got into an argument with my freind..he swears the 360 is more powerful...i dont really dont care which is or not because i own and love both of them..but im curious which one is more powerful?
In raw horsepower, the PS3 is. That doesn't exactly translate into anything unless that power is harnessed, but the difference at this point hast yet to be taken advantage of.
EDIT: Also note that the PS3's advantage is very slight according to the numbers from the spec list. The 360 is potentially easier to work with because programmers and designers know the language. Designing for the PS3 requires you to relearn or learn a new way of design. So, it will take time and effort before anybody really starts cranking it up with the PS3.
ps3 has more processing power, 360 has more graphical power. but, that is not what ultimately matters, its all about the development. you could make a game for either system that looked like a ps1 game if you wanted to.
What's said is $200 more and coming out a year later and this is still a question. I would say the PS3 can draw more stuff on screen but the X360 can draw it better.
^^ i thought the ps3 had more graphical power???damn wasent sure lil50cent
Nope 360 definitely more graphics power -- and the PS3 does have more POTENTIAL processing power, assuming a developer can get all the mulit-function processing running at peak efficiency -- whereas the 360's multi-processor set-up is much easier to program and is only slightly less powerful in terms of processing. Look at all the games for PS3 with frame rate issues. They're all multi-platform games that run more smoothly on the 360 because it's easier to program and it has more power in regards to graphics. Games that are developed exclusively for the PS3 could possibly look better than some other 360 games, but all multi-platform games will look and run better on the 360 for some time. Plus exclusive 360 games look fantastic anyways. Of course, if a game comes out a year or half a year after the 360, it could have some extra tweaking that might help it look better than the 360 version. But otherwise, the 360 version will generally run better.
ps3 has more processing power, 360 has more graphical power. but, that is not what ultimately matters, its all about the development. you could make a game for either system that looked like a ps1 game if you wanted to. whoisryanmack
Well, that's not really a question of power, but versatility. The Xenos GPU in the 360 was designed solely to work with the 360's architecture and to take absolute advantage of the processors. The RSX, meanwhile, is still a very generic PC card with some modifications in order to work well with the Cell processor.
As far as processors go, all I remember is the Cell appearing better on paper. But from my own experience, the amount of things happening on-screen between the 360 and PS3 has been greater on the PS3.
It really all comes down to the developer. A game can run better on the PS3 if they take the time to optimize the code to run on Cell and the RSX. This means breaking up code into small bits and pieces and using the SPUs as an advantage. Most devs feel the 360's GPU outperforms the PS3's but the workload can be taken off the RSX and handled by Cell. It's really tough to say which is more powerful, it all depends on how the developers work the hardware.
got into an argument with my freind..he swears the 360 is more powerful...i dont really dont care which is or not because i own and love both of them..but im curious which one is more powerful?lil50cent
I'm a huge 360Â fan but I assumed it was common knowledge that the PS3 was more powerful. Â
Depends on what you want to do. Certain types of code are floating-point intensive and have a great deal of parallelism, making them perfect for PS3. Other kinds of code don't have as much parallelism or require other types of logic besides floating-point arithmetic, and those won't really run any faster on PS3. On the other hand, I'm sure there are certain shader loads that the unified shaders in the 360 are more capable of handling, while other combinations of shaders wouldn't really show a benefit for the 360. (I'm not a graphics programmer, so no guarantees there.) In short, both implementations have their advantages and their drawbacks. If your design doesn't really need the specific advantages of a particular platform, then you're going to be beating your head against the drawbacks for no good reason.
[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]ps3 has more processing power, 360 has more graphical power. but, that is not what ultimately matters, its all about the development. you could make a game for either system that looked like a ps1 game if you wanted to. Basinboy
Well, that's not really a question of power, but versatility. The Xenos GPU in the 360 was designed solely to work with the 360's architecture and to take absolute advantage of the processors. The RSX, meanwhile, is still a very generic PC card with some modifications in order to work well with the Cell processor.
As far as processors go, all I remember is the Cell appearing better on paper. But from my own experience, the amount of things happening on-screen between the 360 and PS3 has been greater on the PS3.
I haven't played many PS3 games, but I know that Kameo and Ninety Nine Nights are beautiful, and have a lot more going on than any PS3 game that I've seen.
[QUOTE="WARRZONE"]The easy answer in terms of raw power is the PS3. The PS3 performs at 2 TFLOPs, while the 360 performs at 1 TFLOP.whoisryanmack
which is theoretical processing power. thats not all there is to "power" in terms of gaming. Plus, that's only floating point performance. And neither system is capable of either number...
[QUOTE="WARRZONE"]The easy answer in terms of raw power is the PS3. The PS3 performs at 2 TFLOPs, while the 360 performs at 1 TFLOP.whoisryanmack
which is theoretical processing power. thats not all there is to "power" in terms of gaming. Yeah, you can get into all the different kinds of RAM, GPU power, # of VMX vector units, CPU power, etc. I tried simple terms with theoretical data, but here are some in-depth specs if you want them:
The PS3 has 256MB XDR Main RAM (system RAM) at 3.2GHz and 256MB GDDR3 VRAM (dedicated video RAM) at 700MHz. The 360 has 512MB of 700MHz GDDR3 RAM (shared between system and video). While developers can easily allocate the 360's memory wherever it's needed, the PS3's system memory is much faster (system memory can be shared if needed, but the video memory can't). Some might say quality over quantity. With faster memory, you do not need as much buffer room. Developers can use the PS3's hard drive to help buffer if needed. While speed cannot usually make up for quantity, the memory performance of the two systems is very close.
The PS3's GPU is the Nvidia RSX core at 500MHz (split shaders). It can produce 74.8 billion shader operations per second, 33 billion dot products per second, and has 300.2 million transistors. The 360's GPU is the ATI Xenos core (unified shaders) at 500MHz. It can produce 48 billion shader operations per second, 24 billion dot products per second, and has 232 million transistors. The unified and spit shader pipelines is a big issue. The 360 has one pipeline for vertex and pixel shaders, while the PS3 has separate pipelines (24 shader, 8 vertex). The PS3 has a more powerful GPU, but the 360's GPU is supposed to run at 100% efficiency all the time, while the PS3's GPU is guessed to run at 60-70% efficiency. The Xenos can produce more polygons per second than the RSX. The two GPUs on a scale come out about even.
The PS3 has 8 VMX-128 vector units. The 360 has 3 VMX-128 vector units. The PS3 has 1 CPU at 3.2 GHz and 7 SPEs at 3.2 GHz. The 360 has 3 CPUs each at 3.2GHz. The PS3's CPU can do 218 GFLOPs, and the 360's CPU can do 115 GFLOPs. An explination for this might be because the shared memory in the 360 slows down the CPU. TFLOPs the easiest answer in terms of raw power even if it is just theoretical.
While the two systems are close in graphical power, I think the PS3 has a slight edge on the 360 in overall performance because of its sheer processing power thanks to the cell. This could mean better physics and AI for the PS3. The only problem is that if all the system memory is maxed out, you have 256MB at most for video. Yes, devs can use the hard drive to some extent, but it is still a bottleneck. There are bottlenecks and kinks for each system. Like I said before after weighing everything out, I think the PS3 has the edge. Remember that even if one system is more powerful, it's up to developers to not be lazy and use this power efficiently.
Log in to comment