PS3 vs. 360 graphics argument

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already?  Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note:  I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already? Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note: I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

FullMetal22

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already?  Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note:  I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

FullMetal22

No, its not that the PS3 is a failure, its because SONY said the PS3 would be 2 X as powerfull as the 360 right from the start, when in fact, the 360 is more graphically powerfull than the PS3 while the PS3 has the edge in processing.

[QUOTE="FullMetal22"]

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already? Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note: I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

lawlessx

[QUOTE="FullMetal22"]

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already?  Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note:  I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

Nagidar

No, its not that the PS3 is a failure, its because SONY said the PS3 would be 2 X as powerfull as the 360 right from the start, when in fact, the 360 is more graphically powerfull than the PS3 while the PS3 has the edge in processing.

Maybe.  But that is kinda my point.  A lot of ps3 games are 360 ports that look worse because of lazy developers.  How do we know that in a year or 2 when devs get off their rear-ends that ps3 games may look better?  I'm saying that I hate when something is judged so quickly.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="FullMetal22"]

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already?  Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note:  I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

FullMetal22

No, its not that the PS3 is a failure, its because SONY said the PS3 would be 2 X as powerfull as the 360 right from the start, when in fact, the 360 is more graphically powerfull than the PS3 while the PS3 has the edge in processing.

Maybe.  But that is kinda my point.  A lot of ps3 games are 360 ports that look worse because of lazy developers.  How do we know that in a year or 2 when devs get off their rear-ends that ps3 games may look better?  I'm saying that I hate when something is judged so quickly.

I agree, I have no doubt in my mind PS3 games will look better than they do now, but from a hardware spec perspective, the PS3 cannot surpass the 360 in graphics, its hardware is limiting it.

The only system that has peaked is the wii.coolguy1111

lmao, No it hasn't.

PS3, as I said earlier, it hasn't have its graphics used to its full advantage yet, even R:FOM. However, if you look at the first gen PS3 games, it looks worse than first gen XBOX 360 games. gnutuxgnutux

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.Nagidar

lmao, No it hasn't.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.coolguy1111

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how?  No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already? Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note: I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

FullMetal22

[QUOTE="gnutux"]PS3, as I said earlier, it hasn't have its graphics used to its full advantage yet, even R:FOM. However, if you look at the first gen PS3 games, it looks worse than first gen XBOX 360 games. gnutuxSt_JimmyX

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.Nagidar

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how?  No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.The_Nemacyst

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how? No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=8

Xbox360 is better than PS3

[QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.gnutux

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how? No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

Burn sony burn

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.The_Nemacyst

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how?  No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

I am? Sorry bud, I know the specs on the PS3 and the 360 and I know how they break down with their architecture.  Nintendo is the company thats kept the specs on its system a secret.

[QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.gnutux

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how? No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="FullMetal22"]

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already? Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note: I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

FullMetal22

No, its not that the PS3 is a failure, its because SONY said the PS3 would be 2 X as powerfull as the 360 right from the start, when in fact, the 360 is more graphically powerfull than the PS3 while the PS3 has the edge in processing.

Maybe. But that is kinda my point. A lot of ps3 games are 360 ports that look worse because of lazy developers. How do we know that in a year or 2 when devs get off their rear-ends that ps3 games may look better? I'm saying that I hate when something is judged so quickly.

[QUOTE="gnutux"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.coolguy1111

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how? No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

General specs do not tell you how powerfull a system is, a 1.8 GHz P4 is faster than a 3 GHz Celeron.  Of course I'm in no way saying the Wii can compete with the PS3 and 360, thats just dumb.

the movement will shape a new system wars laststep

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="gnutux"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.Nagidar

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how? No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

General specs do not tell you how powerfull a system is, a 1.8 GHz P4 is faster than a 3 GHz Celeron. Of course I'm in no way saying the Wii can compete with the PS3 and 360, thats just dumb.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="gnutux"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.coolguy1111

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how? No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

General specs do not tell you how powerfull a system is, a 1.8 GHz P4 is faster than a 3 GHz Celeron. Of course I'm in no way saying the Wii can compete with the PS3 and 360, thats just dumb.

You're not getting it, to measure power, you have to completely understand the technology, just because something has a higher clock speed than something else, doesn't mean its more powerfull.

  Heres an example, The X1900 XTX has a peak pixel fillrate of 10.4Gigasamples/s, the 7900GTX has a peak pixel fillrate of 15.6Gigasamples/s. Neither of them is actually able to achieve and sustain those peak fillrate performance numbers though due to not being efficient enough, but they get away with it in this case since they can also bank on all the raw power. The performance winner between the 7900GTX and the X1900XTX is actually the X1900XTX despite a lower pixel fillrate because it has twice as many pixel pipes and is the more efficient.

Your not getting what im saying, it doesnt matter if its faster, its still ALOT slower then stuff we say 3 years ago. You dont change how you program for a 7300 if your upgrading to a 7800. The only difference between a Gamecube and wii is 1. A few more pipelines 2. A fast cpu, but still single core!!! So nothing changing 3. more Ram Thats all nothing devs havnt been dealing with for years. Making something more powerful, wont change how you program for it, it changes WHAT you program for it. I mean, the wii cant even do HDR, its not like the devs gotta figure that out. Its not like the PS3, where they gotta learn "What do we do with these spus?" Or 360, Wtf is this gpu and what do we do with it? Ive never seen this architecture".coolguy1111

No, you still don't get it, all you're doing is trying to bash the Wii with no proof whatsoever, do you know what the peak triangle fillrate is on the Wii's GPU? Because I don't.  Do you know what the peak GFLOP performance is on the Wii's CPU? I don't. If you do, please, post some sources for me, I'd really like to know.

[QUOTE="gnutux"][QUOTE="The_Nemacyst"][QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="coolguy1111"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]

[QUOTE="coolguy1111"]The only system that has peaked is the wii.coolguy1111

lmao, No it hasn't.

And you know this how? No one knows what the in depth technical specs on the Wii are, you're talking out of opinion.

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already?  Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note:  I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

FullMetal22

I don't see how your graphic topic relates to the ps3 failing...there really isn't a strong relation.  Even if the 360 ended up with the better graphics this gen, evidence from last gen shows that it's not going to win it for them alone.  It's all about the games, and we know how tha tis working out so far for the PS3.

[QUOTE="FullMetal22"]

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already?  Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note:  I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

Nagidar

No, its not that the PS3 is a failure, its because SONY said the PS3 would be 2 X as powerfull as the 360 right from the start, when in fact, the 360 is more graphically powerfull than the PS3 while the PS3 has the edge in processing.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="FullMetal22"]

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already? Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note: I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

FullMetal22

No, its not that the PS3 is a failure, its because SONY said the PS3 would be 2 X as powerfull as the 360 right from the start, when in fact, the 360 is more graphically powerfull than the PS3 while the PS3 has the edge in processing.

Maybe. But that is kinda my point. A lot of ps3 games are 360 ports that look worse because of lazy developers. How do we know that in a year or 2 when devs get off their rear-ends that ps3 games may look better? I'm saying that I hate when something is judged so quickly.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="FullMetal22"]

Why is it that when someone says 360 has peaked graphically after a year and a half MS fans get defensive and say a system can't peak after just over a year, yet they bash PS3 graphics after only a couple months?.....and say the system has failed already?  Is that not being hypocritical?

Side note:  I play ALL 3 consoles and have fun with all of them.

CarlosPontinas

No, its not that the PS3 is a failure, its because SONY said the PS3 would be 2 X as powerfull as the 360 right from the start, when in fact, the 360 is more graphically powerfull than the PS3 while the PS3 has the edge in processing.

Can't, because its true, the Cell does have more "horse power" than the Xenon.