@Lou

Quote:

So the PS3 had to "dumb down" the # of objects, but the 360 can support better textures and animation/rendering on them.

That's the opposite of what developers say regarding number of objects on screen.

The PS3 GPU is adequate and is about just as powerful as the 360 GPU with regard to screen refresh in many cases (in some cases the RSX is more powerful and under other circumstances the Xenos). However the GPU was picked and designed to not overlap too much with the strongpoints of the Cell architecture. The Cell is far more suitable / flexible for many graphics related tasks, however this works very differently as compared to on the PC / 360, hence there are some issues related to that when designing a cross platform game, amongst other issues.

Really, try Uncharted 2. That will put things into perspective.

The dual Cell idea was from the very early days. The RSX is far more powerful and dedicated than the Cell for some graphics tasks. There could have been potential for fully raytraced games, but that would have complicated games design (and porting of legacy game engines) for such a PS3, a lot more than is currently the case.

Quote:

Sony shoved a lame duck gpu in there

This coming from someone like you (wowed by Wii graphics) this sounds so weird to me....

Last edited by MikeB on 23-Sep-2009 at 01:11 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 23-Sep-2009 at 12:44 PM.

@MikeB

If Xbox 360 was the lead platform for Ghostbusters, where's the tessellation support? Tessellation was designed to reduce the load on the CPU.

Last edited by Hammer on 23-Sep-2009 at 02:09 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 23-Sep-2009 at 02:08 PM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)