THE BORE
General => Video Game Bored => Topic started by: Christopher on December 25, 2006, 11:21:06 PM
-
Because it's 600 dollars? I mean what the fuck is the problem here? The PS2 was awesome.
-
No games duh.
-
The PS2 wasn't awesome at first, much like the PS3, the launch library was gay and boring. The PS2 didnt cost 600 dollars. The PS2 wasnt a testbed for an unproven format. Most of the stuff I care about will be on 360 or the DS Lite so bleh.
-
The PS2 wasn't awesome at first, much like the PS3, the launch library was gay and boring. The PS2 didnt cost 600 dollars. The PS2 wasnt a testbed for an unproven format. Most of the stuff I care about will be on 360 or the DS Lite so bleh.
What he said
-
The PS2 wasn't awesome at first, much like the PS3, the launch library was gay and boring. The PS2 didnt cost 600 dollars. The PS2 wasnt a testbed for an unproven format. Most of the stuff I care about will be on 360 or the DS Lite so bleh.
SSX was pretty cool. Better than anything on the PS3 right now.
-
Because it's 600 dollars? I mean what the fuck is the problem here? The PS2 was awesome.
Mostly their hardcore fans. They are arrogant and pompous, for the most part.
-
because there are a whole lot more newbies on the Internet now than there was a few years ago, and for the most part they are heedless, moronic, short-sighted (OMG Microsoft has something concrete now, Sony is fucked, EVERYTHING IS SET IN STONE!!!), and ready for anything to look edgy and irreverent, and to do so they'll bash the established champion
-
Because it's hugely overpriced, technologically equivalent to a lower-priced competitor that has a better library and online implementation, is a trojan horse for an unproven media format, has one decent game, and is losing most of its exclusives?
-
XBL just cant be beat, the competition has been seen and its just kinda meh
-
Seems like a weak attempt in comparison. Nintendo is trying to out-ds itsself, and might just do that. Microsoft is trying to include every imaginable exclusive and feature you'd want, and might just do that. PS3 tries to be a bluray player, when most people are fine with youtube.
For average people: A lot of people are going to see 360 as definitely next-gen (games look as good as PS3's and not many exclusives on PS3) and Wii as the best parts of next-gen and last-gen (bunch of cheap fun, games like PS2 and online capabilities in some ways similar to 360).
While PS3 isn't worse, it's not making anybody feel like it's better. There's also going to be a lot more multiplatform AAA games instead of exclusives so that companies can make more money and all the filler will get put on Wii because of the lower budget needed.
Of course a lot of people don't like sony and that's part of the hate you see.
-
There's not any peculiar, or unusual mystery to it, Chris...
Having the market leader falter, with the legions of enemies they've built up from opposing fanboy teams, then it's not too difficult to understand.
-
I was a huge PS2 fanboy last gen. I woulda loved to see the PS3 keep it up. However, for the reasons cited above, Sony totally dropped the ball.
-
This thread is...what? We "hate" on it because of it's lack of support, overly pressured media format and stupid multimedia features, and the fact it costs 550-700 clams (that's with taxes).
Shit, ps2 is my favorite system EVER and ps3 will likely take the backseat from me until about 2009.
-
I hated the PSP because of the dry library and high price, but now that it's widely available and easy to pirate, even allowing for PSX game emulation, I'm so stoked to get one.
PS3 offers nothing above what I can find in my 360, except the web browser, and I played with WebTV back in 1999.
-
PS3 has been out for like a month. Give it time. The same shit was going on the 360 when it launched, and a lot of previous consoles as well. Launches generally suck. The PS2 launch (April 2000 in Japan) was fucking AWFUL, with Street Fighter EX3 and Ridge Racer V. The Dreamcast launch in November 1998 was also fucking terrible. The only good game was a mediocre VF3tb port. Sonic came out a month later, and then there was nothing for another two months.
None of this is anything new. People tend to forget how systems were early-on.
-
lol, youre invested.
-
Some good shit will come out for PS3 eventually, but like everyone else said, 360 already has a solid library and a great online component. Right now there is no real reason to get a PS3 over a 360.
Personally I just dont like Sony, they make crappy hardware that has failed me several times, I had a PS and a PS2, they are both broken now. And all their lies and PR spin, while hilarious, is such utter bullshit, which accounts for most of Sony's forum flaming.
-
PS3 offers nothing above what I can find in my 360, except the web browser, and I played with WebTV back in 1999.
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/02/09/browse-the-internet-on-your-xbox-360/
-
Bah, I like my PS3 now that I own a working console. There is not much to play though. However, that's expected at launch. But honestly, it doesn't look to be changing. I bought the console on a whim and I haven't touched it since the beginning of the month. MGS4, FF XIII and Motorstorm, baby! That's what I'm waiting on. (of course a few other titles as well.)
-
Why do people buy something AT LAUNCH, then go "yeh, there's nothing to play but that's expected AT LAUNCH"
Does this not make any sense to people? Am I missing something?
-
Because they want to be able to say they had that console AT LAUNCH.
-
Every console has a "tipping point". Where it's cost and it's games make it irresistable to a gamer. By setting the price point so high, Sony has delayed their "tipping point" by a few years for most gamers.
Even when the PS3 has been out for 2-3 years and has amassed a sizeable amount of games. It will STILL be 300 dollars (60 GB) (maybe even more?!). That's not the type of value that sells consoles in their 3rd year.
Unfortunately for Sony, due to high costs of game development, game makers have to make sure they are on EVERY platform possible. What this means is that we will see libraries that are almost equal when it's said and done. So, cost matters when you look at it like that.
I can change my mind. I pretty much felt the same way about the PS2, until I played GTA3. Killer Apps have that effect on people, but they are impossible to predict.
-
Most consoles sold from launch fail anyway lol. Just wait a year. I gave Gamecube 5 years and I was able to build a library of 8 awesome games!
*seriously tho, I like my cube :)*
-
Sony got overconfident and nobody feels bad for Sony fans being on the other side of the fence now.
-
Well no one can win FOREVER
-
Well no one can win FOREVER
THE HOUSE ALWAYS WINS
(http://img.mtv3.fi/mn_kuvat/mtv3/ohjelmat/house/382995.jpg)
-
God DAMNIT I love House, I mean the show, not the guy. I mean maybe I love the guy, not in the sex way, I mean id be his friend even if he made fun of me every day just cause he's awesome.
I just came into posession of the complete black adder collection, its hilarious seeing him in that and then watching house lol.
-
lol, youre invested.
I didn't pay for my PS3. ;)
-
lol, im jealous :(
-
Because it's hugely overpriced, technologically equivalent to a lower-priced competitor that has a better library and online implementation, is a trojan horse for an unproven media format, has one decent game, and is losing most of its exclusives?
.
-
Why do people buy something AT LAUNCH, then go "yeh, there's nothing to play but that's expected AT LAUNCH"
Does this not make any sense to people? Am I missing something?
Because there are other uses for the system? Umm, Blu Ray?
Think before you speak, mister. I stated before that there wasn't much I wanted from the system other than a Blu Ray player.
-
A cop-out response.
-
A cop-out response.
How so, baby boo? Because I specifically went into detail in my original post to talk about how there wasn't much I wanted for the PS3 in the first place?
-
btw Mupepe I'm going to add you to my PS3 friends list, how does that work? Do you recieve the request? I'm gonna add you Hans and morphix
-
Wii60 bitches.
-
technologically equivalent to a lower-priced competitor
Stop saying this. Everyone knows RSX > Xenos.
-
Apparently people with SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT CAREERS don't!
-
Because it's 600 dollars? I mean what the fuck is the problem here? The PS2 was awesome.
Forums hated the X360 when it 1st came out.
I think it is because a lot of people can't get one and it is a way of compensating so they don't feel like they are missing out.
-
Apparently people with SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT CAREERS don't!
give it up drinky , we all know that faith >>>>> knowledge
-
Apparently people with SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT CAREERS don't!
give it up drinky , we all know that faith >>>>> knowledge
::)
-
::)
:'( :'( :'(
-
btw Mupepe I'm going to add you to my PS3 friends list, how does that work? Do you recieve the request? I'm gonna add you Hans and morphix
I haven't added anyone so I'm not sure :(
But go ahead and we'll find out :hyper :hyper
I'll log on tonight. Wanna play some Resistance?
-
Stop saying this. Everyone knows RSX > Xenos.
No Xenos is much better then RSX. PS3's cpu has more potential, can't do graphics but it can do cpu things. A developer will make a version for PS3 because in the end it's worth it, but it's still weaker graphically.
I'll log on tonight. Wanna play some Resistance?
You need a seperate friends list for resistance for some reason.
-
technologically equivalent to a lower-priced competitor
Stop saying this. Everyone knows RSX > Xenos.
You got that backwards
-
Stop saying this. Everyone knows RSX > Xenos.
No Xenos is much better then RSX. PS3's cpu has more potential, can't do graphics but it can do cpu things. A developer will make a version for PS3 because in the end it's worth it, but it's still weaker graphically.
Yeah ok, we'll see how they compare a year/two years from now.
-
I'll log on tonight. Wanna play some Resistance?
You need a seperate friends list for resistance for some reason.
Fucking lame. I need to add everyone that is in the PSN thread.
-
Yeah ok, we'll see how they compare a year/two years from now.
Okay, Xenos simply has physical advantages over RSX. There's numbers that are higher on Xenos then on RSX.
Fucking lame. I need to add everyone that is in the PSN thread.
Yeah but I think it was only for that one game cause it used it's own servers and PSN wasn't ready for that type of game yet.
There was a PS3 sitting on the counter at Fred Meyer's today... at 2:30 in the afternoon. WTF?
Probably refunded.
-
btw Mupepe I'm going to add you to my PS3 friends list, how does that work? Do you recieve the request? I'm gonna add you Hans and morphix
I haven't added anyone so I'm not sure :(
But go ahead and we'll find out :hyper :hyper
I'll log on tonight. Wanna play some Resistance?
lol I have no games yet :(. But I'm getting Resistance Saturday, you better fucking play :rock
-
btw Mupepe I'm going to add you to my PS3 friends list, how does that work? Do you recieve the request? I'm gonna add you Hans and morphix
I haven't added anyone so I'm not sure :(
But go ahead and we'll find out :hyper :hyper
I'll log on tonight. Wanna play some Resistance?
lol I have no games yet :(. But I'm getting Resistance Saturday, you better fucking play :rock
HELL YES! :hyper
-
Yeah ok, we'll see how they compare a year/two years from now.
Okay, Xenos simply has physical advantages over RSX. There's numbers that are higher on Xenos then on RSX.
Source plz? Not asking to be a smartass, I wanna read for myself, that's all.
-
Triangle Setup
Xbox 360 - 500 Million Triangles/sec
PS3 - 250 Million Triangles/sec
Vertex Shader Processing
Xbox 360 - 6.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 2.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 16 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 1.5 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 12 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 8 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec
Filtered Texture Fetch
Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
PS3 - 12.0 Billion Texels/sec
Vertex Texture Fetch
Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
PS3 - 4.0 Billion Texels/sec
Pixel Shader Processing with 16 Filtered Texels Per Cycle (Pixel ALU x Clock)
Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec
Pixel Shader Processing without Textures (Pixel ALU x Clock)
Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec
Multisampled Fill Rate
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz)
PS3 - 8.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 500MHz)
Pixel Fill Rate with 4x Multisampled Anti-Aliasing
Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz / 4)
PS3 - 2.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 500MHz / 4)
Pixel Fill Rate without Anti-Aliasing
Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)
PS3 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)
Frame Buffer Bandwidth
Xbox 360 - 256.0 GB/sec (dedicated for frame buffer rendering)
PS3 - 20.8 GB/sec (shared with other graphics data: textures and vertices)
PS3 - 10.8 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)
PS3 - 8.4 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)
Texture/Vertex Memory Bandwidth
Xbox 360 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with CPU)
Xbox 360 - 14.4 GB/sec (with 8.0 GB/sec subtracted for CPU)
Xbox 360 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for CPU)
PS3 - 20.8 GB/sec (shared with frame buffer)
PS3 - 10.8 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for frame buffer)
PS3 - 8.4 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for frame buffer)
Shader Model
Xbox 360 - Shader Model 3.0+ / Unified Shader Architecture
PS3 - Shader Model 3.0 / Discrete Shader Architecture
-
Diablos fights with the powers of PURE SPECULATION and FANBOY
-
Triangle Setup
Xbox 360 - 500 Million Triangles/sec
PS3 - 250 Million Triangles/sec
Vertex Shader Processing
Xbox 360 - 6.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 2.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 16 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 1.5 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 12 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 8 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec
Filtered Texture Fetch
Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
PS3 - 12.0 Billion Texels/sec
Vertex Texture Fetch
Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
PS3 - 4.0 Billion Texels/sec
Pixel Shader Processing with 16 Filtered Texels Per Cycle (Pixel ALU x Clock)
Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec
Pixel Shader Processing without Textures (Pixel ALU x Clock)
Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
PS3 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec
Multisampled Fill Rate
Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz)
PS3 - 8.0 Billion Samples/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 500MHz)
Pixel Fill Rate with 4x Multisampled Anti-Aliasing
Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 4 Samples x 500MHz / 4)
PS3 - 2.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 2 Samples x 500MHz / 4)
Pixel Fill Rate without Anti-Aliasing
Xbox 360 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)
PS3 - 4.0 Billion Pixels/sec (8 ROPS x 500MHz)
Frame Buffer Bandwidth
Xbox 360 - 256.0 GB/sec (dedicated for frame buffer rendering)
PS3 - 20.8 GB/sec (shared with other graphics data: textures and vertices)
PS3 - 10.8 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)
PS3 - 8.4 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)
Texture/Vertex Memory Bandwidth
Xbox 360 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with CPU)
Xbox 360 - 14.4 GB/sec (with 8.0 GB/sec subtracted for CPU)
Xbox 360 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for CPU)
PS3 - 20.8 GB/sec (shared with frame buffer)
PS3 - 10.8 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for frame buffer)
PS3 - 8.4 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for frame buffer)
Shader Model
Xbox 360 - Shader Model 3.0+ / Unified Shader Architecture
PS3 - Shader Model 3.0 / Discrete Shader Architecture
SOURCE (URL)?
You prolly yanked it off B3D or something.
MAF: Don't be daft. I WANT A 360 OMG SHUT UP.
-
why do YOU think the RSX -- basically a 7600GS -- is better than Xenos, which has a full DX10 feature set, and whose tech will appear in the next generation of ATi graphics cards?
-
Because it's 600 dollars? I mean what the fuck is the problem here? The PS2 was awesome.
Forums hated the X360 when it 1st came out.
I think it is because a lot of people can't get one and it is a way of compensating so they don't feel like they are missing out.
What am I missing out on? What am I going to miss out on? When was X360 released, I picked mine up August 2006. What could I possibly be missing from when PS3 was released up until the same time span from when I picked up a 360?
-
Another part where Sony ROYALLY has fucked up:
Part of the reason they were able to take the crown from Nintendo was that they made it easier for developers to be profitable after Nintendo started treating third parties like doormats at the end of the 16 bit gen. Developers didn't have to pay an arm and a leg to get cartridges made, and they didn't have to deal with Nintendo's draconian licensing and royalty shit. Developers could be more easily profitable.
Sony has forgotten this very important part of their earlier victory, and they've let development costs skyrocket. Leave Blu-ray out of this argument - you can cite sources that say it's the same price as pressing DVDs or pricier or less timely or whatever. Sony fucked up by thinking they could get away with providing half-assed development tools like they did with PS2, and I don't think developers will be so forgiving this time around since development prices have really skyrocketed to near industry breaking levels. 360 has some very nice tools with XNA. Wii has well, cheaper development in general. Sony has, well, another Sony development clusterfuck. You think they would've learned their lesson after PS2, where it took time and god's gift of Renderware to make the platform blossom. There's no replacement for Renderware this time, and we the gamers are going to pay for that with fewer games all around.
Sony, learn how to cater to developers. The industry is dry-heaving at development costs now, and you're not doing anything to help the matter.
-
Yeah, like I can't afford a PS3. :lol
I almost dropped $600 on one as an impulse buy until MAF wisely stopped me, reminding me that there wasn't actually shit to play on it and the downside was having to explain to my wife why I'd just subtracted six hundred benjamins from the checkbook to purchase a console I'd never touch after a playthrough or two of Resistance. Unlike some of you, I don't suffer from Launch Game Syndrome, where you magically and dubiously "enjoy" games of a sort you'd never touch at the end of a successful console's lifespan.
-
http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=9
Now the 360’s GPU is one impressive piece of work and I’ll say from the get go it’s much more advanced than the PS3’s GPU so I’m not sure where to begin, but I’ll start with what Microsoft said about it. Microsoft said Xenos was clocked at 500MHZ and that it had 48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader pipelines (48 unified shader units or pipelines) along with a polygon performance of 500 Million triangles a second.
Before going any further I’ll clarify this 500 Million Triangles a second claim. Can the 360’s GPU actually achieve this? Yes it can, BUT there would be no pixels or color at all. It’s the triangle setup rate for the GPU and it isn’t surprising it has such a higher triangle setup rate due to it having 48 shaders units capable of performing vertex operations whereas all other released GPUs can only dedicate 8 shader units to vertex operations. The PS3 GPU’s triangle setup rate at 550MHZ is 275 million a second and if its 500MHZ will have 250 million a second. This is just the setup rate do NOT expect to see games with such an excessive number of polygons because it wont happen.
Microsoft also says it can also achieve a pixel-fillrate of 16Gigasamples per second. This GPU here inside the Xbox 360 is literally an early ATI R600, which when released by ATI for the pc will be a Directx 10 GPU. Xenos in a lot of areas manages to meet many of the requirements that would qualify it as a Directx 10 GPU, but falls short of the requirements in others. What I found interesting was Microsoft said the 360’s GPU could perform 48 billion shader operations per second back in 2005. However Bob Feldstein, VP of engineering for ATI, made it very clear that the 360’s GPU can perform 2 of those shaders per cycle so the 360’s GPU is actually capable of 96 billion shader operations per second.
# 8 shader units * 4 ops per cycle = 192 shader ops per clock
# Xenos is clocked at 500MHZ *192 shader ops per clock = 96 billion shader ops per second.
(Did anyone notice that each shader unit on the 360’s GPU doesn’t perform as many ops per pipe as the rsx? The 360 GPU makes up for it by having superior architecture, having many more pipes which operate more efficiently and along with more bandwidth.)
Did Microsoft just make a mistake or did they purposely misrepresent their GPU to lead Sony on? The 360’s GPU is revolutionary in the sense that it’s the first GPU to use a Unified Shader architecture. According to developers this is as big a change as when the vertex shader was first introduced and even then the inclusion of the vertex shader was merely an add-on not a major change like this. The 360’s GPU also has a daughter die right there on the chip containing 10MB of EDRAM. This EDRAM has a framebuffer bandwidth of 256GB/s which is more than 5 times what the RSX or any GPU for the pc has for its framebuffer (even higher than G80’s framebuffer).
Thanks to the efficiency of the 360 GPU’s unified shader architecture and this 10MB of EDRAM the GPU is able to achieve 4XFSAA at no performance cost. ATI and Microsoft’s goal was to eliminate memory bandwidth as a bottleneck and they seem to have succeeded. If there are any pc gamers out there they notice that when they turn on things such as AA or HDR the performance goes down that’s because those features eat bandwidth hence the efficiency of the GPU’s operation decreases as they are turned on. With the 360 HDR+4XAA simultaneously are like nothing to the GPU with proper use of the EDRAM. The EDRAM contains a 3D logic unit which has 192 Floating Point Unit processors inside. The logic unit will be able to exchange data with the 10MB of RAM at 2 Terabits a second. Things such as antialiasing, computing z depths or occlusion culling can happen on the EDRAM without impacting the GPU’s workload.
Xenos writes to this EDRAM for its framebuffer and it’s connected to it via a 32GB/sec connection (this number is extremely close to the theoretical because the EDRAM is right there on the 360 GPU’s daughter die.) Don’t forget the EDRAM has a bandwidth of 256GB/s and its only by dividing this 256GB/s by the initial 32GB/s that we get from the connection of Xenos to the EDRAM we find out that Xenos is capable of multiplying its effective bandwidth to the frame buffer by a factor of 8 when processing pixels that make use of the EDRAM, which includes HDR or AA and other things. This leads to a maximum of 32*8=256GB/s which, to say the least, is a very effective way of dealing with bandwidth intensive tasks.
In order for this to be possible developers would need to setup their rendering engine to take advantage of both the EDRAM and the available onboard 3D logic. If anyone is confused why the 32GB/s is being multiplied by 8 its because once data travels over the 32GB/s bus it is able to be processed 8 times by the EDRAM logic to the EDRAM memory at a rate of 256GB/s so for every 32GB/s you send over 256GB/s gets processed. This results in RSX being at a bandwidth disadvantage in comparison to Xenos. Needless to say the 360 not only has an overabundance of video memory bandwidth, but it also has amazing memory saving features. For example to get 720P with 4XFSAA on traditional architecture would require 28MB worth of memory. On the 360 only 16MB is required. There are also features in the 360's Direct3D API where developers are able to fit 2 128x128 textures into the same space required for one, for example. So even with all the memory and all the memory bandwidth, they are still very mindful of how it’s used.
I wasn’t too clear earlier on the difference between the RSX’s dedicated pixel and vertex shader pipelines compared to the 360s unified shader architecture. The 360 GPU has 48 unified pipelines capable of accepting either pixel or vertex shader operations whereas with the older dedicated pixel and vertex pipeline architecture that RSX uses when you are in a vertex heavy situation most of the 24 pixel pipes go idle instead of helping out with vertex work.
Or on the flip side in a pixel heavy situation those 8 vertex shader pipelines are just idle and don’t help out the pixel pipes (because they aren’t able to), but with the 360’s unified architecture in a vertex heavy situation for example none of the pipes go idle. All 48 unified pipelines are capable of helping with either pixel or vertex shader operations when needed so as a result efficiency is greatly improved and so is overall performance. When pipelines are forced to go idle because they lack the capability to help another set of pipelines accomplish their task it’s detrimental to performance. This inefficient manner is how all current GPUs operate including the PS3's RSX. The pipelines go idle because the pixel pipes aren't able to help the vertex pipes accomplish a task or vice versa. Whats even more impressive about this GPU is it by itself determines the balance of how many pipelines to dedicate to vertex or pixel shader operations at any given time a programmer is NOT needed to handle any of this the GPU takes care of all this itself in the quickest most efficient way possible. 1080p is not a smart resolution to target in any form this generation, but if 360 developers wanted to get serious about 1080p, thanks to Xenos, could actually outperform the ps3 in 1080p. (The less efficient GPU always shows its weaknesses against the competition in higher resolutions so the best way for the rsx to be competitive is to stick to 720P) In vertex shader limited situations the 360’s gpu will literally be 6 times faster than RSX. With a unified shader architecture things are much more efficient than previous architectures allowed (which is extremely important). The 360’s GPU for example is 95-99% efficient with 4XAA enabled. With traditional architecture there are design related roadblocks that prevent such efficiency. To avoid such roadblocks, which held back previous hardware, the 360 GPU design team created a complex system of hardware threading inside the chip itself. In this case, each thread is a program associated with the shader arrays. The Xbox 360 GPU can manage and maintain state information on 64 separate threads in hardware. There's a thread buffer inside the chip, and the GPU can switch between threads instantaneously in order to keep the shader arrays busy at all times.
Want to know why Xenos doesn’t need as much raw horsepower to outperform say something like the x1900xtx or the 7900GTX? It makes up for not having as much raw horsepower by actually being efficient enough to fully achieve its advertised performance numbers which is an impressive feat. The x1900xtx has a peak pixel fillrate of 10.4Gigasamples a second while the 7900GTX has a peak pixel fillrate of 15.6Gigasamples a second. Neither of them is actually able to achieve and sustain those peak fillrate performance numbers though due to not being efficient enough, but they get away with it in this case since they can also bank on all the raw power. The performance winner between the 7900GTX and the X1900XTX is actually the X1900XTX despite a lower pixel fillrate (especially in higher resolutions) because it has twice as many pixel pipes and is the more efficient of the 2. It’s just a testament as to how important efficiency is. Well how exactly can the mere 360 GPU stand up to both of those with only a 128 bit memory interface and 500MHZ? Well the 360 GPU with 4XFSAA enabled achieves AND sustains its peak fillrate of 16Gigasamples per second which is achieved by the combination of the unified shader architecture and the excessive amount of bandwidth which gives it the type of efficiency that allows it to outperform GPUs with far more raw horsepower. I guess it also helps that it’s the single most advanced GPU currently available anyway for purchase. Things get even better when you factor in the Xenos’ MEMEXPORT ability which allows it to enable “streamout” which opens the door for Xenos to achieve DX10 class functionality. A shame Microsoft chose to disable Xenos’ other 16 pipelines to improve yields and keep costs down. Not many are even aware that the 360’s GPU has the exact same number of pipelines as ATI’s unreleased R600, but to keep costs down and to make the GPU easier to manufacture, Microsoft chose to disable one of the shader arrays containing 16 pipelines. What MEMEXPORT does is it expands the graphics pipeline in more general purpose and programmable manner.
I’ll borrow a quote from Dave Baumann since he explains it rather well.
“With the capability to fetch from anywhere in memory, perform arbitrary ALU operations and write the results back to memory, in conjunction with the raw floating point performance of the large shader ALU array, the MEMEXPORT facility does have the capability to achieve a wide range of fairly complex and general purpose operations; basically any operation that can be mapped to a wide SIMD array can be fairly efficiently achieved and in comparison to previous graphics pipelines it is achieved in fewer cycles and with lower latencies. For instance, this is probably the first time that general purpose physics calculation would be achievable, with a reasonable degree of success, on a graphics processor and is a big step towards the graphics processor becoming much more like a vector co-processor to the CPU.”
Even with all of this information there is still a lot more about this GPU that ATI just simply isn't revealing and considering they'll be borrowing technology used to design this GPU in their future pc products can you really blame them?
-
Im sure Diablos can refute all of that with ...uhh 'u guys am dumb scoff'
-
I always thought 360 had a better GPU, but PS3 a better CPU?
-
or HURR PS3 CAME OUT LATER IT HAS TO BE BETTER despite the fact that the RSX is a bargain-grade graphics processor
-
Oblivion, in almost disingenuously simple terms, yes. Truth is, for the average developer, it's easier to get good performance of of the Xbox CPU -- the CELL is a multi-threading nightmare with the current APIs Sony is shipping. But in two-three years? Yeah, the CELL will be probably be delivering overall better results than the 360 tri-core PPC. Xenos' superiority offsets that advantage, making the two systems largely similar in terms of real world performance -- it's just that one costs $600 to the other's $400. I guess if you REALLY want that Blu-Ray support, the extra $200 might be worth it, but I'll pass.
-
I always thought 360 had a better GPU, but PS3 a better CPU?
Drinky said it better, but another way to look at it is that the two CPUs, although drastically different-sounding on paper, are close cousins. They're 2 different branches of the same PPC family. 360 went with fewer, more powerful cores; PS3 went with more, less powerful cores. In addition, 360 ships with better API.
-
Actually, the CELL is completely out-of-order in terms of operation execution, and the bus doesn't exactly make thread synchronization easy.
-
ToxicAdam actually had a really good reply earlier in this thread, on the first page.
It's like an equation, where AWESOMENESS OF GAMES - COST OF CONSOLE = BUY ZONE. Right now, I'm not seeing anything that's going to outweigh the cost of the stupid thing.
Also, the bonus bells and whistles of the PS3 don't do anything for me and lots of other people out there. I don't WANT to move to a new media format for movies. Why should I encourage that? To my admittedly untrained eye, the visuals on the 360 are definitely in the same ballpark as the PS3, and I don't even own an HDTV yet so why get excited for stuff I'm not gonna notice until I plunk down a good bit of scratch on a new tv.
And then there's the games issue. Because of the time of launch and the fact that this gen is looking increasingly multi-platform, the 360 is pretty much ALWAYS gonna have more games for it that I want than the PS3, because it's built up a catalog. I could buy a 360 and four AWESOME games for essentially the price of a PS3. Well, who WOULDN'T do that?
-
Im sure Diablos can refute all of that with ...uhh 'u guys am dumb scoff'
:hurr
No. I just want to learn about the differences between the two. In case you didn't get the memo, I want both consoles. Quit being such a bitch.
-
While I think it is either sad for Sony or impressive for MS that the X360 can stand toe to toe with a system releasing a year later and 100-200 dollars more technologicallly, what really pisses me off about the PS3 is how Sony had a year to copy MS on feature set and failed to do it.
- Custom soundtracks - PS3 does custom sound tracks like Xbox1...360 lets you use custom soundtracks for everything (360 games, DVD movies, movies off the HDD, XBLA games, even Xbox1 BC games if you do the work around)
- Scaling - X360 has a good internal scaler. Almost every resolution is supported, so you can always be in your native resolution. PS3 has all these scaling problems with BRD and PS3 games...you'd think Sony, which also makes TVs, would have remembered most HDTVs out there look best when used in their native resolution.
-
The Blue-Ray is also fucked on the PS3.
If I play BR movies, I need to switch the 720p setting I have for games to 1080i, and then let my TV scale the 1080i signal to 720p FURTHER degrading quality.
-
Yea, that resolution scaling thing is fucking distinguished mentally-challenged. I love watching the Sbots try to spin it as a nonissue at GAF.
-
- Custom soundtracks - PS3 does custom sound tracks like Xbox1...360 lets you use custom soundtracks for everything (360 games, DVD movies, movies off the HDD, XBLA games, even Xbox1 BC games if you do the work around)
How do you do that?
-
- Custom soundtracks - PS3 does custom sound tracks like Xbox1...360 lets you use custom soundtracks for everything (360 games, DVD movies, movies off the HDD, XBLA games, even Xbox1 BC games if you do the work around)
How do you do that?
Basically start your music player from the dashboard before you launch the Xbox1 game.
-
Basically start your music player from the dashboard before you launch the Xbox1 game.
Ah.