XXXXXX

80 results
1
2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

Apparently, the Xbox 360 has reached its limits with Gears of Wars, hardware limits that is. Gears of War is a third-person tactical action game developed by Epic Games and using the 3.0 Unreal Engine.

In an interview gave to Siliconera, Epic Games manager, Preston Thorne declared that through this game, his company has pushed the Xbox to the limits. Joystiq gaming news website consider that there is some truth in this statement as, according to them, Epic was the one that convinced Microsoft to upgrade Xbox 360's RAM to 512. Epic is still supporting their statement according to which Gears of War would not be able to run on 256 MB of RAM. Preston was also asked if the PlayStation 3 will be able to handle the game, but presumably he dodged the question, but still implied that the answer was no.

It toke only a year, for a game to use the full potential of the 360.. And considering to fact, that most developers state that not even 20% of the Ps3 potential has been reached with games like Resistance: Fall of Man, and Motor Storm. Ps3 fans have a long and wonderful future, expect games to be 5x better, then what the 360 could dash out.

So, now I ask, it toke the 360 a year to reach its potential, how long before developers well be able to access the full potential of the Cell processor, and use the RSX to its full potential as well?

17 years ago

3281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 3281 Posts

MGS4 and GTA4

17 years ago

4816

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 acidBURN1942

Member since 2002 • 4816 Posts

BS just because Epic makes a great game doesn't mean they can say it has used teh full power of the 360. I mean Mass Effect looks 10x better than anything I've seen and IMO is on par with MGS4. I know developers will be tapping into the power for years to come as MS releases new tools and they just get better at coding and find loopholes for each system (360, Wii, Ps3) to optimize the games.

17 years ago

868

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 868 Posts

limits are always broken down, please post this in system wars

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

BS just because Epic makes a great game doesn't mean they can say it has used teh full power of the 360. I mean Mass Effect looks 10x better than anything I've seen and IMO is on par with MGS4. I know developers will be tapping into the power for years to come as MS releases new tools and they just get better at coding and find loopholes for each system (360, Wii, Ps3) to optimize the games. acidBURN1942

Wow, you have a demo of a game, that is still in production? o_O This is Epic games, they develop Unreal Tornement, if they say the 360 has reached its potential, there has to be truth to it. And the funny part is, Gears of War lagged, and dropped frames.. and this is the best the 360 has to offer.

17 years ago

6870

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 6870 Posts

the thing is this is not the right plase to do this because you now the fanboy's will come in here and say something else. i really don't care much about this because i now wether or not the 360 can do better or anything i will still be happy with the ps 3 because i now the games i been playing sence ps 1 and new ones will be there.

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

limits are always broken down, please post this in system warsBones8653

This is not about system wars, Its for Ps3 forum I asked, what game do you think is going to reach the limits of the Ps3, as gears of war has done it for the 360 already. Also, how long will it take the Ps3 to reach its limits? Considering the fact, that the 360 toke only a year.

17 years ago

1796

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 1796 Posts

Cell is different, very different implementation that convenational programming. Developers are struggling to make full use of the CELL SPU. F1 developer does put it to good use, by letting one SPU handle on shader decompressing. In this case RSX can do what it really does best.

17 years ago

Devils_Joker_22

5592

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Devils_Joker_22

Member since 2005 • 5592 Posts

In an interview on Gametrailers the Motorstorm devs said they 'Had bearely scratched the surface of the ps3's power' So lets hope

17 years ago

9597

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#10 BenderUnit22

Member since 2006 • 9597 Posts

saying they fully used a system's power is pure marketing talk, I think the 360 can do a bit better. Oh, and why wouldn't Gears be possible on the PS3, UT3 seems to work, uses the same engine, has more player support and wider landscapes (-> more polygons)

17 years ago

xcoregamerskill

892

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 xcoregamerskill

Member since 2006 • 892 Posts

Most of the games manufactured by one will play on the other, except for any engine specifically designed for the Cell Processor. IE the white engine.

17 years ago

988

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 988 Posts

[QUOTE="acidBURN1942"]BS just because Epic makes a great game doesn't mean they can say it has used teh full power of the 360. I mean Mass Effect looks 10x better than anything I've seen and IMO is on par with MGS4. I know developers will be tapping into the power for years to come as MS releases new tools and they just get better at coding and find loopholes for each system (360, Wii, Ps3) to optimize the games. mu5afir

Wow, you have a demo of a game, that is still in production? o_O This is Epic games, they develop Unreal Tornement, if they say the 360 has reached its potential, there has to be truth to it. And the funny part is, Gears of War lagged, and dropped frames.. and this is the best the 360 has to offer.

There no lagged or drop in frames unless your playing online GEAR OF WAR is great best graphic i have seeing in a game. I dont think the xbox 360 has reach it full protential people said that the xbox 360 would be not able to play unreal tournament 2007 and they were corrected but at the end of the day the ps3 is powerful in the graphic department than the XBOX 360 so in about 2 to 3 year ps3 games will look a bit better than xbox 360 game but i really dont care because i plan on owning all 3 next gen console. I all ready own a wii and xbox 360 and get my ps3 in 10 day on the 23 of march yes cant wait

17 years ago

978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 978 Posts

MGS4 and GTA4cmpepper23

NAH, the MGS4 guys even said themselves they werent pushign for a crazy heavy graphics game. you wotn see the PS3 hit its limits with this game

17 years ago

xcoregamerskill

892

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 xcoregamerskill

Member since 2006 • 892 Posts

the biggest problem Kojima said they had with the game was getting the full extent of the sounds they want in it, not the graphics, although those do look Amazing. We won't really see the PS3's full potential for a while as the Cell is such a new technology and people need lots more experience before the knowledge of how to push it is realized.

17 years ago

978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 978 Posts

i dont get why he says gears cant run on the PS3, that has to be total bull. and also he says gears needs 512mb of ram to play does he mean system memory or graphics memory? cause if its graphic memory thats bull crap. there are better looking games on the PC that dont even use 512mb of graphics memory. infact 512mb on a graphics card has been out for ever and current PC games that are coming out now are just starting to use that much.

17 years ago

xcoregamerskill

892

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 xcoregamerskill

Member since 2006 • 892 Posts

and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?

17 years ago

978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 978 Posts

and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?xcoregamerskill

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

17 years ago

16383

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

Member since 2003 • 16383 Posts

[QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?joevfx

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

Woah! Could you put that in laymans terms for me? LOL :P

17 years ago

xcoregamerskill

892

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 xcoregamerskill

Member since 2006 • 892 Posts

[QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?joevfx

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

saying they fully used a system's power is pure marketing talk, I think the 360 can do a bit better. Oh, and why wouldn't Gears be possible on the PS3, UT3 seems to work, uses the same engine, has more player support and wider landscapes (-> more polygons)BenderUnit22

Gears can run on Ps3, they didn't comment on it because, they won't be able to release a copy on the Ps3. Since, MS is the producer.

17 years ago

978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 978 Posts

[QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?donalbane

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

Woah! Could you put that in laymans terms for me? LOL :P

ok, so say the 360 has 512mb of ram in its box. it will dedicate 256mb to the graphics card ( meanign all that space is JUST for the graphics card to use) and the rest is for the processor to use. like a computer, you have sticks of memory that you put in the motherboard for the processor to use and then the graphics card has its own memory built on to it for it to use. Now with the PS3 say it has 512mb of ram in its box. when the if the graphics cards needs to use 128mb of memory at a moment in time it will use it and leave the rest for the proc. if it needs more then it will take more and leave the rest for the proc. So its sharing the whole 512mb of space with the processor. now im not sure of the ecact numbers of each system but thats how dedicated memory and sharing memory basically works. I think the rule of thumb is dedicated memory is better. But i think the PS3 makes up for that with all its SPUs. game designers just have to figure out a new way to program games to take advantage of the PS3 achitecture.

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

the biggest problem Kojima said they had with the game was getting the full extent of the sounds they want in it, not the graphics, although those do look Amazing. We won't really see the PS3's full potential for a while as the Cell is such a new technology and people need lots more experience before the knowledge of how to push it is realized. xcoregamerskill

Gears can run on the Ps3, he didn't want to answer, because it would mean the Ps3 is better then the 360.

17 years ago

978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 978 Posts

[QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?xcoregamerskill

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

ah ok, i forgot which way it went.

17 years ago

9597

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#24 BenderUnit22

Member since 2006 • 9597 Posts

[QUOTE="BenderUnit22"]saying they fully used a system's power is pure marketing talk, I think the 360 can do a bit better. Oh, and why wouldn't Gears be possible on the PS3, UT3 seems to work, uses the same engine, has more player support and wider landscapes (-> more polygons)mu5afir

Gears can run on Ps3, they didn't comment on it because, they won't be able to release a copy on the Ps3. Since, MS is the producer.

that's what i've been saying (and I've never been expecting it on PS3, I know MS is the publisher), but whoever wrote the article just made some stuff up since UT3 is obviously running on the PS3

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

[QUOTE="donalbane"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?joevfx

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

Woah! Could you put that in laymans terms for me? LOL :P

ok, so say the 360 has 512mb of ram in its box. it will dedicate 256mb to the graphics card ( meanign all that space is JUST for the graphics card to use) and the rest is for the processor to use. like a computer, you have sticks of memory that you put in the motherboard for the processor to use and then the graphics card has its own memory built on to it for it to use. Now with the PS3 say it has 512mb of ram in its box. when the if the graphics cards needs to use 128mb of memory at a moment in time it will use it and leave the rest for the proc. if it needs more then it will take more and leave the rest for the proc. So its sharing the whole 512mb of space with the processor. now im not sure of the ecact numbers of each system but thats how dedicated memory and sharing memory basically works. I think the rule of thumb is dedicated memory is better. But i think the PS3 makes up for that with all its SPUs. game designers just have to figure out a new way to program games to take advantage of the PS3 achitecture.

The Ps3 has 256mb dedicated to graphics, and 256 dedicated to system, but all of it can be used for either purpose. The 360 has only 10mb dedicated to graphics, but it can also dedicated all 512mb of memory to either the system or the game. There is a myth going around, that stats that Ps3 can have access to only 256mb of memory, that is false.

17 years ago

12937

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 danneswegman

Member since 2005 • 12937 Posts

motorstorm developers say they only scratched the surface of the graphicall power of the PS3. They said the game could look MUCH better if they were given the time (video on gametrailers)

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

[QUOTE="mu5afir"][QUOTE="BenderUnit22"]saying they fully used a system's power is pure marketing talk, I think the 360 can do a bit better. Oh, and why wouldn't Gears be possible on the PS3, UT3 seems to work, uses the same engine, has more player support and wider landscapes (-> more polygons)BenderUnit22

Gears can run on Ps3, they didn't comment on it because, they won't be able to release a copy on the Ps3. Since, MS is the producer.

that's what i've been saying (and I've never been expecting it on PS3, I know MS is the publisher), but whoever wrote the article just made some stuff up since UT3 is obviously running on the PS3

He didn't make anything up, the developer of Gears of War.. DID NOT COMMENT about if, Gears can run on the Ps3, the person who commented assumed that it wouldn't be able to run, because of the ram being only 256, but that isn't correct, the Ps3 can use all of its ram, the full 512mb of it. And since, the Cell can process everything in real time, it can out perform the 360.

17 years ago

xcoregamerskill

892

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 xcoregamerskill

Member since 2006 • 892 Posts

[QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]the biggest problem Kojima said they had with the game was getting the full extent of the sounds they want in it, not the graphics, although those do look Amazing. We won't really see the PS3's full potential for a while as the Cell is such a new technology and people need lots more experience before the knowledge of how to push it is realized. mu5afir

Gears can run on the Ps3, he didn't want to answer, because it would mean the Ps3 is better then the 360.

My comment was about MGS4, not Gears of war. Gears could proably run with no trouble on the PS3, there's little doubt in my mind. Who's the developer on that anyway? Certain developers favor one company over the other, but the truly honest ones don't pull any punches. Factor 5 says the PS3 challenged them, in a good way, whereas the people at Ubi-Soft says that the 360 is better, and the guys at Insomniac seem to really like the PS3. The fact is, it all comes down to opinion and experience, some programmers are more comfortable with proven technology, whereas others like the challenge of working with something the world has never seen before.

17 years ago

9597

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#29 BenderUnit22

Member since 2006 • 9597 Posts

[QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?xcoregamerskill

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

Actually, I thought the RSX can access both the VRAM and XDR RAM (when needed) while the Cell can only use the XDR. But I might be wrong, I read that a long time ago

17 years ago

10578

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 eclipsed4utoo

Member since 2006 • 10578 Posts

[QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?xcoregamerskill

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

technically, you are right. The CELL does have access to all 512MB of RAM. However, no developer is stupid enough to use the CELL to use the other 256MB for graphical memory. Development isn't done this way. However, the RSX has access to all 512MB and it is the most optimal way of using all 512MB. The read/write speed from the CELL to the graphical RAM is SLOOWWWW.

17 years ago

10578

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 eclipsed4utoo

Member since 2006 • 10578 Posts

[QUOTE="donalbane"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?joevfx

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

Woah! Could you put that in laymans terms for me? LOL :P

ok, so say the 360 has 512mb of ram in its box. it will dedicate 256mb to the graphics card ( meanign all that space is JUST for the graphics card to use) and the rest is for the processor to use. like a computer, you have sticks of memory that you put in the motherboard for the processor to use and then the graphics card has its own memory built on to it for it to use. Now with the PS3 say it has 512mb of ram in its box. when the if the graphics cards needs to use 128mb of memory at a moment in time it will use it and leave the rest for the proc. if it needs more then it will take more and leave the rest for the proc. So its sharing the whole 512mb of space with the processor. now im not sure of the ecact numbers of each system but thats how dedicated memory and sharing memory basically works. I think the rule of thumb is dedicated memory is better. But i think the PS3 makes up for that with all its SPUs. game designers just have to figure out a new way to program games to take advantage of the PS3 achitecture.

you have it backwards, my friend.

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

[QUOTE="mu5afir"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]the biggest problem Kojima said they had with the game was getting the full extent of the sounds they want in it, not the graphics, although those do look Amazing. We won't really see the PS3's full potential for a while as the Cell is such a new technology and people need lots more experience before the knowledge of how to push it is realized. xcoregamerskill

Gears can run on the Ps3, he didn't want to answer, because it would mean the Ps3 is better then the 360.

My comment was about MGS4, not Gears of war. Gears could proably run with no trouble on the PS3, there's little doubt in my mind. Who's the developer on that anyway? Certain developers favor one company over the other, but the truly honest ones don't pull any punches. Factor 5 says the PS3 challenged them, in a good way, whereas the people at Ubi-Soft says that the 360 is better, and the guys at Insomniac seem to really like the PS3. The fact is, it all comes down to opinion and experience, some programmers are more comfortable with proven technology, whereas others like the challenge of working with something the world has never seen before.

MS was the producer for Gears, that is why the Epic developer didn't comment on it. Ubi-Soft is a multi platformer, that is why they don't like the Ps3. Since they have to pretty much re-do a lot of the games architecture so it can play on the Ps3. A lot of multi-platform developers don't like the Ps3 for the same reason. But, as Sony puts out more developer tools, things should get better.

17 years ago

10578

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 eclipsed4utoo

Member since 2006 • 10578 Posts

[QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?BenderUnit22

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

Actually, I thought the RSX can access both the VRAM and XDR RAM (when needed) while the Cell can only use the XDR. But I might be wrong, I read that a long time ago

the CELL has access, but it's read/write speed is slow to the graphics memory.

17 years ago

xcoregamerskill

892

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 xcoregamerskill

Member since 2006 • 892 Posts

[QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?eclipsed4utoo

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

technically, you are right. The CELL does have access to all 512MB of RAM. However, no developer is stupid enough to use the CELL to use the other 256MB for graphical memory. Development isn't done this way. However, the RSX has access to all 512MB and it is the most optimal way of using all 512MB. The read/write speed from the CELL to the graphical RAM is SLOOWWWW.

i didn't say it writes to the GDR RAM, I said it could. And, when pushing the system to it's limits, the thing might eventually have to.

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

[QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?eclipsed4utoo

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

technically, you are right. The CELL does have access to all 512MB of RAM. However, no developer is stupid enough to use the CELL to use the other 256MB for graphical memory. Development isn't done this way. However, the RSX has access to all 512MB and it is the most optimal way of using all 512MB. The read/write speed from the CELL to the graphical RAM is SLOOWWWW.

LOL, no its not... the problem developers have is not with the CPU to the Graphic card data transfer.. but rather processing for the cell, since it's new technology, developing for it is harder. I believe, there is a 3gb bandwith between the Cell and the RSX that is more then enough.

17 years ago

9597

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#36 BenderUnit22

Member since 2006 • 9597 Posts

[QUOTE="BenderUnit22"][QUOTE="mu5afir"][QUOTE="BenderUnit22"]saying they fully used a system's power is pure marketing talk, I think the 360 can do a bit better. Oh, and why wouldn't Gears be possible on the PS3, UT3 seems to work, uses the same engine, has more player support and wider landscapes (-> more polygons)mu5afir

Gears can run on Ps3, they didn't comment on it because, they won't be able to release a copy on the Ps3. Since, MS is the producer.

that's what i've been saying (and I've never been expecting it on PS3, I know MS is the publisher), but whoever wrote the article just made some stuff up since UT3 is obviously running on the PS3

He didn't make anything up, the developer of Gears of War.. DID NOT COMMENT about if, Gears can run on the Ps3, the person who commented assumed that it wouldn't be able to run, because of the ram being only 256, but that isn't correct, the Ps3 can use all of its ram, the full 512mb of it. And since, the Cell can process everything in real time, it can out perform the 360.

What the hell are you argueing about, I agreed with you that Thorne did not comment but the person who wrote the article just assumed something wrongfully. Or is the fact that I give a heads up to the 360 by saying there's still potential confusing to you and makes me look like a xbox fanboy so you assume I talk bad about the PS3?

17 years ago

10578

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 eclipsed4utoo

Member since 2006 • 10578 Posts

[QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?xcoregamerskill

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

technically, you are right. The CELL does have access to all 512MB of RAM. However, no developer is stupid enough to use the CELL to use the other 256MB for graphical memory. Development isn't done this way. However, the RSX has access to all 512MB and it is the most optimal way of using all 512MB. The read/write speed from the CELL to the graphical RAM is SLOOWWWW.

i didn't say it writes to the GDR RAM, I said it could. And, when pushing the system to it's limits, the thing might eventually have to.

with the read/write speed being 6MB/sec(no, that's not a typo) from the CELL to the graphics memory, no developer will use that method.

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

[QUOTE="mu5afir"][QUOTE="BenderUnit22"][QUOTE="mu5afir"][QUOTE="BenderUnit22"]saying they fully used a system's power is pure marketing talk, I think the 360 can do a bit better. Oh, and why wouldn't Gears be possible on the PS3, UT3 seems to work, uses the same engine, has more player support and wider landscapes (-> more polygons)BenderUnit22

Gears can run on Ps3, they didn't comment on it because, they won't be able to release a copy on the Ps3. Since, MS is the producer.

that's what i've been saying (and I've never been expecting it on PS3, I know MS is the publisher), but whoever wrote the article just made some stuff up since UT3 is obviously running on the PS3

He didn't make anything up, the developer of Gears of War.. DID NOT COMMENT about if, Gears can run on the Ps3, the person who commented assumed that it wouldn't be able to run, because of the ram being only 256, but that isn't correct, the Ps3 can use all of its ram, the full 512mb of it. And since, the Cell can process everything in real time, it can out perform the 360.

What the hell are you argueing about, I agreed with you that Thorne did not comment but the person who wrote the article just assumed something wrongfully. Or is the fact that I give a heads up to the 360 by saying there's still potential confusing to you and makes me look like a xbox fanboy so you assume I talk bad about the PS3?

Sorry, your comment were confusing. I should re-read stuff.. lol

17 years ago

9597

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#39 BenderUnit22

Member since 2006 • 9597 Posts

[QUOTE="BenderUnit22"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?eclipsed4utoo

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

Actually, I thought the RSX can access both the VRAM and XDR RAM (when needed) while the Cell can only use the XDR. But I might be wrong, I read that a long time ago

the CELL has access, but it's read/write speed is slow to the graphics memory.

so they both could use all the 512 MB but you wouldn't want the Cell to use the VRAM anyways if I get that right? (why would you anyways, doesn't graphic processing take more ram for most games so the RSX would naturally need the ram?)

17 years ago

xcoregamerskill

892

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 xcoregamerskill

Member since 2006 • 892 Posts

I don't think we've seen the full potential from either of these two systems in terms of processing and graphical power. However, (and say what you want) the 360 is still crippled in terms of the amount of ROM it has access to. 8.5 Gb as compared to 25 gb. And if you think this ins't a problem, just remember that the more code you can fit on a disc, the more textures, environments, etc you'll have access to.

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

[QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"][QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?eclipsed4utoo

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

other way around. The 360 has unified RAM, while the PS3's is split, but the Cell has access to both kinds of RAM, and the Cell actually has a small cache called Flex I/O just for communicating with itself. The Cell can also pre-render the graphics before their even moved to the RSX.

technically, you are right. The CELL does have access to all 512MB of RAM. However, no developer is stupid enough to use the CELL to use the other 256MB for graphical memory. Development isn't done this way. However, the RSX has access to all 512MB and it is the most optimal way of using all 512MB. The read/write speed from the CELL to the graphical RAM is SLOOWWWW.

i didn't say it writes to the GDR RAM, I said it could. And, when pushing the system to it's limits, the thing might eventually have to.

with the read/write speed being 6MB/sec(no, that's not a typo) from the CELL to the graphics memory, no developer will use that method.

6MB/sec is bad how? The graphic card has 256mb already dedicated to graphics, so the Cell can process info, and give it to the graphics at 6MB a sec. That shouldn't be a problem.. unlike the 360 which has only 10mb dedicated to the processor.. so it needs a larger bandwidth data transfer.

17 years ago

10318

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 57

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 10318 Posts

Cliffy B also said Epic hasn't tapped the full power of the x360.

PS3 Fanboys are living in a dream world if they think the full power of the x360 has already been tapped.

Now that is a fact.

17 years ago

3021

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2006 • 3021 Posts

MGS4 and GTA4cmpepper23

I CANNNOT WAAAAAAIT FOR GTA4 TRAILER ZOOOMG!!!

- - -

17 years ago

978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 978 Posts

[QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="donalbane"][QUOTE="joevfx"][QUOTE="xcoregamerskill"]and also, what kind of memory are we talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ram in the PS3 faster than average?eclipsed4utoo

im not sure , but i hear the thing is the 360 dedicates some Ram to the system and the rest to the Graphics card, while the PS3 i think shares its RAM.

Woah! Could you put that in laymans terms for me? LOL :P

ok, so say the 360 has 512mb of ram in its box. it will dedicate 256mb to the graphics card ( meanign all that space is JUST for the graphics card to use) and the rest is for the processor to use. like a computer, you have sticks of memory that you put in the motherboard for the processor to use and then the graphics card has its own memory built on to it for it to use. Now with the PS3 say it has 512mb of ram in its box. when the if the graphics cards needs to use 128mb of memory at a moment in time it will use it and leave the rest for the proc. if it needs more then it will take more and leave the rest for the proc. So its sharing the whole 512mb of space with the processor. now im not sure of the ecact numbers of each system but thats how dedicated memory and sharing memory basically works. I think the rule of thumb is dedicated memory is better. But i think the PS3 makes up for that with all its SPUs. game designers just have to figure out a new way to program games to take advantage of the PS3 achitecture.

you have it backwards, my friend.

yeah we esablished that a few posts ago

17 years ago

978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2004 • 978 Posts

Cliffy B also said Epic hasn't tapped the full power of the x360.
PS3 Fanboys are living in a dream world if they think the full power of the x360 has already been tapped.
Now that is a fact.
LosDaddie

wait didnt the quote from epic say they squezzed alll they could out of the 360.

17 years ago

3537

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 3537 Posts

Sorry to say this but.. i think its a bit funny. When Epic says ps3 can't handle GeOW they are talking bs When Epic says xb360 has reached its full potential it must be true!! Well i say Epic is just spouting a lot of bs. Just because they can't get more out of a game now does not mean a console has reached its full potential!! I refuse to believe that a potential has been reached within a year on any system , EVER. and as i do recall, people started saying the ps2 reached it's potential after a year maybe 2 and after that in every game that looked slightly better than the last graphical best (quite alot of those in all the ps2 years) they say the devolopers have been pushing the limit and that it has reached its potential. I think Epic has gotten a bit arrogant that they have made the best looking console game out now ( matter of opinion though). And I will wait and see for myself.

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

Cliffy B also said Epic hasn't tapped the full power of the x360.
PS3 Fanboys are living in a dream world if they think the full power of the x360 has already been tapped.
Now that is a fact.
LosDaddie

Umm, did take a moment to read the article? The developers of Epic stated, that they used the 360 to its full potential. "Epic Games manager, PrestonThorne declared that through this game, his company has pushed the Xbox to the limits."

17 years ago

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Member since 2007 • 140 Posts

[QUOTE="The_Tombo"]Sorry to say this but.. i think its a bit funny. When Epic says ps3 can't handle GeOW they are talking bs When Epic says xb360 has reached its full potential it must be true!! Well i say Epic is just spouting a lot of bs. Just because they can't get more out of a game now does not mean a console has reached its full potential!! I refuse to believe that a potential has been reached within a year on any system , EVER. and as i do recall, people started saying the ps2 reached it's potential after a year maybe 2 and after that in every game that looked slightly better than the last graphical best (quite alot of those in all the ps2 years) they say the devolopers have been pushing the limit and that it has reached its potential. I think Epic has gotten a bit arrogant that they have made the best looking console game out now ( matter of opinion though). And I will wait and see for myself.

Epic said nothing about Ps3 not being able to handle Gears of War, it was assumed by the author of the article. The reason, Epic didn't respond to the question was because, the game was produced by M.S. So, they can't discuss it openly.

17 years ago

3537

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Member since 2005 • 3537 Posts

[QUOTE="mu5afir"][QUOTE="The_Tombo"]Sorry to say this but.. i think its a bit funny. When Epic says ps3 can't handle GeOW they are talking bs When Epic says xb360 has reached its full potential it must be true!! Well i say Epic is just spouting a lot of bs. Just because they can't get more out of a game now does not mean a console has reached its full potential!! I refuse to believe that a potential has been reached within a year on any system , EVER. and as i do recall, people started saying the ps2 reached it's potential after a year maybe 2 and after that in every game that looked slightly better than the last graphical best (quite alot of those in all the ps2 years) they say the devolopers have been pushing the limit and that it has reached its potential. I think Epic has gotten a bit arrogant that they have made the best looking console game out now ( matter of opinion though). And I will wait and see for myself.

Epic said nothing about Ps3 not being able to handle Gears of War, it was assumed by the author of the article. The reason, Epic didn't respond to the question was because, the game was produced by M.S. So, they can't discuss it openly.

was there not a lot of upheavel in the forums a while back because epic said ps3 could not handel GeoW ? If not then just focus on the latter part of my post :D

17 years ago

80 results
1
2

Jump to Top

Please Log In to post.

Use your keyboard!

ESC

Log in to comment