john carmack said idsoftware rage would of looked better on 360 texture wise than ps3, but they ran out of disk space, and it's too expensive for idsoftware to license a 3 disk game since ms charges per disk.
[QUOTE="pcgamingisgod"]If ps3 really had just as much ram free avalible for devs to use explain why no game built on ps3 first and then ported to 360 such as burnout as no physical polygonal/mesh data taken out. but games such as dirt on ps3 have less tree's and fight night round 3 the crowd on ps3 is 2d sprites on 360 it's 3d fully animated polygonal people. it's obviously the 360 has more ram avalible. 360's cpu access's the 512 mb ram through the gpu lol.Sgt_Hale
:? The PS3 version of Burnout had both better framerate, less lag, and graphical polish... are you even serious, or are you just trying to make fun of lemmings?
[/QUOTE but no polygonal information was taken out.
[QUOTE="Sgt_Hale"][QUOTE="pcgamingisgod"]I keep seeing people say oh cell can use ps3's gddr3 video ram for main memory that's complete bs and i have yet to see any point to any proof of this. xbox360's gpu act's as the memory controller for 360's cpu. Because we've obviously all read more than you on the specs of either machine... devs are able to allot or manage the memory how they see fit... go do some reading and stop showing your ignorance. but crytek lacks skills at optimizing their games, cryengine 3 uses a physics engine they built, and it's obvious their physics engine is probley hampering their performance on cpus, probley would run alot higher frames if they used havok physics since alot older and companys more knownledgable. not to mention crysis suffered and still suffers from memory leaks which kills the fps when looking in the direction of the map not totally alligned correctly. and their textures looking better on ps3 seems to be they more knownledgeable with pc hardware and ps3's splt/dedicated memory architecture is more similar to a pcs than 360s. they just lack skills at programming for 360.
If ps3 really had just as much ram free avalible for devs to use explain why no game built on ps3 first and then ported to 360 such as burnout as no physical polygonal/mesh data taken out. but games such as dirt on ps3 have less tree's and fight night round 3 the crowd on ps3 is 2d sprites on 360 it's 3d fully animated polygonal people. it's obviously the 360 has more ram avalible. 360's cpu access's the 512 mb ram through the gpu lol.
I keep seeing people say oh cell can use ps3's gddr3 video ram for main memory that's complete bs and i have yet to see any point to any proof of this. xbox360's gpu act's as the memory controller for 360's cpu.
Both have 512mb of memory, PS3 is split up but both can still be used. You now nothing on the architecture of either machine, nor how to program for them. Crytek have infinitely more experience than you. Whta makes you think, you know what they are doing, and they're mucking it up? Wow, just wow
lundy86_4
i know alot more than you and john carmack even said 360 has more megabytes of memory free for dev's to work with.
You know more than me? Go ahead give me the lowdown. Explain how the PS3 has less memory free than 360 and how this specifically effects programming for the console. I'll be waiting.
ps3 has 256 mb xdr memory required for running cell processor dedicated main ram and 256 mb gddr3 128 bit for the downgraded 7800 gtx i bought in 2005. the rsx has turbocache technology so it can use some of ps3's xdr memory for texture storage, but at a performance hit and it cant acess whole thing. the cell has no way of using rsx's gddr3 video memory for main memory if it runs out of it's own xdr main memory. not to mention all the bandwidth ate up by the framebuffer.
[QUOTE="pcgamingisgod"]Funny people posting crysis screenshots and they arent even taken by the person posting them. CRYSIS WARHEAD MAX SETTINGS ON MY PC TAKEN BY ME. I know crysis has better models and more amazing textures, but with the same anti aliasing and anisotropic filtering levels, applied, call of duty 4 just looks alot more crisp. cod4 my pc taken by me^^ dnuggs40
Better models, better textures, larger areas (huge in comparison), better physics, destructible objects, and...well...pretty much better everything. And nice shot of the dirt bud....you really made your point :rolleyes:
the dirt proves its on max, because doesnt look like that on high or medium or low.
crysis beats call of duty 4 at models or textures, but when you got alot of anti aliasing applied and anisotropic filtering, cod4 just looks alot more clean/crisp than crysis does best way to describe it.
Log in to comment