Didnt it take about 7 years for developers to be able to utilize every hardware feature of the PS2? And you'd expect developers to be able to use the Cell, something much more complex than the PS2 to optimize for, in about a year?
The PS3 is more powerful than the 360. Plain and simple.
Its a hell of a lot easier for developers to utilize the power in the 360. Will the PS3 eventually outclass the 360 once developers know how to better use it? Way to early to tell. It may be possible that the 360 continues its lead for a long time.
XaosII
The difference is in 7 years the ps3 will be deader then George Washingon.
Didnt it take about 7 years for developers to be able to utilize every hardware feature of the PS2? And you'd expect developers to be able to use the Cell, something much more complex than the PS2 to optimize for, in about a year?
The PS3 is more powerful than the 360. Plain and simple.
Its a hell of a lot easier for developers to utilize the power in the 360. Will the PS3 eventually outclass the 360 once developers know how to better use it? Way to early to tell. It may be possible that the 360 continues its lead for a long time.
Vortec33
The difference is in 7 years the ps3 will be deader then George Washingon.
this isnt a cell problem this is a ram problem. the only advantage that the 360 has over the ps3 is the floating ram. and thats what framrate comes down to.
this isnt a cell problem this is a ram problem. the only advantage that the 360 has over the ps3 is the floating ram. and thats what framrate comes down to.mattyomo99
Wow that whole floating ram thing you mentioned sounds kind of important.
[QUOTE="mattyomo99"]this isnt a cell problem this is a ram problem. the only advantage that the 360 has over the ps3 is the floating ram. and thats what framrate comes down to.Vortec33
Wow that whole floating ram thing you mentioned sounds kind of important.
the ps3 and 360 both have 512mb of ram, the ps3 splits the ram 50/50 between cpu and gpu. but the 360 shares the ram between the cpu and gpu, so if the gpu needs more ram it can get it as long as the cpu isnt using it.
Who cares? EA wasn't the biggest fan of ps3 from it's introduction regardless. So to compare the two is getting dumb. Both versions will be great so let's enjoy the football at it's finest.
football games r rubbish anyways its down to EA and there **** of a team look at Lair and all the things thats going all at once thats 1080p support running at 60fps just proves that Ps3 aint weak its gettin greater
football games r rubbish anyways its down to EA and there **** of a team look at Lair and all the things thats going all at once thats 1080p support running at 60fps just proves that Ps3 aint weak its gettin greater Whiteknight19
agreed i dont think its a problem to run it at 60fps on ps3, its just ea being dumb and lazy
Cell excels in streaming/parallel programming, This game isnt programmed for that. the 360 is pretty much 100% like a pc, so porting games over from pc to 360 is easy as cake. Ps3 in the other hand is completely different you need to design the whole game around it from ground up not just port some game over from pc/360 and hope for high efficiency.
streaming/parallel programming is the next big thing and lazy devs are to dumb to program for it.
Cell excels in streaming/parallel programming, This game isnt programmed for that. the 360 is pretty much 100% like a pc, so porting games over from pc to 360 is easy as cake. Ps3 in the other hand is completely different you need to design the whole game around it from ground up not just port some game over from pc/360 and hope for high efficiency.
streaming/parallel programming is the next big thing and lazy devs are to dumb to program for it.
Amigwo
yea exactly, the cell takes alot of time to dev for and once devs get used to it we will see some great stuff. like mgs4 and killzone 2
Log in to comment