PS3's Cores


Recommended Posts

Everone seems to be saying that the 360's 3 cores are better than the PS3's 1 core and 7 sub-cores (forgotten correct terminology). This is genuine curiosity as I want the PS3 to do better, as I don't like the 360.

What I want to know is if the Cell's cores are so hard to program for and can only do things for the main core and not function as actual cores, what is their purpose? Sony must have had a use for them, for example explosions or something? Or perhaps they are used for AI processing?

Hopefully someone can educate me here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is genuine curiosity as I want the PS3 to do better, as I don't like the 360.

Really? Look, I own an xbox 360 and not a PS3 but there is no reason you should want one console to do better than the other....competition is good and we (as a consumer) need MS and Sony to fight it to the death ( but not really die though) or else the consumer will loose out....its a great time to be a console gamer as you have three great choices....i feel like this will go down in the flamebait hall of fame :(

and that had nothing to do with your question :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Look, I own an xbox 360 and not a PS3 but there is no reason you should want one console to do better than the other....competition is good and we (as a consumer) need MS and Sony to fight it to the death ( but not really die though) or else the consumer will loose out....its a great time to be a console gamer as you have three great choices....i feel like this will go down in the flamebait hall of fame :(

and that had nothing to do with your question :rofl:

I see how that could have come across as fanboyism...but I'm not. I said that about the 360 to show I wasn't a 360 fanboy, that's all. I'm neutral in the sense that I don't actually care what 'wins' the console war.

Thanks for the links Anaron, what I've read so far is pretty interesting and clears things up. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like the PS3 to win, but I have both consoles so I want a bit of competition going so I can be able to play them both :)

Can anyone tell me which has more capability of running at better graphics, the PS3 or Xbox 360?

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like the PS3 to win, but I have both consoles so I want a bit of competition going so I can be able to play them both :)

Can anyone tell me which has more capability of running at better graphics, the PS3 or Xbox 360?

Thanks

Read this. Xenon = X360, RSX = PS3. (Y)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like the PS3 to win, but I have both consoles so I want a bit of competition going so I can be able to play them both :)

Can anyone tell me which has more capability of running at better graphics, the PS3 or Xbox 360?

Thanks

The 360, it has a better GPU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let the games and developers do the talking (Y)

Wait 2/3/4 more years and see where we are.

These topics comparing two different pieces of hardware go around in circles as there is no "easy" answer.

It's not like comparing PC hardware, where all you need to do is run 3DMark on 2 different setups, or run a benchmark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all comes down to the games, but if you want to compare CPUs and GPUs for each, the best article I've ever read on the topic is Here (Yes, it's 11 pages, but it's well worth the read)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let the games and developers do the talking (Y)

Wait 2/3/4 more years and see where we are.

These topics comparing two different pieces of hardware go around in circles as there is no "easy" answer.

It's not like comparing PC hardware, where all you need to do is run 3DMark on 2 different setups, or run a benchmark.

Theres tons of articles on the net comparing the two machines and the bottom line is the 360's hardware is better for gaming, by the way I did say gaming. The GPU is better, the CPU is better suited for gaming, not to mention it has allot more memory and bandwidth. I've never been one for console gaming, I brought an Elite which I sold to my nephew before christmas because I never played it, heck I traded in Halo 3 and Gears of War for Gears of War for Windows. I do plan on getting a PS3 however, the other half like's playstations and I want a BlueRay player, I'm sure the cell is a fantastic piece of engineering, but as far as gaming goes the 360 is simply better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

even though i have a 360 and i dont have a ps3 I want the ps3 to win. Why? no good rpgs for the 360, it's not the kind of game MS is going for so even without the ps3 i doubt there would be more of them on the 360

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres tons of articles on the net comparing the two machines and the bottom line is the 360's hardware is better for gaming, by the way I did say gaming. The GPU is better, the CPU is better suited for gaming, not to mention it has allot more memory and bandwidth. I've never been one for console gaming, I brought an Elite which I sold to my nephew before christmas because I never played it, heck I traded in Halo 3 and Gears of War for Gears of War for Windows. I do plan on getting a PS3 however, the other half like's playstations and I want a BlueRay player, I'm sure the cell is a fantastic piece of engineering, but as far as gaming goes the 360 is simply better.

I just don't buy it that simple with consoles. PC gaming is simple to judge on hardware merits only, as the hardware (AMD/Intel & ATi/Nvidia) all play the same games on the same platform, so is easier to bench/compare.

The PS3 and 360 both need time to have the best results squeezed out of them - My argument only comes from the logic that back in the day, in 2001 or whenever the PS2 was released, no one would of thought GoW2 for example would of been possible.

It happens every generation, we are "wowed" by what we see in the consoles limelight years, and none of us know what to expect till we see it.

Just my opinion/stance and it's not going to change until I see mature games hit each console and see which one produces the argubaly better looking games.

This topic is rabid with triffle usually (not this actual topic, the one of PS3 vs 360 on hardware), as people look at specs off the internet and then become self professed game developers who know everything.

I'm not going to disrespect those who know their stuff though, and can obviously see the PS3 may be underpowered here compared to the 360, or more powerful there, but I still don't think it's as simple as saying "oh look the GPU is slightly slower, that automatically = worse graphics".

Maybe on the PC, but with a console, the hardware on the whole matters the most, and what developers can do to take "shortcuts" to help out with the lack of memory here, or something being slightly slower there.

Basically, im not committing to saying "console x" is the best for graphics/physics/ect until I see what both consoles have to offer in their lifetime - Unlike some people who would swear their life on their decision this early in this console generation :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No good RPGs for the 360? Have you been living under a rock??? 2 words, Mass Effect.

The 360 has the ability to produce better graphics, due to it's superior GPU and more graphics memory available. The ps3 has the ability to process more things like advanced physics due to the Cell processor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, nice post Audioboxer! Makes a lot of sense. Not a lot of people take a step back and think about things like that.

Back to what my original post said (and I haven't read the articles Aranon gave me fully), would something like a large explosion (or a number of explosions involving physics) be more of a job suited to something with 8 SPEs that can take a take a number of parts and work with it, or what the 360 has? I know it would also be affected by the graphical components, but if there's physics involved and a lot of stuff flies about, then it becomes a processor thing, doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

m-head, yes the PS3 would do a better job of calculating explosions with lots of bits and peices because the processor is very good at those kind of calculations. The fact remains though that it would *look* better on the 360 graphically, even if the physics are more impressive on the PS3.

Both consoles have their strengths and weaknesses, hence I use my 360 for gaming and the PS3 for blu rays and folding, the things both consoles excel at.

I have had the same discussion about the strengths with a developer I personally know who has worked on both consoles, currently developing a motogp for the 360, who has told me that the PS3s strength is really it's weakness. He says the consensus is that the 360 is easier to develop for and most devs prefer working with it, the cell is convoluted due to it's design to be multi purpose rather than just for games and he believes you will see better things coming out for the 360 rather than the ps3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't buy it that simple with consoles. PC gaming is simple to judge on hardware merits only, as the hardware (AMD/Intel & ATi/Nvidia) all play the same games on the same platform, so is easier to bench/compare.

The PS3 and 360 both need time to have the best results squeezed out of them - My argument only comes from the logic that back in the day, in 2001 or whenever the PS2 was released, no one would of thought GoW2 for example would of been possible.

WHile PC's are simple to judge due to game comparison, the fact of the matter is the hardware between PC and Consoles are practically the same (other than the Cell). And time is something the PS3 doesn't have on its side. It started out behind, and due to its lack of GPU power, I feel it will stay behind. There are some great looking games for the PS3, there is no doubt about that, but so far, especially with Mass Effect, I think the 360 is really beginning to show its true potential, where games for the PS3 haven't really gotten much farther in terms of graphics.

This topic is rabid with triffle usually (not this actual topic, the one of PS3 vs 360 on hardware), as people look at specs off the internet and then become self professed game developers who know everything.

I'm not going to disrespect those who know their stuff though, and can obviously see the PS3 may be underpowered here compared to the 360, or more powerful there, but I still don't think it's as simple as saying "oh look the GPU is slightly slower, that automatically = worse graphics".

Maybe on the PC, but with a console, the hardware on the whole matters the most, and what developers can do to take "shortcuts" to help out with the lack of memory here, or something being slightly slower there.

The GPU is the key to graphics. If your GPU isn't as powerful, it can't output on the same level as a better one. No matter how good your processor is, the GPU is the limiting factor once you get into multiple cores. I could go out and buy a Mac Pro today with an eight core CPU, but it wouldn't be as good as my MPB with two cores if the graphics card was of lesser power. Those extra six cores would end up becoming redundant.

Its far easier to get alot of knowledge on certain subjects today than it was a just 10 years ago, thank the internet for that.

Basically, im not committing to saying "console x" is the best for graphics/physics/ect until I see what both consoles have to offer in their lifetime - Unlike some people who would swear their life on their decision this early in this console generation :rofl:

Early? Its been at almost 3 years since this generation started. I dunno about you, but if people don't start buying they may just have to wait till next generation which should be around the corner in less than 3 years. Thats kinda sad actually... knowing my 360 gaming days are already half over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHile PC's are simple to judge due to game comparison, the fact of the matter is the hardware between PC and Consoles are practically the same (other than the Cell). And time is something the PS3 doesn't have on its side. It started out behind, and due to its lack of GPU power, I feel it will stay behind. There are some great looking games for the PS3, there is no doubt about that, but so far, especially with Mass Effect, I think the 360 is really beginning to show its true potential, where games for the PS3 haven't really gotten much farther in terms of graphics.

The GPU is the key to graphics. If your GPU isn't as powerful, it can't output on the same level as a better one. No matter how good your processor is, the GPU is the limiting factor once you get into multiple cores. I could go out and buy a Mac Pro today with an eight core CPU, but it wouldn't be as good as my MPB with two cores if the graphics card was of lesser power. Those extra six cores would end up becoming redundant.

Its far easier to get alot of knowledge on certain subjects today than it was a just 10 years ago, thank the internet for that.

Early? Its been at almost 3 years since this generation started. I dunno about you, but if people don't start buying they may just have to wait till next generation which should be around the corner in less than 3 years. Thats kinda sad actually... knowing my 360 gaming days are already half over.

3 years for the 360 maybe.

1 year 2 months for the PS3 in the USA, and 10 months in Europe. Hardly 3 years.

I think the 360 is really beginning to show its true potential, where games for the PS3 haven't really gotten much farther in terms of graphics.

Uh huh, so why not give it more time?

Let's see where the PS3 is after being in developers hands for 3 years.

Can't you see my points about jumping the gun this early?

Both consoles need time to reach potentials, and right now direct comparisons aren't even technically fair as one console has had more development time with developers than the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 years for the 360 maybe.

1 year 2 months for the PS3 in the USA, and 10 months in Europe. Hardly 3 years.

Uh huh, so why not give it more time?

Let's see where the PS3 is after being in developers hands for 3 years.

Can't you see my points about jumping the gun this early?

Both consoles need time to reach potentials, and right now direct comparisons aren't even technically fair as one console has had more development time with developers than the other.

Next gen started on the first 360 sale. Im not talking next gen for each console, but next gen for the world. The firs next gen console was out. The PS3 is behind in more than just time. Even though it hasn't been in developers hands as long, the 360 will be replaced before the PS3 has a chance to really show itself and shine. Thats a very bad situation. Its not that I want MS to win, I love competition, but the PS3 is too far behind. I am glad that games are starting to come out, but there are already games out for the 360, alot of games worth buying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What benefits does the folding@home do/give you?

Nothing for you, it helps research into cancer and stuff by making your PS3's processor work out some of the problems they're trying to figure out. It can also play music, so if all you're doing on your PS3 is playing music, why not make it fold at the same time? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 years for the 360 maybe.

1 year 2 months for the PS3 in the USA, and 10 months in Europe. Hardly 3 years.

Uh huh, so why not give it more time?

Let's see where the PS3 is after being in developers hands for 3 years.

Can't you see my points about jumping the gun this early?

Both consoles need time to reach potentials, and right now direct comparisons aren't even technically fair as one console has had more development time with developers than the other.

Come on m8, it doesn't matter which way you look at it, if developers take full advantage of both consoles the 360 would produce better results as far as gaming goes, as Emn1ty said, both consoles have more than enough CPU power, especially for HD gaming, the bottleneck on both console is the GPU and the 360's is a fair amount more powerful than the PS3's. You can go on about the potential of each console all day long, but the fact remains that the 360's GPU has allot more to offer than the PS3's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.