A GameDaily hands-on with the PS3 version confirms with developer Treyarch that both the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions will incorporate 24-player online multiplayer across multiple game modes, including Deathmatch and Capture the Flag.
I wander how long it will take for the fan boys to start mud slinging.
That it took exactly 12 minutes.
Yeah and I'm sure resistance will run real smooth with 40player online, it can't even keep up with the 360 on 24 player online. I guess the 360 gpu is more powerful after all.
Didnt you read it, its still in development. They'll have it running fine. Also, Virtua Tennis, NBA2K7, RidgeRacer..etc, are all in 1080P on the PS3 okay. All running at 60FPS.
- "currently running at 30 frames-per-second" - " supposed 60 frames-per second." Moral of the story, we know nothing. There is still little over a month left and nothing is written in stone as of the moment. Therefore, I can say that the title will give me the same experience on either console whether it is gameplay or online.
did u accually read the artical
"I guess the 360 gpu is more powerful after all."-thats been confirmed quite long ago. The 360’s Xenos GPU is slightly more powerful for running current graphics engines and, in terms of complying with Windows Graphic Foundation 2.0 (compatible with future versions of Direct X, shader models, etc.) is a full-generation ahead of the RSX. "One of the key ideas behind a unified architecture is to move the GPU from a rendering only processor to a complete compute processor. Right now all the GPU does is render 3D and displays it on your screen (yes it does more like 2D, video etc... but for the point of this article we are talking about 3D). With a unified architecture the GPU becomes more. It becomes a processor that can do almost anything that needs code processed. This means the GPU can take on more functions like physics, AI, animation and many other processes that can benefit the gaming experience. DirectX 10 and a unified GPU architecture helps a video card become an all-in-one Swiss army knife of game processing. Those are the ideas at least, how it all works out is up to the game content developers" ( http://enthusiast.hardocp.c... According to this article, the unified memory of the 360 and the unified shaders, developers have the ability to use the vector processing power of the GPU, which is a big plus as it allows the developer to use the shaders when they need extra processing power. "However, using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock. It is important to note that if the RSX ALUs are similar to the GeForce 6800 ALUs then they work on vector4s, while the Xbox 360 GPU ALUs work on vector5s. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS." Note, this calculation was made before the downgrade of the ps3's GPU from 550MHz to 500MHz, so redo the equation: PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * (updated speed-->)500 MHz = 208.0GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS. ps3 GPU went down from 228.8 GFLOPS to 208.0 GFLOPS 360 GPU has remained at 240.0 GFLOPS I could be wrong, but isn't 240.0 GFLOPS higher than 228.8 GFLOPS? And isn't 208.0 GFLOPS lower than 228.8 GFLOPS??? My sources: IBM's own white papers on the cell: www-128.ibm.com/developerwork s/power/library/pa-cellperf/?c a =drs-#table4 The IGN article of analysis: xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/ 617951p3.html P.S. when u copy paste these links into the address bar, delete any spaces this site inserts between characters, idk y it does that, it's retarded.
One quick point. How can it be confirmed long ago if the specs aren't even released? Seriously.
Everyone already know the gpu in the ps3 will use vector4's that what the 6800 nvidia cards use, so his calcualtions are correct. That is why both nvidia and ati are making unified gpu's for pc's they are more efficient, powerful, and can do both physics and AI as well. The information he got was from the SONY press release about the RSX which states: Below are the specs from Sony's press release regarding the PS3's GPU. RSX GPU 550 MHz Independent vertex/pixel shaders 51 billion dot products per second (total system performance) 300M transistors 136 "shader operations" per clock and the clock was dumbed down to 500mhz so it is even slower. The PS3 does have the additional 7 DSPs on the Cell to add more floating point ops for graphics rendering, but the Xbox 360's three general purpose cores with custom D3D and dot product instructions are more customized for true graphics related calculations. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches. The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes. HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices.
Could you have been anymore on point with your comment. Like the rest of the world, I know that Sony has not yet released the final specs for the system so where is nathaniel getting his specs from. Even funnier, deceased said he already knew. Lol. Anyways the point of the matter is that we can all speculate but nothing is certain until we have a hold of the final product.
Do you also have the original Star Trek episode names and numbers memorized?
Doesn't the ps3 have 48Gb/s of bandwidth that the cpu and gpu have to share while the 360 only has 22.4 between the two? Also, how old was that press release, and since nothing about the actual structure or performance is known all of the calculations rely on inferred information. "It is important to note that if the RSX ALUs are similar to the GeForce 6800 ALUs then they work on vector4s." From what I understand about what Nathaniel wrote, all of his calculations about gigaflops and stuff derives from this assertion. All of this crap that you're arguing comes down to an "if." Also, it's all well and good copying and pasting crap from all over the internet to justify your points, but if that stuff comes from biased sources, it's all worthless. For instance, Nate's so called "IGN article of analysis." That's just Microsoft's analysis based on assumed spec numbers and suspect comparisons. Case in point, MS claims to have over 5 times the bandwidth of the ps3. Anyone who wholeheartedly believes this crap is just blinding themselves to the bias they know is there. Also, who the hell cares about the number of gigaflops your console can perform? Lastly, WHY THE HELL ARE WE EVEN HAVING THIS ARGUMENT? I clicked on this to find out about Call of Duty 3 multiplayer and now I get to ready about fanboys bickering over which console is better, using biased numbers, and biased analysis. This is why I hate most people.
Sir nathaniel I already knew that, i just like pi$$ing of sony fanboys who think their console is more powerful when it isn't. I can't help it, if I see someone claiming something that is wrong, I will argue and fight till I finally get the point across that the 360 GPU is MORE POWERFUL!!! BTW thanks for giving links to facts so JIN, DJ and all the rest with STFU!!!! Also daritefeacherz, they stated "In this case, it's from the writer's hands-on impressions, and while we can't be sure the PS3 version's running at 30 FPS or the Xbox 360 one exactly at 60FPS, it's clear there's a difference between the two, at least, and that's what matters." <--------------:)
its always fun t pwn those n00bs.
I've already disproved that so-called 'fact sheet' a long time ago since the data was produced by ATI in reference to nVidia's RSX chip, a chip that ATI has not even touched, let alone seen the specs for. Every calculation that ATI provided was based off the assumption that the RSX is 6800 architecture. This is easily explainable since nVidia stated at E3 '05 that the RSX was more than twice as powerful as their 6800 graphics card. At the time however, the 6800 was the top of the line GPU, and even the 7800 cannot do 1.8 Tflops. To think that Sony would pay nVidia $30 million to shove old architecture into their PS3 is simply foolish. It obviously has custom architecture, as well as some really powerful processing power. Want evidence? Just look at games like Resistance, Motorstorm, F1, Heavenly Sword, Eight Days, FFXIII, etc. It's nice that Microsoft and ATI attempted to do so much damage control after Sony beat them down at E3 '05, but pretty pathetic as well.
We see your point but we don't get the picture. You are comparing games that haven't come out yet. You haven't even played the games yet. What makes you know more about any of the games Jin mentioned compared to what we know? Exactly, nothing. Therefore you have to wait a little while before you can make such comments.
For Deaseased and Jin to start a cat fight. Man you guys are sad.
No real excuss for the ps3 running at 30 FPS since Call of Duty 2 for the xbox 360 at launch also ran at 60FPS. This is unless the ps3 is trying to do 1080p, which I doubt because the journalist would have obviously stated that.
Show a link saying that those games will be running in 1080p at 60 fps when released. I'm not calling you a liar. I just haven't seen the official announcement. I know those games are shooting for 1080p...but 60 fps...i haven't seen that one. And what most people don't know is that at TGS all the ps3 games were being viewed on 1080p tv's. The 360 games were being shown on Standard HD tv's. So when people say..."wow the ps3 games look fantastic"...Much of it is in the TV's they are using. When I play my 360 on my 1080p Samsung TV....it looks notibly better than when I play it on my Sharp Aqua 1080i tv. When the 360 is up converted to 1080p and de interlaced....the games will look better for those people who actually have 1080p tv's. But if you don't have a 1080p tv...you won't see what all the editors are seeing when they talk about how good the ps3 games look. Its mostly reliant on the TV you are viewing it on. If you have a standard HD tv and you play ps3 or 360 games....the differences between the two will be minimal. But once you put either on a 1080p tv...it is a tad sharper and smoother. thats why when they compared the nba 2k7 and the virtua tennis to the 360 versions...they said it was a tad better looking....But if they were to play the 360 on a 1080p tv...they would see they are probably a lot more simular if any differnce at all. Now, it will always come down to the developers. Multi platform games release simultaniously will most always run and look better on the 360. But when games are released a month or more after the 360 version you might see a few upgrades....thats common sense. But games made by Microsoft..."Gears of War" and games made by sony...."motorstorm" will utilize their system the best and most likely look and play better. How they will compare head up? Is yet to be seen. Will the ps3 "premier first party" game look as good as the 360's? We'll see. I have to give the nod to the 360 from all I have read. But stay tuned.
Confirmation of 1080p 60fps NBA 07: http://www.gametrailers.com... RR 7 has already been confirmed for 1080p 60fps: http://static.flickr.com/88... 2K7 may be 1080p 60fps as well, but I haven't read anything on that. Just the better A.I., graphics and cloth animations for the PS3 version (developers words): http://ps3.ign.com/articles...
Xbox live is where the online action is. IM OUT.
You laid that S#!t down bro. Nice post.
Ps3 will be better im sorry but the Xbox360 is old already unlucky for the ppl who payied 4 one should of waited! and ps3 fanbois know ur only upset about this inside!
this is a pretty ignorant statement... the 360 is not old, in fact this article says its running cod3 better than the ps3..
Ok, I think I understand what you are trying to say....and you fail. I have a had a 360 since launch and love it. So not only do I have my 360 and have been playing it, but now I have saved so I can buy a PS3 and enjoy both if I choose. I would say you Sony Fanboy are the unlucky one. You have denied yourself quality gaming all in the name of being a fanboy. I truly hope when you get your PS3 it meets all your expectations and makes you feel justified in your purchase. Sadly, I think you will be left a little short of feeling completely good about the PS3. As for Call of Duty 3. I am excited for this game as I loved Call of Duty 2 on my 360.
but we can thank Sony for that, putting out doubt.
it has already been confirmed that the ps3 gpu is running at 500MHz, the gpu calculations i stated above were perfectly valid. We all know that spec wise, the ps3 has only gone downhill, and was less pwerful than the 360 to begin with.