@Hammer

Quote:

Care to start Uncharted 2 vs Crysis?

Crysis' graphics are IMO overhyped. Uncharted 2 wins hands down for me. Also the game itself appeals more to me.

Good engine though.

@Hammer

Quote:

Not supported by the lead designer for both CELL and Xenon.

Peter Hofstee regarding the Cell (from 2006 interview, note the 360 was launched in 2005): “This chip will give you performance that is not achievable with any other architecture”.

BTW Mr Hofstee studied here in Groningen, at the RUG.

Last edited by MikeB on 24-Sep-2009 at 05:55 PM.

@fairlanefastback

well 3/4's each way to keep the aspect ratio the same. .75*.75=.5625

as for the less ram comment, I (in one of the original threads) tried to explain that not having unified ram would limit some things...in this case it limits the gpu. On a brighter note, they added AA...which you sorta have to in order for it to look ok in 1080p if you are multiplying 2x2 to not look jagged.

Look on the bright side: they are rendering almost 27% higher than the Wii version!

HD FTL!

@BrianK

Quote:

The Cell + RSX was a less integrated design than the Xenon + Xenos.

There's a reason why Toshiba uses the RSX with the Cell, it actually is.

If you mean by "integrated" "bottle-necking" then yes, the Xenon and Xenos share one bus to memory. But everyone knows having seperate buses is better for performance. The Xenon is plainly a triple core CPU, with cores being very similar to the PPE of the Cell, but of course it's the SPEs and the overall design which makes the Cell so special.

So the Xenon is not specially geared towards the Xenos design, it just borrowed the less interesting and less remarkable PPE design from the Cell implemented in a more traditional manner.

Last edited by MikeB on 24-Sep-2009 at 06:36 PM.

@Lou

The developers claim they upped the resolution and changed the AA rendering scheme to suit the 360 original with a patch. If that's true, both version actually render in sub-HD resolution and that could hint the 360 does some scaling tricks which make it hard or even impossible for pixel counters to accurately determine rendering resolution based on screenshots.

@MikeB

Quote:

Peter Hofstee regarding the Cell (from 2006 interview, note the 360 was launched in 2005): “This chip will give you performance that is not achievable with any other architecture”. BTW Mr Hofstee studied here in Groningen, at the RUG.

Quote:

There's a reason why Toshiba uses the RSX with the Cell, it actually is. If you mean by "integrated" "bottle-necking" then yes, the Xenon and Xenos share one bus to memory. But everyone knows having seperate buses is better for performance. The Xenon is plainly a triple core CPU, with cores being very similar to the PPE of the Cell, but of course it's the SPEs and the overall design which makes the Cell so special. So the Xenon is specially geared towards the Xenos design, it just borrowed the less interesting and remarkable PPE design from the Cell implemented in a more traditional manner.

Why regurgitate this stuff?

If a game engine runs on 100MB and the graphics require another 400MB, the PS3 is limited to 256MB, see the problem? Graphics make up the majority of the data on a disc. With the 360, the gpu can use as much as is available. There in lies your rub.

If you have to move data from the Cell side, you are still adding another delay that the 360 doesn't have.

You have a 500hp engine mated to a 3 speed automatic limiting you to 110mph. The 360 may be a 360hp engine but it's got a sexy 6 speed and will take you to 180mph.

/facepalm

Last edited by Lou on 24-Sep-2009 at 06:03 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou The developers claim they upped the resolution and changed the AA rendering scheme to suit the 360 original with a patch. If that's true, both version actually render in sub-HD resolution and that could hint the 360 does some scaling tricks which make it hard or even impossible for pixel counters to accurately determine rendering resolution based on screenshots.

Oh...do you mean the 360 has better custom chips? ...boy that sounds like a familiar point...

@Lou

Quote:

You have a 500hp engine mated to a 3 speed automatic limiting you to 110mph. The 360 may be a 360hp engine but it's got a sexy 6 speed and will take you to 180mph.

I think you've captured the point here.

The 360 was built from the ground up to have a good interoperability between the CPU and GPU. As MikeB laid out, and true, the PS3's original discussion was cell for everything. Sony discovered this wouldn't work as desired. It was after the Cell was developed that they then went looking for a GPU as a good fit. The results are similar to your description. The 360 is projected to have a higher utilization rate of console. The % of usable power from the GPU+CPU is projected to be higher than the PS3. Where the PS3 wins is it has more net power. At the end of the day acutal power to tap in each console is in a 10-20% range of each other. Hardly a blip.

The PS3 is finally at a good price point. Wii lowerd their pricing. I expect Microsoft to do the same by Christmas. Likely the $250 point we see now with a rebate will stick.

@Lou

Quote:

If a game engine runs on 100MB and the graphics require another 400MB, the PS3 is limited to 256MB, see the problem?

Strictly speaking you are wrong, as the GPU can use the XDR Ram if needed (,but usually it's not).

Also it's not that big of an issue, the graphics data which require the most Ram are textures, through advanced streaming methods disc storage is more relevant and of course the capacity of Blu-Ray disc is huge.

- Name one 360 game with prettier graphics than Uncharted 2? You can't.
- Specify which has much graphics RAM, the NeoGeo game system or the Amiga 500. And tell me which games looked better?

This is the problem with many people who think they know a lot, there are plenty of non-PC related example which does not fit their world ideas. Like a pope ordering someone to be burned for claiming the world is not flat or center or the universe.

Anyway, some nice comments from Infinity Ward's community manager:

"community manager Robert Bowling tweeted "Oh man, @arne360 let me get some time on #UNCHARTED2 singleplayer. Unbelievable! Controls are so smooth. Seriously, you MUST buy this game!"

http://www.n4g.com/News-399324.aspx

Last edited by MikeB on 24-Sep-2009 at 06:38 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 24-Sep-2009 at 06:38 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 24-Sep-2009 at 06:35 PM.

@Lou

Quote:

Oh...do you mean the 360 has better custom chips? ...boy that sounds like a familiar point...

Not better per se, the 360 also did some weird DVD scaling in the past and it looked horrible.

Hiding scaling patterns (you can't notice by just looking at screenshots, but instead requires deep analysis) can excite fanboys, but may not actually improve image quality. I wouldn't be surprised that with the latest patch the game actually looks as good as identical.

@MikeB

Quote:

This is the problem with many people who think they know a lot, there are plenty of non-PC related example which does not fit their world ideas. Like a pope ordering someone to be burned for claiming the world is not flat or center or the universe.

So you are saying that Lou thinks he knows a lot but does not. And that you know you know a lot?

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@MikeB

Quote:

Not better per se, the 360 also did some weird DVD scaling in the past and it looked horrible.

Are you talking about the rules companies are forced to implement due to DVD certification?

If companies want DVD Certification they must abide by the rules of the DVD police. In upscaling DVD's w/o HDCP compliant outputs, read non-HDMI 360s, the DVD cops limit Microsoft and other companies to 576p. In turn the TV would upscale to 720p or 1080p. If a player had a HDCP compliant output, read HDMI of the PS3 and newer 360s with HDMI, the DVD cops allow a 720p scaling.

The scaling may well have looked bad as people expected 720p DVD scaling with component cables and the DVD police said NO.

In this case the 360 'weirdness' is due to the weirdness of the DVD authorities.

@BrianK

Quote:

Are you talking about the rules companies are forced to implement due to DVD certification?

I don't know the exact reason but the weird scaling / filtering they used resulted in wrong sizing, off colors and such compared to intended. On the same TV, letting the HDTV upscale a DVD played back on a PS2 for example, the end result was often better and more faithful as intended.

@MikeB

Quote:

don't know the exact reason but the weird scaling / filtering they used resulted in wrong sizing, off colors and such compared to intended. On the same TV, letting the HDTV upscale a DVD played back on a PS2 for example, the end result was often better and more faithful as intended.

I think we have the reason above. The PS2 does 480p but I don't believe it does 576p. (Certainly someone here will help fix that if it's wrong.) Certain HD sets don't like 576p and their upscalers do strange things. My understanding is it has to do with the need to multiply by 1.5 or 1.25, for a 720p set (example).

The 360 DVD player is just fine. If 576p didn't work 480p always does for HD sets. The DVD was worse at launch but has had many codec updates. The problem wasn't hardware.

I hope we don't have to cover again how the 360 only reads DVD flags and responds accordingly. Test DVDs aren't flagged, studio movies are flagged. Thus, the 360 looks worse on the quality test DVDs than it truly is.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Hammer Quote: Care to start Uncharted 2 vs Crysis? Crysis' graphics are IMO overhyped. Uncharted 2 wins hands down for me. Also the game itself appeals more to me. Good engine though.

Why is it overhype? Do you want to start Crysis vs Uncharted 2?

Uncharted 2's scope and scale is smaill compared to Crysis.
Uncharted 2's graphics is not *real* enough i.e. abit cartoon

Last edited by Hammer on 25-Sep-2009 at 02:06 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 25-Sep-2009 at 02:05 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)

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Hammer Quote: Not supported by the lead designer for both CELL and Xenon. Peter Hofstee regarding the Cell (from 2006 interview, note the 360 was launched in 2005): “This chip will give you performance that is not achievable with any other architecture”.

He didn't invisage AMD Radeon HD 2900/3800/4800 raytracing the Transformers movie trailers in real time.

Quote:

BTW Mr Hofstee studied here in Groningen, at the RUG.

The David Shippy (lead designer for CELL and Xenon) was referring to CPU+GPU combo vs CPU+GPU combo NOT just CPU vs CPU.

Remember, ATI Xenos has a secondary GPU that reduces the load on the main GPU e.g. HDR being done on the secondary GPU.

_________________
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)

@Hammer

Quote:

Uncharted 2's graphics is not *real* enough.

Not real enough for what? For being a game?

Quote:

The David Shippy (lead designer for CELL and Xenon)

David Shippy was merely involved in the PPE project (hence his efforts on the Xenon) as well. He wasn't "the lead designer of the Cell processor".

@Hammer

Quote:

Remember, ATI Xenos has a secondary GPU that reduces the load on the main GPU e.g. HDR being done on the secondary GPU.

Not really a secondary GPU, it's a daughter chip of the Xenos.

Many don't consider that mode true HDR precision. The daughter chip is mainly there for cheaper (advertised, even coming as free to developers) anti-aliasing, but of course there are plenty 360 HD games lacking any anti-aliasing. For example Halo 3 or just partial AA like Gears of War, etc.

In reality using the daughter chip involves a lot of data transfer (tiling in higher resolutions), severly limiting this potential due to the small amount of Ram on the daughter chip.

@MikeB

Quote:

Not real enough for what? For being a game?

Crysis Warhead in mainstream settings (around early morning)


Crysis in max settings.




Quote:

David Shippy was merely involved in the PPE project (hence his efforts on the Xenon) as well. He wasn't "the lead designer of the Cell processor".

Refer to http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3904/processing_the_truth_an_interview_.php

"The co-authors of 'The Race For A New Game Machine', David Shippy and Mickie Phipps, were two leading figures in the design of the Cell at the Sony-Toshiba-IBM design center"

Refer to http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~skadron/cs451/cell/cell.ppt
SPE Summary.
Essentially small vector computer;
Based on Altivec/VMX ISA

I recall IBM has access to VMX.

_________________
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)

@Hammer

I don't like that Crysis Warhead screenshot, the second one is good but doesn't look real to me neither nor does it have to be. Do Pixar animations look like real life?

"were two leading figures in the design of the Cell at the Sony-Toshiba-IBM design center"

That's not what I disagree with, but is very different from what you stated above.