GPU of PS3?

Status
Not open for further replies.
xFlankerx said:
OK kids...the PCs you're talking about cost over $2000, mmkay? If you take a $400 PC, it's going to get it's ass handed back to it by the X360. The consoles you're talking about cost less than 1/3rd to 1/5th the price of the PCs. We got that covered? Good.
Click to expand...

And cost entered the discussion...where? Hmm...how about here...

Anyway, back to the OP (sort of)...

I guess the question would be...what video card would you have to buy for your PC to *unequivocally* have more GPU oomph than the PS3 *or* XBox360?

...and what CPU?

Obviously, the current 'top of the top end' (Intel Quad-core QX6700 and GeForce 8800GTX) utterly blow away current-gen consoles. But that also costs $2200.

How low CAN you go and still beat both consoles?
 
Tell me which pc game beats out soul calibur for dreamcast in what, 1999, nothing thats what!
 
And also find me a game that looks as good as gran turismo 3 running on a 300mhz pc equivalent at 640x480.

Ps2 ran at 294mhz per second.


You cant really compare consoles to pc spec wise because they are vastly different.


the 32 bit 64 bit and 128 bit for console gaming ended with the xbox. Dont even use that to compare with the 256 bit for video cards.
 
Designers of console games have the opportunity to specifically target the hardware/software on a specific console; They are making the game to run on a single peice of consistant hardware.

PC games on the other hand, cannot be anywhere near as optimized, as every PC has different parts, plus there are always other things running in the background.

When games are released for multiple systems, they usually lage in graphics too, not so optimized. It's the single-console titles that looks outstanding.

Lets face it...that Boxing game demo for the xbox 360 thats always playing in walmart...from 15 feet away, I thought they had the game on tv...have yet to see a PC game look that nice.


Edit: as per previous post...lets try gran turismo 4 on a 300 mhz PC :)
 
Very True, if you took one PC and had someone develop a game solely for that one PC, you could make one of the greatest looking games ever seen in this world. But we get by with still better graphics on games that aren't nearly as optimized...crysis
 
w1retap said:
If you really wanted to get in depth... :rolleyes:

Xbox 360 vs. PS3

Triangle Setup
Xbox 360 - 500 Million Triangles/sec
PS3 - 250 Million Triangles/sec
Click to expand...
7600GT - 700 Million Triangle/sec.
 
I'll add to this. We have a PS3 setup and running Madden 07 as well as an Xbox 360. The Xbox looks better. With the PS3 version it uses no AA (Jagged graphics) and even shows signs of slowdowns when playing.

I'm guessing that it's just first gen games but it was hard to get past the fact it looked pretty bad.
 
I'm still 0 for 3 in trying to play various PS3 games to compare them to Xbox 360 games.

0 for 1 - Went to Best Buy to play PS3 and it was froze up
0 for 2 - Went to Target and actually got to play it for about 2 minutes, then it froze
0 for 3 - Went over my friend's house to play PS3, but the HDMI doesn't work with 1080p on either his 1080p TV or my 1080p Westy. It just flashes/strobes and has cutting out audio.

Anyway, from what I could play, it was not the least bit impressive.. I'd compare it to my old 7900gt graphics, except worse quality textures and AA.
 
w1retap said:
I'm still 0 for 3 in trying to play various PS3 games to compare them to Xbox 360 games.

0 for 1 - Went to Best Buy to play PS3 and it was froze up
0 for 2 - Went to Target and actually got to play it for about 2 minutes, then it froze
0 for 3 - Went over my friend's house to play PS3, but the HDMI doesn't work with 1080p on either his 1080p TV or my 1080p Westy. It just flashes/strobes and has cutting out audio.

Anyway, from what I could play, it was not the least bit impressive.. I'd compare it to my old 7900gt graphics, except worse quality textures and AA.
Click to expand...

Has your friend updated his unit with the new update via the web? I know most stores have not and this fixes a lot of issues. If he still has problems after the update then I'd suggest he contact Sony and see if he needs to return the unit to the place he purchased for a new one or does he need to send it in to them for repair/replacement. I'm sure they would eat the cost of shipping as well if he spoke with them about it.

Gaming goodness here, best of luck
 
He contacted Sony, and they said it was a known issue, and they paid for shipping, but its going to be 3 to 4 weeks before they get him another one. Online updates didn't solve anything.
 
w1retap said:
He contacted Sony, and they said it was a known issue, and they paid for shipping, but its going to be 3 to 4 weeks before they get him another one. Online updates didn't solve anything.
Click to expand...


Don't most video game systems have bugs during the 1st generation? I think if I do end up getting it , I'll wait at least 6 months before they work out the bugs.
 
Wich0 said:
Don't most video game systems have bugs during the 1st generation? I think if I do end up getting it , I'll wait at least 6 months before they work out the bugs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've been hearing some unfortunate things about the ps3. I got a good 360 on launch day that hasn't given me crap (except for that cache clearing problem in oblivion).

Now, going back to the PS3 GPU, does anyone here think that ATI did a lot more for Microsoft than did Nvidia with Sony? I think it's sad have the much-touted cell processor and blu-ray come out with SLI 6800 Ultra power, especially since the 8800GTX beat them to launch.

Opinions?
 
xFlankerx said:
As you shouldn't. Since the 8800GTX costs more than either console.
Click to expand...


Well I got mine for 599.99 which is the cost of the non shitty ps3. And yes it's still valid because for maybe 100 dollars more you get something 3 times more powefull than the consoles counterpart.
 
gorilla show said:
Yeah, I've been hearing some unfortunate things about the ps3. I got a good 360 on launch day that hasn't given me crap (except for that cache clearing problem in oblivion).

Now, going back to the PS3 GPU, does anyone here think that ATI did a lot more for Microsoft than did Nvidia with Sony? I think it's sad have the much-touted cell processor and blu-ray come out with SLI 6800 Ultra power, especially since the 8800GTX beat them to launch.

Opinions?
Click to expand...

yea can we say go ati? lol no flame war please i was j/k cuz they design the Wii also which is worse but the price is right so i cant complain. btw does Wii have AA on?
 
ITSTHINKING said:
Well I got mine for 599.99 which is the cost of the non shitty ps3. And yes it's still valid because for maybe 100 dollars more you get something 3 times more powefull than the consoles counterpart.
Click to expand...

Non-shitty PS3? What denotes the 20gig PS3 of being shitty?

It doesn't have a memory card reader, 40 less gigs, and wireless ethernet? That makes it shitty?

I'm trying to find a reason why anyone would EVER buy the 60gig version.

tvdang7 said:
yea can we say go ati? lol no flame war please i was j/k cuz they design the Wii also which is worse but the price is right so i cant complain. btw does Wii have AA on?
Click to expand...

No, after seeing Wii sports and Zelda, if it has AA on, it's very minor amounts. There are 'jaggy' parts of the game. It's not terrible, but it is there.
 
Deadly sk1llz said:
Non-shitty PS3? What denotes the 20gig PS3 of being shitty?

It doesn't have a memory card reader, 40 less gigs, and wireless ethernet? That makes it shitty?

I'm trying to find a reason why anyone would EVER buy the 60gig version.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking. Since you can buy an independent 2.5" hard drive from Newegg and pop it into your PS3 and have it work as normal, there is no reason left to get the $600 version.

On the note of the HDDs, a 3.5" drive can also be connected via the use of an adapter cable. It'll be sitting outside the PS3 though, so one would need an external enclosure.
 
xFlankerx said:
Exactly what I was thinking. Since you can buy an independent 2.5" hard drive from Newegg and pop it into your PS3 and have it work as normal, there is no reason left to get the $600 version.

On the note of the HDDs, a 3.5" drive can also be connected via the use of an adapter cable. It'll be sitting outside the PS3 though, so one would need an external enclosure.
Click to expand...

Wifi would be the the only reason I would get the higher end version.

EDIT: and not ruining my warranty by replacing the HD
 
I'll be seeing how Crysis is before I buy a PS3... But the PS3 is an impressive piece of hardware, that's for sure.
 
hey guys, I'm new to this forum, and i just ordered these parts

Denmark Opteron 2.0 939 Socket

Asus A8N-E Mobo

Sapphire X1950XT 256MB

2 Gigabytes of Viking Ram

550 Watt PS

Will this be enough to run games like company of heroes, flight simulator X, DoD:S, CS:S, Need for Speed Carbon, and Age of Empires III? Also, I read these exact forums to decide if i should get the x1950xt or the 7950gt...and you guys helped me decide, so thanks!! :)
 
I don't understand why you people are even talking about this. the new gen consoles are definite step ups and will be leaps and bounds over previous given some time. don't compare your jacked up, super-overclocked pc to a console, it's like comparing a ferrari to a toyota. jesus.
 
m3th0d1989 said:
hey guys, I'm new to this forum, and i just ordered these parts

Denmark Opteron 2.0 939 Socket

Asus A8N-E Mobo

Sapphire X1950XT 256MB

2 Gigabytes of Viking Ram

550 Watt PS

Will this be enough to run games like company of heroes, flight simulator X, DoD:S, CS:S, Need for Speed Carbon, and Age of Empires III? Also, I read these exact forums to decide if i should get the x1950xt or the 7950gt...and you guys helped me decide, so thanks!! :)
Click to expand...

Yes, it will... but wrong forum. Overclock that Opteron too... btw.
 
Arcygenical said:
Yes, it will... but wrong forum. Overclock that Opteron too... btw.
Click to expand...


Wrong forum, and in the middle of an existing, unrelated topic...wow.

100 dollar 360's on Amazon.com soon, and refurbed hd's @ EB for 85...thats a 200 dollar 360 folks
 
Hey, you know what's ironic here?

When the PS3 was announced, it had processing power great than anything we had ever heard of. 256MB of GPU memory? An eight-core processor? Everyone thought, wow, this thing is going to mark the end of PC gaming.

Now, when the thing finally is released, we have GPUs with over 700MBs of memory, four-core processors exist with eight-core not too far away, and a top-end gaming rig is way more powerful than the PS3.

The PC caught up with the PS3 before it could even be released. Wow, that was fast, wasn't it?
 
HOCP4ME said:
Hey, you know what's ironic here?

When the PS3 was announced, it had processing power great than anything we had ever heard of. 256MB of GPU memory? An eight-core processor? Everyone thought, wow, this thing is going to mark the end of PC gaming.

Now, when the thing finally is released, we have GPUs with over 700MBs of memory, four-core processors exist with eight-core not too far away, and a top-end gaming rig is way more powerful than the PS3.

The PC caught up with the PS3 before it could even be released. Wow, that was fast, wasn't it?
Click to expand...

I guess you really don't understand the trend of things huh.
 
XSNiper said:
That is the most load of bullshit I have ever seen in my life. How can they get away with comparing a PS3 to a supercomputer? Let alone a mid-range home-user desktop? That's just pathetic. :eek:
Click to expand...

QFT
 
Im not sure, but don't both the PS3 and X360 use in-order processors? If so, then they are SEVERELY crippled and won't be performing as well as they should ;). Also, the Xenos, and the RSX both have only a 128bit memory bandwidth.
 
In my opinion, consoles will always be inferior to PC's...all though more expensive, they just dominate the gaming world. thats just my pick on the matter :)
 
m3th0d1989 said:
In my opinion, consoles will always be inferior to PC's...all though more expensive, they just dominate the gaming world. thats just my pick on the matter :)
Click to expand...

Yeah...but PC gamers are solitary creatures. They are elusive, and very territorial. :p

What I mean is...halo on xbox was ok. It wasnt great, but it was ok. Then you had 10 buddies or so over, fired up halo and had a blast. If 2 people owned systems, and you had two tv's available, even more of a party. There was pizza, booze, even women! sure there's lanparty's, but good luck getting those together 3 times a week in your living room! Sure halo pc had way more people and more fun...but you would be hard pressed to have a good old fashioned split screen experience.

Also...sometimes it's just great to buy a game, toss it in and play with a controller...none of this installing...then trying to find the update (though this is now becoming the case with consoles)...then finding out that since your game is new, and everyone just opened it up and is updating, the update takes an hour...then you gotta spend some time fiddling with the graphix...you gotta dedicate your evening to a new game for a PC, whereas a console you just fire up the new game, and play.

ALSO...for the parent with a 12 year old son, who already has a computer (alas an old one) in their room for internet and mild gaming...you're not gonna buy them a 1500 dollar rig and nice monitor so they can play games...your gonna go to the store, and buy a console, that you dont have to know much about, you plug it in and it works :)

NOW...for most of us here, some of these reasons arent that good...but for many, these could be deciding factors...Parents buying for kids is a big demographic :)
 
lol exactly, you cant compare a ford taurus to a porsche.

A $200 xbox360 to a $650 8800 video card. You better HOPE that the 8800 video card is at least 3 times a powerful when paying three times as much for it.
 
Dynafrom said:
Im not sure, but don't both the PS3 and X360 use in-order processors?
Click to expand...
The 360 CPU does, yeah. Three identical general purpose in-order execution CPUs.

The PS3's cell is even more bizarre than that, with one master PPE general-purpose in-order no-branch-prediction CPU (like the 360's) and 7 SPE CPUs that are smoking fast at floating point single-precision ops and molasses slow at everything else. That's why the PS3 is so horribly difficult to develop for. It has a ton of potential but it's incredibly hard to exploit that.
 
schizo said:
The 360 CPU does, yeah. Three identical general purpose in-order execution CPUs.

The PS3's cell is even more bizarre than that, with one master PPE general-purpose in-order no-branch-prediction CPU (like the 360's) and 7 SPE CPUs that are smoking fast at floating point single-precision ops and molasses slow at everything else. That's why the PS3 is so horribly difficult to develop for. It has a ton of potential but it's incredibly hard to exploit that.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to say you're wrong, but I've heard this story many times before. "Omg what ever will we do, the code is just so complicated to write.." blah blah, whine whine. You get yourself some programmers and developers who actually care about the games they're producing and they'll pump out some quality stuff, just might take a little longer that's all. God forbid you have to put in some work and effort to create a quality product and turn some profit.
 
ummm sorry I don't think this was mentioned, but earlier some said the cell processor has 8 cores and then was told 7 with 1 redundancy core. However to call them a cores is a bit of a mistake. First the cpu consists of (depending but on the PS3 its a ppc core, remember IBM also can make x86, well I imagine they can make x86 cell cpus since they are building a super computer with cells and opterons). However the ps3 has these 7 'synergistic processor elements' these are not full cpu cores, they basically help the actual full cpu core or as ibm calls it ppe, number crunch. Yes the code does have to be written for 7 threads to take full advantage of the spe's. And while the ps3 RSX GPU lags behind, the 360's ATI Xenos, the cell theoretically can smash the triple core IBM PPC cpu. Cell cpus btw are great for multimedia applications, hence why sony is using it for ps3, toshiba wants to use the cell on hd tvs, for pic in pic functionality, apparently the cell can decode 40 something hd signals. Long story short if coded properly, and taking full advantage of the hardware, PS3 and Xbox 360 should be on about equal footing I think. However, that being said, I think its easier to write code for 3 cpus and a faster more kick ass gpu, meaning 360 will generally have better looking games more often then PS3.
 
Dallows said:
I'm not going to say you're wrong, but I've heard this story many times before. "Omg what ever will we do, the code is just so complicated to write.." blah blah, whine whine. You get yourself some programmers and developers who actually care about the games they're producing and they'll pump out some quality stuff, just might take a little longer that's all. God forbid you have to put in some work and effort to create a quality product and turn some profit.
Click to expand...

you forgot IBM also released a nifty little tool called the octipiler that will help with creating these 8 threads for the cell cpu.
 
Dallows said:
blah blah, whine whine.
Click to expand...
Please don't turn this thread into an asinine fan-boy console battle to the death. It's harder to develop for, that's a fact. That doesn't mean it's doomed to fail. The PS2 was infinitely harder to develop for than the xbox1 and it did just fine.
 
Out of all the games on the market.
Gears of War is the best looking game I have seen.
YES, better looking than any PC game out there.

Console gaming is not bottleneck by crap low res gaming anymore.

I can confidently put my house on Grand Turismo 5 PS3 looking better than any PC racing game on the market when it is released.
Xbox 360 and PS3 have high res output now. Remember that

I'm a PC and Console gamer, but I feel with the introduction of HD gaming for consoles, the PC market has an uphill battle.
Lots of ppl will switch from PC gaming to Console gaming.
 
JackAshley said:
Wrong forum, and in the middle of an existing, unrelated topic...wow.

100 dollar 360's on Amazon.com soon, and refurbed hd's @ EB for 85...thats a 200 dollar 360 folks
Click to expand...

why would you get a refubed hd when you can pick new up for $100? got a 15/100 CC coupon and it's $85 :)
 
neostars said:
Out of all the games on the market.
Gears of War is the best looking game I have seen.
YES, better looking than any PC game out there.
Click to expand...
lol?

It looks good.. but not as good as fear or oblivion with max detail in 1920x1080. ;)
 
w1retap said:
lol?

It looks good.. but not as good as fear or oblivion with max detail in 1920x1080. ;)
Click to expand...

heh...but lets see you build a complete rig for 250 dollars that will play oblivion looking as good as the 360 does...:) To max it at 1920x1080, you've got yourself a near 1500 dollar rig...damn the 8800gtx is so tempting, but its true...i'd probably have more fun with a 360 or ps3 for the price than an 8800gtx...wont be a better console out in 6 months!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top