are there still any juice left for the xbox360??

Your trying your best arent you? Having the cell doing the physics work is a normal job for a cpu for games, if you didnt know that. And they didnt use the normal AA on GoW 3 they used a hybrid AA that mimics real AA called Morphological Antialising .Its an algorithm that creates plausibly antialiasedimages by looking for certain patterns in an original image and then blending colors in the neighborhood of these patterns according to a set of simple rules. Which just colors in the spaces between the 3d objects and its background's pixels. Like I said the Cell just off loads some the work from the gpu, the cell doing physics and sound is nothing new.04dcarraher

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Lol, where do you think the PS3 got its tech from? out of thin air? it came from the current Pc tech from 2004. And what do you think the RSX is based off of? Its based off of the Nvidia Geforce 7800 gpu, So dont tell me that Ps3 architecture has no bearing or isnt irrelevant. Do you need to see that alot PS3 games are sub HD too? Heres a list:

Persistantthug

You could have saved yourself the trouble of the copy/paste....I actually know where that is.

The fact of the matter is, it is 2010, and games have gotten more demanding and more advanced....not only is PS3 churning out real HI DEF in native 720p.....it is doing some games in 1080p.

Do you mean to tell me in the future there will be less games in native 1080p 04dcarraher? Is that what you are saying?

Secondly, I'm not sure why you keep mentioning the RSX and what it can do "by itself".....its totally irrelevant. Other than a PS3, I'd be willing to bet you've never owned a CELL PROCESSOR before, let alone work with one, right?

That's precisely my point. Its the unknown variable that many seem to want to dismiss, but they really can't, simply because they don't know enough about it.

No disrespect to you intended, but you fall into that group as well.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Your trying your best arent you? Having the cell doing the physics work is a normal job for a cpu for games, if you didnt know that. And they didnt use the normal AA on GoW 3 they used a hybrid AA that mimics real AA called Morphological Antialising .Its an algorithm that creates plausibly antialiasedimages by looking for certain patterns in an original image and then blending colors in the neighborhood of these patterns according to a set of simple rules. Which just colors in the spaces between the 3d objects and its background's pixels. Like I said the Cell just off loads some the work from the gpu, the cell doing physics and sound is nothing new.Persistantthug

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

Metro 2033 Xbox 360 also uses software based AA.ATI Xenos's Hierarchical Z and Early-Z cull hardware is more competent compared to G7X hardware. With unified shaders, pixel shader kill instruction can kill vertex data.

PS3 would need CELL since RSX/G7X has a design flaw.

ATI Xenos already has decoupled texture and shader/math design.

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Your trying your best arent you? Having the cell doing the physics work is a normal job for a cpu for games, if you didnt know that. And they didnt use the normal AA on GoW 3 they used a hybrid AA that mimics real AA called Morphological Antialising .Its an algorithm that creates plausibly antialiasedimages by looking for certain patterns in an original image and then blending colors in the neighborhood of these patterns according to a set of simple rules. Which just colors in the spaces between the 3d objects and its background's pixels. Like I said the Cell just off loads some the work from the gpu, the cell doing physics and sound is nothing new.ronvalencia

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

MLAA that the CELL is doing isn't software based.

And uh.....wasn't Metro 2033 kind of a crappy game?

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

Persistantthug

MLAA isn't software based.

And uh.....wasn't Metro 2033 kind of a crappy game?

Unlike fix hardware MSAA, most MLAA(or image based AA) is software based i.e. the programmer has use several instructions to form a function.

One of the first MLAA implementation was on Intel Pentium IV (with 64bit SSE hardware).

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Your trying your best arent you? Having the cell doing the physics work is a normal job for a cpu for games, if you didnt know that. And they didnt use the normal AA on GoW 3 they used a hybrid AA that mimics real AA called Morphological Antialising .Its an algorithm that creates plausibly antialiasedimages by looking for certain patterns in an original image and then blending colors in the neighborhood of these patterns according to a set of simple rules. Which just colors in the spaces between the 3d objects and its background's pixels. Like I said the Cell just off loads some the work from the gpu, the cell doing physics and sound is nothing new.Persistantthug

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

Persistantthug

MLAA that the CELL is doing isn't software based.

And uh.....wasn't Metro 2033 kind of a crappy game?

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Your trying your best arent you? Having the cell doing the physics work is a normal job for a cpu for games, if you didnt know that. And they didnt use the normal AA on GoW 3 they used a hybrid AA that mimics real AA called Morphological Antialising .Its an algorithm that creates plausibly antialiasedimages by looking for certain patterns in an original image and then blending colors in the neighborhood of these patterns according to a set of simple rules. Which just colors in the spaces between the 3d objects and its background's pixels. Like I said the Cell just off loads some the work from the gpu, the cell doing physics and sound is nothing new.04dcarraher

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems3/gpugems3_ch16.html

Vegetation in games has always been mainly static, with some sort of simple bending to give the illusion of wind. Our game scenes can have thousands of different vegetations, but still we pushed the envelope further by making vegetation react to global and local wind sources, and we bend not only the vegetation but also the leaves, in detail, with all computations procedurally and efficiently done on the GPU.

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Your trying your best arent you? Having the cell doing the physics work is a normal job for a cpu for games, if you didnt know that. And they didnt use the normal AA on GoW 3 they used a hybrid AA that mimics real AA called Morphological Antialising .Its an algorithm that creates plausibly antialiasedimages by looking for certain patterns in an original image and then blending colors in the neighborhood of these patterns according to a set of simple rules. Which just colors in the spaces between the 3d objects and its background's pixels. Like I said the Cell just off loads some the work from the gpu, the cell doing physics and sound is nothing new.04dcarraher

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

I don't think CPU's do animation.

They certainly don't do textures, shadows, lighting (Killzone 2) and certainly not AA.

Like I said, thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR.

[QUOTE="mike4realz"]sure its got some juice left...it's selling its games pretty wellbbsteven26

so you play with sales number or quality of the game?

the entire OP was about GRAPHICS. Graphics=/= game quality. Case in point, lost planet 2 (at least according to the reviews). Seems to be a beautiful game. The game sucks. Meanwhile, Halo 3 didn't set any graphical achievements, yet is still an incredibly popular FPS and "the most popular franchise for gamers" (according to the Guiness Book of World Records).

If you want pretty exclusives, then yes, the PS3 does beat the xbox. But if your a graphics whore, why the hell aren't you playing on the PC? PS3 is sure better than xbox with exclusives, but neither are on the same realm as the PC, if graphics are what sells the console for you.

[QUOTE="bbsteven26"]

[QUOTE="mike4realz"]sure its got some juice left...it's selling its games pretty wellMellowMighty

so you play with sales number or quality of the game?

the entire OP was about GRAPHICS. Graphics=/= game quality. Case in point, lost planet 2 (at least according to the reviews). Seems to be a beautiful game. The game sucks. Meanwhile, Halo 3 didn't set any graphical achievements, yet is still an incredibly popular FPS and "the most popular franchise for gamers" (according to the Guiness Book of World Records).

If you want pretty exclusives, then yes, the PS3 does beat the xbox. But if your a graphics whore, why the hell aren't you playing on the PC? PS3 is sure better than xbox with exclusives, but neither are on the same realm as the PC, if graphics are what sells the console for you.

Because for new games, PC might not have the games you wanna play.

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="Wildedge93"] okkie first off, u are hilarious. i never knew u can ACTUALLY work with ur ps3 and take advantage and use it, i thought all u do is just pop a movie or game in and play it.....:? also the cpu ISNT USED IN GAMING as much as the Gpu that is. so if u have in new pc terms a ATI x1900 or Nvidia 7800GT with a i7 980EE, ur pretty much fudged becuase those gpus (which is in the 360 and ps3) are limiting as **** EVEN tho u have the worlds fastest processor. now, the ps3 is like a pc, its in fact just like a pc, it has ram, mobo, gpu, cpu, and hdd, and a cooling system, i no becuase i cracked mine open and saw the insides of it... so it works JUST like a pc where a game goes in and plays, the gpu starts working its magic, when its stuck thats where the wonders of the cpu comes in and helps the gpu process those graphics, the unique thing that sony forget to mention about it or misinformed ps3 users is taht the cpu is placed right next to the gpu so i can give more from the gpu to the cpu to process. it is still pointless becuase the hardware is so weak. so now let me ask u, why do u praise killzone 2 so? i have it and i loved it, till i beat the hell out of it, but the grpahics were nothing but garbage, watered down 720p, and topped off with a little blur all over the place.

proof warning, must no what they are talking about to understand.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

Let's try this again, shall we:

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, proceduraltextures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

It's also nice they found out how to use and implement this new (its actually not really new) Antialising technique.....thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR. ;)

I don't think CPU's do animation.

They certainly don't do textures, shadows, lighting (Killzone 2) and certainly not AA.

Like I said, thank God for the CELL PROCESSOR.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

If they cant make demanding games with1080 native resolution then they sure cant do in the future the hardware limits deny them that. Im telling you that if you expect godly looking games on par with KZ 2, or UC 2 standardson the PS3 they wont be 1080 native, because the PS3 lacks the resources.

The RSX(gpu) is the main component that displays and renders the visuals that you see. And the video memory stores the data, and high resolutions such as 1080 uses too much memory, which is why the only 1080 native games are not demanding like Baseball or poker or 2d/3d fightingtypes of games. The cell does nothing to do with producing better visuals all it does is it can take some of the workload off the RSX so it can focus on the graphics with smoother results.

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, procedural textures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/game-types/action/gow-iii-devs-spus-are-faster-than-you-think-$1286294.htm

Are you also aware that the 4X Antialiasing is all done by the CELL PROCESSSOR, 04dcarraher?

I guess not.

;)

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

If they cant make demanding games with1080 native resolution then they sure cant do in the future the hardware limits deny them that. Im telling you that if you expect godly looking games on par with KZ 2, or UC 2 standardson the PS3 they wont be 1080 native, because the PS3 lacks the resources.

The RSX(gpu) is the main component that displays and renders the visuals that you see. And the video memory stores the data, and high resolutions such as 1080 uses too much memory, which is why the only 1080 native games are not demanding like Baseball or poker or 2d/3d fightingtypes of games. The cell does nothing to do with producing better visuals all it does is it can take some of the workload off the RSX so it can focus on the graphics with smoother results.

mayceV

In fact, the God of War III team rely on the SPUs to accelerate both the PlayStation 3's GPU (RSX) and the PPU. They then detailed the systems running on the SPUs, which include animation, cloth, collision, procedural textures, culling, shadows, push buffer generation, meta tasks, geometry conditioning, and sound. Indeed, most (if not all) of the heavy lifting is left to the SPUs.

http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/game-types/action/gow-iii-devs-spus-are-faster-than-you-think-$1286294.htm

Are you also aware that the 4X Antialiasing is all done by the CELL PROCESSSOR, 04dcarraher?

I guess not.

;)

You apparently are wrong, mayceV.....Quite wrong indeed.

Cell Processor renders BY ITSELF.

funny how you needed to edit that twice to get a sense of ownage, I'd admet I'm wrong though :) mayceV

You are quite honorable mayceV.

This is why I wish people would stop trying to compare the PS3 to PC architecture...it's not the same. People want to compare them as if they are the same for simplicity's sake, but it really can't be done....it truly is an "apples to oranges" type of situation.

Thank you for admitting.

Take care.

Any "juice" left. That makes it seem like the console got more and more powerfull until it basically coouldnt do anymore. The real question is can anyone optimse their code anymore to make the most of what the 360 has got. I doubt the 360 has got any more "powerful" maybe with a few updates it has improved drivers etc but the 360 is what the 360 is. Same goes for all the platforms. They dont become more poweful or lose power just the developers code better/worse.

[QUOTE="mayceV"]funny how you needed to edit that twice to get a sense of ownage, I'd admet I'm wrong though :) Persistantthug

You are quite honorable mayceV.

This is why I wish people would stop trying to compare the PS3 to PC architecture...it's not the same. People want to compare them as if they are the same for simplicity's sake, but it really can't be done....it truly is an "apples to oranges" type of situation.

Thank you for admitting.

Take care.

Persistant...again you...I mean who will take you seriously when you say that by "unlocking" 8th SPU you will get res bump by 40%?????Thats bull,the thing that matter the most for resolution are:memory,bandwidth and GPU ROPs.All which those consoles lack.If some devs can push games 1080p those games will be racers or sports games as they are not as taxing on system.

BTW all those things that you said Cell does with GOW III does regular cpu,only difference is MLAA and triangle culling,but triangle culling is not necessary on 360 but is on ps3 since you have to limit input of verticals on RSX otherwise its chokes.And for games like UC2 and GOW III it takes up to 2 spus,thats alot for something that 360 does not even need.

[QUOTE="mayceV"]funny how you needed to edit that twice to get a sense of ownage, I'd admet I'm wrong though :) Persistantthug

You are quite honorable mayceV.

This is why I wish people would stop trying to compare the PS3 to PC architecture...it's not the same. People want to compare them as if they are the same for simplicity's sake, but it really can't be done....it truly is an "apples to oranges" type of situation.

Thank you for admitting.

Take care.

Wow, Persistantthug, you should the face of the ultimate Sony Fan. Unweavering faith, believes in everything that Sony says and its loyal followers. :P
Kidding aside, You have to compare Pc and PS3 because just what? PS3 is a computer, and its a computer that took tech from PC, RSX is a modified Geforce 7 Gpu, The Cell is an IBM cpu thats fills the gap between normal cpu processing and parallel processing techiques. And it isnt apples and oranges as you say it is, Because Nvidia Cuda/Physx on their geforce 8's or newer cards do all what Cell can do, andmuch faster.
There is a thing called transistors. What transistors mean? Amount = power,speed, or processing power. for anything that processes data, like a CPU, GPU or even the "Cell".
The Xbox 360:
Its CPU has 165 million
Its GPU has 320 million (100 million is for the EDRAM daughter die)
The PS3:
Its Cell"Cpu" has 235 million
Its RSX "GPU" has 300 million
Examples of Pc:
Phenom 2 "Cpu"from 2009 has 758 million (The Cell bows down....and steps away 8) )

Nvidia 7800GTX "GPU" from 2004 has 300 million (RSX's bigger brother)

Nvidia 8800GT "GPU" from 2007 has 754 million (with 112 processors can be used for parallel processing total wipes the Cell off the floor)

Nvidia GTX 480 "GPU" From 2010, has close to 3 billion (with 480 processors)

Now, see how weak Consoles really are compared to Pc, then You can see that the 360 cpu is weaker then the Cell, and the 360 gpu is a tad stronger then the RSX. But the Cell can take some of the load off the RSX, but it does not do any of graphics rendering or displaying. Phyiscs, animation, Ai, and everything that moves interacts within the games the Cpu does normally anywayswhich the Cell does anyways. So The Cell isnt special like you think it is.

Wow, Persistantthug, you should the face of the ultimate Sony Fan. Unweavering faith, believes in everything that Sony says and its loyal followers. :P
Kidding aside, You have to compare Pc and PS3 because just what? PS3 is a computer, and its a computer that took tech from PC, RSX is a modified Geforce 7 Gpu, The Cell is an IBM cpu thats fills the gap between normal cpu processing and parallel processing techiques. And it isnt apples and oranges as you say it is, Because Nvidia Cuda/Physx on their geforce 8's or newer cards do all what Cell can do, andmuch faster.
There is a thing called transistors. What transistors mean? Amount = power,speed, or processing power. for anything that processes data, like a CPU, GPU or even the "Cell".
The Xbox 360:
Its CPU has 165 million
Its GPU has 320 million (100 million is for the EDRAM daughter die)
The PS3:
Its Cell"Cpu" has 235 million
Its RSX "GPU" has 300 million
Examples of Pc:
Phenom 2 "Cpu"from 2009 has 758 million (The Cell bows down....and steps away 8) )

Nvidia 7800GTX "GPU" from 2004 has 300 million (RSX's bigger brother)

Nvidia 8800GT "GPU" from 2007 has 754 million (with 112 processors can be used for parallel processing total wipes the Cell off the floor)

Nvidia GTX 480 "GPU" From 2010, has close to 3 billion (with 480 processors)

Now, see how weak Consoles really are compared to Pc, then You can see that the 360 cpu is weaker then the Cell, and the 360 gpu is a tad stronger then the RSX. But the Cell can take some of the load off the RSX, but it does not do any of graphics rendering or displaying. Phyiscs, animation, Ai, and everything that moves interacts within the games the Cpu does normally anywayswhich the Cell does anyways. So The Cell isnt special like you think it is.

04dcarraher

Like I said earlier, 04dcarraher,

APPLES and ORANGES, my friend......Apples and Oranges. ;)

Cell processor faster than Core i7 965 XE H.264 video: New Playstation 3 codec uses for transcoding

so with all the talk about xbxo360 being able to pump out graphic such as kilzone 2 , uncharted2 , even mgs4.

and it ends up the best 3 games alan wake, splinter cell conviction, and halo reach .

Doesn't really have the graphic level that the ps3 has been producing lately.

of course alan wake does look good, but when it takes them 5 years in the making. the result isn't even as good as what it has been showing by the bullshot.

and as for splinter cell and halo reach, i dont' think anyone will say it can be anykind of graphic beast after the beta of reach and full game of SC..

so even when a game that is developed for 5 years + specificly for the xbox360, and it ends up something not live up to the hype from graphic to animation, etc.

so is there any other secret weapon left by MS to really show us what the xbxo is capible of in the future??

or will ms even brother to show us gamer what it is capable of in the first place

Nope, no juice left.

I think 3 years ago Cliffy B. said they had maxed out the 360. Well then Gears 2 came and it didn't show much improvement over the last game, some but not much.

Then jump a 1 1/2 years later and news of Gears 3 dropping from 60fps to 30fps to try to best the ps3 graphic kings. Going backwards normally isn't a sign of alot of potential left. Much less when you think that Epic has had what like 6 years working with the 360 with its engine. Normally with more time on a system with a engine they can just code better to get better results ie: Uncharted 2. But evidently they think their at a ceiling and to get past it, they must lower the fps.

Now what is going to be the icing on the cake, is if the rumors of GG's talking about getting KZ2's engine to run at 60fps for KZ3 is true, then I'd say that is wraps. One console consistantly going forwards while the other one is going backwards to try to keep up.

XBox 360 obviously has juice to spare or developers wouldn't be cranking out 1 million selling titles on a monthly basis. blackace

Splinter Cell, Alan Wake, Reach, ALL SUB HD.

Persistant...again you...I mean who will take you seriously when you say that by "unlocking" 8th SPU you will get res bump by 40%?????Thats bull,the thing that matter the most for resolution are:memory,bandwidth and GPU ROPs.All which those consoles lack.If some devs can push games 1080p those games will be racers or sports games as they are not as taxing on system.

BTW all those things that you said Cell does with GOW III does regular cpu,only difference is MLAA and triangle culling,but triangle culling is not necessary on 360 but is on ps3 since you have to limit input of verticals on RSX otherwise its chokes.And for games like UC2 and GOW III it takes up to 2 spus,thats alot for something that 360 does not even need.

Bus-A-Bus

Let him keep on thinking that.

Greyfoxx, Gears 1 and 2 were 30 fps aswell so how is Gears 3 a step backwards?

I love how this thread managed to draw in 3 of the most ridiculous cows in system wars. :lol:

Not gonna say who i mean but i think everyone knows the 3 i'm talking about ...

Nope, no juice left.

I think 3 years ago Cliffy B. said they had maxed out the 360. Well then Gears 2 came and it didn't show much improvement over the last game, some but not much.

Then jump a 1 1/2 years later and news of Gears 3 dropping from 60fps to 30fps to try to best the ps3 graphic kings. Going backwards normally isn't a sign of alot of potential left. Much less when you think that Epic has had what like 6 years working with the 360 with its engine. Normally with more time on a system with a engine they can just code better to get better results ie: Uncharted 2. But evidently they think their at a ceiling and to get past it, they must lower the fps.

Now what is going to be the icing on the cake, is if the rumors of GG's talking about getting KZ2's engine to run at 60fps for KZ3 is true, then I'd say that is wraps. One console consistantly going forwards while the other one is going backwards to try to keep up.

GreyFoXX4

That sir should be the end of this topic.....forever.

Thank you for giving simple, tried and true common sense, truth and logic.

Let me ask you something.IF one console can have a game that is 640p with no aa and sell 10mil in beginning of console lifetime and that same game is played by millions online even 3 yrs after,does MS really,really need to force devs to cut of content like co op and others and make new ground up engine if they can go easier,but still good enough route?NO.

I mean we have tech gods like Carmack,Sweeney,Crytek,b3d,90% of devs say,they are about equal but Sony pushes system alot more,why do i need to listen some random forum kids otherwise?When RAGE and Crysis 2 come and show the world that while they look and push(60fps,open world,destructible environments) more then UC2 and KZ2 but still play on 360 SW will be in burnings :D

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Wow, Persistantthug, you should the face of the ultimate Sony Fan. Unweavering faith, believes in everything that Sony says and its loyal followers. :P
Kidding aside, You have to compare Pc and PS3 because just what? PS3 is a computer, and its a computer that took tech from PC, RSX is a modified Geforce 7 Gpu, The Cell is an IBM cpu thats fills the gap between normal cpu processing and parallel processing techiques. And it isnt apples and oranges as you say it is, Because Nvidia Cuda/Physx on their geforce 8's or newer cards do all what Cell can do, andmuch faster.
There is a thing called transistors. What transistors mean? Amount = power,speed, or processing power. for anything that processes data, like a CPU, GPU or even the "Cell".
The Xbox 360:
Its CPU has 165 million
Its GPU has 320 million (100 million is for the EDRAM daughter die)
The PS3:
Its Cell"Cpu" has 235 million
Its RSX "GPU" has 300 million
Examples of Pc:
Phenom 2 "Cpu"from 2009 has 758 million (The Cell bows down....and steps away 8) )

Nvidia 7800GTX "GPU" from 2004 has 300 million (RSX's bigger brother)

Nvidia 8800GT "GPU" from 2007 has 754 million (with 112 processors can be used for parallel processing total wipes the Cell off the floor)

Nvidia GTX 480 "GPU" From 2010, has close to 3 billion (with 480 processors)

Now, see how weak Consoles really are compared to Pc, then You can see that the 360 cpu is weaker then the Cell, and the 360 gpu is a tad stronger then the RSX. But the Cell can take some of the load off the RSX, but it does not do any of graphics rendering or displaying. Phyiscs, animation, Ai, and everything that moves interacts within the games the Cpu does normally anywayswhich the Cell does anyways. So The Cell isnt special like you think it is.

Persistantthug

Like I said earlier, 04dcarraher,

APPLES and ORANGES, my friend......Apples and Oranges. ;)

Cell processor faster than Core i7 965 XE H.264 video: New Playstation 3 codec uses for transcoding

Thats all fine a dandy when you set up the cell to parallel processing operations, but for normal cpu work(non parallel)a cpu from 2006 will out do the Cell easily. That same encoding feature using parallel processing can be used with Nvidia cards, my 8800GT can out encode a i7 with Cuda. So your point isnt valid for normal usage. And I hate to tell you that the Cell cant be used like that for gaming purposes because the rest of it resources will be full handling everything else. The PS3 does not have 8 cores, it has only one full function core, then there are 8 SPEs, two of which are not used for processing in games. The SPEs are more like co-processors, they arent autonomous and they dont have the same instruction set as the main core nor do they even have a cache. Cell was not built to be the most powerful processor, it was built to offer as much theoretical power per transistor, as a result it Is a compromised design since engineering trade-offs were made, it lacks in order processing, branch prediction, and its SPEs have limited functionality. Its main PPC based CPU is also obsolete compared to something like the Core 2. If i remember correctly Intel showcased a design similar to Cell at one of the IDFs, to show they could do similar stuff...though such a processor is pointless if it cant reach its max capability in a variety of situations.

[QUOTE="mike4realz"]sure its got some juice left...it's selling its games pretty wellbbsteven26

so you play with sales number or quality of the game?

Greyfoxx, Gears 1 and 2 were 30 fps aswell so how is Gears 3 a step backwards?

I love how this thread managed to draw in 3 of the most ridiculous cows in system wars. :lol:

Not gonna say who i mean but i think everyone knows the 3 i'm talking about ...

Snugenz

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Wow, Persistantthug, you should the face of the ultimate Sony Fan. Unweavering faith, believes in everything that Sony says and its loyal followers. :P
Kidding aside, You have to compare Pc and PS3 because just what? PS3 is a computer, and its a computer that took tech from PC, RSX is a modified Geforce 7 Gpu, The Cell is an IBM cpu thats fills the gap between normal cpu processing and parallel processing techiques. And it isnt apples and oranges as you say it is, Because Nvidia Cuda/Physx on their geforce 8's or newer cards do all what Cell can do, andmuch faster.
There is a thing called transistors. What transistors mean? Amount = power,speed, or processing power. for anything that processes data, like a CPU, GPU or even the "Cell".
The Xbox 360:
Its CPU has 165 million
Its GPU has 320 million (100 million is for the EDRAM daughter die)
The PS3:
Its Cell"Cpu" has 235 million
Its RSX "GPU" has 300 million
Examples of Pc:
Phenom 2 "Cpu"from 2009 has 758 million (The Cell bows down....and steps away 8) )

Nvidia 7800GTX "GPU" from 2004 has 300 million (RSX's bigger brother)

Nvidia 8800GT "GPU" from 2007 has 754 million (with 112 processors can be used for parallel processing total wipes the Cell off the floor)

Nvidia GTX 480 "GPU" From 2010, has close to 3 billion (with 480 processors)

Now, see how weak Consoles really are compared to Pc, then You can see that the 360 cpu is weaker then the Cell, and the 360 gpu is a tad stronger then the RSX. But the Cell can take some of the load off the RSX, but it does not do any of graphics rendering or displaying. Phyiscs, animation, Ai, and everything that moves interacts within the games the Cpu does normally anywayswhich the Cell does anyways. So The Cell isnt special like you think it is.

04dcarraher

Like I said earlier, 04dcarraher,

APPLES and ORANGES, my friend......Apples and Oranges. ;)

Cell processor faster than Core i7 965 XE H.264 video: New Playstation 3 codec uses for transcoding

Thats all fine a dandy when you set up the cell to parallel processing operations, but for normal cpu work(non parallel)a cpu from 2006 will out do the Cell easily. That same encoding feature using parallel processing can be used with Nvidia cards, my 8800GT can out encode a i7 with Cuda. So your point isnt valid for normal usage. And I hate to tell you that the Cell cant be used like that for gaming purposes because the rest of it resources will be full handling everything else. The PS3 does not have 8 cores, it has only one full function core, then there are 8 SPEs, two of which are not used for processing in games. The SPEs are more like co-processors, they arent autonomous and they dont have the same instruction set as the main core nor do they even have a cache. Cell was not built to be the most powerful processor, it was built to offer as much theoretical power per transistor, as a result it Is a compromised design since engineering trade-offs were made, it lacks in order processing, branch prediction, and its SPEs have limited functionality. Its main PPC based CPU is also obsolete compared to something like the Core 2. If i remember correctly Intel showcased a design similar to Cell at one of the IDFs, to show they could do similar stuff...though such a processor is pointless if it cant reach its max capability in a variety of situations.

I just find it funny that a chip that costs $1,000 is losing to a chip that costs approx $35 to make. At 1,000 bucks, it shouldn't be losing at anything. lol

Long live the CELL ;)

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

Like I said earlier, 04dcarraher,

APPLES and ORANGES, my friend......Apples and Oranges. ;)

Cell processor faster than Core i7 965 XE H.264 video: New Playstation 3 codec uses for transcoding

Persistantthug

Thats all fine a dandy when you set up the cell to parallel processing operations, but for normal cpu work(non parallel)a cpu from 2006 will out do the Cell easily. That same encoding feature using parallel processing can be used with Nvidia cards, my 8800GT can out encode a i7 with Cuda. So your point isnt valid for normal usage. And I hate to tell you that the Cell cant be used like that for gaming purposes because the rest of it resources will be full handling everything else. The PS3 does not have 8 cores, it has only one full function core, then there are 8 SPEs, two of which are not used for processing in games. The SPEs are more like co-processors, they arent autonomous and they dont have the same instruction set as the main core nor do they even have a cache. Cell was not built to be the most powerful processor, it was built to offer as much theoretical power per transistor, as a result it Is a compromised design since engineering trade-offs were made, it lacks in order processing, branch prediction, and its SPEs have limited functionality. Its main PPC based CPU is also obsolete compared to something like the Core 2. If i remember correctly Intel showcased a design similar to Cell at one of the IDFs, to show they could do similar stuff...though such a processor is pointless if it cant reach its max capability in a variety of situations.

I just find it funny that a chip that costs $1,000 is losing to a chip that costs approx $35 to make. At 1,000 bucks, it shouldn't be losing at anything. lol

Long live the CELL ;)

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Thats all fine a dandy when you set up the cell to parallel processing operations, but for normal cpu work(non parallel)a cpu from 2006 will out do the Cell easily. That same encoding feature using parallel processing can be used with Nvidia cards, my 8800GT can out encode a i7 with Cuda. So your point isnt valid for normal usage. And I hate to tell you that the Cell cant be used like that for gaming purposes because the rest of it resources will be full handling everything else. The PS3 does not have 8 cores, it has only one full function core, then there are 8 SPEs, two of which are not used for processing in games. The SPEs are more like co-processors, they arent autonomous and they dont have the same instruction set as the main core nor do they even have a cache. Cell was not built to be the most powerful processor, it was built to offer as much theoretical power per transistor, as a result it Is a compromised design since engineering trade-offs were made, it lacks in order processing, branch prediction, and its SPEs have limited functionality. Its main PPC based CPU is also obsolete compared to something like the Core 2. If i remember correctly Intel showcased a design similar to Cell at one of the IDFs, to show they could do similar stuff...though such a processor is pointless if it cant reach its max capability in a variety of situations.

04dcarraher

I just find it funny that a chip that costs $1,000 is losing to a chip that costs approx $35 to make. At 1,000 bucks, it shouldn't be losing at anything. lol

Long live the CELL ;)

And that's where you keep making your fatal mistake, 04dcarraher.....

PS3's games do in fact keep improving...and BECAUSE of the cell, and other stuff, of course.

Like I said, by the time this gen officially ends (developers do still keep making games for the "old" systems btw), PS3 will most likely be outputting many games at native 1080p, just as we are getting 2010 retail games at 1080p right now.

Your making the fatal mistake in believing that the extra free SPE will make all future games 1080 native, and improve graphics detail. The only reason in the past couple of years the PS3 game have gotten better is that Sony is taking the time and money to create 1st party games which they go over everything with a fine toothed comb. The only thing thay can do is add more physics, animations, AI with the extra SPE not better looking details. They cant make things look better then the memory and RSX are loaded to the gill as is. Optiminzing code, and customizing games around limited resources can only do so much. 04dcarraher

And while you say all of that, I and other enjoy MLB 10 THE SHOW at full native 1080p resolution....the best baseball game period, PC, Console, or otherwise.

Can't wait to see what POLYPHONY DIGITAL does with GRAN TURISMO 5. ;)

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Your making the fatal mistake in believing that the extra free SPE will make all future games 1080 native, and improve graphics detail. The only reason in the past couple of years the PS3 game have gotten better is that Sony is taking the time and money to create 1st party games which they go over everything with a fine toothed comb. The only thing thay can do is add more physics, animations, AI with the extra SPE not better looking details. They cant make things look better then the memory and RSX are loaded to the gill as is. Optiminzing code, and customizing games around limited resources can only do so much. Persistantthug

And while you say all of that, I and other enjoy MLB 10 THE SHOW at full native 1080p resolution....the best baseball game period, PC, Console, or otherwise.

Can't wait to see what POLYPHONY DIGITAL does with GRAN TURISMO 5. ;)

But the Cell can take some of the load off the RSX, but it does not do any of graphics rendering or displaying.

04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

But the Cell can take some of the load off the RSX, but it does not do any of graphics rendering or displaying.

Teufelhuhn

In the end its the GPU that renders and displays whatever its does and what the Cell helped with. The RSX does most of rendering with most vertex and shader operations while the Cell works on specific tid bits the Cell does not display anything, it helps calculate. Which helps offload some of the workload off the gpu.

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Your making the fatal mistake in believing that the extra free SPE will make all future games 1080 native, and improve graphics detail. The only reason in the past couple of years the PS3 game have gotten better is that Sony is taking the time and money to create 1st party games which they go over everything with a fine toothed comb. The only thing thay can do is add more physics, animations, AI with the extra SPE not better looking details. They cant make things look better then the memory and RSX are loaded to the gill as is. Optiminzing code, and customizing games around limited resources can only do so much. 04dcarraher

And while you say all of that, I and other enjoy MLB 10 THE SHOW at full native 1080p resolution....the best baseball game period, PC, Console, or otherwise.

Can't wait to see what POLYPHONY DIGITAL does with GRAN TURISMO 5. ;)

Is that what POLYPHONY DIGITAL told you, 04dcarraher....or are you referencing a game from 2007?

I however, distinctily remember Polyphony saying the game would run a full native 1920 x 1080p, since they've been enhancing the game engine for all of these years.....you know....Progression and all. ;)

so with all the talk about xbxo360 being able to pump out graphic such as kilzone 2 , uncharted2 , even mgs4.

and it ends up the best 3 games alan wake, splinter cell conviction, and halo reach .

Doesn't really have the graphic level that the ps3 has been producing lately.

of course alan wake does look good, but when it takes them 5 years in the making. the result isn't even as good as what it has been showing by the bullshot.

and as for splinter cell and halo reach, i dont' think anyone will say it can be anykind of graphic beast after the beta of reach and full game of SC..

so even when a game that is developed for 5 years + specificly for the xbox360, and it ends up something not live up to the hype from graphic to animation, etc.

so is there any other secret weapon left by MS to really show us what the xbxo is capible of in the future??

or will ms even brother to show us gamer what it is capable of in the first place

bbsteven26

Gampleay>graphics

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

And while you say all of that, I and other enjoy MLB 10 THE SHOW at full native 1080p resolution....the best baseball game period, PC, Console, or otherwise.

Can't wait to see what POLYPHONY DIGITAL does with GRAN TURISMO 5. ;)

Persistantthug

Is that what POLYPHONY DIGITAL told you, 04dcarraher....or are you referencing a game from 2007?

I however, distinctily remember Polyphony saying the game would run a full native 1920 x 1080p, since they've been enhancing the game engine for all of these years.....you know....Progression and all. ;)

"Sony wants to try and advertise "1080p resolution" to gamers, so they have told the developers to make sure the game runs in "1080p" resolution. But the fact is that the Playstation 3 doesn't have the power to run Gran Turismo 5 in a resolution of 1920x1080p resolution with 2 million pixels. As a result, Sony has decided to use a resolution of 960x1080p, where the vertical lines are kept at 1080p (so that Sony can use the words "1080p,") but the much larger number of horizontal lines have been cut in half. This means that only 1,036,800 pixels are being displayed on the screen."

But nonetheless, for them to produce "true"1080, something in the game will have to take a hit in quality.

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] 1080 isnt a feat when the games like that are not demanding. And GT5 wont be 1080 (1920x1080)native it will be 1280x1080 , and it will have 2d trees.

04dcarraher

Is that what POLYPHONY DIGITAL told you, 04dcarraher....or are you referencing a game from 2007?

I however, distinctily remember Polyphony saying the game would run a full native 1920 x 1080p, since they've been enhancing the game engine for all of these years.....you know....Progression and all. ;)

"Sony wants to try and advertise "1080p resolution" to gamers, so they have told the developers to make sure the game runs in "1080p" resolution. But the fact is that the Playstation 3 doesn't have the power to run Gran Turismo 5 in a resolution of 1920x1080p resolution with 2 million pixels. As a result, Sony has decided to use a resolution of 960x1080p, where the vertical lines are kept at 1080p (so that Sony can use the words "1080p,") but the much larger number of horizontal lines have been cut in half. This means that only 1,036,800 pixels are being displayed on the screen."

But nonetheless, for them to produce "true"1080, something in the game will have to take a hit in quality.

I couldn't help but notice you couldn't furnish a link. LOL

Link Please....I dare you.

;)

[QUOTE="bbsteven26"]

[QUOTE="Puckhog04"]

Are you saying the 360 lacks quality games?

88mphSlayer

nope i was only asking is there any power left on the xbox360 , to produce better graphic., animation, sound etc

how would one squeeze more power out of hardware?