What is Digg?103 Comments
- Rayonic, on 10/12/2007, -5/+40The guy above me is right, the RSX is pretty much a 7800GTX. Which is a nice card, of course, but no custom design seems to have taken place. ATI, on the other hand, specifically designed a chipset with unified shader architecture for the Xbox 360.
If you want to nitpick, you could point out that the RSX is customized... in order to fit into the PS3. But that goes without saying.
The overall impression that I get is that the PS3 is about as powerful as the Xbox 360, but the 360 is more flexible in a number of ways. - stevoie, on 10/12/2007, -9/+42texture size is very important to consoles that output HD graphics. if the PS3 has to use lower rez textures then the xbox360 will definitely looked better at HD levels.
- Hortos, on 10/12/2007, -16/+46PS3 has an off the shelf GFX solution and a off the shelf Cell Processor neither of which are optimized for a game console. Unlike 360 which has 3 cores that are each equivalent to the main CPU of the Cell processor and a unified memory system where the only memory earmarked for graphics only is the 10 megs embedded into the chip. I should no longer be a suprise that the PS3 is being found to not hold up to claims.
- polistud, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27Well, I would hope for something at least marginally better for a system that is 1 year newer and $200 more expensive than the xbox :-p
- iluvatar, on 10/12/2007, -7/+28I'd say the PS3's gpu is almost identical to a GeForce card in the 7800GT - 7800GTX range
- Rayonic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23Most PS3 games will probably be 720p anyway. (I think Gran Turismo HD is the only 1080p one, and that's just an upgraded port of a PS2 game.)
Higher resolution means less in-game effects, less polygons, etc.. 1080p is roughly double the resolution of 720p. (1920x1080 vs. 1280x720) That extra rendering time has to come from *somewhere*. - Rayonic, on 10/12/2007, -7/+25In Sony's defense, the Cell is still a new and unproven tech. This is the first iteration of the processor, so there was no time to optimize it for gaming.
And with Cell and Blu-Ray taking so much time and money, can you blame them for buying an off-the-shelf graphics solution from nVidia? There was simply no time to make a flexible, more integrated GPU. (Originally a Cell processor was supposed to do the graphics rendering, but that didn't work out.) - Rayonic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Uh, you do know why video cards tend to have direct access to memory, yes? It's so they can quickly and easily work with relevant data. You can put texture data into the PS3's main memory, but it would have to be transferred over to the video memory for the graphics chipset to work to its full potential.
That's why the PS3 (and most PCs) have dedicated video ram. Because in an ambiguous (or hastily-designed) system, you can't count on main memory access to be fast or reliable enough.
The idea of unified memory, besides being able to dynamically allocate, is that it avoids all the main->video->main swapping that might happen. - SPARTACVS, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14@stevoie,
Precisely. If the Xbox 360 can fit in higher quality textures, and it's top resolution of 720p is but 55% of the Ps3's 1080p, then frankly the Ps3's graphics will look terrible by comparison. Not to mention that the framerates will be much lower than the 360's because even though they are comparable machines, again the Ps3 is rendering 45% more screen space. - Rayonic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Those textures look pretty sharp. But they are a bit dull (artistically), so I understand why someone might get confused.
- RazorElite, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16This was pretty much established for awhile, but it helps to hear a developer say it. If you're gonna have such limited memory (512mb total) it should be shared and not split like on the PS3. That way you can use it when you want, how you want. But being restricted to 256mb each way, I think sucks. So the PS3 has the upper hand in the higher quality video and the 360 in the higher quality textures. The question is, which do you want? Well considering many games these days use the in-game engine for cutscenes and you're generally playing the game more than watching movies, I would probably say higher textures. But all this isn't surprising anyway. After all, we all know by now PS3 is a multimedia machine, not a game machine.
- miketuck3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9at last the 'hybrid rendering architecture' will give me real time switching weapons ;-)
what a load of hypobole, the memory is even segmented into two sections not very hybrid is it.. - sakuraz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9XDR is faster than GDDR3, and can be utilised when needed.
GDDR3 is used on RSX, Xenon and Xenos.
XDR is used on Cell, and can be shared with RSX.
Metal Gear Solid 4 is aiming and is being developed for 1080p at the moment - suppah, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9don't use the ubuntu logo please :)
- miketuck3r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9People have to remember a few things...
Sony wanted to use the Cell as a gpu but it wasnt up to it so they approached nvidia late in the day for a solution, due to the lack of time the solution was always going to be more off the shelf that ATI's custom design for the xbox 360
The difference in total of how much memory will be available for games is over 50mb this is due to how the real time OS has been implemented that runs in the background when playing games and the xbox 360's 10mb frame buffer on the gpu - SPARTACVS, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10"Fanboy crap"?
Yeah, you're sure one to talk. You don't have a single Digg. Your only activity on this whole ***** site is your comments making up fake ***** Xbox 360 sales figures and pathetic attempts to justify the Ps3's price. I think there was one story where you had 4 identical comments, all of them listing off Ps3 features, all of which were buried into the ground. You bash Apple, Nintendo, and the Xbox 360, and you either make up or regurgitate Sony praise and negative fake facts about the other consoles and positive fake facts about the Ps3. - Yokai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Though I am on the side of the PS3, Spartacvs is correct about how much of a fanboy you are.
The PS3 may not have high standard textures (or VERY high standard), however the bigger question is the quality of the games and the load times. The PS3 has shown very nice load times (looking at the HDGT demo in Sony's E3 Press Conference) and the games STILL look very very impressive, probably equivilent to the look of the PS3.
However, the only reason I give PS3 an upper hand is blu-ray. Allowing games to have more content and allowing common people to offord a blu-ray player without spending 1.5k on one. Its a start to decreese the price of blu-ray. And even if it loses, it will still impact the gaming society. Blu-ray may be the next DVD.
All consoles will be good, its all a matter of opinion which one you "like" more. Visuals are not everything. - rhaleuk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Its the PS2 vs XBOX argument all over again.
- fatdog789, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14@static: Unfortanately, as Sony and others have repeatedly pointed out, games will not have access to the full resources of the Cell architecture; fully 1 Cell will be devoted to the PS3 OS. Furthermore, the bandwidth constrains of the architecture place a limit on the data that can be bussed around.
- SPARTACVS, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Except then it wouldn't be factual.
- miketuck3r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9no i actally work for a compny tat provides tech for all three next gen consoles, if you cant handle the truth why post
- chembro84, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@deweather
You're wrong, it says it'll (360 version) have more room for textures, with that room they can use higher quality (less compression, which takes up more memory) textures, no where in the GI article does it say the PS3 will have better textures.
Does it really make sense that the 360 has more room for textures, but the PS3 will have the superior textures? No. - HPSauce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7LIsten to you all - this one pushes more shaders than the other! Better textures! Supports HD more!
None of this matters for *****. It's a games console, I care about the games. As should you all. If I wanted the ultimate entertainment hub, the 360 and PS3 wouldn't even be considered. Why? Because it uses sub standard, cheap components for its extra multimedia functions such as movie and music playing. I'd rather buy the best in each field, separately if I wanted the best entertainment hub out there. - neocitron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7the PS3's GPU, being based of nVidia's 7800 architecture is somewhat worse at handling texture passes than a comparable ATI card, it has been debated to hell and back but the general conclusion is that ATI employs better texture handling and filtering techniques (xbox 360) compared to nVidia, while nVidia employs better Geometry calculation (ps3).
- SPARTACVS, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Monkey, you're the biggest fanboy on this story! So stop insulting users that haven't done anything wrong.
GOOGLE IT. Orginally, Ken Kutaragi told the Cell devs that he wanted the Ps3 to be 100 times faster than the Ps2 (I kid you not), and that he also wanted ALL THE GRAPHICS rendering to be done on the Cell, he hoped that the Ps3 wouldn't need an outside graphics company to supply them a GPU. The devs told him he was off his nut, so they approached nVidia late in the process for a quick and dirty graphics solution to back up the Cell. - SPARTACVS, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11*****, monkey. It's an off the shelf 7800gtx that Kutaragi decided to give a fancy name just like all his other *****. ("Emotion Engine", anyone?)
- Yokai, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Hmm
Game Pricing:
They said it would be a little bit over 60 dolars, but it would not be to extravigent. This means it will be around 70$ due to blu-ray costs. Halo 3 is also been marked w/ a 70 pricetag, god knows why...
Bad Rep:
Console Wars is just a marketing scheme, all consoles will be good, and if you are hardcore gamer you will be willing to pay 700$ on a gaming machine that has free online w/stunning visuals. By the end of 2 years, you may be paying more for the Xbox 360 due to monthly charges and upgrades. It would have been much better if the 360 came out later.
PS3 will be better than 360, and if it isnt, Sony would have to be retarded to ***** it up. They have had a whole year to get their ***** together, and companies like EA really seem to like what the PS3 is becoming. When people say "60% of gaming companies" they forget the fact taht 60% of the companies make ***** "Full metal alchemist" and "Dragon Ball Z" titles. Not saying all the people in the world hate those games, but it should be cleared up that there are not that many good third party game developers. - Rayonic, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9@rileyjt :
Actually I was more referring to the CPU, GPU, and memory architectures. But that's a good point about the PS3's potential "media center" capabilities.
I still have my doubts as to the usefulness of the PS3 linux install. Most likely it'll be similar to the PS2 linux kit -- not useful, but a good tax dodge. - sakuraz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Fully one SPU will be reserved when the dashboard or whatever it's named is "called upon".
That means, when playing, it will still be utilised... - Yokai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Well, technicaly the issue is that the PS3 says that the price pays off for the look of the games. However, when people come in saying that their texture quality, you think "wth" and decide that it would be better to purchase a 360.
Also remember that Dev kits are not fully made systems, meaning the coding this developer had worked on may be for the kit, which may not have the best visuals or visuals equivilent to the PS3's final product. - JaytB, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I just want to play games on my gaming console because generally any stand-alone DVD-player outmatches any gaming consoles' DVD-player (yeah like XBox360 DVD quality isn't all that good even with the upscaling in resolution).
But in that respect I also think that there won't be much difference in graphics quality between the 2 consoles. It will, like always, all come down to the content.
I'm no fanboy of either PS3 or 360 although I own a 360 and am happy with it. Personally I just think the price tag of a PS3 is too high for the moment but if there would be 'extraordinary' content in comparison to the 360 I would still buy it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5time will tell which box is superior.
worldpeace,
ben - Yokai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Because thats not the way new technology was found. Thats like asking the first developer of a console to use CD formats why they didnt just stick with Cartrige format. Its obvious that when new technology is pushed, it does everyone good in the long run, whether it fails or succeeds.
I usualy go on posting, defending the PS3. However, I lack the research atm. :P Digg finaly beat me.
note: Are they taking about normal map implantations? or are they talking about resolution? - Rayonic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Decent summary of the RSX.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_%27Reality_Synthesizer%27 - dragonopolis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I agree with the Idea that both Xbox 360 and PS3 have their flaws and strength. I like my Xbox 360 but I'm going to have to go with the PS3 as the graphic champ. However, the Xbox 360 I believe will be the smarter of the bunch. What I mean is Xbox 360 has three full "Logic" Cores vs PS3's one PPE. Logic processing is important to AI and while the PS3 might be able to render more objects on the screen than the Xbox 360 I believe the Xbox 360 can render more "smarter" objects than the PS3.
From what I'm reading SPEs won't help in the AI category very much. However, AI is really not needed as much in online game play where humans are interacting with other Humans so in some instances I feel we Xbox 360 users will find stiff competition from PS3 in this area (as long as Sony doesn't botch up rest of the online gaming experience).
So it will definitely be an interesting battle and I for one want to be right in the middle it so I'm saving up for my PS3 come this November. After all, its about the games. I have a Gamecube and I have at least 15 games for it that I enjoy and it came in last in the Console Wars.
I have a theory, let all of us get a Xbox 360 and a PS3. This way, the numbers will be so high in sales for both that game developers won't be able to ignore the high numbers and thus we will see games for both platforms. We xbox 360 fans actually want the PS3 to succeed. Why? Look what the Popularity and Graphics capability of the Xbox 360 has done for future PS3 owners. They are getting what I feel is the best game line-up in the history of gaming. Don't think Xbox 360 fans won't benefit from this - think again. The quality of PS3 games will only push developers for Xbox 360 harder to develope games equally as good or better to stay competitive. This back and forth battle of quality is a win for us because it just means better gaming for everybody on "both" consoles.
PS3 and Xbox 360 fans need each other. I sticking to my motto than we should "Stop being haters and start being gamers" - achoo5000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It seems to me that the programmer's comments about the differences refer to the game they're making, I don't know if this applies to differences in the system in general. (Of course this could be true but one can't logically deduce this from the comment.)
- NeoTechni, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6http://www.ps3station.com/97/RSX-way-better-than-Geforce-7800-GTX.htm
http://www.ps3portal.com/ps3/article/176.html
RSX is more powerful and advanced than the 7800GTX,
http://www.joystiq.com/2005/08/31/ps3s-gpu-got-plenty-on-the-geforce-7800/ - NeoTechni, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5" Games won't be on BluRay"
Actually ALL PS3 games will be on bluray. - JaytB, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@ SPARTACVS
I agree but it will yet have to be seen if games on the PS3 will actually support the 1080p resolution. Last thing I can remember reading was that it would only be for video (on the HDMI version of the PS3) while games would generally be 720p. But, of course, there still remains the texture-memory issue. - miketuck3r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4it an OS implementation difference ..
xbox 360 512mb memory 10mb frame buffer with 50mb used by the OS when running games
ps3 512mb memory with 90mb used by the OS when running games
so it goes to figure that there is less memory to use for the game.. - staticneuron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@fatdog789
And those limitations do not hamper the RSX's limit. The information on the main,no matter how many spe's are used to process information, operates at 3 GHz. There is a lot of bandwith and less need to actually store textures in the memory. With the speed of the cell the hard drive could be used for temporary file swapping. Whatever could be used for the interim can be stored there and rapidly swapped to the memory for use.
Again though this is a multiplatform port so there is no telling how much time and attention he put into making the PS3 version run as good as possible. - ArchibaldTuttle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Cause everyone knows that how much memory is allocated for textures is what makes games great.
- neonic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow, I can't wait until about a year or two from now when a clear winner in the next gen console wars will show through. Until then I guess we will have to suffer any positive remark uttered about Sony will immediately be buried by the droves of Nintendo fan boys. This makes no sense. The first poster said "and a off the shelf Cell Processor..." Well considering that the company that is developing the PS3 is developing the chip (along with several other partners, but Sony is a big decision maker) I would say that it is not an off the shelf item and was more or less designed for the Exact reason of advancing computing. So you know if you think that a Cell processor right now is "off the shelf" then you are severely brain damaged. Then with the whole thing about Unified Shader Architecture... what people fail to realize is that while yes, a card specifically designed for USA will run faster than one that is not, it is still entirely possible to get up to 100% speed boosts by emulating a USA on the Fragment shader of the current or previous Shader models. So in conclusion I believe that this site is extremely biased towards bashing Sony. I don't know what it is. And not only bashing Sony, but promoting its competitors products just to put Sony down which is weird because Sony's competitor will also be your precious Nintendo's competitor soon enough.
- neonic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Sorry for the double post, but it wouldn't let me edit (error or something)
Just in case you don't believe me about running DX10 or USA on current gen hardware, http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/features/atid3d10/page2.asp It is possible. Plus that whole article (page one and two, I linked to two) is an interesting read. - klunned, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Do keep in mind that the "flop" you are referring to as Gamecube actually did make Nintendo quite a tidy profit...
- gwolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I couldn’t agree more.
You don’t really think they enjoy losing money on every console they sell do you. This completion is the greatest thing that ever happened to gaming. No matter who comes out ahead, we all win. Sony may have been complacent this time, but they won’t make that mistake again.
What have they been doing in the years since they launched PS2. Microsoft has launched two different consoles in that time. Sony is rushing to finish their homework on the way to class and I don’t think they have any idea what kind of a grade to expect. - MasterGrief, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11Well I must say, I'm glad to see that this hasn't turned into another PS3 bash-o-rama. Lots of (at least, seemingly) informed opinions here, and I like that.
- cal01, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Hmm. With the computational power and speed of the Cell(s), why not just do textures on the fly (not literally, but maybe storing them as mathematical algorithmns)? Decoding can be done in real time, and memory can be pushed/pulled as needed.
- JazonBladen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I just wish the systems weren't being marketed as the "ultimate entertainment experience" and rather, on the quality of the games. That, and it seems like the more news I hear about the PS3, the less I want it. First the crazy price tag, then the estimated price of the games, and it keeps going downhill from there. It makes me wonder if this could mean the death of the PlayStation? Most opinions do not reside with the PS3. Even hardcore fanboys of the PS3 have been jumping ship lately. Though, having less capability than the Xbox 360 is a trivial difference (at least when it comes to playing the games,) but when you're marketing your console as the best console to be released and it has a price tag of $600, it had better be the best. Sony still has a long way to go before it learns more about this 'marketing' thing.
- wingnut21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm interested in learning more about the texture compression performance differences of the two consoles. Do you have a link for where you got your info?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 101 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is