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

Forums - Gaming - PS3 vs 360 ROUND 4-----Jon4lakers

I understand the video, but I think the guy kind of waffles on his opinion in the end.

He basically goes on about how the Cell + RSX of the PS3 just edges out the Xenon + Xenos of the X360 in terms of the end result, but the comparison is about CPUs, not CPU + GPU.

Talking CPUs only, the PS3/Cell absolutely destroys the X360/Xenon -- enough to make up the differences in the GPUs, and then some, as is evidenced by the end results.  I also completely disagree with his statement that the SPEs are "not cores".  He's making up his own definition here, and that costs him some credibility, in my book.  They ARE cores.  Plenty of processors lacked caches and other convenience/auto-speedup hardware back in the day -- that didn't stop them from being CPU cores.  That's kinda like saying some cars aren't real cars, because they lack automatic transmissions -- yeah, ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure the X360 will "win" the "GPU only" comparison they do next.



 

Around the Network

So is he saying that most Multiplatform games only use a single core for processing? What about the other 2 cores on the 360?



EMULATION is the past.....NOW.......B_E_L_I_E_V_E

 

 


darklich13 said:
So is he saying that most Multiplatform games only use a single core for processing? What about the other 2 cores on the 360?

He's saying that many (bad) ports are done by trying to stuff all the work of the 3 X360/Xenon cores onto the 1 core of the PS3/PPU core, because its cheap/easy to do so.  That's basically why older PS3 ports tended to be subpar, relative to their 360 counterparts -- they didn't even try to use most of the Cell CPU, they just used the part that was basically identical to one of the Xenon cores.

Porting a game from the 360 to the PS3 is easy, if you're only using one of the Xenon's 3 cores to begin with.  If you actually use the other 2 cores, you have to either write some new SPE code to do the work, or suffer a framerate hit since all the work has to be done on just one core now.   Many, probably all, bad ports from the 360 to the PS3 basically chose the "framerate hit" approach, because its cheaper/less work.



 

BMaker11 said:
LOL @ 3:13

haha, that made me laugh out loud. I was like WTF?!?







VGChartz♥♥♥♥♥FOREVER

Xbone... the new "N" word   Apparently I troll MS now | Evidence | Evidence
Procrastinato said:
darklich13 said:
So is he saying that most Multiplatform games only use a single core for processing? What about the other 2 cores on the 360?

He's saying that many (bad) ports are done by trying to stuff all the work of the 3 X360/Xenon cores onto the 1 core of the PS3/PPU core, because its cheap/easy to do so.  That's basically why older PS3 ports tended to be subpar, relative to their 360 counterparts -- they didn't even try to use most of the Cell CPU, they just used the part that was basically identical to one of the Xenon cores.

But the single core of a PS3 is no faster than a single core of a 360?



EMULATION is the past.....NOW.......B_E_L_I_E_V_E

 

 


Around the Network
darklich13 said:
Procrastinato said:
darklich13 said:
So is he saying that most Multiplatform games only use a single core for processing? What about the other 2 cores on the 360?

He's saying that many (bad) ports are done by trying to stuff all the work of the 3 X360/Xenon cores onto the 1 core of the PS3/PPU core, because its cheap/easy to do so.  That's basically why older PS3 ports tended to be subpar, relative to their 360 counterparts -- they didn't even try to use most of the Cell CPU, they just used the part that was basically identical to one of the Xenon cores.

But the single core of a PS3 is no faster than a single core of a 360?

The PPU core, by itself, is near identical to a single core of the 360.  The 360 has 3 such cores.  The PS3 has 1.  The PS3 also has 7 additional SPE cores, which, when utilized, beat the socks off the Xenon's 3 "normal" cores easily.

Utilizing them requires a good engineer or three, and time.  Publishers like to make stuff as cheaply as possible, often even when it might cost them in terms of quality and eventual sales, because they are conservative investors.  Hence... bad ports.  At least back when people weren't very experienced with the Cell.  

Seems most games are near identical these days, because the knowledge of how to use the SPE cores is more commonplace, and hence, cheaper and more feasible.  It would be accurate to say that the 360 version actually holds HD games back these days, although many 360 fans don't like to hear it.



 

Procrastinato said:
darklich13 said:
Procrastinato said:
darklich13 said:
So is he saying that most Multiplatform games only use a single core for processing? What about the other 2 cores on the 360?

He's saying that many (bad) ports are done by trying to stuff all the work of the 3 X360/Xenon cores onto the 1 core of the PS3/PPU core, because its cheap/easy to do so.  That's basically why older PS3 ports tended to be subpar, relative to their 360 counterparts -- they didn't even try to use most of the Cell CPU, they just used the part that was basically identical to one of the Xenon cores.

But the single core of a PS3 is no faster than a single core of a 360?

The PPU core, by itself, is near identical to a single core of the 360.  The 360 has 3 such cores.  The PS3 has 1.  The PS3 also has 7 additional SPE cores, which, when utilized, beat the socks off the Xenon's 3 "normal" cores easily.

Utilizing them requires a good engineer or three, and time.  Publishers like to make stuff as cheaply as possible, often even when it might cost them in terms of quality and eventual sales, because they are conservative investors.  Hence... bad ports.  At least back when people weren't very experienced with the Cell.

 How is taking code disigned to run on 3 cores down to 1 a cheap process?  Seams more like they would port to 1 core and 2 SPE's. Which in this case the 360 would have an advantage.  This is because 3 actual cores are better than 3 SPE. But when developers take advantage of the Cell additional SPE, this is where you will see the advantage for the PS3.



EMULATION is the past.....NOW.......B_E_L_I_E_V_E

 

 


Interesting and while i question his credibility a bit i do not disagree with the outcome. its common knowledge that the cell is a bit stronger than the PPC core of the 360. However like procrrastinato said it takes alot of developer time and effort to use the SPEs effeciently. And many developers chose not to do this. However the 360 will win in the GPU department which helps make up for the weaker CPU.

All in all the PS3 is a bit stronger than the 360 but games 1st party games are just now beginning to show it.



Long Live SHIO!

darklich13 said:
Procrastinato said:
darklich13 said:
Procrastinato said:
darklich13 said:
So is he saying that most Multiplatform games only use a single core for processing? What about the other 2 cores on the 360?

He's saying that many (bad) ports are done by trying to stuff all the work of the 3 X360/Xenon cores onto the 1 core of the PS3/PPU core, because its cheap/easy to do so.  That's basically why older PS3 ports tended to be subpar, relative to their 360 counterparts -- they didn't even try to use most of the Cell CPU, they just used the part that was basically identical to one of the Xenon cores.

But the single core of a PS3 is no faster than a single core of a 360?

The PPU core, by itself, is near identical to a single core of the 360.  The 360 has 3 such cores.  The PS3 has 1.  The PS3 also has 7 additional SPE cores, which, when utilized, beat the socks off the Xenon's 3 "normal" cores easily.

Utilizing them requires a good engineer or three, and time.  Publishers like to make stuff as cheaply as possible, often even when it might cost them in terms of quality and eventual sales, because they are conservative investors.  Hence... bad ports.  At least back when people weren't very experienced with the Cell.

 How is taking code disigned to run on 3 cores down to 1 a cheap process?  Seams more like they would port to 1 core and 2 SPE's. Which in this case the 360 would have an advantage.  This is because 3 actual cores are better than 3 SPE. But when developers take advantage of the Cell additional SPE, this is where you will see the advantage for the PS3.

He's trying to say that they forced all the 3 core processes to run on one. So it was slower. It's cheaper than rewriting pretty much all the code to run on 1 CPU and a few SPE's.



Badassbab said:
7 x 3 Ghz SPU vs 3 x 3Ghz Cores- makes it sound like the PS3 should be generations ahead when in fact most head to heads have the 360 emerge victorious. I mean if the PS3 really is much more powerful than the 360 than it shouldn't matter about lead development consoles or porting issues.

because of developers are not using it. just enough to make em on "par". thats probably the ppu and 2 SPU.

as from the technological view, it's way ahead.

the thing is hybrid processors are fairly new, people took ages to get to work with only 2 cores, a third was a pain but they were experienced.

and PC developers are used to work only with the gpu and ignore the CPU.

now sony comes in start harvesting it, and own sony first party are leaving any multiplatform game in the dust even xbox360 exclusives.