HardWare Throwdown:IGN puts the 360 up against PS3

no, not at all, the 10mb Edram handles the AA , not the xenos which essentiall gives the 360 up to 4xMsaa with no cost to system memory, everything done on the cell or the RSX costs system memory, and the Edrams system bandwith is 100x faster than the Ps3's system bandwith (256gb/sec vs 25gb/per sec) you also have to take into account that the xenos can run various DX10 subroutines, which niether the cell or RSX can , you also have to take into account the unified shader architecture which effectively lowers the system memory cost of shader operations add to that the fact the 360 has 18mb more useable memory, dude, it's not a good thing that the RSX needs to use the CELL as a zimmer frame to match the xenos performance because that takes up vital CPU recources thet are used to run non graphics aspects of the game, and the 360's CPU can handle AA as well, AAA (analytical anti aliasing) is CPU based AA solution that emeulates 8xmsaa and has already been used in the 360 version of metro 2033, the Xenos has a huge advantage over the RSX in system memory savings, like i stated before, the ps3 edges the 360 out in power, but the xenos is a better GPU than the RSX period.delta3074

Is not free it has been discus on beyond 3D to hell and back.

In terms of computational resources, Xenos' AA really is absolutely and honestly free.
Per "pixel", Xenos computes one color, a depth gradient and determines a subpixel coverage mask. The maks is just four bits. The depth gradient is sufficient because all potentially covered subpixels, while they have variable depth values, are from the same triangle. Hence this connection doesn't need much bandwidth (actually less bandwidth than an equivalent PC part's road to memory because blending is also "free", even without any AA).

Inside the daughter die, the color and z values are replicated to all covered samples according to the mask bits, z test is done and blending is done. So in the worst case, for one incoming pixel the daughter die needs to read/modify/write four subpixel depth values (for a subpixel-precise depth test) and read/modify/write four subpixels' colors (for blending). The eDRAM daughter die has very high internal bandwidth and can cope with this all just fine, and this is exactly the reason why this is deemed "free".

The catch:
The eDRAM daughter die, while having that very high bandwidth, only has limited storage space. Rendering in high resolutions with AA will exhaust this space. Doing 4xMSAA requires four times as much space to be set aside than rendering without AA. If you don't have that space, you can't hold the whole backbuffer at once.

The proposed solution is to split the scene up into tiles that do fit the eDRAM space limits.
E.g. instead of rendering a complete 1280x720 w 4xMSAA frame (which you can't), the rendering process can be split up into three 1280x240 partitions (roughly ~9,8MB each) which are rendered sequentially. You flush out the finished partitions to system memory to make room for the next one. If you have all three partitions down in system memory the frame is done, you can point the RAMDAC there to scan it out and start building up the next frame in the same way.

But this is not free.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=40456

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=29856

Here another thread where AA is discus,is not actually free but more like low costing that it would be without it.

With that bandwidth you just post you are not telling the whole picture,and i show you how this is not apple to apple again for the last time,the RSX has 22.GB bandwidth Cell has a 25.6 bandwidht,is not just 25GB like you claim,also notice the 20 GB connection that go's from the RSX to Cell,and the 15 GB one that go's from Cell to the RSX,on 360 you will not find that one,becuase the Xenon and Xenos don't work like Cell and the RSX.

18MB more of usable memory won mean much dude it would not,the Satur had double the video ram of the PS1,and the PS1 could run 3D games better than the Saturn,it was slower on 2D games but on 3D games no chance,also look at what sony did with the PS2 and 32 MB of ram,sony developer are use to work with console with low ram,in this case is not low is almost the same.

Cell is a monster because not only help the RSX,but also maintain a nice work flow on the CPU task it most handle unlike what you claim,by the way the xbox 360 3 core CPU has just 1 MB of cache which is incredibly low,considering a dual core pentium 4 of that time had 2 MB 1 per core,and compare to Cell which has 256 KB for each SPU without even counting the core chache of 512 KB,xbox 360 CPU has to spread 1 MB between 6 threads dude.

In the end this argument is pointless what to believe the xbox 360 is more powerful ok,i admit it the xbox 360 is more powerful,now wake me up when teh xbox 360 games surpase Unccharted 2 at least.

[QUOTE="Darth_DuMas"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

like computers????

For video decoding, my ATI Radeon HD 5730/5770s are equiped with following tech ...From http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEBOOK/GRAPHICS/ATI-MOBILITY-HD-5700/Pages/hd-5730-specs.aspx

UVD 2 dedicated video playback accelerator
Advanced post-processing and scaling
Dynamic contrast enhancement and color correction
Brighter whites processing (blue stretch)
Independent video gamma control
Dynamic video range control
Support for H.264, VC-1, MPEG-2, and Adobe Flash9
Dual-stream 1080p playback support
DXVA 1.0 & 2.0 support
Integrated dual-link DVI output with HDCP: Max resolution: 2560x1600
Integrated DisplayPort output: Max resolution: 2560x1600
Integrated HDMI 1.3 output with Deep Color, xvYCC wide gamut support, and high bit-rate audio : Max resolution: 1920x1200
Integrated VGA output :Max resolution: 2048x1536
3D stereoscopic display/glasses support
Integrated HD audio controller
Output protected high bit rate 7.1 channel surround sound over HDMI with no additional cables required
Supports AC-3, AAC, Dolby TrueHD and DTS Master Audio formats

ronvalencia

:P I should have been more specific, I mean those DVD player softwares like the Win DVD and Roxio Power DVD. They didn't handle DVD playback as well as dedicated players.

I think the 360 must have some based on the older softwares, because I don't think it is using hardware decoding. Relax, your GPU is very nice.

I meant to compare the 360 equivelent, which is probably PowerDVD 6 or something.

Nothing, I mean't the older ones. :D

[QUOTE="Zero_epyon"]

[QUOTE="Executor_84"]it's up to my my dear friend which is PS 3 FBdelta3074

Be careful with marketing my friend. They'll make you look silly.

[QUOTE="delta3074"]no, not at all, the 10mb Edram handles the AA , not the xenos which essentiall gives the 360 up to 4xMsaa with no cost to system memory, everything done on the cell or the RSX costs system memory, and the Edrams system bandwith is 100x faster than the Ps3's system bandwith (256gb/sec vs 25gb/per sec) you also have to take into account that the xenos can run various DX10 subroutines, which niether the cell or RSX can , you also have to take into account the unified shader architecture which effectively lowers the system memory cost of shader operations add to that the fact the 360 has 18mb more useable memory, dude, it's not a good thing that the RSX needs to use the CELL as a zimmer frame to match the xenos performance because that takes up vital CPU recources thet are used to run non graphics aspects of the game, and the 360's CPU can handle AA as well, AAA (analytical anti aliasing) is CPU based AA solution that emeulates 8xmsaa and has already been used in the 360 version of metro 2033, the Xenos has a huge advantage over the RSX in system memory savings, like i stated before, the ps3 edges the 360 out in power, but the xenos is a better GPU than the RSX period.Eltormo

Is not free it has been discus on beyond 3D to hell and back.

In terms of computational resources, Xenos' AA really is absolutely and honestly free.
Per "pixel", Xenos computes one color, a depth gradient and determines a subpixel coverage mask. The maks is just four bits. The depth gradient is sufficient because all potentially covered subpixels, while they have variable depth values, are from the same triangle. Hence this connection doesn't need much bandwidth (actually less bandwidth than an equivalent PC part's road to memory because blending is also "free", even without any AA).

Inside the daughter die, the color and z values are replicated to all covered samples according to the mask bits, z test is done and blending is done. So in the worst case, for one incoming pixel the daughter die needs to read/modify/write four subpixel depth values (for a subpixel-precise depth test) and read/modify/write four subpixels' colors (for blending). The eDRAM daughter die has very high internal bandwidth and can cope with this all just fine, and this is exactly the reason why this is deemed "free".

The catch:
The eDRAM daughter die, while having that very high bandwidth, only has limited storage space. Rendering in high resolutions with AA will exhaust this space. Doing 4xMSAA requires four times as much space to be set aside than rendering without AA. If you don't have that space, you can't hold the whole backbuffer at once.

The proposed solution is to split the scene up into tiles that do fit the eDRAM space limits.
E.g. instead of rendering a complete 1280x720 w 4xMSAA frame (which you can't), the rendering process can be split up into three 1280x240 partitions (roughly ~9,8MB each) which are rendered sequentially. You flush out the finished partitions to system memory to make room for the next one. If you have all three partitions down in system memory the frame is done, you can point the RAMDAC there to scan it out and start building up the next frame in the same way.

But this is not free.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=40456

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=29856

Here another thread where AA is discus,is not actually free but more like low costing that it would be without it.

With that bandwidth you just post you are not telling the whole picture,and i show you how this is not apple to apple again for the last time,the RSX has 22.GB bandwidth Cell has a 25.6 bandwidht,is not just 25GB like you claim,also notice the 20 GB connection that go's from the RSX to Cell,and the 15 GB one that go's from Cell to the RSX,on 360 you will not find that one,becuase the Xenon and Xenos don't work like Cell and the RSX.

18MB more of usable memory won mean much dude it would not,the Satur had double the video ram of the PS1,and the PS1 could run 3D games better than the Saturn,it was slower on 2D games but on 3D games no chance,also look at what sony did with the PS2 and 32 MB of ram,sony developer are use to work with console with low ram,in this case is not low is almost the same.

Cell is a monster because not only help the RSX,but also maintain a nice work flow on the CPU task it most handle unlike what you claim,by the way the xbox 360 3 core CPU has just 1 MB of cache which is incredibly low,considering a dual core pentium 4 of that time had 2 MB 1 per core,and compare to Cell which has 256 KB for each SPU without even counting the core chache of 512 KB,xbox 360 CPU has to spread 1 MB between 6 threads dude.

In the end this argument is pointless what to believe the xbox 360 is more powerful ok,i admit it the xbox 360 is more powerful,now wake me up when teh xbox 360 games surpase Unccharted 2 at least.

Wow PS3 dominated.

Now compare vs PC too :P

hd5870corei7

If they put a middle of the road Gaming PC on the chart, Xbox and Ps3 would go missing. There'd be a nation-wide search conducted, covered almost constantly by the news while the people of America fretted and spoke excitedly to each other on the streets. "What happened to our gaming consoles?" Then eventually investigators would find a lead, and news cameras would follow a team of trained extraction specialists as they rush up to an old delapidated house in the suburbs of New York City. There's a gunshot and the men start shouting and kick in the door. The cameraman rushes to catch up to the action, and one of the cops mutters "Dear God." and turns away. Laid out before the cameras we see the corpse of Xbox 360 slumped in a chair, and on the floor is the PS3, sobbing, with a handgun pointed at his head while german snuff porn plays on the tv. He looks at his rescuers and mutters "It was all a lie. A facade. They told us that we were in competition, that we were relevant. All this time, we were just a joke." Then he pulls the trigger and the camera cuts to black. The PC's mascot is replaced by trollface.jpg.

]it doesn't need to, that's the point, niether th RSX or the Cell can match the xenos as far as GPU's are concerned, the RSX gobbles up CPU recources that should be used elsewhere, and completely kills any advantage in hardware threading the Cell has over the xenon, the 10mb Edram and USA also means the 360 is far more efficient at system memory usage, the Ps3 needs to use more system memory to do the things the 360 does and it doesn't help that the Ps3 has less usable memory than the 360 anyway, due to the bigger OS footprint and lack of Edram, the Ps3 is more powerful than the 360, but not by enough for it to be even worth thinking about, which means both consoles are 'roughly' equal in power, the only advantage the Ps3 really has over the 360 is in floating point opeartions (flops)ronvalencia

No is not that it doesn't need to is that it can't Cell and Xenon are not the same nor work on the same way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehwFOM4CBKA

Maybe you should look at what Cell can do even without the RSX in real time.

Like i told the other dude who quote me,i admit it the xbox 360 is more powerful,now wake me up when the 360 output something better looking than Uncharted 2.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]]it doesn't need to, that's the point, niether th RSX or the Cell can match the xenos as far as GPU's are concerned, the RSX gobbles up CPU recources that should be used elsewhere, and completely kills any advantage in hardware threading the Cell has over the xenon, the 10mb Edram and USA also means the 360 is far more efficient at system memory usage, the Ps3 needs to use more system memory to do the things the 360 does and it doesn't help that the Ps3 has less usable memory than the 360 anyway, due to the bigger OS footprint and lack of Edram, the Ps3 is more powerful than the 360, but not by enough for it to be even worth thinking about, which means both consoles are 'roughly' equal in power, the only advantage the Ps3 really has over the 360 is in floating point opeartions (flops)Eltormo

No is not that it doesn't need to is that it can't Cell and Xenon are not the same nor work on the same way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehwFOM4CBKA

Maybe you should look at what Cell can do even without the RSX in real time.

Like i told the other dude who quote me,i admit it the xbox 360 is more powerful,now wake me up when the 360 output something better looking than Uncharted 2.

doesn't change the fact that the xenos is superior to the RSX, which was my whole point, and when you only have 512mb 18mb is quite a large chunk of extra memory, not to mention the fact the 360 uses far less system memory for shader operations thanks to the unified shader architecture, and maybe AA isn't entirely free on the 360, but it's a darn sight cheaper, all this frees up MORE usaeble memory for the 360, you also failed to take into account that thanks to the EDram the xenos effectively has 256gb system bandwith which is far more than the 25.6+15 the Ps3 has,you also failed to take into accoun the xenos ability to run DX10 subroutines and the tesselator API it has, i don't even think you read my post properly, because i actually stated that the Ps3 slightly beats the 360 in power, not that the 360 is more powerful, and your post didn't cover half the things i saiddelta3074

Once again the xbox has more memory,is more powerful and is more developer friendly,so why there isn't anything like Uncharted 2 on 360 let alone Killzone 3 which blows away pretty much every 360 game,i say blow becuase Killzone 2 still look better than all 360 games release to this date,is not a lie is the truth,in fact that video posted yesterday here on the Gears thread,showed how much more Killzone 2 was doing than Gear 2 and better looking.

So once again specs mean nothing the games speak for them self.

Why do people insist on using GigaFLOPS as a power comparison? Using their logic, an 8800GTX is more than twice the power of teh Cell.

[QUOTE="delta3074"]doesn't change the fact that the xenos is superior to the RSX, which was my whole point, and when you only have 512mb 18mb is quite a large chunk of extra memory, not to mention the fact the 360 uses far less system memory for shader operations thanks to the unified shader architecture, and maybe AA isn't entirely free on the 360, but it's a darn sight cheaper, all this frees up MORE usaeble memory for the 360, you also failed to take into account that thanks to the EDram the xenos effectively has 256gb system bandwith which is far more than the 25.6+15 the Ps3 has,you also failed to take into accoun the xenos ability to run DX10 subroutines and the tesselator API it has, i don't even think you read my post properly, because i actually stated that the Ps3 slightly beats the 360 in power, not that the 360 is more powerful, and your post didn't cover half the things i saidEltormo

Once again the xbox has more memory,is more powerful and is more developer friendly,so why there isn't anything like Uncharted 2 on 360 let alone Killzone 3 which blows away pretty much every 360 game,i say blow becuase Killzone 2 still look better than all 360 games release to this date,is not a lie is the truth,in fact that video posted yesterday here on the Gears thread,showed how much more Killzone 2 was doing than Gear 2 and better looking.

So once again specs mean nothing the games speak for them self.

doesn't change the fact that it DOESN't need to as the xenos can easily handle everything th CELL+RSX can do on it's own, and like i sated the Xenon CAN do CPU AA solutions, it already has in metro 2033, and like i already staed, i didn't say the 360 was more powerful, i said the Ps3 was but only slightly, reading comprehension FTW crikey, i just realised you actually quoted me saying the ps3 was slightly more powerful above, you need to go to specsavers matedelta3074

Come on dude be real you are trying to say that the Xenon alone can do what Cell + the RSX does.? come one man you know that is not even close to be true,also doing just AA alone will not help much the Xenos because AA is almost free on 360 remember.?

Is does many other task like lighting which Cell can handle but on 360 are done on the GPU,oh by the way Killzone 2 show some impressive lighting to the point of beating 360 games silly,the only game that really come close to Killzone 2 is Alan Wake and is close not better,hell that Gear of war 2 comparison show almost no sun light entering by holes,while Killzone 2 displayed some impressive sun effects.

Again talk specs all you want,i want real time prove now is no were to be found since PS3 exlusive games do look better than 360 ones by a noticiable difference.

[QUOTE="delta3074"]

doesn't change the fact that it DOESN't need to as the xenos can easily handle everything th CELL+RSX can do on it's own, and like i sated the Xenon CAN do CPU AA solutions, it already has in metro 2033, and like i already staed, i didn't say the 360 was more powerful, i said the Ps3 was but only slightly, reading comprehension FTW crikey, i just realised you actually quoted me saying the ps3 was slightly more powerful above, you need to go to specsavers mateEltormo

Come on dude be real you are trying to say that the Xenon alone can do what Cell + the RSX does.? come one man you know that is not even close to be true,also doing just AA alone will not help much the Xenos because AA is almost free on 360 remember.?

Is does many other task like lighting which Cell can handle but on 360 are done on the GPU,oh by the way Killzone 2 show some impressive lighting to the point of beating 360 games silly,the only game that really come close to Killzone 2 is Alan Wake and is close not better,hell that Gear of war 2 comparison show almost no sun light entering by holes,while Killzone 2 displayed some impressive sun effects.

Again talk specs all you want,i want real time prove now is no were to be found since PS3 exlusive games do look better than 360 ones by a noticiable difference.

Most of it is agreeable, but I really don't see how they declared the PS3 the winner in 'video support'. There are plenty 1080p 360 games, and the 360 can also display VGA, whilst (going by that chart) the PS3 can't.

[QUOTE="Eltormo"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]doesn't change the fact that the xenos is superior to the RSX, which was my whole point, and when you only have 512mb 18mb is quite a large chunk of extra memory, not to mention the fact the 360 uses far less system memory for shader operations thanks to the unified shader architecture, and maybe AA isn't entirely free on the 360, but it's a darn sight cheaper, all this frees up MORE usaeble memory for the 360, you also failed to take into account that thanks to the EDram the xenos effectively has 256gb system bandwith which is far more than the 25.6+15 the Ps3 has,you also failed to take into accoun the xenos ability to run DX10 subroutines and the tesselator API it has, i don't even think you read my post properly, because i actually stated that the Ps3 slightly beats the 360 in power, not that the 360 is more powerful, and your post didn't cover half the things i saiddelta3074

Once again the xbox has more memory,is more powerful and is more developer friendly,so why there isn't anything like Uncharted 2 on 360 let alone Killzone 3 which blows away pretty much every 360 game,i say blow becuase Killzone 2 still look better than all 360 games release to this date,is not a lie is the truth,in fact that video posted yesterday here on the Gears thread,showed how much more Killzone 2 was doing than Gear 2 and better looking.

So once again specs mean nothing the games speak for them self.

I am not trolling you i am just tire of you saying that the PS3 get counter by anything the 360 does spec wise,yet now say the you admit the PS3 is more powerful come on man,read your post man,you are trying to counter everything i say even for Cell which we all know is way superior to the 360 CPU,is not me is you.

[QUOTE="hd5870corei7"]

Wow PS3 dominated.

Now compare vs PC too :P

JonSnow777

If they put a middle of the road Gaming PC on the chart, Xbox and Ps3 would go missing. There'd be a nation-wide search conducted, covered almost constantly by the news while the people of America fretted and spoke excitedly to each other on the streets. "What happened to our gaming consoles?" Then eventually investigators would find a lead, and news cameras would follow a team of trained extraction specialists as they rush up to an old delapidated house in the suburbs of New York City. There's a gunshot and the men start shouting and kick in the door. The cameraman rushes to catch up to the action, and one of the cops mutters "Dear God." and turns away. Laid out before the cameras we see the corpse of Xbox 360 slumped in a chair, and on the floor is the PS3, sobbing, with a handgun pointed at his head while german snuff porn plays on the tv. He looks at his rescuers and mutters "It was all a lie. A facade. They told us that we were in competition, that we were relevant. All this time, we were just a joke." Then he pulls the trigger and the camera cuts to black. The PC's mascot is replaced by trollface.jpg.

Lol this is very funny. U r funny guy. I like u and u r cool. It make whole console vs console power struggle seem insignificant. Lol I b ur friend always k?

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="Eltormo"]

Once again the xbox has more memory,is more powerful and is more developer friendly,so why there isn't anything like Uncharted 2 on 360 let alone Killzone 3 which blows away pretty much every 360 game,i say blow becuase Killzone 2 still look better than all 360 games release to this date,is not a lie is the truth,in fact that video posted yesterday here on the Gears thread,showed how much more Killzone 2 was doing than Gear 2 and better looking.

So once again specs mean nothing the games speak for them self.

Eltormo

I am not trolling you i am just tire of you saying that the PS3 get counter by anything the 360 does spec wise,yet now say the you admit the PS3 is more powerful come on man,read your post man,you are trying to counter everything i say even for Cell which we all know is way superior to the 360 CPU,is not me is you.

[QUOTE="sts106mat"]

do you have anything positive to add to any discussion about the 360.....ever???

Can you stop single me out there is allot of people here posting pro PS3 and i am the only one you go to quote for that.

please stop singling him out, AS for that this is system wars if you dont like it then go. I have to deal with the same thing he is, Even when I'm not bashing the ps3 I am bashing the ps3. WilliamRLBaker

Eltorm...be my guest and show the world what can Cell do without RSX.That video is laughable...you could do it with ge force 3 without breaking a sweat :lol:

cell is very good at things like vertex culling(to help out gimped RSX with polygons),post processing and some forms of preparation jobs for lighting.Its nothing that Xenos cant do on its own.

Lemmings, just show us the games and quit the damage control. Its really getting funny actually. Yall can scream off numbers left and right but can't produce a graphic king.

GreyFoXX4

Show me a game on the xbox 360 that looks as good as killzone 2/ uncharted 2 has the same detail and enemies on screen and i will believe itSolid_Tango

Mass Effect 2. You know it's true.

Any one who argues the hardware is an idiot. But making out that for GAMING the ps3 is really high above the 360. lol

Still isn't the 360 the only console to have a graphics king this gen?

we knew this back in 2006. Let the truth set you free

[QUOTE="Solid_Tango"]Show me a game on the xbox 360 that looks as good as killzone 2/ uncharted 2 has the same detail and enemies on screen and i will believe itJonSnow777

Mass Effect 2. You know it's true.

Possible Spoilers!!!

Uncharted 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdN9Bub58no&hd=1

Killzone 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By1mN4s3bPk&hd=1

God of War 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzqJswRGc8o&hd=1

Mass Effect 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4T13yI7L8s

Mass Effect 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9moSglijdw

[QUOTE="Solid_Tango"]Show me a game on the xbox 360 that looks as good as killzone 2/ uncharted 2 has the same detail and enemies on screen and i will believe itJonSnow777

Mass Effect 2. You know it's true.

I thought we were done with this nonsense, and that perhaps this would be a useful buyer's guide. But nope, it's gigaflops this and bandwidth that. Who gives a ****?

They even acknowledge the pointlessness of the comparison by ending it with this quote:

In the end, what matters is how developers and publishers choose to take advantage of each console.IGN

This was obviously just done to get hits from fanboys and the like.

The funniest thing about all this,a thing that shows just how close those systems are in power is the fact that,for more than 5 years after the mentioned consoles were introduced,people still fight which one is LESS WEAK.

Last gen it was well known,Xbox>GC>>PS2.It was known from day one,multiplats showed that,exclusives showed that,specs showed it.NOBODY cared.Why do we today,after more than 5 years still care?Ask yourself ;)

The funniest thing about all this,a thing that shows just how close those systems are in power is the fact that,for more than 5 years after the mentioned consoles were introduced,people still fight which one is LESS WEAK.

Last gen it was well known,Xbox>GC>>PS2.It was known from day one,multiplats showed that,exclusives showed that,specs showed it.NOBODY cared.Why do we today,after more than 5 years still care?Ask yourself ;)

Bus-A-Bus

People take whatever they can get in the fight to prove that their favorite console is better than your favorite console.

rrrriiiggghhhhtttt

sts106mat

http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=381592

"XENOS is capable of processing 64 threads simultaneously, this is to make sure that all elements are being utilized and so there is minimal or no stalling of the graphics architecture. So even if a ALU may be waiting for a texture sample to be achieved, that thread would not stall the ALU as it would be working on something else from another thread. This effectively hides tasks that would normally have a large latency penalty attached to them"

http://techreport.com/articles.x/8342

The Xbox 360 GPU can manage and maintain state information on 64 separate threads in hardware. There's a thread buffer inside the chip, and the GPU can switch between threads instantaneously in order to keep the shader arrays busy at all times

Xenos's 64 threads description is similar to NVIDIA's Giga-Threads description.

Both NVIDIA G80 and ATI Xenos has thread swap technology.

In terms of technology approach, PS3 vs Xbox 360 can easily involves the gaming PC.

With that bandwidth you just post you are not telling the whole picture,and i show you how this is not apple to apple again for the last time,the RSX has 22.GB bandwidth Cell has a 25.6 bandwidht,is not just 25GB like you claim,also notice the 20 GB connection that go's from the RSX to Cell,and the 15 GB one that go's from Cell to the RSX,on 360 you will not find that one,becuase the Xenon and Xenos don't work like Cell and the RSX.

18MB more of usable memory won mean much dude it would not,the Satur had double the video ram of the PS1,and the PS1 could run 3D games better than the Saturn,it was slower on 2D games but on 3D games no chance,also look at what sony did with the PS2 and 32 MB of ram,sony developer are use to work with console with low ram,in this case is not low is almost the same.

Cell is a monster because not only help the RSX,but also maintain a nice work flow on the CPU task it most handle unlike what you claim,by the way the xbox 360 3 core CPU has just 1 MB of cache which is incredibly low,considering a dual core pentium 4 of that time had 2 MB 1 per core,and compare to Cell which has 256 KB for each SPU without even counting the core chache of 512 KB,xbox 360 CPU has to spread 1 MB between 6 threads dude.

In the end this argument is pointless what to believe the xbox 360 is more powerful ok,i admit it the xbox 360 is more powerful,now wake me up when teh xbox 360 games surpase Unccharted 2 at least.

Eltormo

Pentium D doesn't use unified cache design. Like Xbox 360's PPE X3, both AMD (with Phenom)and Intel (with Core 2/i3/i5/i7)has implemented unified cache design in their recent CPUs. With sharing of data, each Pentium D core has to communicate via the slow FSB. The problem with XBox 360's PPE X3 is it's half speed L2 cache.

Unlike Intel Core 2(128bit wide SSE) or AMD Phenom(128bit wide SSE) or IBM PPE (128bit wide VMX), Pentium D core implements 64bit wide SIMD (SSE) hardware.

Show me a game on the xbox 360 that looks as good as killzone 2/ uncharted 2 has the same detail and enemies on screen and i will believe itSolid_Tango

[QUOTE="delta3074"]

doesn't change the fact that it DOESN't need to as the xenos can easily handle everything th CELL+RSX can do on it's own, and like i sated the Xenon CAN do CPU AA solutions, it already has in metro 2033, and like i already staed, i didn't say the 360 was more powerful, i said the Ps3 was but only slightly, reading comprehension FTW crikey, i just realised you actually quoted me saying the ps3 was slightly more powerful above, you need to go to specsavers mateEltormo

Come on dude be real you are trying to say that the Xenon alone can do what Cell + the RSX does.? come one man you know that is not even close to be true,also doing just AA alone will not help much the Xenos because AA is almost free on 360 remember.?

Is does many other task like lighting which Cell can handle but on 360 are done on the GPU,oh by the way Killzone 2 show some impressive lighting to the point of beating 360 games silly,the only game that really come close to Killzone 2 is Alan Wake and is close not better,hell that Gear of war 2 comparison show almost no sun light entering by holes,while Killzone 2 displayed some impressive sun effects.

Again talk specs all you want,i want real time prove now is no were to be found since PS3 exlusive games do look better than 360 ones by a noticiable difference.

edit: I think the ps3 is overal more powerful but less flexible and ends up suffereing alot, its not like we've seen a great deal of games come out better on ps3... 360 has maintained a healthy lead in multiplats and still has some extremely pretty exclusives.

[QUOTE="I_am_a_PS3_FB"][QUOTE="Executor_84"]it's up to my my dear friend which is PS 3 FBExecutor_84

well I'm sure that your mom pooped you out for some reason, Maybe cleaning my 'white liquid' from the floor is your born destiny.. apart from looking stupid and immature in a Public forum..

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"] please stop singling him out, AS for that this is system wars if you dont like it then go. I have to deal with the same thing he is, Even when I'm not bashing the ps3 I am bashing the ps3. clone01

there is a big difference man between going after someone, and singling them out as the only person saying something, as the most hated person in system wars, as the only fanboy. which is what was being done.

there is a big difference between taking part in a thread in a bashing way, and simply making a factual and sometimes opinionated statement that bashes nothing, but the first reply is basically LOL dont listen to that jerk hes a *insert system* fanboy he allways bashes...ect...ect

Theres a big difference between condemning a game for things many others in the thread have condemned it for, yet you are singled out as the representitive when your often the last to have said it.

The funniest thing about all this,a thing that shows just how close those systems are in power is the fact that,for more than 5 years after the mentioned consoles were introduced,people still fight which one is LESS WEAK.

Last gen it was well known,Xbox>GC>>PS2.It was known from day one,multiplats showed that,exclusives showed that,specs showed it.NOBODY cared.Why do we today,after more than 5 years still care?Ask yourself ;)