How Much better is the 360 GPU compared to the PS3's?

i am very surprised by the blid cows in this threadtomertr

LMAO, yep. They are a bunch of dogmatic individuals that think that the PS3 is some sort of Godsend. The Cell is an over-hyped piece of technology with bottlenecks around every corner of its architecture, and on the GPU side the 360 wins hands down thanks to its unified architecture. And to the fool that says that there is no information on the RSX, open your eyes, its not 2004, its 2007 and the beans have been spilled over one year ago.

The lack of HDR+AA is where the Cell comes in. Ninja Theory said that they have HDR emulated on the Cell in Heavenly Sword, freeing up the RSX to do AA. Just the fact that the RSX ins't doing any HDR at all allows it to focus that power in other areas.

makingmusic476

I dont expect an answer in here. But I do expect some insults, fanboyism and at least one meltdown... *sits back with a bag of popcorn and a beer*

:shock:

[QUOTE="makingmusic476"]

The lack of HDR+AA is where the Cell comes in. Ninja Theory said that they have HDR emulated on the Cell in Heavenly Sword, freeing up the RSX to do AA. Just the fact that the RSX ins't doing any HDR at all allows it to focus that power in other areas.

Teufelhuhn

Ah, okay. I must've misread it on their forums.

It's cool that we have people with actual programming experience on these boards. ^^

[QUOTE="daveg1"]

does anyone even know what level the cell can do graphics??? it could be stick men level or just hype for the chip for all we know..

some say the ps3 gpu is a gen behind the 360 one but i expect that only to be becasue of the unified stuff and not in how many polys it can push..

p.s. dont expect any real answer's to this question here from the fanboys....

try here..................http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=3

-Maddog-

Well apparently, the Cell can give the RSX a helping handing with textures and overall visuals..if needed...but god knows how much that boosts the graphics...I don't expect the 360 GPU to be all that powerfull over the PS3's since Most of the 360 games like Oblivion, Fight Night etc etc look better on the PS3....i'm asking if anyones knows exactly how much better. Cause i keep seeing this Unified shaderz the 360's GPU is built around is something SPECIAL. and your probably right, daveg.

Why mention only those 2? And they do not make up MOST of the 360 games

I don't know, what kind of answer are you looking for here? They both have advantages and disadvantages, although the general consensus is that the Xenos has the edge due to the eDRAM and better vertex setup. But of course with the Cell thrown in there, everything is up in the air.

As always, the proof is in the pudding. The are no definite answers for these kinds of things, and in the end you just have to look at the exclusives since there's no benchmarks.
Teufelhuhn

Can you help explain the tessellation unit in the Xenos? Like what it does and how its only been in 1 game so far, being Viva Pinata.

360's GPU is better at antialiasing. And that's about all.Timstuff

You know little about Grapic Hardware and it shows. :| The 360 GPU is superior to the PS3's GPU and most Unbiased game devs already have said it is.

[QUOTE="Innovazero2000"]

Yes it has higher bit HDR, but it can't do HDR+AA, at least no true floating point HDR. Shader based HDR is a very nice alternitive, but it's not as precise, and it takes power from the rest of the card.

Teufelhuhn

FP16 yes, FP32 and up...I call it a toss up. FP is most certain true HDR. I don't doubt memory/bandwidth...but as said, who takes the time to do it otherwise... and some aren't willing to take the hit in shader performance(if given the bandwidth), but it's relative to the card.

I'm don't know muxh about "RGBe", but I do know RGB is not very efficent with encoding HDR images...

Unless you'd like to shed light on something im missing...

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]I don't know, what kind of answer are you looking for here? They both have advantages and disadvantages, although the general consensus is that the Xenos has the edge due to the eDRAM and better vertex setup. But of course with the Cell thrown in there, everything is up in the air.

As always, the proof is in the pudding. The are no definite answers for these kinds of things, and in the end you just have to look at the exclusives since there's no benchmarks.
MrGrimFandango

Can you help explain the tessellation unit in the Xenos? Like what it does and how its only been in 1 game so far, being Viva Pinata.

[QUOTE="-Maddog-"]

I know it has an advantage..since its custom built and uses the unified shaderz and what not, but how much more advanced is it over the PS3 nvidia GPU (RSX)? Also, Since Cell can help the RSX render graphics..does this equal to the 360's gpu and more?

Taz-Bone

FanboyAlert....thanks for your "opinion" and "Imagination"

The GPUs are almost identical in erms of processing power. In terms of how they're set up, AA is better on xbox 360, textures are better on PS3. The cell can theoretically help with graphics on hte RSX.

In reality, none of us are game developers, so we don't really know.

FP16 yes, FP32 and up...I call it a toss up. FP is most certain true HDR. I don't doubt memory/bandwidth...but as said, who takes the time to do it otherwise... and some aren't willing to take the hit in shader performance(if given the bandwidth), but it's relative to the card.

Innovazero2000

HDR is just a technique that requires you to store data past the range thats actually displayable by the GPU (usually referred in terms of the values 0.0 - 1.0). How that data is stored is irrelevent, there's no rule that says you have to store RGB floating-point values. It can make sense to use them in a lot of cases since shaders use this format internally and when your card supports MSAA for that format (say an X1950, for instance), but for the RSX where you have more shader power than bandwidth it doesn't make sense.

I'm don't know muxh about "RGBe", but I do know RGB is not very efficent with encoding HDR images...

Innovazero2000

PS3 is better, the 360 is easy to dev for

no1 gonna read it? CossackNoodle

Assertion 1: Xenos doesn't have Flex IO

Reality: Xenos tech is better it doesn't need Flex IO. The Xbox 360 has 512MB of shared memory, 10MB of embeaded DRAM and the 360 Operating System uses less memory than Sony's.

Assertion 2: Xenos doesn't have any DX10 features

Reality: Xenos supports all DX10 features except shader Model 4.0. However, the Xenos supports SM 3.0+++, which is pretty close to SM4.0 and the Xenos Shader functionality is more advanced the the RSX.

Assertion 3: Xenos Unified Shaders are primitive.

Reality: Any way you look at it the Xenos is generation ahead of the RSX, it's already more efficient than the RSX even in its early stage of development.

The rest appears to be copied word for word from a Nvidia press release.

as usual, I have no idea what Teuf's talking about....but I feel smarter after reading it :Pfuzzysquash

[QUOTE="CossackNoodle"]no1 gonna read it? Natural_Mystic

Assertion 1: Xenos doesn't have Flex IO

Reality: Xenos tech is better it doesn't need Flex IO. The Xbox 360 has 512MB of shared memory, 10MB of embeaded DRAM and the 360 Operating System uses less memory than Sony's.

Assertion 2: Xenos doesn't have any DX10 features

Reality: Xenos supports all DX10 features except shader Model 4.0. However, the Xenos supports SM 3.0+++, which is pretty close to SM4.0 and the Xenos Shader functionality is more advanced the the RSX.

Assertion 3: Xenos Unified Shaders are primitive.

Reality: Any way you look at it the Xenos is generation ahead of the RSX, it's all ready more efficient than the RSX even in it early stage of development.

The rest appears to be copied word for word from a Nvidia press release.

[QUOTE="fuzzysquash"]as usual, I have no idea what Teuf's talking about....but I feel smarter after reading it :PTeufelhuhn

amazing isnt it?

[QUOTE="CossackNoodle"]no1 gonna read it? Natural_Mystic

Assertion 1: Xenos doesn't have Flex IO

Reality: Xenos tech is better it doesn't need Flex IO. The Xbox 360 has 512MB of shared memory, 10MB of embeaded DRAM and the 360 Operating System uses less memory than Sony's.

Assertion 2: Xenos doesn't have any DX10 features

Reality: Xenos supports all DX10 features except shader Model 4.0. However, the Xenos supports SM 3.0+++, which is pretty close to SM4.0 and the Xenos Shader functionality is more advanced the the RSX.

Assertion 3: Xenos Unified Shaders are primitive.

Reality: Any way you look at it the Xenos is generation ahead of the RSX, it's already more efficient than the RSX even in its early stage of development.

The rest appears to be copied word for word from a Nvidia press release.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="fuzzysquash"]as usual, I have no idea what Teuf's talking about....but I feel smarter after reading it :Pakuma303x

amazing isnt it?

[QUOTE="Natural_Mystic"]

[QUOTE="CossackNoodle"]no1 gonna read it? Teufelhuhn

Assertion 1: Xenos doesn't have Flex IO

Reality: Xenos tech is better it doesn't need Flex IO. The Xbox 360 has 512MB of shared memory, 10MB of embeaded DRAM and the 360 Operating System uses less memory than Sony's.

Assertion 2: Xenos doesn't have any DX10 features

Reality: Xenos supports all DX10 features except shader Model 4.0. However, the Xenos supports SM 3.0+++, which is pretty close to SM4.0 and the Xenos Shader functionality is more advanced the the RSX.

Assertion 3: Xenos Unified Shaders are primitive.

Reality: Any way you look at it the Xenos is generation ahead of the RSX, it's already more efficient than the RSX even in its early stage of development.

The rest appears to be copied word for word from a Nvidia press release.

does anyone even know what level the cell can do graphics??? it could be stick men level or just hype for the chip for all we know..

some say the ps3 gpu is a gen behind the 360 one but i expect that only to be becasue of the unified stuff and not in how many polys it can push..

p.s. dont expect any real answer's to this question here from the fanboys....

try here..................http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=3

daveg1

[QUOTE="daveg1"]

does anyone even know what level the cell can do graphics??? it could be stick men level or just hype for the chip for all we know..

some say the ps3 gpu is a gen behind the 360 one but i expect that only to be becasue of the unified stuff and not in how many polys it can push..

p.s. dont expect any real answer's to this question here from the fanboys....

try here..................http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=3

-Maddog-

Well apparently, the Cell can give the RSX a helping handing with textures and overall visuals..if needed...but god knows how much that boosts the graphics...I don't expect the 360 GPU to be all that powerfull over the PS3's since Most of the 360 games like Oblivion, Fight Night etc etc look better on the PS3....i'm asking if anyones knows exactly how much better. Cause i keep seeing this Unified shaderz the 360's GPU is built around is something SPECIAL. and your probably right, daveg.

The GPUs are almost identical in erms of processing power. In terms of how they're set up, AA is better on xbox 360, textures are better on PS3. The cell can theoretically help with graphics on hte RSX.

In reality, none of us are game developers, so we don't really know.

osirisomeomi

I have yet to see a PS3 game that has better textures then gears. Gears has a mix of 512x512 textures and 2048x2048 normal maps.

As for the GPUs, the 360s is a good 2x more powerful, but the CPU is VERY weak compared to the Cell. Pretty much makes them equal in power, but i have yet to see a game that looks better then gears of war. We will have to wait and see in 2-3 years for games to start showing the true power of either system.

And the GPU in the PS3 is a 7900GT @ 500Mhz, cept with 8 ROPs (8 less then the 79series) and half the bandwidth. It is a modified core, as i believe sound is done through the GPU, i dont know for sure tho.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Natural_Mystic"]

[QUOTE="CossackNoodle"]no1 gonna read it? Natural_Mystic

Assertion 1: Xenos doesn't have Flex IO

Reality: Xenos tech is better it doesn't need Flex IO. The Xbox 360 has 512MB of shared memory, 10MB of embeaded DRAM and the 360 Operating System uses less memory than Sony's.

Assertion 2: Xenos doesn't have any DX10 features

Reality: Xenos supports all DX10 features except shader Model 4.0. However, the Xenos supports SM 3.0+++, which is pretty close to SM4.0 and the Xenos Shader functionality is more advanced the the RSX.

Assertion 3: Xenos Unified Shaders are primitive.

Reality: Any way you look at it the Xenos is generation ahead of the RSX, it's already more efficient than the RSX even in its early stage of development.

The rest appears to be copied word for word from a Nvidia press release.

According to alot of developers, the PS3's shader capabilities rival the 360's._AsasN_

Most definitely. The RSX's weakness definitely isn't shader power. It's biggest problem is either its bandwidth or its vertex setup.

think of the rsx as a 7600gt, think of the xenos as just less powerful as a x2900, thats more accurate because the rsx is NOT based in anyway of the 8 series architecture, however the xenos was build with the r600 architecture in mind but customised, i shall find a link to confirm the xenos part in one second

edit i cant be screwed to be honest, heres a nice comparison website for you http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

Kevanio

the xenos is a very very very slow hd 2900 without dx10 or many other features, it only has 15% of the shaders :lol: not te mention the slower clock speeds, the x360 is no match for the hd2900. then look at this the geforce 8800gts is about = with the hd2900 and the 8600 has 1/3 of the shaders which means it should run games better than the x360 and that card is cheap.the fact is the x360 is old tech and the only thing it has over ps3 is unified shaders but it fails to keep up with card such as a 7900gs.x1950pro with split vertex pixel shaders

[QUOTE="osirisomeomi"]

The GPUs are almost identical in erms of processing power. In terms of how they're set up, AA is better on xbox 360, textures are better on PS3. The cell can theoretically help with graphics on hte RSX.

In reality, none of us are game developers, so we don't really know.

dracolich666

I have yet to see a PS3 game that has better textures then gears. Gears has a mix of 512x512 textures and 2048x2048 normal maps.

As for the GPUs, the 360s is a good 2x more powerful, but the CPU is VERY weak compared to the Cell. Pretty much makes them equal in power, but i have yet to see a game that looks better then gears of war. We will have to wait and see in 2-3 years for games to start showing the true power of either system.

And the GPU in the PS3 is a 7900GT @ 500Mhz, cept with 8 ROPs (8 less then the 79series) and half the bandwidth. It is a modified core, as i believe sound is done through the GPU, i dont know for sure tho.

512 x512 :lol: call of juraz on pc can run 2048x2048 through out the whole game. fear on pc leaves gears textures in the dust, not to mention the fact you can aso blow them to bits unlike gears staic textures.

The GPUs are almost identical in erms of processing power. In terms of how they're set up, AA is better on xbox 360, textures are better on PS3. The cell can theoretically help with graphics on hte RSX.

In reality, none of us are game developers, so we don't really know.

osirisomeomi

textures are better on ps3?... i don't think there is any proof of that yet. i hope textures will be better though

[QUOTE="daveg1"]

does anyone even know what level the cell can do graphics??? it could be stick men level or just hype for the chip for all we know..

some say the ps3 gpu is a gen behind the 360 one but i expect that only to be becasue of the unified stuff and not in how many polys it can push..

p.s. dont expect any real answer's to this question here from the fanboys....

try here..................http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=3

_AsasN_

[QUOTE="daveg1"]

does anyone even know what level the cell can do graphics??? it could be stick men level or just hype for the chip for all we know..

some say the ps3 gpu is a gen behind the 360 one but i expect that only to be becasue of the unified stuff and not in how many polys it can push..

p.s. dont expect any real answer's to this question here from the fanboys....

try here..................http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=3

-Maddog-

Well apparently, the Cell can give the RSX a helping handing with textures and overall visuals..if needed...but god knows how much that boosts the graphics...I don't expect the 360 GPU to be all that powerfull over the PS3's since Most of the 360 games like Oblivion, Fight Night etc etc look better on the PS3....i'm asking if anyones knows exactly how much better. Cause i keep seeing this Unified shaderz the 360's GPU is built around is something SPECIAL. and your probably right, daveg.

why dont u look at the graphics comparison here at GameSpot vol 1 and 2. 360 has won both times, heres the latest one:

Link

Armored Core 4 - PS3

Def Jam Icon - 360

NBA street Homecourt - 360

Virtua Tennis 3 - 360

Oblivion - Ps3

Spiderman 3 - 360

MLB 2k7 - 360

PS3=2

360=5

[QUOTE="Innovazero2000"]

FP16 yes, FP32 and up...I call it a toss up. FP is most certain true HDR. I don't doubt memory/bandwidth...but as said, who takes the time to do it otherwise... and some aren't willing to take the hit in shader performance(if given the bandwidth), but it's relative to the card.

Teufelhuhn

HDR is just a technique that requires you to store data past the range thats actually displayable by the GPU (usually referred in terms of the values 0.0 - 1.0). How that data is stored is irrelevent, there's no rule that says you have to store RGB floating-point values. It can make sense to use them in a lot of cases since shaders use this format internally and when your card supports MSAA for that format (say an X1950, for instance), but for the RSX where you have more shader power than bandwidth it doesn't make sense.

I'm don't know muxh about "RGBe", but I do know RGB is not very efficent with encoding HDR images...

Innovazero2000

ahh thank you, I don't mind learning new things so thank you for correcting me. Now that I think of it (as far as RSX having more shader power then bandwidth) FP HDR wouldn't make sense at all.

why dont u look at the graphics comparison here at GameSpot vol 1 and 2. 360 has won both times, heres the latest one:

Link

Armored Core 4 - PS3

Def Jam Icon - 360

NBA street Homecourt - 360

Virtua Tennis 3 - 360

Oblivion - Ps3

Spiderman 3 - 360

MLB 2k7 - 360

PS3=2

360=5

OpticalCanine

If anything, this proves that the PS3 does have the power to be better than the 360 graphically. However, it's not really wise to calculate the power of a system based on multi-plats.

By this much:

{-------------------------------------}

[QUOTE="Kevanio"]

think of the rsx as a 7600gt, think of the xenos as just less powerful as a x2900, thats more accurate because the rsx is NOT based in anyway of the 8 series architecture, however the xenos was build with the r600 architecture in mind but customised, i shall find a link to confirm the xenos part in one second

edit i cant be screwed to be honest, heres a nice comparison website for you http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

imprezawrx500

the xenos is a very very very slow hd 2900 without dx10 or many other features, it only has 15% of the shaders :lol: not te mention the slower clock speeds, the x360 is no match for the hd2900. then look at this the geforce 8800gts is about = with the hd2900 and the 8600 has 1/3 of the shaders which means it should run games better than the x360 and that card is cheap.the fact is the x360 is old tech and the only thing it has over ps3 is unified shaders but it fails to keep up with card such as a 7900gs.x1950pro with split vertex pixel shaders

Considering it's based in that generation, why do you make it out to be bad? I'd take an 1800XT/XTX over a 7900gs any day of the week, and according to ATI Xenos is on level with 1800XT, but with more features/more shading power (@720p that is).

The RSX/Xenos are far from top of the lin anymore, but in a closed env. they don't have to push nearly as hard to look as good.

Don't get me started on the 8600 series, it's nowhere near what the 6600GT or GF3 Ti 200/GF4 4200 were in those days. I bet you the 8600 series struggles in DX10 games when trying to push decent detail. Is it a bad card, no...but it's clearly not as good as the older budget performance cards.

Course with the 8800GTS 320mb coming down in price fast...it might not matter...