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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PlayStation 3/Xbox 360 Graphics Gap Will Start To Widen

HappySqurriel on 30 January 2009

I don't think comparing Gears of War to Killzone 2 is all that reasonable of a comparison ...

Epic developed Gears of War 1 and 2 in a similar ammount of time as Killzone 2 was developed, Epic's claims about their development costs for Gears of War would put the combined Gears franchise at costing less to develop than Killzone 2 (using Sony's claims when Killzone 2 was scheduled for a mid 2008 release), and all three games have similar ammounts of content.

Hypothetically speaking, had Gears of War 1 taken twice as long to develop with Epic spending more time reworking their graphical assets and to optimize their engine Gears of War may have looked better than Killzone 2 ... Its just too bad for Microsoft that they had to have a minor downgrade in visuals to have dramatically higher sales off of lower development costs.



Around the Network
Jereel Hunter on 30 January 2009
haxxiy said:
Of course they'll start to widen. PS3 is the most powerful system by far(for non-gaming related tasks), that's a raw cold fact.

 

Fixed.



Jereel Hunter on 30 January 2009
haxxiy said:
obamanian said:
haxxiy said:
Of course they'll start to widen. PS3 is the most powerful system by far, that's a raw cold fact.

 

 

Well, the 360 has better RAM design and a far better GPU, so i do not know if your "raw cold facts" are for real

Also gets the biggest and most detailed next gen looking worlds, while most PS3 games are in linear small paths, hardly next gen at all

 

 Epic fail!

X360's GPU:

- 48 dynamically scheduled pipelines with 2 ALUs each (1 vector4, 1 scalar)

- 16 texture units, 8 render output units

- 240 GFLOPs (48 pipelines x 5 shader ops x 2 flops/shader op x 500 MHz)

- 8 gigatexels/sec, 4 gigapixels/sec, 16 gigasamples/sec (4xAA x 4 GP)

- 232 million transistors.

PS3's GPU:

- 24 multi-way programmable pipelines with 5 ALUs each (2 vector4, 2 scalars, 1 texture unit)

- 8 vertex pipelines with 2 ALUs each (1 vector4, 1 scalar)

- 32 unfiltered texture samples, 24 texture units, 8 render output units

- 330 GFLOPS (24 pipelines x 11 shader ops x 2 flops/shader op x 550 MHz + 8 pipelines x 5 shader ops x 2 flops/shader op x 500 MHz)

- 300 million transistors.

X360's memory:

- 512MB GDDR3 at 700 MHz, 22.4GB/s bandwidth (1400 MHz x 16 bytes data bus)

- 10 MB EDRAM at 500 MHz, 256GB/s bandwidth (500 MHz x 512 bytes data bus)

PS3's memory:

- 256MB XDR RAM at 3200 MHz,  25.6 GB/s bandwidth (3200 MHz x 8 bytes data bus)

- 256MB GDDR3 at 700 MHz, 22.4GB/s bandwidth (1400 MHz x 16 bytes data bus)

 

These are facts any small research can show you so I have tangible proof which is called knowledge thus killing any type of opinion which you have. =D!

A lot of these statistics mean absolutely nothing compared to what a GPU can truely put out. But I'd like to highlight the bolded, the statistics that truely show what kind of raw power the EDRAM has.

 

Do some REAL research. The Xbox 360's GPU has been factually shown to be more advanced than the PS3's.

 



Groucho on 30 January 2009
Deneidez said:
Groucho said:
So... GeoW2 can improve leaps and bounds, despite being a 2nd iteration of an engine on the 360, but games like KZ2, being a 1st engine iteration and frankly looking better than GeoW2, can't get any better, and thus the 360 has more room to grow?

Come on 360 fans. You can come up with stuff better than that. Like "MS will figure out some genious way to make deferred rendering work on the 360 without blowing the GPU's eDRAM every time a render target is switched! I know, they are working on it right now! They said so!" or somesuch.

Unreal engine isn't made just for X360. Sure it has been optimized a bit, but its still not engine that has been made from scratch for X360. KZ2 engine is and stop calling me 360 fan I haven't even touched X360 ever(I guess, I must be on X360 side or on PS3 side. Theres no alternatives. -.-). Deferred rendering is needed because? Does Crysis use deferred rendering?... uhm... no... Does it look much better than any game on both of these consoles can ever look... yes... And yeah, G-buffer is also way too big for that small eDRAM(With reasonable resolutions.). So its a bit more complicated and I am not sure can it be done with X360 GPU.

@Squilliam

Ok, it does provide more memory for those pixel shader operations, which you can do with it.

Wait... what?  So you believe that the X360's GPU can provide graphics on par with Crysis?  The PS3's GPU is widely known to be slightly less cool than the X360's, due to the Xenos' awesome flexible pipeline.  The PS3's supporting architecture, however, allows the PS3 to outperform the X360, graphically, with techniques like deferred rendering, because the GPUs are really pretty close, and in the end, as an overall architecture, the PS3 takes the prize.

Deferred rendering is a pretty powerful technique.  I doubt it will be used in a large number of games.  In general, I disagree with this article, except for the fact that the most truly phenominal (graphically, and perhaps otherwise) games we will see, for the rest of the generation, are much more likely to be on the PS3 than the 360.  That says nothing about the general game quality, on both platforms, relative to each other.  That's the error this article has made, from my standpoint.

The 360 is not tumbling down the hill or some such BS.  It just doesn't have the room to grow that the PS3 does.  That's the price of its awesome accessibility.  All the power, now.  Honestly I think MS is better off (as the sales numbers demonstrate) by having their games shine initially and then get repetitive throughout the generation.  However, the PS3 is a fun architecture, and as an engineer myself, I can't say that I'm as remotely interested in squeezing power out of the 360 as I am out of the PS3.  360 is pretty easy, and its power is very accessible.  That's nice...  good for the games factory...  set the "B" engineering team on it (I bet you think I'm kidding).



Mvp4eVa on 30 January 2009

I don't think the Ps3 will make better looking games after -KZ2, heavy rain, Uncharted 2 because those engine are optimized to fully utilize the PS3's capabilities, those engine were built with PS3 in mind. Maybe the following sequals will improve in make it smoother, cleaner looking but not a big leap in difference..

In the other hand, the 360 does not have an specific engine built for it yet to fully capitalize on its performance.. When everybody uses the multiplatform Unreal Engine 3 these days the only developer that knows how to optimize it is Epic them self the creators of it, also said there's still room for improvement and again the UE3 is not fully optimized to utilize the 360's performance yet Gears of war 2 has raised the bar this gen when it comes to visuals..

Note: The Unreal Engine 3 is not built with the Xbox 360 in mind .



My Trigger Happy Sixaxis controller

 


                            

Around the Network
FKNetwork on 30 January 2009
Groucho said:
Deneidez said:
Groucho said:
So... GeoW2 can improve leaps and bounds, despite being a 2nd iteration of an engine on the 360, but games like KZ2, being a 1st engine iteration and frankly looking better than GeoW2, can't get any better, and thus the 360 has more room to grow?

Come on 360 fans. You can come up with stuff better than that. Like "MS will figure out some genious way to make deferred rendering work on the 360 without blowing the GPU's eDRAM every time a render target is switched! I know, they are working on it right now! They said so!" or somesuch.

Unreal engine isn't made just for X360. Sure it has been optimized a bit, but its still not engine that has been made from scratch for X360. KZ2 engine is and stop calling me 360 fan I haven't even touched X360 ever(I guess, I must be on X360 side or on PS3 side. Theres no alternatives. -.-). Deferred rendering is needed because? Does Crysis use deferred rendering?... uhm... no... Does it look much better than any game on both of these consoles can ever look... yes... And yeah, G-buffer is also way too big for that small eDRAM(With reasonable resolutions.). So its a bit more complicated and I am not sure can it be done with X360 GPU.

@Squilliam

Ok, it does provide more memory for those pixel shader operations, which you can do with it.

Wait... what?  So you believe that the X360's GPU can provide graphics on par with Crysis?  The PS3's GPU is widely known to be slightly less cool than the X360's, due to the Xenos' awesome flexible pipeline.  The PS3's supporting architecture, however, allows the PS3 to outperform the X360, graphically, with techniques like deferred rendering, because the GPUs are really pretty close, and in the end, as an overall architecture, the PS3 takes the prize.

Deferred rendering is a pretty powerful technique.  I doubt it will be used in a large number of games.  In general, I disagree with this article, except for the fact that the most truly phenominal (graphically, and perhaps otherwise) games we will see, for the rest of the generation, are much more likely to be on the PS3 than the 360.  That says nothing about the general game quality, on both platforms, relative to each other.  That's the error this article has made, from my standpoint.

The 360 is not tumbling down the hill or some such BS.  It just doesn't have the room to grow that the PS3 does.  That's the price of its awesome accessibility.  All the power, now.  Honestly I think MS is better off (as the sales numbers demonstrate) by having their games shine initially and then get repetitive throughout the generation.  However, the PS3 is a fun architecture, and as an engineer myself, I can't say that I'm as remotely interested in squeezing power out of the 360 as I am out of the PS3.  360 is pretty easy, and its power is very accessible.  That's nice...  good for the games factory...  set the "B" engineering team on it (I bet you think I'm kidding).

Wow! you talk a lot of rubbish, ignoring known facts and replacing them with your "pro ps3" ones instead, well done!

It's been proven sooo many times that the 360 can produce better graphics than the PS3, even one of the Cell designers stated the 360 has a better GPU and memory setup (the interview was on VG a few weeks back if you remember),

And if you think Killzone 2 looks good wait until Gears Of War 3 comes out on 360, I will bet you any money that it will look a LOT better than Killzone 2 with much better textures too!

 

At the end of the day you can believe what you want and try and make the PS3 sound like its god until the cows come home but it doesn't change the fact that the 360 has a better GPU and more memory,

 

 

 



Groucho on 30 January 2009
FKNetwork said:

Wow! you talk a lot of rubbish, ignoring known facts and replacing them with your "pro ps3" ones instead, well done!

I guess if you don't have a clue as to how computers work, this might seem the case.

It's been proven sooo many times that the 360 can produce better graphics than the PS3, even one of the Cell designers stated the 360 has a better GPU and memory setup (the interview was on VG a few weeks back if you remember),

And if you think Killzone 2 looks good wait until Gears Of War 3 comes out on 360, I will bet you any money that it will look a LOT better than Killzone 2 with much better textures too!

Suure it will.  GeoW3 4 the winZ!  Oh hey, did you see what Epic did to owners of the PC version of GeoW a couple days back?  Pretty smart.

At the end of the day you can believe what you want and try and make the PS3 sound like its god until the cows come home but it doesn't change the fact that the 360 has a better GPU and more memory,

My point made.

 

 

 

 



Hammer-of-Dawn on 30 January 2009

maybe with 1st party titles..................but is it worth it?

I mean KZ2 took 4 years, FF13 5, GT 5 is taking five years.

Life is too short to be waiting and waiting and waiting....to play a game with better visuals but gameplay that can be found on another console.



FKNetwork on 30 January 2009
Groucho said:
FKNetwork said:

Wow! you talk a lot of rubbish, ignoring known facts and replacing them with your "pro ps3" ones instead, well done!

I guess if you don't have a clue as to how computers work, this might seem the case.

It's been proven sooo many times that the 360 can produce better graphics than the PS3, even one of the Cell designers stated the 360 has a better GPU and memory setup (the interview was on VG a few weeks back if you remember),

And if you think Killzone 2 looks good wait until Gears Of War 3 comes out on 360, I will bet you any money that it will look a LOT better than Killzone 2 with much better textures too!

Suure it will.  GeoW3 4 the winZ!  Oh hey, did you see what Epic did to owners of the PC version of GeoW a couple days back?  Pretty smart.

At the end of the day you can believe what you want and try and make the PS3 sound like its god until the cows come home but it doesn't change the fact that the 360 has a better GPU and more memory,

My point made.

 

 

 

 

No, I have no clue how pc's work, not like i've been building and selling them for the last six years, geezzz

And no, I didn't hear what epic did for PC gow players?



obamanian on 30 January 2009

Xbox 360 has one of the best looking game in 2009

Star Ocean 4


http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/873/new1jg9.jpg

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/7599/new5al9.jpg