PS3 more powerful , or Xbox360 design more smarter?

http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/692502/Former-IBM-Engineer-Discusses-PlayStation-3-And-Xbox-360-CPU-Performance.html#readmore

So what defines a better machine?

Is it more better by design? Developer and user friendly? Games library larger and more appealing to make you purchase more for your console?

So it's simply not just hardware specs, but the smart decisions when developing the machine that is a major contributor to it's success when comparing against a similar competitior.

More smarter?DisPimpin

So what defines a better machine?

Is it more better by design? Developer and user friendly? Games library larger and more appealing to make you purchase more for your console?

yes the 360 design is more smarted and more dev friendly, thanks to a few key features of the unfired shaders/ram, etc. PS3 is has MORE RAW POWER, but to get to it, requires more dev time, since the artecture is new and different and not your typical PC one, like the 360. So you can get more out of the 360, quicker, but drain it faster. but again, the flexibility can also have positives when trying to get more out of it. Eyezonmii

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"]yes the 360 design is more smarted and more dev friendly, thanks to a few key features of the unfired shaders/ram, etc. PS3 is has MORE RAW POWER, but to get to it, requires more dev time, since the artecture is new and different and not your typical PC one, like the 360. So you can get more out of the 360, quicker, but drain it faster. but again, the flexibility can also have positives when trying to get more out of it. McdonaIdsGuy

[QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"][QUOTE="Eyezonmii"]yes the 360 design is more smarted and more dev friendly, thanks to a few key features of the unfired shaders/ram, etc. PS3 is has MORE RAW POWER, but to get to it, requires more dev time, since the artecture is new and different and not your typical PC one, like the 360. So you can get more out of the 360, quicker, but drain it faster. but again, the flexibility can also have positives when trying to get more out of it. Eyezonmii

"With the Xbox 360, you've got more of a traditional multi-core system, and you've got three PowerPC cores, each of them having dual threads -- so you've got six threads running there, at least in the CPU. Six threads in Xbox 360, and eight or nine threads in the PS3 -- but then you've got to factor in the GPU. The GPU is highly sophisticated in the Xbox 360."

So which one is more powerful? His answer is after the jump.


"At the end of the day, when you put them all together, depending on the software, I think they're pretty equal, even though they're completely different processing models."

[QUOTE="Eyezonmii"][QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"] Drain it faster?..Uhh nooo...the 360 is far from being maxed,i really hope KZ2 has some kind of impact in gaming so it will force ms to counter back with something similar..people needs to shut up and stop saying the 360 can't do something like KZ2 because they're so wrong...the 360 has done 2 games already with deferred rendering a in big scale GTAIV and Crackdown.McdonaIdsGuy

then again, MS have a thing for rushing games and trying to get them out quicker....Killzone 2 had plenty of time for polish...and enough funds by sony to make it happen this early.

Did you know that KZ2 has a lot of tricks behind its look? 1)of them is the lighting system 2)the heavy use of depth of field and blur they also have a lot other trick and i can tell you with little they have managed to do a lot and i can't explain you more because is so tech talk and no one here would understand,like i said before those trick they use are part of it and plus the dedication and time they got to pull that off.McdonaIdsGuy

Didn't they droped HDR and per pixel lightning ?!

At the end of the day they're still tricks as in illusions (like cascaded shadow maps), not a lighting-shadow system like in Doom 3 or Clear Sky. You don't get "rreal stuff" like volumetric lighting, dynamic volumetrc smoke or other stuff like that.

The problem of the PS3 is that it was designed as a Cell based console.

Didn't they droped HDR and per pixel lightningDOF_power

Overall, dropping HDR, 4X MSAA for 2X, using only 12 (6) taps on 512x512 shadowmaps for the main directional light, dropping specular color for materials, dropping directional lightmaps, dropping shadows and per-pixel lighting on particles, only one lighting model for the entire world, for the sake of more lights (actually, for the sake of lighting performance non-dependent on the geometry but only on fragments lit which would be desirable) didn't seem worth it to me.

I've read on Beyond3d forum that they droped HDR, witch explains why the lighting was better.

Overall, dropping HDR, 4X MSAA for 2X, using only 12 (6) taps on 512x512 shadowmaps for the main directional light, dropping specular color for materials, dropping directional lightmaps, dropping shadows and per-pixel lighting on particles, only one lighting model for the entire world, for the sake of more lights (actually, for the sake of lighting performance non-dependent on the geometry but only on fragments lit which would be desirable) didn't seem worth it to me.

DOF_power

The engineer give you the answer.

''...They are pretty equal...''

And also that X360 is easier to code than PS3.

And the truth is that and it is well known

[QUOTE="McdonaId]

Wow that's some serious downgraded,can you link me to that thread?

The game wasn't downgraded. It clearly looks much better than it did at E3 07.

The game wasn't downgraded. It clearly looks much better than it did at E3 07.

Cedmln

Wii is the smartestRigga911

Have you ever written a post longer than one line and not drowning in fanboyism? :|

In response to the TC, I think both are true. The 360's design is smarter because it has a similar architecture to the PC making it easier for Devs to program on it.

[QUOTE="DOF_power"]
I've read on Beyond3d forum that they droped HDR, witch explains why the lighting was better.

Overall, dropping HDR, 4X MSAA for 2X, using only 12 (6) taps on 512x512 shadowmaps for the main directional light, dropping specular color for materials, dropping directional lightmaps, dropping shadows and per-pixel lighting on particles, only one lighting model for the entire world, for the sake of more lights (actually, for the sake of lighting performance non-dependent on the geometry but only on fragments lit which would be desirable) didn't seem worth it to me.

McdonaIdsGuy

http://74.200.65.90/showpost.php?s=6249e8d20700ab7a760d4c610be1ae3f&p=1039617&postcount=104

[QUOTE="DisPimpin"]More smarter?RABicle

The exact quote is this:

"With the Xbox 360, you've got more of a traditional multi-core system, and you've got three PowerPC cores, each of them having dual threads -- so you've got six threads running there, at least in the CPU. Six threads in Xbox 360, and eight or nine threads in the PS3 -- but then you've got to factor in the GPU. The GPU is highly sophisticated in the Xbox 360."

So which one is more powerful? His answer is after the jump.


"At the end of the day, when you put them all together, depending on the software, I think they're pretty equal, even though they're completely different processing models."

DOF_power

If the GPU on the 360 is highly sophisticated that the current GPU generation (of Nvidia/Ati cards) is the starship Enterprise.

I stopped reading at "more smarter".urdead18

Is that another trend I notice here.?

"I stopped reading when such and such" The engineer made an important point that you simply overlooked.