Why didn't they just throw a nicer GPU in the PS3?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Redfingers
Redfingers

4510

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Redfingers
Member since 2005 • 4510 Posts

You know, with all this crap where we PS3 owners have to endure threads and comparisons "THIS GAME HAS TEH BETTER THIS AND THIS VERSUS TEH BETTER THIS SO THIS WINS $600 PWN"

And dumb, essentially hard-to-fulfill arguments like "BUT TEH CELL SI DESIGNED FOR GRAPHIX PROCESSING, DEREFORE IT WILL PWN IN COMBO IN SHORT ORDER TEH 360"

If we were simply given a GPU capable of rendering true HDR and AA simultaneously, along with more pipelines and some other basic crap, along with integrated shaders and some other simple crap common of graphics processors nowadays, there would be no argument regarding what the Cell can and cannot do. There would simply be better looking games that outdo the 360 from the gate.

Yeah, I do believe that the combination of the Cell and the RSX are going to trump the Xbox 360 at some point, but providing us with a GPU that had half as much R&D dollars poured into it as the Cell would have given most of us exactly what we wanted: a justification for an early purchase.

With that said, games like Resistance and Motorstorm prove that the Playstation 3 is capable of rendering an attractive game on large scale, with all the goods in plentiful abundance, like physics and AI. However, I just want some pretty lighting effects so they can stop holding it over my frickin' head, man. Golly gosh darnit.

Avatar image for deadmeat59
deadmeat59

8981

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#2 deadmeat59
Member since 2003 • 8981 Posts
lol the 360 ring of death i like that picture post maker
Avatar image for kniveshurt18
kniveshurt18

1506

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 kniveshurt18
Member since 2005 • 1506 Posts

Golly gosh darnit.

Redfingers
Okaly Dokely, Flanders. j/k
Avatar image for MichaelSoft
MichaelSoft

207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 21

User Lists: 0

#4 MichaelSoft
Member since 2006 • 207 Posts

You know, with all this crap where we PS3 owners have to endure threads and comparisons "THIS GAME HAS TEH BETTER THIS AND THIS VERSUS TEH BETTER THIS SO THIS WINS $600 PWN"

And dumb, essentially hard-to-fulfill arguments like "BUT TEH CELL SI DESIGNED FOR GRAPHIX PROCESSING, DEREFORE IT WILL PWN IN COMBO IN SHORT ORDER TEH 360"

If we were simply given a GPU capable of rendering true HDR and AA simultaneously, along with more pipelines and some other basic crap, along with integrated shaders and some other simple crap common of graphics processors nowadays, there would be no argument regarding what the Cell can and cannot do. There would simply be better looking games that outdo the 360 from the gate.

Yeah, I do believe that the combination of the Cell and the RSX are going to trump the Xbox 360 at some point, but providing us with a GPU that had half as much R&D dollars poured into it as the Cell would have given most of us exactly what we wanted: a justification for an early purchase.

With that said, games like Resistance and Motorstorm prove that the Playstation 3 is capable of rendering an attractive game on large scale, with all the goods in plentiful abundance, like physics and AI. However, I just want some pretty lighting effects so they can stop holding it over my frickin' head, man. Golly gosh darnit.

Redfingers
lol the hardware is easier to code then most belive with the shading part u said thats not true u can actually shade in real time with HD etc.
Avatar image for STABW0UND
STABW0UND

2285

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 STABW0UND
Member since 2007 • 2285 Posts
because they waste all the money on worthless crap like a blu ray player when they should just thow in a better gpu and drop the price $100 and it it would play better then the 360 but now they just over charging for a horrible gpu that plays like crap (i know first hand)
Avatar image for Kahuna_1
Kahuna_1

7948

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Kahuna_1
Member since 2006 • 7948 Posts
All it needed was SLi RSX's.
Avatar image for wolverine4262
wolverine4262

20832

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 wolverine4262
Member since 2004 • 20832 Posts
Sony don't care about the games....
Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#8 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
Because Sony made the PS3 to push Bluray... not sell games.
Avatar image for rykaziel
rykaziel

1149

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 rykaziel
Member since 2003 • 1149 Posts
The better question is, why did they put the Cell into a gaming machine? Should have just welded 3 P4's together like the 360 did and spend the saved cash on a better GPU or reduced price point.
Avatar image for CBScott
CBScott

213

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 CBScott
Member since 2006 • 213 Posts
well i think the PS3 costs enough already
Avatar image for gnutux
gnutux

1341

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#11 gnutux
Member since 2005 • 1341 Posts
because they waste all the money on worthless crap like a blu ray player when they should just thow in a better gpu and drop the price $100 and it it would play better then the 360 but now they just over charging for a horrible gpu that plays like crap (i know first hand)STABW0UND
Because Sony made the PS3 to push Bluray... not sell games.foxhound_fox
Agreed and agreed. If Sony actually put their heads truly into gaming, then they won't make the mistake to put the Bluray player and shove in a dual SLi RSX. gnutux
Avatar image for tegovoltio
tegovoltio

9280

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 tegovoltio
Member since 2004 • 9280 Posts
Well, first you have to say which would be a better GPU.
Avatar image for Marka1700
Marka1700

7500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 Marka1700
Member since 2003 • 7500 Posts
All we seem to argue about is graphics, not game quality. Both 360 and PS3 have/will have great games, all you need to know.
Avatar image for gnutux
gnutux

1341

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#14 gnutux
Member since 2005 • 1341 Posts
The better question is, why did they put the Cell into a gaming machine? Should have just welded 3 P4's together like the 360 did and spend the saved cash on a better GPU or reduced price point.rykaziel
They wanted to push the Cell because they are going to also include it into their TVs too, they need something to prove that the Cell is "awesome" The PS3 really is just a tech demo, just like Gears of War for the UE3. Btw, the X360 doesn't have pentium 4 chips, they use PowerPC based cores. gnutux
Avatar image for GsSanAndreas
GsSanAndreas

3075

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 GsSanAndreas
Member since 2004 • 3075 Posts
Il just buy the  Nvidia 8800 and put it in myself :P
Avatar image for ironwarrior2
ironwarrior2

2590

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 ironwarrior2
Member since 2006 • 2590 Posts

lol the 360 ring of death i like that picture post makerdeadmeat59

and its teh elite version!  :lol:

Avatar image for tegovoltio
tegovoltio

9280

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 tegovoltio
Member since 2004 • 9280 Posts
[QUOTE="rykaziel"]The better question is, why did they put the Cell into a gaming machine? Should have just welded 3 P4's together like the 360 did and spend the saved cash on a better GPU or reduced price point.gnutux
They wanted to push the Cell because they are going to also include it into their TVs too, they need something to prove that the Cell is "awesome" The PS3 really is just a tech demo, just like Gears of War for the UE3. gnutux

And that's a bad analogy looking how good Gears has done, what would it be if Unreal or other game based on it does worse than gears.
Avatar image for STABW0UND
STABW0UND

2285

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#18 STABW0UND
Member since 2007 • 2285 Posts
All we seem to argue about is graphics, not game quality. Both 360 and PS3 have/will have great games, all you need to know.Marka1700
gpu affects gameplay.....
Avatar image for STABW0UND
STABW0UND

2285

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 STABW0UND
Member since 2007 • 2285 Posts
edited n' stuff
Avatar image for swaginator
swaginator

3732

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 swaginator
Member since 2003 • 3732 Posts

You know, with all this crap where we PS3 owners have to endure threads and comparisons "THIS GAME HAS TEH BETTER THIS AND THIS VERSUS TEH BETTER THIS SO THIS WINS $600 PWN"

And dumb, essentially hard-to-fulfill arguments like "BUT TEH CELL SI DESIGNED FOR GRAPHIX PROCESSING, DEREFORE IT WILL PWN IN COMBO IN SHORT ORDER TEH 360"

If we were simply given a GPU capable of rendering true HDR and AA simultaneously, along with more pipelines and some other basic crap, along with integrated shaders and some other simple crap common of graphics processors nowadays, there would be no argument regarding what the Cell can and cannot do. There would simply be better looking games that outdo the 360 from the gate.

Yeah, I do believe that the combination of the Cell and the RSX are going to trump the Xbox 360 at some point, but providing us with a GPU that had half as much R&D dollars poured into it as the Cell would have given most of us exactly what we wanted: a justification for an early purchase.

With that said, games like Resistance and Motorstorm prove that the Playstation 3 is capable of rendering an attractive game on large scale, with all the goods in plentiful abundance, like physics and AI. However, I just want some pretty lighting effects so they can stop holding it over my frickin' head, man. Golly gosh darnit.

Redfingers
Because that would more expensive. If Sony would have had Nvidia just put embedded ram on the RSX it would have helped tremendously. There are things that Sony could have done that would helped rather than just replacing the GPU. If they wouldn't have reserved 96 mb of ram for the OS that would have helped a lot to.
Avatar image for l_The_DetoX_l
l_The_DetoX_l

2147

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 l_The_DetoX_l
Member since 2006 • 2147 Posts

All it needed was SLi RSX's.Kahuna_1

I saw this topic about 3 PS3's using linux. All 3 cell processors were used to generate a 3d model. I don't know if sometime in the future you can use multiple PS3's to ante up the graphics, but the idea sounds cool, and expensive, but cool. God damn expensive.

Avatar image for CAlNlAC
CAlNlAC

689

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 CAlNlAC
Member since 2006 • 689 Posts

[QUOTE="deadmeat59"]lol the 360 ring of death i like that picture post makerironwarrior2

and its teh elite version!  :lol:

I'm pretty sure its just dim lighting.
Avatar image for filipinothunder
filipinothunder

470

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 filipinothunder
Member since 2006 • 470 Posts
The RSX is not a bad GPU by any means-- in fact if you've ever compared PS3 and X360 games(ports) you'd notice the PS3 games have better textures, while the X360 features better lightning effects. Both GPU's are really fantastic when you look at them, I will however say the XENOS GPU does have a slight edge, since it's built on unified shader architecture. The RSX is still capable of spectacular things, and really you'll see that down the road. Both GPU's really have their strengths and weaknesses. One does thing better than the others etc.
Avatar image for AlbertE-
AlbertE-

300

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 AlbertE-
Member since 2007 • 300 Posts
Because then the system would cost 900 dollars, not 600 dollars.
Avatar image for -1gamemaster1-
-1gamemaster1-

377

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#25 -1gamemaster1-
Member since 2006 • 377 Posts
sigh graphics whores
Avatar image for STABW0UND
STABW0UND

2285

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#26 STABW0UND
Member since 2007 • 2285 Posts
sigh graphics whores-1gamemaster1-
LOL! thats somethng a nintendo fan would say because wii graphics suck and they cant afford anything else *looks at sig* yep fanboy allright
Avatar image for SergeantSnitch
SergeantSnitch

3692

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 SergeantSnitch
Member since 2007 • 3692 Posts
I couldn't agree more with the TC, I've been thinking the same thing for a while now.  If they had scraped some of the unecessary things like the Media card reader, hell even built in Wi-Fi, and really incorporated a more custom made GPU based on the Nvidia 8 series cards, the PS3 would trump the 360 on all levels.  Man, I wish they did that.  Hell, they could have scraped Blu-Ray and just added the better GPU.  Sucks cause we're stuck with this for 7 more years.
Avatar image for swaginator
swaginator

3732

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 swaginator
Member since 2003 • 3732 Posts
The RSX is not a bad GPU by any means-- in fact if you've ever compared PS3 and X360 games(ports) you'd notice the PS3 games have better textures, while the X360 features better lightning effects. Both GPU's are really fantastic when you look at them, I will however say the XENOS GPU does have a slight edge, since it's built on unified shader architecture.

The RSX is still capable of spectacular things, and really you'll see that down the road. Both GPU's really have their strengths and weaknesses. One does thing better than the others etc.filipinothunder
Ram limitations has more to do with those than the GPU does.
Avatar image for Redfingers
Redfingers

4510

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 Redfingers
Member since 2005 • 4510 Posts
[QUOTE="ironwarrior2"]

[QUOTE="deadmeat59"]lol the 360 ring of death i like that picture post makerCAlNlAC

and its teh elite version! :lol:

I'm pretty sure its just dim lighting.

I'm pretty sure you need to GET OUT. It is teh Elite version. It's hiding in my closet. It broke and I took a picture.
Avatar image for Redfingers
Redfingers

4510

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 Redfingers
Member since 2005 • 4510 Posts
[QUOTE="filipinothunder"]The RSX is not a bad GPU by any means-- in fact if you've ever compared PS3 and X360 games(ports) you'd notice the PS3 games have better textures, while the X360 features better lightning effects. Both GPU's are really fantastic when you look at them, I will however say the XENOS GPU does have a slight edge, since it's built on unified shader architecture. The RSX is still capable of spectacular things, and really you'll see that down the road. Both GPU's really have their strengths and weaknesses. One does thing better than the others etc.

This really only applies for Fight Night, especially since Gamespot argued that Call of Duty and Tony Hawk have better textures on the 360 version. However, I know what you mean, but what I was talking about when I wrote the original topic was this: Sure, the RSX is a fine GPU, and it's obviously comparable to the 360 GPU, but wouldn't we all benefit from a shocking advantage? Wouldn't we benefit from unified shaders and real AA+HDR support? In the short-run at least? Additionally, forget the cost. You don't think there's room in that $600 console to slough off some features for the sake of the core experience? Give me a break, it's all you guys argue about. Blu-Ray, Wi-fi, hard drive (the last two supposedly knock off $100), etcetera, etcetera. I'm saying, perhaps I would prefer a better GPU than a better CPU, a better this, or better that. GPU provides the most noticeable difference out of the gate, provides the best performance on ports, and is easier to tap into for game developers. This provides the wow, the necessary spark out the gate, and the sales necessary to increase user base...and then, WHAM! All the PS3's problems are instantly solved.
Avatar image for Innovazero2000
Innovazero2000

3159

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#31 Innovazero2000
Member since 2006 • 3159 Posts
[QUOTE="filipinothunder"]The RSX is not a bad GPU by any means-- in fact if you've ever compared PS3 and X360 games(ports) you'd notice the PS3 games have better textures, while the X360 features better lightning effects. Both GPU's are really fantastic when you look at them, I will however say the XENOS GPU does have a slight edge, since it's built on unified shader architecture. The RSX is still capable of spectacular things, and really you'll see that down the road. Both GPU's really have their strengths and weaknesses. One does thing better than the others etc.

On the contrary, most ports texture wise favor the 360...the only exceptions being FN3(Which is give and take) and Oblivion. Every other port (COD3, Splinter Cell, NFS, etc) has less/more washed out textures vs 360 versions. But your right, they both have their strength and weaknesses. The Xenos does have an edge over the RSX though. It's just simply more verstile...it really is a unique GPU.
Avatar image for Redfingers
Redfingers

4510

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 Redfingers
Member since 2005 • 4510 Posts
I would argue that the edge is negligible and that Motorstorm proves that beautiful, high-resolution textures are more than possible via the RSX (the textures in Motorstorm are far higher resolution than those offered in Gears of War. This specifically refers to the car models...of which there are many.) It's simply that Xbox 360 owners have the argument "TEH LIGHTING THE LIGHTING!" for every multiplatform game that drives me crazy. The effect of the other hardware advantages is simply negligible (with the exception of having more pipelines...I think the PS3 GPU should have gotten more of them so it could compete).
Avatar image for XYZVector
XYZVector

753

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#33 XYZVector
Member since 2006 • 753 Posts
Cause the PS3's just a trojan horse Blu Ray player, sorry jokes on you PS3 owners.
Avatar image for teuf_
Teuf_

30805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 Teuf_
Member since 2004 • 30805 Posts
I cringe anytime someone utters the words "true HDR". The PS3 can do HDR and MSAA at the same time.

Anyway they didn't put in a better GPU because it would have cost a whole lot more.
Avatar image for imprezawrx500
imprezawrx500

19187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 imprezawrx500
Member since 2004 • 19187 Posts
the ps3 and x360 gpu are basicly the same in power
Avatar image for imprezawrx500
imprezawrx500

19187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 imprezawrx500
Member since 2004 • 19187 Posts
The better question is, why did they put the Cell into a gaming machine? Should have just welded 3 P4's together like the 360 did and spend the saved cash on a better GPU or reduced price point.rykaziel
those 3 p4s would have over twice the power of the tri core cpu in x360 out of order>>>>>>>>>>>>>in order