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

Forums - Gaming - Is 360 or PS3 more powerful? Let's settle this with specs

Aions wins =)

According to my non-techy bro, "cause the PS3 has blu-ray it should be better than Xbox360 and any PC" ....*facepalm



Around the Network

Huh, never realized that Wii's graphics card was only roughly half the speed of the competition. Though having 1/6th the memory doesn't help



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

we've had this time and time again the sega megadrive is the most powerful!lol
plz close mods



PLEASE LOCK THIS THREAD, NOTHING OF INTEREST WILL BE DISCUSSED BECAUSE THE MEMBERS OF VGCHARTZ DON'T POSSESS THE ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND ANYTHING.

Go to beyond3D forums if you want to understand the technical side of things. Here you will just get contaminated ideas from fanboys posing as people who know what they are talking about.



Mr Khan said:

Huh, never realized that Wii's graphics card was only roughly half the speed of the competition. Though having 1/6th the memory doesn't help


It's LESS than half, heck it's LESS than a 1\5!!!

The power of a graphics card is not measured on the speed of its core in Mhz!

My nVidia GTX285 runs at 700mhz roughly.

It is easily 3x as fast as the RSX (RSX = based on Gefore 7x tech)

 

There is NO link, you have to take the width of the memory bus\number of texture units\frequency of RAM BUS\...lots more into account.



Around the Network

I can't say much about the power im not the most tech savvy, but both my PS3 and 360 have good enough graphics for me thats all that counts.



The PS3's got all those SPEs, so technicaly it's got the flops per second advantage. I dont know much about graphics, but I will say that it's extremely difficult to use all those SPE's effectively. I should know, I'm working on an open source parallel sorting algorithm, and realistically when you're working on 8 cores you're only getting 5-6 times the speed up.

I think as developers learn to parallelize their code better, we'll see better results on the PS3, although it's split CPU-GPU memory is still a bottleneck. Essentially I think what it boils down to is, the PS3 can handle more polygons, surfaces, physics, whatever, but has a glass ceiling in terms of textures.




PSN: chenguo4
Current playing: No More Heroes

chenguo4 said:
The PS3's got all those SPEs, so technicaly it's got the flops per second advantage. I dont know much about graphics, but I will say that it's extremely difficult to use all those SPE's effectively. I should know, I'm working on an open source parallel sorting algorithm, and realistically when you're working on 8 cores you're only getting 5-6 times the speed up.

I think as developers learn to parallelize their code better, we'll see better results on the PS3, although it's split CPU-GPU memory is still a bottleneck. Essentially I think what it boils down to is, the PS3 can handle more polygons, surfaces, physics, whatever, but has a glass ceiling in terms of textures.

Basically, this means that the graphics do have somewhat of a limit right now, but by having more polygons, you can have more on display, also meaning more can happen at the same time. I doubt the 360 could show as much, or display or load a map as big or fast as the PS3 can. I love both consoles, but that's just what I see in them.



NO.... This thread stays



Aion said:
There both great specs, capable of producing the best games and graphics.


Aion wins, im proud of you man, its your best post ever.