Valve: Orange Box Uses 93 - 94% of 360 Power, PS3 Using No SPU's

Found this in the PS3 forums.

I know that devs are only guessing to how much power a system is using for their game(s) but I think Valve's guesstimate is a little high.

http://www.psu.com/PSU-Interview--Half-Life-2-and-Team-Fortress-2--a1108-p0.php

Valve: We defintiely feel next-gen technology aided truly in our development process. You know---you have complexer AI, you have more characters to work with, an enhanced ability to work with the animations on a higher scale--all that stuff. The only difference between the 360 and PS3--which both as a collective helped us develop The Orange Box is definitely there. For the 360 version of the game, we can probably say we are using around 93-94% of the console's power given our current optimization. With the PS3, we can't exactly say what power cap we reached, since no developer really knows where the boundary is for the PS3. We can tell you that in terms of the whole game together on the PS3, we are not even using the SPU's and it is purely built on the graphics card and Cell. We're still optimizing for PS3 more because we can, which can explain the slight delay to you. But no worries, everything is going smoothly to put down any rumors.

Discuss.

Look at the site: Playstation Universe

and I can name 5 games that already look better than that.

Edit: Just realized it's at their optimization.....not the console power in general..

Look at the site: Playstation Universe

and I can name 5 games that already look better than that.

killaj2786

So PSU is to blame and bribed the Valve developer to say such things? :lol:

Look at the site: Playstation Universe

and I can name 5 games that already look better than that.

killaj2786

OMG teh hidden powerzStrakha

Yes, the hidden powerz, constituting the 7 physical unused SPUs which can be plainly viewed from any photograph of the actual Cell microprocessor.

Reading comprehension FTW.

Devs are throwing these numbers around all the time, Gear of war 40%, Lair 30%. I reckon thier all just making them up to hype x console. If this game uses 94% of the 360s power than MASS Effect, Gear Bioshock ect all must bet using 130% somehowMarka1700

I was going to say the same thing.

[QUOTE="Strakha"]OMG teh hidden powerzRedfingers

Yes, the hidden powerz, constituting the 7 physical unused SPUs which can be plainly viewed from any photograph of the actual Cell microprocessor.

Reading comprehension FTW.

Until they are actually used and someone makes a good looking game on the PS3 they are hidden.

[QUOTE="killaj2786"]

Look at the site: Playstation Universe

and I can name 5 games that already look better than that.

Ps3Solider

Still: Source engine ran on my P4 3.0 Ghz and 9600 with 1 gig of RAM. Not beautifully, but still. I don't have a framebuffer, I don't have a triple-core processor, and I had a pretty sad GPU, obviously.

As someone who plays Source engine games nearly daily, I found Halo and Mass Effect videos extremely impressive when I looked at them today.

[QUOTE="killaj2786"]

Look at the site: Playstation Universe

and I can name 5 games that already look better than that.

Ps3Solider

read what i said after...

[QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="Strakha"]OMG teh hidden powerzStrakha

Yes, the hidden powerz, constituting the 7 physical unused SPUs which can be plainly viewed from any photograph of the actual Cell microprocessor.

Reading comprehension FTW.

Until they are actually used and someone makes a good looking game on the PS3 they are hidden.

*Sigh*

It's called Edge tools. It literally has code included in it that allows access to the Cell processor's SPUs. For an example of a game using the SPUs, how about I refer you to Resistance: Fall of Man, a launch title?

I have a 3 year old nividia card and it can run half life 2 on high settings so Valve just can't program for consoles too well. Half life 2 isnt so graphic intensive these days so i think they really didnt use the 360 well because HL 2 doesnt look as good as gears of war and gears didnt even top out the 360.

And afterplaying bioshock it surpasses Gears. Even the new footage shown of Half-life 2 doesnt approach Halo 3 levels so valve just messed up on both consoles.

They specifically stated that it's using 93% power AT THEIR optimization. Their optimization could possibly just suck...ever think of that ;) ?Heil68

heres the thing. If the game is already running at 60fps with that optimization then there is no point in optimizing it more. It's not like some people will have like weaker X360's. Now if it is only at 30fps then it is just bad developers. I mean the X360 runs Bioshock really well and Gears of War and those games look way better than half life 2. chansaet

Bioshock and Gears of War both run at 30 FPS...not a very good benchmark on a game's progress overall.

I was discussing this in the other thread and i just realised; playstation universe. In other words, the ramblings of a fanboy.Ninja-Vox

Valve is a Playstation fanboy?

[QUOTE="chansaet"]heres the thing. If the game is already running at 60fps with that optimization then there is no point in optimizing it more. It's not like some people will have like weaker X360's. Now if it is only at 30fps then it is just bad developers. I mean the X360 runs Bioshock really well and Gears of War and those games look way better than half life 2. Redfingers

Bioshock and Gears of War both run at 30 FPS...not a very good benchmark on a game's progress overall.

Bioshock is not set at 30 FPS.

this just validates julian egg.. commnents on ps3, it has no limitations right now... while developers are maxing 360 they have yet to even tap into the power of the cell. :D-Renegade

To their optimization..........which isn't as high as let's say Epic's and their Unreal engine.

teh cell will unleash da Powa!GarchomPro

Of the 7 SPUs that other developers are managing to utilize effectively?

[QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="chansaet"]heres the thing. If the game is already running at 60fps with that optimization then there is no point in optimizing it more. It's not like some people will have like weaker X360's. Now if it is only at 30fps then it is just bad developers. I mean the X360 runs Bioshock really well and Gears of War and those games look way better than half life 2. Marka1700

Bioshock and Gears of War both run at 30 FPS...not a very good benchmark on a game's progress overall.

Bioshock is not set at 30 FPS.

You're going to have to link me.

Devs are throwing these numbers around all the time, Gear of war 40%, Lair 30%. I reckon thier all just making them up to hype x console. If this game uses 94% of the 360s power than MASS Effect, Gear Bioshock ect all must bet using 130% somehowMarka1700

[QUOTE="Strakha"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="Strakha"]OMG teh hidden powerzRedfingers

Yes, the hidden powerz, constituting the 7 physical unused SPUs which can be plainly viewed from any photograph of the actual Cell microprocessor.

Reading comprehension FTW.

Until they are actually used and someone makes a good looking game on the PS3 they are hidden.

*Sigh*

It's called Edge tools. It literally has code included in it that allows access to the Cell processor's SPUs. For an example of a game using the SPUs, how about I refer you to Resistance: Fall of Man, a launch title?

Ok change used to used well because Resistance has washed out graphics and looks like trash. Are we going to see this extra potential the PS3 is supposed to have before the end of the generation?

[QUOTE="Marka1700"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="chansaet"]heres the thing. If the game is already running at 60fps with that optimization then there is no point in optimizing it more. It's not like some people will have like weaker X360's. Now if it is only at 30fps then it is just bad developers. I mean the X360 runs Bioshock really well and Gears of War and those games look way better than half life 2. Redfingers

Bioshock and Gears of War both run at 30 FPS...not a very good benchmark on a game's progress overall.

Bioshock is not set at 30 FPS.

You're going to have to link me.

You didn't previde on, So why should I, If youv'e played both Gear and bioshock then you know that bioshock runs faster than gear most of the time.

Found this in the PS3 forums.

I know that devs are only guessing to how much power a system is using for their game(s) but I think Valve's guesstimate is a little high.

http://www.psu.com/PSU-Interview--Half-Life-2-and-Team-Fortress-2--a1108-p0.php

Valve: We defintiely feel next-gen technology aided truly in our development process. You know---you have complexer AI, you have more characters to work with, an enhanced ability to work with the animations on a higher scale--all that stuff. The only difference between the 360 and PS3--which both as a collective helped us develop The Orange Box is definitely there. For the 360 version of the game, we can probably say we are using around 93-94% of the console's power given our current optimization. With the PS3, we can't exactly say what power cap we reached, since no developer really knows where the boundary is for the PS3. We can tell you that in terms of the whole game together on the PS3, we are not even using the SPU's and it is purely built on the graphics card and Cell. We're still optimizing for PS3 more because we can, which can explain the slight delay to you. But no worries, everything is going smoothly to put down any rumors.

Discuss.

gmastersexay

and that's just the most glaring of tons of errors, mistakes, wierd comments, and broken english.

[QUOTE="Redfingers"][QUOTE="Marka1700"][QUOTE="Redfingers"]

[QUOTE="chansaet"]heres the thing. If the game is already running at 60fps with that optimization then there is no point in optimizing it more. It's not like some people will have like weaker X360's. Now if it is only at 30fps then it is just bad developers. I mean the X360 runs Bioshock really well and Gears of War and those games look way better than half life 2. Marka1700

Bioshock and Gears of War both run at 30 FPS...not a very good benchmark on a game's progress overall.

Bioshock is not set at 30 FPS.

You're going to have to link me.

You didn't previde on, So why should I, If youv'e played both Gear and bioshock then you know that bioshock runs faster than gear most of the time.

That's if you have the framerate option turned off that unlocks that framerate of 30. Which you can play Bioshock in 60 fps, but there's a lot more tearing on screen. It's not bad but it's hella nice.

[QUOTE="Marka1700"]Devs are throwing these numbers around all the time, Gear of war 40%, Lair 30%. I reckon thier all just making them up to hype x console. If this game uses 94% of the 360s power than MASS Effect, Gear Bioshock ect all must bet using 130% somehowSergeantSnitch

What are you talking about? Bioshock needs a way more powerful PC then Half-life 2. It needs more power regardless of where it's used.

94% of my old laptop...Yes.

94% of the 360...No just no.

Yeah,that site seems to like the 360 a lot:|

94% of my old laptop...Yes.

94% of the 360...No just no.

Yeah,that site seems to like the 360 a lot:|

ProductNumber49

Exactly my laptop can run Half-life 2 but if I were to try and run Bioshock or GRAW it would catch on fire. 360 can run both of those games just fine.

who cares? 3 year old game. woop ti dooooooooooo. ill be busy playing halo 3 to even remember this orange box exists.lespaul1919

then why did you come in here?

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]who cares? 3 year old game. woop ti dooooooooooo. ill be busy playing halo 3 to even remember this orange box exists.ginglejangle

then why did you come in here?

Its obvious that the ps3 is a much more powerful system.ps3gen

Yeah, I mean look at how much better the graphics and physics are on PS3 :roll:

The PS2 was theoretically more powerful than the Xbox, but the Xbox routinely outperformed the PS2 out of the gate. The same thing has happened again this generation and I'll believe that the PS3 is more powerful when I actually see some games that look better than 360's.

OMG teh hidden powerzStrakha

[QUOTE="ginglejangle"]

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]who cares? 3 year old game. woop ti dooooooooooo. ill be busy playing halo 3 to even remember this orange box exists.Heil68

then why did you come in here?

So YOU came here JUST to answer that? :|

[QUOTE="ps3gen"]Its obvious that the ps3 is a much more powerful system.Kestastrophe

Yeah, I mean look at how much better the graphics and physics are on PS3 :roll:

The PS2 was theoretically more powerful than the Xbox, but the Xbox routinely outperformed the PS2 out of the gate. The same thing has happened again this generation and I'll believe that the PS3 is more powerful when I actually see some games that look better than 360's.