Ohhh, People already getting spun up......(leaves quickly)!
ZenfoldorVGI said:
Ah, so true. I actually meant the argument that since PS3 makes more money for EA, they get the "privilege" of being lead platform, which is just an ignorant argument.
|
Damn! I was going to point this out too but got beat to it! The only reason EA would go PS3 lead is if it looked better for the bottom line. Clearly they feel this approach will cot overall development cost and will also result in better PS3 versions and hence better sales for PS3 versions. Also their brand image (such as it is) was clearly getting tarnished by the 'can't code well for multiplatform titles' smear it was getting when they ported from 360 to PS3.
I just hope they get more sorta original IP like Dead Space out the door in future and less average games and graphical updates of the same game (I'm looking at you sports games).
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
Garnett said:
Wrong,360 GPU,No matter how much Sony hyped you into believe its better than 360 GPU its not,KZ2 is good and God of war 3 hasnt even been seen,if they can run on PS3 they can run better on 360 that is a FACT.
|
Technically I believe the SPEs could be used to outperform the GPU in the 360 by offloading code that would normally go to the GPU to a SPE instead.
This would require quite a different approach I think, so whether any developers (other than 1st party) will actually do this is the million dollar question. The 360 is easier to code for and allows for more traditional split of code to CPU/GPU focus. To get the best out of the PS3 would require a different approach and would be another factor why getting it right on the PS3 then porting to 360 to get same results would make sense for EA rather than getting 360 right first as that just causes more work switching things around for the PS3.
Unless one or the other console pulls well ahead I think that developers are going to aim for near enough parity in multi-plat games anyway - it'll be down to the exclusives, like Gears, MGS, etc. to really show what each console can do.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
| CGI-Quality said: @ Garnett That's absolutely not true. Yes the 360 has a more powerful GPU but the PS3 has a stronger and faster processor. There are BIG differences in the architecture of the two, people just don't like feeling like their console is weaker than another. As an owner of ALL three I'm fortunate enough to have the pleasure of avoiding that issue, no offense to those that don't as I understand that times are hard and these consoles cost big buck$. Anyway, PS3 and 360 are very different consoles and despite which ever you like more each consoles' exclusives tell the real story. The 360 excels at textures lighting, and anti-aliasing: Gears of War, Mass Effect, Project Gotham Racing 3/4 etc... The PS3 excels at animation, physics, shadowing, and colors: Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, MGS4, Little BIG Planet, Gran Turismo 5: Prologue, etc... The truth is the 360 has a better GPU and uses all 512mbof it's RAM for graphics and is better for anti-aliasing, testures, and lighting. The PS3 has a faster/stronger processor (Cell) and can excel at especially physics, animation, and AI. Ths post is not meant to make fun of either console, but to point out each one's strengths. It's just my opinion that, from the exclusives I've played, the PS3 is the more advanced system. Future games like Killzone 2, Heavy Rain, and inFAMOUS will truly show those advancements I've pointed out. This is not to say the 360 won't have games to show it`s strengths: Gears of War 2, Alan Wake, and Left 4 Dead should take care of that issue :D Man, doesn't it feel good to be gamers...let's just enjoy ALL this gen has to offer. |
I never said that the PS3 is weaker than the 360 i merly said the GPU is weaker than the 360 GPU,and not by alot,Its a known fact that the PS3 CPU is insainly better than the 360 CPU,Only a fanboy would say the 360 CPU is better than the PS3 cpu.
The 360 dosent use all 512mb RAM for graphics,if that were true than the game wouldnt run,since RAM is used for AI,Physics and how many more things,but developers can choose how much ram they want to use for each part where as the PS3 they are FORCED into using 256mb,which isnt really that bad,compared to last generation.
And Heavy Rain isnt really that advanced,since the camera only allows you to see what the developers want you to see,they can only focus on those parts,now if Heavy Rain was a FPS like KZ2 and maintained the same graphics than that would be amazing.
| ZenfoldorVGI said: You know why though? Because the PS3 is hard to develop for. If the develop on the PC and port, the PS3 version would require tons of extra work to get the frame-rate, and textures up to par. If you develop on the PS3 first, it's easy to port to the more user-friendly systems. Anyone claiming they develop on the PS3 first because of profits or favoritism is ignorant and/or lying. Even if EA said it. |
Nail on the head! although in the long run i believe this will be advantageous for the PS3 with devs finding it continually easier to work on
assumption is the mother of all f**k ups
Its funny how the Sony haters dream with PS3 games frame rate problems.Users of the machine dont have this problem ,though.
Garnett said:
Wrong,360 GPU,No matter how much Sony hyped you into believe its better than 360 GPU its not,KZ2 is good and God of war 3 hasnt even been seen,if they can run on PS3 they can run better on 360 that is a FACT.
|
Dont be silly ,the 360 GPU is more modern with the unified pipeline and all but in the end of the day it can do 96Million Shader Operation per second.The RSX can do 100.So no , 360 GPU is not more powerful,just easier to use and to program for.Besides,the Cell can do graphics too with ease unlike the 360 CPU that is way more conventional CPU.This comes into play when you enter the post-processing effects.In fact the Cell is about 3 times more powerful that the 360 CPU(210 Gflops against 77 Gflops).
So the 360 CPU is out of date? Seems 360 users need to upgrade... wait wrong platform...
Joking aside the only thing that any PS3 has above any Xbox360 hardware wise is it's medium, and even then unless your strictly dealing with HD gaming that is way overshooting it's production end.
I remember FF7 used up 3 disc's on the PSX and CD's held a lot of info for that time frame, there is no reason for a 50gb+ game these days unless it's resolution and sound files are eating the space.
I'm Unamerica and you can too.
The Official Huge Monster Hunter Thread:
thejuicingamer you'r sad....
That means that the 360 owners now will have to play a not so good version of the game.... They (EA) should try to do their best in the PS3 and 360. Now they are choosing the weakest one so ports are easy....
I'm glad 360 has LOT'S of exclusives.....
By the way, that said (EA), does that mean GOW2 will be possible in the PS3?
You'r sad man.....
Diomedes1976 said:
Dont be silly ,the 360 GPU is more modern with the unified pipeline and all but in the end of the day it can do 96Million Shader Operation per second.The RSX can do 100.So no , 360 GPU is not more powerful,just easier to use and to program for.Besides,the Cell can do graphics too with ease unlike the 360 CPU that is way more conventional CPU.This comes into play when you enter the post-processing effects.In fact the Cell is about 3 times more powerful that the 360 CPU(210 Gflops against 77 Gflops). |
Nice figures by Sony but can you find a real website that does a comprasion of the 2 GPU,I found alot of them saying 360 GPU is better and they post the specs.
Triangle Setup
Xbox 360 - 500 Million Triangles/sec
PS3 - 250 Million Triangles/sec
Vertex Shader Processing
Xbox 360 - 6.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 2.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 16 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 1.5 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 12 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 8 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec
Filtered Texture Fetch
Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
PS3 - 12.0 Billion Texels/sec
Vertex Texture Fetch
Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
PS3 - 4.0 Billion Texels/sec
Pixel Shader Processing with 16 Filtered Texels Per Cycle (Pixel ALU x Clock)
Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec
Pixel Shader Processing without Textures (Pixel ALU x Clock)
Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec
Multisampled Fill Rate
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz)
PS3 - 8.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 550MHz)
Pixel Fill Rate with 4x Multisampled Anti-Aliasing
Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz / 4)
PS3 - 2.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 550MHz / 4)
Pixel Fill Rate without Anti-Aliasing
Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)
PS3 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 550MHz)
360 wins in most cases,not all but most and those are just some of the numbers.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
