Console power - the truth

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Plagueless"] Your point that PS3 is more powerful is pure theory. Yes, the Cell should have potential to be better, but reality is that multiplat devs dont see the point in making the PS3 version look better when the 360 version is the better seller ofthe two. Also, the GPU in the 360 is not the same as the ps3's: the 360 uses unifed shader architecture for textures and vertex, while ps3 has dedicated shaders fo those purposes. In short, that means the 360 can use more power for textures or vertex when needed unlike the Ps3. Its kinda funny because the 360 does the same thing with its gpu that the ps3 does with the cell: rerouting power.

Plagueless

The 360 may be better tapped-out due to being a more efficient design but it's not more powerful. The reason why the graphics don't look much better on the PS3 is simply that it's GPU is nothing special and the GPU just happens to be more important for the graphics. But in raw power the PS3 is undoubtly more powerful.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darth_DuMas"]

Even from Nintendo themselves? If anyone would have tried to push it, it's Nintendo, to show off what it can do if nothing else.

High Voltage Software and Team Ninja (the dev known for pushing graphics) said they were pushing it with The Conduit 1/2 and Other M didn't they?

Video game websites said games like Goldeneye 007 and Xenoblade were pushing the hardware.

Could no one get performance out of it :|

Maybe it's just the case that just like the Wiis CPU is superior by design to the Xboxs, the Xboxs GPU is also superior by design to the Wiis.

The GameCube and Wii are known to be easy to develop for, I can't believe no one has come close to pushing it in it's 5 years of life.

Darth_DuMas

Incorrect. Nintendo never really bets a lot on the graphics. It was companies like Rare and Factor 5 that really pushed Nintendo consoles in the past. And the best-looking game on the GameCube is Resident Evil 4, a third party game (from Capcom).

The Conduit and Other M look good but I don't think that's the best it could do.

And the GC and Wii may be easy to develop for but to get good results out of them requires some extra dedication.

No, but people talk about Mario Galaxy being a contender for best looking Wii game.

So if devs struggle to get anything out of an easy to develop for platform, how did they get anywhere with a complex one like the PS3.

With complete respect to you, this idea the Wiis GPU has more untapped power seems a little far fetched.

Why does it struggle to perform AA to any useful degree, it's lack of ability to perform AA comes very close to ruining the experience for me. It's the least I would have expected.

SMG does look good and I think pushing it past SMG 2 level graphics would be hard. However those games look good also because they're colorful.

The Wii's GPU is basically the same as the one in the GameCube, just a bit enhanced. It can, however, do all the effects the Xbox can. I think it can even do a sort of HDR lighting but I'm not sure if that's real HDR or just a version of bloom.

AA is not a problem but some games disable it for better performance. I will agree more AA would be suitable for a console that outputs only at 480p though.

both the PS3 and 360 are just PS2's and Xbox's with a little sprinkling of sugar on top.XenoNinja

They're completely different to PS2 and Xbox in tech terms.

John Carmak said it the best. The differences between the two consoles are far less than the differences between developers.

Wasdie

[QUOTE="Darth_DuMas"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Incorrect. Nintendo never really bets a lot on the graphics. It was companies like Rare and Factor 5 that really pushed Nintendo consoles in the past. And the best-looking game on the GameCube is Resident Evil 4, a third party game (from Capcom).

The Conduit and Other M look good but I don't think that's the best it could do.

And the GC and Wii may be easy to develop for but to get good results out of them requires some extra dedication.

nameless12345

No, but people talk about Mario Galaxy being a contender for best looking Wii game.

So if devs struggle to get anything out of an easy to develop for platform, how did they get anywhere with a complex one like the PS3.

With complete respect to you, this idea the Wiis GPU has more untapped power seems a little far fetched.

Why does it struggle to perform AA to any useful degree, it's lack of ability to perform AA comes very close to ruining the experience for me. It's the least I would have expected.

SMG does look good and I think pushing it past SMG 2 level graphics would be hard. However those games look good also because they're colorful.

The Wii's GPU is basically the same as the one in the GameCube, just a bit enhanced. It can, however, do all the effects the Xbox can. I think it can even do a sort of HDR lighting but I'm not sure if that's real HDR or just a version of bloom.

AA is not a problem but some games disable it for better performance. I will agree more AA would be suitable for a console that outputs only at 480p though.

AA is bad on most games.

People that are nitpicking the smallest details when comparing the ps3 and 360.

They both are equal. Thats the truth. If developers said it, why are people still debating about it.

Its all down to the efforts of the developers when it comes to exclusive games.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darth_DuMas"]

Even from Nintendo themselves? If anyone would have tried to push it, it's Nintendo, to show off what it can do if nothing else.

High Voltage Software and Team Ninja (the dev known for pushing graphics) said they were pushing it with The Conduit 1/2 and Other M didn't they?

Video game websites said games like Goldeneye 007 and Xenoblade were pushing the hardware.

Could no one get performance out of it :|

Maybe it's just the case that just like the Wiis CPU is superior by design to the Xboxs, the Xboxs GPU is also superior by design to the Wiis.

The GameCube and Wii are known to be easy to develop for, I can't believe no one has come close to pushing it in it's 5 years of life.

Darth_DuMas

Incorrect. Nintendo never really bets a lot on the graphics. It was companies like Rare and Factor 5 that really pushed Nintendo consoles in the past. And the best-looking game on the GameCube is Resident Evil 4, a third party game (from Capcom).

The Conduit and Other M look good but I don't think that's the best it could do.

And the GC and Wii may be easy to develop for but to get good results out of them requires some extra dedication.

No, but people talk about Mario Galaxy being a contender for best looking Wii game.

So if devs struggle to get anything out of an easy to develop for platform, how did they get anywhere with a complex one like the PS3.

With complete respect to you, this idea the Wiis GPU has more untapped power seems a little far fetched.

Why does it struggle to perform AA to any useful degree, it's lack of ability to perform AA comes very close to ruining the experience for me. It's the least I would have expected.

[QUOTE="Plagueless"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

The 360 may be better tapped-out due to being a more efficient design but it's not more powerful. The reason why the graphics don't look much better on the PS3 is simply that it's GPU is nothing special and the GPU just happens to be more important for the graphics. But in raw power the PS3 is undoubtly more powerful.

JoKeR_421

This I agree with.

PS3 is /potentially/ more powerful than 360 but in practice the 360 is easy to get better results.

This results in first-party exclusives on PS3 better than anything you'll see on 360, and multiplats often looking like crap.

You will never in a million years see God of War 3 or Killzone 2/3 or UC 2 level graphics on a 360.

But still %90 of the stuff that comes out, ends up looking nicer on the 360.

6 of 1, half dozen of the other. These consoles are basically equal.

I hold the unconventional view that PSN is better than XBL.

1. It's more customizable

2. Less commercials

3. Dedicated servers for exclusives (this to me is worth 100 party chats.)

You can snow 12 year olds by saying peer-to-peer networking is a "service" but I'm not that dumb.

I personally find this argument to be pointless. The only thing I care about is what developers do with each system's strength and beyond that what exclusives exist on each console. Which is the very reason I own and supprt all three consoles equally and the PC as well. It's much better than resorting to neanderthal name-calling and juvenile "my system is better than your system" arguments.

PS3 is /potentially/ more powerful than 360 but in practice the 360 is easy to get better results.

This results in first-party exclusives on PS3 better than anything you'll see on 360, and multiplats often looking like crap.

You will never in a million years see God of War 3 or Killzone 2/3 or UC 2 level graphics on a 360.

But still %90 of the stuff that comes out, ends up looking nicer on the 360.

6 of 1, half dozen of the other. These consoles are basically equal.

I hold the unconventional view that PSN is better than XBL.

1. It's more customizable

2. Less commercials

3. Dedicated servers for exclusives (this to me is worth 100 party chats.)

You can snow 12 year olds by saying peer-to-peer networking is a "service" but I'm not that dumb.

LazySloth718

Also, XBL has COMMERCIALS? Oh wait, those are optional to view and rarely appear that often.

[QUOTE="dovberg"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Because most 3rd party devs are unwilling to explore the PS3's hardware to the fullest and rather make games for the 360 and port them over to the PS3 since it's easier to do so.

nameless12345

Right the Vram is a huge difference between the 2 go ahead and look it up TC.

Meh, the Dreamcast had 8 megs V-RAM whereas the PS2 had 4. But in the end of the day the PS2 was considerably more powerful.

I know this is really a late reply but I'm glad you stepped into this one and I couldn't ignore this one. Again I gotta say you need to look up additional info to back up your claims and it was a well known thing that DC games ported to PS2 were ALWAYS scaled down.

Wow, uh, the Xbox has better looking games then the Ps3 right now. So yes, you can get those level graphics on the 360.

Also, XBL has COMMERCIALS? Oh wait, those are optional to view and rarely appear that often.

theJakandsig

"Better looking" is subjective but generally in those "good looking" 360 games (of which there are like...2) there is very little going on in the screen, and using blur along with shades of dark/brown to obfuscate how primative the image is.

More or less every PS3 exclusive going back to LBP makes the 360 look like amateur hour.

Ads are not optional, and exist in every part of the XBL interface, which blocks whatever theme you've selected, furthermore almost every button you press leads you to another webpage that offers to sell you something, it's quite hilarious and clever of Microsoft to make their users pay to fund the development and slick distribution of infomercials while giving them 5vs5 or 8vs8 peer-to-peer.

MS are the ultimate businessmen, they could sell Raid to a bug.

First off you said commercials, not ads. Commercials are optionl. Stop failing. Also, my opinion is and opinion but your opinion is fact? A lot of games since both consoles launcehd have been taggin eachother back and forth with one saying "teh Xbox can't reach this lvl." and all of a sudden it does. Now the Xbox is ahead after all these year of back and forth trading hits, and you are telling me that there is little going on in the screena dn all thos other junk. Uncharted's "Action sequences" would fail if they tried to use them during the actual gameplay because the PS3 can't handle cinmatic gameplay without it switching the game to play like a cutscene. Like for example, the area where Drake is wininging of polls on a falling train or whatnot. Crysis 2 in some areas is an example of actual having a cinematic gameplay during the ACTUAL game.theJakandsig

Ads, commercials, semantics don't change the situation.

Sadly the 360 is not powerful enough to run Crysis2 at acceptable framerates and without alot of tearing, even at only 720p.

In regular gameplay, UC has alot going on, on the screen, they have the horsepower to make that happen. If only it were fun to play.

Gears is good (in terms of fun) but there's not much going on graphically, it's a very bread and butter experience.

(But in raw power the PS3 is undoubtly more powerful.)

power for the sake of power means nothing, is this a joke thread?, Do you sleep better thinking the ps3 is the most powerful thing in the world? , Grow up man

does this topic even has a point??, I mean at the end of the day you can believe what you want but saying (but but but the ps3 is more powerful) doesn't change anything, both consoles are ok, It seems to me that you need to focus your energy on something more positive, Just a thought.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="dovberg"]

Right the Vram is a huge difference between the 2 go ahead and look it up TC.

dovberg

Meh, the Dreamcast had 8 megs V-RAM whereas the PS2 had 4. But in the end of the day the PS2 was considerably more powerful.

I know this is really a late reply but I'm glad you stepped into this one and I couldn't ignore this one. Again I gotta say you need to look up additional info to back up your claims and it was a well known thing that DC games ported to PS2 were ALWAYS scaled down.

Your point? PS2 still was more powerful than DC was. DC just had the more efficient design.

You realize all you've done is create a forum which destroyed your beloved PS3, right? fadersdream

What makes you think PS3 is my "beloved" console?

I'm simply saying that if it's harder to program for doesn't mean it's not more powerful (if not a generational leap by any means).

(But in raw power the PS3 is undoubtly more powerful.)

power for the sake of power means nothing, is this a joke thread?, Do you sleep better thinking the ps3 is the most powerful thing in the world? , Grow up man

does this topic even has a point??, I mean at the end of the day you can believe what you want but saying (but but but the ps3 is more powerful) doesn't change anything, both consoles are ok, It seems to me that you need to focus your energy on something more positive, Just a thought.

hrah

Yes, it has a point. It debunks all the threads saying that the 360 is more powerful.

People that are nitpicking the smallest details when comparing the ps3 and 360.

They both are equal. Thats the truth. If developers said it, why are people still debating about it.

Its all down to the efforts of the developers when it comes to exclusive games.

g0ddyX

i kno.. but then the second the pc enters and the consoles dont hold a candle to them, there is no diffence.

The 360 has the advantage in RAM (better architecture and more available) and a more advanced GPU. The PS3's CPU advantage is only applicable to certain kinds of tasks, and in any case wouldn't outweigh the advantages the 360 has. For all intents and purposes the 360 and PS3 may very well be the closest in power that we have ever seen in two competing consoles.

I think the most powerful thing about the Cell was Sony's BS hype talk about it. /fact

Does anyone else think its funny that Sony cant sell a gold nugget to a homeless man for penny but they can get people to believe the Cell is the "God" chip? Someone needs to rearrange the marketing staff.

I think the most powerful thing about the Cell was Sony's BS hype talk about it. /fact

Does anyone else think its funny that Sony cant sell a gold nugget to a homeless man for penny but they can get people to believe the Cell is the "God" chip? Someone needs to rearrange the marketing staff.

mynamesdenvrmax

[QUOTE="theJakandsig"]First off you said commercials, not ads. Commercials are optionl. Stop failing. Also, my opinion is and opinion but your opinion is fact? A lot of games since both consoles launcehd have been taggin eachother back and forth with one saying "teh Xbox can't reach this lvl." and all of a sudden it does. Now the Xbox is ahead after all these year of back and forth trading hits, and you are telling me that there is little going on in the screena dn all thos other junk. Uncharted's "Action sequences" would fail if they tried to use them during the actual gameplay because the PS3 can't handle cinmatic gameplay without it switching the game to play like a cutscene. Like for example, the area where Drake is wininging of polls on a falling train or whatnot. Crysis 2 in some areas is an example of actual having a cinematic gameplay during the ACTUAL game.LazySloth718

Ads, commercials, semantics don't change the situation.

Sadly the 360 is not powerful enough to run Crysis2 at acceptable framerates and without alot of tearing, even at only 720p.

In regular gameplay, UC has alot going on, on the screen, they have the horsepower to make that happen. If only it were fun to play.

Gears is good (in terms of fun) but there's not much going on graphically, it's a very bread and butter experience.

[QUOTE="theJakandsig"]First off you said commercials, not ads. Commercials are optionl. Stop failing. Also, my opinion is and opinion but your opinion is fact? A lot of games since both consoles launcehd have been taggin eachother back and forth with one saying "teh Xbox can't reach this lvl." and all of a sudden it does. Now the Xbox is ahead after all these year of back and forth trading hits, and you are telling me that there is little going on in the screena dn all thos other junk. Uncharted's "Action sequences" would fail if they tried to use them during the actual gameplay because the PS3 can't handle cinmatic gameplay without it switching the game to play like a cutscene. Like for example, the area where Drake is wininging of polls on a falling train or whatnot. Crysis 2 in some areas is an example of actual having a cinematic gameplay during the ACTUAL game.LazySloth718

Ads, commercials, semantics don't change the situation.

Sadly the 360 is not powerful enough to run Crysis2 at acceptable framerates and without alot of tearing, even at only 720p.

In regular gameplay, UC has alot going on, on the screen, they have the horsepower to make that happen. If only it were fun to play.

Gears is good (in terms of fun) but there's not much going on graphically, it's a very bread and butter experience.

You haven't negated the art asset issue i.e. UC2 and C2 doesn't use the same art assets (data set), hence your comparsion is invalid for hardware performance benchmarking.

On the similar data set(art asset), PS3 runs C2 at a lower resolution than the Xbox 360.

(But in raw power the PS3 is undoubtly more powerful.)

power for the sake of power means nothing, is this a joke thread?, Do you sleep better thinking the ps3 is the most powerful thing in the world? , Grow up man

does this topic even has a point??, I mean at the end of the day you can believe what you want but saying (but but but the ps3 is more powerful) doesn't change anything, both consoles are ok, It seems to me that you need to focus your energy on something more positive, Just a thought.

hrah

Define raw power i.e. 3DC+ decompfunction vs simple ADD/MUL function.

[QUOTE="fadersdream"]You realize all you've done is create a forum which destroyed your beloved PS3, right? nameless12345

What makes you think PS3 is my "beloved" console?

I'm simply saying that if it's harder to program for doesn't mean it's not more powerful (if not a generational leap by any means).

[QUOTE="mynamesdenvrmax"]

I think the most powerful thing about the Cell was Sony's BS hype talk about it. /fact

Does anyone else think its funny that Sony cant sell a gold nugget to a homeless man for penny but they can get people to believe the Cell is the "God" chip? Someone needs to rearrange the marketing staff.

savagetwinkie

Heck, the Xbox 1is technically more powerful than the Wii.theJakandsig

Nope. The Xbox wasn't even anymore powerful than the GameCube. This should be obvious from the fact that Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube was regarded as the best-looking game on last-gen consoles, winning all the best graphics awards and beating out all the best-looking Xbox games (including the slowed-down Half-Life 2 & Doom 3 ports as well as Ninja Gaiden Black).

[QUOTE="theJakandsig"]Heck, the Xbox 1is technically more powerful than the Wii.Jag85

Nope. The Xbox wasn't even anymore powerful than the GameCube. This should be obvious from the fact that Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube was regarded as the best-looking game on last-gen consoles, winning all the best graphics awards and beating out all the best-looking Xbox games (including the slowed-down Half-Life 2 & Doom 3 ports as well as Ninja Gaiden Black).

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="theJakandsig"]Heck, the Xbox 1is technically more powerful than the Wii.delta3074

Nope. The Xbox wasn't even anymore powerful than the GameCube. This should be obvious from the fact that Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube was regarded as the best-looking game on last-gen consoles, winning all the best graphics awards and beating out all the best-looking Xbox games (including the slowed-down Half-Life 2 & Doom 3 ports as well as Ninja Gaiden Black).

I don't have much know-how in the tech department for the HD twins (I find the differences to be negligible, and the best-looking game this generation is IMO FFXIII, which is multiplat), but I don't think there's any credence at all to the PS3 being harder to develop for. This has really only been propagated by the various fanboys on the internet, I've heard from many devs (though I unfortunately have no concrete links) that there's little difference in developing for the two. The problem is that the 360 had a jump on the PS3 in release and more devs learned to program for that system ahead of time. It's basically come down to people having learned one system's set-up ahead of the other, thus making them more knowledgeable on that one platform. I do think at least a lead developer for 2K Marin commented on this when working on the PS3 version of Bioshock.

As for the Wii, of course it's more powerful than the older generation consoles. It's silly that people are telling anything different.

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="mynamesdenvrmax"]

I think the most powerful thing about the Cell was Sony's BS hype talk about it. /fact

Does anyone else think its funny that Sony cant sell a gold nugget to a homeless man for penny but they can get people to believe the Cell is the "God" chip? Someone needs to rearrange the marketing staff.

fadersdream

1. most multiplats are better on the 360

2. crysis 2 on the 360 is the current graphics king

3. carmack stated that the two consoles are pretty much equal in power

4. sorry to break it to you, but there's no hidden untapped power within the cell. :(

MozartXVI

1. Multiplats isn't genuine proof of a console's power, especially if most dev already admitted on not taking the true potential of the ps3 into consideration due to cost with most multiplats.

2. How can a game be considered "console graphics king " (pretty sure this is what you mean, for your sake), if it can't even run consistently? GS surely didn't say this.

3. "Pretty much" still leaves room for possibilities, if you know what I mean, and Carmack did state that the ps3 did have more raw processing power, but the 360 have a better GPU, and is easier to develop for.

4. Sorry, but many of dev did state that if the money and talent is there, a dev can squeeze just a little bit more from the ps3 than the 360. The differences isn't huge or even, in most cases "considerable", but if a dav is willing to spend and have the tools and skills, he can do a little more on the ps3.

[QUOTE="MozartXVI"]

1. most multiplats are better on the 360

2. crysis 2 on the 360 is the current graphics king

3. carmack stated that the two consoles are pretty much equal in power

4. sorry to break it to you, but there's no hidden untapped power within the cell. :(

ermacness

1. Multiplats isn't genuine proof of a console's power, especially if most dev already admitted on not taking the true potential of the ps3 into consideration due to cost with most multiplats.

It is however the only way to benchmark the two consoles power, you can't compare uc3 and goew3 and come to a valid conlusion, they both have different types of targets and its impossible to break it down into a technical analysis any human being can comprehend.

2. How can a game be considered "console graphics king " (pretty sure this is what you mean, for your sake), if it can't even run consistently? GS surely didn't say this.

graphics king's really are only good for comparing hardware though, thats why PC is usually ignored and people don't care, the software and hardware is scalable, so you can throw money at the hardware to produce better software results. Consoles you have to improve software to uitilize hardware to its maximum potential giving you the best possible outcome, which is really why people look for the graphics king in the first place, to measure the hardware of a set of hardware.

3. Pretty much still leaves room for possibilities if you know what I mean, and Carmack did state that the ps3 did have more raw processing power, but the 360 have a better GPU, and is easier to develop for.

He also said specifically the CPU, not the entire system, he was also very clear when he said peak power and not sustained throughput when comparing the full systems. That doesnt' really equate to more powerful at all.

4. Sorry, but many of dev did state that is the money and talent is there, a dev can squeeze just a little bit more from the ps3 than the 360. The differences isn't huge or even, in most cases "considerable", but if a dav is willing to spend and have the tools and skills, he can do a little more on the ps3.

And they also said it was in specific cases, there were areas where the 360 would outperform the ps3 depending on the type of load, so its not a ps3 is more powerful definitively if you put the time in it,

[QUOTE="theJakandsig"]Heck, the Xbox 1is technically more powerful than the Wii.Jag85

Nope. The Xbox wasn't even anymore powerful than the GameCube. This should be obvious from the fact that Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube was regarded as the best-looking game on last-gen consoles, winning all the best graphics awards and beating out all the best-looking Xbox games (including the slowed-down Half-Life 2 & Doom 3 ports as well as Ninja Gaiden Black).