Crytek: on PS3 GPU - "Low End"

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"][QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

No, they aren't. Most offer support for either opengl or directx. That's the point of a multiplat engine.

gamecubepad

There's only one exclusive that looks any better than what's on 360 and that's Killzone 2. GeOW2 and RE5 give it a run for it's money and they're both off multiplat engines at half the cost and time as KZ2.

GEOW 1 "only" cost 10million, supposedly GEOW 2 cost even less:lol:. How much did KZ2 cost again:?

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"] ps3 exclusives not only put 360 multiplat games to shame but also put ps3 multiplat games to shame, what does that tell you?Threebabycows

There's only one exclusive that looks any better than what's on 360 and that's Killzone 2. GeOW2 and RE5 give it a run for it's money and they're both off multiplat engines at half the cost and time as KZ2.

GEOW 1 "only" cost 10million, supposedly GEOW 2 cost even less:lol:. How much did KZ2 cost again:?

The dev cost of Killzone 2 was about $60 million and 4-5yrs.

Ya 360 is superior it runs Uncharted,MGS4 and Killzone 2 far superior on the 360 then the ps3. It also runs blu rays wayyy better!cdecrosta03

[QUOTE="cdecrosta03"]Ya 360 is superior it runs Uncharted,MGS4 and Killzone 2 far superior on the 360 then the ps3. It also runs blu rays wayyy better!Supafly1

He was joking about it like,"until you have better graphics than these games.." even though GEOW 2 looks better than Uncharted, MGS4, and gives KZ2 a run for its money.

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

There's only one exclusive that looks any better than what's on 360 and that's Killzone 2. GeOW2 and RE5 give it a run for it's money and they're both off multiplat engines at half the cost and time as KZ2.

gamecubepad

GEOW 1 "only" cost 10million, supposedly GEOW 2 cost even less:lol:. How much did KZ2 cost again:?

The dev cost of Killzone 2 was about $60 million and 4-5yrs.

I knew how much it cost, I was joking, I was hoping a cow would answer and self-own himself.

I knew how much it cost, I was joking, I was hoping a cow would answer and self-own himself.

Threebabycows

I realize you were being rhetorical. Cows have a serious problem looking up facts so I helped them out a bit.:P

Its amazing how sony fanboys allways use exclusives as an excuse. I just hope by exclusives they mean Killzone2 because its the only one that looks better than Gears2 and other 360 games. As i have said before, i would prefer a console which have the best looking/performing version of almost every single game of an entire lineup over a console which has ONE game that looks slighly better that all the others.

See how long a thread a simple misquote can generate?

This was a pr vid of Crytek displaying their skills with a ps3.....

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

I knew how much it cost, I was joking, I was hoping a cow would answer and self-own himself.

gamecubepad

I realize you were being rhetorical. Cows have a serious problem looking up facts so I helped them out a bit.:P

LMAO, now imagen if they had 120 devs working on the 360, for even 2yrs!!! (120 is the same amount that was working on KZ2)

Its amazing how sony fanboys allways use exclusives as an excuse. I just hope by exclusives they mean Killzone2 because its the only one that looks better than Gears2 and other 360 games. As i have said before, i would prefer a console which have the best looking/performing version of almost every single game of an entire lineup over a console which has ONE game that looks slighly better that all the others.

PAL360

at E3 Crytek said the xbox version will be slightly worse than the ps3 version. I guess it's not then.mayforcebeyou

No, they said shader heavy operations would run better on 360 and particle effect, better on PS3.(even though the lighting is better on the 360 version, weird)

[QUOTE="cdecrosta03"]Ya 360 is superior it runs Uncharted,MGS4 and Killzone 2 far superior on the 360 then the ps3. It also runs blu rays wayyy better!Supafly1

Well this still looks like cryengine 2. I think Cryengine 3 is literally 2 better optimized and scaled down to run on consoles. Damn shame they aren't pushing the bar forward.

Well this still looks like cryengine 2. I think Cryengine 3 is literally 2 better optimized and scaled down to run on consoles. Damn shame they aren't pushing the bar forward.

Brendissimo35

If they settle for pushing the bar a bit higher and improving performance on the pc version I'm a happy little camper.

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

I knew how much it cost, I was joking, I was hoping a cow would answer and self-own himself.

I realize you were being rhetorical. Cows have a serious problem looking up facts so I helped them out a bit.:P

LMAO, now imagen if they had 120 devs working on the 360, for even 2yrs!!! (120 is the same amount that was working on KZ2)

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

I realize you were being rhetorical. Cows have a serious problem looking up facts so I helped them out a bit.:P

LMAO, now imagen if they had 120 devs working on the 360, for even 2yrs!!! (120 is the same amount that was working on KZ2)

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

I realize you were being rhetorical. Cows have a serious problem looking up facts so I helped them out a bit.:P

ZoomZoom2490

LMAO, now imagen if they had 120 devs working on the 360, for even 2yrs!!! (120 is the same amount that was working on KZ2)

Really so halo 1 looks as good as SC:choas theory, sure:roll:

Name me some graphics engine built for xbox360's hardware LOLZvideogamedead03

Rare's engine made for banjo(one of the best looking games IMO)

This thread got me to update my GPU comparison image to include 360, all the figures are taken from Wiki. The thing is looking at what Wiki says Xeno's specs are I'm starting to question its authenticity...

Xenos looks like the lessor GPU according to this, yet I know that cannot be right from dev feedback. Am I missing something here?

This thread got me to update my GPU comparison image to include 360, all the figures are taken from Wiki. The thing is looking at what Wiki says Xeno's specs are I'm starting to question its authenticity...

Xenos looks like the lessor GPU according to this, yet I know that cannot be right from dev feedback. Am I missing something here?

AnnoyedDragon

Yea thats a little odd. Maybe the OP misunderstood or someone else.

The consoles are the same, it is all up to the dev as to what they want to do about it.

Threebabycows

This thread got me to update my GPU comparison image to include 360, all the figures are taken from Wiki. The thing is looking at what Wiki says Xeno's specs are I'm starting to question its authenticity...

Xenos looks like the lessor GPU according to this, yet I know that cannot be right from dev feedback. Am I missing something here?

AnnoyedDragon

Xenos looks like the lessor GPU according to this, yet I know that cannot be right from dev feedback. Am I missing something here?

AnnoyedDragon

Maybe that theoretical performance means nothing and real world performance is what counts?

cows cant say now that the PS3 is better if the best looking game is working better on the 360 (and RAGE also)

CRYSIS 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>U2 & KZ2

Stream processors (newer tech) vs Pixel&vertex shaders (older tech).

loco145

Stream processors actually perform slower than dedicated ones, which is why there are more of them. The main advantage of using them is 100% utilization at all times, no vertex shaders going unused while pixel shaders are getting hammered.

Stream processors are a tricky thing to figure out how they compare to their dedicated counterparts.

Maybe that theoretical performance means nothing and real world performance is what counts?

swazidoughman

Which is entirely subjective and disputable according to system wars :(

Stream processors actually perform slower than dedicated ones, which is why there are more of them. The main advantage of using them is 100% utilization at all times, no vertex shaders going unused while pixel shaders are getting hammered.

Stream processors are a tricky thing to figure out how they compare to their dedicated counterparts.

AnnoyedDragon

This thread got me to update my GPU comparison image to include 360, all the figures are taken from Wiki. The thing is looking at what Wiki says Xeno's specs are I'm starting to question its authenticity...

Xenos looks like the lessor GPU according to this, yet I know that cannot be right from dev feedback. Am I missing something here?

AnnoyedDragon

The Xenos has 332 million transistors. This chart is wrong.

This is actually quite annoying.

That image was intended as a fair, unbiased look at the different GPUs between platforms. It made sense and looked fine until I added 360.

The Xenos has 332 million transistors. This chart is wrong.

gamecubepad

Take it up with Wiki, that's where they were posted.

-edit

Hang on it's listing two different transistor counts, will have to look into this...

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"] never compare two system's based on multiplats, its common sense 101.ZoomZoom2490

Let's apply that logic far into the current gen when multiplat engines like MT-Framework, UE 3.5, Tech5, and CE3 have shown themselves to be as good or better than anything available on consoles.

Multiplats are a better comparison because they're rendering the same assets and if it's a simultaneous release both versions have the same amount of time to get the game looking good.

and how do you expect the engine to run on ps3 if its not being developed for that hardware? lmao

exclusives vs excusives, there is no other way so accept it.

Take it up with Wiki, that's where they were posted.

AnnoyedDragon

Don't need to. I just wanted to let people know that those numbers are way off. The GPU setup in the 360 has more transistors than the RSX.

PS3 and 360 both have very low end GPUs.Brainkiller05

This whole thread is basically saying my crap looks a tiny bit less brown than your crap.

The 360 GPU is stronger but not notciabley. What has put it ahead in multiplats is its architecture, which relative to the PS3, is much easier to port to from PC.

The second transistor count was referring to the embedded DRAM, GPU is listed as having 232m.

Honestly, who gives a crap. We need more threads like the epic PS_John thread months ago. That was some entertainment. These threads are downright boring anymore.

I dont know why this is coming as a suprise to anyone.

Im suprised they managed to make the PS3 version on a similar level to the 360 - the HDR and better textures is what makes xbox stand out. We all know that the PS3 couldnt never handle the HDR shown in Halo 3, thats because of the inferior GPU. Remember a CPU cant perform tasks of a GPU, the cell can only do so much.

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

LMAO, now imagen if they had 120 devs working on the 360, for even 2yrs!!! (120 is the same amount that was working on KZ2)

videogamedead03

[QUOTE="videogamedead03"][QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"] 360 doesnt need 120 devs, the hardware pretty much hit the dead end after one year. old and simple hardware = short life in expanding the potential.ZoomZoom2490

Actually Xbox are taking a page from the PS3, i think they are adding more memory to their dev kits, which allows devlopers more flexibility (which came as standard for the PS3). Also MS will be offering something called X tools (i think thats the name). Built from the ground up for the xbox.

Can someone please post a link to the side by side comparison?

On the side by Side comparision I did not see how the 360 version is any better than PS3. and The Cell is meant to work with the GPU for graphics, that as its purpose.

And What video did you watch to make such a fanboyish claim? I just watched it and I am confused where the TC is making these accusation from

[QUOTE="videogamedead03"][QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"] 360 doesnt need 120 devs, the hardware pretty much hit the dead end after one year. old and simple hardware = short life in expanding the potential.ZoomZoom2490

Right :lol:. Anything else you wanna pull while you're at it?

i may agree wz crytek, but do you have any physical proof on what you are saying, like a killer game for the x360?????? even wz a weaker GPU, the PS3 manages to show better graphics, what do you say abt that for a proof???

the way you twisted the facts in order to show what you want is so pathetic.

The 360 has the better GPU???? :shock::shock::shock:

STOP THE PRESSES!!!! BREAKING NEWS!!

Noticed the sarcasm?

This is actually quite annoying.

That image was intended as a fair, unbiased look at the different GPUs between platforms. It made sense and looked fine until I added 360.

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

The Xenos has 332 million transistors. This chart is wrong.

AnnoyedDragon

Take it up with Wiki, that's where they were posted.

-edit

Hang on it's listing two different transistor counts, will have to look into this...

Yah, quick look into it! SERIOUS BUSINESS!

Ya 360 is superior it runs Uncharted,MGS4 and Killzone 2 far superior on the 360 then the ps3. It also runs blu rays wayyy better!cdecrosta03