Which was the worse Overhype Fail: THE CELL or 8GB GDDR5

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="jhonMalcovich"]Keep dreaming. From those 8gb, at least, 2gb will be occupied by system processes. Those huge textures you are talking about will slow down PS4 gpu (ati 7850) to a slide show. evildead6789

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Yes it will and will allow the GPU to use all its resources and not been hit with performance issues like the 360 and PS3. ""Skyrim with its optional high resolution texture pack is the textbook case for 2GB cards right now. At 1680x1050 (with lower quality settings) matters arent so bad, but at 1920x1200 1GB cards flat out run out of VRAM. This goes for both the GTX 650 Ti 1GB and the 7850 1GB, leaving the field to 2GB cards such as the 7850 2GB and the 2GB factory overclocked retail cards. To that end with enough VRAM the GTX 650 Ti cards can just hit 60fps with their factory overclocks, but the 7850 2GB, which was already just trailing the GTX 660, is well ahead."" http://www.anandtech.com/show/6359/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-650-ti-review/15 STOP and READ... Ram will hit performance period you either lower your resolutions and setting or you run the game at way slower frames. Unlike you i am not pulling argument from my ass,go ahead and read if you dare.KillzoneSnake

Standard PC's has 8 core CPU and buffed up radeon 7850? wow lol

Many PC gamers use Intel HD 3000 xD

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

[QUOTE="clyde46"] You are avoiding the fact that the PS4's CPU and GPU are not as powerful as a standard PC. tormentos

Standard PC's has 8 core CPU and buffed up radeon 7850? wow lol

Many PC gamers use Intel HD 3000 xD

:roll: there is no such thing as a "standard" PC.  Please stop trying to use buzz words like "standard" when trying to argue for PC as if it's all the same S#!%.  

...if any thing "standard" PCs would be no where near PS4 in power when it comes to graphics and gaming. 

casharmy

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

[QUOTE="clyde46"] You are avoiding the fact that the PS4's CPU and GPU are not as powerful as a standard PC. tormentos

Standard PC's has 8 core CPU and buffed up radeon 7850? wow lol

Many PC gamers use Intel HD 3000 xD

Hey tormentos? You do realize that to make proper use of 6gb+ of vram the GPU needs a LOT of grunt. The PS4 GPU doesn't have a lot of grunt. While lots of ram is not a bad thing it can't magically make other hardware better. :roll:

Hey tormentos? You do realize that to make proper use of 6gb+ of vram the GPU needs a LOT of grunt. The PS4 GPU doesn't have a lot of grunt. While lots of ram is not a bad thing it can't magically make other hardware better. :roll:

HaRmLeSS_RaGe

The only thing that I think could stop PS4 from being a fully future proof machine is no option to upgrade to SSD.  Maybe that is the thing that will eliminate load times along with the extra RAM.

I know why they can't have SSD's in PS4 standard, but they should give us the option to uprgrade and swap drive's, and see real gains from SSD's.  It wouldn't alienate any PS4 owner, one's without SSD's just might have to sit through some loading.

[QUOTE="evildead6789"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Yes that leaves 6GB for vram...That is 3 to 6 times more than most GPU out there.tormentos

Sure, i was playing halflife and unreal with a 3d accelerated graphics card when you was still playing on that crappy ps1. I had a sega 16 bit though, but that time was passed for me. The sony ps1 was just another example of successfull inferior tech, because of average joe's like you. The saturn may had a cd-rom  and the sega cd too but both weren't made for 3d.

And it was 3d gaming that made the ps1 successfull. The n64 was way stronger but it still had cartridges, it couldn't use cd's because it was sony's technology. The 3d0 failed because of bad management, just like the amiga cd 32. The saturn was better at 2d games and didn't want to make the leap to 3d because they didn't believe it would be successfull.

And if you think the detail is on uncharted are so nice, then you're living in an illusion. There's hardly any difference between the ps3 and the x360 in gaming performance. It has the same amount of ram as the x360, the only difference is that one uses shared memory and the other dedicated. Only the x360 has a slight advantage with their xenos gpu, bescause it uses technology that's used in gpus that weren't made available back then.

Still the difference was small but it's still there, it's also the reason why games like skyrim and crysis 2 look and play better on the x360.

And the x360 was way cheaper and had better service from the beginning. You payed through the nose for that useless octacore because of the hollow promises from sony. You may had to pay for online with x360, but you had faster download speeds, faster operating system, reliable service and party chat for a mere 5$ a month

But like i said sony does make some good exclusives but they suck at making consoles and it's also the reason why i will never buy one.

If someone's a fanboy , it's you.

Both are massive steps for mankind, their influence and importance can not be voted on in a simple poll.APiranhaAteMyVa

haha this

[QUOTE="HaRmLeSS_RaGe"]

Hey tormentos? You do realize that to make proper use of 6gb+ of vram the GPU needs a LOT of grunt. The PS4 GPU doesn't have a lot of grunt. While lots of ram is not a bad thing it can't magically make other hardware better. :roll:

tormentos

For the sheer amount of tech based posts you make, your lack of any real hardware knowledge is frightening :shock:

[QUOTE="HaRmLeSS_RaGe"]

Hey tormentos? You do realize that to make proper use of 6gb+ of vram the GPU needs a LOT of grunt. The PS4 GPU doesn't have a lot of grunt. While lots of ram is not a bad thing it can't magically make other hardware better. :roll:

tormentos

A geforce titan probably needs more , since that 8gb is shared memory :lol:

SW in a nutshell: GDDR5 HNNNGG + Sony Domination?

8GB GDDR5. Why? because the Cell could potential produce better games it was just difficulty. An incremental RAM upgrade that could of been spent elsewhere? laughable.MBirdy88

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="HaRmLeSS_RaGe"]

Hey tormentos? You do realize that to make proper use of 6gb+ of vram the GPU needs a LOT of grunt. The PS4 GPU doesn't have a lot of grunt. While lots of ram is not a bad thing it can't magically make other hardware better. :roll:

evildead6789

A geforce titan probably needs more , since that 8gb is shared memory :lol:

[QUOTE="evildead6789"]

[QUOTE="tormentos"] Go do the math the PS4 can use almost 6GB...and that is where the bandwidth limitation would start to kick in.... Yes and as soon as games start demanding 3 or more GB that card will be hit very hard. That is funny nothing on 360 has the detail of Uncharted 3 nor the physics and animation,and it got even better with TLOU and Beyond 2 souls,how could that be with a weak 7800GTX with half the bandwidth and half the ram.. So you are a true sony hater another fanboy,yeah the PS1 was a hit because of the CD-rom, so much buthurt the Saturn was release first and also had a CD rom,but wait so did the 3DO,the Sega CD... Fanboy like you are the worst so what is it.? You are a die hard sega fan still crying because sega went bye bye or worst a nintendo one,because to bring such an irrelevant comment about the PS1 you most be..:lol:tormentos

Sure, i was playing halflife and unreal with a 3d accelerated graphics card when you was still playing on that crappy ps1. I had a sega 16 bit though, but that time was passed for me. The sony ps1 was just another example of successfull inferior tech, because of average joe's like you. The saturn may had a cd-rom  and the sega cd too but both weren't made for 3d.

And it was 3d gaming that made the ps1 successfull. The n64 was way stronger but it still had cartridges, it couldn't use cd's because it was sony's technology. The 3d0 failed because of bad management, just like the amiga cd 32. The saturn was better at 2d games and didn't want to make the leap to 3d because they didn't believe it would be successfull.

And if you think the detail is on uncharted are so nice, then you're living in an illusion. There's hardly any difference between the ps3 and the x360 in gaming performance. It has the same amount of ram as the x360, the only difference is that one uses shared memory and the other dedicated. Only the x360 has a slight advantage with their xenos gpu, bescause it uses technology that's used in gpus that weren't made available back then.

Still the difference was small but it's still there, it's also the reason why games like skyrim and crysis 2 look and play better on the x360.

And the x360 was way cheaper and had better service from the beginning. You payed through the nose for that useless octacore because of the hollow promises from sony. You may had to pay for online with x360, but you had faster download speeds, faster operating system, reliable service and party chat for a mere 5$ a month

But like i said sony does make some good exclusives but they suck at making consoles and it's also the reason why i will never buy one.

If someone's a fanboy , it's you.

actually that's not true, the Saturn version had better character detail and the explosions from the ring outs were polygon based as opposed to the PS1 stock footage of a 2D explosion, the saturn also had better backgrounds.

with that said, the PS1 had better shadows

and in theoretical numbers the Saturn was more powerful as it could theorietically render 200,000 textured polygons per second as opposed to do the PS1's 180,00

For the sheer amount of tech based posts you make, your lack of any real hardware knowledge is frightening :shock:HaRmLeSS_RaGe

actually that's not true, the Saturn version had better character detail and the explosions from the ring outs were polygon based as opposted to the PS1 stock footage of a 2D explosion

and in theoretical numbers the Saturn was more powerful as it could theorietically render 200,000 textured polygons per second as opposted to do the PS1's 180,00

rilpas

[QUOTE="rilpas"]

actually that's not true, the Saturn version had better character detail and the explosions from the ring outs were polygon based as opposted to the PS1 stock footage of a 2D explosion

and in theoretical numbers the Saturn was more powerful as it could theorietically render 200,000 textured polygons per second as opposted to do the PS1's 180,00

tormentos

I know that spreading ignorance has always been your strongsuit, but please do some research before spouting your lies.

• The saturn version of DOA uses two layers of backgrounds as opposed to the PS1's one layer
• All of the Saturn's backgrounds are animated whereas only Tina's background is animated on the PS1
• The Saturn uses textured maps whereas the PS1 used flat textures
• The PS1 version suffers from texture warping, the Saturn does not
• Explosions in the Saturn are done using 3D polygons whereas in the PS1 it's in 2D
• The shadows in the PS1 resemble the characters' shapes whereas in the Saturn they're just blobs

These are not opinions, these are facts!

The PS1 moved 360,000 UNTEXTURED polygons

TEXTURED polygons the PS1 could move 180,000

Geometry transformation engine

• Resides inside the main CPU chip, giving it additional vector math instructions used for 3D graphics
• Features:
  • Operating performance of 66 MIPS
  • 360,000 polygons per second[30]
    • 180,000 texture mapped and light-sourced polygons per second

again These are not opinions, these are facts!

now go spread your stupidity elsewhere

I know that spreading ignorance has always been your strongsuit, but please do some research before spouting your lies.

• The saturn version of DOA uses two layers of backgrounds as opposed to the PS1's one layer
• All of the Saturn's backgrounds are animated whereas only Tina's background is animated on the PS1
• The Saturn uses textured maps whereas the PS1 used flat textures
• The PS1 version suffers from texture warping, the Saturn does not

These are not opinions, these are facts!

 

The PS1 moved 360,000 UNTEXTURED polygons

TEXTURED polygons the PS1 could move 180,000

Geometry transformation engine

• Resides inside the main CPU chip, giving it additional vector math instructions used for 3D graphics
• Features:
  • Operating performance of 66 MIPS
  • 360,000 polygons per second[30]
    • 180,000 texture mapped and light-sourced polygons per second

again These are not opinions, these are facts!

 

now go spread your stupidity elsewhere

rilpas

[QUOTE="rilpas"]I know that spreading ignorance has always been your strongsuit, but please do some research before spouting your lies.

• The saturn version of DOA uses two layers of backgrounds as opposed to the PS1's one layer
• All of the Saturn's backgrounds are animated whereas only Tina's background is animated on the PS1
• The Saturn uses textured maps whereas the PS1 used flat textures
• The PS1 version suffers from texture warping, the Saturn does not

These are not opinions, these are facts!

 

The PS1 moved 360,000 UNTEXTURED polygons

TEXTURED polygons the PS1 could move 180,000

Geometry transformation engine

• Resides inside the main CPU chip, giving it additional vector math instructions used for 3D graphics
• Features:
  • Operating performance of 66 MIPS
  • 360,000 polygons per second[30]
    • 180,000 texture mapped and light-sourced polygons per second

again These are not opinions, these are facts!

 

now go spread your stupidity elsewhere

tormentos

And again, stop posting stupidity, these are the saturn's specs:

Some commonly quoted specifications are highly dependent on the rendering modes for the polygons and other factors that burden the system load:

• 200,000 texture-mapped polygons per second
• 500,000 flat-shaded polygons per second
• 60 frames of animation per second

the PS1's specs one more.

• Features:
  • Operating performance of 66 MIPS
  • 360,000 polygons per second[30]
    • 180,000 texture mapped and light-sourced polygons per second

and why are you posting Tomb Raider now? Are you admitting you've been owned? ;)

[QUOTE="jhonMalcovich"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

Not just 8bit prefetch buffer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDDR5

GDDR5 operates with two different clock types. A differential command clock (CK) as a reference for address and command inputs, and a forwarded differential write clock (WCK) as a reference for data reads and writes. Being more precise, the GDDR5 SGRAM uses two write clocks, each of them assigned to two bytes. The WCK runs at twice the CK frequency. Taking a GDDR5 with 5 Gbit/s data rate per pin as an example, the CK clock runs with 1.25 GHz and WCK with 2.5 GHz. The CK and WCK clocks will be aligned during the initialization and training sequence. This alignment allows read and write access with minimum latency.

evildead6789

It doesn´t matter how fast the ram is. What is the purpose of those data transference rates without a good gpu ? PS4 cpu and gpu will be a bottleneck to those GBs of ram.

A system with ddr3 on the cpu but with a faster cpu and a faster gpu will be way more performant. It's like comparing and phenom II x 955 with a hd 7770 and ram clocked at 2100 mhz with my system. That system will only gain a few fps because of the faster ram, while my pc will gain dozens of fps because of the faster cpu and gpu.

Phenom II X4 955 has a total of +8MB of cache (2 MB L2, 6 MB L3) which mitigates the slower memory domain.

Recall one of the improvments with Radeon HD 3870 with 256bit VRAM vs Radeon HD 2900XT with 512bit VRAM i.e. on-chip cache.

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="jhonMalcovich"]Keep dreaming. From those 8gb, at least, 2gb will be occupied by system processes. Those huge textures you are talking about will slow down PS4 gpu (ati 7850) to a slide show. evildead6789

7850 with 2TFLOPs (1Ghz 16 CUs) and 4GB makes it rival 7870 Ghz Edition with 2.5TFLOPs (1Ghz 20 CUs) and 2GB VRAM.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/his_radeon_7850_ipower_iceq_4gb_review,1.html

PS4's Radeon HD "7860" would be closer to HIS Radeon HD 7850 4GB iPower IceQ Turbo. With AMD GCN's PRT (Partially Resident Textures) feature, it wouldn't beat your Radeon HD 7870 XT i.e. Tahiti class GCN.

It will be hard to beat the overhype fail that TEH CELL had, but if anyone/anything can do it, its dem cows and the 8gb GDDR5

Both are God-like. One belongs to the Godstation 3 while the other belongs to the Godstation 4.

ImBatman-

Right on, soldier.  

Its tough to tell which one of these technological marvels is more bad ass.  According to some of my inside sources, The Cell was supercharged just like the GDDR5 is now.  Sony just kept the lid on the supercharged properties of The Cell to avoid full domination since competition is healthy.

Now they feel its time to supercharge the world and who are we to disagree?

Bring it home Sony!!!!

[QUOTE="zeta"]The concept of shared memory always seem to allude Cows.. It's perplexing.StrongBlackVine

Stop with the stupid generalizations. Any way I bet at least 5.5 GB of that will be available for games. Probably more.

[QUOTE="StrongBlackVine"]

[QUOTE="zeta"]The concept of shared memory always seem to allude Cows.. It's perplexing.epicgameplayer

Stop with the stupid generalizations. Any way I bet at least 5.5 GB of that will be available for games. Probably more.

the cell

[QUOTE="epicgameplayer"][QUOTE="StrongBlackVine"]

Stop with the stupid generalizations. Any way I bet at least 5.5 GB of that will be available for games. Probably more.

evildead6789

Microsoft and their drones really are become the running jokes of this industry lolepicgameplayer

Microsoft and their drones really are become the running jokes of this industry lolepicgameplayer

[QUOTE="epicgameplayer"][QUOTE="evildead6789"] Sorry but rumours are rumours, the wii u supposed to have a lot stronger specs because of the so called leaked information. Ms has way more money than sony, so i can't see why they would build a weaker system. Let's talk in april , when ms shows his new stuff.sts106mat

please prove those two points.....oh yeah and 

Standard PC's has 8 core CPU and buffed up radeon 7850? wow lol

Many PC users use Intel HD 3000 xD

KillzoneSnake

[QUOTE="sts106mat"]

[QUOTE="epicgameplayer"] When multiple sources keep stating the same rumors about the kincet box 720 over and over again, you can bet there is validity to them The Kinect box 720 is very real and it WILL be significantly weaker then the PS4 PROVE IT !  Even developers have said as much too! PROVE IT ! But you can keep living in a Microsoft fanboy induced fanatsy world all you want lol Sooner or later you will have to face the reality though you delusional xbot!epicgameplayer

please prove those two points.....oh yeah and