![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Inside the PS3
- Thread starter Firewall
- Start date
paranoia4422
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2005
- Messages
- 625
it was basically bashing the 360 for deticateing %4 of its power to its OS, atleast thats what i readlesman said:
backflipper
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2004
- Messages
- 409
paranoia4422 said:
seems to me it was more so bashing the ps3 for dedicating 14% (I think that's the number in the article) of its power to the OS.
phoderpants
Gawd
- Joined
- May 11, 2005
- Messages
- 804
paranoia4422 said:
Did you read the whole thing? It's saying that the Xbox uses about 4% of its resources for the OS and the PS3 is going to use about three times that. That sounds like bad news for the PS3 as the main idea of the article.
paranoia4422
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2005
- Messages
- 625
i re read it and still dont see where it says thatphoderpants said:
oh well, im high
backflipper
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2004
- Messages
- 409
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
If their OS really uses up that much of the memory on the PS3 that is the biggest hit IMO. Most games wont fully utilize the SPE's to start out, so the OS taking one or two of those isn't as big a deal as all that memory being eaten away.
*thumbs down* to complicated operating systems that take up more than 0.1% of system resources. Hell, there shouldn't be ANY system resources by ANY OS on a console. A BIOS setup screen, sure... but taking up resources during gameplay? That's just ridiculous, no matter how much "power" you may or may not have at your disposal, IMO.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
steviep said:
Spoken like someone who hasn't experienced first hand the benefits that the always present OS brings to the table. Microsoft is only utilizing a portion of the 4% of the power they have reserved for the OS. I mean really they have 32MB of the 512MB reserved for the OS. Personally 4% is a small price to pay for the blade system and custom music and all the other improvements on the 360. I dont think there is anything wrong with using system resources for an OS that improves functionality. However taking up 25% of your memory for this OS...that is stupid.
Custom music? What happened to developers designing a soundtrack for their games as an artistic expression? I mean, I don't go to Star Wars movies and play my walkman over the John Williams score. If you want a blade system, hit the pause button, then the "go to system settings" and THEN have it run the OS. Not all the time, that's just stupid! I play consoles so that I don't have to worry about the same things I do playing on my gaming PC, lost resources due to kernels being one of them.
heatsinker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2001
- Messages
- 5,479
Have you played Burnout 3 and Need for Speed Underground? Their music selection is so fruity that I mute it for playability. Custom music isn't meant to replace anything; it's for games that don't necessarily need to come with a soundtrack and the developers just slap together a bunch of popular tracks to avoid being slammed by the reviewers for a total lack of music.
Come on stevie, what's so bad about custom music? It's a nice perk. You have a point with music as an artistic tool for games, but not everyone likes the music on certain games. I, for one, like to have the ability to change the music in a game if I don't like it.
steviep said:
Man I usually agree with some stuff you say, but your being ridiculous now. I would drop 4% of power any day for the flexibility the 360 gives me when i'm playing a game. That 4% gives me friend invites no matter what game i'm playing, custom playlists in ANY game, message alerts, etc. Its one of the things I like most about the 360.
A 4% drop is almost acceptable. From what's being suggested by the PS3's "guestimates" it's getting to the point of ridiculousness. The system settings bios built into the console (i.e. PS2, Gamecube, DS, etc) that only runs when it's needed (or gets started when needed in game, and stopped when you're done changing settings) seems just fine for me... I mean, I dunno, I just find it unnecessary to
a) belittle the developer's intended music... if it sucks that badly, i turn it off
b) use custom playlists. that's what my MP3 player is for, isn't it? if it's an EA game with "traxx" or something similar, they usually give you your own ability to either customize their playlist and/or add your own music in the game software. why must I have an OS kernel running and eating resources to do so?
c) need invites for games that i'm not playing. for games that i'm playing, it usually has its own software that can cover in-game invites without the additional performance hit of an OS kernel running in the background!
d) deal with message alerts?! hello, i'm trying to play a game... why are you disturbing me? unless my system is about to explode, keep shit off my game screen
Yeah, it's just my opinion... I know. But why have a piece of software running in the background (regardless of the amount of resources) that's not native to the game? The only thing it can cause is problems... is that a worthy trade for further convience? To some, yeah I gues it is. I don't see it as much of a benefit to me.
a) belittle the developer's intended music... if it sucks that badly, i turn it off
b) use custom playlists. that's what my MP3 player is for, isn't it? if it's an EA game with "traxx" or something similar, they usually give you your own ability to either customize their playlist and/or add your own music in the game software. why must I have an OS kernel running and eating resources to do so?
c) need invites for games that i'm not playing. for games that i'm playing, it usually has its own software that can cover in-game invites without the additional performance hit of an OS kernel running in the background!
d) deal with message alerts?! hello, i'm trying to play a game... why are you disturbing me? unless my system is about to explode, keep shit off my game screen
Yeah, it's just my opinion... I know. But why have a piece of software running in the background (regardless of the amount of resources) that's not native to the game? The only thing it can cause is problems... is that a worthy trade for further convience? To some, yeah I gues it is. I don't see it as much of a benefit to me.
paranoia4422
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2005
- Messages
- 625
AH didnt see a 2nd page, ....i am gonebackflipper said:
lesman said:
I personally usually prefer to use the music the game intended me to use, it goes a great deal of the way towards setting the mood. However, the 360s ability to rip CDs for custom soundtracks is nice in some cases, especially for the XBL arcade, I mean, the regular Hexic music gets really old after a while, I play much better with a little David Bromberg, BB King, or Rufus Wainwright in the background.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
steviep said:
I have never seen any current console (you know ones without a persistent OS) that allows you to do that without exiting the game completely. Most consoles only let you into the system settings and what not when there is no game playing. It is a limitation of current consoles which is solved by the persistent OS.
a) belittle the developer's intended music... if it sucks that badly, i turn it off
b) use custom playlists. that's what my MP3 player is for, isn't it? if it's an EA game with "traxx" or something similar, they usually give you your own ability to either customize their playlist and/or add your own music in the game software. why must I have an OS kernel running and eating resources to do so?
c) need invites for games that i'm not playing. for games that i'm playing, it usually has its own software that can cover in-game invites without the additional performance hit of an OS kernel running in the background!
d) deal with message alerts?! hello, i'm trying to play a game... why are you disturbing me? unless my system is about to explode, keep shit off my game screen
a) Nobody is belittling anything, the point is the consumer has a choice to do as they wish
b) With the 360 (and likely PS3) you can take that MP3 player and simply plug it into your system. Then you can play the music through the system over your Home Theater setup so you dont have to look like a complete dork sitting on your couch playing a video game while listening to music from your MP3 player with your headphones. As an added bonus you can control the music easily with the controller your already using for your game!
c) The invite system is really nice, it means that while I am waiting for the [H] Xbox live system to start I can be sitting around playing Oblivion waiting for the invite. When I get the invite the system lets me know, so I can drop back to the dashboard, insert the GRAW disc, and I am off to kill some rebels! If it wasn't for that I would be sitting staring at the GRAW menu screen waiting for the gaming goodness to begin.
d) The alerts and messaging is a good thing. When I die in a match and have to sit out the rest of the round I can simply pull up the blade, go to the friends list and shoot off a couple of voice messages to people.
So stevie, can you tell the difference between 60fps and 57.6fps?
I have yet to have the 360 OS cause ANY problems in any of my games. You know why? Because the OS is always the same on every system. Developers dont have to try and make the game work with 1001 OS configurations and service packs. They simply need to make the game work with one, meaning problems are very easy to solve and avoid.
paranoia4422
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2005
- Messages
- 625
Leave it to stevie to BASH the FEATURES of a system, especially if nintendos console had them hed be sucking there - over it......
i take it stevie doesnt like convinence at all does he?
i take it stevie doesnt like convinence at all does he?
This has nothing to do with Nintendo, it has everything to do with resources being (unnecessarily) devoted to running what should be unnecessary in a game environment on a console. It's not as bad for the X360 as it is for the PS3, unless these guestimates are greatly inflated. But if Nintendo does the exact same thing I won't like it then, either. So throw that notion out of your collective windows.
Erasmus, when you have games that drop below 20fps (Oblivion is certainly one of the many) those extra 4 frames per second could mean the difference between what is perceived as "choppy" (<20fps) and what as perceived as "smooth" (>24fps). I would rather have smooth gameplay than the ability to plug my IPod in DURING a game and listen to my own music, and send messages DURING a game. All of these things can be done just fine *out* of the gaming environment by the system OS without using up a single percentile of resources during a game.
Paranoia, you'll have a hard time convincing me that unnecessary system resources being eaten up is a good thing in any case, including on my gaming PC, but especially on a dedicated gaming console.
Erasmus, when you have games that drop below 20fps (Oblivion is certainly one of the many) those extra 4 frames per second could mean the difference between what is perceived as "choppy" (<20fps) and what as perceived as "smooth" (>24fps). I would rather have smooth gameplay than the ability to plug my IPod in DURING a game and listen to my own music, and send messages DURING a game. All of these things can be done just fine *out* of the gaming environment by the system OS without using up a single percentile of resources during a game.
Paranoia, you'll have a hard time convincing me that unnecessary system resources being eaten up is a good thing in any case, including on my gaming PC, but especially on a dedicated gaming console.
I dunno how this will work out for sony, or if it is true.
Couple of things-
14% is a lot, but who knows, might not make one shit bit of difference, and we, most likely, won't even notice.
Maybe further down the line when more complex games come out, this might be a hnderance to teh ps3 but somehow I duobt it.
and yes, if this was a report done on the Rev, steveip would be singing it's praises and saying how smart N is for doing this. But seeing how its another console it's compete garbage and is gonna suck
don't worry steveip, we still love you
Couple of things-
14% is a lot, but who knows, might not make one shit bit of difference, and we, most likely, won't even notice.
Maybe further down the line when more complex games come out, this might be a hnderance to teh ps3 but somehow I duobt it.
and yes, if this was a report done on the Rev, steveip would be singing it's praises and saying how smart N is for doing this. But seeing how its another console it's compete garbage and is gonna suck
don't worry steveip, we still love you
paranoia4422
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2005
- Messages
- 625
mabey someone doesnt have an MP3 player? what if someone WANTS TO HEAR THE FUCKING GAME WHILE LISTENING TO MUSIC? your speaking for a minority stevie i highly doubt the greater half of the population would take 3FPS over listening to there music through the tv, the OS has a place and its fine where it is on the 360, an IN game UI would take just almost as much resources anyway and make everything inconvient, mabey you dont like it because UH guess what i doubt YOU have every tried it or worked with it, cause you sure as hell dont own an xbox do you where it had to be programed in the game? and i know damn well you dont own a 360 so stop voiceing opinions on things you dont use.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
I have never had Oblivion drop below 20fps. I haven't experienced any stuttering in the over 50 hours I have played the game. I think you are confusing the stuttering from loading new areas with framerate drops. That is entirely different, and the loading stuttering is unavoidable no matter how much 4% the OS takes up. Not even in some of the large battles at the end of the main story did I get any stuttering, and this was with 20 soldiers and countless daedra on the screen all duking it out.I'm sorry steviep, but your complaints just dont hold water (unlike the PS3 and its lack of ventilation holes
)Tetrahedron
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2004
- Messages
- 1,579
steviep - your negativity makes me hate nintendo just out of spite can you stop being so negative all the time please?
can you stop being so negative all the time please?paranoia4422
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2005
- Messages
- 625
yeah since they rushed it and slapped it together they didnt build a GPU/CPU around one memory architecture so they had to let the GPU have GDDR and the cell needs XDRlesman said:
from what i understand the cell requires the XDR, and since the GPU architecture is already set with GDDR why not keep it? honestly it might be better to have it split up like this, will be interesting to see if the XDR will go into melt down or not
paranoia4422
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2005
- Messages
- 625
? no i think its pretty much the same bandwidth dude, half of its ram is slightly faster at 25.6GB/s but the other half is the same as the 360's at 22.4GB/slesman said:
Then the zbuffer isnt reliant on the 360s main memory bandwidth, zbuffer uses more bandwidth on gpus memory then anything else and thats pushed back on the EDRAMs 256GB/s
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
lesman said:
The speed doesn't matter as much as the bandwidth. Lower latency RAM performs better than higher latency yet slightly faster RAM. An Athlon 64 at 2.4GHz beats an Intel P4 at 3GHz. A 7800GTX at 430MHZ beats an ATI Radeon at 500MHz.
You should know by now that nothing in the computer world is as simple as "OMGZORZ ITS SUPER FAST!!!"
lesman said:
The Xbox360's RAM runs at 700MHz as well, not 500MHz.
And by not taking bandwidth into account, which is actually how much usable work you can get from the speed, the raw MHz comparisons don't mean much. It's like comparing two cars, and ignoring the fact that Car "A" can go 150MPH while Car "B" can only do 140MPH and instead focusing on Car "B"s ability to hit a higher engine RPM. It doesn't matter if Car "B"s engine can rev to 10,000 RPM vs. 6,000 RPM for Car "A" if Car "A" can actually go faster.
For system RAM the PS3's max theoretical bandwidth is 25.6Gbps compared to 22.4Gbps for the Xbox360. However because of the 10MB of EDRAM on the Xbox360 GPU, the max theoretical video RAM bandwidth is 256Gbps compared to 22.4Gbps for the PS3.
Obviously these are just max theoretical numbers, which are rarely if ever acheived in real world scenarios. What really matters is how that bandwidth is used. But in terms of potential GPU RAM bandwidth, the Xbox360 has the PS3 beat by a long shot.