Nvideas rsx pipelines vs 360 ATI pipelines 360 core vs ps3 cell

Oh give me a brake. Are you sure you dont work for Sony? Your making out Sony are some lovely kind company like Charlie and the Chocholate Factory. This isnt a little kids story anubis66.

Yes Microsoft are greedy when it comes to windows etc and thats because they are a company with the monoplay in that area.

The reason why you think Microsoft is evil is because it's under the microscope from the media including the man than owns the company. Sony are just as bad if not worse because thay are not as much in the spot light. There are nice big fat cats sitting at thier desks laughing at the money they have made from our backs just like Microsoft want to do. This is called buisness and the real world.

So moving along Microsoft are doing some good things to thier new console that will make it stand out. So much so that it convinced me to not buy a PS3 and to get the 360 instead.

 

i know. but i support them because we need more than one superpower in the computing world. for now i'm dont on the subject, i'm i bit tired.

heh, anyone remember the pippin?
http://images.google.com/imgres?img...images?q=pippin+apple&svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&sa=G

it was apples jump at the gamming world while also being capable of os8

 

I am getting tired of this now as well. But Sony have the control in the gaming world not Microsoft.

 

time will tell. one of us will be right and one of us will be like "OmFg $%#@% i got %%$^$ jewed"

 

It doesnt matter, ps3 CPU memory runs at 3.2ghz. Still beats the 360's with 700mhz shared.
You are forgetting that there are different types fo ram, the artcle i gave, even on my signiture says that Toshiba new xdr ram that the ps3 wil have will be the fastest ram on the market. 12x faster than the typical ram oin pcs. (DDRAM) You forget different types of ram, 360 having worser ram than the ps3. 256mb at 3.2ghz(3200mhz) faster than 512mb at 700mhz. DO YOU NOT SEE THAT?

The cell runs at 218 GFLOPS, that is said everywere.

Did i say he did'nt?

Are you an add or somthing? Even articles from anandtech say that both consols are what game developers are not looking for[/bold]
It even says that on afterdawn news. 360' wont use all 6 threads in 3-5 years, and it wont use 4 threads even 2-4 years. Game developers didnt need multy threading, sure its a good thing, but its not what they wanted from next gen .
I seriosly dont klnow why you are insulting me, but ok. Guess thats what happens whn you are proved wrong.
For the last time i wil say this rsx graphics better
360 performance better.
DONE?!

 

PS:unified architectures are not new

Charza, you calculations, they didnt include all performance, it was just a small portion. What happen to ram, cache tflop ect?
Cache already proven to be better than 360's
and on this website
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/272861-Ram
I proved ps3 ram to be better.

To truthman, charza proved that 360 wil have better performance, not better graphics, which i've already agreed on before charza's post. I proved better graphics for ps3, something you did'nt do.

Are you brainwashed by M$?I swear you should like work forM$, your like a popup add. I believe charza did his calculations to, you didnt insult him taht way did you? SO shutup, goddammit.

 

fiesty padawan, you are. lol.

nuf said there kookoo. you are good. stick it to em!

 

Well they might of and never released it only in Japan. Mabey they made linux, i know some japaneese company made linux. not to mentiion UNIX for super computers. In other nations, excluding North america, they proabbly have different computer OS. We just dont kow about them.

 

M$ is more with computers, while Sony is more with, sterios, mp3's walkmen, Tv's, and tuns more. I've even heard Sony is gogin to make Toasters and Kitchen appliances. They make cameras aswell.
Lol, can ou imagine their toaster if the rumers are true? Its like the toaster is so high tech , when your toast is done, instead of making a laud noise, it would be like ."Good afternoon kookoo, your food is toasted. Thank you for choosing sony" or some bulshit like that.LOL.

 

dude you do not know how cool that would be. maybe it would say "please wait, you food is being toasted. in the mean time, watch the tv on my side." anyways m$ is more with computers but they so a schyttay job at it my god. (heh half expects windows to crash having said that.)

 

Sony Vaio computers beat M$ computers. But the prices are too pricy, but everywhere i go, they're always out of stock.

 

ill be frank, kookoo u dont know what u on about again.

Graphics is DIRECTLY linked to FRAMERATE and performance.

The 360 will have a better framerate because the xenon is the most powerful card (card power = more FPS), if u lecture this you have just contradicted urself BIG TIME.
because it has more power the game developers can TUNE UP the ingame settings making it look much nicer. SO THE GRAPHCIS WILL BE BETTER.

THE ONLY settings the actual card affects on IMAGE quality (graphics) is AA and Anisotropic filtering. the rest is the game's engine.

the Xenon WILL HAVE better graphical quality because it can have AA (adaptive) with HDR lighting at the SAME TIME, the RSX CANT so why do you say the RSX will have better quality graphics. IT WONT.
it will have less performance and lesser quality AA/AF. ALL THE other graphics ARE TO DO WITH THE GAME. you dont even know what you are saying kookoo.
if you took an old card and a brand new one and played the same game on each, and u turned all the ingame setings onto FULL and took screen shots of BOTH graphics cards, the GRAPHIC QUALITY will be the SAME, the differenace is that the new card can actually *play* the game at those settings, the old one cant at all.
so do that with the RSX and the Xenon, the image quality (if you dont have AA and AF or HDR on) will be the EXACT SAME on both. but the Xenon will have a higher framerate when playing on those settings because its a faster (more powerful) card, it has better performance.
If you turnded on AA/AF and HDR the ATI card will have better graphical screen shots/ingame graphics because it can have AA with HDR lighting. KOOKOO fails to REALISE THAT THOUGH DOESNT HE. he JUST IGNORES THE HDR with AA PART, BUT ITS IMPORTANT, this PROVES that Xenon has better ingame graphics with better framerates (even though DHR with AA will run slower, but it can use its extra FPS over the RSX for powering those awsome looking graphics) so the Xenon can eother have same looking graphics and better performance than RSX, or better looking graphics and same framerate as RSX (when saying graphics im on about AA/AF and HDR lighting). both are better than what the RSX has to offer.

kookoo when i went on about the cards architecture (memory architecture is NOT the RAM you fool, which you thought it was) i never said shit about the RAM, as it was irrelevant. even faster RAM doesnt matter kookoo, the Xenon still has better overall power (performance) to power better looking graphics.
the Architecture is VERY IMPORTANT too, so why the hell did you say that it doesnt matter (then referring to your WRONG memory take, as you thought it was RAM). IT DOES.

when talking about the revolution i meant that they can use the new design/type of cards to HELP with future cards, the revolution starts with them. (NOT nintendo's console by the way,lol)

your last post aimed at me, showed me CLEARLY that you dont know about the AA/AF HDR thing, which are the 3 MOST IMPORTANT things (out of 4 - the last is resolution, but thats sorted with HDTV) to do with graphics. they are the only main things that the actual card affects the quality of how they look. and as explained above Xenon comes out on top with them, therefore winning the graphical quality war too.

SO NOW why do you still BELIEVE the RSX is better. ITS NOT. do you have problems failing to engage your brain properly to UNDERSTAND that. Xenon *IS* better.
if you still think RSX is better then ur demented.

 

to last poster. the cell can to many more tsks at once, just a bit less in the output by like nothing. the vid card lso renders vertexes and all the polygons, shades, lights and all that too. the rsx is more powerful in graphics. the load times on a ps3 will be insane to tht of 360 because of the mega speed ram and the blueray with a read of like 36gbs. now on top of that, the cell can run, as i said, many more things at one time with its 7 spes all going at 3.2ghz. sure it has less threads but the 360 games wont even be using all of those threads even close to to end of its life. even the top pc's today use no more than two on average. 3 if you payed like 3287623 dollars. the performance [bold]can[/bold] be better,over time , but the graphics no.

 

Truthman, you have no clue what you are talking about, you just stated what the ati xenos has. nvidea didnt release that type of information. I'm simply just going to let you make a fool of your self. Ill come back to this post.
Your just thinking, oh the geforce 7800 cant have aa and hdr enabled. You would think that the rsx wont. No proofe. Anyways, with both enabled you would only recieve 10% better graphics. So 10% better opperations. so 1.1x96=105.6.
I have read many articles where the geforce 7800 was compaired when hdr only enabled compaired to a spec equivelent ati card. the ati was 10% better in graphics in [bold]some games[/bold]. but the two cards were equivelent in specs. So now rsx being way more powerfull, it wont mattter.
Your confueing this all up. HDR AND aa enabled on the xenos would only affect the ati cenos graphically. It wont be 10% than the rsx because the rsx is more powerfull than the ati xenos. RSX being more than 10% mroe powerfull.

 

kookoo wont you understand, THE GRAPHICS ARE THE GAME's ENGINE.
the GPU just renders them. i can tell you are getting confused so you are accusing me of being confused. im about as Unconfused as you can get.
10% better graphics is A LOT did you know. not just a tid bit.
YOU even said that the ATI card will have more performance than the RSX, that CAME DIRECTLY FROM YOUR mouth (i already knew that). But yet you say that ITS WEAKER than the RSX. DUDE that doesnt MAKE ANY SENSE WHATSOEVER. If its faster (better performance) then ITS MORE POWERFUL, unless you have very stupid definations of power.
power IS speed. not graphics.
and as i said, THE ONLY GRAPHICS THE CARD AFFECTS THE QUALITY OF IS AA/AF/HDR. both RSX and ATI can have Highquality AF which is 16x AF with more enchancements, good eh for both PS3 and 360. but ATI card is better with AA because it has got adaptive AA and ONLY IT can have AA with HDR enabled and have it working properly.
regardeless both 360 Xenon and RSX will kick the sh*t out of anygames that stand in front of them. especially when games become multi-threaded because the processor can step in to the equation more, plus developers can enchance ingame physic effects when games are multi-threaded as all cores can work at once on the game, (so it will look better and still run MUCH faster than before with single threaded games)
ps. you will be glad to know kookoo that the 7800GTX is MUCH weaker than the RSX, the RSX is a generation above the new GTX512. that reasons dude, he is so wrong about the RSX 7800 thing, its much beter than the 7800.
saying that the Xenon is MUCH better than the new X1800XT PE (its not even out yet that) the Xenon is 1 generation above it. they are 8th generation cards, the BRAND NEW BEST PC CARDS are 7th Generation.
so the consoles are SH*T HOT!!!

*lets try to slow the argument now its getting WAY to repetitive* lets just finish it quick (after your next post countering mine - as i know you will, lol).
lets talk about what the consoles CAN do and how fast they will play etc. regardless of which is faster or has better quality graphical enchancements

 

[bold]TruthMan[/bold] seeing as we are on the discusion now of how well games will perform, Please go and download 'Gears of War' on www.xbox360news.com. It has the best in-game graphics you have ever set your eyes on/

 

Rsx beats xenos in power. I dont know what the hell you are saying.
Rsx better clock speed
better core
ops
ect

Having hdr enabled only increases the graphics from 5-10% but then decreases performance.
This is how much graphics improve for xenos with hdr enabeld.
10%+96=106sops (still lower than rsx)
10%of500=550(equivalent)
Not to mention most game developers are avoiding having HDR and AA enabled at the same time.
I dont know how the hell you think the rsx is less powerfull when i have already proved it to be more powerfull.


"And the ONLY it" part. What are you talking about? Nvidea hasnt released if it will or will not have adapted AA. You got no clue if it will or will not, why are you making assumptions?
From anandtech
"At 720p, the G70 is entirely CPU bound in just about every game we’ve tested, so the RSX should have no problems running at 720p with 4X AA enabled, just like the 360’s Xenos GPU. At 1080p, the G70 is still CPU bound in a number of situations, so it is quite possible for RSX to actually run just fine at 1080p which should provide for some excellent image quality."
Proves you more wrong.

 

Amd just before you start blabering about Performing AA and hdr.
As you know the ps2 CPU did the AA, while the GPU did HDR ect.

Your going to talk about memory bandwith. I know you will.

the

The 360 has the ebram doing the AA work.Which enables the 360 to have AA and HDR enabled at the same time.

Its opposite for the ps3, As you know ps2 also had aa and HDR enabled.
Ps3 has 8 spe's in total. One of these spe's can easily do the work for AA, and stil have power to spare.

Now we have bandwith come to play.
Lets take this for example.
Lets say a game takes 10gb\s bandwith
xbox360 has 15gb\s bandwith left. And ps3 has 22.4gb bandwith left.
AA does not take 22.4 gb of bandwith.(xenos ati would have to share its bandwith with the CPU, which is why the 360's memory is bad.)
Which enables AA and HDR.
ps3 does somthing similar, instead of using edram, the ps3 uses its xdr ram, to make the ps3 cell to do the AA work. And since the memories speed is 3.2ghz, the ram is still alote usefull.
and then writing the frame buffer to XDR memory, allowing Cell to do the AA.
Which just proves you wrong that you saying that the ps3 cannot do AA and HDR enabled both.

5gb of bandwith is enought for AA. Still leaves ps3 with more bandwith. Xbox360 edram is doing the AA.
RSX better than Xenos ATI, get over it.

 

right on the dot again, kookoo

 

Truthman, dont even think about saying that the 360's 10mb of edram is more powerfull than a 3.2ghz spe.
The 10mb edram does the AA for xbox360, while the ati xenos does the hdr.
Game developers have the choice to enable both hdr and aa in there games. Some knnow that it has cons along with it. EX: the worsening of performance.

Got any more things i can counter for you?

No, i said that the 360 cpu has better performanec you fool. Stop putting things in my mouth. maybe you should read my posts more properly.

Dont even think to say that the CPU cannot do addaptive AA, the ps2 did.