Help about Hardware Facts in 360 and PS3.

This will end in CHAOS.

The 360 is more effiecent, the PS3 has more potential but a horrible learning curve.

That Curve seems be getting easier as of late.

I say that they are about equel, but the PS3 does have the advantage's of having better Looking Exclusives...which would change with GeoW2.

Like I said, this is Pandora's Box.

This will end in CHAOS.

The 360 is more effiecent, the PS3 has more potential but a horrible learning curve.

That Curve seems be getting easier as of late.

I say that they are about equel, but the PS3 does have the advantage's of having better Looking Exclusives...which would change with GeoW2.

Like I said, this is Pandora's Box.

SolidTy

You posted this in the wrong board man, now you gonna get every fanboy in here that doenst know what they are talkin about and talk about things sony told them, or they heard on the "down low" and defend said information until the end. Then you gonna get people who actually know what they are talkin about state facts, and those facts get disregarded as if it was never posted because fanboys are immune to facts and common sensenavyguy21

Shrug. Why do you care about piddly numbers again? Numbers don't matter... games do. [spoiler] omg, I'm a radical ninja. I think I'll have to keep getting moderated to stay in this level. :P [/spoiler] Jandurin

If that was true, then why do you post here?

The ps3 is more powerful by far but its harder to program for and i say if you look at games like Gears of war 2 it doesnt look that much better then the first one which shows that its already starting to push the 360 but the ps3 still has killzone 2 heavy rain etc the Cpu in the ps3 (cell) is about 2.5 times more powerful but once again harder to program for but they are starting to get use to it just like they did with the ps2 a advantage with the cell is that it can be used as a GPU and a PPU while still doing CPU calcs while the 360 is unable to do this. While xbox fans might say that the graphics card is better in the 360 then the ps3 this just isnt true its just easier to program for but once again the learner curze is getting smaller and smaller and this does show with killzone 2 and heavy rain plus witht the cell being able to be used as a gpu the ps3 in total is able to be more powerfull in terms of processing and graphics just needs time which is about 5 months until killzone 2 to come outshoemen22

He wanted you to state facts, not rumours and guesses.

The ps3 is more powerful by far but its harder to program for and i say if you look at games like Gears of war 2 it doesnt look that much better then the first one which shows that its already starting to push the 360 but the ps3 still has killzone 2 heavy rain etc the Cpu in the ps3 (cell) is about 2.5 times more powerful but once again harder to program for but they are starting to get use to it just like they did with the ps2 a advantage with the cell is that it can be used as a GPU and a PPU while still doing CPU calcs while the 360 is unable to do this. While xbox fans might say that the graphics card is better in the 360 then the ps3 this just isnt true its just easier to program for but once again the learner curze is getting smaller and smaller and this does show with killzone 2 and heavy rain plus witht the cell being able to be used as a gpu the ps3 in total is able to be more powerfull in terms of processing and graphics just needs time which is about 5 months until killzone 2 to come outshoemen22

You have no idea what you are talking about, you just added in stuff like the learnin curve because you here people talking about it all the time, said the 360 is underpowered, and then talked about killzone and heavy rain.

Have a read on the Beyond3D forums. No offence to SW'ers but 99% of people here don't have a clue but are perfectly willing to spout pages of nonsense.

Most here will tell you the PS3 is more powerful simply because Sony told them so.

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

This will end in CHAOS.

The 360 is more effiecent, the PS3 has more potential but a horrible learning curve.

That Curve seems be getting easier as of late.

I say that they are about equel, but the PS3 does have the advantage's of having better Looking Exclusives...which would change with GeoW2.

Like I said, this is Pandora's Box.

abuabed

E.g i thought Psone had better graphics than N64 and PS2 better than GC, why? More games that looked great on them

[QUOTE="shoemen22"]The ps3 is more powerful by far but its harder to program for and i say if you look at games like Gears of war 2 it doesnt look that much better then the first one which shows that its already starting to push the 360 but the ps3 still has killzone 2 heavy rain etc the Cpu in the ps3 (cell) is about 2.5 times more powerful but once again harder to program for but they are starting to get use to it just like they did with the ps2 a advantage with the cell is that it can be used as a GPU and a PPU while still doing CPU calcs while the 360 is unable to do this. While xbox fans might say that the graphics card is better in the 360 then the ps3 this just isnt true its just easier to program for but once again the learner curze is getting smaller and smaller and this does show with killzone 2 and heavy rain plus witht the cell being able to be used as a gpu the ps3 in total is able to be more powerfull in terms of processing and graphics just needs time which is about 5 months until killzone 2 to come outPhazevariance

This is called a "PS3 Fanboy" who doesn't know what he's talking about. I stopped reading at "gears 2 looks like the first one".

As a matter of fact, the two consoles have very different archetectures. 360 has a cpu and ram that communicate between the two, ps3 has cell which is made up of a few chips, and each chip has its own chunk of ram so it can complete functions faster in small, but reassembling them takes more time and it ends up being about the same for speed, except it can process more things at the same time than 360. THe problem with that is that it is harder to program code for a game to split and reassemble liek that as opposed to making it like you would for a PC (and 360).

It has nothign to do with "learner curve" as thats just uneducated BS that the guy above posted about. In the end, the ps3 has less total ram, and that ends up cutting into the texture quality of games, where the 360 has only dvd which cuts into the content quantity available per disc, which cuts on quality of other aspects of the game. They can always go multi disc, but that incurs a larger fee/royalty to the developer which eats away at their profit margins.

shoeman22 has no idea what he is talking about, he sounds like a 10 year old trying to piece together information on something he has no clue about, so don't take fanboyish comments like that as truth.

Nice reply dude.Good to see some one with knowledge over here.

I don't think I'm the guy to ask :(angelkimne

To be honest the best answer I can give you is that there are no hard facts when it comes to performance. Sure there are some big differences in the hardware or the specs for that hardware, but numbers on their own are useless: you have to judge the consoles by what they're capable of producing. And when you look at the games, it's plainly obvious that neither has a significant edge on the other. Instead it tends to come down to how talented a developer is, or how much time/money is spent on a game or a version of a game.

As a general rule, if anyone tries to give you definitive black or white answers about the console hardware then they're most likely jerking your chain. There are no absolutes when it comes to performance...there's always edge cases and other situations where generalizations will fail.
Teufelhuhn

[QUOTE="shoemen22"]The ps3 is more powerful by far but its harder to program for and i say if you look at games like Gears of war 2 it doesnt look that much better then the first one which shows that its already starting to push the 360 but the ps3 still has killzone 2 heavy rain etc the Cpu in the ps3 (cell) is about 2.5 times more powerful but once again harder to program for but they are starting to get use to it just like they did with the ps2 a advantage with the cell is that it can be used as a GPU and a PPU while still doing CPU calcs while the 360 is unable to do this. While xbox fans might say that the graphics card is better in the 360 then the ps3 this just isnt true its just easier to program for but once again the learner curze is getting smaller and smaller and this does show with killzone 2 and heavy rain plus witht the cell being able to be used as a gpu the ps3 in total is able to be more powerfull in terms of processing and graphics just needs time which is about 5 months until killzone 2 to come outPhazevariance

This is called a "PS3 Fanboy" who doesn't know what he's talking about. I stopped reading at "gears 2 looks like the first one".

As a matter of fact, the two consoles have very different archetectures. 360 has a cpu and ram that communicate between the two, ps3 has cell which is made up of a few chips, and each chip has its own chunk of ram so it can complete functions faster in small, but reassembling them takes more time and it ends up being about the same for speed, except it can process more things at the same time than 360. THe problem with that is that it is harder to program code for a game to split and reassemble liek that as opposed to making it like you would for a PC (and 360).

It has nothign to do with "learner curve" as thats just uneducated BS that the guy above posted about. In the end, the ps3 has less total ram, and that ends up cutting into the texture quality of games, where the 360 has only dvd which cuts into the content quantity available per disc, which cuts on quality of other aspects of the game. They can always go multi disc, but that incurs a larger fee/royalty to the developer which eats away at their profit margins.

shoeman22 has no idea what he is talking about, he sounds like a 10 year old trying to piece together information on something he has no clue about, so don't take fanboyish comments like that as truth.

Aha, I see. But I have a question here. Can the PS3 CPU process graphics? I've heard some people saying so, if that is possible how much impact does it do?abuabed

The ps3 is more powerful by far but its harder to program for and i say if you look at games like Gears of war 2 it doesnt look that much better then the first one which shows that its already starting to push the 360 but the ps3 still has killzone 2 heavy rain etc the Cpu in the ps3 (cell) is about 2.5 times more powerful but once again harder to program for but they are starting to get use to it just like they did with the ps2 a advantage with the cell is that it can be used as a GPU and a PPU while still doing CPU calcs while the 360 is unable to do this. While xbox fans might say that the graphics card is better in the 360 then the ps3 this just isnt true its just easier to program for but once again the learner curze is getting smaller and smaller and this does show with killzone 2 and heavy rain plus witht the cell being able to be used as a gpu the ps3 in total is able to be more powerfull in terms of processing and graphics just needs time which is about 5 months until killzone 2 to come outshoemen22

This is exactly the sort of twoddle to disregard. Complete nonsense from start to finish.

[QUOTE="abuabed"]Aha, I see. But I have a question here. Can the PS3 CPU process graphics? I've heard some people saying so, if that is possible how much impact does it do?Teufelhuhn

True, but you have to remember that the Cell is much, much faster than the RSX when it is assigned graphical duties. so there is some "waiting" involved for the RSX to process this data. More RAM would fix this, but PS3's RAM is partitioned. this MAY be another reason for the installs. If sony wouldve put 2gb RAM in the PS3, it would outshine the 360 easily, but the cell, not the RSX, is held back by RAM restrictions. And to the fanboys, im not saying the PS3 cant produce good graphics, im saying that simply the Cell needs more RAM to shine, no matter what device its used in. 256MB just isnt enough

True, but you have to remember that the Cell is much, much faster than the RSX when it is assigned graphical duties.
navyguy21

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]

True, but you have to remember that the Cell is much, much faster than the RSX when it is assigned graphical duties.
Teufelhuhn

Well i was talkin about simply processing data lol, but you are correct, if the Cell is going to act as a GPU, then it is slower that a traditional GPU except with precedural generation(which is what i initially meant) I think most people are thinking that the cell can render graphics like the RSX and at the same time, but this is simply untrue. Correct me if im wrong, but If there is a GPU present, then the Cell (or any processor) cant render graphics unless its procedural???

I know this is kind of off-topic, but if Sony put the PS3 together "incorrectly" in the sense that the simple fact of more RAM would have made it outshine the 360, then how come the "industry experts" didn't do so, but a forum of gamers seems to have all the answers?

It's hard to tell tone when it's just text, so please understand that I'm not insulting anyone here. Just hard to understand why the public seems to know more about computers/consoles than the companies making them.