ps3 better than xbox360? LOL

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/id-tech-5-project/810525p1.html

tech5 demo part1 watch that.

at like 4:57

john carmack say's the problem child is usually the ps3, where you find out you got less memory, compared to xbox360 you got less memory 256+ 256 mb minus 96 for operating system vs xbox360 512 mb minus 32 mb for os.

we always run out of memory first on ps3.

well that's pretty much it.

256/256 -96MB for OS.

VS

512MB+10MB EDRAM -32MB for OS.

xbox 360 wins.

that may have been relevant the first time it was posted, it's lost it's punch after the 100th time someone posted it.

Hay guys did you know 360's got a red ring of death?

PS3>>>>>Xbox3fixme

/runs away and never comes back to this thread again

0ld..besides that, his statment is a little flawed. The ps3 doesn't use 96 mb for OS anymore. That was lowered in the updates.Scarletred

nope the video is brand new man only a few days old, the os uses 96 mb of ram he clearly says it on the video watch

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/id-tech-5-project/810525p1.html

shame, RAGE looks like a kick ass game, better on 360, ps3=downgraded textures :lol:

even if ps3 os used less memory than 96 mb it's still split system memory still wont be as much avalible.

that may have been relevant the first time it was posted, it's lost it's punch after the 100th time someone posted it.

Hay guys did you know 360's got a red ring of death?

Jynxzor

this had been posted, but there was no video of john carmack saying it.

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/id-tech-5-project/810525p1.html

on the link first video, john carmack clearifys it on video says ps3 os 96 mb of ram.

split system memory only a problem if your lazy like many devs appear to be.Jynxzor

no split system memory, means less memory is accessable to cpu/gpu than unified.,

Split memory has been a staple of PC gaming since the dawn of time. The dark days when it was using shared memory were sad indeed, seeing as shared video memory is slower than dedicated memory. That's right. That means that the Playstation 3's video memory is faster than the shared memory in the Xbox 360.

Additionally, so is it's main memory, since it's XDR. It has higher bandwidth and presumably much lower latency, meaning faster.

John Carmack has literally been working on split memory platforms all of his life, excluding this one-time experience with the Xbox 360. His complaints mean nothing to me. He made up his mind a long time ago.

[QUOTE="Scarletred"]0ld..besides that, his statment is a little flawed. The ps3 doesn't use 96 mb for OS anymore. That was lowered in the updates.ps3rulezzggdff

nope the video is brand new man only a few days old, the os uses 96 mb of ram he clearly says it on the video watch

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/id-tech-5-project/810525p1.html

shame, RAGE looks like a kick ass game, better on 360, ps3=downgraded textures :lol:

even if ps3 os used less memory than 96 mb it's still split system memory still wont be as much avalible.

I don't care if the vid is new. His statement is still flawed. It's been said that the updates have lowered the memory used by OS. also RSx can still use memory from the CPU. The cell can also help with textures. Suckerpunch told us that when they were talking about the new game Infamous.

*sigh*

Does anyone even bother readin other threads? Why does everyone think their so special to post somethin that has been posted like a thousand times.

[QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"]

[QUOTE="Scarletred"]0ld..besides that, his statment is a little flawed. The ps3 doesn't use 96 mb for OS anymore. That was lowered in the updates.Scarletred

nope the video is brand new man only a few days old, the os uses 96 mb of ram he clearly says it on the video watch

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/id-tech-5-project/810525p1.html

shame, RAGE looks like a kick ass game, better on 360, ps3=downgraded textures :lol:

even if ps3 os used less memory than 96 mb it's still split system memory still wont be as much avalible.

I don't care if the vid is new. His statement is still flawed. It's been said that the updates have lowered the memory used by OS. also RSx can still use memory from the CPU. The cell can also help with textures. Suckerpunch told us that when they were talking about the new game Infamous.

LOL, a processor cant be used to store textures.

also, cell cpu cant use more than 256 mb doesnt have acess to rsx gddr3.

john carmack knows more than you, you arent even a dev man, you are arguing against a genious.

you have no idea how ps3 works.

Split memory has been a staple of PC gaming since the dawn of time. The dark days when it was using shared memory were sad indeed, seeing as shared video memory is slower than dedicated memory. That's right. That means that the Playstation 3's video memory is faster than the shared memory in the Xbox 360.

Additionally, so is it's main memory, since it's XDR. It has higher bandwidth and presumably much lower latency, meaning faster.

Redfingers

you have no clue what you are talking about.

ps3 XDR ram has 25.6 gigabytes of bandwidth

ps3 gddr3 has 20.8 gb bandwidth

xbox360 has gddr3 with 22.4 gb bandwidth and 10 mb edram with 256 gb bandwidth.

share memory has never been done on pc, only graphics cards and pc main memory is too slow to use used as graphics memory.

[QUOTE="Scarletred"][QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"]

[QUOTE="Scarletred"]0ld..besides that, his statment is a little flawed. The ps3 doesn't use 96 mb for OS anymore. That was lowered in the updates.ps3rulezzggdff

nope the video is brand new man only a few days old, the os uses 96 mb of ram he clearly says it on the video watch

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/id-tech-5-project/810525p1.html

shame, RAGE looks like a kick ass game, better on 360, ps3=downgraded textures :lol:

even if ps3 os used less memory than 96 mb it's still split system memory still wont be as much avalible.

I don't care if the vid is new. His statement is still flawed. It's been said that the updates have lowered the memory used by OS. also RSx can still use memory from the CPU. The cell can also help with textures. Suckerpunch told us that when they were talking about the new game Infamous.

LOL, a processor cant be used to store textures.

also, cell cpu cant use more than 256 mb doesnt have acess to rsx gddr3.

john carmack knows more than you, you arent even a dev man, you are arguing against a genious.

you have no idea how ps3 works.

I didn't say that. i said that the people from sucker punch said the cell can be used to help with textures and such. You obviously don't know how it works. also i didn't say the cell can use more than 256mb. i said the RSX can. though at a severe price. also the only point i was arguing was if the OS used 96mb. It was said in an earlier firmware update that the memory cost for it was lowered.

PS3 is the biggest flop since Dreamcast.UssjTrunks

At least the Dreamcast had good games at launch though. :lol:

I didn't say that. i said that the people from sucker punch said the cell can be used to help with textures and such. You obviously don't know how it works. also i didn't say the cell can use more than 256mb. i said the RSX can. though at a severe price. also the only point i was arguing was if the OS used 96mb. It was said in an earlier firmware update that the memory cost for it was lowered.

listen dude, cell can only be used for procedural textures, and no games use them, tech5 engine doesnt use that type, plus cpu as limited local store.

[QUOTE="UssjTrunks"]PS3 is the biggest flop since Dreamcast.ReverseCycology

At least the Dreamcast had good games at launch though. :lol:

I didn't say that. i said that the people from sucker punch said the cell can be used to help with textures and such. You obviously don't know how it works. also i didn't say the cell can use more than 256mb. i said the RSX can. though at a severe price. also the only point i was arguing was if the OS used 96mb. It was said in an earlier firmware update that the memory cost for it was lowered.

ps3rulezzggdff

listen dude, cell can only be used for procedural textures, and no games use them, tech5 engine doesnt use that type, plus cpu as limited local store.

Listen just go look at what sucker punch said. hell it's on this website. Might have to dig a little since it's not on the front anymore (came around a little after E3).

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/id-tech-5-project/810525p1.html

tech5 demo part1 watch that.

at like 4:57

john carmack say's the problem child is usually the ps3, where you find out you got less memory, compared to xbox360 you got less memory 256+ 256 mb minus 96 for operating system vs xbox360 512 mb minus 32 mb for os.

we always run out of memory first on ps3.

ps3rulezzggdff

might be true but have u checked the other specs?

also the 360 was suppossed to be the connected device right?

Well u can connect and do more with a ps3 then a 360

Carmack also said PS3 is more powerful than the 360. Why 360 fans not quoting that?Shusty_lives

no he didnt he said the ps3 could etract more power to get to the 360 vesion

well that's pretty much it.

256/256 -96MB for OS.

VS

512MB+10MB EDRAM -32MB for OS.

xbox 360 wins.

Poop_Slash

eDram is for L2 cache. You don't sum it with the rest. :?

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/id-tech-5-project/810525p1.html

tech5 demo part1 watch that.

at like 4:57

john carmack say's the problem child is usually the ps3, where you find out you got less memory, compared to xbox360 you got less memory 256+ 256 mb minus 96 for operating system vs xbox360 512 mb minus 32 mb for os.

we always run out of memory first on ps3.

ps3rulezzggdff

Well yeah. Developers have been saying this for months now. Why do you think so many PS3 games have gotten delayed. Why do you think UbiSofts ports from the Xbox 360 to the PS3 has looked lacklustered. The Cell architecture doesn't help matters either. Glad I'm not a developer.

John Carmack: PS3 is probably marginally more powerful, in terms of raw flops and graphic operations, but that's not really the best way to look at things. When you look at these development cycles that stretch over years and years, being 20% easier to develop on is much more important than being 20% more powerful?

English-SW Babelfish: It's offcial, Carmack said Ps3 20% more powerful. Developers are whinners.

Seriuosly, I think one of the reasons the OS is so big, is because Sony plans to integrate so much stuff in the future, like Home, real-time video chatting, in-game Ads, etc... and since they can't change the size if the memory dedicated later, they had to estabilish that 96mb value from the beging, even if now it doesn't use it all nor support as much stuff as the 360(custom soundtrack, etc)

Carmack also said PS3 is more powerful than the 360. Why 360 fans not quoting that?Shusty_lives

The Cell processor is more powerful, but that's about it. It's all about the games anyways and if developers are having a hard time creating some games on the PS3 due to memory issues, that's going to be a problem.

Carmack also said PS3 is more powerful than the 360. Why 360 fans not quoting that?Shusty_lives

more powerful cpu yes, but memory is more important the peak cpu performance.

[QUOTE="Redfingers"]

Split memory has been a staple of PC gaming since the dawn of time. The dark days when it was using shared memory were sad indeed, seeing as shared video memory is slower than dedicated memory. That's right. That means that the Playstation 3's video memory is faster than the shared memory in the Xbox 360.

Additionally, so is it's main memory, since it's XDR. It has higher bandwidth and presumably much lower latency, meaning faster.

ps3rulezzggdff

you have no clue what you are talking about.

ps3 XDR ram has 25.6 gigabytes of bandwidth

ps3 gddr3 has 20.8 gb bandwidth

xbox360 has gddr3 with 22.4 gb bandwidth and 10 mb edram with 256 gb bandwidth.

share memory has never been done on pc, only graphics cards and pc main memory is too slow to use used as graphics memory.

Actually, I do have a clue.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html

"Main RAM -- 25.6GB/s VRAM -- 22.4GB/s"

As far as I know everything you wrote is essentially misinformation. The VRAM means GDDR3 by the way.

Who'd have thought. GDDR3 clocked at 700 MHz both in the 360 and the PS3 happens to have the same memory bandwidth. Shocker!

lol it actually kind of is better depends on your lifesytle

[QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

Split memory has been a staple of PC gaming since the dawn of time. The dark days when it was using shared memory were sad indeed, seeing as shared video memory is slower than dedicated memory. That's right. That means that the Playstation 3's video memory is faster than the shared memory in the Xbox 360.

Additionally, so is it's main memory, since it's XDR. It has higher bandwidth and presumably much lower latency, meaning faster.

Redfingers

you have no clue what you are talking about.

ps3 XDR ram has 25.6 gigabytes of bandwidth

ps3 gddr3 has 20.8 gb bandwidth

xbox360 has gddr3 with 22.4 gb bandwidth and 10 mb edram with 256 gb bandwidth.

share memory has never been done on pc, only graphics cards and pc main memory is too slow to use used as graphics memory.

Actually, I do have a clue.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html

"Main RAM -- 25.6GB/s VRAM -- 22.4GB/s"

As far as I know everything you wrote is essentially misinformation. The VRAM means GDDR3 by the way.

Who'd have thought. GDDR3 clocked at 700 MHz both in the 360 and the PS3 happens to have the same memory bandwidth. Shocker!

actually RSX gddr3 was downclocked to 650 mhz so the bandwidth is 20.8 at 700 mhz it's 22.4 gb but got lowered in clock.

also, xbox360 10 mb edram has 256 gb bandwidth so owns XDR+gddr3

[QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

Split memory has been a staple of PC gaming since the dawn of time. The dark days when it was using shared memory were sad indeed, seeing as shared video memory is slower than dedicated memory. That's right. That means that the Playstation 3's video memory is faster than the shared memory in the Xbox 360.

Additionally, so is it's main memory, since it's XDR. It has higher bandwidth and presumably much lower latency, meaning faster.

ps3rulezzggdff

you have no clue what you are talking about.

ps3 XDR ram has 25.6 gigabytes of bandwidth

ps3 gddr3 has 20.8 gb bandwidth

xbox360 has gddr3 with 22.4 gb bandwidth and 10 mb edram with 256 gb bandwidth.

share memory has never been done on pc, only graphics cards and pc main memory is too slow to use used as graphics memory.

Actually, I do have a clue.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html

"Main RAM -- 25.6GB/s VRAM -- 22.4GB/s"

As far as I know everything you wrote is essentially misinformation. The VRAM means GDDR3 by the way.

Who'd have thought. GDDR3 clocked at 700 MHz both in the 360 and the PS3 happens to have the same memory bandwidth. Shocker!

actually RSX gddr3 was downclocked to 650 mhz so the bandwidth is 20.8 at 700 mhz it's 22.4 gb but got lowered in clock.

also, xbox360 10 mb edram has 256 gb bandwidth so owns XDR+gddr3

Link me.

[QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"][QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

Split memory has been a staple of PC gaming since the dawn of time. The dark days when it was using shared memory were sad indeed, seeing as shared video memory is slower than dedicated memory. That's right. That means that the Playstation 3's video memory is faster than the shared memory in the Xbox 360.

Additionally, so is it's main memory, since it's XDR. It has higher bandwidth and presumably much lower latency, meaning faster.

Redfingers

you have no clue what you are talking about.

ps3 XDR ram has 25.6 gigabytes of bandwidth

ps3 gddr3 has 20.8 gb bandwidth

xbox360 has gddr3 with 22.4 gb bandwidth and 10 mb edram with 256 gb bandwidth.

share memory has never been done on pc, only graphics cards and pc main memory is too slow to use used as graphics memory.

Actually, I do have a clue.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html

"Main RAM -- 25.6GB/s VRAM -- 22.4GB/s"

As far as I know everything you wrote is essentially misinformation. The VRAM means GDDR3 by the way.

Who'd have thought. GDDR3 clocked at 700 MHz both in the 360 and the PS3 happens to have the same memory bandwidth. Shocker!

actually RSX gddr3 was downclocked to 650 mhz so the bandwidth is 20.8 at 700 mhz it's 22.4 gb but got lowered in clock.

also, xbox360 10 mb edram has 256 gb bandwidth so owns XDR+gddr3

Link me.

lol, the the framebuffer is probley the biggest bandwidth hog and it basically eats all xdr+gddr3 bandwidth.

while xbox360 while it's only 10 mb ram it has freaking amazing 256 gb bandwidth, so basically 22.4 left just for other crap.

google it, i seen at e3 sony said gddr3 rsx/ clock was 500 core 650 memory.ps3rulezzggdff

That doesn't qualify. I'm looking at rumors. Every spec sheet I've ever seen was fairly consistent. As it stands, the legit info is 22.4 GB/s at 700 MHz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_'Reality_Synthesizer'

Two for me, none for you!

550 MHz G70 based GPU on 90 nm process [1] 256 MiB GDDR3 RAM at 700 MHz 22.4 GiB/s read and write bandwidth

http://www.innerbits.com/blog/2007/05/09/ps3-memory-footprint/

Voila, proof that the PS3 OS memory footprint is being reduced via updates. Also proving that Carmack is at best inaccurate.

360 Cpu can't access eDram, it's only for internal logic-data transfer in the Xenos. One of the reasons 360 can do AA much better.

Ps3 northbridge(rambus FlexIO) throuputs at 62.4GB/s compared to 360's 22.8GB/s. So it has 64mb less avaliable memory, but it's 3 times faster.

360 Cpu can't access eDram, it's only for internal logic-data transfer in the Xenos. One of the reasons 360 can do AA much better.

Ps3 northbridge(rambus FlexIO) throuputs at 62.4GB/s compared to 360's 22.8GB/s. So it has 64mb less avaliable memory, but it's 3 times faster.

lordxymor

so?

360 Cpu can't access eDram, it's only for internal logic-data transfer in the Xenos. One of the reasons 360 can do AA much better.

Ps3 northbridge(rambus FlexIO) throuputs at 62.4GB/s compared to 360's 22.8GB/s. So it has 64mb less avaliable memory, but it's 3 times faster.

lordxymor

lol, xbox360 10 mb edram 256 gb is used for handling framebuffer and anti aliasing and hdr eases bandwidth off the main 22.4

while ps3 only has 20 gb for framebuffer bandwidth/aa and and then there wont be much bandwidth left for other stuff.

This is old and inaccurate.Heil68

nope, john carmack is currently programming on ps3 man, ps3 os uses 96 mb of ram, the sdk ps3's os uses 84 mb.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NzcxLDMsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0

he Xbox 360 Smart 3D Memory is a relatively small piece of DRAM sitting off to the side of the GPU but yet on the same substrate. The Smart 3D Memory weighs in at only 10MB. Now the first thing that you might think is, "Well what the hell good is 10MB in the world of 512MB frame buffers?" And that would be a good line of questioning. The "small" 10MB of Smart 3D memory that is currently being built by NEC will have an effective bus rate between it and the GPU of 2GHz. This is of course over 3X faster that what we see on the high end of RAM today.

Inside the Smart 3D Memory is what is referred to as a 3D Logic Unit. This is literally 192 Floating Point Unit processors inside our 10MB of RAM. This logic unit will be able to exchange data with the 10MB of RAM at an incredible rate of 2 Terabits per second. So while we do not have a lot of RAM, we have a memory unit that is extremely capable in terms of handling mass amounts of data extremely quickly. The most incredible feature that this Smart 3D Memory will deliver is "antialiasing for free" done inside the Smart 3D RAM at High Definition levels of resolution. (For more of just what HiDef specs are, you can read about it here. Yes, the 10MB of Smart 3D Memory can do 4X Multisampling Antialiasing at or above 1280x720 resolution without impacting the GPU. Therefore, not only will all of your games on Xbox 360 be in High Definition, but they also will have 4XAA applied.

The Smart 3D Memory can also compute Z depths, occlusion culling, and also does a very good job at figuring stencil shadows. Stencil shadows are used in games that will use the DOOM 3 engine such as Quake 4 and Prey.