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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - resident evil 5 ps3 vs. 360 comparison. 360 WINS!!!

forevercloud3000 on 05 February 2009
Garnett said:
forevercloud3000 said:
Garnett said:
jetrii said:

I never claimed the Cell did major graphics. However since it's harder to develop for, developers have to neglect other areas in order to properly use it and stay on budget. A lot of comapanies (Sony included) are having trouble optimizing for the PS3 so their games eat up more memory than they should and this happens.

Edit: And yes, the Cell does do major graphics in some titles to compensate for the weak GPU, but that is another discussion.

 

Not you but everyone is hoping cell can somehow make the PS3 graphics magically better.

 

That magic works a little like this.....

The Cell architecture is versatile enough that it actually can be applied to the GPU to boost it's capabilities. This is actually a technique utilized by Killzone 2. That is just one of the many things the cell is capable of. Whether all developers utilize these sorts of funtions is up to them.

So yea, the Cell does make the PS3's graphics better then the 360's in theory.

 

No it cant be because he said that hte game is using 100% of the SPU at some points in game,so they cant change the graphics mid game,so the SPU are being used for the CPU,All the grfx work is being done by the RSX!

 

 

So what? Part of that 100% is the cell aiding the RSX, which actually coincides the 60% of cell usage Geurilla Games issued. It is not the whole game when 100% is being used.



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

Around the Network
jetrii on 05 February 2009
Garnett said:
forevercloud3000 said:
Garnett said:
jetrii said:

I never claimed the Cell did major graphics. However since it's harder to develop for, developers have to neglect other areas in order to properly use it and stay on budget. A lot of comapanies (Sony included) are having trouble optimizing for the PS3 so their games eat up more memory than they should and this happens.

Edit: And yes, the Cell does do major graphics in some titles to compensate for the weak GPU, but that is another discussion.

 

Not you but everyone is hoping cell can somehow make the PS3 graphics magically better.

 

That magic works a little like this.....

The Cell architecture is versatile enough that it actually can be applied to the GPU to boost it's capabilities. This is actually a technique utilized by Killzone 2. That is just one of the many things the cell is capable of. Whether all developers utilize these sorts of funtions is up to them.

So yea, the Cell does make the PS3's graphics better then the 360's in theory.

 

No it cant be because he said that hte game is using 100% of the SPU at some points in game,so they cant change the graphics mid game,so the SPU are being used for the CPU,All the grfx work is being done by the RSX!

 

 

Actually, you are both wrong (one more than the other.) In Killzone 2, the cell processor is used to generate graphical data for the GPU. In fact, in Killzone 2, the SPEs are mainly used to generate data for RSX since it is not that powerful of a GPU. However, this has nothing to do with the Cell processor being a godsend, any processor can be used to do this, it just happens that the Cell processor has enough dumb little cores to do this sort of thing, while on a normal CPU the cores would be wasted since they can do more complicated things. The Cell processor is highly inneficient at this but there are 7 of them. Had Sony taken the budget for Cell and developed a more advanced GPU and a simpler CPU, we probably would have had the same result.

Search though my post history and you will find a nice post on why Killzone 2 looks the way it does. Here is a hint: It has nothing to do with the Cell processor and everything to do with Sony wanting a game to push it far so they sank a truckload of money into developing it. Killzone 2 is the result of pure effort, not the Cell processor. Had the same effort been done on a 360 game, it would have looked amazing as well. The reason why developers don't push the Cell (and get called lazy by clueless people) is that it simply is not worth the effort. Why spend so much money on it when that money can be spent making other games?



Good news Everyone!

I've invented a device which makes you read this in your head, in my voice!

Pristine20 on 05 February 2009
Garnett said:
jetrii said:
forevercloud3000 said:
WTH? What kind of OP is that? Flaimbait to the extreme.

And I know I cannot be the only one who think they look virtually identical, with only the slightest of differences.

The 360's lights are more intense.
The PS3's shadows are darker.

Neither of these is a graphical feat over the other.

The OP's name is XBOT.......enough said.

 

Although I have already stated that the difference isn't much, the 360 version does have higher resolution textures, improved shading, and a bit less blurring to cover those textures. I've gone through all of the comparison pictures, and although the difference is minimal in most, the textures on a few of them is vastly better on the Xbox 360. However, people won't notice unless the 2 copies are running side to side and they have an eye for these things.

No PS3 fanboy believe syou,no way a fine piece of hardware like the PS3 is being out done by a raggie half ass machine like the 360 that breaks every 5 minutes and a 90% hardware failure rate,no way in hell that happening,how ever the rest of us know better :)

 

 

You know, you have the annoying habit of putting words into the mouths of those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" you dream about and then recalling it to make baseless arguments. You agreed with squilliam about the ps3 version having a lower framerate when he basically pulled the idea out of the blue and you're running around casting judgement on people. Check your eyes buddy. Those "fanboy" goggles you have on are not only foggy but they keep spawning endless spirals of delusion as well.

Maybe you thought using a killzone 2 avatar would make you seem "fair and unbiased" LMAO. What a joke.



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

jetrii on 05 February 2009
Pristine20 said:
Garnett said:
jetrii said:
forevercloud3000 said:
WTH? What kind of OP is that? Flaimbait to the extreme.

And I know I cannot be the only one who think they look virtually identical, with only the slightest of differences.

The 360's lights are more intense.
The PS3's shadows are darker.

Neither of these is a graphical feat over the other.

The OP's name is XBOT.......enough said.

 

Although I have already stated that the difference isn't much, the 360 version does have higher resolution textures, improved shading, and a bit less blurring to cover those textures. I've gone through all of the comparison pictures, and although the difference is minimal in most, the textures on a few of them is vastly better on the Xbox 360. However, people won't notice unless the 2 copies are running side to side and they have an eye for these things.

No PS3 fanboy believe syou,no way a fine piece of hardware like the PS3 is being out done by a raggie half ass machine like the 360 that breaks every 5 minutes and a 90% hardware failure rate,no way in hell that happening,how ever the rest of us know better :)

 

 

You know, you have the annoying habit of putting words into the mouths of those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" you dream about and then recalling it to make baseless arguments. You agreed with squilliam about the ps3 version having a lower framerate when he basically pulled the idea out of the blue and you're running around casting judgement on people. Check your eyes buddy. Those "fanboy" goggles you have on are not only foggy but they keep spawning endless spirals of delusion as well.

Maybe you thought using a killzone 2 avatar would make you seem "fair and unbiased" LMAO. What a joke.

Was Garnett being sarcastic? I'm not familiar with his posts so I just naturally assumed he was. If he wasn't then it's a sad day for darwin.

 



Good news Everyone!

I've invented a device which makes you read this in your head, in my voice!

Pristine20 on 05 February 2009
jetrii said:
Pristine20 said:
Garnett said:
jetrii said:
forevercloud3000 said:
WTH? What kind of OP is that? Flaimbait to the extreme.

And I know I cannot be the only one who think they look virtually identical, with only the slightest of differences.

The 360's lights are more intense.
The PS3's shadows are darker.

Neither of these is a graphical feat over the other.

The OP's name is XBOT.......enough said.

 

Although I have already stated that the difference isn't much, the 360 version does have higher resolution textures, improved shading, and a bit less blurring to cover those textures. I've gone through all of the comparison pictures, and although the difference is minimal in most, the textures on a few of them is vastly better on the Xbox 360. However, people won't notice unless the 2 copies are running side to side and they have an eye for these things.

No PS3 fanboy believe syou,no way a fine piece of hardware like the PS3 is being out done by a raggie half ass machine like the 360 that breaks every 5 minutes and a 90% hardware failure rate,no way in hell that happening,how ever the rest of us know better :)

 

 

You know, you have the annoying habit of putting words into the mouths of those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" you dream about and then recalling it to make baseless arguments. You agreed with squilliam about the ps3 version having a lower framerate when he basically pulled the idea out of the blue and you're running around casting judgement on people. Check your eyes buddy. Those "fanboy" goggles you have on are not only foggy but they keep spawning endless spirals of delusion as well.

Maybe you thought using a killzone 2 avatar would make you seem "fair and unbiased" LMAO. What a joke.

Was Garnett being sarcastic? I'm not familiar with his posts so I just naturally assumed he was. If he wasn't then it's a sad day for darwin.

 

 

His posts basically reads off as: x360>>>ps3 even with all it's hardware faults and purported inferiority. Then he adds that "ps3 fanboys" are basically delusional for thinking ther crap console is the superior one despite been proven wrong over and over. And then comes the funny part, he then adds "however the rest of us know better".

Track Garnett posting history, he's nitpicked any and everything he could pick against the ps3 since I've been reading his posts on this site. After changing his avatar to kz2, he then pops a "great console" line in the ps3 20 mil thread and thinks that makes him unbiased. If you ask me, he sounds even more delusional than those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" he keeps conjuring up.



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

Around the Network
jetrii on 05 February 2009
Pristine20 said:
jetrii said:
Pristine20 said:
Garnett said:
jetrii said:
forevercloud3000 said:
WTH? What kind of OP is that? Flaimbait to the extreme.

And I know I cannot be the only one who think they look virtually identical, with only the slightest of differences.

The 360's lights are more intense.
The PS3's shadows are darker.

Neither of these is a graphical feat over the other.

The OP's name is XBOT.......enough said.

 

Although I have already stated that the difference isn't much, the 360 version does have higher resolution textures, improved shading, and a bit less blurring to cover those textures. I've gone through all of the comparison pictures, and although the difference is minimal in most, the textures on a few of them is vastly better on the Xbox 360. However, people won't notice unless the 2 copies are running side to side and they have an eye for these things.

No PS3 fanboy believe syou,no way a fine piece of hardware like the PS3 is being out done by a raggie half ass machine like the 360 that breaks every 5 minutes and a 90% hardware failure rate,no way in hell that happening,how ever the rest of us know better :)

 

 

You know, you have the annoying habit of putting words into the mouths of those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" you dream about and then recalling it to make baseless arguments. You agreed with squilliam about the ps3 version having a lower framerate when he basically pulled the idea out of the blue and you're running around casting judgement on people. Check your eyes buddy. Those "fanboy" goggles you have on are not only foggy but they keep spawning endless spirals of delusion as well.

Maybe you thought using a killzone 2 avatar would make you seem "fair and unbiased" LMAO. What a joke.

Was Garnett being sarcastic? I'm not familiar with his posts so I just naturally assumed he was. If he wasn't then it's a sad day for darwin.

 

 

His posts basically reads off as: x360>>>ps3 even with all it's hardware faults and purported inferiority. Then he adds that "ps3 fanboys" are basically delusional for thinking ther crap console is the superior one despite been proven wrong over and over. And then comes the funny part, he then adds "however the rest of us know better".

Track Garnett posting history, he's nitpicked any and everthing he could pick against the ps3 since I've been reading his posts on this site. After changing his avatar to kz2, he then pops a "great console" line in the ps3 20 mil thread and thinks that makes him unbiased. If you ask me, he sounds even more delusional than those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" he keeps conjuring up.

 

Well, the whole PS3 vs Xbox 360 is a matter of opinion. Personally, I agree with him, I think the Xbox 360 is a superior platform. It may not be more technologically advanced, but I think it is a superior platform nontheless. I just searched through his post history and he does seem to be a little out of touch with reality. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion just as long as it doesn't blind you. He definetely seems blinded.



Good news Everyone!

I've invented a device which makes you read this in your head, in my voice!

Pristine20 on 05 February 2009
jetrii said:
Pristine20 said:
jetrii said:
Pristine20 said:
Garnett said:
jetrii said:
forevercloud3000 said:
WTH? What kind of OP is that? Flaimbait to the extreme.

And I know I cannot be the only one who think they look virtually identical, with only the slightest of differences.

The 360's lights are more intense.
The PS3's shadows are darker.

Neither of these is a graphical feat over the other.

The OP's name is XBOT.......enough said.

 

Although I have already stated that the difference isn't much, the 360 version does have higher resolution textures, improved shading, and a bit less blurring to cover those textures. I've gone through all of the comparison pictures, and although the difference is minimal in most, the textures on a few of them is vastly better on the Xbox 360. However, people won't notice unless the 2 copies are running side to side and they have an eye for these things.

No PS3 fanboy believe syou,no way a fine piece of hardware like the PS3 is being out done by a raggie half ass machine like the 360 that breaks every 5 minutes and a 90% hardware failure rate,no way in hell that happening,how ever the rest of us know better :)

 

 

You know, you have the annoying habit of putting words into the mouths of those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" you dream about and then recalling it to make baseless arguments. You agreed with squilliam about the ps3 version having a lower framerate when he basically pulled the idea out of the blue and you're running around casting judgement on people. Check your eyes buddy. Those "fanboy" goggles you have on are not only foggy but they keep spawning endless spirals of delusion as well.

Maybe you thought using a killzone 2 avatar would make you seem "fair and unbiased" LMAO. What a joke.

Was Garnett being sarcastic? I'm not familiar with his posts so I just naturally assumed he was. If he wasn't then it's a sad day for darwin.

 

 

His posts basically reads off as: x360>>>ps3 even with all it's hardware faults and purported inferiority. Then he adds that "ps3 fanboys" are basically delusional for thinking ther crap console is the superior one despite been proven wrong over and over. And then comes the funny part, he then adds "however the rest of us know better".

Track Garnett posting history, he's nitpicked any and everthing he could pick against the ps3 since I've been reading his posts on this site. After changing his avatar to kz2, he then pops a "great console" line in the ps3 20 mil thread and thinks that makes him unbiased. If you ask me, he sounds even more delusional than those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" he keeps conjuring up.

 

Well, the whole PS3 vs Xbox 360 is a matter of opinion. Personally, I agree with him, I think the Xbox 360 is a superior platform. It may not be more technologically advanced, but I think it is a superior platform nontheless. I just searched through his post history and he does seem to be a little out of touch with reality. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion just as long as it doesn't blind you. He definetely seems blinded.

 

Well I haven't played a 360 long enough to bother forming an opinion on it and probably won't ever since sony and M$ are pretty much offering the same experience this gen so I won't argue with you on your opinion. However, thanks for acknowledging that my thoughts on Garnett weren't unfounded.



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

eliasg on 06 February 2009

Dear Pristine, i agree with you, but believe me , give your self a chance and buy an XBOX360, cause you missing a lot of great exclusives...



 XBOX360

Official member of the Xbox 360 Squad

Squilliam on 06 February 2009
Pristine20 said:
Garnett said:
jetrii said:
forevercloud3000 said:
WTH? What kind of OP is that? Flaimbait to the extreme.

And I know I cannot be the only one who think they look virtually identical, with only the slightest of differences.

The 360's lights are more intense.
The PS3's shadows are darker.

Neither of these is a graphical feat over the other.

The OP's name is XBOT.......enough said.

 

Although I have already stated that the difference isn't much, the 360 version does have higher resolution textures, improved shading, and a bit less blurring to cover those textures. I've gone through all of the comparison pictures, and although the difference is minimal in most, the textures on a few of them is vastly better on the Xbox 360. However, people won't notice unless the 2 copies are running side to side and they have an eye for these things.

No PS3 fanboy believe syou,no way a fine piece of hardware like the PS3 is being out done by a raggie half ass machine like the 360 that breaks every 5 minutes and a 90% hardware failure rate,no way in hell that happening,how ever the rest of us know better :)

 

 

You know, you have the annoying habit of putting words into the mouths of those imaginary "ps3 fanboys" you dream about and then recalling it to make baseless arguments. You agreed with squilliam about the ps3 version having a lower framerate when he basically pulled the idea out of the blue and you're running around casting judgement on people. Check your eyes buddy. Those "fanboy" goggles you have on are not only foggy but they keep spawning endless spirals of delusion as well.

Maybe you thought using a killzone 2 avatar would make you seem "fair and unbiased" LMAO. What a joke.

To be honest, im a little butt-hurt about the Dead Space comment I made earlier. Its probably because I like salad tossing and I never got to pull anything out of the blue like you said. I was just lazy with providing proof.

"I'm rather more surprised that there's been no talk about Dead Space PS3 regularly dropping to 20fps whereas the 360 version is pretty much locked at 30fps. I suppose on a more slowly-paced game like this, the drop isn't as noticeable as it would be in say, a racing game. But no way did this game lead on PS3."

This is the guy that can measure the framerates on consoles. So its even been measured and its not some BS seat of your pants armchair fanboy.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1232413&postcount=160

 

 



Tease.

piratikkio on 06 February 2009

i dont see any difference.



PLAYSTATION®3