Official PS3 vs. Xbox 360 vs. N. Revolution

Why Would Sony make a remake of a bad game? Killzone sucked!!! And the game play looked good now there showing killzone 2 and the game play looks good but it probably suck the graphics look good but you're not going to like it. Online is going to suck for killzone 2 like killzone online.

 

Matt 1230.... You haven't read much... Always do your homework. Almost everything you said is wrong, I dont even know where to start. Just assume it was all wrong and save me some time. Take each sentence, think the opposite, and thats what I would have wrote here.

 

Well, the PGR3 tourny for $1 mill was talked about and I personally think Halo is amazing. Otherwise, what Ludikhris said...

 

OK but if you're saying I’m wrong then you’re saying IGN.com is wrong too. Do you even know what GFLOPS is? Well Xbox 360 has 240 and ps3 has 228. Also for CPU Floating point performance comparison Xbox is lower but in CPU general purpose performance comparison Xbox 360 has 1 and Ps3 has .27. Get this Total memory system bandwidth for Xbox is 278.4 GB and ps3 has 48 GB Take that I got all my info from IGN.com Also I got all of my info from IGN.com before so I think you are wrong.

 

P.S. I did my homework Ludikhris!!!

 

Lets see you're specs on xbox 360 and PS3 Ludikhris

 

Xbox 360 can play DVD-video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R/RW, DVD+R/RW, CD-DA ,CD-ROM , CD-R, CD-RW , WMA CD , MP3 CD , JPEG photo CD.

PS3 can play CR-ROM CDR+W, DVD, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD+R. thanks to that blu-ray.
+
Xbox has 512 MB of ram Ps3 has 256 MB of ram more ram means faster loading speeds and bigger game world and detailed. What is so great about the blu- ray? What can it do what a normal laser can't?

 

Xbox 360 System Performance Specifications

Custom IBM PowerPC-based CPU Three symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each
Two hardware threads per core; six hardware threads total
VMX-128 vector unit per core; three total
128 VMX-128 registers per hardware thread
1 MB L2 cache

CPU Game Math Performance 9 billion dot product operations per second

Custom ATI Graphics Processor 10 MB of embedded DRAM
48-way parallel floating-point dynamically scheduled shader pipelines
Unified shader architecture

Polygon Performance 500 million triangles per second

Pixel Fill Rate 16 gigasamples per second fill rate using 4x MSAA

Shader Performance 48 billion shader operations per second

Memory 512 MB of 700 MHz GDDR3 RAM
Unified memory architecture

Memory Bandwidth 22.4 GB/s memory interface bus bandwidth
256 GB/s memory bandwidth to EDRAM
21.6 GB/s front-side bus

Overall System Floating-Point Performance 1 teraflop

Storage Detachable and upgradeable 20GB hard drive
12x dual-layer DVD-ROM
Memory Unit support starting at 64 MB

I/O Support for up to four wireless game controllers
Three USB 2.0 ports
Two memory unit slots

Optimized for Online Instant, out-of-the-box access to Xbox Live features with broadband service, including Xbox Live Marketplace for downloadable content, gamer profile for digital identity, and voice chat to talk to friends while playing games, watching movies, or listening to music
Built-in Ethernet port
Wi-Fi ready: 802.11a, 802.11b, and 802.11g
Video camera ready

Digital Media Support Support for DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R/RW, DVD+R/RW, CD-DA, CD-ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, WMA CD, MP3 CD, JPEG Photo CD
Ability to stream media from portable music devices, digital cameras and Windows XP-based PCs
Ability to rip music to the Xbox 360 hard drive
Custom playlists in every game
Built-in Media Center Extender for Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005
Interactive, full-screen 3-D visualizers

High-Definition Game Support All games supported at 16:9, 720p, and 1080i, anti-aliasing
Standard-definition and high-definition video output supported

Audio Multi-channel surround sound output
Supports 48KHz 16-bit audio
320 independent decompression channels
32-bit audio processing
Over 256 audio channels

System Orientation Stands vertically or horizontally

Customizable Face Plates Interchangeable to personalize the console

 

[bold]matt1230,[/bold]

If you have to ask that question then you obviously [bold]haven't[/bold] done your homework.
Allow me to enlighten you. A blue ray disk can hold 25GB per layer.
And as mentioned, Sony is currently testing an 8 eight layer version.

Now, although I am an xbox / xbox 360 supporter, I do have to give credit to sony for it's efforts on the ps3. Although they have 1 processor to the xbox 360's 3, there's runs shitloads faster the the 360's.

Anyway, I'm sure that some of the bad points of the xbox 360 will be some of the good points for the ps3... And vice versa.

 

[bold]All quotes curtesy of Matt1230 and his infinite knowledge[/bold]

No... its actually about 6 months.

Wrong again... First off neither has a price, but MS said it will be close to $300 (more than likely less than 360, but 360 would be catchy for the name of the product.) Sony WILL NOT be that high, if you think so you must be. They have said it will be more price effective to manufacture than PS2 so don't plan on seeing a price over $400. As for the hard drive it comes with the PS3 its not an add-on like the PS2. Also they are planning to make it bigger than 360s.

You don't know that... most analysts and proffesionals are saying the PS3 will be a much stronger piece of hardware, im not going to deny them, but if it means dyning IGN.com, then that is what I am doing. As for online capability PS3 is talking about running multiple OSs and Sony has rumored about making it more of a all-in-one entertainment unit, rather than a gaming console (we dont know much about this yet). I can say that I haven't read anything about MSs net support so at least then part I am not going to say your wrong.

According to what I read, silver only works on the weekend and may have watered down features where as gold ($50) will be a full time full feature service.

PS3 will play DVDs, so far MS has announced [bold]no plans to burn DVDs with the current release of XBOX 360[/bold] you probably read a rumor somewhere. Bluray can hold what, 25gigs single layer? As per DVDs 4.5gigs. I dont care if the format goes nowhere Ill take the 25-50gig games thank you. You can play your 5-10gig games.

To patch up a selling point that MS exploited, a faster better system, they are also working on making the programming code easier to use as well, their other major downfall. Now all they have to do is make it so there are no DREs in the first couple years LOL, that pissed me off.

As per Killzone I kinda agree with you, but my friends dont. They loved that game whereas I didn't care for it. It looks like the sequel will be successful however, so I am not going to slam it till I play it.

You have to admit PS3 has the hardware advantage solely because they are coming out later, they did that on purpose. The 360 has the early release advantage. Baisically they switched positions from last time and only time will tell which console will make the big sales.

 

[bold]Matt1230:[/bold]
Not even the xbox fans here can agree to your drivel.

Ludikhris pretty much covered what i intended to say, but i cannot stress enough how off-track you are. The article which you base your info on i have also seen, i have been following this debate from day 1, and you have a very narrow range of sources and a lot of rumours, all of whom have been countered in later articles.
Ign.com is not wrong, you just red an old article published by MICROSOFT (tadadada.....), which was published during e3, over a week ago.

Your specs seem to be pretty much in order, but you are wrong about the memory bandwidth, the processing power and eveything else you spat out. Yes you have read an article, most of the rest of us here actually understand it aswell, quite unlike you i am sure.

To add to one point made by Ludikhris, the ps3 will be aable to burn dvd's, we dunno bout the 360, also the ps3 has more immediate multimedia options. 7 controllers, flash, sony and classic memory card readers, 3 ethernet ports and wireless + all the disc formats it supports. (bout 3 times as many as xbox NOT counting blu-ray compatibility).
It is also rumoured (only a statememt froom sony here) that you will be able to be on a hotel in japan, on a wireless network, and use a psp to play and operate your ps3 at home in the US forexample (if it is turned on). Now how cool is that.

what the f&¤@ is this. the xbox has 512mb of 700mhz DRAM, the ps3 has 256mb 700mhz GDDR ram and 256mb of 3.2ghz XTRAM.

What have you been smoking???




Ok, sorry bout all that, just needed to let off some steam towards this nutcase, i woulda had to write an essay to describe how wrong he was and counter argue his "points".
As always i think the 360 will be cool and very good, but i am still a hardcore ps fan.

 

XBOX 360 / PLAYSTATION 3 PERFORMANCE COMPARISON

SUMMARY
Now that the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 specifications have been announced, it is possible to do a real world performance comparison of the two systems.

There are three critical performance aspects of a console:
• Central Processing Unit (CPU) performance.
• The Xbox 360 CPU architecture has three times the general purpose processing power of the Cell.
• Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) performance
• The Xbox 360 GPU design is more flexible and it has more processing power than the PS3 GPU.
• Memory System Bandwidth
• The memory system bandwidth in Xbox 360 exceeds the PS3's by five times.
The Xbox 360's CPU has more general purpose processing power because it has three general purpose cores, and Cell has just one.
Cell's claimed advantage is on streaming floating point work which is done on its seven DSP processors.
The Xbox 360 GPU has more processing power than the PS3's. In addition, its innovated features contribute to overall rendering performance.






Xbox 360 has 278.4 GB/s of memory system bandwidth. The PS3 has less than one-fifth of Xbox 360's (48 GB/s) of total memory system bandwidth.

CONCLUSION
When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment.

However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3.

The Xbox 360 processor was designed to give game developers the power that they actually need, in an easy to use form. The Cell processor has impressive streaming floating-point power that is of limited use for games.

The majority of game code is a mixture of integer, floating-point, and vector math, with lots of branches and random memory accesses. This code is best handled by a general purpose CPU with a cache, branch predictor, and vector unit.

The Cell's seven DSPs (what Sony calls SPEs) have no cache, no direct access to memory, no branch predictor, and a different instruction set from the PS3's main CPU. They are not designed for or efficient at general purpose computing. DSPs are not appropriate for game programming.

Xbox 360 has three general purpose CPU cores. The Cell processor has only one.

Xbox 360's CPUs has vector processing power on each CPU core. Each Xbox 360 core has 128 vector registers per hardware thread, with a dot product instruction, and a shared 1-MB L2 cache. The Cell processor's vector processing power is mostly on the seven DSPs.

Dot products are critical to games because they are used in 3D math to calculate vector lengths, projections, transformations, and more. The Xbox 360 CPU has a dot product instruction, where other CPUs such as Cell must emulate dot product using multiple instructions.

Cell's streaming floating-point work is done on its seven DSP processors. Since geometry processing is moved to the GPU, the need for streaming floating-point work and other DSP style programming in games has dropped dramatically.

Just like with the PS2's Emotion Engine, with its missing L2 cache, the Cell is designed for a type of game programming that accounts for a minor percentage of processing time.

Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. That sort of mix makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games. In fact, when analyzing real games one finds almost the opposite distribution of general purpose computing and DSP calculation requirements. A relatively small percentage of instructions are actually floating point. Of those instructions which are floating-point, very few involve processing continuous streams of numbers. Instead they are used in tasks like AI and path-finding, which require random access to memory and frequent branches, which the DSPs are ill-suited to.

Based on measurements of running next generation games, only ~10-30% of the instructions executed are floating point. The remainders of the instructions are load, store, integer, branch, etc. Even fewer of the instructions executed are streaming floating point—probably ~5-10%. Cell is optimized for streaming floating-point, with 87.5% of its cores good for streaming floating-point and nothing else.












Game programmers do not want to spread their code over eight processors, especially when seven of the processors are poorly suited for general purpose programming. Evenly distributing game code across eight processors is extremely difficult.

Game programmers do not want to spread their code over eight processors, especially when seven of the processors are poorly suited for general purpose programming. Evenly distributing game code across eight processors is extremely difficult.
Even ignoring the bandwidth limitations the PS3's GPU is not as powerful as the Xbox 360's GPU.
Below are the specs from Sony's press release regarding the PS3's GPU.

RSX GPU
• 550 MHz
• Independent vertex/pixel shaders
• 51 billion dot products per second (total system performance)
• 300M transistors
• 136 "shader operations" per clock
The interesting ALU performance numbers are 51 billion dot products per second (total system performance), 300M transistors, and more than twice as powerful as the 6800 Ultra.

The 51 billions dot products per cycle were listed on a summary slide of total graphics system performance and are assumed to include the Cell processor. Sony's calculations seem to assume that the Cell can do a dot product per cycle per DSP, despite not having a dot product instruction.

However, using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock.

It is important to note that if the RSX ALUs are similar to the GeForce 6800 ALUs then they work on vector4s, while the Xbox 360 GPU ALUs work on vector5s. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8 GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS.

With the number of transistors being slightly larger on the Xbox 360 GPU (330M) it's not surprising that the total programmable GFLOPs number is very close.






The PS3 does have the additional 7 DSPs on the Cell to add more floating point ops for graphics rendering, but the Xbox 360's three general purpose cores with custom D3D and dot product instructions are more customized for true graphics related calculations.

The 6800 Ultra has 16 pixel pipes, 6 vertex pipes, and runs at 400 MHz. Given the RSX's 2x better than a 6800 Ultra number and the higher frequency of the RSX, one can roughly estimate that it will have 24 pixel shading pipes and 4 vertex shading pipes (fewer vertex shading pipes since the Cell DSPs will do some vertex shading). If the PS3 GPU keeps the 6800 pixel shader pipe co-issue architecture which is hinted at in Sony's press release, this again gives it 24 pixel pipes* 2 issued per pipe + 4 vertex pipes = 52 dot products per clock in the GPU.

If the RSX follows the 6800 Ultra route, it will have 24 texture samplers, but when in use they take up an ALU slot, making the PS3 GPU in practice even less impressive. Even if it does manage to decouple texture fetching from ALU co-issue, it won't have enough bandwidth to fetch the textures anyways.

For shader operations per clock, Sony is most likely counting each pixel pipe as four ALU operations (co-issued vector+scalar) and a texture operation per pixel pipe and 4 scalar operations for each vector pipe, for a total of 24 * (4 + 1) + (4*4) = 136 operations per cycle or 136 * 550 = 74.8 GOps per second.

Given the Xbox 360 GPU's multithreading and balanced design, you really can't compare the two systems in terms of shading operations per clock. However, the Xbox 360's GPU can do 48 ALU operations (each can do a vector4 and scalar op per clock), 16 texture fetches, 32 control flow operations, and 16 programmable vertex fetch operations with tessellation per clock for a total of 48*2 + 16 + 32 + 16 = 160 operations per cycle or 160 * 500 = 80 GOps per second.






Overall, the automatic shader load balancing, memory export features, programmable vertex fetching, programmable triangle tesselator, full rate texture fetching in the vertex shader, and other "well beyond shader model 3.0" features of the Xbox 360 GPU should also contribute to overall rendering performance.

Bandwidth
The PS3 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and 25.6 GB/s of RDRAM bandwidth for a total system bandwidth of 48 GB/s.

The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth.






Why does the Xbox 360 have such an extreme amount of bandwidth? Even the simplest calculations show that a large amount of bandwidth is consumed by the frame buffer. For example, with simple color rendering and Z testing at 550 MHz the frame buffer alone requires 52.8 GB/s at 8 pixels per clock. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches.

The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes.

HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices.

CONCLUSION
When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment.

However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3.
________________________________________
Lastly, we were sent updated spec numbers on the Xbox's numbers, and we spoke with Microsoft's Vice President of hardware, Todd Holmdahl, about the Xbox 360's final transistor count.

Another bit of information sent our way is the final transistor count for Xbox 360's graphics subset. The GPU totals 332 million transistors, which is spit between the two separate dies that make up the part. The parent die is the "main" piece of the GPU, handling the large bulk of the graphics rendering, and is comprised of 232 million transistors. The daughter die contains the system's 10MB of embedded DRAM and its logic chip, which is capable of some additional 3D math. The daughter die totals an even 100 million transistors, bringing the total transistor count for the GPU to 232 million.

 

How about, in the future, we try posting LINKS to the information instead of just pasting everything in? Saves space that way...

Now, Matt1230, the source you quote is from Major Nelson who happens to head up the Xbox Live project and is JUST as biased as the Sony specs released that show the PS3 as twice as powerful as the Xbox 360. If you really want, give me 30 minutes and I'll have an article up that will conclusively prove that the Revolution will rule them all...

You quoted the PS3 as having 228 GFLOPS (and I have to ask, do YOU know what that means?), but that is actually just the proposed GFLOPS that the Cell processor produces. According to Sony (Take with bucket of salt) the RSX is capable of 1800 GFLOPS + the 228 from the Cell for over 2 TERAFLOPS! Also, the 240 from the 360 is based upon their processor only as well.

System Bandwidth is adding the pipe from the GPU to the embedded RAM which is used only at the last point, before the image is sent to the TV and hardly counts for system perfomance. Makes for a great #, but not really an accurate one.

There is NOTHING that states the 360 will burn DVD's (Nor is there for the PS3, sorry Marti, until I see something official I have to call that as much rumor as the 360).

Ludikhris, I do have to add that while I think the PS3 has a bit of an advantage (I think the 360 GPU is MUCH better, though) on hardware, MS has new software techniques that will easily compensate for that and might still allow the 360 to be more powerful. I speak here of applied power vs potential power. If you can use 90% of the 360 power vs 50% of the PS3, then the applied power of the 360 would be greater.

Don't get me wrong, I'm personally for the 360 currently but I am also a firm believer and having an informed and intelligent basis for your point of view. Accepting the Major Nelson article as law is every bit as bad as people waving the "PS3 has 2 TERAFLOPS of power" argument at me.

 

and to prove my point...
http://www.ps3land.com/ps3specs.php
here is the link that says that the PS3 has 2 teraflops (compared to the purposed 1 teraflop of the 360). End result, either company can bend the numbers to say whatever they want.

Also note the use of a link.

 

i dont microsoft has one already wit the ipod features so can it really burn cd/dvds

 

Well i dont really know much thats why i ask and thank you rap4life i now understand it more then i did before.

 

i dont hink ur gunna need a od to play ps2 games dude...

 

Who gives a crap about the specs. Specs are numbers made to make people like you happy. Seriously, once it reaches a certain point, most of it is not noticable (except on your wallet). Take the current generation, PS2 is the least powerful system yet it is the most popular system. If the console is hard to program for then it is doomed. I bet Microsoft has the best development environment. I use their Windows devlopment environment daily and it beats anything else available. It's all about the game ideas and the programming of the games. Nintendo is the only company of the 3 that shares a similar philosophy as I. I look forward to their rerelease of GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, and _countless_ SNES masterpieces as downloadable content from Nintendo. This is why I will buy a Revolution first and a PS3 second. I have a PC and I know how to use it so there is nothing attractive about the XBox or XBox360 at all. Frankly, I don't see what all of the hype behind HALO is. It's just another FPS where you kill aliens. Been there, done that.

 

I think The Xbox 360 is going to win. Because look now who has more processing speed Xbox. Who has a better graphics card Xbox. Who has more ram Xbox. Xbox is more powerful than PS2. So don’t you think ps3 is going to less powerful? This means Microsoft is going to be ahead for next generation consoles. Just like Sony is ahead of Nintendo.

 

I'm going to buy the PS3, cause their product shots look better, X Box's are teh $h177y.

I'm going to buy an PS3 cause Microsoft hasn't convinced me to buy an XBox up to this point, nor has the proposed 360 convinced me that it will be significantly better than the PS3.
Sony has convinced me to buy the PS3 because I trust their proposed product, and am more than happy with PSo & PS2.

If Sony ever releases an OS, I'll probably not give it the time of day untill it has proved itself, I feel the reverse is (still) true of the XBox/360