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

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS3 smoothing beyond that of high-end PC graphics card

marc are you frybread?



Around the Network

Are you guys STILL trying to prove that the 4-year-old PS3 is more powerful than modern PC hardware? Really?



raygun said:

 

 

A few of you still don't get what this is all about. If you watch some of the Naughty Dog videos on Uncharted 2 tech you'd understand the crux of this, and that is they are just now starting to use the cells to do the video processing, freeing up the gpu, and allowing them to push more polygons to the screen, AND that the cell processing IS BETTER THAN WHAT THE GPU COULD DO. Since they are just starting to use this tech, future games on the PS3 will benefit.

Back to the PC vs PS3, and ' killzone2 graphics sucks compared to Crysis' argument, well doesn't every game 'suck' compared to Crysis? Well no, actually, Crysis is on a tropical island, what would killzone 2 look like if it was set on a tropical island? I've played Crysis, your comparing 2 completely different locations, Crysis didn't have the intense particles, smoke, missiles, dust blowing, lightning, explosions that Killzone has, the AI and character animation was much better in Killzone2, just look at the hit bullet animations (Crysis characters were good at first with the soldiers on the island, but they seemed to get lame later on) Again these are 2 different locales, why even compare?

As far as my quad core PC goes, it doesn't have a blu-ray drive, and it doesn't seamlessly fit in with my 1080 tv set up like my PS3 does, and most games I buy for the PS3 were bought at discount, amazon has great deals on preordering, you can save $5 to $10. No wasting 30 minutes to install/tweek/problem solve/drm issues either. (except for that long MGS4 install, lol)

If you missed the video, here:

 

1. Cell processing is better than what a GPU could do? Ha! This AA method is full of artifacts, why would anyone claim it to be superior to anything? Try 16x CSAA or jittered sample AA and you'll see what real AA is.

2. The RSX chip is still setup limited. The PS3 could barely make use of those additional polygons even if it wanted to.

3. Killzone 2 is an optimised linear title. Show me an open world title with dynamic time of day which can match Farcry 2 or Stalker. No prebaked lighting, no linear titles, just a pure comparison. Its pretty funny how a game from 2007 gets dragged into procedings. Resident Evil 5 on PC is probably enough to take down Killzone 2, no need to call for the C-bomb here.

4. As far as your quad core goes, it also outputs native 1080P. I didn't enjoy the jagged edges on Uncharted 2. So where was this Cell smoothing beyond the wildest capabilities of PC GPUs when it was needed for Uncharted? 



Do you know what its like to live on the far side of Uranus?

there are ATI GPUs out there that are more powerful than the PS3... twice that actually... This argument is retarded...



READ THE FIRST POST! Uncharted 2 was brought up because it was also starting to use the cells instead of the gpu but it is Saboteur that used the new cell based smoothing:
"The PS3 rendition of Pandemic’s The Saboteur is different though. It’s special. It’s trying something new that’s never been seen before on console, or indeed PC, and its results are terrific. In a best-case scenario you get edge-smoothing that is beyond the effect of 16x multi-sampling anti-aliasing, effectively delivering an effect better than the capabilities of high-end GPUs without crippling performance. Compare and contrast with Xbox 360 hardware, which tops out at 4x MSAA."
. Do any of you even READ before you respond to something? Twistedpixel:1. yes, I didn't say it, Digital Foundry said it. 2. If the gpu is just drawing frames and not processing, 1,200,000 triangles PER FRAME in Uncharted 2's case, ain't bad. 3. I didn't drag Killzone into this, some guy Killzone 2 sucked to Crysis, and I pointed out that they are 2 different games in different locales, and why in hell are we comparing them? They both look great and they both will suck to what comes out a few years from now. What does that have to do with this post, graphic jobs being offloaded from gpu to cell? (answer-NOTHING!) 4. Saboteur had the smoothing, not Ucharted 2, READ! Maybe Uncharted 3 will, though...



Around the Network

The performance of the ps3 exclusives on a hd tv is crazy...killzone 2 was not the best fps game released but the graphics visually was stunning...



http://www.vgchartz.com/sigs/output.php?userid=60726%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D">

PS3 is a beast, PS3 exclusives look so good because they use the cell for graphics instead of the RSX, . the 360 ports usually look the same or a little better on 360 because its a port, code for 360 to PS3 is very different. Its does not use any PS3 power. The PS3 can pu;; off amazing graphics, some that are PC like, one thing to remember about PC is good monitors are running higher resoluction, along with the graphics card, so hard to compare.



almcchesney said:
hey richardhutnik pulling a multiplat is like grabbing a game on windows 95 and trying to play it on windows xp and complaining its inferior because of bugs due to compatibility issues, if a multiplat where to be re-written for both consoles and "optimized" i have no doubts which one would take the cake, and OP thats a good article not too much new though, recently i did a research paper for my college course over the cell broadband architecture and since 2007 all the articles said that it would be faster and more efficient than any processor out there, (its actually being utilized in the worlds second fastest computer in the world). but the thing is getting the talent to utilize it.


couldnt have said it better myself xD



 

Whoever owns a PS3 in the US, go buy God of War III on March 16,2010

God of War III will be the 2010 Game of the Year.

thetruthhurts said:
PS3 is a beast, PS3 exclusives look so good because they use the cell for graphics instead of the RSX, . the 360 ports usually look the same or a little better on 360 because its a port, code for 360 to PS3 is very different. Its does not use any PS3 power. The PS3 can pu;; off amazing graphics, some that are PC like, one thing to remember about PC is good monitors are running higher resoluction, along with the graphics card, so hard to compare.

I find myself sometimes just stopping in the middle of a PS3 exclusives to take in the visuals...just like Uncharted 2....oMg...its sick to the stomach...to see something so awesome...from the atari to the PS3...the kids of the gen will never know where we came from...



http://www.vgchartz.com/sigs/output.php?userid=60726%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D">

kingdaddymaster said:
almcchesney said:
hey richardhutnik pulling a multiplat is like grabbing a game on windows 95 and trying to play it on windows xp and complaining its inferior because of bugs due to compatibility issues, if a multiplat where to be re-written for both consoles and "optimized" i have no doubts which one would take the cake, and OP thats a good article not too much new though, recently i did a research paper for my college course over the cell broadband architecture and since 2007 all the articles said that it would be faster and more efficient than any processor out there, (its actually being utilized in the worlds second fastest computer in the world). but the thing is getting the talent to utilize it.


couldnt have said it better myself xD

The only two franchises which I know were definately coded seperately on the Xbox 360 also run better on the Xbox 360 as discovered by the person who made this article we are discussing in this thread.



Do you know what its like to live on the far side of Uranus?