Is the GPU holding the PS3 back?

The PS3 continues to underperform the Xbox 360, game after game. Could there be a fundemental problem with the design that will prevent it ever delivering the goods?

[JVIDICAN]

im pretty sure its just ports

[Jamie Foxx]

look at MGS4,look at uncharted and theres been multi-plat games that perform better on ps3 or run identical=cod4,burnout,oblivio n etc

when a game is made specifically for the ps3 the hardware shows it worth,common sense tells you that 360 and ps3 hardware are totally different so lazy developers who try to port a game over from the 360 to ps3 will have troubles its like putting a mini cooper engine into a ferrari it wont work,recently certain developers have learned to use the ps3 hardware as the current multiplat titles shows,but there will always be those lazy developers out there

i guess this article has come about to stop the positive feeling about mgs4 juggernaut

[ELite_Ghost]

it's not even at it's potential! yet...

[Potty Scotty]

In any case of the matter, development time makes all the difference in the world. You can compare Xbox 360 and PS3 Oblivion or Unreal Tournament III, it comes down to the time you invest in your game.

[JsonHenry]

Anyone with a brain that works (everyone except fanboys) knows the GPU in the 360 is technically superior to the GPU in the PS3. But I thought the whole idea behind the PS3 was the CELL was supposed to be the deal breaker? You know, support the GPU, use the extra co-processors to help enhance things like video quality and physics?

Doesn't matter what is the truth or not though. Because those that are objective will never convince a fanboy on any side that their platform is anything but light years ahead of the other.

Sony fans should be happy that the 360 did not incorporate dedicated GDDR3 RAM on the GPU - because then there would be NO DOUBT about which is better.

But both consoles suck. One because of the slow ass RAM, the other because of lack of RAM. Take your pic, they were both underpowered before they even launched.

[Jack Meahoffer]

Someone says something against your console and you go right into defense mode repeating Uncharted, KZ2, MSG4 and RROD.

First of all out of all you games you Sony fans point to ONLY Uncharted is actually released for people to play and judge for themselves so if you're going to lean on KZ2 screenshots you fail.

Second if you defenders would read the article you'd see he backed up his assertions with detailed evidence. But none of you Sony fans care all you saw was the title and went right into post a comment defending your master.

The FACT is and I've been saying it forever is... If you are a real gamer that cares about games more than corporations the only route is to own all three current generation consoles. But you people that sold you soul to a corporation won't do that. You don't want to think for yourself and actually play the games before forming your opinion. You take what has been told to you and run with it like its gods law. It must be fact because its the ONLY thing you WANT to believe.

I love these wannabe engineers in here posting their simple minded nonsense too. These people can barely program their microwave but know all about how the Cell and GPU work together... Yeah in your wet dreams. Fake following corporate sheep.

Its not about being a 360 fan or a PS3 fan for me... Its about having my own mind and making my own judgements without bias. You people love bias. Its the foundation for your sad lives. This is why the world is falling apart because you people care more about being "right" than being "correct". *Spits*

Look at 1.4 gettings mass disagrees for stating actual F'ing facts. But you didn't get past his first sentence to see he said that PS3's RAM is better (fact) because his first sentence wasn't favorable to your master. Sad pukes you people are.

[SL1M DADDY]

Don't be such an idiot please.

It is obvious that the article was written by a 360 fanboy and is simply flame bate here on the N4G site.

If the PS3 was at fault for bad ports then you would not have games like COD4, DMC4, Burnout: Paradise, Dark Sector and so-forth look so good if not better on the PS3.

It is a developer issue and it is left soley up to the lack of developer talent and resources. Games that port from one console and it's architecture will not magically port over by themselves and the developers that know this pour money into the game and do it right by producing two games from the ground up. Doing so created two games that run great instead of one on the lead platform and a poorly driven port on the other platform.

Only an idiot would think that the hardware for the PS3 is what is holding it back. And yes, people bring up Uncharted, Warhawk, Heavenly Sword, UTIII, GT5:P, Ratchet and Clank, and many more when an idiot brings this topic up. Why? because these games prove the idiots wrong and they show that there are devs that care about making games for the platform and KNOW how to do so.

[Mainman]

The RSX is much stronger than most of you think. The RSX is stronger than the 360's GPU.

There is a site, ProFX, these guys make middleware for 360, PS3, PC etc. They have a page in which there is a render, it stated that the 360 can do this render in 10 seconds, the 8800 GTS in 5 seconds. The PS3 isnt on this page, but it used to be on this page, and it was saying for the PS3, 2 seconds. (it appears it was Nvidia and/or Sony that wanted the PS3's time off this site, for reasons unkown).

There are lots of threads on the PS3forums about the RSX. There is also a thread that shows the pictures of the site when it did have the PS3's time displayed. Just search for those threads about the RSX, lots of stuff is explained and discussed about the RSX.

The thing that is holding the graphics back is, the RSX still not fully accesable. It is expected to open the pipelines for the RSX these coming months (or maybe it is allready opened, not sure).

There is also another factor that holds the graphics back, and that is the render method. Killzone 2 has great graphics because it is using deffered rendering. Warhammer will (maybe) have even better graphics then Killzone 2, Warhammer is using fully procedural rendering (it will be the first game to use fully procedural rendering). The game will be native 1080p and no anti-aliasing. For Procedural rendering there is no anti-aliasing needed, which is a plus.

There are procedural games out now, but none is fully procedural. These only use aspects of procedural rendering techniques for the textures for instance. Uncharted and MGS4 use procedural rendering for textures.

[uie4rhig]

erm to be precise.. the Xenos on its own, is apparently better than the RSX.. yes, but the RSX + Cell is better than Xenos + Xenon..
I am not sure if mainman's argument about the rendering is true, i will look it up later.. but if he is right, this means that the PS3 is better even if its part by part..

but yes, like mainman says, the RSX is still not fully accessible by developers..

aside from the hardware, the problem for PS3 under performing compared to Xbox 360 is, in fact, lazy developers port.. look at burnout paradise, it was developed on PS3 first, then ported to 360, both run at the same frame rate, look at CoD4, they were both created simultaneous, no porting was involved (between PS3 and 360 that is, not sure about PC).. creating a game for a more powerful system, and porting it to a less powerful system, is much easier, and you get much more stable result.. but if you port it from a less powerful system to a more powerful system.. you get much less quality!

[sonarus]

Without getting into too much detail, PS3 exclusives like GT5 and KZ2 are unmatched on any other console so...yea

[zypher]

...that was a well said post SL1MDADDY. it has always amazed me how people throw up multiplatform ports as a means to justify that the 360 is more powerful, never once even considering the notion that 360 (which is usually the lead platform) and the PS3's archetict is vastly dissimilar. the author of the article must not have done his homework, because if so he would've mentioned the fact that to date, the most graphically demanding multiplatform games perform either equal (GRID and DMC4) or better (Burnout Paradise, CoD4, Oblivion) on the PS3. he would've also mentioned the fact that to date, the 360's most graphically impressive game (Gears of War) has a similar cousin on the PS3 (UTIII) which sports enhanced graphics using an engine that internet dogma says doesn't work well on the PS3. put in exclusives, and the "PS3 is superior" argument just gains much stronger legs to stand on.

[boodybandit]

should change his name to bruceondrugs or bruceonMSpecker because this article is a load of horse dung. Both the PS3 and 360 have their pros and cons and lately most multi platform titles are nearly identical in every way.

This article is flamebait by a bias moron and nothing more.

[anh_duong]

bruce,

you do know how much this decision cost microsoft don't you?

"Microsoft had their fingers burnt by not owning the chips in the original Xbox, so for the 360 they decided that they wanted to own the rights to both processors. They sat down and co designed their GPU with ATI. By doing this they were able to optimise it’s capabilities for video game playing and also they were able to design it into the elegant system architecture of the Xbox 360. They also gave it a lot of raw power."

here's a hint:

http://www.n4g.com/industry...

The Xbox 360 recall a year ago happened because "Microsoft wanted to avoid an ASIC vendor," said Lewis. Microsoft designed the graphic chip on its own, cut a traditional ASIC vendor out of the process and went straight to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd., he explained.

But in the end, by going cheap--hoping to save tens of millions of dollars in ASIC design costs, Microsoft ended up paying more than $1 billion for its Xbox 360 recall.

To fix the problem, Microsoft went back to an unnamed ASIC vendor based in the United States and redesigned the chip, Lewis added. (Based on a previous report, the ASIC vendor is most likely the former ATI Technologies, now part of AMD.)

So yes designing your graphics chip without understanding heat dissipation wasn't such a smart idea was it?? The fact you include the paragraph praising ms for designing it's own chip says a lot about your lack of understanding about the gpu design process.

bruceongames = a middle-aged fanboy hobbyist who has no track record in the games industry

bruce you can be smarter than this and less fanboyish too

[TL24]

Please fully explain why the RSX is not fully accesable? This sounds very interesting and I'd like to know more about it guys, thanks!

[Jack Meahoffer]

I never said the article was totally unbiased did I? All I said was you Sonys don't even want to discuss anyhing. You've all made up your minds based solely on your emotional love for your system.

1.6 sure loves to call me an idiot yet doesn't refute anything I said. All he did was once again spout his opinion as fact and call anyone that disagrees an idiot. You list all those games as being better on PS3 yet its once again only your opinion. A lot of peopole would disagree with most of the multiplatform games you list but it doesn't matter because YOU only believe the opinion that was given to you by your master. All you care about is defending your team and calling people names.

I'm not attacking the PS3. I'm attacking blind followers that spout their garbage biased defence for everything. You people flip flop on everything from rumble being last generation to limited edition consoles being desperate for MS but awesome for Sony.

Flip flop on everything day to day then whine when your game gets .2 less score than you want claiming they were bribed.

So call me an idiot all you want... At least I take the time to experience both consoles for myself before forming my opinion. At least I have my own opinions rather than repeating the company talking points like you followers do. Go ahead and take my bubbles its a badge of honor on this crap site.

[dan-boy]

thats because those two run on umatched game engines! no games on the 360 have been in development for as long as those two, and none have had game engines crafted as good as those two.

the only thing your post and those two games you write about prove is that they are unmatched with investment aqnd man hours.

it doesn't prove that the 360 couldn't handle or run those game engines. just that nothing has yet been created to equal their engines.

fanboys should think....that includes 80% of n4g before touting supposedly unbeatable games.

[theKiller]

and open ur eyes and see what uncharted and MGS4 can do!!

and look what will resistance 2 and killzone 2 and motorstorm 2 and GT5 and probably FF13 will do!!

i think these examples should shut up any doubters on ps3 capabilities

[Yipee Bog]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the 360 does have games with a longer dev time, point being Too Human. At least I think thats the game. 10 years in the process from what I heard. So yes 360 do developers take extra time to hone their games as well (even though the process started back in the ps1 days).

[beoulve]

if you want a one-sided, totally uninformed article to laugh at. Here's one for you. Brought to you by our friendly "Gaming Veteran" bruce. Thanks for the good laugh, Bruce. Great comedian tend to act stupid and clueless to make us laugh. You are definitely a great comedian.

[Kleptic]

http://www.gamespot.com/fea...

read that...Its a good comparison of two completely different GPU's...the 360 hands down has an advantage in terms of on paper specs...but the laymen wouldn't see how arbitrary some of these specs are when comparing the two...

it goes back to the comparisons of which the cards of which the 360 and PS3 GPUs are based off of...MS used an entirely different memory allocation setup with the 360 than what ATI would use for a PC...while Sony kept the hardware more PC like (with semi-unified memory, but more or less dedicated memory to both the CPU and GPU)...the fact that the two chipsets are so different in hardware configuration in the two consoles, making on paper comparisons nearly entirely moot...

real world comparisons of actual games paints a much clearer picture though...the PS3 has a larger OS footprint than the 360 currently, by about double...when you are only dealing with 512mb total...that is a big deal...while the PS3 OS runs off of server class XDR ram, the RSX can also use that...making more ram unavailable to the RSX alos...probably a major reason that multiplatform games usually have slightly lower res textures on the PS3...

but read through that...on paper you would see that the 360 has 48 pixel pipelines compared to the RSX only having an unconfirmed 24...without any knowledge of what exactly that is, you would assume the 360 setup is superior...

http://forums.afterdawn.com...

the ATI card, as usual, has more pipelines but does not outperform the RSX with half...

I would recommend ignoring the rest between the Cell and 360 CPU...everyone knows the Cell gets trashed at general operation speed, mostly becuase of it having only a single 3.2ghz PPU...its the main reason that development for the Cell is tricky, in that it takes radical amounts of parallel code (very time consuming and very expensive) in order to get it to sing...once that happens though, there is no end in site to how much performance it delivers...there was never any question between the 360's very PC'ish 3 core processor compared to the Cell at general code...another issue of comparing apples to oranges...

overall the main point is that games show the difference...the PS3 has arguably the most impressive exclusives, with MGS4 being at the forefront currently...on paper specs between the two will point to one over the other as a hands down winner...when a developer approaches the PS3 with a pot of cash and infinite time basically, it shows without question (MGS4 and KZ2 being examples of 50+ million dollar exlusives, that have both been in development for nearly 4 years)...when you are dealing with limited resources, time and personel, the 360 has a definite edge...but just because multiplatform games (that do not push either system to the limit) generally end up slightly better (in the past more than now) on the 360...it does not mean the 360 has any true advantages of the PS3 in raw performance...

[theKiller]

i fail to see how is it possible that ps3 has 7 SPE's and the 360 has 3 core CPU's yet they can have more on screen and we saw the opposite in games??

what he means by sprite? how is it possible the 360 CPU have have more individuals sprites on screen and not ps3 that has more CPU's???

and how is it possible that RSX is more powerful than 360 ATI GPU while it have 512 RAM??

that article is confusing and saying many bull$h!t! about specification we cant argue about it but about whats more powerful the only thing i agree about is more pipelines doesnt mean better performance!! a pipe like is just a check-house that r connected by a chain, so if a task was sent to the first pipe line then it will move to the second pipe line after the job in the first pipe line is done, and if the task was in the end of the chain and the last chain finished its operations on the task, the task wont move forward until all the other tasks in the chain is done as well, then they all move at the same time to the next step or chain!

[wind_dragon]

Sony is scared of homebrew on their console so the locked up enough so that hackers can't gain access. They don't want another PSp on their hands. unfortunately this also prevents developers from accessing parts of the GPU.

[pimpstation]

I believe the RSX is holding the PS3 back. Since the Cell is so powerful any GPU would hold it back. Of course the RSX is still far better than the 360's GPU. One of the many reasons why I roll wit tha Triple.

[Kleptic]

TheKiller...who said the 360 has more 'sprites' on screen?...not sure what you are asking...

and JasnHenry...why do you keep saying that?...BOTH CONSOLES HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF RAM!!!...people have been saysing the 360 has more ram, for absolutely zero reason, since both consoles launched...it is simply not true...

the PS3 has dedicated ram for the CPU and the GPU...similar to a gaming PC with a dedicated GPU...it has 256mb of GDDR3 for the RSX...the CPU has 256mb of server class XDR...the RSX can borrow some of the XDR if developers see fit, but the Cell can not use any of the GDDR3, because of the drastically less bandwidth of GDDR3 compared to the XDR...hence the 'semi-unified architecture' of the PS3...and for those of you slow at math (looking at your jasnhenry) that is 512mb total ram for the PS3...

the 360 uses a fully unified ram setup, in which there is one bank of 512mb's of GDDR3...it is allocated to the CPU and GPU as developers see fit...this is an architecture similar to a budget laptop with an integrated graphics chip (I am only saying in terms of architecture, not that the 360 is running a crappy Intel GMA of some kind)...it is a result of in house GPU integration from MS, and is not necessarily superior or worse than the more traditional PC architecture...

360 512mb total (w/ 10mb for special purpose EDRAM, useless at HD resolutions)
PS3 512mb total

[rexor0717]

Until Xbox 360 gets a game as good looking as KZ2, this article is void.

[Real Gambler]

The same GPU in a pc, can do way more than 1920X1080 at 60fps. (Shoot, it can go as high as 2560x1600)

Now, why would the SAME GPU, in a PS3 not be able to do it!!!! Even if you would put a 8800 GPU in it, it would just be more overkill since the PS3 will never display more than 1920X1080 at 60fps.

Now, some devs can make games already that works, so sure enough, it's not the hardware. Only thing left? Lazy devs who don't want to learn how to program the cell correctly.

Even the actual PS3 GPU is probably overkill! Think about it, 5 years old graphic cards could do 1920X1080 then.

[theKiller]

i read the link u provided and it said 360 CPU can provide more individual sprite on screen at the same time than the ps3 cell!!

[Dannagar]

Look, I don't agree with the article. However, it's silly to praise a game that's not even out (for those of you declaring Kill Zone 2 as the best visuals on a Next Gen System). It's not due until next year. Why don't you wait unit it's out before you start bragging. It might turn out to be the next Haze.

[lsujester]

Well, I personally can see how the Xenos could be more powerful than RSX based on specs. But all in all, it seems they are pretty comparable.

If any of you are ACTUAL computer geeks and know what you're talking about, Anand wrote up a detailed breakdown of the two consoles back during the launching days. Although things have changed in the graphic card world since then, the breakdowns are still there.

http://www.anandtech.com/sh...

[Superfragilistic]

"Until Xbox 360 gets a game as good looking as KZ2, this article is void."

Until PS3 releases KZ2 and it looks as good as some claim, your argument is void. ;)

[kindi_boy]

this guy is a major idiot and anyone who talks KZ2 and Uncharted are idiots as well.

in my whole gaming life i own all consoles played all hyped most anticipated games and have a KICK ass gaming rig.

it goes like this

Crysis (PC) > METAL GEAR 4 > ANYTHING ELSE

best looking game ever EVER on a console is MG4

why the hell people talking about KZ2 i have no idea.

-------
if someone says how do you know about MG4, i'll spoil the whole game for him in a message.
BEST GAME EVER!

[NeverP]

"from overclock.net

GPU

The Xbox 360 and the PS3 use two very different GPU architectures. The RSX in the PS3 is based on the G70 (N47) family of GPUs, which includes the 7800 series and 7900 series. The R500 "Xenos" in the 360 is built from the ground up, more closely related the R600 than other GPU designs of the day. Here we will examine the specs of each GPU and compare them.

RSX
Core clock: 550MHz
Memory clock: 1400MHz (DDR)
Memory size/type: 256MB GDDR3
Memory bus width: 128 bit
Memory bandwdith: 22.4GB/sec
Vertex Shaders: 8
Pixel Shaders: 24
Texture units: 24
ROPs: 8
Process: 90nm
Transistor count: 300 million
- G70 based

R500 "Xenos"
Core clock: 500MHz
Memory clock: 1400MHz (DDR)
Memory size/type: 512MB GDDR3 (shared with CPU)
Memory bus width: 128 bit
Memory bandwidth: 22.4GB/sec
Vertex Shaders: n/a
Pixel Shaders: n/a
Unified Shaders: 48
Texure units: 16
ROPs: 8
Process: 90nm/80nm
Transistor count: 337 million
- Unified Shader architecture
- 10MB EDRAM daughter die

Does the fact that the R500 has 48 shaders make it twice as powerful as the RSX? No, it does not actually. Let us dispel that misconception. The pixel shaders in the G70 architecture consist of 1 scalar ALU and 2 vec4 ALUs, while the shaders in the R500 architecture feature 1 scalar ALU and vec4 ALU. This means the RSX has 24 scalar ALUs and 48 vec4 ALUs, while the R500 has 48 scalar ALUs and 48 vec4 ALUs. The R500 does has the advantage due to having more scalar ALUs - but nowhere near double the power of the RSX. Lets look deeper into this architecture and examine how each design affects performance.

In addition to having half the scalar ALUs, the G70 is generally inefficient when it comes to pixel shader operations. Though the G70 can do more work per pixel, having 2 vec4 ALUs per shader, it is very hard for the GPU's compiler to provide enough data per pixel to keep both vector ALUs busy. If 4 pieces of data cannot be grouped together with an instruction; for example, if only 2 pieces of data are fed into the vec4 ALU, it is only being utilized 50%. This is inefficient. That is why both the G80 and the R600 have ditched the vec4 design in favor of an all scalar architecture. Scalar units can only do 1 operation per clock, but they are fully independent of each other, meaning that different operations can be assigned to each one, allowing all of them to be fully utilized. Therefore, a more efficient design.

Also, having 2 vec4 ALUs per shader even further reduces efficiency. Say a pixel only needs 2 operations performed on it. You have 6 data slots going to waste. ATI opted for pushing double the pixels, rather than double the operations per pixel. In this case, if a pixel needs 2 operations, you're only wasting 2 slots. If a pixel needs more than 4 operations, it will have to go in for another pass, but that fact that the R500 pushes double the pixels makes up for this.

You may also notice that the R500 has 16 texture units, while the RSX has 24. Do not be fooled by this, as the architecture is completely different. The RSX may have 8 more texture units, but nVidia decided to integrate the texture units into the shader hardware in order to reduce transistor count. The drawback to this is that each shader/texture cannot process a pixel and a texture at the same time. It can only do one or the other. ATI's approach uses fewer texture units, but they are completely separate from the shader hardware, meaning that the R500 can simultaneously process pixels and textures.

The R500 is designed with efficiency in mind. Though it has 22.4GB/s of external memory, it has another bus linking the main GPU core to a daughter die, with a bandwidth of 32GB/s. Within the daughter die are the ROPs and a 10MB EDRAM framebuffer. Each of the 8 ROPs has a 32GB/s link to the EDRAM, for a total bandwidth of 256MB/s. The EDRAM can be thought of a large cache. With such a large amount of bandwidth, the R500 can do 4x AA, alpha blending and z-buffering with almost no performance hit. The R500 can also get away with fewer ROPs because of this, since they are not sitting idle as much, waiting for data to be sent/retrieved from memory. In the case of the RSX, it too is not just limited to 22.4GB/s memory bandwidth. It also has 15GB/s of write bandwidth and 20GB/s of read bandwidth through the Cell processor. However, data has to pass through two memory controllers and hop over two serial buses to reach the Cell's XDR RAM. This adds a significant amount of latency, making it undesirable for a number of GPU functions.

Another feature, less known, is that the R500 features a programmable tessalator. This allows the GPU to interpolate a low poly model and convert it into a high poly model. This is used extensively in Gears of War. What this does is takes load off the CPU as it does not have to send as much vertex data to the GPU. I'll explain how this factors in later.

Since the R500s shaders are unified, they can perform both vertex and pixel shader operations. This allows for total utilization of all the shaders, and a significant reduction in bottlenecking. The fact the the R500 has more scalar ALUs, more evenly distributed vec4 ALUs, unified shader architecture, decoupled texture units and massive bandwidth gives it an edge over the RSX, and in fact allows it to keep up with its higher-clocked desktop counterpart, the R580. The ATI team behind the R500 went out of their way to eliminate internal bottlenecks and make the R500 very efficient over all. The RSX also cannot perform AA on FP (floating point) surfaces. So it is unable to perform FP-based HDR and AA. However, it can get around this by using interger-based HDR, with a slight reduction in quality. Though not incredibly more powerful, the 360 does come out on top in terms of graphics processing power. "

[dan-boy]

in development for 10 years..lol are you stupid? do you think too human is gonna run on a game engine that was made for the ps1 lol???

the idea has been on paper for that long, they started the work a couple of yeard ago.

what did i say about thinking before posting?

[LJWooly]

Dan-boy, you should steer clear of the "think before you post" argument. From what I've read from you, you'd do fine to pay attention to your own comments, rather than anyone else's.

[dan-boy]

feel free to link my previous comments, and add links that prove me wrong.

i'll check back to see what you can come up with.

otherwise....stfu.

[Hoggy1983]

I think if you gave two developers 5 years to create a game on both the PS3 and 360 the PS3 would undoubtedly be the superior product. In saying that the PS3 is such a pain in the ass to develop for it levels the playing field when your dealing with 2-3 year development timeframes.

[LJWooly]

stfu? I don't see why I should. As for hunting down idiotic comments of yours, I don't see why I should do that either. I'm not going to lengths just to expose a hypocrite, that would be sad.

If you really want to see it, read your own comments, rather than waiting for me to post them.
My point is, you're constantly insulting other people regarding their intelligence, while exhibiting very little yourself.

[dan-boy]

feel free to link my posts which paint me as a hypocrite, or comments where i expose myself as an idiot!?

the bottom line is, i attack moronic fanboys..of which there is plenty on here. if your claim that i am something, then atleast have something of mine to put under scrutiny.

but, the underlying reason for your to dig me out is because i said that killzone and gt are just running on superior game engines nothing else. and would most probably be able to run on the 360..

where as if i had said they were unplayable on the 360, you would've given me bubbles instead. thats how it works on here.

as you can see im out of bubbles. so if you want to continue, then pm me.

[LJWooly]

I'm not going to PM you, and I can assure you, I took no offence to anything you said in this article, or any other for that matter, that's not how I am. I also did not take away any of your bubbles, or click the disagree button on your comments, that's not my agenda.

If you want to carry on attacking these "moronic fanboys" you speak of, then that's fine by me, all I'm saying is that your arguments revolve mostly around insults against your subject's intelligence, which I feel, in some cases, is hypocritical on your part.

And if anyone wants to view your comments, they can click on your name, then click on "comments", and they'll appear in chronological order. It's simple, and doesn't really constitute me posting links to them.

If you need more bubbles, I'm happy enough to give one to you.

[Yipee Bog]

How do you think some game remakes are made? There is still a core code that that can be traced back to a games predecessor. Socom Confrontation has remakes of the multi player maps in the new game, from previous Socom games that still have common ties in engine coding (I think I saw that in an X play interview). Even though too human started development for the PS1, commonalities probably still exist, so it has been in development for a while, most likely due to developer issues. So maybe you should go to the open zone and spend some more time not thinking before you post.

[N4g_null]

The bandwidth between the cell and the RSX keeps the cell from really helping a lot in the rendering. Yet procedural effects that are random can use on the flp pre-made stuff sent from the cell. Like say a fractal or a volumetric volume. Procedural texturing would help the PS3 yet it would also help the xbox 360 also. The system bus is what is going to hold back your frame rate though. Lots of things go into this yet just look up the speed of the system bus for the PS3 and do the math for what you need for a true HD display. It's possible the RSX is being under feed by how the system bus is set up.

Also too if you know any thing about HD graphics you should go to the z brush forums to see what they used to make those graphics on uncharted then take a look at the in game graphics. They look good still but they have been optimized heavily. It's very possible that bandwidth with in the system it self became a problem when using two cells since intel and IBM are running into the same problems with their multicore project and the only solution seems to be GPUs in the CPU.

This stuff is more complicated than you think. It's not a matter of opening and closing stuff. The problem with the PS3 is it's stuck being a console idea with PC parts. Every one knows you need certain things to make PC parts work well. This does not mean that the PS3 will not have great graphics and games but this may mean that the system has flaws that will keep you from seeing what Mr ken want you to see on screen. You can not blame him for thinking big yet he was like 5 years too soon it seems. The GPU is very weak compare to what SONY could have gotten. I mean it's already $600 what is another $100 for a 8800?

Seriously I wish more tech sites would talk about this and many have try ars technica for one. This guys are one of the best for understanding what the metal is doing and they do interviews with the people who made the stuff meaning less PR.

[gamesR4fun]

Nothing Ive seen on our 360 can touch the ps3 power wise I mean just look at Lair real dragon flying in huge open levels in the air on the ground massive armies to claw n eat hoards of dragons and flying enemies to kill... Sure it got some grief over the 6 axis (which btw works. Then look at the other exclusives like HS, uncharted msg4 in two days... Anyone surprised that more and more ports are looking and playing better on the ps3 now?
Nope no doubt the ps3 has more guts than the 360 maybe not as much as id hoped but its still early and Sony's mo has always been to wake the beast slowly.

[BulletToothtony]

he hated bluray and ps3 since they came out.. all of his articles were full of extremely stupid opinions.. don't pay attention to his articles anymore.... he's just a hateful blinded man

just look at what he wrote about the ps3

"Seriously there is still no good reason why anyone should buy a PS3. Next year Sony will be releasing some AAA exclusives (MGS4 Q2 and GT5 Q3) that will change this. However by then there will be even more good reasons to buy a 360 instead."

http://www.bruceongames.com...

and then on bluray's victory he writes

"Is Blu-ray a Microsoft victory?"

http://www.bruceongames.com...

he's just talking non-sense trying to come up with stuff so he can get paid... too bad he's trying while talking crap about sony.. someone should tell him that the hate of the ps3 is coming to an end

[DarkArcani]

Uncharted?
or Killzone2?
Held back? I don't think so.

[Rick Astley]

That's funny because Uncharted is STILL the best looking console game out there right now lol.

And don't even get me started on Killzone 2, Motorstorm 2, Heavy Rain, Naruto: Ultimate Ninja Storm, FFXIII, Versus XIII, and etc.

The 360 doesn't even have a single game that looks better than Ratchet & Clank Future: TOD or Uncharted, even though it launched in 2005.

I'm pretty sure they're talking about half-assed ports that come from Ubisoft and EA.

[INehalemEXI]

I like how your list included Naruto UNS that games cell shading is looking sweet.

[shine1396]

yeh...if naruto has cell shading, it's done it to a pefection (if the frame rates are okay of course). Never seen the process done so well...Prince of persia looks to be good then..

[morganfell]

you can't consider a gpu without examining the cpu to which it is linked. the cell has architecture similar to a gpu and can do things like vertex processing faster than anything. if it requires calculations the cell can hammer it. it's why the cell rules at folding@home. that program had it's roots in a graphics program and the cell kicks but in that area. so in conjunction with it's gpu, it becomes a far better graphics solution than the 360.

[Twilightx7]

I must respectfully disagree with your comment that folding@home started as a graphics program, since the original client came out back in 2000 and was entirely CPU based. There weren't even GPU based calculations for folding@home until less than 2 years ago. Yes, PS3 kicks butt at folding, since the folding@home program we use on our PS3's was made specifically for the system, but all that proves is that PS3 is very good at crunching numbers. The Cell chip itself has much more practical use in the medical field than it does in gaming, and is only just recently beginning to prove itself in other areas. This article has a few good points, even if it does ignore obvious achievements (Uncharted) as well as upcoming games (KZ2, FF13, etc.) I think what this article should have been about was ease of development, not system power. And I doubt anybody can deny the ease of development on MS's platform.

Also, on a side note, the RSX IS underpowered in comparison to the 360's GPU, based on officially released tech specs from both companies.

[morganfell]

i should have been a little clearer. i was not referring to the tinker md although tinker is a molecular modeling program. i stand by what i said which is you can't compare gpus in a vacuum without regard to the systems in which they are placed. the cell has issues with processes that require decision making type functions. it is why jade raymond made her now famous statement that later had to be retracted regarding the ps3 ability to run crowd ai in assassin's creed.

but there were ways around that by dedicating use of the spus. the cell flies at vector processing and similar data chunk calculations. just like a gpu. it also assists in matters like ray tracing speeding up the gpu. in the short, you can't compare gpus alone.

[Twilightx7]

This is very true, which is the reason why I didn't spout any fanboy garbage about 360 somehow being better than PS3. I firmly believe that PS3 is a much more powerful system all around, and in the end, will end up being the lead platform for nearly all game development, with the exception of 360 exclusive titles. I appreciate you not spouting a bunch of fanboy nonsense at me though, unlike SOME people in this thread. Bubbles for you.

[titntin]

Just goes to show - if you look hard enough there are still some people talking sense in here that can have a reasoned conversation.
Thanks you for restoring my faith guys..

As has been mentioned, the issue here is not to do with hardware capabilities, but ease of use. Those imbued with an understanding of the PC method of doing things, will only understand that methodology, and therefore be convinced of superiority by looking at PC techniques (like equating graphic prowess by looking a GPU functionality. Those with a broader understanding, realize this is is not the way to understand the relative horsepowers.
What cannot be disputed, is that making an architecture based on one coders had developed for for ages, together with a tool set that most coders were already familiar with meant that the power of the 360 was much more easily accessible to those that could already code for PC. I would suggest we have regularly seen the machine tapping the bulk of its potential as a result.
The non-standard approach to the architecture employed by Sony, meant that only the nimblest of developers have been able to exploit its potential as yet. Those dev house that lead with PC type code, will always struggle to port such a code structure to the PS3. Its not a structure you port to, you need to plan around its strengths to start with to enable you to obtain the power. Archaic dinosaur dev houses like E.A. find this particularly hard, as like any large company, they find it difficult to change their approach and get it right. I know, I worked for E.A. and have witnessed their issues first hand.

That 'Brucey boy' gets it so utterly wrong, is not in the least surprising. He worked in Marketing. In every software house I've worked, Marketing are despise,d as they have no idea at all about games, hardware or just about anything. They are good at wasting money on company lunches though..... and talking sh*t.
Indeed, Bruce has managed to write the worst game related tripe on the net on several occasions - often disguised with pseudo intellectual language I'll grant you, but utter rubbish in almost everything he has ever typed. I particularly remember his article proclaiming that all children should play GTA4. Ironic justice if someone were to shoot him, I must admit I wouldn't shed a tear! :)

[ip-student]

Was making such a pain in the arse architecture in the first place - DSPs are poorly suited for general cpu type code (which is what games have lots of). Sure you can compensate for it by redoing all your algorithms to take advantage of the SPU - but the fact that you have to do that means you cannot take the time to optimize other aspects of the game.

In the end, there are certain things you can do on both machines that you cannot do on the other but there is no real advantage in technical performance. However, the annoyance in having to take the time to get the PS3 to fly is going to cost Sony in the long run. Unlike the PS2 era - MS provides good tools and it is relatively easy to get good performance from the XBOX 360. That is why you see so many PC/360 games - it just makes sense. If the PS3 was vastly more powerful then this would be irrelevant but the reality is that they are pretty close and it is a lot easier to get most of the performance out of the XBOX 360. So the XBOX 360 is going to continue to enjoy an advantage on a number of games.

And I don't buy the fact that you couldn't do any game on the other console - you might have to make some slight changes but I suspect most people wouldn't be able to see the difference when playing the game. However, if you spend the same amount of money then the PS3 version will look worse. That has to be a concern for Sony given they have a smaller install base.

[GameDev]

on a stick, how many times do I have to read someone's uninformed opinion on why SPU's are not suited for gaming. The SPU's on the PS3 have 4 8 bit registers for data i/o. Traditional sequential processing IS NOT what the SPU's are meant for. The PPU handles that, think of it like the orchestrator and the SPU's are the orchestra. hey guys i need this scene raytraced (ok boss) and off they go. That is why you have never seen raytracing in PC games. THe CPU's can't handle it and process logic at the same time. Sony didn't go and reinvent CPU processing, they only opened up the bottlenecks that was holding CGI gaming back.

To see armchair pundits, ridicule, belittle and downright flame Sony for what I consider a damn good piece of tech is what the internet is all about isn't it? lol

[funkysolo]

and all the 360 was getting was PS2 ports with minimal graphic improvements. I buy a console based on it's exclusive not on games I can play on PC and other consoles. When the 360 can release a game that looks as good as Killzone2 then I will listen

[DontH8DPlayaH8DConsl]

why can't bruce and the ninja gaiden dude send in their resume's and fill out a microsoft application like everybody else who wants to work for bill gates!

[PoSTedUP]

its the devs that make the game, not the console. it seems like there starting to get the hang of it. some games look/run better on the ps3. if the devs want to be lazy and just port the games over from the 360 then theirs your problem right there.

"Could there be a fundemental problem with the design that will prevent it ever delivering the goods?" - are you stupid? look at the games that sony makes and tell me what the problem is... tick tock, tick tock... the developers! DUH!~~

mercenary's 2- the devs said its going to look better on the ps3, why?, probably cause the devs are getting use to the ps3.

[pimpstation]

Because they don't want to work for Bill Gates, just lick the sweat off his balls.

[AngryTypingGuy]

The two systems are on par with each other, but the 360 does seem to run most games better so far. At the very least, the PS3 will never blow the 360 away like Sony once promised. The 360 just plain rules.

[Montrealien]

I love my PS3 and I also love my 360. But fact of the matter is, they are both very close, I do give the PS3 the slight edge, but nothing more. People keep thinking the ps3 is some form of pandora's box that one day will be figured out by all the devs and BOOM, we will be blown away, but that won' t happen. Even the ever so Hyped MGS4 "Wich I am enjoying a lot" push our beloved PS3 to the limits and has some crappy stutters and FPS issues. Kojima is easily the premiere Dev team atm on the PS3 and even they see it's limits.

[Pain]

.

[Kain81]

with there DVD-Drive, and there Monopoly Strategy where is the news about that.
Bots oh man...

[Knightmare]

I totally agree with that

[Bruceongames]

If you click the links in the article you will see that everything in it is supported by facts. Some people may not like these facts but they are there and they are open knowledge.
1) The PS3 GPU is a PC part optimised for that job. The 360 GPU was a co design between ATI and Microsoft that is optimised for the console role.
2) The on paper performance statistics of the 360 GPU are far higher than the PS3 GPU.
3) The PS3 GPU was a last minute fix so the architecture of the machine is not optimised for it.

Three reasons that added together mean that there is a huge GPU performance difference between the two consoles. The PS3 claws some of this back because of the sheer power of the Cell processor. However real world results have the 360 outperforming the PS3 because of the reasons stated. And the 360 will maintain this superiority because it is built in to the hardware of the machine.

Like I say, click the links and read the facts before posting misinformed comments here.

[DiabloRising]

This article would have more credibility if titles like Ratchet, Uncharted, CoD4, Killzone 2, MGS4, etc didn't exist.

A shoddy port is a shoddy port, period. Hardware is only half of the equation.

Also, the article summary is pure fanboy flamebait. Fact. That's the thing about facts, if you take away logical progression, anything can be proven "true."

[icdedppl]

A. stop posting your own opinionated blog as news.

B. shouldn't the title of the article read "Is the GPU holding the WII back?"?

[INehalemEXI]

Actually if you look at the overall specs the PS3 is clearly superior.

The 360's GPU has on board edram and thats its greatest difference from the ps3's RSX.

The PS3 dominates in floating point calcs by aprox 2 to 1.

It streams textures at a faster rate. 6mb per second vs 360s 4 mb per second.

PS3 has a flexible architecture that has yet to be fully optimized, where as DVD9's and the Tradition pc chipset with a boosted gpu is a what you would call just slapped together in comparison.

360 has more bottle necks then the PS3. PS3s chipset has a slightly larger bandwidth. Data transfers faster between all the components. Though the 360s gpu has a higher bandwidth then RSX due to on board edram.

Its like 360 is someone upgrading a pc with a new gpu. PS3 is a totaly redisigned pc with next gen technology.

[Bonsai1214]

i actually believe that sony still hasn't released the specs of the rsx yet. it might be a glorified 7900, but it might have a trick or two up its sleeve.

anyone who actually has been keeping track of how the ps3 architecture works is that the rsx is supposed to put out lots of textures and polygons. its not meant to do things that gpu's are normally supposed to in pcs. the cell takes care of everything under what is see on the surface, and the rsx takes care of the looks. its been mentioned many times by kaz and ken

[sleepbox]

Facts and people following them? On N4G?! Surely you jest.

[Jackthepwnsaur]

when a game like Burnout Paradise is built with the PS3 in mind then ported to the 360, with both version looking about 99.9 percent identical, then the question in mind is "why are developers not making games with the PS3 in mind first?" instead of the flamebait article that you just did.

[Godoftheweek]

I do not understand where this last minute RSX GPU started but it is WRONG. Nvidia and Sony announced that Nvidia will develop the GPU for the PS3 back in 2002 or 2003. This was NOT a last minute fix as you have and many others have said. I will try to find the original article announcing the partnership and post it here. Nvidia was getting its rear kicked in royalties lost from going with the Xbox. They dicided that partnering with Sony on the creation of a dedicated GPU designed SPECIFICALLY to work with the Cell was more lucrative. As for the RSX being less powerfull than the 360's GPU again you are WRONG.

Look at PS3 exclusives and then look at 360 exclusives.
PS3 exclusives have MUCH bigger worlds with more going on all around you. Uncharted, RaC, and the illfated Lair DWARF anything I have seen on the 360.

Gears looks good but you can see that the worlds in that game/ levels are SMALL and thier are never more than a few enemies on screen, on top of that, the backgrounds are STATIC. Halo3 has much bigger worlds but look how crappy it looks to a PS3 exclusive.

What about MGS4? GT5? KZ2? and this friday we will see R2.

Stop with the Sony hate...please. It is sooooo anoying.

sei sei sei....hooooooooooooooo
ooooohhhhhhkkkkkkaaaaayyyyyyy y

[tfur]

Oh dear, are you actually quoting forums from 2006?

A quote from a guy from ATI. What would you expect the person from ATI would say?

You certainly have no knowledge of how devs are using the GPU AND the SPE's. I would suggest you look into Mike Acton's research papers, and his implementation in real world games.

Here are some examples for your education:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

EDIT: I am actually embarrassed that I bothered responding to this person. Please educate yourself on game development.

[Godoftheweek]

"Apparently, Nvidia has been working on the chip for the last two years, according to company CEO Jen-Hsun Huang. That would put the start of company's involvement in PS3 development at least eight months before ATI confirmed its Xbox 2 design win. Then, it was suggested that Nvidia and Microsoft had fallen out over how much the latter owed the former for its graphics technology, and that led to the decision to adopt ATI chippery."

So, Brucieboy, it would appear that the Graphics chip for the PS3 was started BEFORE the graphics chip for the 360. So, how is that last minute again?

One thing is clear, the Microsoft anti-Sony viral campaign is alive and well in the LEMMING infested United States.

And so you do not say that I made that up...here is the link to the entire article.

http://www.theregister.co.u...

[uie4rhig]

where the hell does it say that the RSX is a last minute fix? and the RSX is a PC optimised part? and the Xenos is faster than the RSX? dude.. get your facts right.. the only thing is that the RSX has alot of what the 7800 has, but its NOT a PC optimized part.. remember, RSX was designed to work with the CELL.. while it is based on the 7800, it is more powerful than the 7800 and Xenos if it works with the CELL!!

[drtxprt]

Article after article and time after time, you prove to be nothing more than a 40 year-old virgin who takes hate and turns it in to what you call news with no evidence to back up your fail-phyllic rants, with your grandmother's permission ofcourse. This is strike number three my friend. Any credible journalist would supply their own links to the so-called evidence of this heresay that regards the, and I quote, "slapped together" gpu bs. Provide your own links other than to those of YOUR OWN BLOGS. LOL. You fail at life, let alone journalism.

[xg-ei8ht]

Last minute fix?,lol.

Agreements were already in hand along time ago with nvidia, yes cells main goal was to do graphics as well, which by the way it still can, even hdr. and very well i might add.

Also the 12x dvd speed you speak of is on the outer layer, which is where most of the graphics data is stored on dvd for 360. but thats single, on a dual layer, the speed is the same as a blu-ray disc.

and don't get me started on polys or pixel shading, or even vertex work.

I'll just say this, cell can do amazing vertex work with spu's.

Take a look at insomiacs paper on the spu subjects.

http://www.insomniacgames.c...

http://www.insomniacgames.c...

[boodybandit]

...

[beavis4play]

1.where in your "performance assessment" is how well each machine actually runs. i mean, the failure rate for 360 largest for any electronics ever. in comparison that way: ps3 wins.
2.how does the 360 outperform the ps3 visually? 360 has no games close to visual quality of ratchet,uncharted, HS, GT5p, MGS4, KZ2, FF13, FFv. well, i'll give them 2: bioshock and gears. but how does that equate to superior performance?
3. kind of a follow-up to 1:when you are attempting(and very poorly)to break down ps3 "problem", why don't you break down the 360 hardware in same way? there are all sorts of problems leading to heat issues, console failure, houses burning down...etc

come on bruce, a poorly written, biased, article with your biased view of "facts as you see them". i'd say you're better than that, but probably not.

[zag]

If you click the links in the article you will see that everything in it is supported by facts.

I see no facts though, only made up facts.

Some people may not like these facts but they are there and they are open knowledge.
1) The PS3 GPU is a PC part optimised for that job. The 360 GPU was a co design between ATI and Microsoft that is optimised for the console role.
2) The on paper performance statistics of the 360 GPU are far higher than the PS3 GPU.
3) The PS3 GPU was a last minute fix so the architecture of the machine is not optimised for it.

1) The PS3 GPU doesn't exist on a PC GFX card, if it did it would be a part of the Nvidia 8000 serises GFX cards, reason why it's not on a PC GFX card because it doesn't have any of the directX parts in the RSX it not a PC designed GPU, in fact it'd be more a console driven GPU than the ATi GPU in the 360 for that reason alone.

2) the RSX has a different design spec but the RSX is designed for HD display specs where as the 360 is only based on 720P standard HD design specs, ATi have always designed their GPUs to alway have the full shaders, and colour options in their GPUs the main reason why they have had a lower pixel display rate etc due to the extra processing on the ATi GPU, this how ever doesn't make the RSX a lessor GPU it actually does a quicker full HD Frame than what the 360 GPU can do a 720P frame in.

3) NVidia have spent a few years designing the RSX and isn't dump in GPU as you'd like to think.

This has been stated by NVidia themselves about the RSX.

Three reasons that added together mean that there is a huge GPU performance difference between the two consoles. The PS3 claws some of this back because of the sheer power of the Cell processor. However real world results have the 360 outperforming the PS3 because of the reasons stated. And the 360 will maintain this superiority because it is built in to the hardware of the machine.

Like I say, click the links and read the facts before posting misinformed comments here.

the 360 is held back by the CPU, it always will because the GPU has no effect on how to handle 3D mechanics, it's after that does the GPU come into play.

lol, I wait to see if the 360 will ever display a fullHD image for a game, seeing as it's current version is a gimped 1080I picture format, which none of the 360's games output.

[N4g_null]

Bruce you are missing one important thing in your blog and post. The PS3 uses fixed pipeline shader 24 for each type. The xbox 360 uses unified shader tech which is what is used in the 8800 and the ATI GPUs. That fact along means if your game uses more than 24 of a certain type of shader you will be hit in performance yet the xbox 360 makes it easy to use 32 of one type of shader or all 48 of them for one type of shader. This is where the ports will loose quality. The Cell can not replace the extra shader pipelines in the RSX with out a server problem with bottle necking. The PS3 may be slightly more powerful on paper but that power means nothing with out flexibility. The xbox 360 does not need it's cpu to make up for problem hardwired into the system like a lack of flexibility because it is actually a lot more like ATI's next gen parts.

The thing that people may not understand is that uncharted looks good because of the artist not the tech. It's the same with killzone2. The PS3 is still going to look good and many of you may not even notice the things missing yet when you have effect heavy games you will run into problem because they will depend on how many shaders you can throw on screen. Yet if a way is found to help the PS3 over come this thing it would be a great thing as many companies do not have artist like uncharted crew.

The difference will not be in the actual effects but your frame rate. The PS3 can do any thing that the xbox 360 can but the speeds will wildly vary and I think this is the main problem. The only way to fix it is not to rely on lots shaders to make you game look pretty which is harder to do these days LOL.

Welcome to PC gaming by the way!

[Bruceongames]

It is a big pity that this article failed approval because some people who don't know what they are talking about didn't like it. The truth about these machines should reach a wider audience.

What I posted is not lame and not spam. It is fact as any developer who has worked on both machines will tell you.
I am sorry that Sony fanboys cannot face up to the facts.
I am not a fanboy for any machine, just an industry professional reporting the facts as I find them.
For instance the PS3 is beautifully built. To a vastly higher standard than the 360, which was built down to a price.

Here is a comment someone has added to the original article:
"To all comments above. To anyone having done development on both platforms, Bruce’s comments are obvious.
The RSX is weak, get over it already.
This doesn’t prevent talented studios making PS3 exclusive low polygon, low texture memory games that look very nice indeed.
Outside of the console world, Blizzard is one of those studios who seem to know how to make 3 and half triangles look gorgeous."

[Imallvol7]

Man . . you kinda blew your credibility with your past article history.

[jackdoe]

Lol. You just posted a random comment to support your article? That doesn't exactly add to your credibility...

[King_many_layers]

the fact that you backed up yourself with a comment about Poly count and Texture resolution is absoultely rediculously destroyed by the magnicently TEXTURED and stupendously high polygon pushing KILLZONE 2.

You sir are somewhat of a joke.

[DiabloRising]

Uncharted is low texture, low polygon now? I did not know that. Thank you for opening my eyes!

Excuse me while I hope back to Halo 2.5 then, a true revolution in game visuals at 640p! Or perhaps we can play Ninja Gaiden Update Pack 4, running at a native 585p I believe it was? Yes, the 360 runs circles around the PS3. Silly me!

[GiantEnemyCrab]

You have to know your audience Bruce and you can obviously see the age/maturity level of the kid's who are getting upset by your article that is backed up by facts.

They are very sensitive over that Duderaider game.

[Marceles]

He'd be blowing himself lol...in all honesty, I wish the RSX would've been based on the 8 series and not the 7 series which was over quickly, but also you have to factor in that the Cell can handle graphics without needing the GPU, so the Cell and the fact that the PS3 even has a GPU already makes it produce good visuals.

Yes, it would probably give better visuals if it was based on a later series, but everyone in the industry is still stratching their head on what the Cell and RSX is really capable of.

Some first party devs like Guerilla, Insomniac, and Naughty Dog seem to be up to the challenge of making games that stand out above any console games we've ever seen. Some multiplat devs don't want anything to do with it...Square Enix is working on Crystal Tools for FF13 and taking full advantage of the PS3's specs...it's still too early to say what's holding what back. All we know is first party games look a certain way that defines the PS3 while multiplats truly look like ports that can be thrown on any console.

And who knows if a PS3 exclusive could be handled on another console, but we do know that many Xbox 360 exclusives have all of a sudden been later released on the PC or PS3, so really...what's holding the PS3 back and how good do PS3 games really have to look? I think the Killzone 2 trailer before launch just threw off everyone's judgment and everyone has been letting their aggression out on every PS3 game that has come out since. "Resistance??? that doesn't look anything like Killzone 2...did Sony lie??? 6/10"

To sum my rant up....wait, it's too early to know until the real heavy hitters for the PS3 come out, but I have yet to see a console game look better than Uncharted.

[Imallvol7]

Yeah, and you should definitely listen to GiantEnemyCrab whose username reeks of maturity and non-fanboyism.

If you don't have or haven't played a PS3, you probably wouldn't understand why this article seems rediculous (and once again, please refer to the authors other anti-ps3 articles).

[Zool 08]

Before you go mouthing off about facts, i'll give you a couple

1) Nothing on the 360 looks better than GT5p(1080p native), Uncharted, MGS4 (1080p),motorstorm and HS all look better than GOW on the 360. As for the matter of multiplats COD4 oblivion and GTA4 all look better on PS3 (especially GTA4 despite the so-called lower resolution).

2) The 360 is nearly maxed out (97% I believe) according to some certain developers, so if it's going to outperform the PS3 in the long run how comes it hasn't so far especially when it's been out 1 year longer than the PS3 and the first to the third party devlopers had more time to work on the 360? If that is the case it should have shown the PS3 a clean pair of heals in terms of performance by now shouldn't it?

[SL1M DADDY]

"You have to know your audience Bruce and you can obviously see the age/maturity level of the kid's who are getting upset by your article that is backed up by facts."

Says you, the guy with a user name that is distinctly a derogatory fanboy remark against the PS3. You fail little troll. Move on to the Open Zone, they miss you over there.

As for Bruce... Get a life and stop being such a closet fanboy. You write articles that reek of fanboyism and yet you cannot even openly admit to being a Microsoft Butt Toy. Go home and write something that actually makes sense and stay away from console talk, it isn't doing you any good to write about stuff you know nothing about.

[Captain Tuttle]

The dude just wants hits for his site and you guys are giving him them. Can't you see that your being manipulated?

[THE_JUDGE]

a short memory when it comes to games made on Playstation platforms. They get better over time no matter what the GPU, the Cell's architecture is already being exploited in games like R2 and KZ2 and this only the second generation games and they already look better than anything on the 360. Your GPU argument is tired and lame, its been done before. You should use your eyes and do some more research on actual games, not statistics.

[nycredude]

The last time I checked I didn't play a cpu or a gpu, I played games!!! Let the games do the talking!

Just curious though, what happens if we just take the cpu and other components out and leave the gpu? Can we still play games? Can we develop for them?

This dude goes on and on about how the gpu for xbox is more powerful than the PS3, yet claims that he is not a fanboy and that all this is fact. Ok then why not compare the cell to the cpu in the xbox then?

Article=Fail!

[juuken]

...So how did this article get through again?

[Sir_Ken_Kutaragi]

...M$:News4Gamers.con!!! ;-D

The xBox 360 is holding the PS3 back!!!

Do Any games on xBox 360 look better than...

Uncharted???

Ratchet&Clank:Tools of Destruction???

MGS4???...

Er NO!!!;)

[Kleptic]

it is rare to find an article that is THAT false, even in the gaming industry...

the RSX is based off of the 7800 GTX...but it has a lot of differences...and NVIDIA was approached only a year after Cell development began...I have never heard of this "cell GPU" that they were trying before, doesn't mean that it didn't happen...but definitely means it was scrapped very early...

the GRID demo ran under 30fps on the PS3...but was confirmed to be fixed for the final game...leaving the 2 version nearly identical...as stated in the freakin' link the guy put up...also, GTAIV was CONFIRMED to be delayed to do "large scale multiplatform development"...not just the PS3...why everyone just omits the fact that Houser said that developing GTAIV for the 360 and not being able to use a standard HDD was a huge challenge is beyond me...

crap article...crap author...Nearly every respectable developer has commented on the main issue with the PS3 being development tools at first...and now its mostly an issue of OS footprints...the PS3 still uses about twice the ram for the OS as the 360...that number is continuously falling (down from over triple when the system launched)...couple that with the fact that coding for the Cell is still challenging...and multiplatform games take a hit...

this avoids the issues of 1st party games though...SCE has somehow created some of the best looking games of this generation without question...just because GRID ran slightly better on the 360 doesn't mean that GT5:P isn't the most impressive looking racing game to date...or that Uncharted is arguably the best looking console game ever made...this is the first generation that i have heard idiots drone on so much about multiplatform games...they don't prove which system is superior...they just prove which system is 'easier' with a limtied budget and time...

[Mc187]

This guy bruce has been posting articles from his blog since the first day he stepped foot in the door at n4g. The contributers guidlines clearly state that you are not supposed to do this. Al of his articles are flamebait and mostly anti Sony. I swear.
I've never seen a Limey want to ride MS dong so much in my life.

[CallOfWar22]

I have played both Uncharted and Gears and I still think Gears looks better. It is just that Uncharted is more outdoors and has a lot of sunlight and bright jungle environments. If you play Gears in those environments you would see better if not as good detail. You ps3 owners act like Uncharted is generations ahead of every game out there now. Sorry but ur best game so far was only worth a rental which could be beaten in a few sittings. Not a bad game though.

[Capt CHAOS]

People keep complaining that the PS3 devs are lazy, if it takes 100 man days on the PS3 to do something that can be done in 60 man days on the 360, how much better do you think the results on the 360 would be if we spent 100 man days on the 360 effort??

Plain and simple, the 360 is proving it self again and again that it's a better platform for games.

[Kleptic]

^^no...CoD 4 was 600p on both consoles...don't make crap up just to fit your agenda...

the best looking game on the 360 is a multiplatform game that looks identical on the PS3...I know that stings, but making shat up won't change it...funny though, CoD 4 is not the best looking game on the PS3...

[Imallvol7]

Yeah . . . its called lazy developers. We have seen what PS3 is capable of.

[The Lazy One]

I like how these same "lazy developers" seem to have no problem making great games on the 360.

[SL1M DADDY]

Lead platforms get the most attention. Then they port to the next platform. Lazy developers port in such a way that they do not pour the necessary resources into the port but rather skimp. Developers that know how to get the best of both consoles know that you need to allocate the necessary resources to both consoles and in some cases, build the game on both from the ground up. It takes more money and resources and is the path to a great game on both platforms. Lazy devs take the easy way out and just throw a port together. Having a hint of understanding, this would have been something you would have figured out yourself, but I should have known not to expect anything like this from a fanboy troll...

The Open Zone is datta way --->

[The Lazy One]

for a while now. I haven't seen similar problems with 360 ports from PS3 leads. ggnore

[Fishy Fingers]

LOL... nope. Both consoles have "old" GPU's. But the fact the hardware is standard allows developers to squeeze that bit much more compared to PC GPU's because they can fully optimize.

Both consoles have a ways to go yet, and over time the CPU's will be used to do more and more to lighten the load on their aging GPU's.

This article "may" be relevant in 3-4 years, but not now.

In fact, worthy of a > pfft...

(ps... lack of memory will be a concern before the GPU)

[Says you]

Retarded article that has ever been typed! the same thing can be said about the XBox 360 CPU saying is the CPU on the XBox 360 underperforming the PS3 considering theres nothing on that console that can match Killzone 2 or Uncharted or even the PS3 exclusives for that matter

considering the Xbox 360 is also known for

XBox 360=Unreal Engine 3

I never seen that console use any other engine besides that engine has anyone have?

and plus BioShock is one of those improvements that this article is wrong considering its going to be better then the original one that is on XBox 360.

[Kleptic]

the 360 is no better at running UE3 than the PS3...UT3 is still the best looking released UE3 game so far...Gears 2 will most likely top it...but there is no reason that the PS3 couldn't run it either (fanboys said the PS3 couldn't run Gears, yet UT3 looked better...go figure)...

the 360 is easier to develop for with limited people, limited money, and limited time...the best looking games on the system are ALL UE3...its been squeezed without a doubt...the only thing the 360 did was got Gears out the door first...and no one had seen a big budget UE3 game at that point...that immediately made everyone think the 360 was the king of visuals...but seriously...what game on the 360 looks better so far?...arguably nothing...yet the PS3, without question, have released games that are superior...and some upcoming games that absolutely trash it...one of them drops tomorrow around midnight...

[socomnick]

:/ killzone 2 aint out so it does not count. Uncharted while a solid tittle does not have best graphics Gears of War or Cod 4 holds that spot atm.

[Kleptic]

see...case in point...UT3 uses the newest version of UE3 currently...and has more stuff on screen, better draw distances, better textures, and better lighting than the version used for Gears 1...

that, console wise, is only on the PS3 right now...but it doesn't change the fact that its the best looking and running UE3 game right now...confirmed by Epic...

so if you are going to say Gears and CoD 4 'hold that position atm'...switch gears for UT3...it would make Epic happier...

[resistance100]

yawn

I take it he doesn't release that the PS3 GPU is only used for a small amount of the calculations the CELL perform's the rest, really if it wasn't for sony limiting the amount of calculations which can be assigned for the cell to do, the graphical power would be crazy.

Still i still think the one thing which may hold it back in the future will be the RAM

[2cents]

There are some good points raised but when you mix truth with one sided opinions it doesn't produce the results intended. This article will now fall to the hands of the fanboys to fight over.

[Fishy Fingers]

Nice comment. +1.

[BIoodmask]

You people try and censor the news so the administator of the website..(Newsbot) has to approve this?

Are you really that insecure?

http://n4g.com/PopUpPages/O...

What graphics 'You think look better' IE Uncharted..etc...is just 'your opinion'. The majority of the time, 'with provable testing' IE multiplatform games the 360 does win out in the end.

The lazy developer BS is starting to get old. Game developers have been working with both consoles for over 2 years.

Personally I don't really care but this censorship is amusing to say the least. Kind of pathetic in a way.

[DiabloRising]

Ninja Gaiden Sigma - 60fps 1080p.

Ninja Gaiden II - Slowdown at 585p.

Resistance - Rock solid 30fps at 720p. (With upwards of 30 people on screen no less!)

Halo 3 - Stuttering 30fps at 640p.

Fact. Fact. Fact. Fact.

Who's insecure?

If 30,000 Polygons on the Nathan Drake character is lowpoly... you know what, no. Not even going to bother with you. It's a waste of my time.

[Imallvol7]

Well, you usually try to keep BS articles from getting through on the site.

I didn't report it, but just look at the history of his articles and you will see which way he leans.

[Gun_Senshi]

everyone knows mr bloodmask is no 1 X360 fanboy

[Fighter]

This comment coming from a bloodmask a 360 fanboy with two bloodmask accounts on N4G that somehow gets all his lame articles approved on N4G. bruceongames article is pure fud and he is basing his points on old information. I guess he's never played Burnout Paradise on the PS3 which was much better than the 360 and ran smoother despite both consoles running the game at 60fps.

[Aquanox]

@ OnslaughtX -

Nice way to compare totally different games. It's curious that when the comparison is made against the exact same games, the Xbox 360 outperforms the 95% of times with difference that go from abysmal to not very noticeable, while the underperforming in the 5% (or less) is rare and the gap in performance (if any) is minimal.

[DiabloRising]

My intent is not to bash any games, it's to prove that the article is quite pathetic and unfounded. The article basically says that the PS3 is behind the 360 and being held back by its GPU, the assumption of this obviously coming from shoddy PORT jobs, without looking at any exclusive titles or GOOD ports.

If this article were truth, then there would be NO titles on the PS3 that ran better than anything comparable on the 360, which is what I'm getting at. Notice when a game is deved on both systems (Burnout, DMC, CoD, etc) they turn out pretty much equal. How can the PS3 be lagging behind the 360 if it pushes out EQUAL (and in other cases, as presented, BETTER looking) titles? If the article focused on PS3's more complex nature, fine. But read it man, its pure FUD and Anti-PS3 BS. Frankly from a grown man, its beyond pathetic and laughable.

Notice that 90% of the games that "underperform" are ported FROM the 360, in a quick and sloppy manner, without any attempt made to tackle the different PS3 architecture. I'm not saying the PS3 is a cakewalk, it is quite complex, and that is a failing. It's like shoving a person who drives automatic into a manual car. He can figure it out, but he isn't going to win any races right away. "The PS3 continues to underperform the 360" is just a flatout lie. FACT. It has nothing to do with which console you prefer, its BS.

[SL1M DADDY]

Don't just take the Sony fanboys word for it when they say that Uncharted is the best looking console game -

http://www.ripten.com/2007/...

http://bestof.ign.com/2007/...

Just do a search and you will find that the rest of the web finds Uncharted to be the best looking console game around.

Bruce is a douche and to fall for his dribble in this article makes anybody look silly.

[solidjun5]

you don't want to get bloodybaby (#3 xbox360 fanboy on N4g) angry. He has a penchant to go "Waaaaah waaaaah" and he'll try to get you banned.

[Gun_Senshi]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ That someone is spamming to devs is holding PS3 back.

[Azurite]

This guy is what I call uninformed.

[THE_JUDGE]

no name website getting approved. I would have flagged this one as lame and uncredible for sure.

[BIoodmask]

to the administrator of N4G if you have a problem with it. He is the one who approved it. Or does your opinion override his?

http://n4g.com/PopUpPages/O...

[THE_JUDGE]

as we are the ones who usually approve and keep the site moving. My opinion is likely plenty of other people on this site and right above your comment. Read around to see if people think he's credible. I for one don't. He's just trying to make a name for himself and its lame.

[gerol]

they are just not good in ps3 programming thats why the ports are underperformed...

[Varsarus]

The RSX is not weak....

We just don't know much about it.

The 360's GPU may be better, no sh*t, because the RSX isn't a standalone graphics card, nobody takes into account that the RSX was designed to use OpenGL to it's fullest extent, and what can OpenGL produce?, EVERYTHING DirectX 10 can produce and a whole lot more.

The Burnout developers confirmed in a podcast that the Xenos being more powerful is a myth, the power of the RSX was just restricted....

[AllseeingEye]

Next.

[TheMART]

"However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn’t up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages:

It wasn’t designed or optimised as a console GPU. It was designed and optimised as a PC GPU.
The whole architecture of the console was compromised by the last minute change.
The 7800GTX has less raw processing power than the Microsoft Xbox 360 GPU."

That's just the truth. You Sony fans can say all you want, but it is like that...

@ Jamie Foxx

"look at MGS4,look at uncharted and theres been multi-plat games that perform better on ps3 or run identical=cod4,burnout,oblivio n etc"

MGS4 is said by Kojiama himself: that he didn't get it up in graphical terms like he wanted, mainly because of the Cell. I have it here printed in a magazine from a reviewer that played MGS4 for days on Konami invite in Japan.

Multiplats that run better on PS3? Don't think so:

COD4 textures were better on the 360 if you zoom in. Burnout was made on PS3 first then ported to the 360 and run about equal. Oblivion got a year extra devtime, while the 360 version was a straight PC port. It just ran a tad better with a year extra time.

Focus on those games multiplat that release on the same time. The PS3 version always is worse period.

THere are more games to mention that run bad on the PS3 then those that run equal or better.

@ DarkArcani

"Uncharted?
or Killzone2?"

Uncharted? I've played it, looked nice but not the best graphics ever as hyped by PS3 fanboys.

KZ2? Not released yet?

@ Rick G@Ystley

"Killzone 2, Motorstorm 2, Heavy Rain, Naruto: Ultimate Ninja Storm, FFXIII, Versus XIII, and etc. "

Same, calling those games that haven't even released yet.

Sony actually said themselves they got it wrong with the Cell. They thought they could cut costs so the PS3 would be cheap to produce. In the end they had to buy the GPU last minute. The architecture of the PS3 ain't right because of that and got delayed again.

The Cell on paper is strong. For streaming video and calculating how many light years a planet is from here. But not optimal for gaming. It's like putting a Ferrari motor in a Lada. A lot of marketingblabla and many costs, but not optimal for the result in the end.

[Gun_Senshi]

a dreaded Wall of Text of Sh!T!

[juuken]

Mart...
...
...
Shut-up.

Please, for the sake of humanity.

[heyheyhey]

yeah those games haven't been released

but we've seen a lot of them in action and they put all your theories to rest

the Cell isn't optimal for gaming your right, but the devs are starting to take advantage of it and this is only the beggining

in a year or so, PS3 will have the better multi-plats (optimised dev tools) and those great looking games will have been released

but you'll still be here yapping on about some BS

[pwnsause]

oh, mart, the fact that you run xboxkings, the biggest badest biased site in the the universe, basically destroys your credibility on this site. HAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAA HHAAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

[gumgum99]

We are only in the 4th year of the console wars(4th being since the Xbox 360 launched). Such accusations on one's processing power should be saved towards the end say..2012? Developers are just starting to get used to the Ps3's archietecture as far as exploiting its raw computing power. The only reason the 360 look solid in graphics because its not as powerful and will reach iits potential faster because it still uses DVD-ROMs

[CNIVEK]

...the 360 launched on November 22nd, 2005...which was less than 2 1/2 years ago. Combine that with the fact that there WAS no "war" until the PS3 and Wii launched a year later...and it's only been a 1 1/2 year console war. You fail at 1st Grade math. :o

[CNIVEK]

1 disagree...apparently from someone who ALSO failed 1st Grade math. :D

[crimsonfox]

was it the 360 that held back gta4 or was that ps3???

[DJ]

Slow PS3 development is what pushed back the release date, and 360 hardware held back the game's potential. There's telltale signs of these problems if you look closely at both versions.

[Martini]

Your hardware ended up running in lower resolution and worse average frame rate, what is your point ?
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

[crimsonfox]

i meant potential i don't care how long a game takes as long as it's not a downgrade from a previous one.playing gta4 was kinda like playing gta3 with better graphics.like they say id rather do other things then watch t.v. i mean if they cut that aspect of the game i can care less but the list of things they could have put in the game that didnt end up making it to the final game i bet was to much for the 360 to handle.

[DJ]

Yes, PS3 version runs at a lower resolution, but the framerate is pretty much identical across both versions (i.e. great most of the time). I had to correct you on that. The signs are in the resolution of the TV feeds, the texture quality, lighting quality, etc. I won't name which versions though.

The implementation of Natural Motion was also a big holdup, but a necessary one, and I'm glad they did since that technology adds a lot more believability to both the NPCs and main characters.

Edit: Thanks for the framerate info Martini. It borders on nerdy, but shows that they got both versions running fairly well. But I'm not sure why you keep acting like you're arguing Against me. I hate to repeat myself, but PS3 development was one of the reasons for the game's delay. Building a PS3-specific engine took a LOT of effort since porting 360 code ever doesn't work well, and 360 development did start earlier.

The next GTA game should be a lot better in terms of technical specs.

[Martini]

Read the article - 360 has better frame rate then ps 3 these are the facts http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

Test One: Game Intro
360: 31.627fps
PS3: 26.504fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Two: Clean Getaway
360: 28.624fps
PS3: 23.989fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Three: Final Destination
360: 35.662fps
PS3: 29.523fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Four: Station Face-Off
360: 26.015fps
PS3: 25.803fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Five: Rigged to Blow
360: 26.507fps
PS3: 23.781fps
See it on EGTV.

Test Six: Ivan the Not So Terrible
360: 33.713fps
PS3: 28.313fps

So the results clearly show that over the course of the entire clip, 360 out-performs PlayStation 3 in every one of the six scenarios presented here. Indeed, on the longer vids, with a larger average sample, we're seeing a good 17 to 18 percent variance. Tests on gameplay (playing through the same mission, but not rendering identical scenes, obviously) saw a similar range of variance too. For example, the 'Ivan the Not So Terrible' stage has a nice range of in-car, on-foot, rooftop and cut-scene action. 30.106fps average on a 360 runthrough, compared with 26.733fps and 26.696fps on two separate PS3 captures of the same mission.

The bottom line is that no matter what material I put through the detector, 360 came ahead in all tests, sometimes dramatically so.

[Varsarus]

Remember, the delay was to make the PS3 version up to par with the 360...

and lower resolution? yeah right, now would you think Rockstar will be dumb enough to software scale the game from 640p to 720p?, as software scaling takes power away from running the game....lol

[Jackthepwnsaur]

it was 360 lead platform, ROFL so of course the frame rate is faster on the 360 HAAHAHHAAHHAHAAHHAH

BTW look at these pictures, need i say more?

[Martini]

Excuses,excuses ...... LOL

[crimsonfox]

what the hell was the point to those screens?

killzone looks better?

"need i say more?"....yes

[Jackthepwnsaur]

you know killzone 2 looks better :D, but theres one thing that articles like these still confirm, Microsofts viral marketing campaign against sony is alive and well. if this guy is actually a part of the games industry as he said, then it confirms that there is biasness in the industry, it confirms what we have known since the beginning with sites like gamespot, 1up and guys like brucie right here, biasness against sony cause they get Microsoft checks to speak against sony.

@Martini

"excuses excuses....LOL"

ROFL no comback? cause you know its true, go play burnout or devil may cry 4 on both platforms, then come back to me

[GiantEnemyCrab]

jack, you pulled one of the worst Halo 3 pictures you could find from the online portion. Halo 3 has some of the best HDR lighting this gen and the picture you posted did not truly represent what Halo 3 looks like.

[DJ]

And has some enormous hardware advantages over Xenos. Developers agree that they can get 2~3 times better performance out of RSX compared to its ATI counterpart; this is partially due to chip performance, but also due to the environments these chips were put in.

RSX has a huge amount of bandwidth at its disposal, as well as a powerful CPU to feed it instructions and also do GPU functions (i.e. pre-culling, skinning, lighting, and even rendering/compositing) before even touching RSX. This makes sense since RSX is biased towards pixel functions, and all gaming GPUs technically suck at polygon processing.

Xenos has a limited amount of bandwidth at its disposal, and relatively weak CPU to feed it instructions. Also, the bandwidth and memory are shared (as seen in low-end PCs and Laptops) which leads to performance issues. If the CPU eats up a large amount of bandwidth, the GPU suffers, and vice versa.

Now back in 2006, it was easy to argue that RSX was nothing more than a 7800 series chip. But current games like Uncharted and Killzone 2 prove otherwise.

[Martini]

Whatever makes you sleep better DJ... LOL

[Varsarus]

Xenos is also limited by the poor engineering of Xenon, and with the limited EDRAM of 10Meg, which NG2 used 9.998MiB and ran at sub-HD.

[Fanboy Slaughter]

I didn't even read it when I realized who it was. Bruce is about as bad as Gabe Newell. I don't read biased crap.

[Dir_en_grey]

The guy posted this to his own website. If you look at the info history you can see how many report it has, and it was approved by 1 person only. Is the "News Bot" really a N4G moderator or is it this guy's bot?

Look at his scoring history, this post was added 1 day and 10 hours ago, and it magically got approved again 20 minutes ago.

Seems like he's either hacking or using bots or something to bump the article rating...

[Time_Is_On_My_Side]

I saw Killzone 2, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, MotorStorm: Pacific Rift, Heavy Rain: The Origami Killer (screen shots looked amazing), WarDevil: The Beast Within (cinematics is said to be in-game graphics as well, we'll soon see), and maybe others.

[The Lazy One]

You named one released game... SUPER!

[Time_Is_On_My_Side]

The PlayStation 3 is on its second year and those games are supose to hit this year. I can't even say Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is out yet.

[eagle21]

By far the most problematic running game last fall. It has terrible screen tearing, framedrops that were just overlooked by many sites...

Gametrailers takes time out their video review to show all these problems.

PS3 has no problems running top graphics. The 360 does. Games like COD4, DMC4, Burnout Paradise (criterion said themselves), Oblivion, GTA IV, UT3 etc....look and run better on PS3.

Must we hear about the 360 anymore? Hasn't the sad thunder of NG2 showed you that 360 is not powerful at all?

[Martini]

Quit spamming, multiplats are better on 360 there have been countless comparisons done and every one of them except a handful of titles have been proven to be technically superior on the 360. Even GTA IV could not run at 720p on the ps3 so they had to lower the resolution to 640p where 360 runs at 720p.

[JVIDICAN]

well if were going to srtart with the resolution crap
the 360 couldnt run ninja gaiden 2 at 720p
does resolution affect the game?
nope ;)

[NOLA]

Id like to bring up ninja gaiden

Ninja Gaiden sigma (ps3 exclusive)...looks awesome and runs at 1080p
Ninja gaiden 2 (360 exclusive) ...looks good, but not AS good as NG: Sigma. also it only runs at 640p (which, by the way, is officially standard definition)
GTA4 360: 720p
GTA4 PS3: 640p

Bottom line, its up to the developers. Both consoles are capable of great things

[RememberThe357]

Thank you for not being a jerk.

[PirateThom]

GT5: Prologue --- 200,000 polygons per car.
PGR4 --- 90,000 polygons per car.

[jcfilth]

jaja did you read that article?? lol

"the elegant system architecture of the Xbox 360." ..lol

yeah elegant architecture, hot architecture, very very f*ing hot architecture!! lol

[gamesR4fun]

get a life maybe use your admin powers for something other than these anti sony flamebait articles?

[Fighter]

We should just ban bruceongames on this site until he does his research based on current material.

[eagle21]

Screen tearing, frame drops....Go to gametrailers review (they take the time to point them out...360 can't handle top graphics...

PS3 can..Uncharted runs PERFECT....I don't have to list the games like Ninja Gaiden Sigma (PWNED NG2), COD4, DMC4, GTA IV, Burnout Paradise, Oblivion, GRID, etc...look better and run perfect on PS3. The exclusives that PS3 gets are incredible.

BruceonFLAMES needs to go buy THREE 360's, put them in one bedroom of his home, and open up a public SAUNA so he can make some money off this industry....LOL

[Sir_Ken_Kutaragi]

That would be one of the HOTTEST SAUNA in the WORLD!!! ;-D

[Kleptic]

good point...

reminds me of that '360 owner buys a PS3' from that xbox website a few weeks ago...he commented on how the 360 may get a lot of average multiplatform games that are superior to the PS3 versions...but when looking at the 1st party exclusives, they without a doubt have not been matched by the 360...

its mostly a matter of 360 owners simply never playing a game like Uncharted (or UT3 for those still hammering about Gears of War being the best looking game of all time)...seriously...watch those real time cutscenes in Uncharted on a decent HDTV...or even better play MGS4 tomorrow night...end_debate.exe

[pwnsause]

"BruceonFLAMES" XD XD XD HHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA bubbles eagle21 for that statement

[Master of Menace]

Yes it does. And it has been hailed as the BEST looking console game on the market. And it streams it all from the disc as well, no installation at all. You show me a game that has better water effects.

[heyheyhey]

biased opinions, from biased Bruce :)

the two GPU's are largely equal

Xenos= more shaders
RSX= higher clock speeds

oh yeah and Killzone 2, that's all im gonna say

my sneaky little mentioning of that game just put Brucie to shame

[Kleptic]

agreed...

[TheMART]

You mean that game in grey and no colours?

And PS3 fans said that Gears of War was looking pretty with a lack of colour? KZ2 isn't any colour at all!

BTW I've seen too much video of any game releasing. I am only judging the end product. I've seen video's from Gears of War 2 also, which look great. Still I will be judging it when I can play it myself and see it myself.

Lair was supposed to be great, Haze the same. Two years after each other the PS3 had the biggest most hyped and fallen the hardest games.

2007: Lair
2008: Haze
2009: ?

[juuken]

Mart, again...shut-up.
Please.
Do you 360 fanatics have some sick obsession with Haze and Lair or something? Do you want to have sex with the box covers or something? Those games were never hyped among PS3 owners to begin with. In fact, I heard that Lair isn't such a bad game. And didn't your precious 360 have flops as well? If I'm getting a 360, I'll be getting some good quality games, and not flop hazards.

[heyheyhey]

so?

just because it has little colour (not no colour, little colour) doesn't mean the game is any less demanding to run

remember this article is about processing capabilities, not a "which game looks more like a rainbow" contest

the lack of colour is there PURELY for atmosphere, the game is set on a dreary battlefield in the middle of a dark war

if GG wanted to make Killzone look like some Skittles just shat on it a la Halo 3.... they most certainly could do

so yeas MART- i do mean that grey game of which gameplay videos have been released and it puts the graphical prowess of every 360 game to shame

now im not saying the game will be the best shooter ever made, in fact- i won't be surprised if the gameplay turns out lacklustre

but we're talking about graphics here right?

oh and btw

at the end you made no sense, games flop- it happens

2007- Uncharted, Ratchet, HS, Warhawk
2008- MGS4, Res 2, Tekken 6, Infamous (maybe), LBP
2009- FF13, GOW3, GT5, KZ2, Twisted Metal, Uncharted 2 and beaucoup plus :) (or whatever)

if so, 360 doesn't compare

@etownone

Lair was hyped no doubt, mainly on graphics though anyway (an area in which it did succeed in, but that's obviously overlooked)

Haze was more talked about by 360 fans than PS3 fans actually- yes a few idiots dubbed it as the "Halo killer", but that isn't hyping to the extreme

i said the game looked like it could turn out well, but i only said that because FRD was making it (makers of Perfect Dark, Goldeneye007, Timesplitters)

[etownone]

Lair and Haze were hyped to the extreme by too many sonyfans on this very site, especially Lair!! Even I was curious and looking forward to see how Lair turned out.

(should be better now that the update is out or coming for manual controls)

[Mr Playboy]

hey junkpig

All the things themart talked about were true, if not just prove it or STFU

ُEdit below

lol, so themart was right and you proved how dumb and ignorant you are also you got nothing to prove, I feel sorry for you droid

[juuken]

Hey, playboybunny, go back to playing with your toys.
And while you're at it, how about you take a cup of stfu and shove it up your ass?

Can you prove what he's saying is true? Can you do that for me? Or are you to blind-sighted to do it? I had enough with you 360 fanatics. You act as if MS is your God and savior of gaming and it's sickening. And don't use that analogy on me for Sony because even I don't kiss Sony's ass that kind of way. I just feel that they're experts when it comes to the gaming industry and will end up winning in the end.

edit: You feel sorry for me? Ha! I feel sorry for you playboybunny. You're not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed so how can you call me an idiot? Lolz, and the xbabies ganging up on me with disagrees. And how did an idiot like you get that many bubbles? Lemme guess, you either stole them or your buddies were handing them out as freebies.

[juuken]

etownone, please show me a bit of evidence which proves they were hyped? Show me right now because it seems that whenever you or PoG talk, you can't seem to back up your statements with *facts*. The only games that are hyped right now are MGS4, LBP, Resistance 2, Killzone 2, FFXIII, FXIII Versus, Motorstorm:Pacific-since they will be big titles. I never hyped Haze or Lair. I had hopes that Haze would have been good, but unfortunately it wasn't. As for Lair, I've heard mixed comments for it.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

I am not even going to comment on the article but rather the intent. It's flame war material and whether its right or wrong it was written with one objective in mind, to draw all the Fanboys to the flames.

Ducks head and sneaks away from fued.

[socalr6]

When the 360 is broken who cares if it might have a better GPU. Having disk read errors and loud,overheating console does not make you want to go out and drop 60 bucks on games for it. All multiplats will go to the ps3 unless my replacement 360 gives me confidence in it again. We will see.

[sleepbox]

And mindless idiots continue to follow the Sony hype train. Ignoring the FACT that the original MGS4 trailer shown at E3 2006 ran at over twice the framerate. Pathetic.

[DiabloRising]

So did the Halo 3 teaser, at double the resolution with double the texture resolution as well. All companies toss out BS target renders, get over it.

PS - Sony doesn't make MGS. Konami does.

[SL1M DADDY]

Yeah but look what is happening with the target render that they put out for Killzone 2. The game footage played by many editors nearly looks as good as the render. In some cases, the render is the mark the devs try and hit and actually come close to hitting or in the case of KZ2, it looks to be one they might hit.

[THE_JUDGE]

game of the year, and got a 40/40 from Famitsu, one of only 8 games. What 360 game got that? Good try though, jealous a bit much??

[Mainman]

MGS4 is currently 60fps. You mean to tell me that the 2006 MGS4 trailer was 120fps?

[SpenserTracy]

No matter what, I've seen the power of the PS3 and I know nothing will ever come close. 360 is not even HD LOL.

[beoulve]

lol, what a great article. Bruceonmeth should be the name of the site though. He does look good for someone who take meth for quite a long time.

[PirateThom]

You know, as long as the PS3 continues to pump up games that look as good as Uncharted, Gran Turismo and MGS4, I don't care if it's holding the PS3 back.

Meanwhile, I'm in the belief that 360 has reached its graphical peak, or else Gears of War 2 would actually be more than a minor upgrade over Gears of War.

Both consoles are being held back by various things, but I think the PS3 has more room to surpass the 360 as Uncharted has already shown and every so often there's going to be something that blows everything else away, while it will be easier for all devs to rach graphics at the level of Gears of War a lot quicker, so there's going to be a lot of uniformly good looking games.

[Mu5afir]

This article is idiotic to say the least..

[mabreu]

Lets wait until Metal Gear Solid 4 comes out. This game will set the standard of what the PS3 can do. So far I have not seen a single game on any console that even comes close to the graphical achievements that MGS4 presents in its trailers.

Just 3 more day's left. :)

[Jdoki]

Come on Bruce, get real. Regardless of pure performance specs (which tend to be skewed one way or the other depending on who is trying to get their point across) you only need to look at the games available.

Compare first party titles, or exclusives and you'll see similar quality (Uncharted vs Gears of War for example). Maybe 6-12 months ago your argument may have held water - but most recent multi-plat releases have been comparable (even GRID's framerate is not exactly a big issue)

It's been known for a long time that the PS3 is harder to develop for, but that seems to be changing. Few, developers are saying the PS3 is being held back though. You mention a delay in GTAIV and GRID's framerate - fair points, but hardly conclusive. Perhaps I could use the opposite argument that Burnout Paradise plays and looks better on PS3 compared to 360? You fail to mention Ratchet and Clank, Burnout Paradise, CoD4, MGS4, GT5P because it becomes obvious that in the hands of capable developers there no differences between the consoles.

If anything one could argue that DVD9 and a lack of standard hard drive are holding back more innovative multiplatform titles just as much as you try and argue that the 360 is the superior hardware.

If your article had actually attempted to provide interesting commentary on why you think the RSX is holding back the PS3 I'd be fine with that - I don't disagree that it's the weakest part of the PS3 - but instead you use biased sources (as if ATI would say the RSX is better!!) and use the 'holding back the PS3 angle' to actually just promote the 360.

As an owner of both consoles I think there's very little in it - but the last few months has definitely seen PS3 quality improve (and that trend looks set to continue) while the 360 has plateaued to an extent (nothing I've seen coming on the 360 looks significantly better than Gears of War).

[The Lazy One]

That is one of the few games that's almost identical on both systems. They don't even have major lighting or color differences.

[sephy 9 2 5]

Here is a comment someone has added to the original article:
"This doesn’t prevent talented studios making PS3 exclusive LOW POLYGON, LOW TEXTURE MEMORY games that look very nice indeed.
Outside of the console world, Blizzard is one of those studios who seem to know how to make 3 and half triangles look gorgeous."

I used caps to emphasize what's wrong with that comment from the original source.

The technical specs of quite a few PS3 exclusives say otherwise. One title, albeit running at a sub-HD resolution, sports one of the highest polygon counts on a console.

[Silogon]

I believe this is only the case with multiplatform games. I've played through Uncharted and R&Cftod to know the ps3 isn't weak by any means. In fact, those are the two best looking games this generation and that is a hard pill to dispute by any console owner who's played them both.

[kewlkat007]

but if your to look at what we have now in front of us, as far as games and doing comparisons up the wazooo

It's safe to say graphical wise the Ps3 has nothing on the 360. If you wanna talk about technical feats and doing all these little things like particles and animation, this is where the Cell comes in handy but looking at graphics in terms of Pixels, I think the PS3's GPU will hold back the cell.

Games will not look anymore real life then they do on the 360,like I said maybe in the animations, you will notice differences. Little things. Not so "Oh my!!!" this game belongs on the next gen console after what we have today.

[CViper]

I can spend the time and get links together showing how much powerful the 360 is compared to the ps3 citing instances like:

Madden
GTA4
Bourne
Darkness

And all of the multiplats which were developed to run on the 360 first, then ported to the ps3 without use of the cell. Your argument could be made very easily without any effort. Because Multiplats are generally better on the 360.. since they were developed for the 360 first..

You see what happens when developers actually put effort into the PS3. Infinity Ward did such a good job with COD4. Perhaps they would disagree with your misinformed wiki'd article write up. Same with Criteron. You have absolutely no facts backing up why Gt5p's advanced engine runs at 1080p, yet halo3,Gta,gears,bioshock can't. And they cant even handle the shaders or the level of geometry on screen coupled with HDRI lighting OBJECT Motion blur, and Depth of field, which are all traditionally GPU abusive.

Your argument makes no sense because you are sitting there grading the PS3's specifics by traditional processing. Which means More graphics, Better video card. And that WAS the rule until people started using broadband procs to assist the heavy lifting. If the situation was cars, your argument would be the following:

Which Car is Better? And By better, we mean which is more powerful based on the rules of "More Cylinders means More Power", an 8 Cylinder Ford Mustang GT, or a 6 Cylinder Porsche 997 Turbo.

"Well Durr Clearly the Mustang is better because it has a bigger engine. So that means it will be faster"
--

Now as incorrect as that seems. That's completely what your halfass arguments are all based on. It would be like ignoring the weight/supension/forced induction of the faster Turbo vehicle, just to make a point that the Mustang has more cylinders. You aren't even factoring in the rest of the specifications for the Ps3 while doing your argument. You are grading the PS3 based on the Criteria to grade the 360/Traditonal PC Graphical processing. The PS3's architecture lends it to be more of a communal process that will be the way computer technology evolves into. Silicon can only get so thin before it can no longer hold charges.

GPU's are a thing of the past, and this "author" doesn't quite grasp the idea. Why the hell do you think people are trying to do Graphic heavy lifting calculations with broadband Chips??!? I mean come on. Hell a basic search would lead you to see that the 360's GPU is surpassed by older technology already, and UNLIKE the PS3 it doesn't have any systems to perform calculations when the GPU is overexerted. Thats why all of the SPECIFICATIONS for 360 ported PC titles are rock bottom. If the 360 is so advanced, why don't I need a Crysis like Rig to run Gears or COD4? Because its not pushing advanced engines that are resource hogs. The load its lifting is compressed and optimized to run at certain specs, and those specs are low. STALKER has higher specifications than any 360PC port to date.

You telling me I need a top of the line 360 to play Half Life 2 in lower resolution with less texture quality than my PC from 5 years ago? please. The highest PC specs were for Assassins Creed which is KNOWN to not have optimized code, and be heavily heavily tempermental.

You are making yourself seem completely ignorant that Super computers and Game Development are being born from the broadband processor technology. Don't believe me? Visit M.I.T. Where they currently have technology development working for the Cell and specifically the PS3.

This article more importantly falls apart when you realize that games like:

Ratchet & Clank Future Tools Of Destruction is one of the most diverse console engines out. Whether or not people outside of the development community want to acknowledge that, its up to you.

Uncharted's Stream loading & High Praise for visuals, animation variety Streaming loading and running at a full 720p. A resolution that Halo3 couldn't attain.

Heavenly Swords # of High polygon to LOD massive crowds, that you could FULLY interact with.

Gran Turismo 5, the most console- photorealistic title out. Runs on a PS3.

Are games that can never run on the 360, and there is no other comparable titles to even mention. Outside of underperforming Unreal Engine titles, which have NEVER NEVER NEVER been known for their processing weight and graphics capabilities. Until this generation, Epic was known for Unreal Tournament. Which was badass, but it was no Quake as far as visuals.

You are an opportunist trying to get hits to your pathetically low rated web site. Icanhascheezburger.com has more traffic for the love of god. Yes you can stir a pot of Bee's here on N4G. But I'll rest perfectly fine knowing that your opinion is only being seen by a handful of people on the internet (with your 300k rated site0, that have already made choices about which console to purchase. I'd hate for anyone to stumble upon your site, and mistake your words for any bit of journalistic credibility.

I'll just say put up or shut up.

Why don't you act like a journalist instead of pretending to be one. Do an article on Uncharted\Gt5p\Heavenly Sword Engine VS any Pre-Made Unreal Engine title, or even bungies Halo3 engine All of these are benchmarked, and have tests that quantify the work being done. But I'm sure your mighty "pull" in the industry couldn't even line up something like that. If you manage to do so, post your findings, and maybe someone will take you seriously for once.

Plugging your own website is pathetic.

[Ashta]

I would like to know why an admin approved a flamebait story that was submitted by a guy who is plugging his own site to get hits.

[Fanboy Slaughter]

It's also kinda sad when you try to get your own articles posted on here, OldWizard did that quite a bit ago and it didn't turn out good.

[Meus Renaissance]

The guy who wrote the article also submits the article. Plus its uninformed, the GPU comparisons are rather complicated because the Cell itself can perform functions to assist the RSX to achieve comparability with the Xenon, and also potentially improve on it.

Source, Criterion Games

[Varsarus]

People just need to realise that Xenos is just Unified Shaders, that's it.

It has NO 128 bit FLOATING POINT HDR (RSX has) and is part of Shader Model 4.0

It uses Bloom instead of 128bit HDR to simulate True HDR (Fake HDR)

The Cell wipes the floor out of every other CPU running Allegorythmic's New Substance Procedural Rendering Engine!

http://www.allegorithmic.co...

Don't forget that's 1 SPU, now do the other SPU's and do the math :D

Xbox 360? ROFL, can only run the game at 1 core at most, the other 2 cores are for game engine and OS (in-game chat)

These media freaks or whoever, all want to prove at ALL COSTS that the PS3 is not better than the Xbox 360.

[MONOLITHICIDE]

nice thats good to know and i love Dues Ex

[lokin]

@Varsarus
you get guys like you that dont have a technical bone in your body then you make statements like: "Xbox 360? ROFL, can only run the game at 1 core at most, the other 2 cores are for game engine and OS (in-game chat)". IDIOT. I say things like that and you dont have phisical technical data to back it up? I call pll like you idiots, because thats just what you are. If you like the tech side of the systems and you actually sit down and read about both systems you WILL KNOW that the xbox uses just a few % of the first core. and is doesnt use one core just for chatting. So M$ just thought of developing a system with extra cores for just a siple thing as chatting??? like i said IDIOT. And NO I dont prefer a system but in this case the article make sense. There are thinks that one system does better than the other, but one thing is for sure.... NO SYSTEM IS LIGHT YEARS AWAY FROM THE OTHER!

[Master of Menace]

The 360 is much better at breaking! LOL.

[Pornlord]

Eh, technically he is right, the GPU is more powerful in the 360. But the GPU in the PS3 is being helped by the CPU and the Satelite CPU's. So you can't compare one GPU to the other because they don't perform the same function if properly used... and that is what is making this argument a little flimsy. Ports aren't taking the time to properly use the PS3's CPU and GPU. If it were having trouble, wouldn't it have trouble with everything??? How come uncharted runs so well and looks so good? It's a simple point really. It takes two sides, hardware AND software to make a good game. The dev's are just being lazy.

[PMR_21]

show me one game on the 360 that looks better than GT5 Prologue or Uncharted. yea, thats what I thought. stupid bots

[Ninja-Sama]

Thats exactly what I tell ppl when they say multiplat games look better on 360 than on the PS3...I just mention Uncharted and GT5P and they stfu.

[PMR_21]

not to mention, we saw what happens when multi-plats are developed from the PS3 first. take for example Burnout Paradise. On the PS3, it's 60fps, while on the 360 it's 30fps.

[etownone]

http://www.gamecriticsaward...

http://www.1up.com/do/newsS...

http://www.joystiq.com/2007...

http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed...

thats how Uncharted stacks up against the rest!!
it was hardly ever mentioned for any award, especially in graphics,
2007 goto Bioshock and Call of Duty 4
2006 Gears of War

Uncharted is an above average game at best with an 88 on metacritic.com

and one of the most trusted website (IGN) gave it:
9.0 Graphics
"There's no doubt the game looks great and that the use of in-game assets for the movies is seamless transition, but there's still a fair amount of screen tearing and texture pop in."
http://ps3.ign.com/articles...

IGN being the SAME website that gave
Gears of War a 10
Bioshock 9.5
Call of Duty 4 10

now please you sonydroids and any other sonydroids that read this, STFU already about Uncharted!! it is FAR from best the BEST in anything. I know sonykids are itching for a game to justify their $599 blu-ray machine but Uncharted is not it!!!

[karlostomy]

Wow, man.

All you did was post some facts from websites and you got 5 disagrees.

What is the matter with the SDF? How long does complete denial last for those guys?

[Master of Menace]

The games you mentioned are all FPS. Please, name one adventure game that comes close to Uncharted on 360. You can't. You are owned my friend! Go back to playing FPS after FPS after FPS after .......................(infini ty).

[Godoftheweek]

http://www.theregister.co.u...

http://www.zdnetindia.com/p...

"The companies revealed in a joint statement that they have been working together for the past two years to develop a graphics processor based on Sony technology and Nvidia's GeForce architecture for PC graphics processors. The deal will include a royalty structure for Nvidia and will encompass other Sony consumer electronics products, the companies said. Further financial details were not disclosed."

See that? This press release is dated Dec.2004, so logic would dictate that if Sony and Nvidia have been working on the chip for the past TWO years...that would make it 2002 right?

HOW IS THIS LAST MINUTE BRUCIEBOY? They started work on the GPU BEFORE the mighty ATI Xenon GPU.

So sick of it all.

[funktion_d]

I particularly don't like the 360. (sorry people)

I would expect this article to cause a huge fanboy war too..

I'm a PS3 lover, however everything everyone says is pretty much speculative. is anyone here actually a developer who's worked on both platforms? also it's comparing apples to oranges pretty well hardware wise.

Yes some PS3 games looks fantastic... but i don't see the 360 as not being just as capable.. it's games where the Cell is fully used for handling geometry setup that the 360 could not keep up.. but fillrate/GPU wise i think the 360 is likely the winner here. . (but this is my opinion)

[4D]

*Alert*
*Alert*

Another article that says something negative about the PS3. Immediately log in with all 10 of your accounts and hit disagree. Remove all Xbot bubbles. Spread FUD. Talk about the RROD, DVD-9, no standard HDD. HD-DVD's death. No wifi. Ho HDMI in launch units.

Do not use facts. I repeat do not use facts to defend the PS3. We can't let the Xbots know that the 360 GPU is superior in every way to the PS3 GPU.

Edit: HeyHeyHey. Good job. That was a fact. The clock speed is higher.

Everyone else: You still haven't proven the the PS3 GPU is better than the 360 GPU. All of you are foaming at the mouth. Now it's a conspiracy because Xbots are afraid of MGS4 right??? Whats next. Hurry. I only got 1 bubble left.

[heyheyhey]

that's the plan :)

oh and lol, superior in every way...

Xenos clock speed- 500mhz
RSX clock speed- 550mhz

and what Varsarus said

PWNED!!!!

oh and look at that, i used facts- now there's a surprise aint it?

[PMR_21]

of course it's another negative article. the bots are just desperate to get attention before getting raped by MGS4. losers

[MONOLITHICIDE]

All that crap was pretty funny actually but i have to disagree this was my favorite part

"Hurry. I only got 1 bubble left."

[Zool 08]

And remember the nearly maxed out 360's been out 1 year longer than the PS3 LOL

[radchris]

4D is true Next-gen!

Dual screens w/ 120 fps, 1080p native on EVERY game.

Obviously PS3 is better than 360, I mean why would Sony lie?

My 360 cant do 4D graphics :(

[CViper]

While the PS3's exclusives can, so odd.

[The Lazy One]

It renders 2 different SD+ images of the same scene to create better color and lighting. That doesn't mean the hardware is less powerful. It renders 2 standard definition images for each image that would normally be rendered.

That's not less power. It's a different application of the power.

[DiabloRising]

What's Ninja Gaiden II's excuse then for running at 585p with slowdown? Because its levels are empty and the colors don't pop, nor does the lighting, like Halo 3.

Face it, the PS3 and 360 are about equal, and shine in different areas. It's up to the devs to make their titles shine. If you try to use one console's programming techniques on the other, you're going to get mud on your face.

[CViper]

Resolution has NOTHING at all to do with performance. You can run Pong in 1080p.

Halo3's Sub HD frame does prove that its impossible for the 360 to render the engine at a 720p/1080p frame and keep a stable frame rate with HDRI lighting, and keeping the same lod.

The purpose of my comment was to point out that there ARE 1080p titles. That run well, and look good. halo3 runs well, and looks good. Its not 1080p. And that 1080p isn't a necessity for gaming.

The sooner people get off of the history bus with over zealous PR sony reps words, the better gaming will be. That was 2005. Its 2008.

Bungie did tricks to render a solid frame. But Uncharted runs HDRI lighting model's fine, at 720p. And it Stream Loads. There is a reason games like Crysis & Uncharted run solid frames without compromising frame resolution and rate, because the hardware can take the load. Halo3 isn't going to get any special treatment for Bungie not being able to do what Naughty Dog/Crytek/Guerrilla Games does with ease. Sorry, but No pass here for not being able to pull 720p off for microsoft's biggest exclusive known to man.

There is room for improvement but it has to go slowly to keep frame rates. I'd LOVE to play all of my games in 1080p, but that reality just isn't here yet for console games.

[The Lazy One]

Your comment shows an enormous misunderstanding in the Halo 3 engine.

Halo 3 doesn't use just HDRI. That's why it needs 2 images. It renders one image with HDRI and one image with LDRI and puts them together to give the appearance of more realistic lighting.

here it is explained http://www.bungie.net/News/...

[Testo]

I know you will all think I'm saying this because I'm a fanboy but personally this article seems borderline spam.

@Bruce

"If you click the links in the article you will see that everything in it is supported by facts. Some people may not like these facts but they are there and they are open knowledge."

From your picture on your website I can tell that you are an older man so I would assume you know the definition of "Facts"

IF you don't know fact from fiction:

Facts are a lot unlike the links you provide in your BLOG.

Let me explain.

http://www.gamesindustry.bi...

RUMOUR: From the "well respected" analyst Michael Patcher. Unless you can provide proof from R* saying its the PS3's fault the game was delayed this link will be left as fiction.

http://community.codemaster...
http://forum.pcvsconsole.co...
http://www.rllmukforum.com/...

These are all posts on forums which in themselves are not allowed to be posted as "NEWS" on N4G. But I guess since your posting a BLOG and linking to FORUMS, its ok? And again unless I'm stating "Fact" in the comments section here these are also fiction.

http://rofl-at.us/?page_id=...
^^^^^^
Here you posted someone elses BLOG as "Factual" information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
^^^^^^
Do I even have to explain myself regarding Wikipedia?

Mr. Bruce.

I would have assumed by your age that you would know NOT to believe EVERYTHING you read on the internet.

P.S. Has anyone actually checked the dates on the links?
June 7, 2006 - 5:47:16pm
Dec 24 2005, 05:34 PM

I don't remember both consoles being out at either of these times.

[The Lazy One]

Something using anything not set in stone against the PS3 is spam, but someone's friend steve saying something for the PS3 is certainty.

[Bebedora]

I beg you all to reconsider posting more. It's bad as it is (100+ posts). Now we will see like a dozen of the same flamebait articles released so it generates more web traffics. Who in it's right mind wants that?

So please don't post if you like more quality content in your articles.
(This is based on experience and conclusion of).

[1stKnighT]

Old news! Everybody already knows this.

[rawd]

Bruce, you're a deuce

[Cyb3r]

Both consoles have their pros and cons but the 360 is now maxed out graphically the PS3 isnt. And we have yet to see what a game that will take full advantage of the PS3s hardware will look like dispite the RSX not being as powerful as the 360s GPU.

[snakeater3]

constantly underperforms 360 game after game? you mean uncharted, ratchet, mgs4 , ff13, gt5 , res2? were you referring to those "game after game" ??

[Watapata]

That isn't to say that what is in the article is correct by any stretch of the imagination. It isn't, plain and simple. This is the same garbage that was posted all over this site ages ago to try to prove the PS3 was inferior to the 360. None of this stuff has since been corroborated by anything reputable. In fact, the GTAIV delay mentioned so early in the article was never more than rumor. All the arguments in the article are old and tired and frankly carry no weight. It may be true that the RSX isn't the match of the GPU in the 360...but that doesn't mean that anything in this article is valid aside from that basic premise...and I'm not sure that even that much can be safely said

[RussDeBuss]

I love this part

"Microsoft had their fingers burnt by not owning the chips in the original Xbox, so for the 360 they decided that they wanted to own the rights to both processors. They sat down and co designed their GPU with ATI. By doing this they were able to optimise it’s capabilities for video game playing and also they were able to design it into the elegant system architecture of the Xbox 360. They also gave it a lot of raw power."

so we can thank microsoft for co-designing the GPU, which most people agree is the main cause for the dreaded RROD. well done there.

[Irishrocket69]

Someone said something bad about the PS3!!!!!!! When will people realize that the PS3 is infallible, I mean come on!!! It does everything and then some!!! PS-Tools lets all hold hands and chant june 12 in harmony!! Whoa, now I fell better.

[trancefreak]

LOL im chuckling

[trancefreak]

Interesting article but i don't think the comparisons completely work this way pitting the gpus together. I know that both systems have other components that make them work well along side of the gpu. i dont feel like indulging in facts and links but I think IMO that the consoles developers will find ways to optimize games by the time this current gen is over just like they did last gen.

[trancefreak]

i always wanted to know how consoles stack up against the nvidia g80 chipset or against some pc comparisons if plausible. Maybe toms hardware guide has sumthing like that

[etownone]

Don't sonyfans get tired with the same excuses??

1. Lazy dev's
2. Like the ps2, the beast will awake in time
3. it was a port from the 360
4. but look at KZ2, FF, MGS4, (games that aren't even out yet!!)
5. the 360 is holding it back!!

c'mon now!! whats wrong with you people?

seriously, if the ps3 is so powerful as even I thought it was supposed to be, then it should have been producing better ports from DAY 1... same way the original Xbox pwned Ps2 in EVERY multi-plat that were all PS2 ports!!

in time dev's will learn how to unleash more power out of the ps3, but the same goes for the 360!! just try and compare COD2 in 2005 to COD4 from 2007... see what i mean?

99% of us here know nothing about developing games, GPU and CPU architecture, polygon count, textures, etc. etc.,... all we need to know is that the PS3 is NOT living up to expectations.
period. EVen I thought the Ps3 would be blowing away the 360 away in multi-plats and exclusives because of so much hype about the "power of the cell" and blu-ray.

Perfect example: If the Ps3 was so powerful there was NO reason why GTA4 (PS's biggest and best selling franchise) ran at sub HD with NO AA, while the 360 ran at 720p with 2xAA.

[trancefreak]

for the amount of components the ps3 has its pretty damn reliable. Ps3 owners really don't have that fear of missing game time due to their console exploding in rrod fury.

i really wouldnt take the risk Imo buying another 360 after going threw 4 of them just because bruce says the gpu is better.

[etownone]

oks... thanks, i guess I forgot the one excuse from sonyfans:

6. RROD (even though completely irrelevant)

but seriously, what does that have to do with the quality of games being produced?!

"i really wouldnt take the risk Imo buying another 360 after going threw 4 of them just because bruce says the gpu is better"
why didn't you just send it back for a free repair? you would have gotten it back in like 10 days.

[trancefreak]

I sold the 4th One brand new with all my games and the warranty to my neighbor for a more reliable machine IMO. I gets old going back to best buy because the machine breaks down. Also they were changing xbox skus at the time because the elites were coming out and there were no premiums in stock at best buy so I said screw it and a got a ps3 then when the premium came in i sold it. couldnt be more happier.

Im not an xbox hater I like to poke at it once in awhile for the hell it gave me but I still play my original xbox. i just need new controllers for it.

[nycredude]

"Perfect example: If the Ps3 was so powerful there was NO reason why GTA4 (PS's biggest and best selling franchise) ran at sub HD with NO AA, while the 360 ran at 720p with 2xAA."

That is your perfect example huh? Chosing a game that looks absolutely like sh*t on both consoles to say that the PS3 is underpowered! Personally I think GTA 4 looks like total crap, on both consoles! maybe it is because I am spoiled cause the Ps3 has so many other games that look way better than it. You seem to hold the graphics on GTA4 in high regards, probably because there aren't that many games on the 360 that compares to it's last gen looks.

Why not try comparing games designed for their respective consoles? Because then we would all know which console is clearly superior. Comparing ports is a total waste of time and energy as they do not take advantage of the hardware. When are people going to understand this?

I for one am not sure which console is more powerful as I am not a developer or a programmer but I know games. I also know that Sony has way more in house developer than Microsoft has so if exclusive are the only way that the hardware will be optimized, then I feel much more confident that Sony will deliver goods.

[etownone]

you just dont get it do you?

I picked GTA4 not for graphics or gameplay but because GTA WAS the best selling franchise on PS2. The three GTA games on ps2 were on the top 4 for sales.

[Mc187]

Seriously....
STEP AWAY FROM THE CRAK PIPE SIR!
Noone listens to what yousay or reads it for that matter.
here I'll translate every post you have ever made at N4G into one word.
W
A
A
A
A
A
H
DUMBA$$

[karlostomy]

I agree with your list. Touche man, you summed it up well.
It seems like the forums just keep spitting out the same list, in various forms.

But i would perhaps add one more point to the list of SDF excuses:

1. Lazy dev's
2. Like the ps2, the beast will awake in time
3. it was a port from the 360
4. but look at KZ2, FF, MGS4, (games that aren't even out yet!!)
5. the 360 is holding it back!!
6. If 1-5 fail, then mention RROD.

That about sums up 99% of posts from the SDF.

Gosh guys, aren't you all getting a little predictable?

[Testo]

I was just going to point that out + Bubbles

[Mr PS3]

Looks like a right RAMP
And an Xbot

[power of Green]

We already know the PS3 isn't as powerful.

Uncharted devs had to turn off some of the Unreal engine to make it run on PS3 and even though it looks good for a PS3 title its still looks like the textures are a coat of paint flat and with poor bump mapping with weak lighting.

KZ2 looks like a Xbox game with stellar lighting effects to cover up the textures.

[trancefreak]

Look at what you just wrote "KZ2 looks like a Xbox game with stellar lighting effects to cover up the textures"

Xbox game?

you meant killzone 2 is the game u wish you could play on your xbox 360 but unfortunately the 360s gpu couldn't handle it :)

[nycredude]

Dude you just made me regret giving you a bubble days ago. This comment is pretty embarrassing.

"Uncharted devs had to turn off some of the Unreal engine to make it run on PS3 and even though it looks good for a PS3 title its still looks like the textures are a coat of paint flat and with poor bump mapping with weak lighting."

Unreal Engine? Uncharted does not use the unreal engine! Did you see any oversized macho men on steriods with rediculous looking armor and absolutely on IQ what so ever and the vocabulary or a pit faced xbox live teenager going through puberty? I sure didn't!

Not to mention the comment about Killzone 2... I am not going to answer that rediculous notion...

Even by your fanboy standards this is a new low!

[power of Green]

I can tell Star Ocean 4 did not have PS3 in-mind when looking at the new pics just from the graphical quality alone.

[TL24]

You idiot Uncharted does not use the overused Unreal 3 engine! You really need to do some research before posting anything at all.

[LinuxGuru]

Wow, are people really this damned desperate to derail the PS3?

What the hell?

Why do people post articles like this that have absolutely no credibility or validity?

[LinuxGuru]

Also, do some reading on the beyond3D forums, you'll quickly discover that the Cell processor + RSX combo can and will easily surpass the 360's abilities.

For god's sake, did the retard who wrote this article completely ignore Killzone 2 or Uncharted: Drake's Fortune?

This article sucks so bad, I just had to comment twice.

[demolitionX]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[mightydog01]

So uncharted uses unreal engine WTF! and killzone2 looks like an xbox game dont insult gamers. You are one sad person like the mart and is mob that talk crap from your mouths...You lot act like flys round sh!t........mgs4 coming thats the reason for all this BS.....And when other gamers and public see it with their own eyes what the ps3 can do then you will be a joke just like the xbox360.....The xbox360 got to prove if it can keep up with the ps3 and the ps3 is just warming up.....PS like I said before you need to see a shrink your losing it..........

[PSWe60]

that don't work for Sony, Incognito, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Kojima or Polyphony are the ones that are holding the PS3 multi platform games back.

The developers that I just mentioned seem to have it down pretty good. Like WarHawk, MGS4 of course, Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted, Grand Turismo, and the other first party exclusives look much better than anything that's appeared on the 3rd60.

PUTO Bots like POG and Jason pleez fix me and Mr. Crabs are still just crying and b!tchin'...am I repeating myself? that's because it TRUE!

[PSWe60]

you'll get your chance in here. In 2 days the rest of us will be playing MGS 4 while you idiots will be waiting by your phones in joyful hope that M$ will call to let you know that your sh!tty 3rd60 has been "fixed" for the 4th time this year, ask Jason3rd60, he's still waiting for his.

LOSER bots, if you hate this site so much then why stay?

[beoulve]

LOL
good one man

[LFC1EE]

Sony fanboys can't take the truth what is the matter with you people?

Everybody is wrong except you guy's the sony fanboy,your self
justification is unbelievable and laughable, take the 7800gtx card it's
obsolete, outdated.

[Kleptic]

idiot...The 360 GPU and PS3 GPU are based off of ATI and Nvidia chipsets, respectively, of the same generation...they are nearly indentical in performance, where as the RSX has many more changes to the aging 7800 series than the 360 GPU does over the ATI chip...

if you are going to say the RSX is an old card...you have to say the 360 card is too...

and how is shouting about Uncharted or MGS4 any different than you guys still droning on about Gears 1?...that is still the best looking game on the 360...save the multiplatform CoD 4...

if you have watched the HD gameplay footage of MGS4 and can't admit that its definitely one of the most impressive looking games to date...you are a certified biased idiot fanboy...that is why PS3 fans keep yelling about it...its that impressive...and don't even bring up the visuals of Killzone 2...despite that being on track to look even better, its not even needed in this debate...MGS4 is set to easily be the most impressive looking console game of all time tomorrow...like it or not...

[trancefreak]

dude the 7800 gtx is still a good card my kid has 1 but its not as good as my 8800 gtx. but it will still plays alot of pc games and play them well. it plays all valve games well so there should be no excuse why the orange box looks like sh!t on the ps3.

[Bladestar]

Tell me something I don't know... if the PS3 were so much powerful than the xbox 360.. it would be obvious... lets ignore the fact that the PS3 came out 1 year after and gave Sony more time to make it 10 times better than the xbox 360...

Here is an obvious question... when COD3 came out for the PS3, Xbox 360 and the wii.... why weren't people expecting the wii version to look and play like the xbox 360 or PS3 version? When a game came out for the PS2 and the original xbox... why people weren't surprised that the xbox version looked and ran better... including with res in HD?
The original xbox came shortly after the PS2... well.. same here.. the PS3 came shortly after the xbox 360... never did a PS2 game look and played better than the orginal xbox... never... so, why are even having 1 game that look better or perform better on the xbox 360?

Hell... if the PS3 was so much powerful as Sony leg humpers wish it was... developers would throw $h!t at the PS3 version and it will perform and look better on the PS3... even without trying... it's simply common sense... why should code written for the cell be so optimized.. when non-cell CPU have no problem processing non-optimized code? where is the superiority?

name 1 game that came out on both PS2 and orignal xbox where the PS2 version run and look better? The fact is that NOT 1 game should look and perform better on the xbox 360 compare to the PS3.. not one...

Do you expect your old computer to perform better than your new one because developers didn't optimize better for your new computer? new hardware should easy run on new hardware... period...

people talk about the same games when trying to prove that the PS3 can do something that the xbox 360 can't... funny thing is that they used exclusive games to prove it... games that will never be on the xbox 360... how convenient ehh? they mention games with low polygon count (GT5P) compared to Forza 2... yes.. low polygon count compared... why? the fact that GT5 does not have to create separate 'actors' for all the parts and textures that change when you crash and all the individual physics and how the performance of the car changes like Forza 2... explain a lot why GT can have prettier cars...

People also compare uncharted with other 360 games like Mass Effect... does uncharted offers the same level of customization, game length, AI, etc? Will Kill Zone 2 offer only prettier textures but because of it now have less enemy count compare to Gears 2, will it allow hand combat, same covert system, destructive environment, same AI, etc?

The sad truth that Sony leg humper do not want to accept is that the only way to prove that the xbox 360 can't do something that the PS3 can.. is with multiplatform games... it's obvious and common sense... you can't prove that one person can beat another on something if they are both presented with the same challenges... ohh and don't be an idiot an mention obvlibion or another game that the PS3 got later... since I could easily mention games like Virtual Fighter and say that the PS3 couldn't handle online gameplay which is why the xbox 360 got it.. it has to be simultaneously game release where developers got the same amount of time to make the game... and that's where the xbox 360 is currently shinning and performing the same or better than the xbox 360... which is why Sony leg humpers avoiding... instead trying prove their theory with stuff that can't be proven since these games are PS3 exclusives and will never be on the xbox 360... that's like saying, "You can't never beat me on X game while not giving me the chance to kick your @$$... then go around telling people that you beat me on that game.. because you are really good at a game I never played..." yeah.. that make sense.. only to sony leg humpers...

[DJ]

"name 1 game that came out on both PS2 and orignal xbox where the PS2 version run and look better?"

Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. The only other multiplats I remember were the sports and movie games, which generally looked better on Xbox. PS2 was more powerful though, so its exclusives generally won. Having only 4 MB of texture memory kinda sucked though. Xbox had a sick GPU advantage.

[xg-ei8ht]

The cell is superior, its pretty simple.

General purpose cpu's can take sh^t code and it'll still run pretty decent(aka 360)Meaning sh^t devs can get away with it (E.A) and many others too numerous to mention.

Cell is streamlined, meaning, better use of code, as time goes on you'll see this more and more. meaning better devs,(who'd have thought it)

Spu's are simple, yet very powerful.

Kinda like the very poor code that was written for orange box on ps3, and thats also the reason the lower rez in gta4. If they can't get the performance from cell+rsx, they drop the rez, but its not the hardware, its the devs.

Things are improving all the time.

Notice how alot of devs have shut up moaning about ps3, because they've finally realized, it does indeed have alot of power, its how you tap it.

I get your argument about damage in gt5p, it's upto the devs if they want damage or not.

But i can say this, GRID, a very nice looking game, runs perfectly well with damage, so it's nothing to do with anything but what a dev wants in his game.

I do indeed hope that the full gt5 game does have damage. As it does need it.

[Egzekutor]

It is true about the PS3 GPU.. When there is a lot of police chasing you in GTA IV , or around you.. the game starts to lagg. The same thing happens when you enter an area in COD4 where someone threw a smoke granade..

But then one developer said that the 360 does hold back the best looking games, because most developers , develop the game onto 360 and PS3, and the same day of release. If there was no 360, we would see much better games, with amazing graphics coming to the PS3.

Dont forget about 360s DVD disc.

Both consoles have their + and - , thats why i own both.

[Kleptic]

good point...except that the exact same thing happens in GTAIV on the 360...with MANY reviewers blatantly claiming the PS3 version runs superior...with less slowdown, with less pop up, and with better lighting...you argument should have centered around the PS3 version running at a lower resolution...not around which version runs better...

I have played countless hours of CoD 4 on both systems...they are identical...some reviewers claim the PS3 has slightly less texture detail, but with better AA on shadows...I can't tell...they look and run identical...

[RSX]

I do not hold back the Playstation 3 blame lazy devs e.g EA/UBISOFT

want proof?
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Heres more
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Both games arent even finished yet..Dont underestimate me.

[BlackCountryBob]

This is a garbage article about a stupid topic. Frankly who gives a damn except for some sad and pathetic fanboys.

[LiquifiedArt]

= NOTHING.

TRUTH!

If SONY leans anything from this gen, they should learn developers are lazy and there are some (Mostly copy-cat devs) taht would rather use somebody else's engine.

SONY MAKE A SONY EXCLUSIVE ENGINE and you got yourself some COIN!

[SykoBlu]

ppl talk like they know all bout specs, anyhoo .. you've graphical beast on ps3 ( uncharted? killzone2?) this articles is therefore useless =]

[RAM MAGNUMS]

the cell doesn't rrod!
the cell won't crash your console!
as a developer, you won't have to hold back your product & stock up on xboxes to test your product!
I'm not all into the specs of each system. I just know what works right!
Please rrod ends this debate right there!
that's why you will never ever see anything on xbox that a ps3 can't do better!
using the reviewers scores from back then during all the excitement of 2007 & trying to match the launch titles of ps3 when xbox was at full steam should make you feel bad because look at you now!
what happeped?
those same reviewers have turned thief back on you & us Sony droids only care about what other people who actually played thier game have to think about it! Reviewers & media follow the hardcore gamer anywhere they go!
and the argument that keeps getting debated by some of you is that ps3 launch games don't look as good as as the games that took years to comeout!
if gears & halo came out at launch, we could talk but the truth is uncharted & rc: tod , resistance looked better graphically for a early begining of future games.
I say it 1 more time for every xbox 360 you have had:
Rrod,rrod,rrod!!!
that's so very powerful?!?
hey, wait let's play mass effect but before we play let's wait for all the graphics to load up or let's just take this elevator!
gimme a break! Not a extended warranty!

[karlostomy]

Lol you just completely pwned yourself!

check post 2.7

damn that was soooo easy to predict.

[TL24]

Someone please explain to me how the RSX is still not fully accessible, sounds VERY interesting.

[Muff1nB4k3r]

As far as I am, aware, Sony purposefully restricts different 'parts' if you will of their gaming hardware. The Linux users on ps3 have often asked that the full specs and/or associated files/software/code related to the RSX be released so they can work with the RSX on whatever they want to do in Linux. (homebrew is included, so that may be a reason it's restricted in linux)

http://forums.gametrailers....

An example of how Sony limits hardware on purpose would be the PSP cpu when the unlocked it, to allow for better games When they let the PSP processor speed up from 222mhz to 333mhz, I would assume this is to increase the effectiveness of game producers by giving them certain requirements to reach. Then by releasing new information or letting more software related to the RSX out, developers can make games look even better. Which all seems to fold back to Sony's 10 year plan.

http://www.shacknews.com/on...

If anything, Uncharted, Killzone 2, Ratchet and Clank will probably be considered ugly compared to what comes out in a couple years of more.

Much like original ps(insert letter/# here) and the later games on the same platform

Hope this helps =/ EDIT: included some sources

[Citizen Cook]

Its true you KNOW...
Thank god i chose to suckle from the bounty of M$...

HA HA HA HA!

[beoulve]

Fedex called. they lost your XBOX 360. You are getting a new one from Microsoft but that you have to wait another 2 month.

[ApocalypseShadow]

bruce has no REAL facts to back him up,bladestar posted all that crap above and yet has no PROOF being that he's not a developer.and others still post garbage about 1080p/120fps/60fps(pick a framerate-doesn't matter)without ANY ***LINKS*** that say that ALL games would be at that resolution or framerate.

360 fans are constant liers.just like in this article,just like microsoft FUD against sony.MUST BE A PS3 AAA EXCLUSIVE GAME COMING OUT SOON.

FACT:not one multiplatform developer has said 360 is more powerful than ps3.

FACT:carmack himself said ps3 has more peak power.he just like 360's ease of development.

FACT: exclusive games on ps3 like GT5:P produce better visuals than any 360 game.if devs have had more time producing 360 games exclusively(year head start),games like fable2,forza2,gears2,etc.,woul d look WAY BETTER than ps3 games.but...THEY DON'T.

microsoft has lied about RROD and everything sony supported in it's console.then turned around and tacked it on.

360 fans have lied and spread rumors on games to get them to consider making them for 360.but even kojima said no.MGS4 is a theater experience,not a straight to dvd experience.bladestar said he's a MGS fan,but has of yet bought a ps3 to play it.

you lie to yourselves that it's okay to send your system back for repair,lie about it being okay paying expensive prices for accessories,lie about it being okay to pay for online gaming,lie to yourselves that microsoft is still first when nintendo is....

you guys are just shameful with these lies just like this article.if you have to fallback on PORTS of 360 code to ps3 and not EXCLUSIVE games as PROOF(and we have seen 360 exclusive games like halo3 struggle to keep up),then i don't know what to say but....

PLEASE DON'T GET PS3S WITH THIS KIND OF BULL.AND THE ONES THAT DID BUT CALL THEMSELVES NEUTRAL AND SPREAD SMALL LIES,PLEASE DON'T EVER GIVE ME YOUR PSN NAMES.I WOULD NOT WANT TO PLAY ONLINE WITH YOU.

apocalypse................... ..

[MazzingerZ]

"The PS3 continues to underperform the Xbox 360, game after game"

hahahaha, I stopped reading there...this is way too "2006"

[Leaderof Espada]

so the article is void, and is this idiot and many of you forgetting the other untalked about spec of the rsx the 1.8tflops that people still are saying is impossible? nothing in the gpu world still touches the rsx in this form, for all we know rsx isnt even begun pumping out what it can really do.

and one word "Wardevil" thats all i need to say

[RAM MAGNUMS]

do you really believe the xbox 360 is the most capable machine for gaming in our future?
do you still feel cartridges, cd, DVD or downloading is what we need?
it was much simpler in the old days when we did it by bits.
nintendo was 8 bits & genesis was 32 bits.
try putting a 8 bit nintendo game on a sega dreamcast & you have a xbox 360 port on a bluray !
ps3 jumps 3 generations ahead of your overheating piece of crap.

[etownone]

oks in all honesty.

blu-ray is great. has it proven that it is needed in this generation for gaming. NO. That was just Sony forcing the next format down loyal sonyfans throat.

Instead you have a flagship game, MGS4, thats needs installs between each chapter and like 5gig of HDD space. I'd rather swap a disc, that only takes like 5-10 sec and no mandatory installs.... so what the hell is blu-ray for then? especially when you have just about every multi-plat game on 360 that look and run better WITHOUT the mandatory installs.

i'll admit the blu-ray is nice to have...for movies that is.

so in all honesty, since your putting your "fanboyism" aside for a moment, yet you refer to the 360 as a piece of crap,
tell me, how does it feel that with every multi-plat game released the so called "piece of crap" is outperforming the ps3? what does that make the ps3, a bigger and smellier piece of horse crap?

wake up you sonydroid!!! blu-ray is not needed, and the "power of the cell" has been hyped like it's god's gift to consoles.

Sony did a number on you kid.

[t-0_ot-]

I agree with you on that Blu-Ray is NOT needed this generation.. But, I do believe that it will be needed for the next gen. And, whether people want to believe it or not, the PS3 was Sony's best choice of getting people to switch to Blu-Ray.

[Genesis5]

Bruce you knucklehead. MS designed their own own GPU or did you not read the story on the front page. They wanted to save money by not using a ASIC vendor. They didn't team up with anybody until the RROD thing blew up in their face. Costing them at the least 1 billion USD. How am I supposed to beleive anything else you wrote if you don't even have that fact straight?

[Wotbot]

think it's not just the GPU, there are some other chips inside the PS3, which other electronics manufactures have had problems with as well.

These chips don't perform to a satisfactory level.

[funktion_d]

which ones are you talking about? you know this because?

[Wotbot]

work in electronic manufacturing and we use some of the same chips that are inside the PS3.

1 chip is not as good as it should. I can not tell you what this chip is but it transfers information. Don't mention bottlenecks!

So there is your answer to "What"

[techie]

Ha, hilarious article.

[i_like_ff7]

hmmm interesting read.

[Otheros00]

if you don't have anything to back up what you say then don't post this article based on your opinion.
the only thing that is weaker on the RSX is the amount of ram and all the other stuff are actually more powerful on the PS3.

P.S. Making a good port is up to the developers and not the hardware

[Kyur4ThePain]

I don't know.
Is the CPU holding back the 360?

BTW, you're a self-professed marketer. Why would anyone take you seriously when talking tech?

And for God's sake, man. Put up a better picture of yourself. You just scared the sh!t out of my kid.

[beavis4play]

360 gamers are comforted by a site called "bruceongames"?

how pathetic. tell bruce and other 360 fans: when the 360 gets games that match the visual quality of ratchet, HS, uncharted, MGS4, GT5p, or KZ....let me know.

[Dc4eVeR]

Jamie Foxx i agree !!!

"look at MGS4,look at uncharted and theres been multi-plat games that perform better on ps3 or run identical=cod4,burnout,oblivio n etc "

[aiphanes]

The RSX can work with the cell and the combination is way beyond what the Xbox 360 can do graphically....

Can we say MGS4? Killzone 2??? Resistance 2???

[Kyur4ThePain]

Apparently not.
LOL

[KatanaSteel]

In technical terms:

PS3 > Xbox 360

It's not my personal opinion but rather a fact.

[joeynox]

Numbers mean nothing,and talk about which cpu or gpu is better on paper means nothing.Its how they perform in real life and as of today ,august,december08 and 09 they will be equal. Even though both systems are different they are on the same lvl. The cell means nothing because it is held back because the ps3's lack of ram and the gpu as well. Deal with it people

[DevastationEve]

for trying to stack up each console. like, you know trying to nail down numbers and figures. i said 360 has FAR more flexibility than the PS3. he said "right, highlight the one thing that benchmarking can't measure". so, that got me to reason a little bit...and conclude that benchmarks don't prove SH*T! i don't buy a PS3 or Wii or 360 to sit there and friggin run BENCHMARKS?! let the games speak for themselves!

[DevastationEve]

it's never easy to get people to see things your way. if you want to believe PS3 is superior, by all means believe it. if that's what it takes to get you to heaven sooner, that's fine with me. i don't have to believe in what you have accepted as truth, because i'm just as free to believe in what i want. and what i believe to be true is that the games speak for themselves.

[spacetoilet]

But as a PS3 owner and HUGE Playstation fan, It is plain as day that the ati gpu is better than the Rsx.
Now it's not hugely better, but better it is. It has built in AA, and better colours.

Now before you disagree en masse, I still think that the Ps3 is a vastly superior console overall.
It;s built better, has better sound, better OS, better controller, better game choices, quieter etc but no the RSX is not as good as the 360 Ati gpu.

This article is crap however because despite my opinion, this is not holding the ps3 back, on the contrary, it's overtaking the 360 at a steady pace. We all know that, even the 360 loser fanboys, thats why horsesh1t articles like this keep appearing.
THEY ARE WORRIED.

[t-0_ot-]

I disagree on SOME of the "points" you made.. "It;s built better, has better sound, better OS, better controller, better game choices, quieter etc"

Okay.
1. "It;s built better".. I agree.
2. "has better sounds".. Oh, hows that?
3. "better OS".. Eh, Possibly. Certain parts.
4. "better controller".. Nope, gotta disagree on that one. Also this is an opinion.
5. "better game choices".. Once again, gotta disagree. And, this is also an opinion.
6. "quieter".. Yeap.

So, I disagreed with 3 of those 6 statements.. Even though most of what you said is "better" is an 'opinion.' So, they really don't count as why the PS3 would be better.

[spacetoilet]

I was referring to the DTS Master audio, and full dolby (uncompressed) surround in game.

Controller..You think 360 one is better for real? Wow, well yes, that is opinion, these are all opinions, but as a fighting game (and jrpg) fan, I love the d-pad on the dual shock.

And on game choices I just mean that, MS seems to be mainly gaining huge North American acceptance. So I'm figuring as time goes by, there will be tons of great (and wierd!) Japanese titles coming down the pipe for the PS3, not so much for the 360 judging by the sales in Japan.
I don't dig FPS games on consoles so much as I think they are gimped by controller, so I play more traditional 'consoley' games on consoles.

[Trekster_Gamer]

I can run BLU-RAY?!?!?!

BWBWBWHAHAHA

At least you don't own a cheap inexpensive Blu-Ray player you know like the ones that are sure to soon come out.

At least you don't have to worry about the same amount of great games that the XB360 have to worry about. Think about it Sony Fanboys, if you owned the best system like the 360 you would have to worry about the amount of great games you have to invest in. Owning a PS3 you don't have to make such decisions.

[Expy]

GPU no, developers yes.

[RoseSapphire]

Easy solution to this whole article - Who the fructose is Bruce On Games?

[dirtrider]

one article that comes on here that doesnt bow down to the ps3 and the ps3 girls go crazy! if its an article that totally goes against MS or the 360 then thats OK! but not the beloved ps3. i cant see where the ps3 people consider themselves gamers i mean sh1t they are always on here! in my next post im poke fun back at the sony camp cause it was perfectly ok to post that mgs4 bs story bout kojima supposedly bashing the 360 where as im sure he was pokin fun at himself cause of the first game in the mgs series

[dirtrider]

snake: otacon do you read me? otacon: yes snake im here whats wrong? snake: otacon im tryin to go online and play this game but i cant otacon: what you mean snake you are signed onto id number one right snake? snake: yes otacon and i cant get into the online portion otacon: i know why snake its cause you need id number two, you do have an id number two right snake its labeled konami id snake: why that makes no sense otacon: its because this is the ps3! youll need 2 ids snake snake: wouldnt just be easier to have multiple disks and just one id to play this game online and off! what a headache snake out....

[Covenant]

Based on his conclusions, would a better question be:

"Is the GPU holding the Cell back?"

Just a thought.

[t-0_ot-]

I don't necessarily think that it holds back the PS3.. BUT, I do however believe that it won't reach what Sony said that should be able to do..

[ASSASSYN 36o]

I don't know why anyone bothers with these articles. You sony nuts believe the ps3 is incapable of any fault or handicap.

[Tyrael]

RABBLE!! RABBLE, RABBLE!!!

[RememberThe357]

Agreed.

[SYSTEMS-at-WAR]

Thit isn't necessarily true. Sure some ports as well as exclusives end up sucking, one that is forever etched in my mind is Rainbow Six Vegas 1 which was blurry and had horrible audio compared to 360 but it all seems to depend on the team behind bringing it to the PS3 and the time they put into it. For example: Oblivion for the PS3 came long after the 360 version but it looked better, ran smoother and the load times were WAY better. I guess there are good and bad games but both consoles have those.. I own both by the way and honesty don't prefer one over the other.

[djroberts]

How does this crap get approved?

[thehitman]

The GPU may seemed gimped is because it was made to work with the CPU. If your not using the cell properly your not using the rsx properly. Which may mean inferior sometimes games than the 360 which usually outputs games running at lower framerates. Its either use it good and get games at 1080p 60fps or use it inefficiently and get games at like 720p around and 30fps.

[pumpkinpunker]

It's just a plain fact that the GPU is superior on the 360 and that is all this article is pointing out. I feel bad for Sony fanboys because it seems like they have some emotional attachment to a console. Like they sleep next to it at night and whisper sweet nothings in its ear.

PS I played uncharted and a bunch of 360 games look better than it or as good.

[darkstar]

The rsx is basicly a nvidia 7 series, which is how old? The 360 is not much better.

[Egzekutor]

@etownone

You are the biggest bullSH i ever seen on this site.
Blu-Ray has proved that its needed for this generation, MGS4 wouldnt be so good if it wasnt for the high capacity blu-ray disc. Even the Rockstart guy said, there might not be GTA 5 for XBOX 360 because of low capacity DVD disc, and one more thing, this generation has just started for PS3 ;). Maybe its over for XBOX 360 and you wont see anything better coming out, but you can look forward for the best titles..still to come.
Just like Resident Evil 4 came on on PS2 and looked amazing.

So go on and get jealous and pretend that Blu Ray is not needed for this generation , because without it there would not be games like MGS4 and Killzone2. If you were given a chance to put a blu ray player in your xbox you would take it so stfu and stop lying to yourself.

And i will say this again.. i own both consoles..

COD4 does lagg when you walk into a cloud of smoke.
GTA IV does lagg when there are many police cars around you.

PS3 does fuking lagg, but lets hope its only mistakes made by developers... ;)

[t-0_ot-]

"Blu-Ray has proved that its needed for this generation," Has it? Think Lair, Haze, Heavenly Sword...

[IWentBrokeForGaming]

I personally feel that Killzone is the only game I've seen that justifys the cell processor being put into the PS3. Cause everything else seems expected of next gen gaming to me. But Killzone shows me the reason I actually invested in my PS3, with hopes of seeing other games with like wise quality invested in them!

[Trekster_Gamer]

So you bought the game hoping that KZ2 will be the game to get on the PS3? So, it your console collecting dust for 3 years before a game that you believe to be worthy of the PS3 comes out?

[proArchy]

In the 18 months the PS3 has been out the difference of quality between 360 games and PS3 ports has gone from huge, and obvious (Madden '08) to arguably better on the PS3 (GTA4). If the 360 is so much more powerful than the PS3 then we should see the same amount of growth in 360 games' quality. I'm still of the mind that the Cell hasn't even been properly utilized yet. The PS2 didn't reach its full potential until extremely late in its life with God of War 2, and I expect the same type of evolution with the PS3.
The 360 is capable of excellent games - NO ONE CAN ARGUE AGAINST THAT - but I think that its use of a standard PC architecture doesn't leave it enough wiggle room to grow. When it came out people had already learned how to optimize code for it. All it was was a spec change.
I think that the PS3 has proven itself as a capable gaming machine with Uncharted, Ratchet, GTA4, COD4, GT5 Prologue, etc. Graphically, how can you deny that Killzone2 looks ridiculously awesome? The only thing holding it back is developers' lack of experience with its chip set structure. It will be interesting to compare Resistance 1 with its sequel and see exactly how much of a difference a year and a half has made.

[Chris Bosh]

There wuz a problem with the ps3 graphics????
PHHHHHH!!!!!
I couldnt keep a straight face.

[RINGOFDEATH]

Dont people read game reviews.

[Trekster_Gamer]

They are using much more than that. They might be able to squeeze more out of CPU but I doubt they are going to EVER get much more out of there GPU...

Maybe they could borrow the Fatter Agnus Chip from the Amiga 500 to help out ;)

[xxBATTLECATxx]

stopped reading after first sentence.
yea game after game after game after game......whatever you say

[Xbox is the BEST]

news and please don't bring up Unwanted that game thou colorful lacks texture

[sleepyk]

while don't bring Halo 3 and it's non-HD resolution, same as NG2.

[CallOfWar22]

That Sony under delievered once again on their promises. The Generation begins when Sony releases the PS3 bull. PS3 will blow any other next gen system out of the water. Blah blah blah. Didn't happen sorry.

[HelghastGeneral]

You know from the beginning articles like this were potent against people who were casual gamers. However they aren't so effective anymore because ps3 this year has finally lived up to its true potential. Metal gear solid 4 is finally coming out and just from the footage alone it cannot be compared to anything else. The game not only surpasses anything that the 360 can offer but the fact that its on a 50gig disc to is great. Also not to forget the other great titles such as how amazing uncharted drakes fortune looks is so realistic. Heavenly sword is also very realistic and gran turismo 5 looks like live action footage during the replays. All potential that 360 can't do which makes this article outdated and proven wrong.

[dkgshiz]

The ps3 owns the 360 in everything! The ps3 mite not of delivered on launch, but uncharted just kills the 360. GT5p just murders anything the 360 has, and will ever have for graphics. MGS4 will tear the 360 apart.

[air1]

ppl just f*cking enjoy the damn games didnt the ps2 prove that it's not about raw power? or did i miss out on how last gen played out?

[th3james]

it really comes down to te game developer, some lousy ports are due to a lack of time and effort. Rockstar has said that they now understand the ps3's design and will continue to make games. Valve hates ps3, 360 and pc are almost identicle in the way you can develop games for it and valve is WAY more pc focused. i honestly don't care for this flame bait. I have shared many discussions on console wars with friends and it always ends up with my friends calling me a fanboy for defending a system, and i am like "hey you can't say nothing i got my 360 at launch way before you and got a ps3 before you got a 360"

ps3's got power, 360's got power dev's never even tap the power of a console after about 4-5 years of learning how it works and still don't fully utilize it

[Morgue]

Who cares. If I spent all my time dissecting the flaws of every game on both the PS3 and 360 plus counting pixels<??? ( dumb ) analyzing the processor or whatever, I wouldn't be able too beat a game. Some people ( game websites, fans of one system or the other ) have nothing better to do than sit around like a bunch of old ladies in a sewing circle and nit pick. Get over it. This is the one thing I hate about the internet. Yeah I've posted some stupid post's but come on. To p*ss and moan about games,systems and technology that most of you didn't even create and then too post BS rant's is retarded. Enjoy the advancement of technology and games while you can because although you may be able to afford both or only one system., you should step back and respect the people and companies that you are supporting. Instead of b*tching about them.

[karlostomy]

Guys, if the PS3 was really a better machine then:

- ALL the Ports would be better on the ps3
- ALL the exclusives would blow the 360 away
- We wouldn't have a thread with 200 plus comments debating this.

The fact that the ps3 is nowhere even close to equal in ports and has really only one exclusive game that is outstanding (MGS IV) speaks volumes about the fact that MS did much much better than a lot of people would like to believe and SONY, in fact, has let us all down.

Just use some common sense guys.

Sounds to me like the 360 wins and the SDF are just spitting the dummy again.

[themyk]

epic fail.

[Common Sense]

all you spew out is a load of stinking sh*t. I suggest you get an appliance (colostomy bag) before you start regurgitating and aspirating on your sh*t.

[Common Sense]

Both have their respective ups and downs.
I have a Ps3 so I am a little biased accordingly but if it was financially feasible, I would have a 360 as well.
The RSX is not holding back the PS3. The RSX and the Xenos are almost equal; each with its advantages and disadvantage like the Cell and the Xenon chips.
RSX has higher clock speed than Xenos. Xenos has a unified shader structure (meaning its shaders can take on the role of vertex or pixel shaders in any given cycle). The Xenos cannot reach its theoretical peak performance because the theoretical peak performance is achieved by assuming all 48 shaders take on the role of vertex shaders or pixel shaders so for the Xenos to reach a maximum of 500 million triangles per second, it would mean there wouldn't be any colors on the screen because the shaders are solely dedicated to vertex shading. The principle applies vice versa. So the RSX is more likely to reach its theoretical peak performance because of dedicated pixel and vertex shaders. Oh and the RSX isn't fully accessible to developers ( I wonder why).
RSX supports the latest version of OpenGl which is the equivalent of Directx 10 with extra features. Xenos supports Directx 9. The final verdict is that they are both powerful G.P.Us with respective advantage and disadvantages but it is up to the developers to maximize their strengths and downsize their weaknesses.

[TheExecutive]

jesus, it has nothing to do with the hardware.

Since when did anyone ever base the power of a gaming machine on multiplatform titles? Never. It never used to happen. The titles that are brought up over and over were PORTED to the PS3. Ports are hardly ever as good as their predecessor. This has nothing to do with the power of any gaming machine. It has to do with which was a lead platform.

Lets start comparing exclusives on each console and see which one comes out on top. No one in their right minds would point to a multiplatform title and use that as proof to which system had more horsepower.
Look at drakes fortune. It is STILL the best looking game on any console. Period.

Heavenly Sword is an absolutely stunning game.

Look at the footage from the playable killzone2. It completely smashes everything on any console.

look at gran turismo. Say what you will about the gameplay but NOTHING beats the actual graphics.

So, as I bring up these titles what does the 360 have to match it?

Forza isnt nearly as impressive graphically as Gran Turismo

NG2 isnt nearly as good of looking as HS.

Halo 3 looks nothing close to what kz2 does. Nor does Gears of war.

Must I go on?

Nobody uses sh*tty f*cking ports to prove points. What the h*ll is wrong with you people anyway?

[karlostomy]

Lol.
You seem to be confused about ports. It's ok to be a noob, but let me educate you:

You said:"Since when did anyone ever base the power of a gaming machine on multiplatform titles? Never. It never used to happen."

bzzzzzt! FAIL.

In the previous generation, the ps2 was the lead platform in all Multi games. THEN the game was ported to the xbox1 and was, without exception, superior on the xbox.
Why? because the xbox had MUCH better hardware.

Just read the above again. and then read it again.
I just want to make sure you understand what is being said here.

Face it. The ps3 is gimped. The evidence is in the multiplats
Take your blinkers off

[TheExecutive]

you act as though the architecture of the hardware has nothing to do with how its ported. Like I said, multiplatform titles are not a good measuring stick to compare consoles.

Its about the exclusives and NO exclusives on the 360 match Drakes, Gran Turismo, or KZ2.

Have you seen the footage of Killzone 2?

Have you?

Seriously, just the off screen blows everything that your beloved 360 has to offer.

Once again look at the exclusives.

Why hasnt the 360 seen a superior looking game since Gears of War? Why is that?

Why in its third year of existence doesnt it have titles like KZ2 (coming out in the PS3's third year)?

Tell me that friend.

[karlostomy]

No, you didnt.
You just repeated what you said in your first post.

Just read my above post again.
And here's a tip: you can't read while you are busy typing.

So hop to it, friend.. :)

[themyk]

don't waist your time. just look at his avatar. that well explain everything.

[Clinton514]

But the games of today tell a different story. While the PS3 may prove to be the stubborn mule for SOME developers, graphically there's no doubt that these machines are pretty much comparable.

In short...not such a well thought out article.

ps. citing interviews from 2005 and memory comparison charts drawn up by Microsoft themselves isn't a wise backing.

[Morgue]

The Executive.

I might have to agree with you or with anyone that says the same thing you do, just phrased differently. You can't compare apples too oranges and the apple in my eye is the PS3, still after 12 years. A lot or most of the Xbox/360 owners at one point depending on when they were brought up has owned a PlayStation product. Naturaly the hardware in each system is going too be different because if not. Then all games would look the same. In the end M$ will have they're followers and the same for Sony, it's just that Sony might have more of a loyal fan base were as M$ has a fan base because of HALO, GEARS, Mass Effect and the exclusives or games that were originally on the PS. GTA anyone???

[TheExecutive]

i have nothing against liking one system or the other. I think its quite natural and have nothing against someone who prefers one or the other.
I think that graphics are blown way way out of proportion. I am a fan of both gameplay and graphics and both must be equally as good in order for a title to be excellent.

All that said, people who blatantly disregard the facts when its in front of their faces to see is just retarded and I dont mind saying so.

[dkgshiz]

What is this all about? The ps3 kills the 360 in graphics and just about everything! Look at uncharted, killzone 2, MGS4! JESUS! If those are not top of the line in the graphics factor, than I guess I was just smoking crack. The cell alone is enough to produce better graphics than the 360 can. This post is just stupid.

[360_Rules]

Gears kills Uncharted and Gears 2 is going to blow it away. You Sony fanboys are a bunch of fart knockers!

[SmokingMonkey]

let's see them ask this question 5 years down the line.
think PS2 launch games compared to PS2's games 5 years after
GOW
SOCOM
history tends to repeat itself right?

[PS360PCROCKS]

your all immature. before you haul off and call this guy an idiot he is correct. The GPU in 360 is better. The GPU is holding the PS3 back. But I think what he is referring to is that Sony made a last minute change that kind of negated the power of the cell with the GPU they used. I think the best summation is that if it were a better and more efficient GPU for the system, you would see even more advanced games.

[Bruceongames]

"I am a software developer with a master’s degree in CS, so I can confirm PS3 is vastly inferior to Xbox 360 as a game console.

During its inception, CELL’s architecture was mainly guided by Toshiba, who previously engineered and supplied infamous(formerly the most difficult console to program for prior to PS3) Emotion Engine to PS2, for its own audio/video processing requirement and CELL is excellent for streaming audio/video processing, but is almost useless for general purpose applications(aka games). For gaming, CELL is roughly equal to a 800 Mhz Pentium III(Yes, a Pentium III) in extractable performance, or slightly faster than the original Xbox. RSX in the meanwhile is indeed a downgraded GeForce 7800GTX that Kutaragi Ken(father of PlayStation) purchased from nVIDIA for just $30 million(Sony spent 100 times that amount on CELL), because Kutaragi Ken ran out of time and money to do a proper GPU for PS3, and decided to go for the nVIDIA option. Due to bandwidth limitations, RSX performs similar to GeForce 7600GT, not 7800GTX. Compare RSX to XGPU2, which was designed just for Xbox 360 from scratch at no expense spared, and ran so well it overheated(This is the cause of infamous red ring of death. XGPU2 ran faster and hotter than Microsoft expected)

Based on publictly released development material and benchmark figures(namely Sony’s own EDGE library), PS3 has roughly 1/4th the power of Xbox 360, with RSX capped at 45 million polys/s ingame while Xbox 360 easily pushes through 180 million polys/s.

1/4th the rendering power of Xbox 360 is pretty unbelievable to non-programmers, but that the numbers we see."

[RememberThe357]

We're suppose to take that because some one said there a dev that they are. Am I Superman because I say I am...? I'll take official statements please.

How does this person explain the superior graphics produce on the PS3's exclusives? Is it just good development? (My first question was rhetorical, but these ones are not.)

[Agent VX]

How does this person explain the superior graphics produce on the PS3's exclusives? - RememberThe357

Oh, here we go again. I am sorry to say, but there isn't one exclusive on the PS3 that blows any 360 game away. No, not Lair, nor Drakes, or Heavenly Sword, GT, Haze or MGS 4. None of these games not only do not blow any 360 game away graphically, they aren't even a little better.

This isn't to say that PS3 can put out great graphics, it does. But the whole issue here is that Sony won't publish the true specs of the PS3, and it routinely spouts out how much more powerful it is compared to the 360 along with their pimpled faced fanboys.

The PS3 has some serious design flaws that will never push it way ahead of the 360. And with all the delays in games with the PS3, and still how they on average come out preforming poorer to the 360 counterpart, just shows all the complaints from developers to be true.

[Common Sense]

RSX Xenos
300+ million transistors 300+ million transistors
51 billion dot product ops per sec 24 billion dot product ops per sec
100 billion shader ops per sec 96 billion shader ops per sec
364 Gigaflops per sec 240 Gigaflops per sec
250 million polys per sec* 500 million polys per sec**
1.1 billion vertices per sec* 1.5 billion vertices **
Pixel fill rate
4.4 Gigasamples per sec 4.4 Gigasamples per sec
256 mb GDDR3 @ 7oomhz 512mb GDDR3 share with CPU @ 700mhz
can access 256mb xdr system mem. at 3.2 Ghz
* Cell handles a lot of the Geometry because SPES are very good at vertex shading.
** This number is achievable assuming all 48 shaders take on the role of vertex shaders ( meaning if Xenos renders 500 million polys there would be no color because there isn't any pixel shaders, so this number is higherly improbable;

Cell Xenon
234 million transistors 165 million transistors
1 ppe - two threads @ 3.2 GHz 3 general purpose core(like Cell PPE)
8 spes- @ 3.2 GHz 1 is disabled @ 3.2 Ghz
to improve manufacturing yields 1 core reserved for OS
1 spe is reserved for OS 2 threads per core
1 teraflops peak performance 115.2 Gflops peak performance

There is no physical way PS3 is inferior to Xbox 360 (theoretically). They are equal at 360's best but the PS3 is most likely more powerful (technically speaking) .Ask IBM, they designed the Cell and Xenon. Who cares about all this numbers anyway. What matters are the games. So please stop spewing BS and enjoy the excellent library of games the 360 has (by the way I'm not being sarcastic).

[RememberThe357]

Dude, I don't want to get into a pissing match, mainly because ain't got no bubble... :( But I can't help but think you haven't played the games your talking about. To be fare, I realize that not every PS3 exclusive looks better (Haze), but if you look at the best looking game on the 360 then you look at the best looking game on the PS3 there's a noticeable difference. And yes I can piont to HS and Uncharted, and thats because they do thing graphically that I have seen on my 360. I'm not against the 360 I live right across the water from MS, those my peeps. I just think the PS3 looks better.

And even with your point that the systems put out similar graphics it it doesn't make sense since the PS3 supposedly has 1/4 the POWER of the 360. Explain that, smarty pants!

[Common Sense]

RSX
300+ million transistors
51 billion dot product ops per sec
100 billion shader ops per sec
364 Gigaflops per sec
250 million polys per sec*
1.1 billion vertices per sec*
Pixel fill rate
4.4 Gigasamples per sec
256 mb GDDR3 @ 7oomhz
can access 256mb xdr system mem. at 3.2 Ghz
* Cell handles a lot of the Geometry because SPES are very good at vertex shading.

Xenos
24 billion dot product ops per sec
96 billion shader ops per sec
240 Gigaflops per sec
500 million polys per sec**
4.4 Gigasamples per sec
512mb GDDR3 share with CPU @ 700mhz

** This number is achievable assuming all 48 shaders take on the role of vertex shaders ( meaning if Xenos renders 500 million polys there would be no color because there isn't any pixel shaders, so this number is highly improbable;

Cell
234 million transistors
1 ppe - two threads @ 3.2 GHz
8 spes- @ 3.2 GHz 1 is disabled
to improve manufacturing yields
1 spe is reserved for OS
1 teraflops peak performance

Xenon
165 million transistors
3 general purpose core(like Cell PPE) @ 3.2 Ghz
1 core reserved for OS
2 threads per core
115.2 Gflops peak performance

There is no physical way PS3 is inferior to Xbox 360 (theoretically). They are equal at the 360's best but the PS3 is most likely more powerful (technically speaking) .Ask IBM, they designed the Cell and Xenon. But Who cares about all this numbers anyway. What matters are the games. So please stop spewing BS and enjoy the excellent library of games the 360 has (by the way I'm not being sarcastic).

sorry about clutter in previous post

[CrazyJ]

Who ever posted that is a 360 fan boy.

"I am a software developer with a master’s degree in CS, so I can confirm PS3 is vastly inferior to Xbox 360 as a game console."

There are lots of idiots with master's degrees in CS. Even an intelligible person can be mislead without knowing all the facts. Somehow I'm betting this person loves Microsoft and used their software exclusively in school.

"During its inception, CELL’s architecture was mainly guided by Toshiba, who previously engineered and supplied infamous(formerly the most difficult console to program for prior to PS3) Emotion Engine to PS2, for its own audio/video processing requirement and CELL is excellent for streaming audio/video processing, but is almost useless for general purpose applications(aka games). For gaming, CELL is roughly equal to a 800 Mhz Pentium III(Yes, a Pentium III) in extractable performance, or slightly faster than the original Xbox. "

Last I checked console games are not general purpose applications. They are specifically written for their hardware. And these days require lots of floating point operations. If your saying the Cell performs like a 800 Mhz Pentium III because of its Linux performance then you loose all credibility. First off that is general purpose unoptimized programming, compiled with an unoptimized compiler, and on top of that it's only using the one PPU core. The same core that shares a lot in common with the 360 CPU cores. You can't compare these CPU's to ones that do speculative branch prediction and out of order execution like the Pentium III. Game consoles quit including those general purpose features since they take up way too much die space and when the game is running right you don't need them much.

"RSX in the meanwhile is indeed a downgraded GeForce 7800GTX that Kutaragi Ken(father of PlayStation) purchased from nVIDIA for just $30 million(Sony spent 100 times that amount on CELL), because Kutaragi Ken ran out of time and money to do a proper GPU for PS3, and decided to go for the nVIDIA option. Due to bandwidth limitations, RSX performs similar to GeForce 7600GT, not 7800GTX. Compare RSX to XGPU2, which was designed just for Xbox 360 from scratch at no expense spared, and ran so well it overheated(This is the cause of infamous red ring of death. XGPU2 ran faster and hotter than Microsoft expected)"

RSX does indeed have its roots from the 7800 Geforce line. Which at the time they announced it, it was top of the line. It's been tweaked to work better with the limited bandwidth and texturing from XDR memory.

"Based on publictly released development material and benchmark figures(namely Sony’s own EDGE library), PS3 has roughly 1/4th the power of Xbox 360, with RSX capped at 45 million polys/s ingame while Xbox 360 easily pushes through 180 million polys/s.

1/4th the rendering power of Xbox 360 is pretty unbelievable to non-programmers, but that the numbers we see"

These days you can make numbers look however you want. Are the poly's on the 360 textured and lit? Are the even visible? The 360's GPU can render more polys but after you put effects on them they're a lot closer than these numbers make them appear.

Having said all the above I do believe the RSX is the cause of the crappy ports. More specifically I believe either nVidia failed to deliver or Sony didn't want to spend what was necessary to deliver on the initial RSX specs. (550Mhz clock and 700Mhz GDDR3 Ram) The clock downgrade to 500Mhz and 650Mhz ram is enough of a difference to cause the frame rate problems on the crappy ports.

It's sad really, instead of being pretty much equal on general purpose graphics power developers now have to use the Cell to make up for the difference. This takes away all the cooler things developers could be doing with the extra Cell power.

[RememberThe357]

I don't mean to call anyone out but it seems that you guy REALLY want to prove this guy wrong. It's obvious that he bias, and that he posted this for self promotion, but it you guy are really into this. I love my PlayStations, always have, but the same people who were saying that graphics don't matter, when the xbox came out and looked amazing, are arguing over witch console performs better. Well, I'm one of those people who loves graphics and how they can immerse you in the game, but I also realize that it not that important. GTASA looked like sh*t and was one hell of a good time. The point is, take perspective when deciding to get a riled up for something, at the end of the day content and quality always out way technology.

[sniddles]

1/4 the power. no fricking way. Among the developers i've talked to, it's currently believed that base CPU/GPU layout in the 360 is more capable than the base layout of the PS3 (assuming using just RSX for GPU/cell for CPU). BUT, since SPU's can be employed to help out with GPU functions for culling and lighting, etc. etc., most think it's a wash to, if anything, the PS3 being more capable (yet to be "proven", but when the time is put into it, i think it already has. i.e. 1st party titles.

Figuring how one character in uncharted is drawn with 30,000 poly's, i don't think that PS3 is having much trouble with polygons. The only game i know of using more poly's on characters is crysis (for the nano suit character). Oh yeah, the cars in GT5 are using 200k of them on each car. That's a LOT of polygons being pushed around.

The full specs of RSX are STILL UNDISCLOSED because of NDA's. So how do you know that it is a 7600? The only people who DO know aren't allowed to say. so if that's the case, SONY gonna be looking for you.

I'm not knocking 360, it is a VERY capable machine, it's a freaking powerhouse, but PS3 is right there with it... Possibly with a few extra levers to pull for more performance too.

I'm sensing some major bias here. There is no way PS3 has a quarter the power.

[GIJeff]

who took the ps3 apart and figured the gpu to be very closely related to the 7800gtx, murdering the x1600 in the 360.

[TheBronxxx]

I would just like to take a moment and express my appreciation for etownone...someone who actually uses his mind along with common sense and reasoning when posting on N4G instead of my countlessly reading fanboy's ignorant comments of "rrod" and such. I've gotta give credit where credit's due and this dude's pretty much hit everything on the head with what's going on with these consoles and I'm sure you all know he's telling the truth and stating nothing but facts here...it might just be hard to admit what he's saying is true. So without further adu, my hats off to ya bro.

[Agent VX]

I really fail to see why PS fanboys spout out titles like Drakes as being some graphical masterpiece.

"but there is a lot of texture pop-in on the jungle floor and treasures while aliasing on the walls and screen tearing are par for the course." IGN Review - http://ps3.ign.com/articles...

And GT 5 Prologue, yep it looks good, but it ain't mindblowing. Better than Forza 2 by a little, but Forza 2 was never a graphical masterpiece, nor did it base it self on it. GT 5 is basing it self on graphics, and here it is disappointing many fans.

The PS3 is a gimped console, with more reliable hardware than the 360, but definately with the poorer architecture of the 2. It continually preforms poorer, and looks poorer on average. The PS3 exclusives are disappointing graphically, as the PS3 was marketed as the "Overwhelming" powerhouse, and yet has to put out anything that stands head and heels above GeOW, a title a year and half old.

GeOW 2 is already looking better than "ANY" PS3 title out now or the near future.

All that aside, I expect both systems to function fairly close graphically throughout this gen.

[GIJeff]

looks better. END OF STORY.

[Clinton514]

Calling anyone fanboy then spouting of STUPID comparisons of your own. Lame.

[mistertwoturbo]

It's more sad that Gears of War is the best looking 360 title. And still is. Why not list a bunch more games that are "graphically amazing" instead of just Gears? That's the oldest arguement in the book. And then Gears 2 that looks great but is just an update to Gears 1. Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Gears fan, but anybody who thinks Gears 2 is some sort of magical leap in graphics over Gears 1 just needs their eyes checked.

Secondly the PS3 has many more graphically amazing games than the 360. Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank Future (The best IMO, rock solid 60 frames per second 1280x704 resolution), Gran Turismo 5 Prologue (Tell me a game that has this much detail at 1280x1080 resolution), and when more screenshots are revealed MGS4. Plus upcoming games like Resistance 2 (which we will see Friday), God of War III, and the biggest graphical showcase Final Fantasy XIII.

[themyk]

The PS3 is a gimped console, with more reliable hardware than the 360, but definately with the poorer architecture of the 2. It continually preforms poorer, and looks poorer on average. The PS3 exclusives are disappointing graphically, as the PS3 was marketed as the "Overwhelming" powerhouse, and yet has to put out anything that stands head and heels above GeOW, a title a year and half old.

GeOW 2 is already looking better than "ANY" PS3 title out now or the near future.

hahahahahahahahaha.
wake up dude.

[Blue Legend]

In a system like PS3, you'll max out the GPU's power long before you max out the CPU.
My PC is like that now, I've once ran 4 games at once as a limits test. The CPU ran at about 25~30%, while my GPU was maxed, and struggling to keep up.

[mistertwoturbo]

That's the thing, they designed with the CPU to support the GPU in mind. It's up to the developers to figure out ways to make them work together. Not like traditional PCs where it matters most on just the GPU alone to do all the work (which is why your CPU is only being used 25%).

[pshizle]

http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...

specs dont change sony fanboys

RSX is holding back the ps3...

[Clinton514]

So you must be one content kid.

You clearly didn't read IGN's disclaimer before posting their info:
"We decided to put this Microsoft-provided information up undigested. Thus, enclosed is a Microsoft-made comparitive analysis. We have not altered, added, or tinkered with the data. We have not interpreted the specs. We have cut and pasted this information from the email into our site and formatted it. Make of it what you will, but be clear we know Microsoft has clearly slanted this info, and we're not endorsing it, just printing their version. There is a difference."

[DiabloRising]

This stupidity is still going? Dear god. Excuse me while I go play the superior versions of Burnout, DMC4, Ninja Gaiden, and Oblivion. On my Ps3. Because it's so inferior to the 360!

Goddamn armchair programmers and 50yo fanboys? Is that what this hobby has reduced to? Pathetic. Utterly pathetic.

[GIJeff]

its very comfortable to program from my armchair! if it wasn't i wouldn't have gotten that shiny new laptop. :)

[PJ]

Fact the ps3 has no hidden magical power that has not been tapped. Fanboys have been talking #!@# about the cell more than sega marketed that phony blast processing. Most of you fanboys blog more than actually play games stop loving companies and start playing games.

[Common Sense]

more than actually play games stop loving companies and start playing games".
Tell that to Bruceongames

[GIJeff]

the 360's gpu is a x1600. and the PS3 uses a "modified" 7800gtx. In any benchmark you will see the 7800gtx killing and murdering the x1600. The x1600 is a low/mid card. The 7800gtx is a high end card. The RSX is WAY more than enough to display at 1080p. This is a lower resolution than the 7800gtx was designed for. However, the nVidia based card in the ps3 was tailored for the cell, there is likely very little bottlenecks to be found in the ps3. It all comes down to receiving Dev tools/tricks late in the ps3's life, just like the ps2 vs. dreamcast days. All of the 360 lovers will look back to these days with embarrassment in 1 year when the 360 hasn't improved, and the ps3 keeps taking giant steps forward with every generation of games. I don't care if you have fun with your xbox, do it and keep to yourself. But when people spew lies about other systems to make themselves feel good, thats just sad. Take it easy, and enjoy your 3 year old mid range PC.

OH AND : "but is almost useless for general purpose applications(aka games)" LOL. Since when are games general purpose applications? Games are media heavy SIMULATIONS. With way too many uses of float and double and heavy math to be considered a general purpose application. General purpose is what INTEL does best. Guess what the 360 sports? a rockin word processor! epic fail for you.

[lokin]

GPU

The Xbox 360 and the PS3 use two very different GPU architectures. The RSX in the PS3 is based on the G70 (N47) family of GPUs, which includes the 7800 series and 7900 series. The R500 "Xenos" in the 360 is built from the ground up, more closely related the R600 than other GPU designs of the day. Here we will examine the specs of each GPU and compare them.

RSX
Core clock: 550MHz
Memory clock: 1400MHz (DDR)
Memory size/type: 256MB GDDR3
Memory bus width: 128 bit
Memory bandwdith: 22.4GB/sec
Vertex Shaders: 8
Pixel Shaders: 24
Texture units: 24
ROPs: 8
Process: 90nm
Transistor count: 300 million
- G70 based

R500 "Xenos"
Core clock: 500MHz
Memory clock: 1400MHz (DDR)
Memory size/type: 512MB GDDR3 (shared with CPU)
Memory bus width: 128 bit
Memory bandwidth: 22.4GB/sec
Vertex Shaders: n/a
Pixel Shaders: n/a
Unified Shaders: 48
Texure units: 16
ROPs: 8
Process: 90nm/80nm
Transistor count: 337 million
- Unified Shader architecture
- 10MB EDRAM daughter die

Does the fact that the R500 has 48 shaders make it twice as powerful as the RSX? No, it does not actually. Let us dispel that misconception. The pixel shaders in the G70 architecture consist of 1 scalar ALU and 2 vec4 ALUs, while the shaders in the R500 architecture feature 1 scalar ALU and vec4 ALU. This means the RSX has 24 scalar ALUs and 48 vec4 ALUs, while the R500 has 48 scalar ALUs and 48 vec4 ALUs. The R500 does has the advantage due to having more scalar ALUs - but nowhere near double the power of the RSX. Lets look deeper into this architecture and examine how each design affects performance.

In addition to having half the scalar ALUs, the G70 is generally inefficient when it comes to pixel shader operations. Though the G70 can do more work per pixel, having 2 vec4 ALUs per shader, it is very hard for the GPU's compiler to provide enough data per pixel to keep both vector ALUs busy. If 4 pieces of data cannot be grouped together with an instruction; for example, if only 2 pieces of data are fed into the vec4 ALU, it is only being utilized 50%. This is inefficient. That is why both the G80 and the R600 have ditched the vec4 design in favor of an all scalar architecture. Scalar units can only do 1 operation per clock, but they are fully independent of each other, meaning that different operations can be assigned to each one, allowing all of them to be fully utilized. Therefore, a more efficient design.

Also, having 2 vec4 ALUs per shader even further reduces efficiency. Say a pixel only needs 2 operations performed on it. You have 6 data slots going to waste. ATI opted for pushing double the pixels, rather than double the operations per pixel. In this case, if a pixel needs 2 operations, you're only wasting 2 slots. If a pixel needs more than 4 operations, it will have to go in for another pass, but that fact that the R500 pushes double the pixels makes up for this.

You may also notice that the R500 has 16 texture units, while the RSX has 24. Do not be fooled by this, as the architecture is completely different. The RSX may have 8 more texture units, but nVidia decided to integrate the texture units into the shader hardware in order to reduce transistor count. The drawback to this is that each shader/texture cannot process a pixel and a texture at the same time. It can only do one or the other. ATI's approach uses fewer texture units, but they are completely separate from the shader hardware, meaning that the R500 can simultaneously process pixels and textures.

The R500 is designed with efficiency in mind. Though it has 22.4GB/s of external memory, it has another bus linking the main GPU core to a daughter die, with a bandwidth of 32GB/s. Within the daughter die are the ROPs and a 10MB EDRAM framebuffer. Each of the 8 ROPs has a 32GB/s link to the EDRAM, for a total bandwidth of 256MB/s. The EDRAM can be thought of a large cache. With such a large amount of bandwidth, the R500 can do 4x AA, alpha blending and z-buffering with almost no performance hit. The R500 can also get away with fewer ROPs because of this, since they are not sitting idle as much, waiting for data to be sent/retrieved from memory. In the case of the RSX, it too is not just limited to 22.4GB/s memory bandwidth. It also has 15GB/s of write bandwidth and 20GB/s of read bandwidth through the Cell processor. However, data has to pass through two memory controllers and hop over two serial buses to reach the Cell's XDR RAM. This adds a significant amount of latency, making it undesirable for a number of GPU functions.

Another feature, less known, is that the R500 features a programmable tessalator. This allows the GPU to interpolate a low poly model and convert it into a high poly model. This is used extensively in Gears of War. What this does is takes load off the CPU as it does not have to send as much vertex data to the GPU. I'll explain how this factors in later.

Since the R500s shaders are unified, they can perform both vertex and pixel shader operations. This allows for total utilization of all the shaders, and a significant reduction in bottlenecking. The fact the the R500 has more scalar ALUs, more evenly distributed vec4 ALUs, unified shader architecture, decoupled texture units and massive bandwidth gives it an edge over the RSX, and in fact allows it to keep up with its higher-clocked desktop counterpart, the R580. The ATI team behind the R500 went out of their way to eliminate internal bottlenecks and make the R500 very efficient over all. The RSX also cannot perform AA on FP (floating point) surfaces. So it is unable to perform FP-based HDR and AA. However, it can get around this by using interger-based HDR, with a slight reduction in quality. Though not incredibly more powerful, the 360 does come out on top in terms of graphics processing power.

[NeverP]

i see you have already one dissagree, that sucks. anyway just shows how ignorant some of these guys are. that article you mentioned, I suspect that it is from a guy in tha know? anycase just shows you that some people on here would actually believe his 12 year old friend that heard from sony that the ps3 is the best thing since talking smack. this is just sad. I encourage ALL of you to go and read of as much of the 2 consoles as you can.... 2 things are evident... the ps3 (as the guy above stated) doesnt have secret code or swith that some dev would later discover to make the games faster... and second point.... the ps3 is powerful but if you guys on here just do a little bit of reseach you would see that the ps3 isnt this powerfull machine that crushes everyting in its path. it is propably better that the 360.... BUT JUST

[lokin]

http://www.overclock.net/vi...

actually a good read for everyone

[Mr_Luke]

Oh no.. another stupid article.... Well, i go to play with my "very bad graphic" MGS4, while i wait for the "awful graphic" Resistance 2.
Sadness, again...

[Jihaad_cpt]

good Gordon haven't these fools seen GT5 Prologue...

[Bruceongames]

A number of posters on here have said that the 360 uses PC architecture.
They are wrong, it doesn't. The original Xbox did.
The 360 uses a compltely different sort of CPU (from IBM) optimised for gaming instead of the Intel family CPUs used in PCs.
Likewise the system architecture is a clean sheet design owing zero to PC architecture. It was optimised from day one to get the most out of it's two processors and memory and is a very elegant design indeed, possibly the nicest console hardware design to date.

More here: http://features.teamxbox.co...

[Genesis5]

Bruce Ms designed their own GPU in and effort to save money. They failed the GPU overheats causing RROD. They have since had help to redesign the chip in order to solve this problem. How is this the nicest hardware design to date? It doesn't work properly!

http://www.eetimes.com/news...

[dragunrising]

Sony fanboys to the rescue!!! I hope the article ruined your week because obviously your too concerned with a little o' article to actually enjoy games. I should probrably call out all fanboys, however Sony fanboys are the worse by far. Look at the comments for evidence.

[thewhoopimen]

The fact that you're even in this thread, means your a fanboy yourself.
That one finger you're pointing at some fanboy? There's three pointing back at you.

[dragunrising]

I come to n4g for news and insightful comments. If anyone has any opinion even remotely anti-ps3, there is a legion of fanboys to the rescue. Come to think of it, you have even less to add on account your support of this nonsense. I am a Sony fan, not a fanboy. There is a huge difference.

[fablib]

A part from technical aspects, PS3 has failed in delivery quality (and quantity let me say!) games.
I am tired of playing Uncharted, Cod4 and Sigma…
MGS4 (to me the last in-game videos show an horrible graphic, very old gen) it will be only a good movie to watch…
I have bought PS3 for gaming…
And so, as I have told elsewhere in this site, after months of doubts (Kojima statement, developers statements, tangible evidences,SONY LIES, delayed games, canned games, bad performances, MANDATORY INSTALLATION!!! And so on..), the yesterday conference of Square Enix, ( as well as MGS4 in-game) has allowed me to take the right decision…

I will definitely buy a 360 this week end (and a copy of MGS4 to watch)…
And I tell you this: on Monday I will be a gamer finally! I will have so many titles to choose from and so many others in the coming months…
If I only consider that as a Playstation 3 owner the only title that I consider interesting until December is Resistence2…
On Monday I will finally enter again in the world of videogame… Lost Odyssy, Blu Dragon, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Gear of War, Halo, Ninja Gaiden 2 and all the new Square Enix, Fable 2, Too Human, C&C..
Too much games!!!

NO MORE LIES SONY!!! NO MORE FALSE PROMISES SONY!!!NO MORE CUSTOMER DECEPTION SONY!!!

This gen consoles war is ended, at lest for me!

p.s. OPEN YOUR EYES PEOPLE... This is not a war, and you are not soldiers... WE ARE GAMERS! So go out and take a device that allow you to play videogame! The choose is yours (WII or Xbox360)but as a Ps3 owner I firmly suggest you to leave Sony console alone, at least for this generation!!!
SONY has completely failed in the videogame market this time around... no doubt abou it!

[Joe2911]

A 360 fan boy must have posted this article, if anything the 360 is holding the ps3 back, just look at ps3 exclusives compared to cross platform games. I have no idea how this article got published because its complete utter BS.

[lokin]

explain to me hoe the 360 holds back the ps3. allmost all multi plat titles are better on the 360, so please with a stupid statement like that, then the ps3 should be on par everytime with the 360? ANOTHER IDIOT. IDIOT COUNT=4

[Master of Menace]

Any game that runs inferior on PS3 is just a shoddy 360 port, PS3 exclusives prove that without a doubt. So, 360 ports are bad for PS3! The sooner we can kill 360 the better. Less ports. More exclusives.

[IWentBrokeForGaming]

Now while I also own a 360 and have more games for it over my PS3. I know that some expierences just can't be pulled off on the 360. I currently own Resistance, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, and Unreal Tournament 3. I used to have Motorstorm but I thought it was pretty bland and traded it. Resistance graphically Im not impressed, but I do have a love for some of the physic's in the game that's for sure. Like how you can pick apart the little chimera shields and stuff. Can't wait for game 2. Heavenly sword I feel the CG is more impressive than the actual gameplay, but I feel Uncharted pulls the sickest CG between the 2 games. While the graphics are impressive in Uncharted I'd like to see more follage react to drake and the water physic's when you swim to be more realistic. Can't wait for the 2nd game. Unreal Tournament 3 is pretty much the expected looking next gen game, but obviously won me over with the mod support... which I know I wouldn't/will not get on my 360. But I want to expierence more games with the graphic fidelity of Killzone 2. I know Killzone 2 has upped the anty for EVERY PS3 developer and these dev's that are too lazy to learn the tech will be overshun by games with the same/similar quality. But I also think all the people that tout Killzone 2 should slow down, cause it's the 1 and only game I've seen for PS3 that absolutely/purely makes the system sweat. Only thing I've seen closest to Killzone visuals that is also a exclusive is Heavy Rain but that is only tech demos, gameplay has yet to be proven. I cannot wait to pick up my collectors MGS4 on thursday (no midnight launch dang it). But I wonder since Im new to the series I just bought the 3 pack of the old games, if 4's reviews are justified or is just given good scores based on the long time fans who got to review the game example - GTA4 (I thought was weaker than Saints Row in features and way too overhyped for the dubbed down game that was released) and Halo 3 (turned out fun was easily way too overhyped). Since Im not a die hard MG fan, I wonder what the expierence will do for me since I don't have a woody for it like the fans that have been tailing the game since it was born. Although I loved it on NES. But all in all I love having a blu-ray player and a game system that is no push over within my collection of systems. 360 fans need to learn that the 360 can't do it all... but PS3 fans need to know the same of the PS3. Both offer great expierences that EVERYONE should learn to enjoy, cause the people who don't embrace that fact are the true losers of gaming!

P.S. = Rescue Dawn good movie to buy? yet alone on Blu-ray? it's on sale and Im a christian bale fan. Yay or nay on the buy?

[ProblemSolver]

Sorry 'Common Sense', but your numbers are somewhat flawed.

'Common Sense' wrote:

"Cell
234 million transistors
1 ppe - two threads @ 3.2 GHz
8 spes- @ 3.2 GHz 1 is disabled
to improve manufacturing yields
1 spe is reserved for OS
1 teraflops peak performance"

At best, the Cell/B.E. processors performs as follows;
1 [[email protected]] = 8 flop * 3.2GHz = 25.6 Gflops(DP)
8 [[email protected]] = 8*(8 flop * 3.2GHz) = 8 * 25.6 Gflops(SP) = 204.8 Gflops(SP)
=> Cell/[email protected] = 230.4 Gflops(SP)

(SP := single precision, DP := double precision)

8 flop = 4 * [fmac] = 4 * 2 flop (within the PPE and within each SPE)
1 fmac := x + a*y // two mathematical floating-point operations (flop)

How much Gflops has a PS3-developer at its disposal?
1 Cell/B.E. processors - 1 SPE yield - 1 SPE GameOS = 179.2 Gflops(SP)

179.2 Gflops(SP) are really a lot of flops one can put to good use. Compare
these numbers to a general-purpose processor, a Pentium4 processor at
3.2GHz;

Pentium4[SIMD]@3.2GHz = 25.6 Gflops(DP&SP)

Hence, one need at least 7 Pentium4 processors to match the raw computation
performance a PS3-developer has at its disposal. But raw computational
performance is only halfway down the road. Due to its very flexible architecture,
the Cell/B.E. processor allows much, much better to harness its raw
performance as any other processors' architecture to date. References follows;

The issue 'IBM Journal of Research and Development (Volume 51, Number 5,
2007)' is completely dedicated to the Cell Broadband Engine (CBE), it is also
nice and simple run-down of what the Cell/B.E. architecture is all about;

// IBM Journal of Research and Development
// Cell Broadband Engine Technology and Systems
[LINK] http://www.research.ibm.com...

Everyone who wants to talk about the Cell/B.E. processor should have read it,
first!

I've collected a lot of references on my webside which should give a good
starting point to investigate on the Cell/B.E. processor;
http://r.breitrueck.googlep...

'Common Sense' wrote:
"Xenon
165 million transistors
3 general purpose core(like Cell PPE) @ 3.2 Ghz
1 core reserved for OS
2 threads per core
115.2 Gflops peak performance"

The three PPEs within the 360 have a peak performance of
3 [[email protected]] = 3 * 25.6 Gflops (SP) = 76.8 Gflops (SP).

A 360-developer has at its disposal;
[email protected] - 1 [email protected] GameOS = 51.2 Gflops (SP).

Hence, from a pure performance standpoint, a PS3-developer has 3.5x the raw
computational performance than a 360-developer. However, not only the raw
computational performance counts. What also counts to a large amount is the
way how you can harness this performance! And this is what the Cell/B.E.
architecture is all about. Once you are into this architecture you will recognize
how flexible and how efficiently you can express your algorithms /
data-structures within this on-chip parallel multicore system. And this is proved
against the best known processor architectures in the world;

S. Williams, J. Carter, L. Oliker, J. Shalf, K. Yelick, "Lattice Boltzmann
Simulation Optimization on Leading Multicore Platforms", International
Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS), 2008."
[LINK] http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/...

But why don't we see all teH power in action thus far? Because its a new world,
its parallel. Parallel programming isn't easy at first instance. It really takes some
time, esp. if you are coming from the sequential world. Parallel programming
isn't a Cell/B.E. issue, it's a common problem the industry has to solve! You will
face the same problems on any other multicore system. Up until today, efficient
parallel programming is a research problem. Not even supercomputers perform
at their best because of architectural problems, programmer's parallel
programming deficiencies, and also due to inherent algorithmic difficulties on
parallelizing some of the well known (sequential) algorithms. Due to these
issues most parallel programs / applications do utilize the given supercomputer
in question only up to 10-15% of its peak performance. A sustain 50% of peak
performance is already a outstanding number. However, sometimes it is
possible to gain near peak performance for certain applications, but not on
any system. For example, fast Matrix-Matrix multiplication is such an application.
It gains 99% of Cell/B.E.'s peak performance. But not because of the SPEs
204.8 Gflops performance, but because of Cell/B.E.'s architecture. No other
system in existence gain such a value. Nor an 8 core Pentium, neither a GPU
can sustain such a performance. Don't get me wrong, it always depend on
the application and on the intended use of the system in question, but there
are numerous performance tests taking Matrix-Matrix multiplication into
account, also on GPUs (see; GPGPU).

Some game developers say; Programming the Cell/B.E. processor is difficult.
And why? Because we are gone parallel! There were no parallel programming /
gaming on PC. The same developers would get the same problems and the
same issues if they had to program an 8 core PC to its fullest!

I'm 100% certain that no one, no game, has taped out the performance of the
Cell/B.E. processor! There are a lot of things to learn. Further down the road
the benefits will become visible, and not only for this generation, but also for
the generations to come.

@Bruceongames
"For gaming, CELL is roughly equal to a 800 Mhz Pentium III(Yes, a Pentium III)
in extractable performance, or slightly faster than the original Xbox"

No offense, but try again!

Now lets have a BIG break, play some of your favorite games, until the next
"news" comes in.

[lokin]

the xbox like i stated does not use 1 entire core for the OS! there isnt a rule that if the sp3 uses one spe then all of a sudden all consoles should do it!

[NeverP]

if you dont agree with statements help the guy right dont just not agree and leave it at that..... or did the person not agree because of the idiot statement... im confused

[ProblemSolver]

"the xbox like i stated does not use 1 entire core for the OS! there isnt a rule
that if the sp3 uses one spe then all of a sudden all consoles should do it!"

Right.

But you have to consider that as more complex as the GameOS' become
as more they eat up resources (cpu cycles). The fact is that the 360 uses
an OS and this OS has to run on one core, at least. And either it runs on
one core, or it doesn't. "does not use 1 entire core..." doesn't not exists.
The OS may run via a thread, but this doesn't imply that the given core
can put its full strength on a game at the same time. If the OS is under
heavy load, then there is no way that only a few resources are used. Having
threads on a system doesn't imply that they run simultaneously or that one
of them only eats half the resources.

[Bruceongames]

The xenos has a claimed 240GFlops possible in the shaders. Given that it takes 4 ops to perform a transformation to screen space we can say its theoretical maximum poly throughput is 60,000,000,000 polys/sec.

The RSX has 8 vertex shaders each capable of 10 Flops per cycle. So .. well ... thats 40GFLOPS @ 500MHz. Max poly through put is 10,000,000,000 polys/sec.

[lokin]

I have learned a loooong time ago that doesnt matter what you say and what you try to do to open their eyes, it just doesnt happen. thing is even if you actually get a dev to state the one is better than the other they would suddenly turn around and say..."lazy dev"... "crappy game dev".... "they suck"....." i am gonna tell my mommy".... "but sony said the ps3 will crush the competetors. So you know

edit.
I just feel this site is loosing allot of its credability because of this nonsense. you know I think the devs sat together and created this site to laugh at the simple minded people because they have to relieve the stress of making great games for both consoles

[Oner]

You have done nothing more than show you have no credibility with your post history as well as trying to push your biased opinionated misinformed blog as "News". That is seriously weak.

1) You have linked to old, outdated, misinformed POSTS IN FORUMS as reference

2) You have shown your bias by only posting negatives about Sony products but praising MS products, that is CLEAR

3) You say "I have been told this by a gaming professional" but yet provide no credible links, audio or video to prove and support this "information"

4) MANY people here have shown actual links to devs and other RESPECTED sites that have disproved EVERYTHING you have tried to pass off as "Newsworthy" yet you don't appologize for your biased actions

5) You have also done this solely to gain hits to your little blog in an attempt to make it as if it is a credible News site

You really are a sad person to go through what you just did. How does it feel to be laughed at by thousands of people with your absolutely horrible "reporting" of which is equal to nothing more than another biased misinformed fanboy rant on the internet. Great job at that failure of epic proportions. Next time try a little less bias, more credible up to date REAL facts & proper supportive informational gathering.

[NeverP]

fine brucie like the 360 more than ps3. thats fine, you like the ps3 more. thing is he makes sense AS DO ALOT OF OTHER SITES THAT STATES THE SAME THING. lokin posted a site http://www.overclock.net/vi... go and read! you say there were alot of posts disproving him, i havent seen any. guys the get this... the rsx is not as poerful as the xenos BUT the cell wins the cpu race

[aliveinboston]

The Xenon has, theoretically, 6 times the vertex processing capability of the RSX as long as the game does not need any pixels.

Go read about unified shaders then stop making a fool of yourself.

If a unified shader is used for a vertex operations then you're cutting into pixel operations. It's a balancing act.

Because RSX has dedicated pixel shaders (and powerful one at that) pixel operations are never diminished by increasing the polycount. What's more, CELL can kick the polygon count well beyond anything the XBox360 can handle (while still drawing pixels).

This is why PS3 games that use both cell and RSX for graphics have higher polygon counts, better resolution (more pixels), better lighting (prettier pixels), and better framerates. GT5 is a perfect example of a game that's far beyond anything possible on Xbox360. It simply blows away the best looking racer on Xbox360 (PGR4), a game that has been developed exlusively for and completely optimized (even uses tiling) for the XBox360 hardware.

[Oner]

@NeverP

Who ever said I like the PS3 better? I sure didn't. Please don't put words into my mouth of which I did not say. I fail to understand how you can say you haven't seen any posts disproving him, are you reading the same 6 pages everyone else has?

Bruce ~ "However at the last minute Sony realised that the Cell GPU wasn’t up to the job so they went to nVidia and bought their 7800GTX GPU. This gave them a number of disadvantages"

N4G Poster ~ "Nvidia and Sony announced that Nvidia will develop the GPU for the PS3 back in 2002 or 2003. This was NOT a last minute fix as you have and many others have said http://www.theregister.co.u... "

N4G Poster ~ "Oh dear, are you actually quoting forums from 2006?"

Bruce ~ "This doesn’t prevent talented studios making PS3 exclusive LOW POLYGON, LOW TEXTURE MEMORY games that look very nice indeed."

N4G Poster ~
"GT5: Prologue --- 200,000 polygons per car.
PGR4 --- 90,000 polygons per car"

N4G Poster ~ " http://rofl-at.us/?page_id=...

Here you posted someone elses BLOG as "Factual" information.

P.S. Has anyone actually checked the dates on the links?
June 7, 2006 - 5:47:16pm
Dec 24 2005, 05:34 PM"

N4g Poster ~ "Man . . you kinda blew your credibility with your past article history."

N4G Poster ~ "Lol. You just posted a random comment to support your article? That doesn't exactly add to your credibility..."

If you want to read about some specs try this one http://forums.afterdawn.com... and while that post is from 2005 the information of which it links to is from anandtech...a truly respectable site unlike the misinformed forum posts Bruce quoted! Look I agree and understand the RSX is slightly weaker than the Xenos but even in your own link it says

"Does the fact that the R500 has 48 shaders make it twice as powerful as the RSX? No, it does not actually. Let us dispel that misconception.....Though not incredibly more powerful, the 360 does come out on top in terms of graphics processing power."

So I agree with your point of "the cell wins the cpu race" but Bruce can't/shouldn't specifically take out the Cell from the calculation as it works directly with the RSX in the graphics department so it is a disservice to his "readers" to omit that information. The Cell works in unity to help in graphics so you can't leave it out when discussing graphics.

The main point of what I posted above was to show his bias and how he does not offer ANY rock solid supportive proof (other than some posts on a random forum or a link to a MS site about the 360!) That is not proper reporting. Forget the point of RSX vs Xenos it is how he handled the information he "provided" of which is in question.

[Oner]

Excellent post aliveinboston that is exactly what I am trying to say but in a technical aspect. +bubbles & agree

[Master of Menace]

I have played countless Blu-rays(own 35), and owned and played over 30 games over the past year. I've used my PS3 to surf the web and store my photos, videos and my library of CD's. It still runs quiet. And guess what, I haven't had one single problem with it. Unlike the 360, which does not have beautiful architecture. The guy who wrote this article is a biased idiot. And who cares. The only market in the world where 360 is still dominating is America. And that is slowing down. Owned!

[The-Only-Truth]

It is really astonishing how the next-gen consolewar made some high-tec expert geeks out of the usual gamer !

Wow...just....wow...

@topic

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaawn, next (and we all know there's an article coming up similiar to this crap)

[jethro_jones]

because the gameplay videos online look stupid. I mean seriously, I don't know how there can be so much hype for this game. He plays dead and his suit blends in with the environment, and he controls a little robot thing that zaps people. Has anyone seen him run? He looks like there is a stick up his a$$. At least you can see the curvature of his butt in his tight spandex pants.

Like I said, I hope the story makes it worth while because the gameplay looks a little sub-par.

[The playa]

"At least you can see the curvature of his butt in his tight spandex pants."

Thats why sony fandroids love this game sooo much ;) haha

[jethro_jones]

People are bragging about it being the best game of all time and I don't understand it at all. Is the story what makes it? Because from what I've seen of the gameplay videos that are online, it looks pretty sub-par. Has anyone seen him run? hahahahaha, he looks like an idiot.

My prediction: a few days of time spent on MGS4 when it gets released, then back to the good games like COD4, KZ2, GT5, GeOW 2, and hopefully COD5.

[BubblesDAVERAGE]

Ps3 proved it can do the same graphics as the 360...but it has yet to proved it is 2 times better than the 360

[TheKungFool]

127 million people and counting didn't care the original Xbox had better graphics than the PS2.

20 million people and counting didn't care that the Wii is graphically inferior to the PS3/360.

Simply put, I couldn't care less about the minor differences in multiplat titles because I didn't choose the PS3 over the 360 for multiplats; I chose the PS3 because of its exclusives.

[Main_Street_Saint]

Wow I don't think it really matters too much since I've played my wife's cousin's PS3 and I think it looks pretty good. I don't care too much about the numbers, as long as the game looks good (and plays far better). Also I played my best friend's 360 and I think that also looks quite good too (pretty much the same quality of graphics).

Let the putting down of other people's consoles continue; as for me, both are good and are now showing there value.

[themyk]

here's what i have to say about this.

you buy a ps3 for exclusives. they always have the best exclusives. and for the most part i can't complain about the multi plats either. because most of them are running the same if not better now.

so i'll take our "horribly" running multi plats, if that comes with the amazing exclusives that sony is known for.

so if you want to compare consoles. lets compare exclusives. it makes no sense to compare multiplats, unless they are made separately optomizing each console.

so yeah. sony exclusives from this point on are going to destroy the 360 exclusives.

and thats all i care about.

[TheKungFool]

I feel the exact same way.

It doesn't bother me that my PS3 version of "Fear", "Rainbow Six Vegas" or "Lost Planet" scored a few points lower than the 360 version, because I still enjoyed those games thoroughly.....

....and when I'm done with those multiplats, I'll be enjoying titles like "Uncharted", "Resistance", "Metal Gear Solid 4", "Final Fantasy XIII", "Killzone2", "SOCOM", "Gran Turismo 5" and such, since THOSE games are the reason I own a PS3 over a 360.

[themyk]

and another thing. come midnight tonight i'll be playing MGS4.

and if i'm not mistaken quite a few reviews of this game have said that it sets the standard for console graphix sooooooooooooo. why are we having this conversation?

[xhairs]

"The PS3 continues to underperform the Xbox 360, game after game."

Where's the list & proof?

[Jeppe]

Who cares? My mum has told me the ps3 is better..

[Godoftheweek]

Since you continue to make an ash out of yourself by posting your OUTDATED BIASED KayRap, I will post REAL credible sources that blow up every last bit of your garbage. Regardless of this pissing match, I see MGS4 coming out 2nite, and I look at the CONSTANT improvement of PS3's games while the 360 peaked 2 years ago with Gears.

Anyhoo, here they are...

Look at the date on this article

http://arstechnica.com/news...

You say the CELL is not meant for graphics eh?

http://www.mc.com/mercury.a...

This last article is a bit off base but I wanted everyone to see that Sony has been thru this backlash before and seemed to be ok. What system could I be talking about? The PS2.

http://archive.salon.com/te...

Like many others have said, paper means nothing. RESULTS mean everything. For me so far, the PS3 games IMPROVE constantly while the 360 games have stagnated for nearly TWO years.

The PS3 games we will be playing 2 years from now just like the PS2...will look outdated and ugly.

Now Brucieboi...

continue with your garbage from XBOX sites with articles 2 to 3 years old.

[N4g_null]

I'm glad you like ars techinca

here is some more reading

http://arstechnica.com/news... explains why the cell is having such a hard time using all that power. This is from IBM who made the cell not some SONY PR guy.

http://arstechnica.com/news... is from a SONY PR guy that tries to get you to believe that their is hope for the cells power to be used in games.

You should take a look at cpus in history. Intel Itanium was the first 64bit capable chip they had ever made and it may even be more powerful at FP units than a core duo but the core dou crushes it in every thing else.

It's cool to hope for things. Yet I think you guys are confusing power with art direction. The games listed by many fans look good because of art direction. The reason why I speak about the power myth in PS3 is because they are really even on a lot of levels. Both systems have flaws that leave them both at the same point of preformance with only the art making a difference after that. The only thing the PS3 would have a real problem with is processing too many of one type of shader since it is a unified shader tech. This would affect frame rate yet any every thing else should be doable.

Frame rate is the main problem here. Before you say any thing about resolutions that still does not change the fact that shader will still be hit performance wise. Resolution is mostly the frame buffers job. There is lots of upscaling on both sides also.

These is not a post to bash this is a post to show you they are on even grounds because it all comes down to art direction not shader pipeline all the time and it's nice to see HD gamers caring about that more.

[TheXgamerLive]

HELL YES! We, meaning most everyone be it fanor dev. have said this, no new surprise here.

[highdro]

a bunch of bs, .. look at killzone 2 and tell me that the gpu is holding back the ps3,..haha what a dumb post, i guess all this good news surronding mgs4 and ps3 80g bundles there is always some one that want to find something bad to say about the true king of the gameing industry.

[Crazyglues]

I do agree with this statement, the graphics card is indeed holding the PS3 back... and even though the CPU far exceeds what developers expected the GPU brings the whole thing back down hard, by not being just as impressive.

Some companies will find a way around that problem, but it will not be easy, and because of this few games will be able reach that level of greatness that Sony had in mind for the PS3.

So sadly only big dogs like people working on GT5, the guys working on Killzone 2, the guys who did MGS4, Uncharted, & others will be able to get around these problems. It takes a serious team -of really smart people.....

And most game companies even some big ones just don't have that kind of resources. Will we still get amazing games, of course.. but it does put PS3 on 360's level... for now..

As we move forward they will tap that CPU power to a level that will surprise people...that and exploiting using Blu-ray will send PS3 to the next level. GT5p already shows that this will indeed happen, nothing looks as amazing as that game.

So there both great systems but I think PS3 will edge out 360 longterm... (but that in no way means the 360 is a weak system, it's not and it's really well designed for gaming) -Microsoft's next system will really shake the gaming world up.

Sony has a 10 year plan on PS3 but before they can pull that off Microsoft will drop there new system, then it's really going to get interesting.

[Master of Menace]

To see what Microsoft has up it's sleeve for it's NEXT console. Considering they have failed to actually turn a profit the last two generations. I think they will still have trouble competing with PS3. Sony have all the bases already covered!

[AliC]

The only time the PS3 has underperformed is when

A) It was a bad port
B) Game was not at all optimised for the PS3

It's been proven in a lot of the more recent games, that now developers are getting to grips with the CELL just how much they can do now.

Anyway this is a badly wrote article, that serves nothing but flame bait.

And remember that just because a CPU may have a lower clock rate, it's what the CPU does that counts, multiple cores when used correctly can vastly improve performance and allow you to enhance on certain aspects that would normally bottleneck most CPU's

[TheKungFool]

Very well put ALiC, and I agree completely.

If Valve, Ubisoft, EAgames, whomever makes a shoddy port, that doesn't prove one system is stronger than the other, it just means someone didn't do their job properly.

There are multiplasts like Oblivion, Devil May Cry 4, Grand Theft Auto 4 and Call of Duty 4 that perform and look fantastic on the PS3.

[Xi]

I wonder how many there would be if it was the 360 that wasn't preforming as well. And how much of that would be the same "bs, no proof, system X is god" posts that have been in this thread.

[N4g_null]

Just to let you know about the same. We had these type of post about shader tech a long time ago on PCs. You have to understand shaders and how they work to see where hs is coming from. Yet I agree the PS3 could still show up the xbox 360 simply due to talent in art direction. Some people need every thing throw at the screen to look good and some only need a few shaders. This is why crysis runs at 30FPS on some PC lol. Brute force coding which never works right no a real console.

[crom]

if sony is so much better, everything about it is supreme, then when are they going to outperformed or straight up beat ms in all games produced by the same dev. i'm tired of hearing "they haven't reach their potential." for goodness sake it's been out over 2 years. sony failed in my opionion because they claimed to have a superior console, yet we have to talk about this issue over and over again. ms shouldn't even be in the conversation if they so such a.

[N4g_null]

At best they are even. One with better FP performance and PR(performance is only good for servers and number crunching with not branching) and one with flexibility and bad PR(RROD ignorance yet this can be fixed). I mean the shader stuff isn't going to matter until we get the crazy amount of shaders on the next gen GPUs.

[Kyur4ThePain]

Shouldn't you ask the developers in question?

If one group of people can do 1080p at 60fps, that means the hardware is capable of doing it, right?
To anyone replying to this....FIRST answer that question for me.

Just because some other group is unable to do the same says absolutely nothing about the hardware.

[na2ru1]

way to up the hits on this page and waste our internet usage

[chidj2]

the RSX (ps3) and XENOS (xbot 3rd60)

ps3

* 550-500 MHz G71 based GPU on 90 nm process[1] , proporcional a la serie GF 7900FX
* 300.2 million transistors total
* Multi-way programmable parallel floating-point shader pipelines
* Independent pixel/vertex shader architecture
* 24 parallel pixel pipelines
* 5 shader ALU operations per pipeline per cycle ( 2 vector4 and 2 scalar (dual/co-issue) and fog ALU )
* 27 FLOPS per pipeline per cycle
* 8 parallel vertex pipelines
* 2 shader ALU operations per pipeline per cycle ( 1 vector4 and 1 scalar, dual issued )
* 10 FLOPS per pipeline per cycle
* Maximum vertex count: 1 billion vertices per second ( 8 vertex x 550 MHz / 4 )
* Minimum (worst case) polygon count: 333.3 million polygons per second ( 1 billion vertices per second / 3 vertices per triangle)
* Maximum (optimistic case) polygon count: 800 million and more depending on how many triangle strips are used in a game.
* Maximum shader operations: 136 shader operations per second

xbot 3rd60

100 million transistors in total
500 MHz 10 MiB daughter embedded DRAM (eDRAM) framebuffer on 65 nm process.
NEC designed eDRAM die includes additional logic (192 parallel pixel processors) for color, alpha compositing, Z/stencil buffering, and anti-aliasing called “Intelligent Memory” (eDRAM), giving developers 4-sample anti-aliasing at very little performance cost.
10 million transistors [2]
8 Render Output units
Maximum pixel fillrate: 4 gigapixel per second (8 ROPs x 500 MHz)
Maximum Z sample rate: 8 gigasamples per second (2 Z samples x 8 ROPs x 500 MHz), 32 gigasamples per second using 4X anti aliasing (2 Z samples x 8 ROPs x 4X AA x 500 MHz)[1]
Maximum anti-aliasing sample rate: 16 gigasamples per second (4 AA samples x 8 ROPs x 500 MHz)[1]
500 MHz parent GPU on 65 nm TSMC process of total 232 million transistors
48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader pipelines[3]
Unified shader architecture (each pipeline is capable of running either pixel or vertex shaders)
10 FLOPS per pipeline per cycle
Maximum vertex count: 1.5 billion vertices per second ( (48 shader pipelines x 500 MHz) / 16)
Maximum polygon count: 500 million triangles per second[3] (1.5 Billion vertices / 3 vertices per tiangle)
Maximum shader operations: 96 billion per second

THIS ARE THE SPECS NOW BRUCE CLOSE UR FUC!#!@# MOUTH AND DONT MAKE MORE "I LOVE XBOT 360" articles

and now xbots ur stupid consoles cant rech the 800 million polygons of the ps3 and that means more textures = better graphics

[chidj2]

the specs are in beyond3d dudes

so now xbots what r going to say?