Resistance 2.  The first was definitely maxing the ps3's ram, but the second looks much better.

The textures in Uncharted really are amazing.  You really have to play the game and and aim at stuff to see how damn good they are:

And the screen I posted above also highlighted the awesome textures.  Uncharted's beauty comes from more than just art style.

ya but its share the same plastic looking characters with perfect dark zero.... thats my opinion.