ps3 better than xbox360? LOL

[QUOTE="Heil68"]This is old and inaccurate.ps3rulezzggdff

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

"First, the base memory footprint of the PS3 OS in main memory has been reduced from 56 MB to 52 MB. These values will lead to some confusion, as we've previously reported that the memory footprint was 64 MB. 8MB of memory was given back to developers sometime before Christmas, and now a further 4 MB has been returned. Currently, as of SDK 1.60, the PS3 operating system takes up 52 MB of main memory and 32 MB of graphics memory (84 MB total). As a comparison, the Xbox 360 still only uses 32 MB of shared memory for all its system utilities."

[QUOTE="ps3rulezzggdff"]

[QUOTE="Heil68"]This is old and inaccurate.Redfingers

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

"First, the base memory footprint of the PS3 OS in main memory has been reduced from 56 MB to 52 MB. These values will lead to some confusion, as we've previously reported that the memory footprint was 64 MB. 8MB of memory was given back to developers sometime before Christmas, and now a further 4 MB has been returned. Currently, as of SDK 1.60, the PS3 operating system takes up 52 MB of main memory and 32 MB of graphics memory (84 MB total). As a comparison, the Xbox 360 still only uses 32 MB of shared memory for all its system utilities."

ok, so ?

512 mb unified graphics memory>>> split 256+256 memory architecture.

360 os uses 32 mb

ps3 os uses 84 mb from your link

32>84

xbox360 still has 52 mb more ram avalible for textures, that's more ram than ps2 had all together LOL.

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

[QUOTE="Heil68"]This is old and inaccurate.ps3rulezzggdff

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

"First, the base memory footprint of the PS3 OS in main memory has been reduced from 56 MB to 52 MB. These values will lead to some confusion, as we've previously reported that the memory footprint was 64 MB. 8MB of memory was given back to developers sometime before Christmas, and now a further 4 MB has been returned. Currently, as of SDK 1.60, the PS3 operating system takes up 52 MB of main memory and 32 MB of graphics memory (84 MB total). As a comparison, the Xbox 360 still only uses 32 MB of shared memory for all its system utilities."

ok, so ?

512 mb unified graphics memory>>> split 256+256 memory architecture.

360 os uses 32 mb

ps3 os uses 84 mb from your link

32>84

xbox360 still has 52 mb more ram avalible for textures, that's more ram than ps2 had all together LOL.

I suppose you just through that in for kicks eh?

[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!

Except that small 3GB is negated when you factor in the EDRAM...why you ask? Because the EDRAM soaks up the most bandwidth hogging operations of the graphics subsystems, which traditionally are the frame buffer, Alpha blending, etc. So I wouldn't at all be surprised if the 360 has as much if not more bandwidth available, or at the very least mroe flexible. You also forget that only RSX can grab from the Xdr poll, the CPU however is screwed if it needs more memory, and even if it could it would take a sizeable performance hit. XDR has high latency issues, and it's read speed on the ps3 is awful. I can also guarentee you Xenos acting as the Memory controller is FAR more efficent then anything the ps3 is doing. Yes the PS3 has FlexIO which is pretty cool, but the 360 has it's own dual 11GB upstream/downstream data path between the CPU and GPU, and not to mention memexport, although thats more for Xenos sake.

Carmack is not the first developer to compalin about the ps3's RAM, so I don't know why people here act surprised.

Further more I don't know why Cows or Lemmings act as if they're system is vastly more powerful then one or the other when they are very similar in overall power.

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

To what? Like 86? I dont think it was by much.

[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.

Innovazero2000

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!

Except that small 3GB is negated when you factor in the EDRAM...why you ask? Because the EDRAM soaks up the most bandwidth hogging operations of the graphics subsystems, which traditionally are the frame buffer, Alpha blending, etc. So I wouldn't at all be surprised if the 360 has as much if not more bandwidth available, or at the very least mroe flexible. You also forget that only RSX can grab from the Xdr poll, the CPU however is screwed if it needs more memory, and even if it could it would take a sizeable performance hit. XDR has high latency issues, and it's read speed on the ps3 is awful. I can also guarentee you Xenos acting as the Memory controller is FAR more efficent then anything the ps3 is doing. Yes the PS3 has FlexIO which is pretty cool, but the 360 has it's own dual 11GB upstream/downstream data path between the CPU and GPU, and not to mention memexport, although thats more for Xenos sake.

Carmack is not the first developer to compalin about the ps3's RAM, so I don't know why people here act surprised.

Further more I don't know why Cows or Lemmings act as if they're system is vastly more powerful then one or the other when they are very similar in overall power.

Why do you say this? also where do you get your sources from. i would post this tech breakdown...but it's too long.

[QUOTE="Shusty_lives"]Carmack also said PS3 is more powerful than the 360. Why 360 fans not quoting that?fileman3

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

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

[QUOTE="Heil68"]This is old and inaccurate.ps3rulezzggdff

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

"First, the base memory footprint of the PS3 OS in main memory has been reduced from 56 MB to 52 MB. These values will lead to some confusion, as we've previously reported that the memory footprint was 64 MB. 8MB of memory was given back to developers sometime before Christmas, and now a further 4 MB has been returned. Currently, as of SDK 1.60, the PS3 operating system takes up 52 MB of main memory and 32 MB of graphics memory (84 MB total). As a comparison, the Xbox 360 still only uses 32 MB of shared memory for all its system utilities."

ok, so ?

512 mb unified graphics memory>>> split 256+256 memory architecture.

360 os uses 32 mb

ps3 os uses 84 mb from your link

32>84

xbox360 still has 52 mb more ram avalible for textures, that's more ram than ps2 had all together LOL.

Unified memory is NOT better than split memory architecture.

Also, my link only proves one thing: the amount of memory reserved for the OS in the Playstation 3 is being reduced via firmware updates. It doesn't prove how much as of 1.90. In fact, it sort of leaves that to the imagination.

The link says that the SDK reserves 84 MB as of 1.60. That's all.

I lol'ed at some of the replies. Hmmm... who should we trust here, ps3 fanboys talking out of their asses, or a legendary 3D programmer who actually has experience programming a next gen engine for both systems?DLuffy

The wisest of our camp, seeing as I've already proven Carmack wrong. He's using old figures, he's misinformed, or he's lying or oversimplifying. It doesn't matter what he's doing, he's not telling the truth.

Plus, A) only 32 MB of video memory is being reserved in the Playstation 3 using his figures (which one could only guess can now be false) and B) the main memory is faster.

[QUOTE="Redfingers"]

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.

farrell2k

Ouch! That's still insane 84mb. 32 for video and 52 for system. 172 total for applications. PC games 4 years ago used 128 of main ram and 16-32mb of video ram. If someone wrote a ps3 app that required 128mb main ram, they'd only have 44mb video ram... Crazy. At least you'd have about 64mb available on the 360.

The PS3 is obviously the best console on the market. :roll:

edit: what in the hell is the ps3 doing with 32mb video ram and 52 for the os? Is linux using it or something? It seems awfully innefficient.

You seem confused. The Playstation 3 has a split pool of 512 MB, and the Xbox 360 has a unified 512 MB.

[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.

Innovazero2000

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!

Except that small 3GB is negated when you factor in the EDRAM...why you ask? Because the EDRAM soaks up the most bandwidth hogging operations of the graphics subsystems, which traditionally are the frame buffer, Alpha blending, etc. So I wouldn't at all be surprised if the 360 has as much if not more bandwidth available, or at the very least mroe flexible. You also forget that only RSX can grab from the Xdr poll, the CPU however is screwed if it needs more memory, and even if it could it would take a sizeable performance hit. XDR has high latency issues, and it's read speed on the ps3 is awful. I can also guarentee you Xenos acting as the Memory controller is FAR more efficent then anything the ps3 is doing. Yes the PS3 has FlexIO which is pretty cool, but the 360 has it's own dual 11GB upstream/downstream data path between the CPU and GPU, and not to mention memexport, although thats more for Xenos sake.

Carmack is not the first developer to compalin about the ps3's RAM, so I don't know why people here act surprised.

Further more I don't know why Cows or Lemmings act as if they're system is vastly more powerful then one or the other when they are very similar in overall power.

XDR does NOT have high latency issues. I've already proven it eliminates the unusually high latency issues in previous versions of Rambus RAM and has extremely LOW latency in addition to being very fast RAM.

Plus, it's got the highest bandwidth.

Frankly, I'm not willing to factor the eDRAM as the biggest component determining overall bandwidth in addition to overall bandwidth usage. Why, you ask? First of all, Carmack, who you're so willing to trust, said it has 512 MB of unified memory and didn't even mention the framebuffer as a component in performance. If that was the case, who knows how it would come out? Your comment was pretty much speculative. Second, most Xbox 360 games don't actually have 4xAA as advertised via the framebuffer with no hit to the GPU. If all 360 games used 4xAA or at least most, I might be a little more inclined to believe that was the case.

Using your logic, Carmack did not mention the eDRAM because it is fairly inconsequential.

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 watchps3rulezzggdff

.....WOW....

[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.dudy80

To what? Like 86? I dont think it was by much.

It's 84 as of 1.60 according to my source. However, we're currently at firmware 1.90. There is no telling where it's at at this point, but the point is we know it's not 96. According to a few scattered internet sources, there's an NDA on that kind of information. I don't even know why Carmack opened his mouth. He's just confusing people.

[QUOTE="DLuffy"]I lol'ed at some of the replies. Hmmm... who should we trust here, ps3 fanboys talking out of their asses, or a legendary 3D programmer who actually has experience programming a next gen engine for both systems?Redfingers

The wisest of our camp, seeing as I've already proven Carmack wrong. He's using old figures, he's misinformed, or he's lying or oversimplifying. It doesn't matter what he's doing, he's not telling the truth.

Plus, A) only 32 MB of video memory is being reserved in the Playstation 3 using his figures (which one could only guess can now be false) and B) the main memory is faster.

So what you're saying is: You're a Carmack zombie?

You just listen to everything he says without reprieve?

You never doubt the almighty Carmack?

He is the lord thy god of programming?

The foremost expert on the PS3?

The only expert to comment on the PS3?

I lol'ed at some of the replies. Hmmm... who should we trust here, ps3 fanboys talking out of their asses, or a legendary 3D programmer who actually has experience programming a next gen engine for both systems?DLuffy

Um PS3 fanboys have everyright to laugh at this guy. He is the same guy that wouldnt develope a game for the PS2 because he simply thought it was to hard to workwith, yet that didnt stop many devs from making some of the best games of the last genration on the PS2. Hell the PS2 had more AAA and AA titles then any other console combined. Not to mention the PS3 has always been said it would be harder to develope for but if done properly it would do things that would look beyond any console and to be honest the first party exclusives show that. Uncharted.DF,HS, R&C, MGS4,KZ2 are just a few examples of games that simply look better then anything coming to the 360.

[QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="DLuffy"]I lol'ed at some of the replies. Hmmm... who should we trust here, ps3 fanboys talking out of their asses, or a legendary 3D programmer who actually has experience programming a next gen engine for both systems?primetime2121

The wisest of our camp, seeing as I've already proven Carmack wrong. He's using old figures, he's misinformed, or he's lying or oversimplifying. It doesn't matter what he's doing, he's not telling the truth.

Plus, A) only 32 MB of video memory is being reserved in the Playstation 3 using his figures (which one could only guess can now be false) and B) the main memory is faster.

I don't have to be a programmer to know that what he said is factually incorrect.

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

buh buh buh teh cell... and teh blu-ray... teh dvd9 sux...

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

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

:lol: