PS3 constant jaggies
Framerate problems in general
Then a general movie from a company that wants to sell its product. Which is still a Bottleneck 3 seen all the problems it has.
Cell: optimal for streaming video (BluRay player it is)
Memory problems: latest said by Ubisoft on Assassins Creed confirmed
BluRay player slow: many games need additional installation on the HDD to speed up loading
Sony made the PS3 to push BluRay. Not to make it optimal for games
Both are talking, the genius must tell the retard what to do, and the retard must take that information and do with it what it can, the retard then must tell the genius what to do and the genius must do with it what it can.
Now being a genius the genius will relay information fast, and clear, The retard being of very lil intelect will do what is asked slowly because they do not understand the information given, and are slow to begin with in following that information.
The Retard being of very lil intelect will relay the information slowly, and with fault the genius beng a genuis gets the information slowly and does with it what he does but slowly because of the retard.
the same is said of ps3 memory, you have 2 unique pools of memroy, One at what was it 700mhz? and one at 3.2 ghz.
The 700mhz can put the informtion out there as fast as it can, the 3.2ghz can put the information out there as fast as it can, But they cannot match speeds, and information contained in both that are paired will all ways be slower because of the slower memory, Essentially.......TA DA A bottleneck, If sony had a unified single pool of memory or HELL both pools we're 3.2 ghz then things would be fine, or 700mhz for that matter, but because they are different speeds that creates a bottleneck.
if there were only one chip on the PS3 architecture, but in fact there's two. The RSX only runs at 550Mhz, so giving it 3.2Ghz GDDR3 RAM (which doesn't even exist) would be pointless.
Now he's bagging on Cell for having faster RAM than Xenon. Totally classic. =]
Your complaint of PS3's graphics problem seem to be mostly from EA sports games. Quite a lot of PS3 games have shown it can perform just as well and if not better (take the PS3 version of DiRT for example, go see Gamespot's review) than its 360 counterpart. Next time you want to list out problems, please specify which games it is seen in before listing them out as if it was common knowledge, as that is just generating FUD.
I'm a bit confused about the rest of your statement but I'm guessing you mean the PS3 would function better as a BD player and it has development problems. While I agree with you that the UMA for the XDR and GDDR3 memory is unconventional, it is not what you call a bottleneck. XDR memory is visible to the RSX, there are just some things that are different from 360's shared UNA. Again though I don't understand the system developer's choice, since I'm only a undergrad in ECE I really shouldn't pretend to explain why it is superior. All I know is that this type of architecture is not unique to the PS3 and that there a lot of games are able to look great on the system so there is no reason why there is such a bottleneck.
As for the PS3 being promoted as a BD player, it seems a natural thing for Sony to promote the advantages of the PS3 and kills two birds with one stone by selling more PS3 and promoting their BD format.
Your last statement gets to me the most since I doubt you are a senior computer engineer that worked for Sony and yet you make it sound as if you know the ins and outs of how Sony's development came to their final decision. Leave the technical stuff to them and just buy and play the games for whatever system(s) you own.
Dude, stop talking of what might be.
Talk instead of what IS.
Reality.
You should try it sometime...
I have seen what the competition is capable of. Gears, bioshock, forza, pgr4, orange box... etc 95%, 97%,92% and on and on and on...
As of today NOTHING AT ALL (that's zippo, nadda, nix, kaputt) even comes close on the PS3. I wanted to buy a ps3, but i am just angry now.
If I was a PS3fan i'd hide my head in shame.
and Killzone2 when it is released in 2009 NEEDS TO ROCK... Because if it doesn't and I have waited this long to be let down with another (rack em up) 6/10 on the PS3 hardware... oh deary me...
I think developers have had plenty of time to work the ps3 out. Please let's not blame developers anymore.
This time last year the 360 had Gears of war!
We have been waiting soooooooo long now for the PS3 to front up the goods. It was supposed to launch in 2005(!) for Pete's sake. Did we forget that?
memory? WTF?
Don't talk about 256mb MEMORY when the PS3 is bleeding like a stuck pig from every performance orifice!
Just show me a true AAA.
Enough delays, enough excuses, enough talk.
Edit @ 10.2
errrrrr...
dude i think i was stating a few facts, based on verifiable sources. That is the scientific method right there. Would you prefer i read a PS3 review, but ignore it, then buy the game but still hate it? That is what you are saying my friend.
If anyone has their head in the clouds it is... oh ffs do i need to say it...
I love to make up my own mind...to discuss against a monologue majority... what do you think i am doing in a forum FULL of PS3fans arguing against a fanbased article?
Yeah, 360 is so powerful it has games that run at 640p24fps and has framerate issues....not one game on PS3 runs on SD mode..Let me guess you paid $400 for a system not to be able to display a 3rd gen game....I paid $500 for a game system that has games running at 1080p60fps in sigma and RnC runs at 720p60fps and are 1st PS3 gen games....What game on 360 looks as good as RnC and run at 60fps...NONE...You claim numbers and multiplatform games but the truth is multiplatforms games still look the same and even when COD4 comes out and looks better on PS3, I will still say the same thing multiplatform is still the same game.....It's exclusives where the PS3 shines and there is noway M$ can keep up with SONY...Uncharted coming out next month is the best looking nextgen game to date....Uncharted just took graphics to the next level...so enjoy your lastgen graphics on your $400 system...why I get my HDgaming and my HD movies experiance for less than what you already paid...360 $400 and 2 years of xboxlive $110...PLAY B3YOND little blind sheep
It was a bit hard to read through your ranting since it was somewhat chopped up, but I have a few disagreements about what you said.
1) I don't understand why you think us PS3 owners should hang our head in shame when two great titles are coming out within two months from now: Ratchet & Clank and Uncharted. If you don't like the system that's fine, but please refrain from telling us how we should feel if we were you.
2) I thing Killzone 2 still has a release in Q1 2008.
3) I think we should blame certain developers who don't take the time to make a good port for the PS3 when we have seen from Resistance, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, and Folklore that the PS3 is capable of rendering graphics just as well as 360. And when you said last year this time the 360 had Gears of War, it is understandable since this is also the time (one year since release) that PS3 finally has its big titles coming out.
4) The PS3 has 256MB of XDR for the Cell and 256MB of GDDR3 for the RSX. The architecture is set up as a UNA (unified memory architecture), meaning the memory has been mapped together. So the XDR memory is visible and accessible to the RSX, and vice versa. Please do more research before making it sound like you are schooling us.
I forgot 360 1st party games run at 640p with all that memory and power...I guess you want to compare multiplatform games that run on one game engine that doens't take advantage of the power of PS3....brilliant
Lair...Heavenly Sword...Folklore...all exclusives supposed to show the real power of the PS3. Heavenly Sword and Folklore are great games, but nothing more. I don't see them selling over 5 million copies in their first weeks. There's a reason Halo 3 achieved that. It's f#ckin' amazing.
I'd like to see a PS3 game that can match the scope of environments, draw distance, attention to detail (try zooming in on the textures) and the hdr lighting(unrivaled) found in Halo 3. The games graphics are way underrated in my opinion.
ohhhhh jenzoo.. you must be joking.. the textures.. jesus christ, sorry dude, but once I played coop goign through the warthog, and watching the grass literally grow at the tires of the warthog, watching bodies disappear and reapper.. granted thist might only be in coop mode.. but god damn that was garbage. Absolutely fun game play, a real blast to play, nothing has it on gameplay, but do not even attempt to talk about the graphical prowess of that game
Then pokeman on ds has sold more copies than halo1halo2halo3 combine...Halo3 isn't sh1t,,GT5 has sold more copies as a franchise and let's not even talk about FF......If I wanted to play Halo2.5 on 640p i would kept my xbox1 and play at least 720p....It's sad the xbox1 is capable of 720p but the 360 is not.....Please do explain why Halo3 doesn't run in HD......I want to know where all that power and memory were used.....360 is so powerful but their biggest franchise looks like a lastgen game....I guess that explains why 360 only sold 200,000 extra 360s...Look what FF did with the PSP it sold 1 million PSP in 2 weeks...DO you idiots see the difference between hype and system seller
I wouldnt brag about the FF on psp. To me that only means there was no reason to by one before. If i recall right, it wasnt doing the well.
Its a hand held.
From my knolage, the cables on the xbox one couldnt even support 720p.
Im sure the console could do it. But mabye on a super tiny scale.
I dont rember who said it, one of the here said they stoped coming to this site so often beasue of fan boys, espacly on the ps3 side. Im going to start doing the same
Well think of it this way my friend if u dont know how to utilize the tools your given then of course your gonna say i dont like it but in fact the only reason you dont like it is because you dont know how to use it hence ounce everyone gets more familiarized with the tools there given there gonna be more willing to use them in ways there probably never thought they could do.
Out of fairness I must say our PS3 system ram isn't that much better than XBoxes, it is faster, but only about 10%. "But it's 700 mhz vs 3.2 ghz, you tool!" you say. But remember, the XBox has a wider bus, so it can do more per cycle than PS3 can, but in the end the PS3 is a bit faster.
The PS3 is also hyperthreaded, meaning if I say "Hey, give me 2 bits of information please", and another process says "Give me 8 bit's please" etc. It can do all of them on the same cycle. It could process 8 4-bit requests in a single cycle, which makes it better for small operations. In terms of big request it's about the same as XBox, both just pound something like a huge texture through the bus in few cycles. XBox on the other hand, if I give a 2-bit request to it, it will use one whole cycle to send 2 bits over it's 128 (do I remember right?) bus, leaving 126 of those waisted.
The more you search into, the more you'll see that the XBox is a solid machine, that has great balence and a logical layout. But the PS3. WOW, it's the one keeping things interesting, because it's WAY different on so many levels. What advantage, if any, this gives will be seen more and more as time progresses.
Ultimately, both will be about equal if a dev really does a good job. PS3 (IMO) may have a bit of an edge, but it also costs more, so whos to say who wins. Any differences between the two are certainly made to be much more important than they really are though.
I'll just presume that they're disagreeing with my opinion that the PS3 has an edge, and that is a perfectly valid counter opinion.
If they disagreed with the technical facts I mentioned I would hope they could be man enough to tell me where I am wrong, as I may be wrong, and I would like know.
I completly agree.
the xbox is a very balanced system, to bad it had the Hardware faliures, or it might have been bigger.
And technacly ur not a ps3 "fanboy" your whats known on this site as a "gamer". very rare
Really? A lot of people don't use XDR because it's pretty expensive, not because it's outclassed by DDR. DDR is high preformance bang for your buck ram.
Uncharted has de-forestaton aka Crysis
self shadow in the eyes
the best water effect in games
human like reflex in the eyes
Infra-rate blurr
and deffered rendering (something only capable in ps3 not even crysis have that ,or in a 9 core computer,and if u are a stupid xbots dont even dare to talk or mention about it cause ur crappy console is not even capable of runni games natively at 1080p 60 fps)
I use to own some Rambus ram, with my P3 cpu. Are they the ones making memory for PS3. I remember when the Rambus and DDR ram for the pc came out, Intel went with Rambus, that didn't work out to well, but I really liked the ram, is was fast for its time.
VERY informative video. I learned just about everything on XDR memory in that single video.
Wow, that all went over my head. Is it any good then? lol
wow... nuff said...
Asledamako kawawawa lotiti broohaha
sound like that on my head lollll
but i think it's fast memory transfer rate and it's good for gamiing ;)
@ 3.2Ghz not 4.0Ghz