@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @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?

It doesn't use XDR because as has been rammed down your throat many times that there is a penalty. When you have to pull external data, there is always a penalty. On the 360, you can front-load more data if the game engine runs in less than 256MB.

As for Uncharted 2's graphics...I'm not familiar with the level/environment design of the game but here's what I know:
-In sprawling open worlds like GTA4, textures have to be scaled back and other shortcuts have to be used like limiting the view distance by introducing curves/turns so that you are not rendering an extremely large environment (and view distance) at any given time while driving...
-In games such that feature smaller enviroments (for instance Resident Evil 4 on the Wii or any sports game on any system where the arena is a fixed and relatively small size) it's easy to maximize details and have all your assets in RAM.

I imagine Uncharted 1/2 is more the latter. Even in this situation, if Uncharted 2 was ported to the 360, it could still most likely run at a faster frame rate if the art assets weren't upgraded to take advantage of the extra available RAM. Streaming from any external source incurs a penalty. Even then the 360 can stream faster off DVD than the PS3 off BluRay and since they both allow HD installs, again that is no advantage for either system there.

As for the Neo Geo and Amiga comparison, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo_Geo_(console)
The Neo Geo only have 64k of video RAM (compared to 1MB on Amiga) though it could display more colors and sprites than Amiga, it had to do so in low resolution. It also had a 12Mhz 68000, which is faster than an Amiga 500 so once again having more CPU power does not guarrantee you better looking games WHICH HAS BEEN MY POINT ALL ALONG! The Amiga wins in graphics memory over Neo Geo as does the 360 over PS3.

For the love of whatever you might believe in - buy a clue!

The CELL is a wonderful CPU but it is surrounded by a poor system design when compared to the 360. End of story.

Last edited by Lou on 25-Sep-2009 at 02:35 PM.

@MikeB

Hypothetically speaking and for the sake of argument, let's assume the frame buffer is the full size of available video ram...:

Let me put it you you another way... Suppose a monitor existed that could display a picture of infinite resolution. The PS3 has 256MB to use to store 1 full frame of size x,y. The 360 could displace a picture of 2x, y or x, 2y or (squareroot of 2)x, (squareroot of 2)y because it had DOUBLE the video ram available.

So the 360 can have more HD assets in memory. Do you understand?

The 360 is more 'HD' than the PS3.

Last edited by Lou on 25-Sep-2009 at 02:41 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

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

It includes 192 pixel co-processors.

Quote:

Many don't consider that mode true HDR precision

It's still HDR FP(FP10). It also handles global illumination.

Quote:

but of course there are plenty 360 HD games lacking any anti-aliasing

Refer to http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241
Let's do some stats

PS3, 137 games**,about 80 games with "no AA".
Xbox 360, 142 games**, 35 games with "no AA"

**Not factoring PSN and XBL games.

_________________
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:

I don't like that Crysis Warhead screenshot

It's an early morning screen shot at medium settings.


Crysis at high/max details



Quote:

the second one is good but doesn't look real to me

Compare it with real life photo during a clear midday time.

Quote:

Do Pixar animations look like real life?

Why Pixar toon animations when you can have the Transformers movie animations?

Last edited by Hammer on 25-Sep-2009 at 02:46 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 25-Sep-2009 at 02:44 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)

@Hammer

Quote:

SPE Summary. Essentially small vector computer

From Tom's Hardware:

"Cell's chief architect, Dr. H. Peter Hofstee, advised us not to characterize the SPEs as specialized co-processors, dedicated to occasional tasks such as graphics or arithmetic."

"Dr. Hofstee said, the SPEs are fully-capable processing units that are capable not only of running threads spawned off from a main program, but also running "single-core," scalar programs in their entirety - not only multithreading, but multitasking."

As long as you keep this in mind.

The Cell approach of independent systems running on a chip is very efficient compared to multi-cores.

@Hammer

To me Crysis is the clear winner. Uncharted's building somehow looks flat. Perhaps it's the camera angle but it seems to be a building on a studio lot, only the front. Then there's the Sony blur which seems to be the same level of blur no matter how far something is in the distance. To me that blur seems forced and not as natural as the bluring for example in the 2nd Crysis picture. The building is a bit blurry but farther back the trees and leaves are even more, nice depth.

@MikeB

Quote:

The Cell approach of independent systems running on a chip is very efficient compared to multi-cores.

These go to eleven

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Hammer Quote: SPE Summary. Essentially small vector computer From Tom's Hardware: "Cell's chief architect, Dr. H. Peter Hofstee, advised us not to characterize the SPEs as specialized co-processors, dedicated to occasional tasks such as graphics or arithmetic." "Dr. Hofstee said, the SPEs are fully-capable processing units that are capable not only of running threads spawned off from a main program, but also running "single-core," scalar programs in their entirety - not only multithreading, but multitasking."

Fold@Home CELL didn't match Fold@Home CPU in terms of work types.

In practise, why have PPE?

Quote:

As long as you keep this in mind. The Cell approach of independent systems running on a chip is very efficient compared to multi-cores.

Erm, where did I state "co-processors"?

Like VLIW/EPIC based processors, there are vector based processors e.g. Cray C90 .

Mainstream CPUs like PPC970 or AMD64 are scalar based processors with SIMD(vector) co-processors.

Anyway, AMD64 mode doesn't have a pure scalar FP ISA i.e. SSE handles that role i.e. X87 is stuck in IA-32 mode.

Last edited by Hammer on 25-Sep-2009 at 03:19 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 25-Sep-2009 at 03:15 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 25-Sep-2009 at 03:12 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 25-Sep-2009 at 03:10 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)

@Lou

Quote:

When you have to pull external data, there is always a penalty.

There's a penalty, but not like you put it. It would mean shared bandwidth for the CPU (and more latency), which is the case by default on the 360. But the benefit for the GPU is not only increased memory but also increased bandwidth.

Quote:

if Uncharted 2 was ported to the 360, it could still most likely run at a faster frame rate if the art assets weren't upgraded to take advantage of the extra available RAM.

LOL

Quote:

The Neo Geo only have 64k of video RAM (compared to 1MB on Amiga) though it could display more colors and sprites than Amiga, it had to do so in low resolution.

Sorry Amiga 500 games don't provide much higher resolution, NTSC games were lower resolution.

No offense to the Amiga 500 (it's mid 80s tech, the NeoGeo is 90s tech).

NeoGeo games looked way more impressive graphically than Amiga 500 games:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqb0ea31fUI

Quote:

It also had a 12Mhz 68000, which is faster than an Amiga 500 so once again having more CPU power does not guarrantee you better looking games WHICH HAS BEEN MY POINT ALL ALONG! The Amiga wins in graphics memory over Neo Geo as does the 360 over PS3.

The NeoGeo with its tiny RAM was superior to the Amiga 500 in terms of graphics.
Similarly the Amiga 500 was superior to PCs for 80s gaming, despite PC games at the times required many times as much RAM (and a harddrive for mandatory install):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cETl8PhUy_E

It just shows the world isn't black and white.

Last edited by MikeB on 25-Sep-2009 at 04:09 PM.

@Hammer

Quote:

In practise, why have PPE?

Why not? It surely simplifies porting legacy software a lot (both as a host for development environments, as well as for hosting quick legacy ports). The SPEs only run tiny operating systems, they were designed for stream processing like Blu-Ray disc was designed for data streaming.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou It just shows the world isn't black and white.

I think this may be the most reasonable statement you have made here in a VERY LONG TIME!

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

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou Quote: When you have to pull external data, there is always a penalty. There's a penalty, but not like you put it. It would mean shared bandwidth for the CPU (and more latency), which is the case by default on the 360. But the benefit for the GPU is not only increased memory but also increased bandwidth. Quote: if Uncharted 2 was ported to the 360, it could still most likely run at a faster frame rate if the art assets weren't upgraded to take advantage of the extra available RAM. LOL Quote: The Neo Geo only have 64k of video RAM (compared to 1MB on Amiga) though it could display more colors and sprites than Amiga, it had to do so in low resolution. Sorry Amiga 500 games don't provide much higher resolution, NTSC games were lower resolution. No offense to the Amiga 500 (it's mid 80s tech, the NeoGeo is 90s tech). NeoGeo games looked way more impressive graphically than Amiga 500 games: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqb0ea31fUI The NeoGeo with its tiny RAM was superior to the Amiga 500 in terms of graphics. Similarly the Amiga 500 was superior to PCs for 80s gaming, despite PC games at the times required many times as much RAM (and a harddrive for mandatory install): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cETl8PhUy_E It just shows the world isn't black and white.

Graphically superior is a relative term. Since you want to compare games of the same generation then we'd have to look at the AGA Amigas. I don't see how games like Shadow of the Beast AGA would look better on a NeoGeo or any game involving resolutions >320x224 since the NeoGeo simply cannot do it.

I tell you the PS3 is limited in it's ability to pump out HD visuals on many games and the NEO GEO cannot even do SD visuals which the Amiga could. As is common on the PS3 since the visual fidelity is lower, they apply more effects to compensate...like the NeoGeo can do with more colors and sprites.

So I say the term "better graphics" is relative and you change it's meaning to suit your argument. You talk about the PS3 being the true 'HD' system...well that is defined by pixels and the 360 pushes them easier. I tell you the Amiga can display more pixels and you tell me the NeoGeo has better graphics. Make up your mind please.

Also screenshots only tell part of the story with regard to graphics, here an earlier demonstration of Uncharted 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ok9Nd5RMLk

Notice how the helicopter wind moves the plants and everything and the amazing view distance. Of course this is youtube quality and you will need to use some imagination combined with the screenshots to imagine how this will look on your HDTV.

Uncharted 1 was an amazing game, the most beautiful console game at its time of release. Uncharted 2 takes the PS3 much further, a huge leap technically and Naughty Dog already revealed they will be able to take Uncharted 3 a lot further still from a technical perspective.

The PS3 is awesome!

Last edited by MikeB on 25-Sep-2009 at 05:31 PM.

@MikeB

Surely Neo Geo had more on screen colors (without tricks), more and better things moving on screen.
But Amiga still had some tricks Neo Geo could not do, like rainbow effects, super ultra smooth scrollings with lots of parallax and the like.
I think that if it's true that Amiga could not run 100% a perfect conversion of Metal Slug, Neo Geo could not run 100% perfect conversions of Agony or Shadow of the Beast.
The two machines are too different for a direct comparison.

_________________
God created Paula so that Allister Brimble and Dave Whittaker could do music

Check my Amiga gameplays (ITA)!

@Lou

Sorry, I love Amiga for many different reasons, but everyone except maybe a few like you knows Neo Geo games were graphically superior, also better than Amiga 1200 games with its 2MB of RAM.

Quote:

don't see how games like Shadow of the Beast AGA

A straight port doesn't need to look better, but a lot could have been added if built up from the ground for the NeoGeo. For instance huge complex level bosses, etc (just look at NeoGeo games).

Quote:

tell you the PS3 is limited in it's ability to pump out HD visuals on many games

Not really if built from ground up for the platform, referring to rendering resolution. Uncharted 2 is the most demanding PS3 game to date and runs 100% smooth in HD. More an issue is texture streaming, but as pointed out by reviewers the streaming engine is super solid.

@MikeB

Quote:

@Lou everyone except maybe a few like you knows Neo Geo games were graphically superior

So you are saying you and "everyone except maybe a few like" Lou are correct and that Lou's opinion on a somewhat subjective topic is just wrong?

This after you said the world is not just black and white to defend an opinion of yours a few posts ago?

My how sorry and sad a low you have gotten your trolling down to it would seem. If you want to defend your position doing it with this "everyone knows" junk is not going to fly, because its just that, junk.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 25-Sep-2009 at 06:05 PM.

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

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: Also screenshots only tell part of the story with regard to graphics, here an earlier demonstration of Uncharted 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ok9Nd5RMLk Notice how the helicopter wind moves the plants and everything and the amazing view distance. Of course this is youtube quality and you will need to use some imagination combined with the screenshots to imagine how this will look on your HDTV. Uncharted 1 was an amazing game, the most beautiful console game at its time of release. Uncharted 2 takes the PS3 much further, a huge leap technically and Naughty Dog already revealed they will be able to take Uncharted 3 a lot further still from a technical perspective. The PS3 is awesome!

I saw that video and it looks like the game plays like RE4 on the Wii or Gears of War. When there is a big view of the city, there is 0 action other than running on a fixed path from roof top to roof top. When there is actually some meaningful gameplay, you will notice the camera zooms in and the view distance varies from 20-50 yards roughly. RE4 on the GC/Wii does much of the same approach however, I didn't see too much freedom of movement and it actually looked like a HIGHLY linear path that the characters had to take which reaffirms my point about visual assets. Even the Conduit on the Wii limits your "path" to employ better visuals. Also, alot of the canned animations on the character when coming out of cover and such looked choppy. The tree-plants were moving poorly.

In addition to that, when the helicopter first appears and they start running and jumping, the coptor's bullets seem to hit the player at times with no reaction. It seemed like that sequence was just designed to look intense and force you into the room where you have a shootout with the copter and after a period of time you automagically defeat it.

It just seems very canned and linear as are all games that historically push the visuals of a system.

@fairlanefastback

Seriously, for a moment imagine these games would run like this on your Amiga 500:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AicqdWPSjKg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAjpHXxR_9o

I think that would be jaw dropping, thus the Neo Geo provided graphically more impressive games. This is no secret. The absolute best looking amiga games would have amigans go: "The game looks and moves so well, you'd swear it was a Neo-Geo game!"

The Neo Geo hardware was considered to be excellent for in arcades.

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

fairlanefastback wrote: @MikeB Quote: @Lou everyone except maybe a few like you knows Neo Geo games were graphically superior So you are saying you and "everyone except maybe a few like" Lou are correct and that Lou's opinion on a somewhat subjective topic is just wrong? This after you said the world is not just black and white to defend an opinion of yours a few posts ago? My how sorry and sad a low you have gotten your trolling down to it would seem. If you want to defend your position doing it with this "everyone knows" junk is not going to fly, because its just that, junk.

The problem is that he contradicts his own stance. What defines good graphics to him changes based on what he's trying to prove.

@Lou

Quote:

The problem is that he contradicts his own stance. What defines good graphics to him changes based on what he's trying to prove.

What do you mean?