Is the GPU holding the PS3 back?

GTA IV, quite famously, was delayed from being a 2007 release to being a 2008 release because of problems Rockstar were having with the Playstation 3 version of the game. And now Codemasters admit that whilst the Microsoft Xbox 360 version of Grid runs at a solid 30 fps the Playstation 3 version doesn't. These are just two of the latest of a long stream of disappointments with the comparative performance of the PS3. What is happening here?

For the PS3 Sony wanted to have a technology advantage so they developed, in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM, the Cell processor. A clean sheet design with many innovations this took $400 million and four years to develop. The intention was to use two of these in the PS3, one as CPU and one as GPU. However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn't up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:
* It wasn't designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
* The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
* The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU.

Link

GTA IV, quite famously, was delayed from being a 2007 release to being a 2008 release because of problems Rockstar were having with the Playstation 3 version of the game. And now Codemasters admit that whilst the Microsoft Xbox 360 version of Grid runs at a solid 30 fps the Playstation 3 version doesn't. These are just two of the latest of a long stream of disappointments with the comparative performance of the PS3. What is happening here?

For the PS3 Sony wanted to have a technology advantage so they developed, in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM, the Cell processor. A clean sheet design with many innovations this took $400 million and four years to develop. The intention was to use two of these in the PS3, one as CPU and one as GPU. However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn't up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:
* It wasn't designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
* The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
* The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU.

Link

General909

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

Holds it back from what? Sure it would perform better, but so would the 360 if you put a G80 in it.
Teufelhuhn

So true.

GTA IV, quite famously, was delayed from being a 2007 release to being a 2008 release because of problems Rockstar were having with the Playstation 3 version of the game. And now Codemasters admit that whilst the Microsoft Xbox 360 version of Grid runs at a solid 30 fps the Playstation 3 version doesn't. These are just two of the latest of a long stream of disappointments with the comparative performance of the PS3. What is happening here?

For the PS3 Sony wanted to have a technology advantage so they developed, in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM, the Cell processor. A clean sheet design with many innovations this took $400 million and four years to develop. The intention was to use two of these in the PS3, one as CPU and one as GPU. However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn't up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:
* It wasn't designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
* The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
* The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU.

Link

General909

[QUOTE="General909"]

GTA IV, quite famously, was delayed from being a 2007 release to being a 2008 release because of problems Rockstar were having with the Playstation 3 version of the game. And now Codemasters admit that whilst the Microsoft Xbox 360 version of Grid runs at a solid 30 fps the Playstation 3 version doesn't. These are just two of the latest of a long stream of disappointments with the comparative performance of the PS3. What is happening here?

For the PS3 Sony wanted to have a technology advantage so they developed, in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM, the Cell processor. A clean sheet design with many innovations this took $400 million and four years to develop. The intention was to use two of these in the PS3, one as CPU and one as GPU. However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn't up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:
* It wasn't designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
* The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
* The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU.

Link

septicvirus

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

I honestly hope you don't believe the **** that you post.

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

septicvirus

thats sarcasm... right?

[QUOTE="septicvirus"][QUOTE="General909"]

GTA IV, quite famously, was delayed from being a 2007 release to being a 2008 release because of problems Rockstar were having with the Playstation 3 version of the game. And now Codemasters admit that whilst the Microsoft Xbox 360 version of Grid runs at a solid 30 fps the Playstation 3 version doesn't. These are just two of the latest of a long stream of disappointments with the comparative performance of the PS3. What is happening here?

For the PS3 Sony wanted to have a technology advantage so they developed, in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM, the Cell processor. A clean sheet design with many innovations this took $400 million and four years to develop. The intention was to use two of these in the PS3, one as CPU and one as GPU. However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn't up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:
* It wasn't designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
* The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
* The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU.

Link

Nagidar

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

I honestly hope you don't believe the **** that you post.

Look at Always-honest's post. There are others on here who believe the truth when they see it.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="septicvirus"][QUOTE="General909"]

GTA IV, quite famously, was delayed from being a 2007 release to being a 2008 release because of problems Rockstar were having with the Playstation 3 version of the game. And now Codemasters admit that whilst the Microsoft Xbox 360 version of Grid runs at a solid 30 fps the Playstation 3 version doesn't. These are just two of the latest of a long stream of disappointments with the comparative performance of the PS3. What is happening here?

For the PS3 Sony wanted to have a technology advantage so they developed, in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM, the Cell processor. A clean sheet design with many innovations this took $400 million and four years to develop. The intention was to use two of these in the PS3, one as CPU and one as GPU. However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn't up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:
* It wasn't designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
* The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
* The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU.

Link

septicvirus

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

I honestly hope you don't believe the **** that you post.

Look at Always-honest's post. There are others on here who believe the truth when they see it.

LOL, Yea, I totally didn't see you edit your post, twice.

[QUOTE="septicvirus"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="septicvirus"][QUOTE="General909"]

GTA IV, quite famously, was delayed from being a 2007 release to being a 2008 release because of problems Rockstar were having with the Playstation 3 version of the game. And now Codemasters admit that whilst the Microsoft Xbox 360 version of Grid runs at a solid 30 fps the Playstation 3 version doesn't. These are just two of the latest of a long stream of disappointments with the comparative performance of the PS3. What is happening here?

For the PS3 Sony wanted to have a technology advantage so they developed, in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM, the Cell processor. A clean sheet design with many innovations this took $400 million and four years to develop. The intention was to use two of these in the PS3, one as CPU and one as GPU. However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn't up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:
* It wasn't designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
* The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
* The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU.

Link

Nagidar

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

I honestly hope you don't believe the **** that you post.

Look at Always-honest's post. There are others on here who believe the truth when they see it.

LOL, Yea, I totally didn't see you edit your post, twice.

I'm glad we are in agreement!

That and having half the ram of the 360, a blu-ray player that reads at half the speed of what it's supposed to be improving on (DVD), and an archiechture that looks like it was built by a monkey with a severe case dyslexia. :P
Ilikemyname420

If you develope on a system first, then port to the PS3, of course the 360 version will look better.

If you developed on the PS3 first, then ported to the 360, of course the PS3 version would look better.

You can say the PS3 is hard to develope for, but it's not underpowered.

[QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"]That and having half the ram of the 360, a blu-ray player that reads at half the speed of what it's supposed to be improving on (DVD), and an archiechture that looks like it was built by a monkey with a severe case dyslexia. :P
ThePlothole

and which is better? could explain to a non-techie what does that all mean?

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"]That and having half the ram of the 360, a blu-ray player that reads at half the speed of what it's supposed to be improving on (DVD), and an archiechture that looks like it was built by a monkey with a severe case dyslexia. :P
st1ka

and which is better? could explain to a non-techie what does that all mean?

listen, all you need to know is that the ps triple is utter dog crap.

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

septicvirus

Oh dear :roll:

[QUOTE="septicvirus"]

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

speedsix

Oh dear :roll:

WHAT. You can't handle the truth?? Keep cowering in fear then. :P

The better the engine is optimized for the system the more efficient it runs. Dont care if you understand this or not. Both do things the other cant. If you want to know what, get both.

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"]That and having half the ram of the 360, a blu-ray player that reads at half the speed of what it's supposed to be improving on (DVD), and an archiechture that looks like it was built by a monkey with a severe case dyslexia. :P
st1ka

and which is better? could explain to a non-techie what does that all mean?

[QUOTE="septicvirus"]

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"]That and having half the ram of the 360, a blu-ray player that reads at half the speed of what it's supposed to be improving on (DVD), and an archiechture that looks like it was built by a monkey with a severe case dyslexia. :P
st1ka

and which is better? could explain to a non-techie what does that all mean?

LMAO, they're getting younger and younger on these boards... :lol:

yesAlways-Honest

Forcing dev's to learn a difficult system just to keep up with the easier to use rival is ridiculous. And expecting them to embrace it arms wide open even more so. So yeah, it is.

everytime i read something related to PS3s gfx performance or stuff like that...its always comming from multiplatform devs....

but look at devs like naughty dog, insomniac, guerrilla, konami ( with MGS4 ), poliphony digital, square enix ( FFXIII ), erm..the guys developing motorstorm 2.......

those devs are doing a pretty good job, i havent readed about them complaining about PS3 GPU.......or if the have...let me know XD !!!

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

septicvirus

Sorry, I had to...he just left it there entirely open for me.

no its not, the gpu is the only thing not holding it back,

the cell si because not many devs are very familiar with multi threaded coded let alone the cells 1 + 7 spe arcitecture, so if they want to do a good game they have to work on it for 2 years, if you dont believe me, look at all thoses games that were meant to come out last year or even at ps3 launch. and now ff13 is due probly in 2010

then also the ram, the ram holds the console back (well for most consoles this is the case) since the cell is theoretically mroe powerful then the xenon is alot of cases but the ram criples those numbers(even the real world performance)

It absolutely FASCINATES me to read SW children with thousands of posts ATTEMPT to discuss technical underpinnings of GPU's. "the 7800 GTX is not optmized as a console GPU." I didn't even need to read that article to know that is BS. The RSX is the GPU and it is NOT an exact 7800 GTX.

Secondly, the GPU of the ps3 is NOT significantly less powerful than the 360 GPU. The RSX operates at 550mhz core while the 360 is 50mhz less BUT the 360 does have the unified architecture and 10mb EDRAM buffer which supposedly helps with AA.

half the ram on the 360" WTF is that? They both have the SAME amount of RAM but they utilize it differently. The ps3 ram is actually extremely fast but some of the advantages of the PS3 ram is mitigated by having to account for a beefier OS.

BOTTOM FLIPPING LINE. BOTH systems are EXTREMELY close in GPU performance and if a game was developed simultaneously with two teams working on the games, then you would be NITPICKING differences and it would come down to, "Do i like Nvidia image quality better (PS3 GPU maker) or ATI image quality better (360). The CPU advantage of the ps3 is apparent in SOME games BUT it is harder to program for. The reason (in simple terms) is that the ps3 uses a "single core" that has a lot of "little helper cores" to offload SPECIFIC tasks. The 360 has THREE general cores which are general purpose. However, when a game is properly coded for and utiliizing the SPE's (little helper cores) then you will see more characters on screen, less lag, more particle effects and better physics. The ps3 cpu is actually a VERY CAPABLE performer.

FINALLY, the ps2 was VERY inferior to the xbox. You are talking 4mb integrated GPU VS 64mb dedicated GPU in the xbox and the visual differences were "big" but not mind blowing. This time around we are talking about "structural" differences and not much else. So the differences are NIL.

[QUOTE="General909"]

GTA IV, quite famously, was delayed from being a 2007 release to being a 2008 release because of problems Rockstar were having with the Playstation 3 version of the game. And now Codemasters admit that whilst the Microsoft Xbox 360 version of Grid runs at a solid 30 fps the Playstation 3 version doesn't. These are just two of the latest of a long stream of disappointments with the comparative performance of the PS3. What is happening here?

For the PS3 Sony wanted to have a technology advantage so they developed, in conjunction with Toshiba and IBM, the Cell processor. A clean sheet design with many innovations this took $400 million and four years to develop. The intention was to use two of these in the PS3, one as CPU and one as GPU. However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn't up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:
* It wasn't designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
* The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
* The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU.

Link

septicvirus

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

It absolutely FASCINATES me to read SW children with thousands of posts ATTEMPT to discuss technical underpinnings of GPU's. "the 7800 GTX is not optmized as a console GPU." I didn't even need to read that article to know that is BS. The RSX is the GPU and it is NOT an exact 7800 GTX.

Secondly, the GPU of the ps3 is NOT significantly less powerful than the 360 GPU. The RSX operates at 550mhz core while the 360 is 50mhz less BUT the 360 does have the unified architecture and 10mb EDRAM buffer which supposedly helps with AA.

half the ram on the 360" WTF is that? They both have the SAME amount of RAM but they utilize it differently. The ps3 ram is actually extremely fast but some of the advantages of the PS3 ram is mitigated by having to account for a beefier OS.

BOTTOM FLIPPING LINE. BOTH systems are EXTREMELY close in GPU performance and if a game was developed simultaneously with two teams working on the games, then you would be NITPICKING differences and it would come down to, "Do i like Nvidia image quality better (PS3 GPU maker) or ATI image quality better (360). The CPU advantage of the ps3 is apparent in SOME games BUT it is harder to program for. The reason (in simple terms) is that the ps3 uses a "single core" that has a lot of "little helper cores" to offload SPECIFIC tasks. The 360 has THREE general cores which are general purpose. However, when a game is properly coded for and utiliizing the SPE's (little helper cores) then you will see more characters on screen, less lag, more particle effects and better physics. The ps3 cpu is actually a VERY CAPABLE performer.

FINALLY, the ps2 was VERY inferior to the xbox. You are talking 4mb integrated GPU VS 64mb dedicated GPU in the xbox and the visual differences were "big" but not mind blowing. This time around we are talking about "structural" differences and not much else. So the differences are NIL.

Dave_NBF

1. The RSX is a "watered down" 7800GTX.

2. Clock speed != power, and the RSX was presumedly dropped from 550Mhz to 500Mhz.

3. Yes, the Xenos is quite a bit more powerfull than the RSX, it has a higher SM, puts out 2x polygons over the RSX, destroys the RSX in architecture efficiency, puts out almost 30 billion more SOP/s.

Legendary Beyond 3D "RSX: Vertex input limited?" thread

Posts by Ninja Theory (Heavenly Sword) Devs, and some 3rd party guy (Joker 454) talking over the differences in gpu. DEVS. Given SW rules, they trump random poster speculation. The consensus was that given a set of 3d data, the Xenon would offer better performance over the RSX. Its an awesome thread if you like reading technical stuff like that.

If the GP's were really of near equal power, devs wouldn't have ANY trouble with multiplats. Its not like any 360 multiplats use any special programming to use more than 1 core (PS3 PPU and 360 main core being IDENTICAL 3.2ghz PowerPC RISC.) But devs ARE having problems doing ports. Don't give me CoD4 or GTA4, that took ALOT of extra effort on the dev's part to achieve parity

No this is the cows excuse.

"Well if teh Xbox neva came out, devs wouldent need to water down their gamez to work with xbox. If tehy made it PS3 exclusive it would be 1000x better then Gears of Bore!"

It absolutely FASCINATES me to read SW children with thousands of posts ATTEMPT to discuss technical underpinnings of GPU's. "the 7800 GTX is not optmized as a console GPU." I didn't even need to read that article to know that is BS. The RSX is the GPU and it is NOT an exact 7800 GTX.

Secondly, the GPU of the ps3 is NOT significantly less powerful than the 360 GPU. The RSX DOES NOT operate at 550mhz core while the 360 RUNS AT THE SAME SPEED AND the 360 does have the unified architecture and 10mb EDRAM buffer which supposedly helps with AA.

half the ram on the 360" WTF is that? They both have the SAME amount of RAM but they utilize it differently. The ps3 ram is actually extremely fast but some of the advantages of the PS3 ram is mitigated by having to account for a beefier OS.

BOTTOM FLIPPING LINE. BOTH systems are EXTREMELY close in GPU performance and if a game was developed simultaneously with two teams working on the games, then you would be NITPICKING differences and it would come down to, "Do i like Nvidia image quality better (PS3 GPU maker) or ATI image quality better (360). The CPU advantage of the ps3 is apparent in SOME games BUT it is harder to program for. The reason (in simple terms) is that the ps3 uses a "single core" that has a lot of "little helper cores" to offload SPECIFIC tasks. The 360 has THREE general cores which are general purpose. However, when a game is properly coded for and utiliizing the SPE's (little helper cores) then you will see more characters on screen, less lag, more particle effects and better physics. The ps3 cpu is actually a VERY CAPABLE performer.

FINALLY, the ps2 was VERY inferior to the xbox. You are talking 4mb integrated GPU VS 64mb dedicated GPU in the xbox and the visual differences were "big" but not mind blowing. This time around we are talking about "structural" differences and not much else. So the differences are NIL.

Dave_NBF

Thought you'd like to have your post fixed. Both GPUs run at 500MHz. Sony dropped it to 500...or should I say they just lied about it being at 550MHz so they could claim it was faster than the 360's which came out a year earlier!

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

septicvirus

If you develope on a system first, then port to the PS3, of course the 360 version will look better.

If you developed on the PS3 first, then ported to the 360, of course the PS3 version would look better.

You can say the PS3 is hard to develope for, but it's not underpowered.

carljohnson3456

Yeah, and the games that aren't ports, like GTAIV looks and performs exactly the same on both systems.

Well PS3 is kinda held back in the same ways as PS2 was. Relatively weaker GPU (although it is about equal to 360's) and bandwidth limitations (both consoles suffer from). My guess is it'll be just like PS2 in the developement cycle but take longer. Took a year with PS2 to see games that looked much better than Dreamcast. It's taken 2 years with PS3. If the system is ever fully exploited like PS2 was we'll see games just as impressive as God of War2 was for PS2 hardware.Lazy_Boy88

The ps2 could actually push more poly's than the xbox. It was held back (ironically the right word when doing a ps3 comparison?) by having like 4mb of video ram. I loved the ps2 so much I paid $500 for one >_< I'm not sure if I believe that PS3 games will have the same evolution that late ps2 games like Zone of Enders, DMC, and GoW showed.

[QUOTE="septicvirus"]

NO, THE CELL EMULATES A GPU AND WORKS TOGETHER WITH THE RSX TO BE STRONGER THAN CRYSIS. JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS TO STOP BEING SO LAZY.

speedsix

here we go again..

In a sense, all components of any system hold it back. That's why we don't have holographic games, how cool would that be. tmntPunchout

[QUOTE="tmntPunchout"]In a sense, all components of any system hold it back. That's why we don't have holographic games, how cool would that be. ThePlothole

oh heh.

[QUOTE="st1ka"] [QUOTE="septicvirus"]

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"]That and having half the ram of the 360, a blu-ray player that reads at half the speed of what it's supposed to be improving on (DVD), and an archiechture that looks like it was built by a monkey with a severe case dyslexia. :P
septicvirus

and which is better? could explain to a non-techie what does that all mean?

LMAO, they're getting younger and younger on these boards... :lol:

:lol: