How Much better is the 360 GPU compared to the PS3's?

I know it has an advantage..since its custom built and uses the unified shaderz and what not, but how much more advanced is it over the PS3 nvidia GPU (RSX)? Also, Since Cell can help the RSX render graphics..does this equal to the 360's gpu and more?

I know it has an advantage..since its custom built and uses the unified shaderz and what not, but how much more advanced is it over the PS3 nvidia GPU (RSX)? Also, Since Cell can help the RSX render graphics..does this equal to the 360's gpu and more?

-Maddog-

[QUOTE="-Maddog-"]

I know it has an advantage..since its custom built and uses the unified shaderz and what not, but how much more advanced is it over the PS3 nvidia GPU (RSX)? Also, Since Cell can help the RSX render graphics..does this equal to the 360's gpu and more?

Taz-Bone

4 times?

All we know for sure is that the 360's GPU is easier to dev for.miss_kitt3n

[QUOTE="-Maddog-"]

I know it has an advantage..since its custom built and uses the unified shaderz and what not, but how much more advanced is it over the PS3 nvidia GPU (RSX)? Also, Since Cell can help the RSX render graphics..does this equal to the 360's gpu and more?

Taz-Bone

I smell BS.

does anyone even know what level the cell can do graphics??? it could be stick men level or just hype for the chip for all we know..

some say the ps3 gpu is a gen behind the 360 one but i expect that only to be becasue of the unified stuff and not in how many polys it can push..

p.s. dont expect any real answer's to this question here from the fanboys....

try here..................http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=3

does anyone even know what level the cell can do graphics??? it could be stick men level or just hype for the chip for all we know..

some say the ps3 gpu is a gen behind the 360 one but i expect that only to be becasue of the unified stuff and not in how many polys it can push..

p.s. dont expect any real answer's to this question here from the fanboys....

try here..................http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=3

daveg1

Well apparently, the Cell can give the RSX a helping handing with textures and overall visuals..if needed...but god knows how much that boosts the graphics...I don't expect the 360 GPU to be all that powerfull over the PS3's since Most of the 360 games like Oblivion, Fight Night etc etc look better on the PS3....i'm asking if anyones knows exactly how much better. Cause i keep seeing this Unified shaderz the 360's GPU is built around is something SPECIAL. and your probably right, daveg.

[QUOTE="daveg1"]

does anyone even know what level the cell can do graphics??? it could be stick men level or just hype for the chip for all we know..

some say the ps3 gpu is a gen behind the 360 one but i expect that only to be becasue of the unified stuff and not in how many polys it can push..

p.s. dont expect any real answer's to this question here from the fanboys....

try here..................http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=3

-Maddog-

Well apparently, the Cell can give the RSX a helping handing with textures and overall visuals..if needed...but god knows how much that boosts the graphics...I don't expect the 360 GPU to be all that powerfull over the PS3's since Most of the 360 games like Oblivion, Fight Night etc etc look better on the PS3....i'm asking if anyones knows exactly how much better. Cause i keep seeing this Unified shaderz the 360's GPU is built around is something SPECIAL. and your probably right, daveg.

[QUOTE="Taz-Bone"][QUOTE="-Maddog-"]

I know it has an advantage..since its custom built and uses the unified shaderz and what not, but how much more advanced is it over the PS3 nvidia GPU (RSX)? Also, Since Cell can help the RSX render graphics..does this equal to the 360's gpu and more?

miss_kitt3n

I smell BS.

Fact is the ps3s rsx is not a 7800 bolted on. It was designed to go with the cell and work together. Ive said this before I read somewhere the rsx has features such as 128bit lighting only the 8800 has for direct x 10. Also just becuase the 360 gpu uses a new feature of unified shaders doesnt mean they are powerful shaders.

latest ati has 320 stream processing units

latest nvidia has 128 Stream Processors

and yet i believe the nvidia is slightly more or less powerful

so those 48 the 360 has are pretty lame

Fact is the ps3s rsx is not a 7800 bolted on. It was designed to go with the cell and work together. Ive said this before I read somewhere the rsx has features such as 128bit lighting only the 8800 has for direct x 10. Also just becuase the 360 gpu uses a new feature of unified shaders doesnt mean they are powerful shaders.

latest ati has 320 stream processing units

latest nvidia has 128 Stream Processors

and yet i believe the nvidia is slightly more or less powerful

so those 48 the 360 has are pretty lame

CossackNoodle

Isn't the RSX something sony slapped together real quick and at last minute...because they couldn't get 2 cells working as a GPU?

Got any links to support that statement?

The PS3 can do CRYSIS graphics pretty soon... I'm sure of it.. Where as XBOX 360 will be stuck with Gears graphics for the rest of it's life time.Dahaka-UK

ummmmmmmm no

[QUOTE="CossackNoodle"]

Fact is the ps3s rsx is not a 7800 bolted on. It was designed to go with the cell and work together. Ive said this before I read somewhere the rsx has features such as 128bit lighting only the 8800 has for direct x 10. Also just becuase the 360 gpu uses a new feature of unified shaders doesnt mean they are powerful shaders.

latest ati has 320 stream processing units

latest nvidia has 128 Stream Processors

and yet i believe the nvidia is slightly more or less powerful

so those 48 the 360 has are pretty lame

-Maddog-

Isn't the RSX something sony slapped together real quick and at last minute...because they couldn't get 2 cells working as a GPU?

Got any links to support that statement?

sadly no but all i know is most rsx info is very old and sony wont release much info on it so dont take the 05 info or whatever year it was as the whole truth

think of the rsx as a 7600gt, think of the xenos as just less powerful as a x2900, thats more accurate because the rsx is NOT based in anyway of the 8 series architecture, however the xenos was build with the r600 architecture in mind but customised, i shall find a link to confirm the xenos part in one second

edit i cant be screwed to be honest, heres a nice comparison website for you http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

The PS3 can do CRYSIS graphics pretty soon... I'm sure of it.. Where as XBOX 360 will be stuck with Gears graphics for the rest of it's life time.Dahaka-UK

why are you sure of it?.... you are not sure of it. those textures are nowhere to be seen on any console yet

no1 gonna read it? CossackNoodle

Its a rant of put together uneducated thoughts and speculations. 99% of it is not backed up what so ever. Saying they arent telling us the truth about it. seriously? c'mon now. I know if i was expecting consumers to buy a $600 dollar console and the sales were slow i would definately show off as many things as i could, so i seriously doubt they would hide graphical power from the consumer.

Lets use our heads kids.

360's GPU is better at antialiasing. And that's about all.Timstuff

Not really, it easier to implement AA on 360, but 360 is'nt any better at it then PS3.

no1 gonna read it? CossackNoodle

No cus its wrong

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]360's GPU is better at antialiasing. And that's about all.mrboo15

Not really, it easier to implement AA on 360, but 360 is'nt any better at it then PS3.

Oops. My bad. :)

No one here knows because Sony and Nvidia have yet to release any official specifications on the RSX.I would think though,seeing Sony's background,if the RSX was more powerful then they would have surely released the specs just as a bragging right.

Im pretty sure though that Sony said the RSX can be programmed at 70% effeincy where as Xenos can be programmed at 100% effeciency due to the unified architecture.Thats really the only thing thats been released officialy that can be compared of the two,the rest is hoobla.

pffft when has using your head worked in SWCossackNoodle

a lot?

No one here knows because Sony and Nvidia have yet to release any official specifications on the RSX.I would think though,seeing Sony's background,if the RSX was more powerful then they would have surely released the specs just as a bragging right.

Im pretty sure though that Sony said the RSX can be programmed at 70% effeincy where as Xenos can be programmed at 100% effeciency due to the unified architecture.Thats really the only thing thats been released officialy that can be compared of the two,the rest is hoobla.

killab2oo5

Its just so funny that you beleive that :lol::lol::lol:

think of the rsx as a 7600gt, think of the xenos as just less powerful as a x2900, thats more accurate because the rsx is NOT based in anyway of the 8 series architecture, however the xenos was build with the r600 architecture in mind but customised, i shall find a link to confirm the xenos part in one second

edit i cant be screwed to be honest, heres a nice comparison website for you http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

Kevanio

major nelson't bs again?

can't you link something trustworthy?

[QUOTE="killab2oo5"]

No one here knows because Sony and Nvidia have yet to release any official specifications on the RSX.I would think though,seeing Sony's background,if the RSX was more powerful then they would have surely released the specs just as a bragging right.

Im pretty sure though that Sony said the RSX can be programmed at 70% effeincy where as Xenos can be programmed at 100% effeciency due to the unified architecture.Thats really the only thing thats been released officialy that can be compared of the two,the rest is hoobla.

mrboo15

Its just so funny that you beleive that :lol::lol::lol:

"Rather than separate pixel and vertex pipelines, we've created a single unified pipeline that can do both. Providing developers throw instructions at our architecture in the right way, Xenos can run at 100% efficiency all the time, rather than having some pipeline instructions waiting for others."

LINK

The RSX running at 50-70% is speculation,because its rumored.The reason Xenos runs at 100% efficiency is because it has the unified shader architecture,the RSX does not.At the most,powerful but older cards(7800 and below) usually run at 50-70% effeciency,the RSX is RUMOURED to be in those catagories of cards...it doesnt have a unified architecture so it doesnt have an effeciency rate as high as Xenos.

If your laughing because I spelled effiency wrong,then :oops:oops.

I know it has an advantage..since its custom built and uses the unified shaderz and what not, but how much more advanced is it over the PS3 nvidia GPU (RSX)? Also, Since Cell can help the RSX render graphics..does this equal to the 360's gpu and more?

-Maddog-

This thread created by fanboys for fanboys lol

The x360's GPU is just more efficient and has access to all 512MB of RAM. The GPU also has some near DX10 capabilities.

In the end: both consoles have a total 512MB of RAM and 3.2GHz CPUs. Neither console is going to out-shine the other.

The x360's GPU is just more efficient and has access to all 512MB of RAM. The GPU also has some near DX10 capabilities.

In the end: both consoles have a total 512MB of RAM and 3.2GHz CPUs. Neither console is going to out-shine the other.

LosDaddie

Los, that might be the first thing resembling a compliment you've ever said in regards to the PS3.

PS3 can overcome the 360 GPU in raw processing power if the developers would take the time to take advantage of multiprocessing, which most of them don't because it's a pain in the ass. So they just decide to go over the the 360.Vax45

CAre to get any more specific? How will the PS3 overcome GPU capabilites with CPU capabilities?

This is to that long wall of text on in page 2, couldn't quote for some reason.

First of all the 10mb of Edram (not 8mb) is used to store the frame/Z buffer/alpha blending, not to metnion stencil operations. A known fact is these are the most bandwidth intensive parts of a graphics subsystem. This saves an amazing amount of memory, allowing Xenos to uses most of the memory bandwidth it is given. This gives most of that 22GB's freedom to which the CPU or GPU need. This not including the very tightly packed 10.8GB up and down (dual channel) connection between the GPU and CPU, which is nice because the GPU can read directly from the CPU L2 and lock it if needed (this helps stop an inefficencies in the L2, and with the small 1MB the CPU has to share, this helps a ton)

If anything, this givens the 8 ROP's on Xenos FAR more flexablity then RSX's 8...they simply won't push as much.(48GB vs 256GB in framebuffer bandwidth).

Why you are comparing these cards with ATI/Nvidia's DX10 cards are beyond me. Xenos and RSX are FAR FAR more similar to their respective R5xx and 7xxx cards. It's a prety well known fact that the R5 series had more shader power then 7xxx series, not that you could be mad at the either. It's been said that Xenos is slightly more power then the R520 chip (aka 1800XT) and based off the specs I culd believe it. Seeing what we know of the RSX, it similar to the 7800GTX, the only problem is it has bandwidth similar to the 7600GT, and its pipes while clock for clock are more powerful, there aren't as many, and thats not even dealing with the inefficency of a traditional pipeline. Yes it has higher bit HDR, but it can't do HDR+AA, at least no true floating point HDR. Shader based HDR is a very nice alternitive, but it's not as precise, and it takes power from the rest of the card.

I haven't mentioned Memexport, which the ps3 has nothing like. Memexport is like an advanced version of stream-out in DX10. This allows the GPU to slave one of the 360's core entirely for graphics...a good reason why the 360 is a beast at procedural processing.

The unified shaders allow the developers to maximize the output of the Xenos so that every shader is used at all times.

Overall, they are very comparable in power, but the RSX is clocked at 550 mhz compared to the Xenos' 500 mhz, and people say that the RSX has more sheer brute power because of this. But once again, the power of the RSX is rarely maxed out because of it's separate vertex/pixel shaders.

This is to that long wall of text on in page 2, couldn't quote for some reason.

First of all the 10mb of Edram (not 8mb) is used to store the frame/Z buffer/alpha blending, not to metnion stencil operations. A known fact is these are the most bandwidth intensive parts of a graphics subsystem. This saves an amazing amount of memory, allowing Xenos to uses most of the memory bandwidth it is given. This gives most of that 22GB's freedom to which the CPU or GPU need. This not including the very tightly packed 10.8GB up and down (dual channel) connection between the GPU and CPU, which is nice because the GPU can read directly from the CPU L2 and lock it if needed (this helps stop an inefficencies in the L2, and with the small 1MB the CPU has to share, this helps a ton)

If anything, this givens the 8 ROP's on Xenos FAR more flexablity then RSX's 8...they simply won't push as much.(48GB vs 256GB in framebuffer bandwidth).

Why you are comparing these cards with ATI/Nvidia's DX10 cards are beyond me. Xenos and RSX are FAR FAR more similar to their respective R5xx and 7xxx cards. It's a prety well known fact that the R5 series had more shader power then 7xxx series, not that you could be mad at the either. It's been said that Xenos is slightly more power then the R520 chip (aka 1800XT) and based off the specs I culd believe it. Seeing what we know of the RSX, it similar to the 7800GTX, the only problem is it has bandwidth similar to the 7600GT, and its pipes while clock for clock are more powerful, there aren't as many, and thats not even dealing with the inefficency of a traditional pipeline. Yes it has higher bit HDR, but it can't do HDR+AA, at least no true floating point HDR. Shader based HDR is a very nice alternitive, but it's not as precise, and it takes power from the rest of the card.

I haven't mentioned Memexport, which the ps3 has nothing like. Memexport is like an advanced version of stream-out in DX10. This allows the GPU to slave one of the 360's core entirely for graphics...a good reason why the 360 is a beast at procedural processing.

Now clearly it's not as white and black as most fanboys will have you believe, but simply put Xenos is a more flexible monster then RSX. Innovazero2000

The lack of HDR+AA is where the Cell comes in. Ninja Theory said that they have HDR emulated on the Cell in Heavenly Sword, freeing up the RSX to do AA. Just the fact that the RSX ins't doing any HDR at all allows it to focus that power in other areas.

Yes it has higher bit HDR, but it can't do HDR+AA, at least no true floating point HDR. Shader based HDR is a very nice alternitive, but it's not as precise, and it takes power from the rest of the card.

Innovazero2000