Can we now officially say TEH CELL was all hype?

comparison videos of GTA5 have been done, 360 emerging on top once again. Can we now put to rest the POWER of the cell?

you can say marketing, but still we've seen better visuals on PS3. We still know its complex to develop games for, so now its in the hands of developers.

console graphics is nothing but hype

Bad video. It's not even in 1080p. Kjranu

6 years from now: "Can we now officially say TEH 50% was all hype?"LA-Nighthawk

More like "Can we now officially say TEH power of the cloudz was all hype?"

Yep. Total waste of billions by Sony for nothing.  Sony dreamed of the cell being in everything from PCs to watches to music players and phones.  Never happened.

.

yup it was hype. And pretty sure TEH CLOUD is all hype too.

you are easily one off the worst posters on here, and that's saying something

and it seems to be the same with GTA 5.CanYouDiglt

comparison videos of GTA5 have been done, 360 emerging on top once again. Can we now put to rest the POWER of the cell?

Far_RockNYC

The PS3 problem with open games doesn't have anything to do with Cell and more to do with having split memory pools and less available ram for games.

comparison videos of GTA5 have been done, 360 emerging on top once again. Can we now put to rest the POWER of the cell?

Far_RockNYC

Until the 360 can manage to produce graphics on "Uncharted", "God of War", and "TLOU" level, then the answer is NO!!! Lemming's desperation to try and prove this little theory of theirs, by comparring third-party games is getting old; How can you really say anything at this point when the developers that produce games exclusively for the 360, can't even produce PS3 first-party level games... 

Besides, you might want to go check out the Digital Foundry comparison before jumping to make stupid threads like this...

No, it wasn't hype. If the CELL wasn't preoccupied with compensating for the RSX's short-comings, its full potential would have been realized in games.

DF just put up his compare. PS3>>360 :P

At its core, both PS3 and 360 present the same massive Los Angeles-inspired sprawl via the same 720p native resolution lens, with almost entirely identical effects and object detail. However, it's apparent that the PS3 version has an undeniable advantage in one area: even to the naked eye, ground textures on 360 are blurred as a result of what appears to be unoptimised asset streaming. Glitch or not, this basically amounts to concrete and grass textures appearing fuzzier beneath the feet of Trevor, Michael or Franklin, while the PS3 version's remain crystal clear. The 360 does command a minor advantage in frame-rate during synchronised play, but for shoot-outs and high-speed hurtles down the city streets, the PS3 can sometimes pull ahead in these metrics - though the difference is rarely perceptible either way. Since all else is identical across the board, the PS3 version is recommended on the grounds of image quality if you have the option.

360 didn't need the cell to show similar graphics, so yes.

Why do Xbox fans always like to compare 3rd party games instead of 1st party vs 1st party?PSP107

What about Gears 3, Halo 4 and Forza Horizon?

Why do Xbox fans always like to compare 3rd party games instead of 1st party vs 1st party?PSP107

Because you cannot compare 1st party games, theres only one version of them you numbnuts !

You always end up with an opinion !

But rejoice , GTA5 is the tiniest amount better on the PS3 .

What some of you have conveniently missed out on the Digital Foundry comparison is they seem to have put the fact the 360 out-performs the PS3 version throughout the entire game by an average of 2fps more as less important than random slightly sharper ground textures (wtf?). I pre-ordered the 360 version because just like 90% of ALL multiplats I knew the 360 version would have a superior framerate as when playing on out-dated hardware such as a 360 or PS3, I personally don't care about small things like textures on the ground at random events vs a consistently higher framerate and for that alone the 360 version is superior.

Holy SHIT, who cares?

Cell was an overated product and a slap in the face ( it was highly priced to develop and produced also ). It never delivered what supposed to do and that was games some levels above competition. Never happened and never will. PS4 though do everything right because of that slap so i cant ask for more. Ill jump once again on Sony's train it seems after 8 years i was off

[QUOTE="eyebrows"]

What some of you have conveniently missed out on the Digital Foundry comparison is they seem to have put the fact the 360 out-performs the PS3 version throughout the entire game by an average of 2fps more as less important than random slightly sharper ground textures (wtf?). I pre-ordered the 360 version because just like 90% of ALL multiplats I knew the 360 version would have a superior framerate as when playing on out-dated hardware such as a 360 or PS3, I personally don't care about small things like textures on the ground at random events vs a consistently higher framerate and for that alone the 360 version is superior.

MoneySha

Perhaps, you might want to go back and re-read that article... It was the PS3 with the sharper ground texters; Not the 360...

Another sad Lem, wanting to "see" what they want to "see"...:(

Wow, go back and re-read what you quoted me you FOOL!

Moron.

[QUOTE="PSP107"]Why do Xbox fans always like to compare 3rd party games instead of 1st party vs 1st party?Caseytappy

Because you cannot compare 1st party games, theres only one version of them you numbnuts !

You always end up with an opinion !

But rejoice , GTA5 is the tiniest amount better on the PS3 .

Bullsh!t, you can't compare them!!! 

First-party exclusives are a prime way of comparring hardware... Third-party developers use game engines that are either designed to take advantage of both systems, or one; In most third-party developers cases, their engines were based around specific architectures at the time of development for this current; namely, the 360's hardware, or Direct x, or PC specific pipelines that were simular to the 360's... The Unreal engine is a prime example of this, obviousely favoring the 360 this gen. So the comparrisons between third-party games are bullsh!t; the purity between each console is up to the developer and the engine they are using...

Lem have been trying to use this hair-brain sceme to try and prove the 360 outshines PS3 all gen long... The only thing it proved is the desperation of a certain group of Fanboys.

[QUOTE="MoneySha"]

[QUOTE="eyebrows"]

What some of you have conveniently missed out on the Digital Foundry comparison is they seem to have put the fact the 360 out-performs the PS3 version throughout the entire game by an average of 2fps more as less important than random slightly sharper ground textures (wtf?). I pre-ordered the 360 version because just like 90% of ALL multiplats I knew the 360 version would have a superior framerate as when playing on out-dated hardware such as a 360 or PS3, I personally don't care about small things like textures on the ground at random events vs a consistently higher framerate and for that alone the 360 version is superior.

eyebrows

Perhaps, you might want to go back and re-read that article... It was the PS3 with the sharper ground texters; Not the 360...

Another sad Lem, wanting to "see" what they want to "see"...:(

Wow, go back and re-read what you quoted me you FOOL!

Moron.

Actually, that wasn't meant for you, Dude... My Badd!!! I replyed to the wrong person... Sorry!:cry:

[QUOTE="Caseytappy"]

[QUOTE="PSP107"]Why do Xbox fans always like to compare 3rd party games instead of 1st party vs 1st party?MoneySha

Because you cannot compare 1st party games, theres only one version of them you numbnuts !

You always end up with an opinion !

But rejoice , GTA5 is the tiniest amount better on the PS3 .

Bullsh!t, you can't compare them!!! 

First-party exclusives are a prime way of comparring hardware... Third-party developers use game engines that are either designed to take advantage of both systems, or one; In most third-party developers cases, their engines were based around specific architectures at the time of development for this current; namely, the 360's hardware, or Direct x, or PC specific pipelines that were simular to the 360's... The Unreal engine is a prime example of this, obviousely favoring the 360 this gen. So the comparrisons between third-party games are bullsh!t; the purity between each console is up to the developer and the engine they are using...

Lem have been trying to use this hair-brain sceme to try and prove the 360 outshines PS3 all gen long... The only thing it proved is the desperation of a certain group of Fanboys.

There's a sticky for GTAV.

ps3 gave me U2, the last of us (some of the greatest games of this gen). i think ill take the ps3. 

you can say marketing, but still we've seen better visuals on PS3. We still know its complex to develop games for, so now its in the hands of developers.

arabi_89

The cell is something people are still trying to figure out. It's full potential still hasn't been tapped this late in the game.

The cell is something people are still trying to figure out. It's full potential still hasn't been tapped this late in the game.

Pikminmaniac

No

The PS3 version has higher contrast.

The 360 version has blurry ground textures.

VERDICT - WHO CARES?!?!?! Just Shut up and play the game.

[QUOTE="Pikminmaniac"]

The cell is something people are still trying to figure out. It's full potential still hasn't been tapped this late in the game.

wis3boi

No

yes... It was bottle necked by other aspects such as ram. Professors from my old university had PS3s they were working with to try to tap the full potential of the cell. It was really new and unususl tech that hasn't been figured out yet.

lol Far_RockNYC thread

Still butthurt over the fact DF gave the edge to the PS3 version of GTA V

Stay mad lems

Well the difference isn't hugely noticeable between the two when it comes to multiplat games.

[QUOTE="MoneySha"]

[QUOTE="Caseytappy"]

 

Because you cannot compare 1st party games, theres only one version of them you numbnuts !

You always end up with an opinion !

 

 

But rejoice , GTA5 is the tiniest amount better on the PS3 .

AzatiS

Bullsh!t, you can't compare them!!! 

First-party exclusives are a prime way of comparring hardware... Third-party developers use game engines that are either designed to take advantage of both systems, or one; In most third-party developers cases, their engines were based around specific architectures at the time of development for this current; namely, the 360's hardware, or Direct x, or PC specific pipelines that were simular to the 360's... The Unreal engine is a prime example of this, obviousely favoring the 360 this gen. So the comparrisons between third-party games are bullsh!t; the purity between each console is up to the developer and the engine they are using...

Lem have been trying to use this hair-brain sceme to try and prove the 360 outshines PS3 all gen long... The only thing it proved is the desperation of a certain group of Fanboys.

Sony's hype for the Cell chip, was it's power over "previous" gen consoles' CPUs... I think people seriously confused this with "Xbox 360 vs PS3" arguments; Sony wasn't hyping Cell to be superior to 360, it was hyping it's superiority over last gen capabilities... And because it was superior over previous gen, yes, all the AI and graphics stuff was a sound argument; They didn't care what Microsoft was doing at the time...

And you even said it yourself; that the Cell proccessor made it tricky for third-party developers to tame, so, that's the proof that comparring third-party games was always a null and void argument; and the fact that people sat up here and argued about it for 8 years was always funny to me.

So, let's agree to "disagree" on that argument... But yes, like you, I do believe the whole Cell proccessor was a lesson learned for Sony and it's gonna show next gen when the PS4 mops the floor with Microsoft and Xbox One...

DF just put up his compare. PS3>>360 :P

 

At its core, both PS3 and 360 present the same massive Los Angeles-inspired sprawl via the same 720p native resolution lens, with almost entirely identical effects and object detail. However, it's apparent that the PS3 version has an undeniable advantage in one area: even to the naked eye, ground textures on 360 are blurred as a result of what appears to be unoptimised asset streaming. Glitch or not, this basically amounts to concrete and grass textures appearing fuzzier beneath the feet of Trevor, Michael or Franklin, while the PS3 version's remain crystal clear. The 360 does command a minor advantage in frame-rate during synchronised play, but for shoot-outs and high-speed hurtles down the city streets, the PS3 can sometimes pull ahead in these metrics - though the difference is rarely perceptible either way. Since all else is identical across the board, the PS3 version is recommended on the grounds of image quality if you have the option.

killzowned24