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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - If the 360 can't do graphics like the PS3, HOW can it do THIS?

selnor on 07 September 2009
ithis said:
selnor said:
The recent threads you refer to, have been proven yers old images or fanboy BS. The pure fact we have seen CryEngine 3 run side by side on PS3 and 360 and are basically identical shows the 360 is a very capable machine. I always said that there woud be nothing in it between them. And there isn't.

CryEngine 3 latest showing at Cologne showed just how far ahead of any Console engine out there. Also it was confirmed it's the only engine on console where everything runs in realtime. Even KZ2 was confirmed to have tricks involved and not all realtime. So look at the facts and make your own mind up. I'm getting the best of both worlds. :)

The showing of rain drops and water flowing in the burhing castle scene, where one of the Yerli brothers explained that they wanted to see the maximum pixel shader performance the PS3 can do, would be interesting to see on the Xbox360.

I'm curious to see if the Cell's computational power does help the PS3's GPU to outdo the XBox360's powerfull GPU/CPU combination.

There will be differences if you max everything, but in different areas, showing off the different strenghts of the two machines.

In the CryEngine 3 side-by-side demo, the interiors looked better on the XBox, and the exteriors on the PS3, but only in the details, or so it seamed to me.

There is another semy-graphic thing that could benefit from the computational advantage of the PS3, and that's physics (provided said computational advantage is not all consumed to offset the graphics performance disatvantage).

All the above, IMO.


I agree with alot of what you say. From what I noticed on outdoor areas of CryEngine 3 was PS3 seemed to load further objects bit quicker, but 360 had better lighting. The lighitng through palm tree looked more real on the 360 closer to the PC one above it. But thats probably more due to the GPU having more visual effects features, which unfortunately the Cell cant account for. Heres an excerpt from Crytek tech employee.

" Now theres alot of engines that run, or 2 major engines that run beside us on consoles. But I would argue that nobody is running on PS3 as good as we do. I can put my hand on fire on this, NOBODY. I mean nobody. I have seen what people are running on PS3 and we here are running on PS3, 360 and PC this quality bar. I mean PS3 is the lowest medium for alot of people and in our case PS3 is running at the top level.

It's very difficult. The PS3 as an engine..uh.. as a technology platform is extremely challenging. But all the SPU's, the Cell architecture itself.. the...the.. low end GPU compared to the rest of the family, the 360 and PC it adds complexity to it, but we have managed to extract that complexity for the developer and write intelliugent computer systems that actually take care of the problems. Umm thats it."



Around the Network
Aion on 07 September 2009

Yeah the 360 has graphics on par with ps3.



 

   PROUD MEMBER OF THE PLAYSTATION 3 : RPG FAN CLUB

 

Sweep on 07 September 2009
Aion said:
Yeah the 360 has graphics on par with ps3.

IMHO : "360 had graphics on par with PS3"

I think the tables are starting to turn, now that 3 rd party developpers are beginning to use the CELL to help the RSX

And while the Xenos is a bit superior to the RSX, I don't think it can't beat a CELL+RSX combo.

The only problem is that 3rd party games versions are build to match each other and can't use all the respective power of each console



Hyams on 07 September 2009
selnor said:
ithis said:
selnor said:
The recent threads you refer to, have been proven yers old images or fanboy BS. The pure fact we have seen CryEngine 3 run side by side on PS3 and 360 and are basically identical shows the 360 is a very capable machine. I always said that there woud be nothing in it between them. And there isn't.

CryEngine 3 latest showing at Cologne showed just how far ahead of any Console engine out there. Also it was confirmed it's the only engine on console where everything runs in realtime. Even KZ2 was confirmed to have tricks involved and not all realtime. So look at the facts and make your own mind up. I'm getting the best of both worlds. :)

The showing of rain drops and water flowing in the burhing castle scene, where one of the Yerli brothers explained that they wanted to see the maximum pixel shader performance the PS3 can do, would be interesting to see on the Xbox360.

I'm curious to see if the Cell's computational power does help the PS3's GPU to outdo the XBox360's powerfull GPU/CPU combination.

There will be differences if you max everything, but in different areas, showing off the different strenghts of the two machines.

In the CryEngine 3 side-by-side demo, the interiors looked better on the XBox, and the exteriors on the PS3, but only in the details, or so it seamed to me.

There is another semy-graphic thing that could benefit from the computational advantage of the PS3, and that's physics (provided said computational advantage is not all consumed to offset the graphics performance disatvantage).

All the above, IMO.


I agree with alot of what you say. From what I noticed on outdoor areas of CryEngine 3 was PS3 seemed to load further objects bit quicker, but 360 had better lighting. The lighitng through palm tree looked more real on the 360 closer to the PC one above it. But thats probably more due to the GPU having more visual effects features, which unfortunately the Cell cant account for. Heres an excerpt from Crytek tech employee.

" Now theres alot of engines that run, or 2 major engines that run beside us on consoles. But I would argue that nobody is running on PS3 as good as we do. I can put my hand on fire on this, NOBODY. I mean nobody. I have seen what people are running on PS3 and we here are running on PS3, 360 and PC this quality bar. I mean PS3 is the lowest medium for alot of people and in our case PS3 is running at the top level.

It's very difficult. The PS3 as an engine..uh.. as a technology platform is extremely challenging. But all the SPU's, the Cell architecture itself.. the...the.. low end GPU compared to the rest of the family, the 360 and PC it adds complexity to it, but we have managed to extract that complexity for the developer and write intelliugent computer systems that actually take care of the problems. Umm thats it."

Well, apparently:

Development of the cross platform tech wasn’t easy though, as Atkinson says. “It’s been tricky, but we’ve got a strong PS3 engine with all the major systems running on SPUs.  With middleware, what you want is for someone else to do all that so the developer can just concentrate on making games.  We have parity between the platforms now: both run at the same speed.”  Although this ’same speed’ clearly depends on what the engine is doing at that particular time.  “If the game’s shader-heavy it runs a bit faster on 360; if it’s compute-heavy with physics and particles, then the SPUs take over and it’s a bit quicker on PS3.”

-- http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2009/05/17/cryengine-3-ps3-vs-360/

Can't wait to see what games devs make with it.



NKAJ on 07 September 2009

once i see killzone 2 graphics on xbox360 then i will agree with the statement



"They will know heghan belongs to the helghast"

"England expects that everyman will do his duty"

"we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender"

 

Around the Network
selnor on 07 September 2009
NKAJ said:
once i see killzone 2 graphics on xbox360 then i will agree with the statement


Certainly nothing thats currently out beats KZ2. But Ive seen alot that is releasing in the next 9 months that beats it fairly easily. And then CryEngine 3 owns all.



NKAJ on 07 September 2009
selnor said:
NKAJ said:
once i see killzone 2 graphics on xbox360 then i will agree with the statement


Certainly nothing thats currently out beats KZ2. But Ive seen alot that is releasing in the next 9 months that beats it fairly easily. And then CryEngine 3 owns all.


well only time will tell



"They will know heghan belongs to the helghast"

"England expects that everyman will do his duty"

"we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender"

 

Rickz0r on 07 September 2009

IMO The Ps3 is far more capable then the 360, games like Uncharted 2, GT5, God of War III and Heavy Rain prove this. It took the 360 a dang long time to reach Uncharted-like graphics.
/IMO



Hyams on 07 September 2009

Personally I think Killzone 2 still looks better than all the upcoming graphical heavy-hitters. So yeah, I think Killzone 2 looks better than Uncharted 2, Alan Wake, Lost Planet 2, whatever you want to name.

Although, I suspect a lot of that comes down to Killzone 2's amazing art direction, rather than technical prowess. Still, it's the only game that I've seen where the gameplay actually looks like CGI (which is a very bizarre feeling to have when you're actually playing the game).



Aldro on 07 September 2009
Rickz0r said:
IMO The Ps3 is far more capable then the 360, games like Uncharted 2, GT5, God of War III and Heavy Rain prove this. It took the 360 a dang long time to reach Uncharted-like graphics.
/IMO

Not like I've tried many games but I so far I agree with this post. I would say it havent even exceeded Uncharted 1 graphics yet...

But that might just happen soon ^^.