Xbox360 has the more powerful Graphic chip

[QUOTE="gamerking178"][QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"] What you have just said proves nothing, apart from due to the fact a 360 is a diet PC its easier to develop for. and thasts the thing, if MS could make a game which looked better than killzone 2, theyve had 4 years since it was announced, and their system is easier to develop for, and they have more money. MS had all the advantages, except one, the 360 is less powerful, thats it. I mean how long has the gears engine been out? Ages, its had so long to be perfected to a point where it could be used to make a better lookig game than killzone 2, and they tried, but failed. Right now the evidence points towards the ps3 being more powerul, and that stands until the 360 makes a better lookg game... And right now there isnt even a game on the horizon which looks to do that.PSGamerforlife

You dont know what your talking about now. Do you?

Cell can seriously thrash the Xenon around like a baby in raw computing power.

[QUOTE="gamerking178"]

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

Wartzay

[QUOTE="PSGamerforlife"][QUOTE="gamerking178"] 3 Core Intel Xeon CPU vs 2 Core *Don't know make* CPU + 4 SPU + 1 Unused Core 3 Cores is using Hyper threading. Not sure if Cell is. If not 3 Core wins. Cell is Over-rated, games only max out at 2 Cores (except a few very very high end ones). How is the PS3 more powerful? Because it's got Sony in Silver writing?McdonaIdsGuy

You dont know what your talking about now. Do you?

Cell can seriously thrash the Xenon around like a baby in raw computing power.

[QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"][QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"]

This is all good and well, but unfotunately its not just the graphics chip which makes games look good.

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

NinjaMunkey01

there about the same, the 360 GC can do 2x AA with no performance lossGTR_FX

[QUOTE="PSGamerforlife"][QUOTE="gamerking178"] 3 Core Intel Xeon CPU vs 2 Core *Don't know make* CPU + 4 SPU + 1 Unused Core 3 Cores is using Hyper threading. Not sure if Cell is. If not 3 Core wins. Cell is Over-rated, games only max out at 2 Cores (except a few very very high end ones). How is the PS3 more powerful? Because it's got Sony in Silver writing?McdonaIdsGuy

You dont know what your talking about now. Do you?

Cell can seriously thrash the Xenon around like a baby in raw computing power.

Alot Multiplats dont even touch on the SPE's , if coded to use the SPE's properly, thats what accelerates the visuals, physics and effects into something like Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2.

But code which is optimised for RSX+CELL runs better than the same Code optimised for Xenon+ Xenos.

[QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"][QUOTE="PSGamerforlife"]

You dont know what your talking about now. Do you?

Cell can seriously thrash the Xenon around like a baby in raw computing power.

PSGamerforlife

Alot Multiplats dont even touch on the SPE's , if coded to use the SPE's properly, thats what accelerates the visuals, physics and effects into something like Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2.

But code which is optimised for RSX+CELL runs better than the same Code optimised for Xenon+ Xenos.

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

Another thing is that you cant compare by just using clock speed because sometimes one architecture is more efficient than the other and can do more with a lower clock speed than the other architecture (see the whole P4 v Athlon64 benchies from a few years back).

Teufelhuhn

[QUOTE="gamerking178"]

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

LordDhampire

xbox doesn't have a 2900 series or anything close

xbox has the 1950XT not the 2900kemar7856

[QUOTE="kingtito"][QUOTE="GTR2addict"]riiight... look buddy: a gimped X1650 XT isnt an HD 2900 XT, the 2900 may be old but its better than the PS3's and the 360's GPU's combined twice, the PS3 has a gimped 7800 GTX, and there is a huge gap between the GT and the GTXTeufelhuhn

[QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"]

This is all good and well, but unfotunately its not just the graphics chip which makes games look good.

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

McdonaIdsGuy

Then why haven't we ever seen a game on the 360 that looks as good as uncharted, Killzone 2, soon to be God of War 3, or better yet some of the older games like Heavenly sword. The 360 is theoritcally more powerful on paper isn't it? Yes sir, I mean a lot more powerful and this situation should be the other way around, but it isn't. So tell me why isn't the 360 destroying the PS3 instead of the other way around.

[QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"][QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"]

This is all good and well, but unfotunately its not just the graphics chip which makes games look good.

The reason games like Killzone 2 look better than gears is becuase the ps3 is more powerful, and can handle more things at once.

Which is why we wont be seeing a game like killzone 2 on the 360.

gamewhat

Then why haven't we ever seen a game on the 360 that looks as good as uncharted, Killzone 2, soon to be God of War 3, or better yet some of the older games like Heavenly sword.

I own a ps3 and 360 and imo GEARS2 and Kameo are up there with Uncharted1 and Killzone 2 beta graphics.

[QUOTE="gamerking178"]

XT 2900 vs 7800GT.

Gear's 1 and 2 took 2 yrs to make. Killzone 2 took 5.

And looks say 20% better.

That's why KZ2 is O/Rated Graphics hype.

P.S. Crysis still owns it ;)

Chutebox

[QUOTE="gamewhat"]kozzy1234

Then why haven't we ever seen a game on the 360 that looks as good as uncharted, Killzone 2, soon to be God of War 3, or better yet some of the older games like Heavenly sword.

I own a ps3 and 360 and imo GEARS2 and Kameo are up there with Uncharted1 and Killzone 2 beta graphics.

It's funny how despite this being a thread regarding the 360 graphics chip, it's become a Killzone 2 vs Gears of War 2 thread.

Seeing how it has, I'll follow suit.

Okay, so I just played the KZ2 demo. My cousin downloaded it by making a PSN European account (I didn't even know Europe already had the demo). And I have to say, I'm not all that impressed. Gameplay wise, it plays like any other COD style shooter, the default controls were horrible, so I had to change to something similar to COD4. Now, seeing as how this is a demo, there wasn't much story revealed as in some demo's. Perhaps this is why the US PSN store hasn't seen this demo yet, it does nothing to convince me to buy it.

Graphics wise, I'll admit, it seems to have a bit more fluidity that Gears of War 2, but overall, I'd say the detail/lighting is about the same. Honestly, it looks maybe .10 better than Gears 2 and it's mostly the animation/post processing effects like motion blur, etc. When I compare it to some of the videos that I've watched online it's actually quite disappointing. But then again, I tend to have this same reaction whenever I'm comparing video I've watched on my computer to what I see when actually playing the game. This goes for almost all games Gears 2, Halo 3, GTA4, etc to me, they all looked better in the HD videos on gaming websites than they did on the actual console while connected to my HDTV.

Don't get me wrong, KZ2 is a beautiful game, but so is Gears 2. I've heard it described as leaps and bound ahead of the Unreal 3 engine. From what I've seen by playing the demo (and I know it's basically the final build as the game has gone gold already) it's more like a 1/2 step ahead of Unreal 3.

Despite all of my criticisms, I have no doubt that this game will be a good hit for the PS3.

But from what I've gathered from various boards/articles over the internet. The PS3 CPU is slightly more powerful than the 360 CPU and therefore has a slight advantage. The 360 GPU is much more powerful than the PS3 GPU and gives an advantage to the 360. So basically they should end up being the same. With the main difference coming down to the way the developers develop.

Alot Multiplats dont even touch on the SPE's , if coded to use the SPE's properly, thats what accelerates the visuals, physics and effects into something like Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2.

But code which is optimised for RSX+CELL runs better than the same Code optimised for Xenon+ Xenos.

PSGamerforlife

Far Cry 2

"The R&D revealed some pleasant surprises, as Guay explained: "One thing that we realized pretty quickly as we started R&D on PS3, was that the hardware architecture had a very nice fit with some of our technical design decisions. We were positively surprised by how efficient the SPUs (the Cell processing units) were to do such things as run our vegetation simulation, our animations or our physics systems."

Source: http://www.videogamer.com/ps3/far_cry_2/news-7481.html

----

Unreal Tournament 3 (Unreal Engine 3)

"Also, Epic isn't a huge company. They don't have unlimited resource. We have parachuted in some of our SWAT team of super engineers to help them. Specifically, to optimize for SPUs, which are the point of difference that the Cell Processor has. That process is under way. The benefits that it yields to end developers whether they're writing exclusive titles or multiplatform titles is that the performance on PS3 goes up exponentially, and it will make for a much better game experience."

Source: http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200707/N07.0719.1908.25222.htm

----

Warhawk

"Although I would say it's the sum-total of all of our natural phenomenon in the game. Our clouds, procedural water, atmospheric scattering, terrain, etc. All of this stuff runs in parallel on all 7 SPUs simultaneously every frame – I'm still not sure if the game community is giving enough credit to just how fast the SPUs really are."

Source: http://blog.us.playstation.com/2007/07/05/inside-the-developers-studio-dylan-jobe/

----

Motorstorm

"SPU usage is a good example. The progressive development of corresponding debugging and profiling tools made thorough exploitation of this powerful resource quite challenging for the less technically biased members of the team. In the aftermath of MotorStorm, with mature tools at our disposal, we've been developing mechanisms to make the PPU and SPU's power and parallelism far more accessible to our entire team, re-thinking data organization and algorithms in the process. MotorStorm only uses between 15 and 20 percent of available SPU resource, so we're aiming to achieve a 5 fold increase in SPU performance, which should allow us to do some awesome stuff!"

"Our SPU exploiting systems consist of:

i) Havok physics.
ii) Determination of object visibility.
iii) Concatenation of hierarchies.
iv) Billboard object culling and vertex buffer creation.
v) Updating of particles and vertex buffer creation.
vi) Updating of vehicle dynamics.
vii) Updating of vehicle suspension constraints.
viii) Audio (MultiStream).
ix) Video decoding."

"If by cooperative rendering you're referring to SPUs supporting the RSX, I strongly believe that this approach will become far more widespread. In addition to reducing the vertex load on the RSX through the use of culling and vertex pre-processing, this approach also provides an efficient mechanism to introduce procedural geometry.

Source: http://www.beyond3d.com/content/interviews/38/

Since RSX is based on G70,Read

http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_37100.html PDF Page 31,39, 32

Design flaws with G7X vs G8X from NVIDIA.

There's a programming paradigm called "object oriented" or modularization. Also, there's thing called "middleware". Google them up if you don't know them.

[QUOTE="kingtito"][QUOTE="GTR2addict"]riiight... look buddy: a gimped X1650 XT isnt an HD 2900 XT, the 2900 may be old but its better than the PS3's and the 360's GPU's combined twice, the PS3 has a gimped 7800 GTX, and there is a huge gap between the GT and the GTXTeufelhuhn

[QUOTE="LordDhampire"][QUOTE="gamerking178"]

xbox doesn't have a 2900 series or anything close

LibertySaint

xbox has the 1950XT not the 2900kemar7856

You can't run 3.0 Windows shaders directly on Xenos, because the output format is different. Xenos doesn't support the same token format as Windows, so it won't be able to handle the output of the Windows HLSL compiler. You need to compile your shaders twice i.e. once for Windows targeting shader model 3.0, and one for Xbox 360's extended Xbox 360 shader model.

With Shader 2.0, it's exactly the same on Windows and Xbox 360 i.e. you can use the same compiled token format on both.

With RSX, we have NVIDIA statement that this GPU is based on NV47 (later known as G70).

everyone is arguing backwards and forwards about killzone 2 and gears 2, but the fact is the TC is right the xenos IS more poxerful than the rsx as a gpu, it's a proven fact that it can push twice as many polygons and only uses half the rcources the rsx does to produce lighting and shadows, you can argue all day long but the Tc is quite correct delta3074

[QUOTE="delta3074"]everyone is arguing backwards and forwards about killzone 2 and gears 2, but the fact is the TC is right the xenos IS more poxerful than the rsx as a gpu, it's a proven fact that it can push twice as many polygons and only uses half the rcources the rsx does to produce lighting and shadows, you can argue all day long but the Tc is quite correct ronvalencia

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="delta3074"]everyone is arguing backwards and forwards about killzone 2 and gears 2, but the fact is the TC is right the xenos IS more poxerful than the rsx as a gpu, it's a proven fact that it can push twice as many polygons and only uses half the rcources the rsx does to produce lighting and shadows, you can argue all day long but the Tc is quite correct delta3074

The edram isn't just a frame buffer. It's an integrated memory and logic unit that has built in graphics functions. 192 parallel pixel processors means its more than just a frame buffer."Dual GPU" in this case is asymmetric.

Read http://research.scea.com/ps3_deferred_shading.pdf Let's 5 SPE = 20 pipelined enabled Geforce 7800GTX in pixel shader. You can run pixel shader workloads on SPEs.Remember, CELL doesn't have extra hardware to reduce the workload on it's stream processors i.e. Filters, Early-Z Cull, Z-Cull, AA, Textures, ROPs.

TC's dismissal of SPEs for shader work is not wise.

We have known all along that the X360's GPU is better than the RSX. But it's interesting to see what the developers can put in those exclusive games on the PS3 compared to the mustiplats. The PS3's CELL can handle graphics processing, 7.1 PCM sound, animation, physics and a lot more, all at once. So the more you can exploit the CELL, the less work the RSX have to do. And don't tell me that the hyperthreaded 3 cores in the X360 is as powerfull as the SPE's in the CELL, because it is'nt. The CPU in the X360 is just twice as powerfull in terms of G.Flops as the Wii's CPU. Martin_G_N

Wii's PowerPC only includes 64bit(2X 32bit) SIMD. AMD's 3DNow implements 64bit (2X 32bit) SIMD. Xenon has 3 VMX128 units.Calculate GFLOPS.

Yes the graphic chip on the Xbox 360 is better then the one in the PS3. The PS3 has the Cell chip to help with the graphics so in terms of raw power the PS3 edges out the 360 slightly.

It takes about four years to make a great looking PS3 game. ;)

PS3_3DO