|
GPU holding PS3 Back
|
|
|
xXxBG
Member
|
11. June 2008 @ 02:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
Jonno7
Junior Member
|
11. June 2008 @ 05:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
There might be some truth in the article
but by looking at ingame footage of MGS 4 I dont think so...
|
|
SDF_GR
Member
1 product review
|
11. June 2008 @ 06:15 |
Link to this message
|
I am not an expert or anything, but i am sick tired to read articles that try to prove that 360 is better than PS3.
Especially from people, that they either are working for MS, or are bought off from MS to write staff like this, or they just dont have anything better to do in their life's.
and to the bottom of this, same s**t was all around with PS2 and a couple of years back we saw God of War, and every one was surprised.
If game studios want to output nice graphs they can.
|
Senior Member
2 product reviews
|
11. June 2008 @ 08:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
yea, I read half way through the article the other day and became disgusted. its not an article, its a blog. Tell me that same crap tomorrow after I pick up MGS4. We'll see what system has the better graphics. Stupid fanboys...
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
11. June 2008 @ 08:46 |
Link to this message
|
That article has absolutely no proof to support his "findings" and what little information he provides is outdated (2005,2006). He basically finds some old info to support his opinionated biased blog reporting. If you want to read more that proves what he is about go here and look at some of these replies
Quote:
"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"
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. With link http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12/07/...gn_win/
Quote:
Oh dear, are you actually quoting forums from 2006?
Quote:
Man . . you kinda blew your credibility with your past article history.
Quote:
Lol. You just posted a random comment to support your article? That doesn't exactly add to your credibility...
Quote:
Uncharted is low texture, low polygon now? I did not know that. Thank you for opening my eyes! (in sarcasm)
Quote:
"This doesn?t prevent talented studios making PS3 exclusive LOW POLYGON, LOW TEXTURE MEMORY games that look very nice indeed."
Really? What about this
GT5: Prologue --- 200,000 polygons per car.
PGR4 --- 90,000 polygons per car.
Quote:
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
Hell some of the stuff comes right back here to aD as reference. But this guy clearly does not know what he is talking about and has been viewed as "outside the age of real gamers" and only posting negatives about Sony products while praising MS products. That is where the problem lies, his bias is clear since he does not show true factual supportive evidence combined with what has been shown in his post history as well as posting his blog as REAL news only to get hits....pretty weak in my opinion.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. June 2008 @ 08:48
|
|
bigo93
Senior Member
|
11. June 2008 @ 09:58 |
Link to this message
|
Well I wouldn't be surprised if tsomethign like this was true. I've got a PS3 and I'v eloving GTA4 right now. But I am also angry at Sony for ripping us off. Removal of hardware emulation replaced with software, 40GB having only PS1 emulation. No 80GB console in europe, even though they have stopped selling 60GB ones! Making the first european consoles inferior to the same US and Jap consoles and yet selling for a higher price. And no Dualshock being added as standard.
Sony have a lot to answer for but right now all they care about is profits rather than consumers.
|
Senior Member
|
11. June 2008 @ 10:11 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by grkblood:
yea, I read half way through the article the other day and became disgusted. its not an article, its a blog.
Exactly! That's the problem with this age of blogging. It's great that people have taken an interest in writing but most of the time the columns/blogs are poorly written. Furthermore, in this case, there's no support to any of his claims.
Trash!
Latest AnyDVD to rip > VOBB to blank the unwanted on a DVD > Shrink to compress > ImgBurn to burn = Never starting a thread asking how to backup a movie
|
|
StilDeath
Member
|
11. June 2008 @ 10:21 |
Link to this message
|
how can you say they dont care about there consumers, im on my 4th 360 now and it throws red rings every second day and i have to rap it in a towel for 30 min to get it to work bc my warranty ended, and i've had my ps3 since launch day (60gig) i hav yet to hav a single problem with it, it already outlasted my 360 by 4x its life length, this is an age old battle nvidia n Ati they both hav there ups and downs nuthings perfect.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
11. June 2008 @ 11:04 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by bigo93:
Well I wouldn't be surprised if tsomethign like this was true. I've got a PS3 and I'v eloving GTA4 right now. But I am also angry at Sony for ripping us off. Removal of hardware emulation replaced with software, 40GB having only PS1 emulation. No 80GB console in europe, even though they have stopped selling 60GB ones! Making the first european consoles inferior to the same US and Jap consoles and yet selling for a higher price. And no Dualshock being added as standard.
Sony have a lot to answer for but right now all they care about is profits rather than consumers.
Um what does ANY of that have to with the topic at hand? Though I don't see how it is Sony's fault that people didn't buy the more capable PS3's when they where available? It is not Sony's fault that people waited for prices to drop and by doing so they got what was available.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. June 2008 @ 11:05
|
|
redux79
Member
|
11. June 2008 @ 11:15 |
Link to this message
|
The one thing about the ps3 that throws me off is that it only has 512 ram, while the 360 has 1 gig. I know the cell processor is more powerful so wouldn't that require more ram or dose it use it differently/more efficiently?
I've wanted a ps3 for a while, but with the way that GTA 4 turned out and the lack of exclusives the only real draw it has left is the quality of the hardware. At the same time the 360 is still appealing because of the older library of games that are $30 or less. There aren't many ps3 games under 50-60. I just can't shake the feeling that no matter which way I go I'm screwed, RROD or far and few between overpriced games.
|
|
bigo93
Senior Member
|
11. June 2008 @ 11:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
Um what does ANY of that have to with the topic at hand? Though I don't see how it is Sony's fault that people didn't buy the more capable PS3's when they where available? It is not Sony's fault that people waited for prices to drop and by doing so they got what was available.
Well first of all the European launch of the PS3 was delayed. So we didnt wait for prices to drop, we waited for Sony to manufacture more inferior consoles which they could sell in the european markets for a greater price.
Its not just Sony, everything in europe ends up being sold at rippoff prices compared to the same item being sold in the US.
And those who did wait for a price drop ended up with the choice of a 40GB console and a...40GB console. No 60GB console and no 80GB to replace the 60GB which they stopped producing.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. June 2008 @ 11:28
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
11. June 2008 @ 12:18 |
Link to this message
|
If anything is holding back the ps3 it is the lack of ram for applications other than gaming.
|
|
Sharpy321
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
11. June 2008 @ 12:25 |
Link to this message
|
i concur.
Mostly when browsing internet with say 4 windows and if one has say too many photos then it locks it up. compared to having streaming multiple videos on a 512MB ram pc and even then not noticing anything...
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
11. June 2008 @ 15:11 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Sharpy321:
i concur.
Mostly when browsing internet with say 4 windows and if one has say too many photos then it locks it up. compared to having streaming multiple videos on a 512MB ram pc and even then not noticing anything...
Indeed, and it isn't like ram costs a lot to manufacture, if there was a way to solder on more ram to the ps3 mobo like with the original xbox I'd do it.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
11. June 2008 @ 17:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by redux79:
The one thing about the ps3 that throws me off is that it only has 512 ram, while the 360 has 1 gig.
I don't know where you got your info but the 360 does not have 1 gig of ram. It has the same 512 megs as the PS3. But again I ask what does this have to do with the topic at hand people?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. June 2008 @ 17:13
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
11. June 2008 @ 17:57 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
Originally posted by redux79:
The one thing about the ps3 that throws me off is that it only has 512 ram, while the 360 has 1 gig.
I don't know where you got your info but the 360 does not have 1 gig of ram. It has the same 512 megs as the PS3. But again I ask what does this have to do with the topic at hand people?
Well you pretty much blew the original "problem" out of the water so I figured I'd just bring up what actually is holding the PS3 back.
Oh and the PS3 only has 256 megs, the 360 has 512 megs. The ram was the only thing stopping a few companies from using PS3's as cheap supercomputers, the PS2 had the same issue.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
12. June 2008 @ 08:49 |
Link to this message
|
Incorrect the PS3 has 512 megs of ram
Quote:
256MB of XDR Main RAM @ 3.2GHz and 256MB of GDDR3 VRAM @ 700MHz, or a total of 512MB for the entire system. The RSX graphics chip can actually use all 512MB of system RAM; it is not limited to the 256MB of GDDR3 RAM. According to Kaz Hirai and Nvidia from E3 2005
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 12. June 2008 @ 08:54
|
|
redux79
Member
|
12. June 2008 @ 10:41 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
Originally posted by redux79:
The one thing about the ps3 that throws me off is that it only has 512 ram, while the 360 has 1 gig.
I don't know where you got your info but the 360 does not have 1 gig of ram. It has the same 512 megs as the PS3. But again I ask what does this have to do with the topic at hand people?
I remember browsing prices online a few weeks back and on several sites the amount of ram was listed. In hindsight probably not the most reliable source of information.
As for the topic at hand well this thread is about a possible gpu bottleneck. I thought a lack of ram would serve as a bottleneck as well, holding the cell processor back. I wasn't trying to jack the thread, just curious if anyone else had any thoughts on the subject.
As I said before I had bad info and I stand corrected i'll make sure to get my info from more reliable sources next time.
|
|
bigo93
Senior Member
|
12. June 2008 @ 11:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
what does this have to do with the topic at hand people?[/b]
My point is that Sony skimped in some placed to make a cheaper console and hence that is what has held the PS3 back.
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
12. June 2008 @ 12:51 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
Incorrect the PS3 has 512 megs of ram
Quote:
256MB of XDR Main RAM @ 3.2GHz and 256MB of GDDR3 VRAM @ 700MHz, or a total of 512MB for the entire system. The RSX graphics chip can actually use all 512MB of system RAM; it is not limited to the 256MB of GDDR3 RAM. According to Kaz Hirai and Nvidia from E3 2005
Ah my bad I didnt know it could access both for one use. But only the rsx can access 100% of the ram then and the system can only use the 256 megs.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
12. June 2008 @ 13:43 |
Link to this message
|
From my understanding this would be correct to assume. I would be inclined to agree as on the Linux side the OS can only use 256.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
12. June 2008 @ 14:03 |
Link to this message
|
No. PS3 only has 256MB RAM I think not 512
|
Senior Member
2 product reviews
|
12. June 2008 @ 14:35 |
Link to this message
|
@CK, read this from the Sony GAP forums. It'll actually enlighten everbody...
Quote:
i am a programmer, as well an enthusiast.
here is the answer to your complaint and as well i would like to add that your comments were, if anything, completely misleading.
to start,2x bluray (PS3) is slower than 12x dvd(XBOX), and for those that do not know this is the main difference in the battle here.
2x bluray = 72 mbps or 9 MBps
12x DVD = 128 mbps or 12 MBps
to make the console versions more comparable in load times they use a hard disk on the ps3
the average notebook serial ATA hard disk will read much faster than either...
for example
Seagate momentus 5400.4 = 806 Mb/s or 100MBps
now you will understand why GTA has less pop-in issues, and why oblivion has farther draw distances on the ps3. this is made possible by the much faster throughput from the hard disk
to say it is ps3's RAM starvation is complete blasphemy.
so to compete with load times from a slower optical medium, the ps3 uses a much faster storage medium.
another completely uneducated quote is
'this is why the 360 is able to process data quicker than the PS3'
amount of ram has nothing to do with speed of processing. and if you did your research you would know the ps3 is using 256mb of ddr3 733MHZ (found in the 360) and another 256mb of XGA RAM 3.2GHZ... you could also reference how much quicker the ps3's cpu can perform.. which would lead you to agreeing that it can actually process much more data simultaneously than the 360
so you can see by numbers that the ps3's ram is the same size, and running at the same speed if not quicker depending on which module the data is loaded into...
and another uneducated quote (you are full of them buddy)
'With a 360 game you are looking at a maximum disc capacity of 8.5 GB. With a PS3 install you are looking at about 4-5 GB.'
.. the reason sony chose bluray is so that your quote there would be more like 4-5 GB on hard disk and 45gb on bluray disc.
if you see the size comparison it seems to be a no brainer to chose the larger, slower medium when you have a hard disk at your disposal.
the problem is with multi-platform titles the games are snubbed down to a way smaller size, and thus the bluray disc is set to waste most of its capacity.. but in retrospect if GTAIV were an exclusive ps3 title, they would have around 40 more GB of game to program if they wanted to.
now to talk about 'swap' or 'page' files.
one thing that makes hard disks an incredible tool for gaming is the capability of a swap file.
your computer uses one all the time..
basically when the ram is filled, the computer delegates other data typically stored in ram to a 'pagefile'..this page file is used by the OS as an 'overspill' for your RAM. the 360 does not have this, and for this reason you will see much more resulting pop-in... the pop in happens more frequently because .. on the ps3 when it runs out of memory for map / texture storage it references the hard disk(800mbps(MAX TRANSFER SPEED)) for these files,while the 360 references a dvd rom (72mbps(MAX TRANSFER SPEED) for these files).
the 360 has a disc, that is read only, and ram, once that is filled it has nothing. even though the 360 can have a hard disk, because variations of the console were released without one, the developers cannot assume a hard disk as they can on the ps3.
now the reason why the comparison games dont result in much quicker load times (except a few...gtaIV and oblivion) are because the programmers use the 360's bandwidth from its DVD medium as a lowest common denominator and only query the hard disk whenever the 360 would query its DVDROM... properly programmed games you will see a much better result because of the hard disk addition.
insomniac has even spoken of algorithms where they stream from the bluray and hard disk at the same time, just to provide optimal bandwidth to the Cell / RAM.
this is also a call to programmers for PS3 to PLEASE RELEASE EXCLUSIVE TITLES
look @ mgs 4, it fills 50gb, that title cannot fit on any less than 6 DVDS..
so keep complaining about your load times, i will prefer the slow larger medium and the much faster hard disk for swap files and load times.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 12. June 2008 @ 14:35
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
12. June 2008 @ 18:15 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by CKhaleel:
No. PS3 only has 256MB RAM I think not 512
What you think and what IS are 2 different things.
|
