[QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRAM limitations or not in a year from now PS3 will demonstrate what all that power can do in the right hands. Clearly devs thinking along your lines won't be able to make the most of PS3's archtecture. In fact you only have to look at Motorstorm to get a good indication of what devs will be able to do. But lets wait and see shall we... oblivion WAS suffering on ps3 due to ram limitations, until they heavilly optimize it? so how is that a year from now? ps3 is a great console, and will show fantastic resualts, though thers no telling what 360 can do also... and it seems that your saying in the long run, 360 will have the more dominate platform when it comes to power for gamesOblivion is a game designed for the architecture of the 360 which in itself is very similar to PC. PS3 is a very different beast and so requires a very different understanding of its design to exploit it's strengths. Take my word for it my friend. This issue is minor. atleast your trying, and making some smart comments, and not something like LOL YOU DONT EVEN USE TEH SPELL CHECKERS!ZEORZ!@!!12467326
Game On...
Rashpal
RAM WARS (PS3 vs 360)
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"]okay, knowone is talking about ram, cause its undeniable 360's ram is better in most aspects /thread /ownageRashpal
you just ended your own thread there Einstein.
yeah, im not coming back to this thread after this post, since knowone can own me when it comes to ram 360vs ps3, ill leave this thread as a reminder the cows, about attacking ther weak point for massive damage!Take your rytalin and go take a nap little boy. You're embarassing yourself.
little boy? emarassing myself? hm on forums? hm and how am i embarassing myself? cause i was right the whole times? go to school little girlYour views are clearly as biased as was suggested earlier in the thread. IMO PS3 is mthe more powerful machine. You can sugar coat that with talk about Ram, but in a year from now no one will care. It's that games that'll do all the talking. IMO ps3 is the more powerfull platform(cpu wise) gpu, 360 has ram 360 has you will not see the full potentail of cell cause its being bottleneck by the ram... though we will see some amazing stuff on both platforms but 360 will be the dominate console, (power wise) meaning multiplats, such as assassins creed will be better on 360..... how am i biased? im using facts... and to let you all know..im a pc gamerAnd that's the point. Your applying PC rules to PS3's design. That's fine for 360 as they share similar architectural designs but Sony's console is very different. Just look at Motorstorm. In fact just look at my sig. Give it a year my friend. i cannot view sigs for some reason... its just not ther, unless i sign off then i can see it.... ps3 exclusive will be amazing, but the majority of games are multiplats, and that is when 360 is better then the ps3,For example, while it's true that the 360 has the superior RAM layout, but the PS3 can write to the hard disk and has the faster processor. In the end they pretty much even out, and the PS3 graphics will probably look a little better at the end of its lifespan.
[QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRAM limitations or not in a year from now PS3 will demonstrate what all that power can do in the right hands. Clearly devs thinking along your lines won't be able to make the most of PS3's archtecture. In fact you only have to look at Motorstorm to get a good indication of what devs will be able to do. But lets wait and see shall we... oblivion WAS suffering on ps3 due to ram limitations, until they heavilly optimize it? so how is that a year from now? ps3 is a great console, and will show fantastic resualts, though thers no telling what 360 can do also... and it seems that your saying in the long run, 360 will have the more dominate platform when it comes to power for gamesOblivion is a game designed for the architecture of the 360 which in itself is very similar to PC. PS3 is a very different beast and so requires a very different understanding of its design to exploit it's strengths. Take my word from it my friend. This issue is minor. that is totally true in some ways, but remember, multiplats such as assassins creed, will be either developed on pc or 360(cause simillar architecture) then be ported on ps3That's debateble, but for arguements sake lets say that's true, then it wouldn't a discuss about the virtues of Sony's console, rather the ability of the devs in charge of exploiting it. Let me revert back to similar qualms devs had at the beginning of PS2's life. Then too it was problems with the VUs and RAM limitations. 6 years later who would have imagined a game like GOW2 on the system? Believe me this is not important.
Game On...
Radeon_X1950XTX
[QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"]okay, knowone is talking about ram, cause its undeniable 360's ram is better in most aspects /thread /ownageRadeon_X1950XTX
you just ended your own thread there Einstein.
yeah, im not coming back to this thread after this post, since knowone can own me when it comes to ram 360vs ps3, ill leave this thread as a reminder the cows, about attacking ther weak point for massive damage!Take your rytalin and go take a nap little boy. You're embarassing yourself.
little boy? emarassing myself? hm on forums? hm and how am i embarassing myself? cause i was right the whole times? go to school little girlacting like a fool by using words like "cows", "own", "weal point", "massive damage", "ownage", and "nooblet" (look through your other posts) is very immature. If you cannot have a civilized arguement without using those words then you sir are immature. Oh and using the "little girl" arguement has no effect on me since I am a man. Assuming that I am a woman and needed to go to school, is basically saying that only women need to go to school because they are uneducated. That is sexist, and because of that I shall have to mod you.
[QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRAM limitations or not in a year from now PS3 will demonstrate what all that power can do in the right hands. Clearly devs thinking along your lines won't be able to make the most of PS3's archtecture. In fact you only have to look at Motorstorm to get a good indication of what devs will be able to do. But lets wait and see shall we... oblivion WAS suffering on ps3 due to ram limitations, until they heavilly optimize it? so how is that a year from now? ps3 is a great console, and will show fantastic resualts, though thers no telling what 360 can do also... and it seems that your saying in the long run, 360 will have the more dominate platform when it comes to power for gamesOblivion is a game designed for the architecture of the 360 which in itself is very similar to PC. PS3 is a very different beast and so requires a very different understanding of its design to exploit it's strengths. Take my word from it my friend. This issue is minor. that is totally true in some ways, but remember, multiplats such as assassins creed, will be either developed on pc or 360(cause simillar architecture) then be ported on ps3 This was MS's whole idea, with Vista coming out, if anybody remembers. They said they wanted to bring more gaming to the PC. Meaning a variety of games that can be done in both environments, and easily ported between each other. This is one of the strength's MS has over Sony. It's tools. That is why it is easier for a dev to make for the PC then ported to 360 without any problems whatsoever. Here is the problem, if the gpu needs help with more memory, it needs to ask permission first from the Cell, which is actually pretty fast, but still a problem. This is one of the reasons that this is problem, and takes longer to optimize on PS3. Which is a problem for devs. Thats why alot of them have gone multi plat with alot of there games. To make up for cost in developing a game.
Game On...
Radeon_X1950XTX
[QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"]okay, knowone is talking about ram, cause its undeniable 360's ram is better in most aspects /thread /ownageRadeon_X1950XTX
you just ended your own thread there Einstein.
yeah, im not coming back to this thread after this post, since knowone can own me when it comes to ram 360vs ps3, ill leave this thread as a reminder the cows, about attacking ther weak point for massive damage!Take your rytalin and go take a nap little boy. You're embarassing yourself.
little boy? emarassing myself? hm on forums? hm and how am i embarassing myself? cause i was right the whole times? go to school little girlYour views are clearly as biased as was suggested earlier in the thread. IMO PS3 is mthe more powerful machine. You can sugar coat that with talk about Ram, but in a year from now no one will care. It's that games that'll do all the talking. IMO ps3 is the more powerfull platform(cpu wise) gpu, 360 has ram 360 has you will not see the full potentail of cell cause its being bottleneck by the ram... though we will see some amazing stuff on both platforms but 360 will be the dominate console, (power wise) meaning multiplats, such as assassins creed will be better on 360..... how am i biased? im using facts... and to let you all know..im a pc gamerAnd that's the point. Your applying PC rules to PS3's design. That's fine for 360 as they share similar architectural designs but Sony's console is very different. Just look at Motorstorm. In fact just look at my sig. Give it a year my friend. i cannot view sigs for some reason... its just not ther, unless i sign off then i can see it.... ps3 exclusive will be amazing, but the majority of games are multiplats, and that is when 360 is better then the ps3,That's on the assumption the devs will for the majority of this gen approach 360 as their primiary platform. For that to happen Microsoft would have to convince they have a significant hold on the market. That's debateble for another thread, so lets not jump to too many conclusions.[QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRAM limitations or not in a year from now PS3 will demonstrate what all that power can do in the right hands. Clearly devs thinking along your lines won't be able to make the most of PS3's archtecture. In fact you only have to look at Motorstorm to get a good indication of what devs will be able to do. But lets wait and see shall we... oblivion WAS suffering on ps3 due to ram limitations, until they heavilly optimize it? so how is that a year from now? ps3 is a great console, and will show fantastic resualts, though thers no telling what 360 can do also... and it seems that your saying in the long run, 360 will have the more dominate platform when it comes to power for gamesOblivion is a game designed for the architecture of the 360 which in itself is very similar to PC. PS3 is a very different beast and so requires a very different understanding of its design to exploit it's strengths. Take my word from it my friend. This issue is minor. that is totally true in some ways, but remember, multiplats such as assassins creed, will be either developed on pc or 360(cause simillar architecture) then be ported on ps3That's debateble, but for arguements sake lets say that's true, then it wouldn't a discuss about the virtues of Sony's console, rather the ability of the devs in charge of exploiting it. Let me revert back to similar qualms devs had at the beginning of PS2's life. Then too it was problems with the VUs and RAM limitations. 6 years later who would have imagined a game like GOW2 on the system? Believe me this is not important. that is also totaly true, but imagine if ps2 had 64megs of ram, it would be even more stunning, ram is very important, games like brothers in arms always struggled on ps2 mainly because of ram, but i can see what you are trying to say,
Game On...
Rashpal
[QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"]okay, knowone is talking about ram, cause its undeniable 360's ram is better in most aspects /thread /ownageRashpal
you just ended your own thread there Einstein.
yeah, im not coming back to this thread after this post, since knowone can own me when it comes to ram 360vs ps3, ill leave this thread as a reminder the cows, about attacking ther weak point for massive damage!Take your rytalin and go take a nap little boy. You're embarassing yourself.
little boy? emarassing myself? hm on forums? hm and how am i embarassing myself? cause i was right the whole times? go to school little girlYour views are clearly as biased as was suggested earlier in the thread. IMO PS3 is mthe more powerful machine. You can sugar coat that with talk about Ram, but in a year from now no one will care. It's that games that'll do all the talking. IMO ps3 is the more powerfull platform(cpu wise) gpu, 360 has ram 360 has you will not see the full potentail of cell cause its being bottleneck by the ram... though we will see some amazing stuff on both platforms but 360 will be the dominate console, (power wise) meaning multiplats, such as assassins creed will be better on 360..... how am i biased? im using facts... and to let you all know..im a pc gamerAnd that's the point. Your applying PC rules to PS3's design. That's fine for 360 as they share similar architectural designs but Sony's console is very different. Just look at Motorstorm. In fact just look at my sig. Give it a year my friend. i cannot view sigs for some reason... its just not ther, unless i sign off then i can see it.... ps3 exclusive will be amazing, but the majority of games are multiplats, and that is when 360 is better then the ps3,That's on the assumption the devs will for the majority of this gen approach 360 as their primiary platform. For that to happen Microsoft would have to convince they have a significant hold on the market. That's debateble for another thread, so lets not jump to too many conclusions. ah true true, we gotta see how that turns out, but remeber, ps2 KILLED xbox in sales, but xbox still had the dominate multiplats[QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRAM limitations or not in a year from now PS3 will demonstrate what all that power can do in the right hands. Clearly devs thinking along your lines won't be able to make the most of PS3's archtecture. In fact you only have to look at Motorstorm to get a good indication of what devs will be able to do. But lets wait and see shall we... oblivion WAS suffering on ps3 due to ram limitations, until they heavilly optimize it? so how is that a year from now? ps3 is a great console, and will show fantastic resualts, though thers no telling what 360 can do also... and it seems that your saying in the long run, 360 will have the more dominate platform when it comes to power for gamesOblivion is a game designed for the architecture of the 360 which in itself is very similar to PC. PS3 is a very different beast and so requires a very different understanding of its design to exploit it's strengths. Take my word from it my friend. This issue is minor. that is totally true in some ways, but remember, multiplats such as assassins creed, will be either developed on pc or 360(cause simillar architecture) then be ported on ps3That's debateble, but for arguements sake lets say that's true, then it wouldn't a discuss about the virtues of Sony's console, rather the ability of the devs in charge of exploiting it. Let me revert back to similar qualms devs had at the beginning of PS2's life. Then too it was problems with the VUs and RAM limitations. 6 years later who would have imagined a game like GOW2 on the system? Believe me this is not important. If there wasn't a ram limitation would you not think that better games would have came out??? Same can be said for xbox 360 if dev work their ass off then they can make an incredible game like gow2 on ps2. Devs work their way around the ps2 last gen because they had no other options but now xbox 360 is on the market many devs won't waste their time figuring the cell out and would just work on xbox 360 titles which is easiler to develop.
Game On...
Rashpal
[QUOTE="Twisted_Hawk"]Oh, you poor thing. Did your 360 go to heaven? That's right. Shut up! Wow, using a forum link to describe a difference. Real pownage there.Radeon_X1950XTXso please, send some facts that ps3 ram owns 360? or can you make a logical comment on which one is really better? otherwise quit bashing me, and start using some facts... devs even said ram on 360 is much better then on ps3 "but, but teh dev" Just shut up! I've also heard that monkeys can fly. Wow, so you like to spend all your days and nights saying how one maching is better just because some other troll posted a comment like that. Alright, so both rams are separated, but CPU is able to pull ram straight from the GPU is needed. Is it that hard to understand? You might wanna show some better proof. Even the president of Epic confirmed that the RAM doesn't affect the PS3, and that games such as Gears of War can run on the PS3. Ya know what, I'm gonna stop there. It's practically impossible to reason with Fanboys. I'm giving up right now.
[QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"]okay, knowone is talking about ram, cause its undeniable 360's ram is better in most aspects /thread /ownageRadeon_X1950XTX
you just ended your own thread there Einstein.
yeah, im not coming back to this thread after this post, since knowone can own me when it comes to ram 360vs ps3, ill leave this thread as a reminder the cows, about attacking ther weak point for massive damage!Take your rytalin and go take a nap little boy. You're embarassing yourself.
little boy? emarassing myself? hm on forums? hm and how am i embarassing myself? cause i was right the whole times? go to school little girlYour views are clearly as biased as was suggested earlier in the thread. IMO PS3 is mthe more powerful machine. You can sugar coat that with talk about Ram, but in a year from now no one will care. It's that games that'll do all the talking. IMO ps3 is the more powerfull platform(cpu wise) gpu, 360 has ram 360 has you will not see the full potentail of cell cause its being bottleneck by the ram... though we will see some amazing stuff on both platforms but 360 will be the dominate console, (power wise) meaning multiplats, such as assassins creed will be better on 360..... how am i biased? im using facts... and to let you all know..im a pc gamerAnd that's the point. Your applying PC rules to PS3's design. That's fine for 360 as they share similar architectural designs but Sony's console is very different. Just look at Motorstorm. In fact just look at my sig. Give it a year my friend. i cannot view sigs for some reason... its just not ther, unless i sign off then i can see it.... ps3 exclusive will be amazing, but the majority of games are multiplats, and that is when 360 is better then the ps3,That's on the assumption the devs will for the majority of this gen approach 360 as their primiary platform. For that to happen Microsoft would have to convince they have a significant hold on the market. That's debateble for another thread, so lets not jump to too many conclusions. ah true true, we gotta see how that turns out, but remeber, ps2 KILLED xbox in sales, but xbox still had the dominate multiplats[QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRAM limitations or not in a year from now PS3 will demonstrate what all that power can do in the right hands. Clearly devs thinking along your lines won't be able to make the most of PS3's archtecture. In fact you only have to look at Motorstorm to get a good indication of what devs will be able to do. But lets wait and see shall we... oblivion WAS suffering on ps3 due to ram limitations, until they heavilly optimize it? so how is that a year from now? ps3 is a great console, and will show fantastic resualts, though thers no telling what 360 can do also... and it seems that your saying in the long run, 360 will have the more dominate platform when it comes to power for gamesOblivion is a game designed for the architecture of the 360 which in itself is very similar to PC. PS3 is a very different beast and so requires a very different understanding of its design to exploit it's strengths. Take my word from it my friend. This issue is minor. that is totally true in some ways, but remember, multiplats such as assassins creed, will be either developed on pc or 360(cause simillar architecture) then be ported on ps3That's debateble, but for arguements sake lets say that's true, then it wouldn't a discuss about the virtues of Sony's console, rather the ability of the devs in charge of exploiting it. Let me revert back to similar qualms devs had at the beginning of PS2's life. Then too it was problems with the VUs and RAM limitations. 6 years later who would have imagined a game like GOW2 on the system? Believe me this is not important. If there wasn't a ram limitation would you not think that better games would have came out??? Same can be said for xbox 360 if dev work their ass off then they can make an incredible game like gow2 on ps2. Devs work their way around the ps2 last gen because they had no other options but now xbox 360 is on the market many devs won't waste their time figuring the cell out and would just work on xbox 360 titles which is easiler to develop.Those are all ifs and buts. RAM isn't cheap and so including more of it in PS2 would more than likely have increased it's RRP. Remember making a console is a juggling act between power and cost. What confuses me is that you seem to discuss this issue as if PS3 has less RAM than 360. It doesn't. It's allocation is just different, but then the design and philosophy of Sony's console is different too.
Game On...
Jhung207
*Sigh*So, Bethesida said that the PS3 is inferior, but oblivion looks better on PS3. Wow, the John Kerry of game developing!
Well, here is a link to hopefully end the debate.
http://www.qj.net/Bethesda-PS3-technical-limitations/pg/49/aid/81701
Raidea
So, Bethesida said that the PS3 is inferior, but oblivion looks better on PS3. Wow, the John Kerry of game developing!Twisted_Hawk
Try thinking outside the box a little...
Edit: Besides, the articles doesn't say it's inferior, just that they were having trouble with the RAM. The PS3 is superior to the 360 in many ways, it goes both ways.
*Sigh*Sadly for PS3's critics this means very little as it can be argued that as Bethesda are a PC dev first and formost their experience is lacking to exploit the PS3s architecture.
Well, here is a link to hopefully end the debate.
http://www.qj.net/Bethesda-PS3-technical-limitations/pg/49/aid/81701
Raidea
[QUOTE="Raidea"]*Sigh*So, Bethesida said that the PS3 is inferior, but oblivion looks better on PS3. Wow, the John Kerry of game developing! Well if you know anything, textures have been optimzed. Since of course it's a year old, and you would think it looked better. Which should have better texture's a year later. They didn't say it was inferior, they just said it has memory limitations. But 360 has it's own also, but memory is not one of them.
Well, here is a link to hopefully end the debate.
http://www.qj.net/Bethesda-PS3-technical-limitations/pg/49/aid/81701
Twisted_Hawk
[QUOTE="Raidea"]*Sigh*Sadly for PS3's critics this means very little as it can be argued that as Bethesda are a PC dev first and formost their experience is lacking to exploit the PS3s architecture. How can you exploit something that doesn't exist. Even Anandtech themselves said the same thing.
Well, here is a link to hopefully end the debate.
http://www.qj.net/Bethesda-PS3-technical-limitations/pg/49/aid/81701
Rashpal
[QUOTE="Twisted_Hawk"]So, Bethesida said that the PS3 is inferior, but oblivion looks better on PS3. Wow, the John Kerry of game developing!Raidea
Try thinking outside the box a little...
Edit: Besides, the articles doesn't say it's inferior, just that they were having trouble with the RAM. The PS3 is superior to the 360 in many ways, it goes both ways.
True, the PS3 has better specs that the 360. However, if developers can not find a way to use all of this, then the PS3 will always be inferior to the 360.
[QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Raidea"]*Sigh*Sadly for PS3's critics this means very little as it can be argued that as Bethesda are a PC dev first and formost their experience is lacking to exploit the PS3s architecture. How can you exploit something that doesn't exist. Even Anandtech themselves said the same thing.Anandtech offered a possible technical problem. But as has always been the case the best devs come up with creative solutions to these problems. What Bethesda couldn't solve this time round (possibly due to launch date pressures) doesn't necessarily mean they can't be overcome in the future. The upcoming patch of the 360 version improving graphical output should surely tell you that.
Well, here is a link to hopefully end the debate.
http://www.qj.net/Bethesda-PS3-technical-limitations/pg/49/aid/81701
Fusible
[QUOTE="Fusible"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Raidea"]*Sigh*Sadly for PS3's critics this means very little as it can be argued that as Bethesda are a PC dev first and formost their experience is lacking to exploit the PS3s architecture. How can you exploit something that doesn't exist. Even Anandtech themselves said the same thing.Anandtech offered a possible technical problem. But as has always been the case the best devs come up with creative solutions to these problems. What Bethesda couldn't solve this time round (possibly due to launch date pressures) doesn't necessarily mean they can't be overcome in the future. The upcoming patch of the 360 version improving graphical output should surely tell you that. They didn't say possible, it's in writing. But I'm not saying it won't have great games. I'm waiting for the juggernauts to come out, since that is why I bought one.
Well, here is a link to hopefully end the debate.
http://www.qj.net/Bethesda-PS3-technical-limitations/pg/49/aid/81701
Rashpal
The downside to the RSX using the Cell for all vertex processing is pretty significant. Remember that the RSX only has a 22.4GB/s link to its local memory bandwidth, which is less than 60% of the memory bandwidth of the GeForce 7800 GTX. In other words, it needs that additional memory bandwidth from the Cell’s memory controller to be able to handle more texture-bound games.
Anandtech offered a possible technical problem. But as has always been the case the best devs come up with creative solutions to these problems. What Bethesda couldn't solve this time round (possibly due to launch date pressures) doesn't necessarily mean they can't be overcome in the future. The upcoming patch of the 360 version improving graphical output should surely tell you that.Rashpal
A workaround to a problem does not mean it's as efficient as a solution that needs no workaround.
You've moved on from one topic to another anyway, now you are saying that while the PS3 does weaker RAM architecture it brought up to speed with more development time, well of course it can!
Sadly for PS3's critics this means very little as it can be argued that as Bethesda are a PC dev first and formost their experience is lacking to exploit the PS3s architecture. How can you exploit something that doesn't exist. Even Anandtech themselves said the same thing.Anandtech offered a possible technical problem. But as has always been the case the best devs come up with creative solutions to these problems. What Bethesda couldn't solve this time round (possibly due to launch date pressures) doesn't necessarily mean they can't be overcome in the future. The upcoming patch of the 360 version improving graphical output should surely tell you that. They didn't say possible, it's in writing. But I'm not saying it won't have great games. I'm waiting for the juggernauts to come out, since that is why I bought one.[QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Fusible"][QUOTE="Rashpal"][QUOTE="Raidea"]*Sigh*
Well, here is a link to hopefully end the debate.
http://www.qj.net/Bethesda-PS3-technical-limitations/pg/49/aid/81701
Fusible
The downside to the RSX using the Cell for all vertex processing is pretty significant. Remember that the RSX only has a 22.4GB/s link to its local memory bandwidth, which is less than 60% of the memory bandwidth of the GeForce 7800 GTX. In other words, it needs that additional memory bandwidth from the Cell’s memory controller to be able to handle more texture-bound games.
If you look at the games coming out on PS2 now compared to the complaints from various sections of the dev community in the early days of the system's life than I'd have to say it's "possible". Like I said, problems are there to be solved and I have no doubt those that are up to the challenege will use their creativity to overcome those currently being bemoaned of Sony's platform. But lets wait and see...[QUOTE="Rashpal"]Anandtech offered a possible technical problem. But as has always been the case the best devs come up with creative solutions to these problems. What Bethesda couldn't solve this time round (possibly due to launch date pressures) doesn't necessarily mean they can't be overcome in the future. The upcoming patch of the 360 version improving graphical output should surely tell you that.Raidea
A workaround to a problem does not mean it's as efficient as a solution that needs no workaround.
You've moved on from one topic to another anyway, now you are saying that while the PS3 does weaker RAM architecture it brought up to speed with more development time, well of course it can!
The argument implys that because the allocation of the 512MB RAM is different on PS3 it is in some way inferior. I'm saying that because the architecture isn't as well understood as that of Microsoft's it's too soon to make such an assumption. The designs are clearly different and so the rules that apply for one system aren't necessarily true of another. I'm saying this argument won't mean much in a year from now when devs are more at home with the PS3's design. But as I've already said lets wait and see...
If devs. tried to program GPU specific functions on the 360's GPU then that wouldn't work either. The PS3 also has higher bandwith. The PS3 has 512MBs 256MB system and then XDR. espoacWTH are you talking about? The PS3 has low bandwidth.
[QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="MADVLAD123"][QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"]okay, knowone is talking about ram, cause its undeniable 360's ram is better in most aspects /thread /ownageRashpal
you just ended your own thread there Einstein.
yeah, im not coming back to this thread after this post, since knowone can own me when it comes to ram 360vs ps3, ill leave this thread as a reminder the cows, about attacking ther weak point for massive damage!Take your rytalin and go take a nap little boy. You're embarassing yourself.
little boy? emarassing myself? hm on forums? hm and how am i embarassing myself? cause i was right the whole times? go to school little girlYour views are clearly as biased as was suggested earlier in the thread. IMO PS3 is mthe more powerful machine. You can sugar coat that with talk about Ram, but in a year from now no one will care. It's that games that'll do all the talking. How many games will do the talking? 4-5... the exclusives only? Because in multiplatform games you won't see anything but unperceptive differences, the developers won't bother making graphics better on the PS3 if more people have the 360, they'll rather have similar graphics for a higher ammount of combined sales. Wasn't the Xbox more powerful than the PS2? Did you ever get to see any major differences? I do not think so.[QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced system Then why is that everywhere I look, developers are saying PS3 is a more powerful system overall. Maybe not by a large margin, but more powerful eitherway. If the 360 is so balanced and PS3 is not, why does the 360 have more hardware issues? Cell has 256MB of XDR and RSX has 256MB. RSX can dip into system memory when needed.
Game On...
Radeon_X1950XTX
It comes down to what a developer can and can't do. I can easily say PS3 is difficult to develop for if I never put any time into it and just because a game is multiplat doesn't mean the devs are experts at both consoles, some comments by devs prove this.
[QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRAM limitations or not in a year from now PS3 will demonstrate what all that power can do in the right hands. Clearly devs thinking along your lines won't be able to make the most of PS3's archtecture. In fact you only have to look at Motorstorm to get a good indication of what devs will be able to do. But lets wait and see shall we...
Game On...
Rashpal
RAM has always been the Achille heel of the Playstation brand. All devs should be able to fully support a console and have the proper tools necessary to harness the full potential of a console (good cpu,gpu, memory). The arrogant "country club" type logic used by Sony and its support for certain devs leaves the average developement house out in the cold. Why should a product touted as gods gift to gaming only be used to full potential by Capcom, Konami, and others AAA devs successfully while others are accused on not trying hard enough if they arent able to crack the riddle of the PS3?
Game On...
[QUOTE="Radeon_X1950XTX"][QUOTE="FatalDomain"]Its not rocket science folks, well informed gamers know Sony has always developed uber high powered CPUs with its Playstation consoles and choked the life (and full potential) out of them with the lack of RAM....Although the consoles were very successful, in many cases it forced devs to either chop up a perfectly good game to try to run on the console or look towards the competition.yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRAM limitations or not in a year from now PS3 will demonstrate what all that power can do in the right hands. Clearly devs thinking along your lines won't be able to make the most of PS3's archtecture. In fact you only have to look at Motorstorm to get a good indication of what devs will be able to do. But lets wait and see shall we... if motorstorm is an indication of PS3's power than PS3 is just as big a failure as PS2 graphically
Game On...
Rashpal
It comes down to what a developer can and can't do. I can easily say PS3 is difficult to develop for if I never put any time into it and just because a game is multiplat doesn't mean the devs are experts at both consoles, some comments by devs prove this.
Its not about one component ruling a system, its about balance. You cant have to much in one area and severely lacking in another. The problem with the PS3 is that it has a fast CPU, a good GPU but the memory is not unified and does not work in the same manner as a unified system where the total amount of RAMÂ is accessible throughout the console. The lack of a unified system is whats keeping the textures low and blurry (devs use this techniques as a workaround), and animation that chugs along in multiplat games.
The Wii, although low powered, is a balanced system.
The Xbox360 is a balanced system.
The PS3 is the equivalent of a Lamborghini engine (CPU) in a very nice honda accord....it will shine with software created specifically for the console, but in games comparable to the competition (multiplat) you will see its short comings.
Game On...
hm. i'm pretty sure 700mhz 256-bit ddr (i.e. 1400mhz) gets more like in the 40's for bandwidth.Main System RAM :
Xbox 360 :512 MB GDDR3 RAM (700 MHz), shared with GPU
Memory bandwidth :
22.4 GBps__________
Playstation 3 :256 MB XDR RAM (3.2GHz)
Memory bandwidth :
25.6 GBps
SyinnX
please review this threadJealousyhttp://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=25379428&msg_id=284119231#3
as i said before cell is limited to 256, now cows may say BUH GPU CAN WRITE ON CELLS BANK :cry: thats true, with a cost of bandwidth, making have performance isssues, developers try to avoid it,
cell can only write on 256, simple, which means ps3 has 256 of ram. 360 canot only do 50%-50% for cpu and gpu, but it can do limitless ways, such as 30%-70%or 70%-30%, with the same performance cost. ps3 does have faster ram, but that speed will be useless when the ram is in overload,making it have to use something called Virtual memory, and i have expierienced this, its really bad especailly during gameplay,
thus, 360 ram can be used in many different ways, ps3 can only use 256 for system(CELL) 256 for gpu(RSX), if one of these banks dont have enough ram for a specific task, then ps3 will suffer greatly while 360 can be something like  256-256 or 300-212 or 212-300..... in so many differnt ways that has the exact same performance with eachother,
respond to that cows,
p.s dont forget the 10mb devoted to xenos, which allows for aa and hdr, with no performance costs, and no bandwidth on the ram pool which happens on ps3.
Radeon_X1950XTX
please review this threadLame Threadhttp://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=25379428&msg_id=284119231#3
as i said before cell is limited to 256, now cows may say BUH GPU CAN WRITE ON CELLS BANK :cry: thats true, with a cost of bandwidth, making have performance isssues, developers try to avoid it,
cell can only write on 256, simple, which means ps3 has 256 of ram. 360 canot only do 50%-50% for cpu and gpu, but it can do limitless ways, such as 30%-70%or 70%-30%, with the same performance cost. ps3 does have faster ram, but that speed will be useless when the ram is in overload,making it have to use something called Virtual memory, and i have expierienced this, its really bad especailly during gameplay,
thus, 360 ram can be used in many different ways, ps3 can only use 256 for system(CELL) 256 for gpu(RSX), if one of these banks dont have enough ram for a specific task, then ps3 will suffer greatly while 360 can be something like  256-256 or 300-212 or 212-300..... in so many differnt ways that has the exact same performance with eachother,
respond to that cows,
p.s dont forget the 10mb devoted to xenos, which allows for aa and hdr, with no performance costs, and no bandwidth on the ram pool which happens on ps3.
Radeon_X1950XTX
[QUOTE="SyinnX"]hm. i'm pretty sure 700mhz 256-bit ddr (i.e. 1400mhz) gets more like in the 40's for bandwidth. x360 is only 128bit you know, but yes the bus is more important that the mhzMain System RAM :
Xbox 360 :512 MB GDDR3 RAM (700 MHz), shared with GPU
Memory bandwidth :
22.4 GBps__________
Playstation 3 :256 MB XDR RAM (3.2GHz)
Memory bandwidth :
25.6 GBps
Makari
[QUOTE="Makari"][QUOTE="SyinnX"]hm. i'm pretty sure 700mhz 256-bit ddr (i.e. 1400mhz) gets more like in the 40's for bandwidth. x360 is only 128bit you know, but yes the bus is more important that the mhz well crap. why would they do something like that? haha.. i can't imagine having something awesome like gddr3 and crippling it like that. i guess it gets the job done, though..Main System RAM :
Xbox 360 :512 MB GDDR3 RAM (700 MHz), shared with GPU
Memory bandwidth :
22.4 GBps__________
Playstation 3 :256 MB XDR RAM (3.2GHz)
Memory bandwidth :
25.6 GBps
imprezawrx500
both console lack ram, way put overpowerd chips in for the amount of ram?imprezawrx500cuz system ram is the least important part of a console video ram is much more important and the amount in 360 is more than enough for everything the most demanding graphics engine out there right now(as far as need for VRam goes) is UE3 and DOom 3 engine I'm not sure exactly what UE3 requires, but it's much more than 256mb........... which is what PS3 is limited to Doom 3 engine requires soemthing like 384mb of Vram to rum at it's maximum settings
please review this threadin reality it cant go 70-30, or the other ways. thats why you always get the red lights.let me begin than explain. ok lets say that the cpu is using 30, and the gpu is using 70. well lets say that the cpu needs more ram, but it has to basically ask the gpu for permission, causing bad framerates, and somtimes freezing, and when they are constantly fighting over ram they start to get hot, and red lights appear. thats why on high end pc's the ram is separate.http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=25379428&msg_id=284119231#3
as i said before cell is limited to 256, now cows may say BUH GPU CAN WRITE ON CELLS BANK :cry: thats true, with a cost of bandwidth, making have performance isssues, developers try to avoid it,
cell can only write on 256, simple, which means ps3 has 256 of ram. 360 canot only do 50%-50% for cpu and gpu, but it can do limitless ways, such as 30%-70%or 70%-30%, with the same performance cost. ps3 does have faster ram, but that speed will be useless when the ram is in overload,making it have to use something called Virtual memory, and i have expierienced this, its really bad especailly during gameplay,
thus, 360 ram can be used in many different ways, ps3 can only use 256 for system(CELL) 256 for gpu(RSX), if one of these banks dont have enough ram for a specific task, then ps3 will suffer greatly while 360 can be something like 256-256 or 300-212 or 212-300..... in so many differnt ways that has the exact same performance with eachother,
respond to that cows,
p.s dont forget the 10mb devoted to xenos, which allows for aa and hdr, with no performance costs, and no bandwidth on the ram pool which happens on ps3.
Radeon_X1950XTX
in reality it cant go 70-30, or the other ways. thats why you always get the red lights.let me begin than explain. ok lets say that the cpu is using 30, and the gpu is using 70. well lets say that the cpu needs more ram, but it has to basically ask the gpu for permission, causing bad framerates, and somtimes freezing, and when they are constantly fighting over ram they start to get hot, and red lights appear. thats why on high end pc's the ram is separate. LogpaqThat's not how it works. The memory allocation is determined by the developer. At a certain point in a title, he tells the 360 to reserve so much for the system and so much for the graphics. As you move to new scenes, instructions are added to alter the ratio accordingly.
yes, sony makes crazy processor for the times, but they always come to huge bottlenecks, ps3 is an unbalanced system, 360 is more of a balanced systemRadeon_X1950XTXThen why is that everywhere I look, developers are saying PS3 is a more powerful system overall. Maybe not by a large margin, but more powerful eitherway. If the 360 is so balanced and PS3 is not, why does the 360 have more hardware issues? Cell has 256MB of XDR and RSX has 256MB. RSX can dip into system memory when needed.But can it do so without penalty? Speed is critical in graphics applications, and any timing penalty will result in slower rendering. That's why the memory-sharing feature of the AGP bus never took off.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment