PS3: Unreal Tournament 2007

[cau]

I should have been more clear. The PS3 doesn't actually exist yet. Until it does, his claim that it's more powerful than the X360 is rubbish.

If the PS3 matches the specs currently made available by Sony, it will have some advantages (theoretical geometry/vertex horsepower) and some disadvantages (architecture is bad for high resolutions, AA, and HDR).

Since it isn't released, it's impossible to say anything for sure.

John Carmack said that the PS3 might have a slightly more powerful CPU. First off, he was probably referring to Sony's theoretical numbers when he said this. But as I've said a dozen times, the PS3's problem won't be the Cell - it will be the overall system architecture (in particular, the memory architecture and the GPU).

You say we can't say PS3 is more powerful since it doesn't exist yet but it's ok for you to say its non-existent overall system architecture will be a problem.. :rolleyes:

I have no idea what additional features/specs/online support Sony plans to offer. But until they announce something, I'll assume that they think the Cell and a couple exclusive games are going to win this battle for them. But Microsoft and Nintendo have realized the importance of community to gamers. So far it doesn't look like Sony has.

PSM: How will the Playstation online experience change with the introduction of PS3?

Kaz Hirai: With the Playstation 3, you can expect to see a lot more of the freatures that make it exciting to be part of an online community, beyond just the gameplay. Wether it's matchmaking or other community features, those are a integral part of being an online community. We're hard at work on integrating those functionalities, as well as other functionalities that people have come to expect, and even some new things that people will find very refreshing.

[iconboy]

did anyone else think that Kaz was pretty )surprisingly) straightforward with his answers?

[jerry]

No, I'm not saying trolling is ok. I am simply saying that regardless of the troll post on the first page, the odds are that trolls from the opposite side would still do their own trolling.

I am hardly trying to defend the initial troll post on the first page. Just an observation as a pattern of other threads.

See others also find it odd that you didnt mind the first flame-bait post of this thread. Anyway, nobody could have predicted that this thread would have ended up like this without that post. ;)

[iconboy]

See others also find it odd that you didnt mind the first flame-bait post of this thread. Anyway, nobody could have predicted that this thread would have ended up like this without that post. ;)

latley it seems like every thread in the console area turns out like this! :laugh: :no: :rolleyes: :whistle: ;) :| :yes: :x :woot: :p :devil:

[Brandon Live Veteran]

You say we can't say PS3 is more powerful since it doesn't exist yet but it's ok for you to say its non-existent overall system architecture will be a problem.. :rolleyes:

If you're going to compare specs, the 360 wins. Game over.

But that's not a fair comparison since the PS3 doesn't actually exist yet. That's why I'm not saying the PS3 will be worse off or not.

[udontneed2know]

Yet Xbox fanboys will still curse the moon and say the Xbox360 IS MORE POWERFUL. Yeah right folks. Heres UT2007 running on the PS3 at 720p on alpha kits at 49FPS with even better lighting and detail levels then that of Gears of War. Gears of War can't even do 30FPS yet on the Xbox360 and that game has probably had a full year more development time then UT2007 on the PS3.

Like Sony said recently, " the proof will be in the pudding " and well, we'll be seeing this playable gem very soon running smoothly on the PS3 with every graphical touch you could imagine being incorporated.

Whereas Xbox fanboys will jump for joy when they see the next Gears of War video still struggling to even reach 20FPS let alone 30+.

PS3 is for real folks, and the bandwidth is just fine : laugh :

If you're going to compare specs, the 360 wins. Game over.

But that's not a fair comparison since the PS3 doesn't actually exist yet. That's why I'm not saying the PS3 will be worse off or not.

Specs huh? Alright lets compare specs.

PS3 Flop = 2Tflop overall capability, 216Gflops from Cell 1.8Tflops from RSX

Xbox360 Flop = 1Tflop. Less then 100Gflops from Xenos, rest from Xenon

Winner = PS3

Polygon Counts

PS3 = +800,000,000 triangles per second ( thats the Geforce 7800GTX number )

Xbox360 = 500,000,000 triangles per second

PS3 Wins again

Shaders per second

PS3 = 100+ billion shaders per second

Xbox360 = 48 billion shaders per second

PS3 Wins again

Memory Bandwidth

Xbox360 = 21.6 FSB bandwidth, 5.6GB CPU-GPU bandwidth

PS3 = Main Ram = 25.6GB/s, V-Ram = 22.4GB/s, RSX - Cell Bandwidth = 35GB/s

PS3 Wins yet again.

Dot Products Per Second

Xbox360 = 6 billion dot products per second

PS3 = 50 billion dot products per second

PS3 Wins again

I dunno dude, your looking at a different set of specs then the rest of the world lmao. The PS3 owns the Xbox360 in every single category.

But wait were talking about the dude that thinks the PS3 won't be able to handle even 720p because of all things, frame-buffers and bandwidth lmao. The dude has no clue what hes talking about, hes just a rabid Microsoft boy toy who thinks just because he uses the words frame-buffer and anti-aliasing he knows a thing or two. The fact that he even made that pathetic statement about GAME OVER XBOX360 SPECS FTW! when the official specs for both system have been out since E3 is laughable to say the least.

And yes, both specs are theoretical. Meaning the Xbox360 numbers will be dramatically lower in the real world as well. So in the end, the PS3 wins hands down no matter what you want to compare.

But hey, what is left in the Xbox360 fanboys arsenal next? Hmmmmm ... lets see .... THE XBOX360 CONTROLLER HAS MORE BUTTONS! ... nope ... that one won't work either ... hmmm ...

Welp, I think were all out of debate points now. Case closed.

Edited December 10, 2005 by udontneed2know

[b mitchell]

If you're going to compare specs, the 360 wins. Game over.

But that's not a fair comparison since the PS3 doesn't actually exist yet. That's why I'm not saying the PS3 will be worse off or not.

Your comparison is all theoretical and you know that though.

[sundayx Veteran]

this is like comparing a pc with a mactel. the systems run with different components, runs different os, different software, different architecture. one isnt even out yet. and yet arguements exist. yawn

[udontneed2know]

this is like comparing a pc with a mactel. the systems run with different components, runs different os, different software, different architecture. one isnt even out yet. and yet arguements exist. yawn

Its more like comparing this years PC with a PC 4 years from now. The architectures are the same, but since IBM was only given 24 months to build the thing they basically looked at the PS2 and went with that style of architecture for the overall facet. The PS2 was of course far less advanced, but it still had the muscle it needed thanks to those VU0-VU1 Vector units attached to the EE to allow it to keep up with the Xbox all these years graphically. And the 360 is just 3 generic PPE's with sequential order multi-threading and IBM slapped a VU onto each Core for more muscle. Whereas the Cell is a reinnovation of the Vector processing paradigrm where the Vector Units can speak to one another, share LS SRAM and differentiate the amount of LS avaliable per SPE depending on the projected load each SPE will be given, and the PPE is like the brain of the operation or the conductor of an orchestra. Similar architectures, but one has far more thought and innovation apparent inside.

Software? Thats all the same. Sony has gotten a hold of pretty much every stellar engine out there from SpeedTree to UE3.0 and Havok and AGAEI and slapped it into the SDK's, but also threw in some special work from SN Systems for their compilers and debuggers and IBM sends out its SPE Optimizers this month as well as Nvidias shader programs and stuff of that sort.

Different OS's, sure, but OS's all do the same thing. Just most do it better then Windows can. And just because the PS3 isn't out yet doesn't mean the thing isn't being built as we speak in mass units prepping for the upcoming launch in March or April.

[cau]

Memory Bandwidth

Xbox360 = 21.6 FSB bandwidth, 5.6GB CPU-GPU bandwidth

PS3 = Main Ram = 25.6GB/s, V-Ram = 22.4GB/s, RSX - Cell Bandwidth = 35GB/s

PS3 Wins yet again.

But.. but Xbox 360 have 256 GB/s to eDRAM so it can have 4xAA for FREE! :cry:

:rolleyes:

[Michael1406]

You can't really compare PS3 and 360 like that as they work in different ways. Just wait until they come out and judge then, instead of guessing and pretending you know the truth.

That goes out to everyone.

[tHa_vIlLaMaN]

You can't really compare PS3 and 360 like that as they work in different ways. Just wait until they come out and judge then, instead of guessing and pretending you know the truth.

That goes out to everyone.

Couldn'ta said it better myself :no: :whistle:

[udontneed2know]

You can't really compare PS3 and 360 like that as they work in different ways. Just wait until they come out and judge then, instead of guessing and pretending you know the truth.

That goes out to everyone

What are you talking about? They work in different ways? What does the PS3 play games in reverse or something?

We've known plenty about both systems since their unveiling at E3. Theres only 1 Playstation 3 that exists and thats the one thats been talked about for 7 months now.

The only technical thing we don't know about the PS3 is all the juicy little inner details of the RSX. But we can guess considering it will be more powerful then the 7800GTX which pushes 800,000,000 triangles per second. That alone beats the 360's mark of 500 triangles per second.

We know enough to know whats up. So those who have been paying attention will talk plenty.

[jerry]

Ut-oh you better report me or get the thread locked, as always. Nevermind I will save you the trouble and report myself. REPORTED!

What YOU are doing (psuedo-reporting) your own flame-bait posts is making the job difficult for the mods, they'll have to wade through thus increasing more work load for them. For once, try to put your motives aside and think for this forum. :rolleyes:

How convienent, someone says something postive about programming on the PS3 and now he is a sellout.

Uh no, Sweeney is a sell-out. Shall I dig up his previous comments that reaffirm that image? :whistle:

And udontneed2know, are you on Sony's pay roll? (Doing all their dirty-work here) :laugh: :rofl:

[cau]

And udontneed2know, are you on Sony's pay roll? (Doing all their dirty-work here) :laugh: :rofl:

Was that the best you could come up with? :unsure:

[jerry]

Was that the best you could come up with? :unsure:

I dont need to waste so much energy responding to all of his "numbers". We all know most of it is from Sony's FUD machine just like Microsoft's response to it was also FUD.

[Laughing-Man]

What YOU are doing (psuedo-reporting) your own flame-bait posts is making the job difficult for the mods, they'll have to wade through thus increasing more work load for them.

Let me shed a tear. :cry:

For once, try to put your motives aside and think for this forum. :rolleyes:

Thank you concerned citizen, I think the forum will do just fine.

And udontneed2know, are you on Sony's pay roll? (Doing all their dirty-work here) :laugh: :rofl:

No, he is been quite informative. Just because someone can't stand reading the crap that is posted downplaying the capabilities of the PS3 by the Xbots doesn't mean he is being payed Sony or is a fanboy like you seem to peg many people if they are the slightest bit interested in something other then a Microsoft console. This is like the fourth or fifth time I have noticed you do this to a person, including myself. Are you on the MS pay roll? Edited December 11, 2005 by jmole

[jerry]

Let me shed a tear. :cry:

Funny (not). You probably dont know what it takes so you shouldnt make fun of them.

Thank you concerned citizen, I think the forum will do just fine.

Ofcourse it would, if you would stop snow-balling every thread with little eggs with a hint of flame-bait.

No, he is been quite informative. Just because someone can't stand reading the crap that is posted about the PS3 by the Xbots doesn't mean he is being payed Sony or is a fanboy like seem to peg many people if they are the slightest bit interested in something other then a Microsoft console.

Yes, he is informative; he is telling us exactly what Sony told us 6 months back at the E3. :D He claimed that he wrote 'papers' and hasnt put forth any. He goes on and rambles how some future PS3 games will turn out. Every post of his puts the PS3 as the best thing since sliced bread. All of these signs are obvious. :whistle:

[Brandon Live Veteran]

Yet Xbox fanboys will still curse the moon and say the Xbox360 IS MORE POWERFUL. Yeah right folks. Heres UT2007 running on the PS3 at 720p on alpha kits at 49FPS with even better lighting and detail levels then that of Gears of War. Gears of War can't even do 30FPS yet on the Xbox360 and that game has probably had a full year more development time then UT2007 on the PS3.

Umm... where did Epic say that GoW was running at under 30FPS? Oh wait, you made that up.

Like Sony said recently, " the proof will be in the pudding " and well, we'll be seeing this playable gem very soon running smoothly on the PS3 with every graphical touch you could imagine being incorporated.

With such lofty expectations, you're going to be very, very disappointed when the PS3 arrives.

Whereas Xbox fanboys will jump for joy when they see the next Gears of War video still struggling to even reach 20FPS let alone 30+.

Again with the made up numbers. Good job there.

PS3 Flop = 2Tflop overall capability, 216Gflops from Cell 1.8Tflops from RSX

Xbox360 Flop = 1Tflop. Less then 100Gflops from Xenos, rest from Xenon

Winner = PS3

1) I think you mixed up Xenos and Xenon.

2) You're comparing the Cell's non-IEEE compliant single-precision number to the Xenon's IEEE compliant double-precision number. For the PS3, the DP number is a measely 20 GFLOPs or so (estimated as IBM reports the cell with 8 SPEs at 4Ghz does 26 GFLOPs)

3) As for the RSX, the Geforce FX 5800 had more computational power than a Radeon 9800 Pro. Which was more useful in games?

Polygon Counts

PS3 = +800,000,000 triangles per second ( thats the Geforce 7800GTX number )

Xbox360 = 500,000,000 triangles per second

PS3 Wins again

Those numbers are meaningless and you know it. According to Sony the PS2 could do 77 million triangles per second. And yet not a single game does much more than a tenth of that. Why? Because sony timed how long it took to draw 1 untextured triangle on a black background and divided that from 1 second to get their ridiculous calculation.

Furthermore, you were insisting in a previous thread that all the geometry work would be done on the Cell, not on the RSX. So which is it?

Shaders per second

PS3 = 100+ billion shaders per second

Xbox360 = 48 billion shaders per second

PS3 Wins again

You're comparing the Xbox 360's GPU number to a number that Sony says is for the RSX + Cell. Clearly that's not a fair comparison. You're also not defining what counts as a "shader operation." On the 360, the Xenos chip has 48 unified shader pipelines each capable of 2 operations per cycle. Sony won't comment on how they came up with their 100+ number (except to say that it's based on the RSX+Cell) which means there's no possible way you can compare those 2 numbers.

Memory Bandwidth

Xbox360 = 21.6 FSB bandwidth, 5.6GB CPU-GPU bandwidth

PS3 = Main Ram = 25.6GB/s, V-Ram = 22.4GB/s, RSX - Cell Bandwidth = 35GB/s

PS3 Wins yet again.

Your Xbox360 numbers are just plain wrong.

Xbox 360 = 22.4GB/sec UMA, 21.6 GB/sec FSB, 32GB/sec primary GPU to daughter die, 256GB/sec EDRAM bandwidth.

Xbox 360 wins this one hands down.

Dot Products Per Second

Xbox360 = 6 billion dot products per second

PS3 = 50 billion dot products per second

PS3 Wins again

First of all, the 6 billion number is just plain wrong. You probably meant 9.6 billion.

Once again you're comparing the CPU+GPU in the PS3 to just the GPU in the X360. The X360 is capable of 33+ billion dot products per second.

Sony's number is unsubstantiated and probably assumes the unrealistic scenario of having the entire system (CPU + SPEs + GPU) doing nothing but dot products.

I dunno dude, your looking at a different set of specs then the rest of the world lmao. The PS3 owns the Xbox360 in every single category.

Only if you make up numbers and intentionally misinterpret them.

But wait were talking about the dude that thinks the PS3 won't be able to handle even 720p because of all things, frame-buffers and bandwidth lmao. The dude has no clue what hes talking about, hes just a rabid Microsoft boy toy who thinks just because he uses the words frame-buffer and anti-aliasing he knows a thing or two. The fact that he even made that pathetic statement about GAME OVER XBOX360 SPECS FTW! when the official specs for both system have been out since E3 is laughable to say the least.

I said it won't be able to handle anything above 720p, and that it can't possibly do 720p with both FSAA and HDR enabled. The numbers could smack you in the head and you still would pretend they weren't there.

And yes, both specs are theoretical. Meaning the Xbox360 numbers will be dramatically lower in the real world as well. So in the end, the PS3 wins hands down no matter what you want to compare.

So in the "real world" the Xbox360 numbers will be "dramatically lower" but the PS3 numbers won't be? Give me a break.

But hey, what is left in the Xbox360 fanboys arsenal next? Hmmmmm ... lets see .... THE XBOX360 CONTROLLER HAS MORE BUTTONS! ... nope ... that one won't work either ... hmmm ...

Welp, I think were all out of debate points now. Case closed.

All this from the guy that says the PS2 has better graphics than the Xbox. I wish Sony would hurry up and ship their console so this nonsense will end.

[cau]

Umm... where did Epic say that GoW was running at under 30FPS? Oh wait, you made that up.

Uhm, ask anyone that have seen the demos in real life and they'll say it doesn't have very smooth framerate.

[giga Veteran]

Uhm, ask anyone that have seen the demos in real life and they'll say it doesn't have very smooth framerate.

The demo that was ran back in September during TGS.

It only took the five-minute duration of the Gears of War demo to convince us that the game's explosive combat will more than likely live up to its lavish visuals. The demo version was running reasonably well, with a frame rate hovering at and occasionally below the 30 mark. But the game is purportedly running on only one of the Xbox 360 CPU's three cores, and Epic claims it should at least double that performance number by the time emergence day rolls around, sometime next year. In the meantime, we'll bring you more on Gears of War as soon as possible.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/gea...tml?sid=6133348

This is the first time we've seen the demo running on final Xbox 360 hardware (the E3 demo was running on a high-powered PC), and you'll be happy to know that it looks better than it did a few months ago, and it's running smoothly already. Unlike last night's demo, Cliff was in the driver's seat and manipulating everything in real-time.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/651/651385p1.html

[Brandon Live Veteran]

Uhm, ask anyone that have seen the demos in real life and they'll say it doesn't have very smooth framerate.

Got any sources?

[cau]

The demo that was ran back in September during TGS.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/gea...tml?sid=6133348

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/651/651385p1.html

I'm talking about the demo they showed at Zero Hour (or whatever that event was called).

[Laughing-Man]

I said it won't be able to handle anything above 720p, and that it can't possibly do 720p with both FSAA and HDR enabled.

You sure about that: Heavenly Sword

1.3 Developer Quotes

Dean Calver, a Heavenly Sword developer, has been a member of the Beyond 3D forums for quite sometime. He has also gave us a couple of hints on development of Ninja Theory's next-generation title. Read the following information:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: These are actual quotes from Dean Calver, a developer of Ninja Theory's next-generation title, Heavenly Sword.

Talking about the FPS of Heavenly Sword at resolutions of 1080p:

"If you split the demo into 2 sections (interior and exterior), the interior runs real-time quite happily at 1080p. The exterior struggles a bit but more because we just kept adding more and more till it looked right without going through various optimization passes then anything else (i.e. the flags are really expensive at the moment due to a quick implementation)."

...

We currently have complex pixel shaders, a full atmospheric model, full-scene dynamic shadowing, HDR lighting, tone mapping, parallax mapping, internal lens reflection and depth-of-field all in hi-def resolution running in real-time.

...

Asked if the E3 trailer was running on one core:

"We haven't yet made the jump to a multi-thread game architecture yet. Almost everything sits on a single thread…"

Oh noes, physics and AI too. Something you said the Cell wouldn't be very good at doing in a previous thread.

Our full-on combat system works against highly skilled individual AI, against coordinated squads of enemies, all the way through to army scenarios. The Havok physics engine is being used to push character interaction within the world and within combat to unprecedented levels."

Edited December 11, 2005 by jmole

[Brandon Live Veteran]

Ooops missed a post.

You were at Zero Hour?

You sure about that: Heavenly Sword

Oh noes, physics and AI too. Something you said the Cell wouldn't be very good at doing in a previous thread.

Huh?

I said the Cell sucks for AI. And it does. I said it's great for physics, but that the architecture of the PS3 doesn't allow it to fully flex its muscle since according to the person I was arguing with it will be too busy doing all the geometry setup. So you're taking my comment out of the context of that conversation which isn't fair.

Also, that developer doesn't mention if they're running on an actual PS3 or a PC with a 7800GTX (which has oodles more memory bandwidth than the RSX)... and makes no mention of FSAA nor what resolution he's talking about.

The PS3 should be able to render 720p with HDR but no FSAA. Or it could do 720p with 2x FSAA but no HDR (assuming HDR means FP16 or higher). Of course it's entirely a matter of what you trade-off in order to get that.