Sucker Punch: Half a PS3 is better than a whole 360

[Sethos]

PS3 quiet? Ha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GBWyapsylM&feature=player_embedded

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Open that up and clean it out. If it's a 40/60GB it runs with a large fan (seriously large) and if you don't use your PS3 much it'll be clogged up with dust. Not hard to open up the PS3, I done it a few times with my 40GB.

Doubt you'll care enough though :p

Or you could always buy a slim Sethos, good investment there ;)

[Hedon]

PS3 quiet? Ha

[HawkMan]

Lol, Firstly the "PPC" cpu in the PS3 is dual core and it also has 7 SPUs, the 360 has triple core "PPC" cpu thats very similar to the PS3 CPU considering IBM worked on both processors. Secondly the 360 has the same amount of memory they just use it as one big cache that you can dynamically allocate should you need more GPU ram but less ram for CPU at any given moment thats the only advantage memory wise the 360 has.

the 360 cpu is based on the Power5, NOT the PPC. PowerPC is the simplified version of the Power5 that IBM redesigned for Apple because they didn't want the full power5.

[clotz2000]

Then explain all the big high def games on the 360 to me. maybe they used magic ?

the only games who really have an issue is JRPG's with pre rendered cut scenes instead of live rendered ones. and those are hardly a problem to change disk after 20 hours of gameplay for the next 20 anyway.

I can explain that pretty easy, 360 gets away with the high def title because 720 is considered hi-def compared to standard, it's been proven many times that the PS3 discs can hold more textures and files as well as the videos and such to make a game on 1 disc. Also, MS isn't future proofing itself, it may be good today but if we're going to be using this hardware for another 2-3 years then they won't have an option other than to: A-Dumb down the games (Either through Low Quality Audio/Video, etc) B-Cut parts out of the game OR C-Add more discs to titles, (Good Example - Castlevania- Lords of Shadow - There should be no need for this title to be on 2 discs, it's not like a JRPG as you mentioned such as Star Ocean for example)

[HawkMan]

I can explain that pretty easy, 360 gets away with the high def title because 720 is considered hi-def compared to standard, it's been proven many times that the PS3 discs can hold more textures and files as well as the videos and such to make a game on 1 disc. Also, MS isn't future proofing itself, it may be good today but if we're going to be using this hardware for another 2-3 years then they won't have an option other than to: A-Dumb down the games (Either through Low Quality Audio/Video, etc) B-Cut parts out of the game OR C-Add more discs to titles, (Good Example - Castlevania- Lords of Shadow - There should be no need for this title to be on 2 discs, it's not like a JRPG as you mentioned such as Star Ocean for example)

errrr. wtf are you talking about

720 IS high def. it's also the res PS3 titles run at. there's no more 1080 games on the PS3 than on the 360. So what ARE you talking about ?

And as already mentioned, the PS3 can't use higher quality models, textures and audio anyway due to the technical limitations of the console itself. it can store high def uncompressed textures. It can't use them. Just as it can't use more textures. without dividing the game into a LOT of levels.

and the point was that the 360 has just as many high def games of the same quality, length and detail as the PS3. and what does it matter if a game is on 2 disks anyway ? oh no I need to change discs ... oh noez.. the horror... :rolleyes:

[spaceelf]

Also, MS isn't future proofing itself

Neither console is future proof. They're both already slaughtered by an average new PC.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Neither console is future proof. They're both already slaughtered by an average new PC.

The PC is not a console so stop bringing it up, that goes for everyone in this thread. 9 times out of 10 you just make yourself look stupid.

Consoles being futureproof is a whole different matter than PC's.

Look at all 3, they have varying levels of "future proof ness".

[Massiveterra]

LOL "futureproof"

what does that even mean?

[spaceelf]

The PC is not a console so stop bringing it up, that goes for everyone in this thread. 9 times out of 10 you just make yourself look stupid.

Consoles being futureproof is a whole different matter than PC's.

Look at all 3, they have varying levels of "future proof ness".

Dude, I was just saying they're too old to be 'future proof.'

It really doesn't apply anymore.

Calm down buddy

[clotz2000]

errrr. wtf are you talking about

720 IS high def. it's also the res PS3 titles run at. there's no more 1080 games on the PS3 than on the 360. So what ARE you talking about ?

And as already mentioned, the PS3 can't use higher quality models, textures and audio anyway due to the technical limitations of the console itself. it can store high def uncompressed textures. It can't use them. Just as it can't use more textures. without dividing the game into a LOT of levels.

and the point was that the 360 has just as many high def games of the same quality, length and detail as the PS3. and what does it matter if a game is on 2 disks anyway ? oh no I need to change discs ... oh noez.. the horror... :rolleyes:

OK, somebody is apparently bored at work...(As I am) I'm not trying to pick a fight or argue with you but there needs to be facts in this, there are a total of 93 PS3 PSN & Retail games that support 1080p, there are roughly 30ish X360 1080p games. 720 is considered HD compared to my Grandma's cable TV is. Also, why would they even bother making the hi-def uncompressed textures if it couldn't use them, that's like you renting only 1080p movies but have a DVD player, those points make no sense, "yeah guys let's create some sweet 1080p textures and video renders for our new PS3 game, the game won't use them but we'll fill the disc!" I don't care so much about the 2 discs or whatever but if technology Advances, as it has you know like 1 or 2 times since 2006 then they may want to get ready for something, but I guess if they get stuck here in a year or two they can add a peripheral that we can go and buy or maybe a bigger HDD so we can buy the game and go home and download the rest of the game from Live...

and I say all this even though i have 4 360's and only 1 PS3, lol... 480 Wii not included in this...

[Richard Hammond]

the 360 cpu is based on the Power5, NOT the PPC. PowerPC is the simplified version of the Power5 that IBM redesigned for Apple because they didn't want the full power5.

I was being facetious at his inability to comprehend that the Xbox 360 CPU is close in architecture to the PS3 than it is anything else so by extension calling PS3 cpu crap means he is also calling 360 cpu.

[HawkMan]

let's do a little math.

the ps3 has 256MB video memory. how many uncompressed high def textures do you think that is ?

Let's take a 2048x2048 texture. with an easy case example.

4194304 pixels, RGB color, 8 bits per color. that's 24 bits. add in 8 bit alpha channel. and you have 32 bits.

134217728 bits, or 134Mb. or 16MB.

and that's a fairly low end example. most would be significantly above that. but at that you have 10 textures, and you have used half the video memory of the PS3. not leaving a lot of room for models and special effects stuff in the video memory with a lot of these around is there. in fact there isn't a lot of room for textures period.

now then, a compressed texture on the disk, where the artist has saved it as a compressed texture format and is able to analyze the final result for flaws, and redo the compression if he doesn't like it. the texture is at most 1/10 the size of the uncompressed one. so not only does he have control of the final quality, it reads 10 times faster from disk, loads 10 times faster into memory, and it doesn't require CPU/GPU time to compress the texture every time it's unloaded and loaded back into memory as you turn around (after all using uncompressed you'd make the texture popping in early Unreal engine games seem like nothing).

Now before you go on about technology you obviously have no clue about again, think first, then if possible do some basic maths, it could avoid you being this humiliated ever again.

NO GAME USES UNCOMPRESSED TEXTURES. not even PC games, with 4 or 8 times the video memory and 16+ times the system memory.

oh and a reliable source for those numbers of 1080 games. no upscales. FYI many of the top games on either console isn't even 720p, though in some cases the 360 versions is 720 while the PS3 version is sub 720.

[spaceelf]

Nevermind, someone beat me to it.

[Hedon]

101010101010101010101010101010101010101010

There is my contribution

[spaceelf]

the ps3 has 256MB video memory. how many uncompressed high def textures do you think that is ?

not disagreeing with anything you said elsewise, but the PS3 can use system mem as video mem as I understand it (not as fast as the main video memory though)

[Richard Hammond]

I thought that developers could dip into the CPU ram but at a significant bandwidth hit?

[Emn1ty]

OK, somebody is apparently bored at work...(As I am) I'm not trying to pick a fight or argue with you but there needs to be facts in this, there are a total of 93 PS3 PSN & Retail games that support 1080p, there are roughly 30ish X360 1080p games. 720 is considered HD compared to my Grandma's cable TV is. Also, why would they even bother making the hi-def uncompressed textures if it couldn't use them, that's like you renting only 1080p movies but have a DVD player, those points make no sense, "yeah guys let's create some sweet 1080p textures and video renders for our new PS3 game, the game won't use them but we'll fill the disc!" I don't care so much about the 2 discs or whatever but if technology Advances, as it has you know like 1 or 2 times since 2006 then they may want to get ready for something, but I guess if they get stuck here in a year or two they can add a peripheral that we can go and buy or maybe a bigger HDD so we can buy the game and go home and download the rest of the game from Live...

and I say all this even though i have 4 360's and only 1 PS3, lol... 480 Wii not included in this...

"Support" is not "native". Native 1080p games hardly even exist on either console. Only a handful of games on the PS3 even support 1080p native while both console's entire library support 1080p upscale. Second, as has been said, using uncompressed textures is stupid. First off, the textures that are now uncompressed must be installed to the HDD increasing the time it takes to actually play the game. Then those uncompressed textures must be loaded into the game which slows the game/engine itself down. Compression is more than just fitting it on the disk. No game uses uncompressed textures and no game uses uncompressed audio. The last bit is that the wonderful PS3 has yet to ship with a high definition cable. If you wonder why they allow you to use 1080p textures when the console can't handle 1080p on everything the you are probably wondering why anything is HD at all if the console can't display it out of the box.

I was being facetious at his inability to comprehend that the Xbox 360 CPU is close in architecture to the PS3 than it is anything else so by extension calling PS3 cpu crap means he is also calling 360 cpu.

As has been stated several times by developers for both games and hardware, the PS3 CPU is amazingly good at processing... just not for games.

[HawkMan]

I was being facetious at his inability to comprehend that the Xbox 360 CPU is close in architecture to the PS3 than it is anything else so by extension calling PS3 cpu crap means he is also calling 360 cpu.

Well they are based on the same architecture. but they work completely different. the power5 core inthe PS3 is only used as a mailman, or postmaster/manager. whereas the SPU's do the number crunching, something they're very effective at.

the 360 however has 3 full cores able to process 2 threads each at full attention.

they work in completely different ways, and at pure number crunching the Cell works faster than most things out there without cray or quantum in the name. however it's also not universally faster than the 360's cpu. there are areas where it is faster than the cell as well due to the more complex instruction sets and 3 full cores available. though it'll never beat the cell at Seti@Home :p

So he could call it crap without insulting the 360. but the Cell isn't crap. It's crap for some things. but it's certainly not crap. I'm not sure it's a good fit for a console CPU however, but that's an entirely different matter, and for the price they paid for it, they could probably have gotten 6 or 8 core Power5 CPU in the PS3's which would have been somewhat more awesome for gaming. But that's stems from an early mis judgment from the designer who thought the Cell would be bale to be awesome without a graphics card. Had they known it wouldn't from the start we probably wouldn't have had the Cell, and the PS3 would have had a more powerful and better integrated graphics card and architecture more similar to the 360. However at that point it was to expensive to abandon the Cell. and it was still a very powerful CPU.

[Hedon]

The Xbox 360 has some native 1080p games, but very few. Sames goes for the PS3. Though, most of the 1080p native games on the PS3 are actually small titles on PSN.

[spaceelf]

and no game uses uncompressed audio

My earlier audio comment was not about uncompressed audio, but Dolby vs Dolby TrueHD.

I didn't figure it really mattered enough to get back into that...it seems to have splintered off into another topic entirely, but just wanted to clarify that anyway

Light Peak will allow for uncompressed multichannel digital audio to receivers, which will be neat.

[clotz2000]

ok, I'm going to leave this thread with a note. While everything you guys say sounds pretty convincing, why would the game studio use time and resources to make God of War III 40.1GB? Because they are bored and really trying to impress the boss, doubt it. Also the cost of the discs, if I could spend 90 cents on a disc or 9 dollars on a disc, I think I would go with 90 cents if it wasn't important, Also, the comment from Emn1ty, why would they put the Cell processor in the PS3 costing tons of money and losing millions of dollars, just so that they can say ooh, we got a Cell processor, the 360 guys got a crappier one. This has gone somewhat off topic, although I do understand where you and Hawkman are coming from, it just seems that the companies and studios would do totally opposite of what they are doing if it was the case. Also, on the texture thing (or anything), just because I can RAR something up or make it smaller to load only to extract to memory from a disc does not qualify as "smart" , only as saving disc space and making the machine work twice as hard.

[Emn1ty]

My earlier audio comment was not about uncompressed audio, but Dolby vs Dolby TrueHD.

I didn't figure it really mattered enough to get back into that...it seems to have splintered off into another topic entirely, but just wanted to clarify that anyway

Light Peak will allow for uncompressed multichannel digital audio to receivers, which will be neat.

It was just a comment about compression more than specifically audio.

ok, I'm going to leave this thread with a note. While everything you guys say sounds pretty convincing, why would the game studio use time and resources to make God of War III 40.1GB?

That usually happens when the can make it that big. It isn't about whether or not they spent the time or not. The nice thing about the PS3 is that space isn't its limiting factor when it comes to the disc. So long as it runs on the console the game can be as big as it wants to be. Second, many developers have begun duplicating files on the disc to increase install and stream speed. So games are far bigger for the PS3 than they sometimes need to be.

Also, the comment from Emn1ty, why would they put the Cell processor in the PS3 costing tons of money and losing millions of dollars, just so that they can say ooh, we got a Cell processor, the 360 guys got a crappier one.

I would read the above explanation that by the time they realized it wasn't actually good at working with games that they had dumped too much money into it and therefore made a judgement call to continue with it. Regardless of that decision if the company came out saying, "Yeah it sucks but WE STUCK WITH IT!!! *thumbs up* ", I doubt they would have sold anything. They came out without ever hinting at the fact that it may not be good for games in the hope that developers would squeeze every ounce out of the machine. And they are starting to do that.

This has gone somewhat off topic, although I do understand where you and Hawkman are coming from, it just seems that the companies and studios would do totally opposite of what they are doing if it was the case. Also, on the texture thing (or anything), just because I can RAR something up or make it smaller to load only to extract to memory from a disc does not qualify as "smart" , only as saving disc space and making the machine work twice as hard.

It is smart, which is why people do it. It makes the machine work less on each task and able to do more with what it is given. If you could shave 20lb's off every load you carry you would probably carry more, right? Sony is an awkward company in the first place.

[Emn1ty]

Darnit, double.

[HawkMan]

only as saving disc space and making the machine work twice as hard.

you still don't understand how textures and graphics card memory work.

ever since the late days of 3DFX graphics cards where created to work natively with compressed textures.

in fact using uncompressed textures would use more cpu/gpu than compressed with how it works. the gpu never uncompresses a texture that's compressed it's loaded right into memory and used in memory as compressed.

and do you notice how the only games, that use massive amounts of the BD capacity is first and second party titles. titles where Sony has a significant influence, and they want people to think that they need BluRay. and obviously their misinformation campaign is working.