@ Garnett

And everyone knows the Cell is far more powerful than the Xenon.

A large part of the reason why the PS3 graphics system is more powerful is because of the Cell. The RSX is a powerful GPU but especially a good fit for the Cell, as it's only relatively weak at the uses where the Cell is far more powerful and flexible.

Another reason is the 360's memory layout, tiling is killig a lot of the 360's graphics potential.



Low latency is just as important and this is where the PS3 config is far more powerful. 256 MB of RAM to work with for the CPU is actually pretty huge.

You don't seem to understand why being able to move around data fast is very important and why this drags down memory requirements. Please take a look at the Neo Geo memory configuration, look at the games and compare them with PC games at the time together with their minimal memory requirements. You can learn a lot from looking at the past, I think it will be far more effective for you to research this yourself and come to your own conclusions.

MikeB said: @ Garnett Did you just ignore my hole post? Were not talking about graphics were talking about the Processors. And everyone knows the Cell is far more powerful than the Xenon. A large part of the reason why the PS3 graphics system is more powerful is because of the Cell. The RSX is a powerful GPU but especially a good fit for the Cell, as it's only relatively weak at the uses where the Cell is far more powerful and flexible. Another reason is the 360's memory layout, tiling is killig a lot of the 360's graphics potential. No matter how much you DENY it,No matter what you SAY,No matter what EXCUSE you try to use,PS3 still only has 256mb for CPU. Low latency is just as important and this is where the PS3 config is far more powerful. 256 MB of RAM to work with for the CPU is actually pretty huge. You don't seem to understand why being able to move around data fast is very important and why this drags down memory requirements. Please take a look at the Neo Geo memory configuration, look at the games and compare them with PC games at the time together with their minimal memory requirements. You can learn a lot from looking at the past, I think it will be far more effective for you to research this yourself and come to your own conclusions.

Where the hell did that come from?

"The RSX is a powerful GPU" "as it's only relatively weak" (Lol wut?)      Again im not talking about Graphics.

Are you serious? So flexible RAM = BAD? Is that a joke????????

It dosent matter how fast your memory is,You can only put 256 (actually less) in a game at once or your gonna lag,I realize its SLIGHTLY faster.

 

Garnett said: MikeB said: @ Garnett Did you just ignore my hole post? Were not talking about graphics were talking about the Processors. And everyone knows the Cell is far more powerful than the Xenon. A large part of the reason why the PS3 graphics system is more powerful is because of the Cell. The RSX is a powerful GPU but especially a good fit for the Cell, as it's only relatively weak at the uses where the Cell is far more powerful and flexible. Another reason is the 360's memory layout, tiling is killig a lot of the 360's graphics potential. No matter how much you DENY it,No matter what you SAY,No matter what EXCUSE you try to use,PS3 still only has 256mb for CPU. Low latency is just as important and this is where the PS3 config is far more powerful. 256 MB of RAM to work with for the CPU is actually pretty huge. You don't seem to understand why being able to move around data fast is very important and why this drags down memory requirements. Please take a look at the Neo Geo memory configuration, look at the games and compare them with PC games at the time together with their minimal memory requirements. You can learn a lot from looking at the past, I think it will be far more effective for you to research this yourself and come to your own conclusions. Where the hell did that come from? "The RSX is a powerful GPU" "as it's only relatively weak" (Lol wut?) Again im not talking about Graphics. Are you serious? So flexible RAM = BAD? Is that a joke???????? It dosent matter how fast your memory is,You can only put 256 (actually less) in a game at once or your gonna lag,I realize its SLIGHTLY faster.

Oh yea...

 

"One little change and you're out of memory. When it comes to PlayStation3, there's less memory to work with. We actually ended up hiring some from Sony to help us make our PS3 version. Fortunately, they are the same. We've been able to make sure that PC, 360 and PS3 versions are the same."

 

"Kennedy even stressed how hard Red Faction: Guerilla is pushing the current-gen technology and then says that the lack of memory on PlayStation3 causes a additional headache."

 

“I mean, to be honest, we are pushing the Xbox 360 and PlayStation3 to the limits,” he says. “I mean, not only has it been a balancing act making destruction work with the gameplay and making it all come together in a cohesive way that’s fun, but it’s been a balancing act getting the game to run on the systems.”

 

From Selnor "So there you have it. Again people on this site choose to find and nitpick partial events. When in reality the most probable reason they are looking at 720 is because the PS3 couldnt do anymore. They had a harder time with the PS3 because the memory is a worse situation."

 

from http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=55476

 

So it sounds like the PS3 version is bringing both PC/360 versions down.

 

Unified ram is flexible, but it's never the best performing solution. Both XB360 and PS3 suffer anyway from a quite low total system+graphics RAM of 512MB.
Theoretical XB360 flexibility clashes with the fact that most mid-range GPU's, just like those in PS3 and XB360, use from 256 to 512 MB graphics RAM.
RAM is the biggest shortcoming of current generation, whichever the system.

Yet another victory for the glorious PS3 gaming system and another nail into the coffins of the competition!

Sony should remember to include this as a feature the next time they release charts detailing they are infact the best and cheapest system. I know i'd buy another PS3 with a feature like "Shuts Up Gabe Newell!".

@ Garnett

No way, if the 360 would have had more RAM than the PS3, the 360 version would simply have used more RAM than the PS3 version just like the PC version will. Understand? BTW I think he talks about graphics RAM here, maybe Sony helped them to take advantage of the XDR instead, if the CPU memory would be limited they probably would use the harddrive for virtual memory.

Things which bog down ports for other systems is performance related, you cannot have twice the enemies onscreen in one version compared to the other. You usually will not provide far more content than another version than would fit another target platform's storage medium and such (graphics varierty and quality).

That game is probably PC orientated, thus memory problems without significant adaptations are to be expected. I never said the Neo Geo was easy to develop for compared to the PC at the time, however results and potential were vastly superior.

MikeB said: @ Garnett So it sounds like the PS3 version is bringing both PC/360 versions down. No way, if the 360 would have had more RAM than the PS3, the 360 version would simply have used more RAM than the PS3 version just like the PC version will. Understand? BTW I think he talks about graphics RAM here, maybe Sony helped them to take advantage of the XDR instead, if the CPU memory would be limited they probably would use the harddrive for virtual memory. Things which bog down ports for other systems is performance related, you cannot have twice the enemies onscreen in one version compared to the other. You usually will not provide far more content than another version than would fit another target platform's storage medium and such (graphics varierty and quality). That game is probably PC orientated, thus memory problems without significant adaptations are to be expected. I never said the Neo Geo was easy to develop for compared to the PC at the time, however results and potential were vastly superior.

Hes not talking about graphics ram here,he means normal ram,That means if this game is dev for 360 and ported to PS3 it can only use 256 ram for CPU.

You are trying everything in the book in order not to accept the fact that 360 ram is used better,accept it all ready,you used every single excuse already dude.

I never said the 360 had more ram i said that 360 can unevenly use its ram unlike the PS3,and they cant take advantage of the harddrive because not all 360 have HDD so they can only use the RAM.

MikeB said: Another reason is the 360's memory layout, tiling is killig a lot of the 360's graphics potential.

I promised myself not to reply for MikeBs posts as they seem to be nothing but bad joke. Anyway, I just wanted to correct that tiling problem applies only for pixel shader operations that are made on daughter die. (You do know or don't know that everything must be 'tiled' for SPUs. Processing very large amount of data that is dependant on large amount of other data will render SPUs quite useless.)

And for both of you:

Get me devkit for X360 and PS3 and I will make program for both platforms that do not run properly on another platform. Neither you can optimize those programs for them to make them work. ;)

Oh and MikeB:

Your amiga analogs suck. I know you love amiga, but PS3 isn't amiga.

@ Deneidez

You agree that with more EDRam, the 360 would have been able to perform 16FP HDR together with AA like for example Uncharted does on the PS3?

If so, that's my point.



Not everything of course,

but of course they are designed as stream processors for mass data processing (hence the huge internal and external bandwidth). I talked about this to great lenght in the past, AFAIK in threads you also participated in!

The 360 situation is different, tiling with regard to its GPU is a major limiting work around due to lack of EDRAM. It greatly diminishes any real world advantages the architecture may have had compared to other high definition GPUs. Only GPU or CPU can access its shared RAM at any one time (like some cheaper embedded and PC solutions), so tiling goes against optimal usage of the 360 hardware.

Do you agree the Cell is far more powerful potentially than the Xenon if programmed right.

And your example regarding code running properly on both platforms is stupid. Sure you can't run PPC assembler code on x86 processors and vice versa, but who cares? Both PPC and x86 processors are capable of similar functions if coded properly for that architecture, it's about what can be done, not about how it must be done.

@ Deneidez

The Neo Geo wasn't an Amiga. Of course I would agree I could have used the Amiga as an example in this regard as well. MSDOS PC games required lots more memory than Amiga games from the 80's (both harddrive storage as well as system memory) and early nineties and Amiga games at the time were far superior in terms of graphics, audio and game complexity.

It just shows things aren't always as black and white as noobs think they are. I had a hard time explaining to PC noobs my 25 Mhz Amiga was roughly 4 times as fast than someone else's 50 Mhz Amiga in terms of CPU performance (that does not compute in a noob world).