I tend to agree with Squilliam. Let's say in a perfect driver situation a HD3870 is about equal to a 8800 gt. That means it's also twice as powerfull as a 7800. A HD4870 then is 2 times the power of the HD3870, wich makes 4 times the PS3 gpu. Wrong. The 4870 is about ~70% more powerful than 3870. So the multiplier is 3,4. The 5870 then is twice a HD4870, bringing the total to 8. Wrong. The 5870 is about 70% more powerful than the 4870. So the multiplier becomes ~5.8. Then finally the 5970 is a dual 5870, wich brings the total 16. Wrong. A 5970 is roughly 65% more powerful than a 5870. So the multiplier becomes only 8.5. So by that logic it would actually be about 15 times as powerfull as the PS3 gpu. No, only rufly 8.5 times as powerful as the PS3 GPU.
Than you have two side to look at it:
1: This is an ideal situation, so the number is probably lower, say 10-12 times as powerfull.
2: We have not counted in the DirectX revisions, since the HD5xxx series is two Directx gens ahead of PS3. Also the architectures of modern gpu, like the unified shader parts are still not fully utilizied, and also offer more potential power than the old pixel pipeline architecture of the PS3 7xxx gpu. This making the number higher.
Then on a side note the HD consoles have proven to be mostly memory limited, especially if one would like to use 1080P in games. The 2048mb ram of the HD5970(1gb per gpu) completely removes this limitation.
To sum it up, i would say 12 times more powerfull is actually an understatement, and i would say closer to 15 times more powerfull in a scenario where it's full potential could be utilizied, wich a gaming console is since all the PS3 have te exact same hardware.
Lastgengamer said: Interesting comments from Microsoft. all of the features that Xbox live have are impressive especially cross game chat.
Not as impressive as gross game chat in the same service.
@Selnor: Being pain in the ass to get on par with others doesn't automatically mean that the difference in system performance would cause the difficulties, but different architecture and different API:s that require you to do things differently. A PS3 only developer could say that 360 and PC versions were a pain in the ass to get on par with PS3 version.
all microsoft is trying to do is make their console the center of attention because they knew "facebook" was a site that was truly taking away from the "entertainment market" so why not make it an application on the 360 so that the gamers that own a 360 and Xbox Live can then bounce away from the computer and log in on the 360 and "BOOM" generate Live activity that way rather than PC activity.
microsoft is an funny corporation because they always have their money...oops...I meant to say their "hands" in everything!
I tend to agree with Squilliam. Let's say in a perfect driver situation a HD3870 is about equal to a 8800 gt. That means it's also twice as powerfull as a 7800. A HD4870 then is 2 times the power of the HD3870, wich makes 4 times the PS3 gpu. The 5870 then is twice a HD4870, bringing the total to 8. Then finally the 5970 is a dual 5870, wich brings the total 16. So by that logic it would actually be about 15 times as powerfull as the PS3 gpu.
Than you have two side to look at it:
1: This is an ideal situation, so the number is probably lower, say 10-12 times as powerfull.
2: We have not counted in the DirectX revisions, since the HD5xxx series is two Directx gens ahead of PS3. Also the architectures of modern gpu, like the unified shader parts are still not fully utilizied, and also offer more potential power than the old pixel pipeline architecture of the PS3 7xxx gpu. This making the number higher.
Then on a side note the HD consoles have proven to be mostly memory limited, especially if one would like to use 1080P in games. The 2048mb ram of the HD5970(1gb per gpu) completely removes this limitation.
To sum it up, i would say 12 times more powerfull is actually an understatement, and i would say closer to 15 times more powerfull in a scenario where it's full potential could be utilizied, wich a gaming console is since all the PS3 have te exact same hardware.
I agree with this. And the HD consoles main issue is Memory. I wish they had 1024mb. I believe they would have gotten more from their designs if they did. Also 360 has unified shaders on it's GPU which again hasnt really been used properly yet. With also the ability to do some DX10 features. Something the PS3 cant do. It's not as simple as many people think.
yet, PS3 doesnt use direct X to begin with.
and opengl support extensions and can be update, so many direct x 11 features can be found on the ps3 one way of another.
360 can do antialiasing easier, ps3 can do better lighting and deffered rendering and parallell engine slike cry engine 3.
But that doesn't make sense according to CRYTek. They are on record at GDC this year saying the PS3 version was a nightmare to bring it up to speed with the PC and 360. They got there now, but the things you say PS3 can do better, were easier to get on 360 than PS3. Thats from CRYTek direct. They also took a pop at other top games on PS3 and 360 saying no other game engine is fully realtime. ( Including KZ2 and at the time upcoming Uncharted 2 ). They said there engine is the only engine on consoles where no tricks are used it was all realtime.
last line it's marketing, cry engine it's very similar to kz2 engine, since both use deffered rendering, but they are practically selling engine saying it's only one real time, when kz2 graphic wise looks almost as good, if not better (on the consoles).
and they did say cry engine 3 was better on the ps3.
No it's not. Now your trying to split hairs. Not one single GG dev or Naughty Dog dev even remotely tried to say different. Dont forget this was a presentation in front of all developers and Sony and M$. They said it in front of them ALL. And no they have not said anything about the PS3 version being better. If anything the version they showed at GDC, had much better lighting on the 360 version as they showed them all side by side. Talking about tricks etc, they were actually mainly pointing at PS3's top exclusive games.
Notice in the video here, the first part in the corridor. The red lights on the walls are much more vibrant on 360 and you will also notice better draw distance in the tunnel. Loads of wierd fog in the PS3 version quite close. Look at the PC version, 360 draw distance is much closer to PC version. On the bit outside. It's very obvious the PS3 version has inferior lighting. Look at the sun reflecting off the water, the rays. Not very prominent in the Ps3 version yet the 360 version is fairly colse to the PC verison. All this eveidence says the PS3 struggles with CRYEngine 3.
On the first video I post here go to 8 mins and 30 secs. That is where he talks about PS3 problems. And how it has less resources to work with, also saying for many the PS3 is the lowest of the 3 mediums. Shock something I said for years. Pin points the weak GPU to. Actually says that is a problem. The second video is the one where all three are side by side.
EDIT:
Here is the Gamescom video where the dev says it's the only engine ever built where EVERYTHING is realtime. No tricks.
I tend to agree with Squilliam. Let's say in a perfect driver situation a HD3870 is about equal to a 8800 gt. That means it's also twice as powerfull as a 7800. A HD4870 then is 2 times the power of the HD3870, wich makes 4 times the PS3 gpu. The 5870 then is twice a HD4870, bringing the total to 8. Then finally the 5970 is a dual 5870, wich brings the total 16. So by that logic it would actually be about 15 times as powerfull as the PS3 gpu.
Than you have two side to look at it:
1: This is an ideal situation, so the number is probably lower, say 10-12 times as powerfull.
2: We have not counted in the DirectX revisions, since the HD5xxx series is two Directx gens ahead of PS3. Also the architectures of modern gpu, like the unified shader parts are still not fully utilizied, and also offer more potential power than the old pixel pipeline architecture of the PS3 7xxx gpu. This making the number higher.
Then on a side note the HD consoles have proven to be mostly memory limited, especially if one would like to use 1080P in games. The 2048mb ram of the HD5970(1gb per gpu) completely removes this limitation.
To sum it up, i would say 12 times more powerfull is actually an understatement, and i would say closer to 15 times more powerfull in a scenario where it's full potential could be utilizied, wich a gaming console is since all the PS3 have te exact same hardware.
I agree with this. And the HD consoles main issue is Memory. I wish they had 1024mb. I believe they would have gotten more from their designs if they did. Also 360 has unified shaders on it's GPU which again hasnt really been used properly yet. With also the ability to do some DX10 features. Something the PS3 cant do. It's not as simple as many people think.
yet, PS3 doesnt use direct X to begin with.
and opengl support extensions and can be update, so many direct x 11 features can be found on the ps3 one way of another.
360 can do antialiasing easier, ps3 can do better lighting and deffered rendering and parallell engine slike cry engine 3.
But that doesn't make sense according to CRYTek. They are on record at GDC this year saying the PS3 version was a nightmare to bring it up to speed with the PC and 360. They got there now, but the things you say PS3 can do better, were easier to get on 360 than PS3. Thats from CRYTek direct. They also took a pop at other top games on PS3 and 360 saying no other game engine is fully realtime. ( Including KZ2 and at the time upcoming Uncharted 2 ). They said there engine is the only engine on consoles where no tricks are used it was all realtime.
last line it's marketing, cry engine it's very similar to kz2 engine, since both use deffered rendering, but they are practically selling engine saying it's only one real time, when kz2 graphic wise looks almost as good, if not better (on the consoles).
and they did say cry engine 3 was better on the ps3.
No it's not. Now your trying to split hairs. Not one single GG dev or Naughty Dog dev even remotely tried to say different. Dont forget this was a presentation in front of all developers and Sony and M$. They said it in front of them ALL. And no they have not said anything about the PS3 version being better. If anything the version they showed at GDC, had much better lighting on the 360 version as they showed them all side by side. Talking about tricks etc, they were actually mainly pointing at PS3's top exclusive games.
Notice in the video here, the first part in the corridor. The red lights on the walls are much more vibrant on 360 and you will also notice better draw distance in the tunnel. Loads of wierd fog in the PS3 version quite close. Look at the PC version, 360 draw distance is much closer to PC version. On the bit outside. It's very obvious the PS3 version has inferior lighting. Look at the sun reflecting off the water, the rays. Not very prominent in the Ps3 version yet the 360 version is fairly colse to the PC verison. All this eveidence says the PS3 struggles with CRYEngine 3.
On the first video I post here go to 8 mins and 30 secs. That is where he talks about PS3 problems. And how it has less resources to work with, also saying for many the PS3 is the lowest of the 3 mediums. Shock something I said for years. Pin points the weak GPU to. Actually says that is a problem. The second video is the one where all three are side by side.
EDIT:
Here is the Gamescom video where the dev says it's the only engine ever built where EVERYTHING is realtime. No tricks.
believe what u want, similar lighting effect i seen in kz2 on visari hammer a multiplayer map!.
and its part of the deffered rendering techniques. deferred rending permit the gpu and cpu to do alot of lighting without taking huge performance hit.
The CE3 runs currently at more or less the same quality bar," Yerli asserted. "I say more or less because the engine still optimizes itself to power of the platforms' intrinsics. So the PS3 will run slightly better here, it'll look and feel probably the same, but the engine is diverting computation needs to power subsystems available to the PS3, and the 360 differently, and PC differently.
out CEO mouth. i already watch those =).
EDIT = LULZ?! red lights more vibrant did u notice the screens have difference contrast?
To be fair, like Nintendo and the Wiiremote MS was the first to successfully leverage the Internet. And it really is powerful. Part of the problem is that I would support BBC iPlayer before Netflix. Though I like Netflix very much on my PC and would welcome a Netflix channel on my Wii.
First company to make money off of free, but alternative incomes(ads being strong) will seriously be the first home set top box. So 360 has no killer weapon as of yet.
Squilliam: On Vgcharts its a commonly accepted practice to twist the bounds of plausibility in order to support your argument or agenda so I think its pretty cool that this gives me the precedent to say whatever I damn well please.
I would think that if they let ppl play 360 games online for free will go a long way for killing off wii and ps3. This fee from playing games online is keeping me from getting that many 360 games because a lot of the games on 360 has a great deal of replay value online so it feels like you have to pay doublet? for these games. (If I have understand this wrong pleas tell me because i would love to play some gets on my 360 online like border lands.) On a side note how can they not changes for pc games yet they charges for 360 games when its (well what i think i do not know for sure) the same comply?
I tend to agree with Squilliam. Let's say in a perfect driver situation a HD3870 is about equal to a 8800 gt. That means it's also twice as powerfull as a 7800. A HD4870 then is 2 times the power of the HD3870, wich makes 4 times the PS3 gpu. The 5870 then is twice a HD4870, bringing the total to 8. Then finally the 5970 is a dual 5870, wich brings the total 16. So by that logic it would actually be about 15 times as powerfull as the PS3 gpu.
Than you have two side to look at it:
1: This is an ideal situation, so the number is probably lower, say 10-12 times as powerfull.
2: We have not counted in the DirectX revisions, since the HD5xxx series is two Directx gens ahead of PS3. Also the architectures of modern gpu, like the unified shader parts are still not fully utilizied, and also offer more potential power than the old pixel pipeline architecture of the PS3 7xxx gpu. This making the number higher.
Then on a side note the HD consoles have proven to be mostly memory limited, especially if one would like to use 1080P in games. The 2048mb ram of the HD5970(1gb per gpu) completely removes this limitation.
To sum it up, i would say 12 times more powerfull is actually an understatement, and i would say closer to 15 times more powerfull in a scenario where it's full potential could be utilizied, wich a gaming console is since all the PS3 have te exact same hardware.
I agree with this. And the HD consoles main issue is Memory. I wish they had 1024mb. I believe they would have gotten more from their designs if they did. Also 360 has unified shaders on it's GPU which again hasnt really been used properly yet. With also the ability to do some DX10 features. Something the PS3 cant do. It's not as simple as many people think.
yet, PS3 doesnt use direct X to begin with.
and opengl support extensions and can be update, so many direct x 11 features can be found on the ps3 one way of another.
360 can do antialiasing easier, ps3 can do better lighting and deffered rendering and parallell engine slike cry engine 3.
But that doesn't make sense according to CRYTek. They are on record at GDC this year saying the PS3 version was a nightmare to bring it up to speed with the PC and 360. They got there now, but the things you say PS3 can do better, were easier to get on 360 than PS3. Thats from CRYTek direct. They also took a pop at other top games on PS3 and 360 saying no other game engine is fully realtime. ( Including KZ2 and at the time upcoming Uncharted 2 ). They said there engine is the only engine on consoles where no tricks are used it was all realtime.
last line it's marketing, cry engine it's very similar to kz2 engine, since both use deffered rendering, but they are practically selling engine saying it's only one real time, when kz2 graphic wise looks almost as good, if not better (on the consoles).
and they did say cry engine 3 was better on the ps3.
No it's not. Now your trying to split hairs. Not one single GG dev or Naughty Dog dev even remotely tried to say different. Dont forget this was a presentation in front of all developers and Sony and M$. They said it in front of them ALL. And no they have not said anything about the PS3 version being better. If anything the version they showed at GDC, had much better lighting on the 360 version as they showed them all side by side. Talking about tricks etc, they were actually mainly pointing at PS3's top exclusive games.
Notice in the video here, the first part in the corridor. The red lights on the walls are much more vibrant on 360 and you will also notice better draw distance in the tunnel. Loads of wierd fog in the PS3 version quite close. Look at the PC version, 360 draw distance is much closer to PC version. On the bit outside. It's very obvious the PS3 version has inferior lighting. Look at the sun reflecting off the water, the rays. Not very prominent in the Ps3 version yet the 360 version is fairly colse to the PC verison. All this eveidence says the PS3 struggles with CRYEngine 3.
On the first video I post here go to 8 mins and 30 secs. That is where he talks about PS3 problems. And how it has less resources to work with, also saying for many the PS3 is the lowest of the 3 mediums. Shock something I said for years. Pin points the weak GPU to. Actually says that is a problem. The second video is the one where all three are side by side.
EDIT:
Here is the Gamescom video where the dev says it's the only engine ever built where EVERYTHING is realtime. No tricks.
believe what u want, similar lighting effect i seen in kz2 on visari hammer a multiplayer map!.
and its part of the deffered rendering techniques. deferred rending permit the gpu and cpu to do alot of lighting without taking huge performance hit.
The CE3 runs currently at more or less the same quality bar," Yerli asserted. "I say more or less because the engine still optimizes itself to power of the platforms' intrinsics. So the PS3 will run slightly better here, it'll look and feel probably the same, but the engine is diverting computation needs to power subsystems available to the PS3, and the 360 differently, and PC differently.
out CEO mouth. i already watch those =).
EDIT = LULZ?! red lights more vibrant did u notice the screens have difference contrast?
First of all that comment from the 'Sony' website is laughable. Thats what they took from that excerpt. LOL. They mean it looks slightly better now they have it up to speed. OMG. I cant believe a website takes those comments and twists it to saying Ps3 version is slightly better LOL. Would you like me to write out the whole 1 and a half minute speech. You will see how silly PSU look. LOL
About your different contrast arguement. You know all 3 were running on the same TV right? Right? As in it was shown in dev stage where all 3 are linked to 1 TV or monitor and shown in each corner of the screen. So in other words all 3 had the same contrast and exactly the same screen. I also missed when the coloured lights were swirling around. Notice the PS3 version the lights were at what looked like 10 FPS or something. A glitch it may be, but very obvious what CRYTek said about PS3 struggle was apparant right there.
I tend to agree with Squilliam. Let's say in a perfect driver situation a HD3870 is about equal to a 8800 gt. That means it's also twice as powerfull as a 7800. A HD4870 then is 2 times the power of the HD3870, wich makes 4 times the PS3 gpu. The 5870 then is twice a HD4870, bringing the total to 8. Then finally the 5970 is a dual 5870, wich brings the total 16. So by that logic it would actually be about 15 times as powerfull as the PS3 gpu.
Than you have two side to look at it:
1: This is an ideal situation, so the number is probably lower, say 10-12 times as powerfull.
2: We have not counted in the DirectX revisions, since the HD5xxx series is two Directx gens ahead of PS3. Also the architectures of modern gpu, like the unified shader parts are still not fully utilizied, and also offer more potential power than the old pixel pipeline architecture of the PS3 7xxx gpu. This making the number higher.
Then on a side note the HD consoles have proven to be mostly memory limited, especially if one would like to use 1080P in games. The 2048mb ram of the HD5970(1gb per gpu) completely removes this limitation.
To sum it up, i would say 12 times more powerfull is actually an understatement, and i would say closer to 15 times more powerfull in a scenario where it's full potential could be utilizied, wich a gaming console is since all the PS3 have te exact same hardware.
I agree with this. And the HD consoles main issue is Memory. I wish they had 1024mb. I believe they would have gotten more from their designs if they did. Also 360 has unified shaders on it's GPU which again hasnt really been used properly yet. With also the ability to do some DX10 features. Something the PS3 cant do. It's not as simple as many people think.
yet, PS3 doesnt use direct X to begin with.
and opengl support extensions and can be update, so many direct x 11 features can be found on the ps3 one way of another.
360 can do antialiasing easier, ps3 can do better lighting and deffered rendering and parallell engine slike cry engine 3.
But that doesn't make sense according to CRYTek. They are on record at GDC this year saying the PS3 version was a nightmare to bring it up to speed with the PC and 360. They got there now, but the things you say PS3 can do better, were easier to get on 360 than PS3. Thats from CRYTek direct. They also took a pop at other top games on PS3 and 360 saying no other game engine is fully realtime. ( Including KZ2 and at the time upcoming Uncharted 2 ). They said there engine is the only engine on consoles where no tricks are used it was all realtime.
last line it's marketing, cry engine it's very similar to kz2 engine, since both use deffered rendering, but they are practically selling engine saying it's only one real time, when kz2 graphic wise looks almost as good, if not better (on the consoles).
and they did say cry engine 3 was better on the ps3.
No it's not. Now your trying to split hairs. Not one single GG dev or Naughty Dog dev even remotely tried to say different. Dont forget this was a presentation in front of all developers and Sony and M$. They said it in front of them ALL. And no they have not said anything about the PS3 version being better. If anything the version they showed at GDC, had much better lighting on the 360 version as they showed them all side by side. Talking about tricks etc, they were actually mainly pointing at PS3's top exclusive games.
Notice in the video here, the first part in the corridor. The red lights on the walls are much more vibrant on 360 and you will also notice better draw distance in the tunnel. Loads of wierd fog in the PS3 version quite close. Look at the PC version, 360 draw distance is much closer to PC version. On the bit outside. It's very obvious the PS3 version has inferior lighting. Look at the sun reflecting off the water, the rays. Not very prominent in the Ps3 version yet the 360 version is fairly colse to the PC verison. All this eveidence says the PS3 struggles with CRYEngine 3.
On the first video I post here go to 8 mins and 30 secs. That is where he talks about PS3 problems. And how it has less resources to work with, also saying for many the PS3 is the lowest of the 3 mediums. Shock something I said for years. Pin points the weak GPU to. Actually says that is a problem. The second video is the one where all three are side by side.
EDIT:
Here is the Gamescom video where the dev says it's the only engine ever built where EVERYTHING is realtime. No tricks.
believe what u want, similar lighting effect i seen in kz2 on visari hammer a multiplayer map!.
and its part of the deffered rendering techniques. deferred rending permit the gpu and cpu to do alot of lighting without taking huge performance hit.
The CE3 runs currently at more or less the same quality bar," Yerli asserted. "I say more or less because the engine still optimizes itself to power of the platforms' intrinsics. So the PS3 will run slightly better here, it'll look and feel probably the same, but the engine is diverting computation needs to power subsystems available to the PS3, and the 360 differently, and PC differently.
out CEO mouth. i already watch those =).
EDIT = LULZ?! red lights more vibrant did u notice the screens have difference contrast?
First of all that comment from the 'Sony' website you show is taken out of context and is very old comment. When he said the PS3 will look slightly better here, they have kindly left of and 360 will look better there. The websites that missed that were already called out in numerous forums. LOL.
About your different contrast arguement. You know all 3 were running on the same TV right? Right? As in it was shown in dev stage where all 3 are linked to 1 TV or monitor and shown in each corner of the screen. So in other words all 3 had the same contrast and exactly the same screen. I also missed when the coloured lights were swirling around. Notice the PS3 version the lights were at what looked like 10 FPS or something. A glitch it may be, but very obvious what CRYTek said about PS3 struggle was apparant right there.
it was reported in multiples website when cry engine 3 was announced.
and they are the same TV but they look different look at the load screen, contrast and setting are differnet in all 3.
