The Truth About The Playstation 3 Rsx...

[joeorc]

this was for all those people that said the xbox360's GPU was better than the playstation 3's...this link is for you..and for those that are trying to say the playstation 3 is a sub BLU-RAY player and is not as good as any stand alone player this LINK is also for you.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=jQ6vvxM3ISU



its not HYPE if its true....
nay sayers indeed get PAWNED.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by joeorc

this was for all those people that said the xbox360's GPU was better than the playstation 3's...this link is for you..and for those that are trying to say the playstation 3 is a sub BLU-RAY player and is not as good as any stand alone player this LINK is also for you.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=jQ6vvxM3ISU



its not HYPE if its true....
nay sayers indeed get PAWNED.

Only misinformed people could have ever believed otherwise.

Thanks for the link.

[joeorc]

Originally Posted by JTK

Only misinformed people could have ever believed otherwise.

Thanks for the link.

yea i just helped to KILL SOME FUD most of the xbox360 zealots like to keep posting and spreading the wrong info on the internet.

[Aaron]

What does "FUD" mean?

[JTK]

Originally Posted by AaronDavies

What does "FUD" mean?

Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt.

A well known tactic of Microsoft that they've practically turned into an art form.

[dakota81]

That's the worst endorsement I've seen. Everyone should know by now that technical numbers do not always equate to real-world performance. That's why every computer video card is benchmarked instead of reviews just listing the specs and being done with it. A good example were the Volari graphics cards. They had some amazing specs in a few areas, but a couple other aspects of the architecture were pitiful, and as a result, the performance was down-right disappointing.

"I saw a sign that said the PS3 has the most advanced graphics, so it must be true." Specs are worthless, find a way to objectively benchmark the performance and then the better will be shown. Until then, don't bring yourselves down to the levels of whomever xbox owners this is targeted to.

If those site review links are good, then great. I don't have the time to check them out.

[joeorc]

Originally Posted by dakota81

That's the worst endorsement I've seen. Everyone should know by now that technical numbers do not always equate to real-world performance. That's why every computer video card is benchmarked instead of reviews just listing the specs and being done with it. A good example were the Volari graphics cards. They had some amazing specs in a few areas, but a couple other aspects of the architecture were pitiful, and as a result, the performance was down-right disappointing.

"I saw a sign that said the PS3 has the most advanced graphics, so it must be true." Specs are worthless, find a way to objectively benchmark the performance and then the better will be shown. Until then, don't bring yourselves down to the levels of whomever xbox owners this is targeted to.

If those site review links are good, then great. I don't have the time to check them out.

this info is from benchmarking from NVIDIA, THE SAME WITH ATI they were able to sustain the ammount of SHADER OPERATIONS PER SECOND IN LAB TESTS. NOW GRANTED EVERY GAME WOULD RUN not nearly the same. but you have to go by something what better info to go by the lab testing in bench marking. example:
http://www.smartcomputing.com/editor...7r03/77r03.asp

the info posted in that video is true ..
notice this:

First off, the custom-built ATI chip runs at 500MHz, a very respectable speed for a console-based GPU. It uses 512MB GDDR3 memory (which requires less power and runs cooler than previous memory types) running at 700MHz and has a 256-bit memory interface bus with a 22.4GBps bandwidth. This memory is equally accessible to both the GPU and CPU, creating what is known as Unified Memory Architecture, making graphics performance truly lightning-fast. (For more on the Xbox 360’s Xenon processor, see “Fire In The Belly” on page 137.)

which also go for the playstation 3 the GPU AND THE cpu ram is accessible by the rsx and the CELL.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

I believe the RSX was downgraded from 550MHz to 500MHz. But, even after reworking the numbers based on that change would still allow for the GPU to do more than the Xbox 360 GPU.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by JTK

Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt.

A well known tactic of Microsoft that they've practically turned into an art form.

all three are paths to the darkside....

[WinterWolf]

Wow, 360 fans are really gonna be disappointed.

[KingDeezie]

While I do agree that the PS3 has the much better processor, I do however not believe that the RSX is better then the ATI card in the 360.

NO matter what the tech specs say about both of the video cards, the Xbox 360's video card has proven itself to be very effecient and easy to work with. Sometimes its not about how much power is in a machine, its the ease at which a developer can tap into it. Take a look at some ports like Splinter Cell: DA or Fear to know that the PS3's architecture is offering some resistance to developers over the 360's design.

[mainman]

Originally Posted by KingDeezie

While I do agree that the PS3 has the much better processor, I do however not believe that the RSX is better then the ATI card in the 360.

NO matter what the tech specs say about both of the video cards, the Xbox 360's video card has proven itself to be very effecient and easy to work with. Sometimes its not about how much power is in a machine, its the ease at which a developer can tap into it. Take a look at some ports like Splinter Cell: DA or Fear to know that the PS3's architecture is offering some resistance to developers over the 360's design.

You are saying it yourself, SC and Fear are ports. You cant expect much improvement, you cant even expect it to be equal.

It will be the same with Haze, but only this time, the PS3 will look better than the 360, because the lead platform for Haze is PS3.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

I think I have finally come across an explanation of the TRUE abilities of the PS3 and why it is so much better than the Xbox 360. Here's a hint...It not really about the graphics card. The difference in the graphics cards appears to be minimal at best.

PS3 rendering architecture explained...

"The PS3 rendering architecture is designed to be used like this:

The PPE functions as a controller for the entire system.

The SPEs function as the heavy lifters for game logic, physics, and dynamic vertex work. They also are used for some pixel work.
(I've been saying the exact same thing folks)

The RSX functions as the main pixel painter, but it is also used for static geometry.

A PS3 engine will start off with the PPE spawning off tasks to the SPEs and acting as the central control point for the engine. Static geometry is put onto the RSX. PPEs start cranking through tasks in parallel, usually setup to double buffer the data they operate on. A SPE will have its code uploaded, then it starts a DMA fetch for its initial data into to one half its local memory, and then it starts ping ponging back and forth: work through one half the local memory while the second half is being DMAed in, then swap. Ideally you have it setup so that you are effectively hiding almost all of your data loading latencies with the double buffer setup and chaining SPEs together where you do animation, deformation, physics, transformation, lighting all going on in parallel.

The heavy vertex work being done, that data is then sent off to the RSX to be rasterized along with the resident static vertex data. So in effect the PS3's Cell RSX combo is one giant unified rendering system. Depending on the nature of your game, your division of labor between the RSX and Cell will be different. It is entirely possible to do all vertex work on Cell or none. And the same for pixel painting.

What the design of the PS3's rendering architecture brings to developers is the unification of your physics, collision, dynamics, and geometry. On systems like desktop pcs or the 360 you have a division between your geometric data and collision/physics data with each of them sitting in GPU and CPU space respectively. The latest Factor 5 interview talks in general about this design of the PS3 and the Lair engine.

The RSX does exactly what it was designed to do, have the pixel painting power to handle 1080p output. The extra vertex power is a nice addition. The RSX in isolation is not very interesting to talk about. Or is a comparison to standard desktop graphics cards or the Xenos."

[joeorc]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

I believe the RSX was downgraded from 550MHz to 500MHz. But, even after reworking the numbers based on that change would still allow for the GPU to do more than the Xbox 360 GPU.

nope that is also a MYTH IN THE Q&A with the hardware SONY REP. ON THE PLAYSTATION UNDERGOUND they answered this the answer is it is still at 550 MHz...

[joeorc]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

I think I have finally come across an explanation of the TRUE abilities of the PS3 and why it is so much better than the Xbox 360. Here's a hint...It not really about the graphics card. The difference in the graphics cards appears to be minimal at best.

PS3 rendering architecture explained...

thats just one way there are other ways..it depends on the developers. the SPE'S CAN ALSO SPAWN OFF THREADS INDEPENDENT FROM THE PPE...

[joeorc]

Originally Posted by KingDeezie

While I do agree that the PS3 has the much better processor, I do however not believe that the RSX is better then the ATI card in the 360.

NO matter what the tech specs say about both of the video cards, the Xbox 360's video card has proven itself to be very effecient and easy to work with. Sometimes its not about how much power is in a machine, its the ease at which a developer can tap into it. Take a look at some ports like Splinter Cell: DA or Fear to know that the PS3's architecture is offering some resistance to developers over the 360's design.

yes it's one thing about ease of which a developer can make a game the resistance is how the developer develops the game and what resources they take into account. notice alot of the developers are haveing better luck in developing on the playstation 3 and then porting over to the xbox360. but thats besides the point, its also another thing based on the hardware itself higher benchmark. the mere fact the playstation 3 by fact's alone bench's higher in tests. does that mean anything. not realy it depends on the developer team. but it does give the team a higher ceiling to work with.

[Shin-Ra]

Splinter Cell 4 wasn't even a port, 360 was the lead dev platform and it took UBI Shanghai extra time to finish up the PC version which was released at a later date.

Both the 360 and PS3 ports of F.E.A.R are underwhelming, with the same visual quality as the PC game maxed out both versions should run at 60fps. The 360 game can't hold a stable 30fps just glancing around an area without particles from combat flying yet. There hasn't been a PS3 demo (just as well, it probably would have sold even less) so I can't see just how bad a port job that is.

Condemned: Criminal Origins actually looks better and runs smoother than F.E.A.R with a modified version of the same graphics engine. It came out a year earlier..

9/10 times ports are way less than they could have been, you can't judge much from them.

[Musashi]

Joeorc's video is another example of what I've known the entire time. I read the comparisons at Wikipedia and other sites, and simply put, the PS3 is more powerful. Both CPU and GPU are stronger.

Wikipedia also provided some facts going against the myth that the PS3 was overly hard to develop on. Unanimous word of developers is that its a vast improvement over the PS2, and that both 360 and PS3 require multithreading, and that ultimately, any system (even the old PS1)becomes "hard to develop on" if you code to the metal and maximize the resources like say for example, Square Enix or Tecmo.

[Gamekid]

As far as I know, the ps3 is better in ways that the 360. The 360 is a great console, no doubt about that. The ps3 is a great console, no doubt about that. Two ps3 games, Lair and Uncharted: Drakes Fortune were shown on the ps3 and it was confirmed by both companies that the games could only be done on the ps3. Any 360 fanboy will say that the 360 is better then the ps3, this is true only in some ways, but keep in mind that the 360 was out first and the ps3 was out later. Graphics wise, the ps3 is better then the xbox 360, just look at the spec sheets, it's all there.

[CEEarl]

I've been to store after store and bottom line, I think half the people selling HD tvs just want to sell it and don't know what the hell they're talking about, lol. My problem is I bought a 720p HD LCD RCA tv. It seems to have HDMI hookup spots in the back, but of course I have no cord. I got it not for watching HD movies on cable tv, but instead only for my PS3 blu-ray movies and to have my PS3 video games in HD. I have the (Red, white and yellow), AV jacks that is hooked up to the back of my PS3 plugged into the Red, white and yellow on the back of my HD tv. Is that going to give me the HD quality I need, or to really appreciate the picture do I need to go out and buy an HDMI cord? If so, what kind and how many. I've seen some forums say you need 2 or 3, so now I'm really confused. Also, I'm getting broadband from my phone company and the modem is coming from them. Is there any special hookups for the modem I need for PS3 to get online with it. The main modem is going to my computer, so of course I'll need a router. I have the usual stuff already (Wireless keyboard for PS3, etc.) Please help! Thanks!