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

Forums - Sony Discussion - killzone 2 uses only 60% of ps3 SPUs

selnor on 06 December 2008
MikeB said:
selnor said:
^ Gears 2 uses 33.33% of Xennon and KZ2 uses 60% of SPU's. It means nothing. The rest of the systems hold it back.

Already 360 launch games used up to 85% of Xenon cycles (all 3 cores), Gears 2 uses more combined with heavy optimisations. IMO no more major technical gains are to be expected, other than maybe for future 360 games a harddrive becomes mandatory and games span several disc (crossing the 6.8 GB barrier of dual layer 360 discs).

 

 

 Whatever bro. Epic stated that Geow 1 only used one core on their website. And Gears 2 when in deveopment said only 1 core 2 threads.

Do you remember when Sony stood on stage in front of thousands and stated that MGS4 used 85% of PS3's full potential? Or have you keenly and quickly forgot about that.



Around the Network
MikeB on 06 December 2008
NJ5 said:
MikeB said:

@ NJ5

Killzone 2 runs very solid already and they are adding more stuff, it's a preview build and already runs far more solid and is far more impressive than finalized releases.

I find your comments funny coming from an alledged developer, everyone knows that betas aren't finalized.

I didn't mention KZ2 specifically, did I? Did you read the post I quoted?

 

OK, I read something similar from you regarding Killzone 2 in another thread and this thread regards Killzone 2, so I figured this to be the case. I will start reading some earlier comments, I just got back from work.

 



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

NJ5 on 06 December 2008

@MikeB: I saw some framerate problems in one KZ2 video, but since it was only one I figured it was a problem with the video, not KZ2.



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

MikeB on 06 December 2008
selnor said:
MikeB said:
selnor said:
^ Gears 2 uses 33.33% of Xennon and KZ2 uses 60% of SPU's. It means nothing. The rest of the systems hold it back.

Already 360 launch games used up to 85% of Xenon cycles (all 3 cores), Gears 2 uses more combined with heavy optimisations. IMO no more major technical gains are to be expected, other than maybe for future 360 games a harddrive becomes mandatory and games span several disc (crossing the 6.8 GB barrier of dual layer 360 discs).

 

 

 Whatever bro. Epic stated that Geow 1 only used one core on their website. And Gears 2 when in deveopment said only 1 core 2 threads.

Do you remember when Sony stood on stage in front of thousands and stated that MGS4 used 85% of PS3's full potential? Or have you keenly and quickly forgot about that.

A direct quote please or link.

LOL

 



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

luisgvm on 06 December 2008
disolitude said:
No offence to the OP, but I can't believe these facts get released by the developers.

If people haven't learned that higher/lower cpu usage % doesn't make a game good...there really is no hope for HD gaming.

 

 i thought that SPUs had something to do with graphics looking better and all that.



Around the Network
MikeB on 06 December 2008
luisgvm said:
disolitude said:
No offence to the OP, but I can't believe these facts get released by the developers.

If people haven't learned that higher/lower cpu usage % doesn't make a game good...there really is no hope for HD gaming.

 

 i thought that SPUs had something to do with graphics looking better and all that.

 

The SPUs can do lots of stuff, they can help a lot with regard to graphics in a more narrow perspective as well (in addition to more onscreen activity, physics and such):

"One of the main developments was that more processes that were initially handled by the main CPU were being moved to the SPUs. Physics, lighting set-up, particle set-up, animation and such are by now all running on the SPU, leaving the CPU to calculate the more tricky game systems that aren't easily made parallel. At some point we even found ways to start doing certain GPU calculation on the SPUs, so now a lot of our post-processing such as bloom, depth-of-field and motion blur are being rendered by the SPUs. This freed up performance from the GPU, which in turn allowed us to go even further with shader complexity and particle density."

Source: Gamespy

Killzone 2 tech interviews:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43389.html

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43389.html



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

luisgvm on 06 December 2008
MikeB said:
luisgvm said:
disolitude said:
No offence to the OP, but I can't believe these facts get released by the developers.

If people haven't learned that higher/lower cpu usage % doesn't make a game good...there really is no hope for HD gaming.

 

 i thought that SPUs had something to do with graphics looking better and all that.

 

The SPUs can do lots of stuff, they can help a lot with regard to graphics in a more narrow perspective as well (in addition to more onscreen activity, physics and such):

"One of the main developments was that more processes that were initially handled by the main CPU were being moved to the SPUs. Physics, lighting set-up, particle set-up, animation and such are by now all running on the SPU, leaving the CPU to calculate the more tricky game systems that aren't easily made parallel. At some point we even found ways to start doing certain GPU calculation on the SPUs, so now a lot of our post-processing such as bloom, depth-of-field and motion blur are being rendered by the SPUs. This freed up performance from the GPU, which in turn allowed us to go even further with shader complexity and particle density."

Source: Gamespy

Killzone 2 tech interviews:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43389.html

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43389.html

mm i see

 



Staude on 06 December 2008
selnor said:
Staude said:
gebx said:
luisgvm said:

Speaking in IGN's latest Play Beyond podcast, Jeff Haynes revealed that even during the heaviest loads, Killzone 2 utilizes roughly only 60 per cent of the SPU's.

"It's incredible to see huge levels and see the deferred rendering and note that on all the SPU’s, even on the heaviest load were coming up to about 60%," Haynes said. "They weren't coming close to maxing out. .They had about 40% of space before they started tripping or saw slow down on some of the processes."

Furthermore, Haynes noted that the preview codes recently distributed to various media outlets were of an alpha build of the title, and have since been polished up . Visiting Guerilla Games in Amsterdam, Haynes was shown an updated version of the game, mid to late beta, noting that elements such as lighting, cut scenes, glitches, load times, have all been optimized.

Killzone 2 is due out exclusively on PlayStation 3 on February 27, 2009.

here is the link. http://www.psu.com/Killzone-2-only-using-60--of-SPUs-overall-power-News--a0005629-p0.php

wow if thats true then uncharted 2 will look amazing!!! jajaja

 

So at 60% the game has issues and had slowdowns... Crappy PS3 architecture confirmed??

if you cared to read he says that they had 40 percent space AFTER being used to their full (of load kz2 is putting on them) before they started tripping or slowing down :p

 

 

What hes saying is when your playing at home, and the game has a framerate moment does that mean it's maxed out? No.

Gears 2 uses only 2 threads out of the 6 360 has to offer. Thats 1 core out of the 3. So does that mean Gears 2 is only using 33.33%?. No it doesnt. Because it's not just the CPU that is the main bottleneck in these consoles.

 

read it again.

 



Check out my game about moles ^

Lolcislaw on 06 December 2008

Eh Killzone 2 hype continues, i'm still not convinced about this title. R2 seemed more promising yet sales were medicore, and the game itself had this sense of being average like the 1st one (but i've only played about 40 minutes). I think K2 will be similar, it's hard to make an excellent shooter in these days.



luisgvm on 06 December 2008
Lolcislaw said:
Eh Killzone 2 hype continues, i'm still not convinced about this title. R2 seemed more promising yet sales were medicore, and the game itself had this sense of being average like the 1st one (but i've only played about 40 minutes). I think K2 will be similar, it's hard to make an excellent shooter in these days.

 

 well i havent played r2, but from the trailers both games look really good to me, specially r2.