Laying the Graphics Question to Rest

  • 119 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for primetime2121
primetime2121

3953

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#101 primetime2121
Member since 2004 • 3953 Posts
[QUOTE="nanomecha4"]360 still cant do Motorstorm, GT:HD, LAIR, HEavenly Sword, MGS 4 graphics. Xenos is bottlenecked by Xenon.hydrophoboe
It is.. where is your "proof"? As I recall, the Xenos is the equivalent of a x1900xt.. most dual core processors have more than enough head-room for an x1900xt. So why wouldn't a tri-core? Also, Motorstorm runs like crap. GT:HD doesn't look NEAR as good as PGR3, imo.

http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/736/736366/gran-turismo-hd-20061009023346321.jpg
http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/655/655559/x05-new-project-gotham-racing-3-images-20051003093647560.jpg

The only edge GT seems to have over PG3 is the backgrounds, imo.


actually the 360 GPU is above an x1800 xt and below a x1900 xt...but it has some features that none of them have which can be very useful to developers
Avatar image for angelofevil69
angelofevil69

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#102 angelofevil69
Member since 2006 • 158 Posts
thank you for helping the 360 on its way to mass pwnage :)
Avatar image for glitchgeeman
glitchgeeman

5638

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#103 glitchgeeman
Member since 2005 • 5638 Posts
Sorry but I can't agree with you at all. First of all, when you say 60% of the people here think the Xbox is more powerful then the Wii, that's complete BS. Either A) You're a fanboy, or B) 60% of the people here are fanboys. The Wii is 3 times more powerful then the GC and the GC was only slightly weaker then the Xbox so unless someone's is completely ignorant, it's plainly obvious that the Wii is more powerful than the Xbox.
Avatar image for mrboo15
mrboo15

2043

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#104 mrboo15
Member since 2006 • 2043 Posts
Yes 360 is more powerful then PS3 because it can push more vertex's :roll: In a game world that 90% normal mapped i can were the extra polygons would get used :|
Avatar image for hydrophoboe
hydrophoboe

444

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#105 hydrophoboe
Member since 2004 • 444 Posts
actually the 360 GPU is above an x1800 xt and below a x1900 xt...but it has some features that none of them have which can be very useful to developers
primetime2121

That is very interesting, which further highlights my point that IT IS NOT BOTTLENECKED BY THE CPU.

Anyway, I see a lot of "facts" and very few sources around here. Quote your crap and then link the source. An official PS/Xbox magazine is better than no source.



Avatar image for Tony_aaaa
Tony_aaaa

475

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#106 Tony_aaaa
Member since 2007 • 475 Posts
[QUOTE="Tony_aaaa"]

Oops, forgot the memory stuff. Yes, the GPU has its pool of memory (V-Ram) just as the CPU's pool of (main) RAM. on PS3 each has direct access to it's respective block and the GPU can access the main RAM (with a sizable latency hit) I'm just guessing that the origial design would be similar---2 pools of memory, 1 per Cell.

FYI about the "slow" system ram vs fast V-RAM.....Cell has a faster connection to its memory than RSX. Why would a CPU need so much bandwith when the GPU could desperately use it??? (full sarcasm on the last question :)

Teufelhuhn


The RSX has plenty of bandwidth to the XDR (20 GB/s read, 15 GB/s write).   That's more than enough for the CPU to do some pre-processing on the geometry, for example it could do use back-face culling to remove un-needed geometry and improve rendering performance. 

Teuf....read my previous posts on this thread ---your "response" was something i already mentioned.
Avatar image for mojito1988
mojito1988

4973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#107 mojito1988
Member since 2006 • 4973 Posts
OMG the 360 is more powerful than the wii???? NOOOOOO!!! (i'm sure glad i have a 360 and a wii, of the 2 the wii is still better lol)
Avatar image for Tony_aaaa
Tony_aaaa

475

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#108 Tony_aaaa
Member since 2007 • 475 Posts

[QUOTE="primetime2121"]actually the 360 GPU is above an x1800 xt and below a x1900 xt...but it has some features that none of them have which can be very useful to developers
hydrophoboe

That is very interesting, which further highlights my point that IT IS NOT BOTTLENECKED BY THE CPU.

Anyway, I see a lot of "facts" and very few sources around here. Quote your crap and then link the source. An official PS/Xbox magazine is better than no source.



I agree with you there---this whole x1900>xenos>x1800 stuff is ruining this thread. If you can't keep up--DON'T POST! Anyway, hydophoboe is correct. PS3 is not CPU bottlenecked. Why??? Because it was originally designed to be a CPU all-in-1 system with massive CPU bandwith. RSX was a (reletivly) last minute design change and it shows by it being unable to keep up. Hence all the SPU "work arounds"

PS--(just for fun) a better Xenos equation Xenos=(R600 X .55)-GeometryShaders+EDRAM

Avatar image for hydrophoboe
hydrophoboe

444

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#109 hydrophoboe
Member since 2004 • 444 Posts
Hmm.. I was talking about the Xbox 360's GPU, but I agree with you on either system. The PS3 has a LOT of processing power so the RSX is definitely NOT bottlenecked.
Avatar image for nextgengaming18
nextgengaming18

2719

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#110 nextgengaming18
Member since 2006 • 2719 Posts

RSX according to that site

"Over 750 Million Polygons/Second. Vert count and poly count "

Runs at 550 mhz

Ram 256 mb

Xenon according to that site

Maximum polygon performance: 500 million triangles per second

Runs at 500 mhz

Ram 512 dual linked with xenos.

Avatar image for kukukuk
kukukuk

2406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#111 kukukuk
Member since 2005 • 2406 Posts
lawl Wii graphics source: www.wikipedia.org/xbox
Avatar image for Sensui1986
Sensui1986

390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#112 Sensui1986
Member since 2005 • 390 Posts
Respect for nintendo...
I don't think neither Microsoft or Sony could keep up with the concurrention, without having the next gen graphics.
And in this age where graphics matter the most to most kids, I must say that is a very good achievement.
Avatar image for Eidog
Eidog

249

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#113 Eidog
Member since 2007 • 249 Posts
Someone editted those sources already :).
Avatar image for Eidog
Eidog

249

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#114 Eidog
Member since 2007 • 249 Posts
I suggest you find another source because wikipedia can be editted by anyone on this forum.
Avatar image for blues35301
blues35301

2680

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#116 blues35301
Member since 2008 • 2680 Posts

You know nothing about graphics processors. If you'd like a free lesson, please let me know.Teufelhuhn

thats exactly what i was thinking. and based on seeing you post in the past you definitely know what you're talking about

Avatar image for blues35301
blues35301

2680

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#117 blues35301
Member since 2008 • 2680 Posts
why was this on the first page? i didnt bump it but now it looks like i did lol. guess someone bumped and deleted their posts
Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

51583

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#118 Chutebox  Online
Member since 2007 • 51583 Posts

Someone bumped it then deleted their post.

Common trolling unfortunately.

Avatar image for gamewhat
gamewhat

926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#119 gamewhat
Member since 2007 • 926 Posts
The author of this post I take it is trying to make himself feel better about his purchase. For one if you read the so called 500 million triangle theory, rofl, one would notice that in order to do that the gpu would be doing that and nothing else. No color, no nothing but triangles is exactly what you would be seeing on the television screen; all 500 million to be exact. Which is why nothing on the 360 will never look as good as mgs4 or uncharted, just as an example. So yeah......... whatever.
Avatar image for efflux02
efflux02

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#120 efflux02
Member since 2008 • 219 Posts

Well, the TC's main point might be flawed, but at least he shed some light on the whole GPU development situation with Sony. I never knew that stuff.

It's all subjective anyway.. the theoretical numbers or benchmarking performances don't mean much to anyone except developers, hardcore gamers and fanboys. In terms of graphics, my opinion is something like this:

Best textures: Gears
Charater Models: Heavy Rain
Water and Environments: Crysis
Lighting: Killzone 2

My opinion might suck, but at least I'm not wrong.

Avatar image for lesner87
lesner87

2441

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#121 lesner87
Member since 2004 • 2441 Posts
TC your theory and post is a complete FLAW.The VERY MINOR weakness of RSX is actually made up by the Cell processor,giving PS3 better graphics than the 360.
Avatar image for mamkem6
mamkem6

1457

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#122 mamkem6
Member since 2007 • 1457 Posts

PS3 can do 1 billion red stars per second.

Yeah, strong

:P

  • 119 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Browse Boards
Jump to Top

×

Move topic to another board

Pick a board and hit submit

  • (Or search for a more specific forum)
    • Close