XDR rambus on the PS3: faster is better

Many argue over the relative power put into the Playstation 3 entertainment system with out fully grasping the technology that has gone into this monumental hardware giant.

The most common issue that people take into account with the system is the seemingly small 256MB of dedicated video and 256MB of system memory.

Click the link for more the jump on what it all really means.

(video is quite long, but informative)

[Iamback]

Ok i "approved" this story but really this isnt that important.

[GutZ31]

Agreed, but then again it hasn't been posted, and it allows people to debate a little more.

Thank you for the approval also :)

[JsonHenry]

I still hold that if they had added a unified memory architecture and used the Rambus RAM that is currently in the system that there would be no doubt as to which is the stronger of the two systems.

But that is not the case. The PS3, while having much faster system RAM compared to the 360, is unfortunately starved for RAM due only 256 megs being directly available to the CELL.

But I am not a system engineer, so what do I know? (about the same as the rest of you?)

[actas123]

PS3 has 2 thats two 256 ODR memory chips, and according to the video ODR is much faster than DDR (used in 360)--------> Ps3 ram is way faster than 360 ram. And if you want to disagree don't disagree with me, instead go get a lawyer and sue Rambus.

[EZCheez]

You said it all right there. What do we know?

I'm sure that a simple 512mb was an option at some point in designing the PS3. But someone smarter than all of us about designing consoles decided it would be better to split it in the way that they did. Considering the way everything else in the PS3 is designed, I'm pretty sure they not only knew what they were doing, but they were REALLY good at it.

We can argue about it until the cows come home and no one will care except us. So I guess a better question would be why do we care?

[Dareaver1]

because if you go to the sony official website, the ps3 has 1 256mb GDDR3 VRAM and 1 256mb XDR RAM, so some of you guys need to stop trying to change things. The XDR ram is impressive, but the GDDR3 Ram is the same as the one in the 360.... So someone should maybe sue sony for putting the wrong type of ram on their site....

[LJWooly]

Jason Henry, you hit the nail right on the head, my friend. We don't know anyhitng compared to the engineers who actually made the damn thing, and the fact that they aren't on N4G arguing with the fanboys who seem to think they know better, just goes to show how little it actually means to argue about it.

I know that neither Sony or Microsoft would stand up for any of us in a fight, so why should we waste our time defending them?

[JsonHenry]

I think the addition of the 7800GTS style video card in the PS3 (which means no unified memory or unified shaders) had more to do with the CELL not performing as well as the GPU as they originally intended.

Look at the new 8800-9800 cards from Nvidia. They all use a unified shader model. At the time it was just not an option for Sony. (at least not a cost or time effective option)

The CELL was originally in development as the next GPU, right? I think I remember reading that somewhere a long time ago.

Anyway, it does not matter. The PS2 was supposedly "superior" by the numbers last gen and it never showed in the video games. Even the gamecube was more powerful.

So fanboys can scream about their platform being better all they want. But I choose to look at games. And this gen the two big guns look so similiar it is not worth griping over one way or the other.

[LJWooly]

I don't know, Jason. When we look at the games, the PS3 seems to actually be showing it's worth. Uncharted already started to widen the gap between the 360 and PS3, and I'm sure things can only get better. For both conosles.

Yeah, it's a great time to be a gamer, regardless of what console you happen to own.

[ruibing]

@JsonHenry
The PS3 actually has a unified memory architecture, it was proven in a white paper on deferred rendering through emulation of a gpu on the cell.

[ravenguard88]

Rambus, a company unable to properly break into mainstream computer memory, it going to milk this for all they can.

Anybody who knows computers will tell you more memory is better than faster memory every time. For the cost of that "superhightech" Rambus chip, you could have put 2gb of DDR2.

Any PC gamers in the house?

EDIT: Wow, I like their claim that an XDR chip is able to support resolutions of 1080p for video... Hrm, I wonder why every new budget video card with "craptacular" ddr3 can handle 1080p video just fine with their little cheap hardware decoders that don't even use the GPU...

[JsonHenry]

I am sorry, but that is NOT the definition of Unified Memory. The fact that the GPU and the CPU both have 256megs of RAM a piece is quite the opposite of a unified memory setup.

Just because the CELL can access the GPU RAM does not mean it is unified.

[JsonHenry]

Dude, you might want to save your breath on this crowd. While I agree with your statement 100% - most of the people on here have NO IDEA what they are talking about and surely have no idea what you or I talk about.

I am a PC gamer first and foremost. And yes, I know that more RAM is better than less but faster RAM.

There is a reason that the CELL and Rambus have not broken into the mainstream, you and I both know why. There is also a reason that Sony is using an Nvidia GPU as well.

But trying to explain to people who do not live and breathe PC components is hard to do.

[LJWooly]

While I agree that the majority on this site don't know what they're talking about, you shouldn't make the mistake of thinking that you're more clever than others, because anyone can be clever when they're sitting behind a keyboard. Everyone's been wrong at least once in their life.

I'm not saying you are wrong, it's just a wee bit presumptive of you to imply that you're too educated for people to understand you. If trying to ake people understand was truly a waste of your time, you wouldn't have been on this site for as long as you have.

[mikeslemonade]

PS2 on paper was not as strong as the Gamecube or Xbox. Xbox was up to 7 times more powerful than the PS2 and the Gamecube was almost as strong as the Xbox however due to PS2's unique archetecture games like God of War 2 were able to be done. I challange you to find any xbox 1 game that surpasses God of War 2. Now PS3 has that unique archetecture like the PS2 so only time will show. As a PC gamer you're short sighted and you only care about what's happening now. Some of us don't want to spend so much money on games so we stick to the system that doesn't need more money thrown at it and power of the system will be discovered over time. Like PC the same goes for 360. It's no coincidence that Gears of War 1 is still the best looking xbox 360 game from more than a year ago. Why would you want a system that peaks and then plateaus after one year?

[ruibing]

Here's the white paper that was published awhile ago:

http://research.scea.com/ps...

"The system's unified memory architecture allows
the Cell/B.E. and GPU to exchange data through shared textures."

"This system combines the
Cell/B.E. with a state of the art GPU in a unified memory
architecture. In this architecture both devices share access to
system memory and to graphics memory. As a result they can
share data and processing tasks."

[DethWish]

@1.12
With that reasoning.. would you be ok with a 10gb page file on the HDD? Would that be working better than 2GB DDR2? :p

[CrazedFiend]

It was posted a LONG time ago. I think b4 the PS3 was released. I've already seen the video, but for a moment there I thought the topic was going to be about improving the technology in the PS3.

But honestly, I didn't bother to watch the video because I could care less about the technology that is already inside the box. No matter how amazing that technology is (and I do think it is amazing, to say the least), what matters is how the games are that come out on the system.

If the developers are not using it, then the technology is not really there, right? Kind of a "if a tree falls in the forest" kind of thing.

Now, if this post was about new technology being implemented into the system, then I would consider that something worth looking at.

[2Negativecool]

The expression is, "I COULDN'T care less."

Honestly, why do so many online dumbf**ks screw this up when it is so f**king elementary!

[ravenguard88]

Sorry, but God of War 2 may have looked and played great on PS2, but it was NOWHERE near the graphical quality of Xbox titles. Again, it is taste, the same taste that makes people say Killzone 2 is graphically superior to Crysis, or the taste that makes people say COD4 is the best looking game of 2007...

[ravenguard88]

This is the first time I have owned a high-end PC in YEARS. I PREFER console gaming, and you are making an incredible assumption to think pc gaming has "blinded me". The PS2 was an over-engineered, over-thought, over-complicated machine, and the PS3 follows in it's footsteps. Sure, there's potential, but the Xbox launch games weren't as good as the final generation games... Same goes for the PS2. Same will go for the Xbox 360 and PS3. Just because PC hardware is so above and beyond that of consoles does not mean it can not be properly utilized, with a PC customization is key. I can take Crysis, and spend an hour messing with the configuration files to make it run like a charm on MY specific hardware. Because I am a PC gamer does not mean I am a rich spoiled brat that tries to best everything with brute force. If anything, it helps me remain objective when speaking about consoles because I don't need to deal with the easily realized fact that console hardware is (rightfully so) nothing special next to expensive PC systems.

Finally, I have owned all systems mentioned above less the PS3, and I have owned them for their games. But, not for a second will I EVER say that ANYTHING on the PS2 could best a well made Xbox title. It's as simple as you have less to work with, PERIOD. 32mb of RAM can't do as much as 64mb, a graphics chip with a lower potential can't suddenly explode outside of it's technical boundaries... I'm almost awestruck that people continue to argue that good PS2 titles could possible ever be as graphically complex as good Xbox titles. Consider this: The Xbox supported 480p and even 720p in some circumstances.

Raw horsepower and lots of RAM will ALWAYS beat "unique architecture" every single time. And, I'd like to know where you got the idea that the Xbox was supposedly 7 times stronger than the PS2? Are you aware that the PS2 in fact (theoretically) outperformed the Xbox in floating point operations?

Oh, and the Gamecube did actually have a better GPU than the Xbox, I heard something about this earlier but I'm too lazy to check who mentioned it.

[sonarus]

WTF lol. Who cares about this $hit all i care about are games. If rambus being faster gives me a better game then fine. I really don't see why i should believe you over the next guy telling me ps3 has unified architecture. All i can believe are good looking games period

[AuToFiRE]

I am an extremely advanced user of electronics, let me clear this up. More RAM is good - to an extent. thats why in the first place they switched to dual core processors, because at one core the heat generated to produce higher speeds was actually killing the transistors and slowing the processor down, so they split the processor into 2 yet both processors are at a slower speed than 1. now they are doing the same thing with the RAM in the PS3 instead of getting lots of heat generating RAM they are narrowing it down to smaller amounts at faster speeds which is still equal if not faster to more RAM at slower speeds. The PS3 uses RAM differently than a home computer, a home computer uses RAM as swap space, it loads the program/image/movie/etc into RAM for it to play smoothly. for the PS3 there is so much processing power there is no need to do that, instead the PS3 can calculate the game in real time and not need to cache the data beforehand, the RAM in the PS3's case is more like a blackjack table if you will, you lay your cards out and sort them for each player and hand (each player can be the equivalent to each CELL processor) and at the end of the hand the cards are discarded(clearing up the table or in this case the RAM) for the next hand to be played

[sonarus]

@ Au To fire. How do you know this. What are your credentials? Not trying to knock you or discredit you but no matter how you argue this everyone will have a point of view on it and everyone will be right.

[AuToFiRE]

I agree with you on that one, everyone does have their own views, but if you look at the PS3 at this way it makes more sense than that of conventional electronics especially with Linux and even more so with windows, for all of you on windows do you ever remember getting those messages "low on virtual memory" well thats because with windows and linux it uses a portion of the hard drive to act as an extension to that of the memory, and to do that you need to access the hard drive, well on the ps3 the only time the hard drive is being accessed is when the game is saving so that is showing it is not using virtual memory or as linux calls it "swap space" so that shows there is enough RAM in it to work properly.

[AuToFiRE]

just on top of this note, the xbox 360 uses regular dual layer dvds(8GB), it is still plausible to use larger amounts of RAM to store the disc onto, with the PS3 it is highly impractical to use the same methods of RAM usage for 50GB of disc

[InMyOpinion]

I'd rather let the games talk. Both the 360 and the PS3 have great games so we don't need this empty tech talk anymore.

Don't get me wrong, I actually love watching tech demos(although they don't always represent what game graphics will look like).

If they want to show how good their XDR rambus is, make a demo of it so we all can see it with our own eyes.

[InMyOpinion]

Ok, empty tech talk rules then. At least give me some feedback.

If there's anything more annoying than achievements it's those damn 'agree'/'disagree' buttons lol!

[The Wood]

but there are still misconceptions about BOTH systems and not everybody was on sites like this from 'your' beginning so its still fresh for some.

Some people still to this day quote and use bd fud as truth and articles like this dispel some of those false truths

I didn't disagree by the way

[LJWooly]

Exactly. We play games, not consoles. A lot of poeple seem to be forgetting that.

[ravenguard88]

The fact that you received a disagree for that causes me to lose all my faith in N4G and, quite possible, humankind.

[macalatus]

@jenzo,

Even though we have had some fights in the past, strong political differences, and you're pro-360, I must admit that you're one of the better people in this site. Your comments are a welcome change of fresh air in this "console war".

[Guwapo77]

...what was she talking about? I had to skip to the PS3 section. I was all kinda lost.

How many gigs per second can Sony's competitor produce? I need some contrast here.

[ravenguard88]

It doesn't matter.

Neither system is dying from bandwidth issues and PCs get by with much worse stats... Yet, outperform the consoles.

[Guwapo77]

You are looking on the now my friend. You need to look at tomorrow and beyond. Yes it matters. You are correct neither system is maxed out with today's games. As we all know, as the Devs become more comfortable with the system the further they push it.

So according to the slide it showed the PS3 capable of pushing a max of 50gig/s. I would like to know for comparison sake is the 360 more or less with 512 megs of unified ram.

I'll make sure to write a more lengthy question next time.

*edit* PCs get by with much worst stats and outperform consoles? Are you serious? My PS3 smokes my PC in every which way.

-Athlon 2500+Barton overclocked 3000+
-Western Digital Raptor x 2 10,000 rpm in Raid0
-1 gig Corsair TWINXP1024-3200C2 2-3-3-6 lat
-ATi x800pro 256mb

Not even in the remotely close...

[morlac]

You ask how much bandwidth 360 has compared to ps3 look at the system specs. System Bandwidth PS3

Main RAM 25.6GB/s
VRAM 22.4GB/s
RSX 20GB/s (write) + 15GB/s (read)
SB< 2.5GB/s (write) + 2.5GB/s (read)
System Floating Point Performance
2 TFLOPS

XBOX 360

* 22.4 GB/s memory interface bus bandwidth
* 256 GB/s memory bandwidth to EDRAM
* 21.6 GB/s front-side bus
System Floating Point Performance
1 TFLOP

So more power means the CPU has to do less work to accomplish the same task. Yes there is less memory in the ps3, but it process the same tasks the XBOX 360 does faster. Which means it can handle extreme gaming with no problem. Both systems are similar and both are high definition graphics. They both have the same titles with the same graphics from what I seen. One other thing Xbox 360 just lost out on the HD DVD market haha. Ps3 is Blue Ray and is the only thing the market is going to make in the high definition format race. BOOYA MAD MONEY.

[GutZ31]

For a little contrast, which this wasn't meant to be a 360 vs ps3 post, you can look at this link for info to your liking.

http://www.xbox.com/en-AU/s...

Again, this is basically just talking about the shear power behind the XDR ram. The PS3 is brought up because it uses it.

[Guwapo77]

I didn't want to make this into a PS3 vs 360 conversation. When a person does not understand how/why the PS3 was made a certain way...I need a contrast to an archetiture I know and understand which is the 360. I was always curious to know why only 256mb system ram was used. The 360 is a traditional platform that almost everyone knows and understands. PS3 well very very few. Hence the request of the contrast.

[GutZ31]

Its really best to watch the full video, because it doesn't tell everything if you just skip to the PS3 section of the video.

The video as a whole is relative to the over all performance of the system.

[Guwapo77]

Cool. I'll check the video out again. Thanks.

[GutZ31]

Thank you guys for the approvals, it really means alot to me for my first story, as small and insignificant as it may be.

Thanks again.

[Frances-the-Mute]

its all good
:)

[skynidas]

Ok

[Mr Playboy]

Bull$hit

[MiniMii]

that the PS3 is the best console hardware in the market.

It was only the xbots on the internet that claimed differently on many forum sites.

But the proof is in the pudding.

[InMyOpinion]

Multiplatform titles tell a different story, and have done so since the release of the PS3 except for COD4(identical) and Burnout(slightly better on PS3). If there's any other multiplatform title than those that interests you, the PS3 will leave you with the lesser version.

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

The Club -
"While general gameplay is also pretty much the same on both consoles, it's an undeniable fact that the Xbox 360 version is the one to have if you're in a position to choose between them. While both run at the requisite 720p, the 360 game looks tangibly superior thanks to a better colour balance, superior lighting effects, and much smoother, full-on anti-aliasing. Additionally, while both games run at 30 frames-per-second, the PS3 version can struggle a touch on the rare occasion when all hell is breaking loose. Also noticeable is that the game's special effects look a touch rougher on PS3, with shader effects that aren't quite as attractive as the Xbox 360's."

I know, I know, it's not the PS3, it's the fact that ALL developers in the world are lazy. PS3 fanboys seem to know the hardware better than the worlds premier developers ;)

[GutZ31]

I think your forgetting that development for the PS3 has practically just started, as last years tech was all about the 360.

The xbox 360 had plenty of time in developers hands with dev kits and easily compiled code from almost any source they felt most comfortable with, basically, developers got lazy and stopped pushing the bar before the PS3 was launched.

One thing to remember is, look back to the PS2 and the Xbox. PS2 was pretty good, but the xbox had it graphically, but after a while, it pushed PS2 devs to step up there game and create some massively beautiful games that almost don't seem possible on the PS2 architecture.

The tables are about to switch as the PS3 finally gets developers working correctly, and then both Xbox 360 and PS3 will be pushing each other to the limits.

[Mr Playboy]

"Multiplatform titles"

Enuff said

Bub Jenzo ;)

"I think your forgetting that development for the PS3 has practically just started, as last years tech was all about the 360. "

I guess you are right, but who is responsible for that "just started" ????

I guess its $ony my friend

bubbles

[InMyOpinion]

How long will we have to wait then??

To me all this "It will take time for the developers until they can unleash the power of the PS3" is just ways of trying to hide the fact that it isn't more powerful than the 360. Even if it does evolve, so will the 360. Just look at the Gears of war 2 tech demo. It wasn't long ago people said "Games on the 360 will never look any better than Gears of War 1". Games and features on both consoles will continue to look better.

For consoles it's not as much about pure hardware power as it is about finding new techniques of enhancing graphics. Like Epic's use of texture streaming etc.

Back 'atcha Playboy!

[GutZ31]

that new technology that you speak of for GoW2 was perfected on the PS3 with Unreal Tournament 3.

why do you think they were so happy about there over all experience with the PS3 after they released the game?

Basically, the PS3 is going to be pushing for developers to make games for both systems run the systems specs to the ground till every ounce of power is at its disposal.

[MiniMii]

You know, today I realized why we all get upset on these forums again. Some of these xbot scum arent just annoying. No, they are downright disgusting.

I mean, you come in here despite all the proof shown and then you whine and ask us how long we have to wait till developers get grip with the complicated PS3 hardware.

How is that even an argument? You talk like as if you wake up in the morning and your life depended on some unknown multi platform game coming out that must look better on the PS3 or else...

Or else what, boy. I ask again. Or else what, boy. Do you only have 2 months to live or something. Do us all a favor and get a frikkin clue!

How long have you been waiting then. Uh I can answer that one. You waited 1 minute. The time it took for you to write something down and post it on N4g.

Unless you literally wake up in the morning and spend the whole day sitting on your couch waiting for the promised multi platform game that will look better on the PS3, you havent waited jack shiat. Okay.

And FYI UT3 and COD4 look stellar and awesome. And yes, they are both multi platforms. Finally, who cares about multi platforms anyway.

Exclusives are where its at. And PS3 exclusive look absolutely unsurpassed. The power of the system can be seen on its exclusives. And by golly, PS3 got a whole line up of exclusives, all top of their respective genres and found nowhere else.

Now what.

The best of each genre, can be found exclusively for the PS3. There is no denying. And since they are exclusive, they look absolutely stunning. You can tell how desperate you xbots are, when you then try to convince us how "multi platform titles dont push the PS3."

As if COD4, DMC4, UT3 and many others look like crap on the PS3. So delusional. So delusional.

[InMyOpinion]

Not capable of answering me without name-calling?

Are you calling me "boy"? Nice of you to make racist remarks.

"2 months left to live"? That's just...

I pity you.

[MiniMii]

is hardly the same as making a racist comment. So how does that in any way relate to skin, religion, race or sex. Youre being delusional again, x'boy'. Whoops, I mean xbot.

How do you refer to someone who is 14 years old then if not with 'boy'. Would you rather have me call you 'kid'.

And you actually responding to my 'question' about whether or not you have only got 2 months to live, shows how little you actually understand what was being said there.

I ask again, kid. Do you wake up every morning sitting on your couch, biting your nails, staring at the wall, cursing at developers, waiting for the promised game that looks better than the 360? Cos thats the only time you can actually claim to have been "waiting so long".

You xbots are uninformed and clueless. And delusional.

[tidus007]

Blazing angels 1, tiger woods 08, Oblivion , RR7, DMC4 ( IGN said that FUKXBOT), Burnout ( runs at 2x speed) , COD4 are wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better on PS3

However nothing on that GARBAGE BOX 3 fix me comes even close to Uncharted graphically or Heavenly Sword in terms of technical acheievements (1000 enemies)

@JENZO the GA*BOT ...nothing on x360 comes close to PS3's exclusive titles.

even GEARS2 looked Crap vs uncharted not to even mention GT5 ,FF13 ,KZ2

[tidus007]

IGN said that

DAILYGAME said that

GAMEZONE said that

*******DONT bring that MS moneyhatting eurogamer article

GAMEPRO clearly said tht COD4,BURNOUT,DMC4 --all look and run better on PS3

MULTIPLAT games that matter all look better on PS3

RR7 which is RR6 basically runs at 1080p AT 60 FPS vs just 720p and 30 fps on GARBAGE BOX 3 FIX ME

[Mr Playboy]

calm down my friend, no need to insult other person because he loves what you hate

Just take a deep breath and you should be fine

[tidus007]

that garbage box 360 is now the least selling console in USA too.

That is dead GARBAGE BOT. You TARD will leave this N4G soon

http://www.highdefforum.com...

"With that said, the console similarities end when it comes to textures, lighting and resolutions, because those three areas make the PlayStation 3 version definitely excel over the Xbox 360 SKU."

COD4 PS3 version ---9.6 at GAMEZONE
http://ps3.gamezone.com/gam...

COD4 GBOX version---9.5 at GAMEZONE
http://xbox360.gamezone.com...

DMC4 better on PS3 ( better FR,graphics, faster FR too 60 fps vs 45 on 3 FIX ME)

"Like most multi-console games, any review would inevitably have to come down to which system is better, and for this instance, the PS3 winds up winning out just slightly. It's not in the gameplay department, because DMC4 plays the same regardless of which system that you play on. Nor is it in the visual department, because visual issues are virtually negligible. For example, the 360 has some harder edges to some characters during cutscenes, and a little more screen tearing than the PS3 at times. The PS3 can be a wee bit darker during some scenes, though. Both systems show off a certain amount of render passing that pops into focus on sweeping vista shots, but they occur at the same time on each system and are quickly dismissed. However, observing these differences will only come via frame-by-frame analysis of each game side-by-side. Even then, you're still receiving an incredible visual experience."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles...

BURNOUT PARADISE ---wa yyyy better on PS3

I am nt an IGN insider but log on to their HEAD TO HEAD video

PS3 version of BURNOUT runs at 2x the speed, has better graphics and better textures

http://insider.ign.com/teas...

XBUGS OWNED

[Percy]

Next time you come across a dictionary look up the words hardware and software you will find there is a diffrence this article is about how powerful the ps3 is not about how successful devolopers have been at utilizing that power. I'm not trying to say the devlopers suck just that what sony has created is a very large step forward and one that many were not prepared for.

[InMyOpinion]

And then everybody went completely insane...

[Azurite]

Pretty sure I saw this video some year(s) ago.
May imagining things.

[GutZ31]

Your actually right, this is pretty old, but N4G never picked it up for some reason.

[ruibing]

I saw the main video on Rambus but not the alternate link to the Rambus specifically for the PS3.

[PeterGriffinSays]

I thought it was a great site. Showed me some some new info I aint know beforehand.

[Sir Ken Kutaragi 3]

...Console EVER!!! ;-P

[poopsack]

You guys do know hes being sarcastic right? This is the guy thats been bashing onthe PS3 on every single post ive seen him in.

[LJWooly]

Hey, don't worry about it. If it's a joke, you should take it as such.

[gEnKiE]

Its not so much of the ram being split up anymore as to how much memory the PS3 needs to run the OS. Developers can access any amount of the ram if they need, just not what is used for the OS.

[Expy]

The OS is decreasing ram usage every few firmware updates or so, they are reducing the amount of memory allocated (and used) by the OS gradually.

It's minimal anyway, the RAM is used mainly for fast calculations and most other data that needs to be stored can be streamed to the hard disk and cached there for later use.

[GutZ31]

You would think that the memory would be getting eaten up by firmware upgrades to the Ps3, but there are many cutbacks in the usage of the memory also, from version 1.5 to 2.0 it cut about 16MBs of used ram.

[actas123]

SO according to the video. An ODR 2 X 256 Ram is not only on bar but way faster than 1 X 512 DDR, and since Rambus has not been sued by anyone over this claim, this leads me to believe that everything they said is actually true.
Which means the PS3 Ram is way faster than xbox 360 ram. Even though it seems to some people otherwise.

[Dareaver1]

the xdr ram is way faster than the 360's yes, but that's only 256mb, the GDDR3 VRAM is the same speed (700mhz, just in case you didn't know, because you seem to want to infer a lot).

[Dareaver1]

for telling the truth, plus facts. I mean please if the 360's 512mb of GDDR3 RAM runs at 700mhz, and the PS3's 256mb of GDDR3 RAM run at 700mhz, then how are they not running at the same speed. The 256mb of XDR RAM is a beast and has no equal running at 3.2ghz, and i said that it was faster than the 360's ram. So how was i wrong and got disagrees, I guess wonders never cease.

[GIJeff]

their video ram is pretty much the same. but system ram, the ps3 wins no prob. end of discussion, NEXT.

[Dareaver1]

I know that, that's exactly what i said, but i got disagrees because i pointed out that the PS3 and 360 have the same video ram. I had to correct someone mouthing off that both Video and System RAM was faster than 360's, which is not true. But I did say that the system ram is the only differentiating component and is extremely fast (about 4.57 times faster than the 360's unified setup).

I guess someone assumed that i was lying, i don't know. Probably an uninformed blind fanboy.

[Guwapo77]

See the problem with your statement is that you're claiming the PS3 is bottlenecked by the 700mhz GPU. This is the problem with a lot of the average poster thinks. The Cell's SPEs processes majority of the graphics on the PS3. So having the 3.2 ghz XDR coupled with 3.2 ghz SPEs tackles graphical info that needs to be processed right away and stuff that can addressed at a slower pace the GPU handles. This is the problem the Devs were having the problems in tackling. Learning how to use the Cell as main number cruncher not the GPU.

[GIJeff]

both system use gddr3 video ram. That does not mean both systems are the same. Its like saying the ps3 is the same as the genesis because they both use electricity. The ps3's graphics chip is much more advanced, especially when paired with the cell. But thats not the point of this article/video. The point of this video is that the ps3's system ram is extremely fast. The 360 shouldn't even be brought up here people.

[pswi60]

that's nice, but sort of misleading. let me disclaim first that i am a ps3 fan, and i've done alot of research into the ps3 architecture. yes, the xdr ram is fast, however the gpu also has to access this ram on a slower bus. here's how the ps3 flows:

cell -> xdr <-> rsx -> ddr -> output

im not saying the ps3 is any less powerful, but the rsx bus to xdr is about 15.6Gb/s slower than the cell to xdr. the cell does have a back door bus to rsx to make up for this at 20Gb/s, however that just makes programming that much harder.

the cell is designed to pre-render any graphics it can before it goes to the rsx, and anything that can be sent readily can be sent on a different bus right to the rsx. however i can understand why there is so much difficulty with programming for the ps3, due to splitting up code among 6 SPU's and having 2 different busses to the rsx with a limited scalar (horizontal only).

once devs get a template down across the board, i truly believe games will start walking away from the competition, more than they already have. more enemies on-screen, more physics, bigger worlds, better game engines, etc... better graphics is not just making things look better, its also making things look better on a larger scale.

[The_Engineer]

so now the memory is rasterizing instead of the rsx??

mkaaayyyyyy bub....lol

[pswi60]

i don't see how you gathered that from my post. can you form your statment into a question?

[GutZ31]

The statement that the RSX has to go through the XDR memory is ignorantly bless of technical knowledge.

The RSX communicates directly with the cell processor in almost every way, unless you are the worst coder on earth, EA would tell you that you need to code it the way that you describe.

The truth is that both the XDR and RSX ram talk directly to the cell processor, but the cell puts a redundancy on visuals back out to the XDR if further processing of visual data is needed.

Most data is directed in and out, no pass throughs of unneeded redundancy unless there is a defferad rendering at play, which does most work still in the cell.

[pswi60]

you are right. i got confused by the redundant bus back to xdr. so the cell communicates directly with rsx, but the point i was trying to make is still relevant (i think)...yeah the xdr is fast BUT the bus from cell to rsx is much slower than cell to xdr....hope that makes sense and sorry for the confusion.

[GutZ31]

I think your retraction is well placed, but I really think you should read the developers grips as they are unfounded, its more of they want to hit a button and have everything done for them.

The hardships come down to whats in a name, on a CPU, you run a loop to the memory, on the PS3 its to the DMA or Direct memory allocation(dont remember if this is right).
To run a vector matrix multiplier, it can be simplifyed from multiplying a vector (x,y,z,w) by a 4x4 matrix at:

(x'y'z'w')=(x y z w)*(m00 m01 m02 m03)
(m10 m11 m12 m13)
(m20 m21 m22 m23)
(m30 m31 m32 m33)

To using a preswizzle:

(m02 m13 m20 m31)
(m12 m23 m30 m01)
(m00 m11 m22 m33)
(m10 m21 m32 m03)

With a simple command bringing a vector multiply in 6 instructions.

rotqbyi yzwx, xyzw, 4
fm temp, xyzw, m0_
fma temp, yzwx, m1_, temp
rotqbyi result, temp, 8
fma result, xyzw, m2_, result
fma result, yzwx, m3_, result

and I could go on, but most wouldnt even get it.
so why wast my time right?

[tidus007]

bubbles for you man

@PSwii60

dont invent CRAP out of your AS*. RSX can directly access the full XDR ram and its bus. DONT post CRAP everytime.

sell your 3 FIX ME

[pswi60]

i didn't invent anything. my original statement is accurate, however i didn't realize the rsx could access the cell without using the xdr ram.

when Gutz corrected me i admitted i was wrong. what else do you want?

sorry i'm not a blind ignorant sony fanboy. i've owned a ps3 since launch and if you take the time to view my comment history, you will see i've stuck up for sony on many occasions.

however selling my 360 is not an option as i like having more than 1 console, so i don't end up a complete loser like yourself.

if i didn't know any better, i would guess TANOD = tidus? i used to like your posts man, but now you are lashing out at your own kind.

[bigjclassic]

It makes since now when you look at games like KZ2 and FFXIII.
Both studios claim that the footages were in real-time, and with the RAM speed along with the CELL, HDD and BD-ROMS those types of visuals can be accomplished. We as gamers are not going to be able to tell a difference until MGS4 drops, since MGS4 will be the most demanding PS3 game to date.

IF MGS4 can run without clipping, frame-drops and screen tearing then the PS3 is doing something right.

[SSJSubgeta]

Basically what all these DDR numbers mean is as memory evolves it decreases power consumption and calculates more fast.

DDR3 1.5 Volts
DDR2 1.8 V.
DDR 2.5 V.

As for the PS3 memory it has 256MB XDR Main RAM that is used for the OS. Which is small. Some of you dismiss the fact that its console not a PC machine. The PS3 has less components to work with then a PC. Whereas a PC has to deal with a heavy assortment of hardware and software.

When you are playing a game the OS of the PS3 is not being utilized. Thus this ram is free of use. If I remember correctly Sony did mention that if and when the PS3 needed more RAM. The PS3 was designed to access/page that memory for use.

To keep it simple and do a simple comparison to me it looks like this:

PS3 = a PC with its own 256 XDRam and 256MB GDDR3 VRam
360 = a Laptop with 512MB of Shared video/Memory

[Dareaver1]

but the OS in the PS3, like the 360, is always active and runs in the background, but with every firmware they've done, they have been reducing the size of the ram used by the OS.

[potenquatro]

fail on the ps3=pc 360=laptop part and an os never stops running.

[SSJSubgeta]

potenquatro, I compared the 2 systems to my own comparison,
to my own opinion.

"To keep it simple and do a simple comparison to -->ME<-- it looks like this:"

To contradict something I mentioned,
My comparison seems to be a bit true on the PS3's counterpart. The option to install another OS like Linux. Thus utilizing a mouse and keyboard, options to connect a web cam, printer etc. Shall we say it's close to resembling a PC somewhat.

To: Dareaver1
I mentioned that the PS3 OS(XMB) was not using the full 256XDR when in game. Apparently I don't know if you do or don't own a PS3. If you do you'd know you don't have the XMB appear once you press the PS button in-game. You have to exit out of the game to access the XMB(OS of the PS3). Hence the fact that you have to EXIT out of the Game(Program) to return to the PS3's OS. So at this point and time the OS(XMB)of the PS3 does not run in the background.

[potenquatro]

i totally respect ur opinion. i'm just saying the comparison fails as a mesuring tool since, u can change os on a laptop and you can use mouse and keyboard on 360, and a very powerfull laptop like my wife's hp hdx 20 inches or my mac pro 17 inches is alot more powerful than most of the desktops out there, theres to much of a grey area in that logic. the fact that you have to exit a game to get to the xmb is an inconvinience when considering the competition found a way around it, but it does not mean the os stops running. maybe the ps3 switches between sony's own os and linux, but i doubt it. my experience with faster memory and faster gpu like the playstaion's is efficcency benefits more than raw power. maybe thats why i'm on my 2nd 360 and still have the one ps3 i got more than a year ago, idk. but imo, we shouldn't take this as a clear cut sign of superiority. faster memory and gpu usually means better frame rates and fps have been iffy on ps3. if there is a botleneck.............

[Bathyj]

Another people dont realize is that PS3's graphics are NOT just the GPU. They can be done on the Cell as well and speed which the Cell and the RSx talk to each other is amazing.

Used right the Cell and RSX is actually one big powerhouse. Cell can use its own power and memory to do things normally done on the GPU, effectively freeing up the graphics processor for other things. PS3's RAM is better, and yes it is split but the PS3 strength lies in how the CPU and GPU work together as one.

Rookies may have problems with this. Devs that have done their homework wont. Thats probably alot of the reason why Xbox ports suck on PS3 because if they did a certain part using 400mb of Ram on the Xbox then the same results can be achieved, but now buy simply porting it over. It needs to be programed the PS3 way to get best results.

Is it any wonder all the best games on PS3 are 1st party or in the rare case like CoD4 its, not a port and had its own separate team coding just for it. Sometimes you have to unlearn what you already know to learn something new or different.

[macalatus]

Also, that's another reason why developers such as Lucasarts are making the PS3 as the lead platform for their games. An example of this would be Burnout: Paradise for the PS3. DISCLAIMER: The last sentence ISN'T meant to say that the PS3 version is better than the 360, so I truly hope nobody flames me on this one!

[Guwapo77]

This was something I was trying to convey in an earlier post but you summed it up nicely. +1 /salute.

[Monkeynator]

Many parts of the PS3 contribute to it's performance, but this tech news focuses on the RAM aspect. Rambus makes some interesting ram, but they have always had issues with getting it to be used wide scale in the PC world. Supposedly they also have had a hand in the memory technologies in use today, or at least they have sued companies over supposed IP violations. From watching how they have presented their cases and evidence against them I believe they are not trustworthy.

Tech wise the solution used in the PS3 is somewhat cool. At some point though you have to wonder if high speed RAM or large amounts of RAM would work better for gaming. Remember that DDR is not slow by any means, so how fast do you need memory to be if you can already cache what you need in RAM? With very, very fast Rambus DRAM it may sound great to have all that speed, but where are you going to store all the data you create? Since you can't store as much extra info then you have to design a system with tighter tolerances and quicker reflexes.

Seriously though, while producing good effects in 256MB + 256MB is quite possible so is 128MB + 128MB, yet we don't want to be masochists and demand such systems. On a side note, the split system actually contributes to the speed by cleanly limiting/organizing data access. If the system was used as a unified 512MB block, then would it really perform better? Maybe, maybe not as the requests from all the processors would be working in the same space, but the system is faster so maybe it can handle the traffic.

[DFresh]

The proof is there technology is the best and up for grabs now it's up to the developers to unlock that new technology.
Games are now better looking off the PS3 now.
ex.)
Burnout Paradise
COD4
DMC4
Assassins Creed
Turok
GTAIV (Confirmed recently by Rock Star Games.)
Soul Calibur 4 (It's Namco a Sony Exclusive Company)
etc.
Tables are turning fast if you've seen some of the technology invested in the new PS3 Exclusives like Killzone 2, Resistance 2, Eight Days, Tekken 6, MGS4, Ratchet & Clank Future, Uncharted Drake's Fortune, FFXIII, etc. you'll notice there's still so much to learn from the PS3 it's ridiculous.
Hell...there are games the ones mentioned on top that couldn't be made on the 360 cuz unless MS can prove they can make a game better than Gears of War 2 than their not the best.
I've seen Gears of War 2 graphics they look almost the same to the 1st game only a hair better in visuals the only thing that has changed is the visuals. Physics the same, story a little bit better, weapons the same, environments the same style only now your in a different place.
Noting to be impressed about when it comes to 360 exclusives and technology.

Everything MS says is better always isn't and loses.
ex.) HD DVD, Multi-platform Games, Online, Better Graphics, and Achievements, etc.

1.) HD DVD- Announced 2 weeks ago Toshiba is dropping out of the HD Format Race due to lack of support and sales.

2.) Multi-platform Games: Only because of weak Xbot Ports start off w/ Sony get a better deal.

3.) Online: For now MS is in the lead but once Home comes out in April this little dilemma will be a thing of the past.

4.) Graphics: Once from a multi-platform stand point but not any more however Sony was always better from the start on exclusives now better on multi-platform games.

5.)Achievements: Earning awards for games on your console.
Home Trophy Room all in 1080P w/ 4D rotation in your virtual home space. MS is in the lead but just wait until April and this will also be proven wrong.

If you don't pay attention to gaming shows and news not noticing that the PS3 is starting to make a comeback and prove people wrong about it's technology then your blind.

The more you Xbots hate and disagree the more foolish you look and your just proving my point.

[GutZ31]

I would agree with this post, but your fanboy was showing its face a bit, assassins creed looked pretty much the same on both consoles, only think the PS3 had going for it was super whites.
Turok is a blattent fraud, as its graphics sucked on both systems, and I still found the 360 version having better environments.

the others you maybe right about, but try to keep your fanboy in your pants before jumping the PS3s taint to the point its crying in a corner.

[Ariexv]

Umm you do realize you're pretty much wrong about all those right?
Burnout Paradise-This one your right, but that's because the 360s version is a port.
COD4-360 has higher res textures.
DMC4-Look identical, the small differences are arguable.
Assassins Creed-Arguable again + it runs alot better on 360
Turok-No Contest 360 version dominates.
GTAIV-They said they looked Identical.
Soul Calibur 4-No-ones even seen the game yet.
Then when you add in every other 3rd person title ever the 360 dominates
Madden-60FPS on 360 30FPS on Ps3
Lost Planet-lol Do I even need to list the problems?
Club-360 better

Do you really want me to keep going? Ps3 has exactly one title that looks better/performs better on their system and it's a port.

[tidus007]

COD4 ( has way better textures on PS3 ) --dailygame,IGN ,Gamepro and Gamezone

Gamezone gave the PS3 version 9.6 and 9.5 to xbug version

DMC 4 is better on PS3---IGN,GAMEPRO,GAMESRADAR
read IGN's DMC4 review (ps3 version)

Burnout --way better on PS3 ( IGN, GAMEPRO)

Assassin's Creed --- way better on PS3 ( Gamesradar,Gamepro)

RR7 --1080p at 60 FPS on PS3 ----same game RR6 720p 30 Fps on 3 FIX ME

Oblivion ---PS3 is better ( said by the DEV themselves)

Blazing Angels -- PS3 is better (iGN)

Tiger Woods --PS3 is better ( gamespot)

Madden /NCAA wil run at 60 FPS on PS3 this year. It will look identical to the xbug version

However Uncharted makes any Garbage box 3 FIX me game look like PILE OF CRAP. HS has 1000 enemies on screen --- a feat which GARBAGE BOX 3 FIX ME will never achieve due to its very weak hardware.

LAIR had 20,000 enemies on screen ----GARBAGE BOX will need 10 XENONS to do that

[Ariexv]

You can go ahead and quote the few sites who give yours a better score but lets look @ the overall Scores

Oblivion
Ps3-93
360-94

Rock Band
360-93
Ps3-92

Burnout Paradise
Ps3-87
360-88

DMC4
Both-84

Cod4
Both-94

Orange Box
360-96
Ps3-89

Do I need to keep going? Every multiplatform title is either better on 360, or equal to the Ps3 version.

Then because I feel like making you look like a retard for buying a Ps3 just for sh1ts and giggles.

Ps3 titles w/ 90+ score=3
Xbox 360 Titles w/ 90+ scores=11

Ps3 titles 80+ Scores=45
360 Titles w/ 80+ score=88

Top rated Ps3 exclusives=Ratchet and Clank, and Ninja Gaiden Sigma

Ninja Gaiden Sigma=Remake of an XBOX ONE game.

Your best exclusives are equal to or worse then an XBOX ONE game that I can buy online for $15.

Now let's look @ the upcoming Year

Ps3's Biggest Exclusives
KZ2-Killzone 1 avg Score=70(LMAO)
Resistance 2-R1 avg score=85
MGS4-avg MGS score=94
GT5:Prologue-GT4 Prologue-70(lmao)

360's Biggest Exclusives This year
Gears of War 2- Gears 1 Avg score=94
Ninja Gaiden II-Ninja Gaiden avg score=94
Fable 2-Fable avg score=85
Banjo kazooie 2-Banjo kazooie Avg Score=92

Ps3 Avg Score-79(C)
360 Avg Score-91(A)

Then we can pretty much guarantee that most Multi-Platform games run better on 360, since that's been the case since the Ps3's release. And Also factor in the biggest Multi-Platform game of the year (GTA IV) having up to twice as much content on 360.

So overall 360 Dominates Ps3 once again this year, and does it at a lower Price, Man I sure would feel like an Idiot If I bought a Ps3..... that is unless of course I bought it as a Movie player which it seems most Ps3 owners did. Enjoy Your C rated gaming system~

[nicholascage24]

you have to come up reviews of XBOT mags/websites to move ahead of PS3 version???

XBX magazine gave PGR4 10/10....what a joke . that joke game

Uncharted has 90% average
http://www.gamerankings.com...

Ratchet has 89%
http://www.gamerankings.com...

GT5 P is A DEMO ((pISS XBOT)

The full game will definitely average over 94%---XBOT

GTA4 doesnt have 2x as much content on X360. GTA4 will have the same content on PS3 and X360. PS3 will get its own DLC

Multiplat games that matter are all better on PS3. From now on all multiplat games also look better on PS3 ( most do nowadays)

Big MULTI titles like COD4, DMC4,AC and BURNOUT all look better on PS3

***************************** *************THANKS to TIDUS above
http://www.highdefforum.com...

"With that said, the console similarities end when it comes to textures, lighting and resolutions, because those three areas make the PlayStation 3 version definitely excel over the Xbox 360 SKU."

COD4 PS3 version ---9.6 at GAMEZONE
http://ps3.gamezone.com/gam...

COD4 GBOX version---9.5 at GAMEZONE
http://xbox360.gamezone.com...

DMC4 better on PS3 ( better FR,graphics, faster FR too 60 fps vs 45 on 3 FIX ME)

"Like most multi-console games, any review would inevitably have to come down to which system is better, and for this instance, the PS3 winds up winning out just slightly. It's not in the gameplay department, because DMC4 plays the same regardless of which system that you play on. Nor is it in the visual department, because visual issues are virtually negligible. For example, the 360 has some harder edges to some characters during cutscenes, and a little more screen tearing than the PS3 at times. The PS3 can be a wee bit darker during some scenes, though. Both systems show off a certain amount of render passing that pops into focus on sweeping vista shots, but they occur at the same time on each system and are quickly dismissed. However, observing these differences will only come via frame-by-frame analysis of each game side-by-side. Even then, you're still receiving an incredible visual experience."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles...

BURNOUT PARADISE ---wa yyyy better on PS3

I am nt an IGN insider but log on to their HEAD TO HEAD video

PS3 version of BURNOUT runs at 2x the speed, has better graphics and better textures

http://insider.ign.com/teas...

XBUGS OWNED

***************************** ***********************

Thanks to Tidus007 for those finds

lol XBOT having got 0 games this year you have to resort to a multiplat title like GTA4 which will sell 2x as much on PS3 in EUROPE and will also sell as much as the TRASH BOX version in USA.

GTA4 content 2x as much?????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????
you mean TRASH BOX DLC which is just costumes and some crap achievements???

GTA4 will be the same on both PS3 and X360 . PS3 will have its own DLC too.

However we dont just have GTA4 . We have KZ2,MGS4,LBP and R2. You have nothing.

GT5 P is a DEMO ...yet it got 9/10 from many websites. It makes any TRASH BOX games look like a n64 game including FOOOOORZA and PGCRAP4

Multiplat games that ARE BIG are all better on PS3 . It will get even better this year

BTW XBOT 'DIRT" is also better on PS3 according to the DEVS themselves too. DIRT looks and runs much better on PS3

RR7 runs at 2x the speed on PS3 and at 1080p. RR6 (x360 version) ran at 720p with 30 fps

So overall most multiplat games are looking better on PS3

X360 has no games this year and even Gears 2 pales against 60 player R2 with 8 player coop. X360 is fit only for repair shop with movies at 480p on its broken DVD rom (backdated and outdated)

[Ariexv]

Comon, can you come up with more excuses "WAHH PRO-XBOX SITE WAAH" there's plenty of sites on their that are Pro-Ps3 as well. Even then w/ Uncharted gaining a 90% that's still BARELY a AAA title and that still leaves you with ONE. You have 1 valid game that's better on Ps3 and that's because it was PORTED to 360 and even then the difference is almost non-existent. As for no games in 2008 lets try this again

Ps3's Biggest Exclusives
KZ2-Killzone 1 avg Score=70(LMAO)
Resistance 2-R1 avg score=85
MGS4-avg MGS score=94
GT5:Prologue-GT4 Prologue-70(lmao)

360's Biggest Exclusives This year
Gears of War 2- Gears 1 Avg score=94
Ninja Gaiden II-Ninja Gaiden avg score=94
Fable 2-Fable avg score=85
Banjo kazooie 2-Banjo kazooie Avg Score=92

Ps3 Avg Score-79(C)
360 Avg Score-91(A)

You guys are looking forward to a sequel to a mediocre FPS(resistance) and a sequel to a game that was flat-out terrible(KZ). Meanwhile we have a sequel to Gears which Destroyed R1, your only argument is the amount of players that can play online..... which didn't save R1 from being destroyed by Gears 1 and won't save R2, along w/ that we have 2 sequels to AAA titles in Banjo and NG. That pretty much leaves you with Little-Big-Planet which was supposed to be a PSN game but now sonys going to be charging you idiots $60 for a game that is essentially HD Super Mario Bros w/ Co-op and custom lvls. Then just to add insult to injury we have Too Human which every recent preview of it has said it's amazing, and Alan Wake which is acknowledged as being better graphically then Crysis. O and as Far as trash DLC, You do realize R* is going to make th e DLC amazing right? Every cent of that $50 million that the DLC doesn't make back for MS has to be paid for. Do You really think it's going to be something small? No it's going to be huge.

[Snukadaman]

Good job...first things first...I love how people are saying the ps3 is just catching its stride...how long did it take...back from the get go it was claimed the ps3 was far superior...but multi platform game after another showed the xbox on top...yet the games that are supposedly better are COD4 and devil may cry....I have not seen one website which gives the edge too any console in either game....best they can come up with are better online for cod4
(which by the way is still waiting for a patch..which should give you a idea of that BS) and devil may cry's best asset is the install...which supposedly gives you better loading times...I will say the best game the ps3 has as we speak is burnout paradise..but it also ruined the xbox version with its washed out graphics...face it..the ps3 delayed gta4...anyone who says different is lying too themselves...as I said before..the ps3 might be superior in some peoples eyes..but too the majority its just a problematic console that cant be trusted yet..now some of you morons will pull out the RROD card and say..."well you cant be trusted with that rrod"....I will say again..I already have one headache with the xbox..why get another one with the ps3....I do see some ps3 fanboys who admit too some problems with the ps3...I will state..the xbox aint perfect..but with its stable of games....with its superiority in multi
platform games...its well worth the headache.

And I will state it right now....I put that on my first born child I have but only one account on this website...Im not so fanatical where I have too make up different accounts too shout my message to the masses...whats the use anyways...those with many accounts will disagree anyways so why the hell bother.

[Ludwig]

Rambus is so good, it Lucking FAILED on the PC market.

PS3/Cell architecture was built to use XDR from scratch because back when they first started it was the most promissing kind, xcept it's lucking expensive and not enough power to back it up... hence only half of the memory being XDR.

[poopsack]

Im gonna have to go look up what the luck lucking means then. Maybe your babble will make sense then

[GIJeff]

using xdr in my PC...oh if only.

[zapass]

you sound like these dumb PC coders who are pooping their pants now that the 360 swindle is falling apart. "sh!t, I thought learning directx was enough to make it into the games industry!"

LEARN

[DeadlyFire]

I wouldn't say XDR has failed for the PC market just yet. Its to early for that. They will work themselves into the PC market in the next 15 years at somepoint or fall flat and disappear in 5-10 years. They are starting to push XDR around and its yet to be picked up, but its likely someone will at least give it a good trail run at the PC market before discarding it. Likely XDR 2 will appear in some gaming system in 2010-2015 as well. PS4 anyone? XDR 2 is 4-5 times faster than GDDR 5 and DDR 3 RAM. :P

XDR Ram isn't as expensive as you would think either. It had nothing to do with large PS3 price tag. Blu-Ray was the only big push that did that to PS3.

[morlac]

quote( PS3/Cell architecture was built to use XDR from scratch because back when they first started it was the most promissing kind, xcept it's lucking expensive and not enough power to back it up... hence only half of the memory being XDR.) Yes, but you are incorrect with saying the ps3
doesn't have the power to back it up sir. It has double the power of the XBOX360 and can process it faster, its all about teraflops man.

[Rice]

woah 1tb a second....

[gambare]

It's with the games itself, multiplat games are becoming better in the PS3 unlike the last year, the games released over the past year weren't quite awesome but this year are totally breath taking and the games for the next year, who knows?

[djroberts]

Kind of lame. The PS3 lacks certain caching that the 360 has but has overall faster memory. It was a smart architectural move because they wanted consistent and predictable results rather that relying on the less consistent but sometimes superior caching performance.

The animation doesn't provide any useful information.

[PimpHandStrong]

its all greek to me

[eagle21]

shame on you...lol

[Snukadaman]

some of us might be falling for microsofts hype...problem is your falling for sonys and you got less games....so how about you go watch a movie or fold@home?

[eagle21]

Get your mind out of the early 07' gutter that Microsoft served you..lol

[potenquatro]

that was a very enlightening comment.

[DrakenSilverwing]

1TB a sec!, so what they saying PS4 is goin to be that fast or faster?? i wouldn't be surprised.. just do a multicore next gen cell processor along with that XDR? would be nice to see.

[meepmoopmeep]

XDR is not mainstream and so it will cost more and the Cell is already mulit-core. unless they put cores inside each core.

[Pain]

PS3>> your crappy console. LOL Xbot kids spin all u Want.

[stuntman_mike]

i didnt understand any of that??

[grilledgorlupa8]

ps3 = high tech

[Tru2U]

Go play a game and STFU.

The only thing I would use that video for is to help me get to sleep late at night.

[grilledgorlupa8]

Hmmm All I know is now I'm really excited for Final Fantasy XIII

[1-800-4MY-XBOX]

1-800-4MY-XBOX for all your coffin needs.

[heyheyhey]

daaaaamn

i want this stuff in my PC NOW!!!

is it available for consumer purchase? even so soon after the release of DDR3? (which sucks cause it's too expensive and i think the latencies don't yet match DDR2)

[DJ]

And it's a good thing that Sony chose XDR RAM for its CPU memory pool. I just read through Naughty Dog's white paper on how they constructed their engine for Uncharted, and I was surprised at how efficiently built their system was. Not a single MB of XDR went unused. Sony also decreased the memory footprint of the OS from 60MB to 47MB (that's shown in their slides), and is continually trying to decrease it in size.

The high bandwidth also helped them out stuff like rendering the water particles on Cell, animation blending, and pre-culling of vertices in order to get the insanely high polygon counts we see in-game. The in-game characters are composed of around 20,000 polygons, which is 3~4x greater than other games on the market.

[GETPWNZORED]

LOL. Great headline! Sony PR FTW! Too bad results say otherwise.... awwww....

[Alcaponeyou]

i can sense it.

[potenquatro]

the ps3 is an overall faster machine i think. rsx is faster than 360's gpu. maybe linux is bottlenecking.

[Ri0tSquad]

PS3 is the superior console this generation. Multiplatform games ported from the 360 to PS3 have always turned into a mess except for when devs delay it to work on it (DiRt runs smoother, Oblivion is superior on PS3,) but when the exact opposite happens we either get an identical or superior version on the PS3. It seems as if the only games that actual push the PS3 in any sort of way are the exclusives.

[Qwagy UK]

Who cares let the games be the judging factor in this debate!!!

[Monkeynator]

Even if the games are good, it doesn't mean the tech for the memory architecture was what paid off. The other designing elements, or perhaps better talent could be what makes the games good.

You do realize this wasn't a PS3 vs 360 thread right? The tech info was just that, info about what's in your system. If you don't care about the tech, then why are you even posting on the topic?

[feejo]

I already post that OLD video here.

[PimpHandStrong]

i guess outselling the 360 on the world market tells the story. Or maybe the fact MS is talking blueray after just ONE year

but i guess your right

That wasnt done because of PR.

That was done by Sony making a rock solid system. MS PR in 07 for the win but i guess they needed that year head start to feel like winners

[killer_trap]

to many people with to many different accounts. surely there must be a way to fix this. i really like this place and i do hope in time it'll get better at managing accounts. to mods check peoples IP addresses and stop this multiple identity crisis .

edit: sorry but i can't keep ignoring the same person over and over again.

[t-0_ot-]

MiniMii - Well, I was gonna reply, but you don't have any bubbles. But, then I thought.. What the hell?

It just seems funny that you would call someone else a 'kid' or "boy" when in fact your the only acting like a child. How about you STOP writing paragraphs on proving why the PS3 is "the best" and just let Sony do that, they have people that do that, it's their job and they get PAID to do it.. unlike you.

Ri0tSquad - Oh my God. haha. I can't believe you brought up Oblivion saying it is "superior" on the PS3. Well, I would HOPE so. How long did it come out after the 360 version? Like SIX MONTHS? That was a stupid comparison to the other Ported games.. The games that come out at the SAME time.. 360 is usually the better. And, no, it's not me saying this, Reviewers and others have said this..

tidus007 - Okay, Nasim.. Of course Oblivion is going to be better on Ps3.. Are you retarded? Go back under your rock.. PS3 Oblivion came out like SIX MONTHS AFTER the x360 Oblivion..

[The Closing]

1 year after the ps3 version, and there should be no surprise which is ultimately the superior version most likely. Let me give you a hint here ..it's not the 360 version.

There are much bigger factors that come into play than you're giving credit to.

Imo the ps3 undoubtabley has the edge as far as the future is concerned. But right now it's far too close to call, and nothing is decided yet as these things could turn around on a hairpins notice. They're both powerhouse machines capable of vast amounts.

[Goodfella78]

the japanese are responsible for the worlds best and most reliable hardware in the world,spanning way back to the seventies,its an undisputed well known fact,360 fans remember when bill said he wanted the west to take the hardware crown from eastern countries/or something to that effect anyway/even bill technically admitted japanese hardware holds the crown for hardware.and it still does trying not to mention 360 s known hardware complaints,so c,mon 360 guys bite that american ms bullet and atleast give sony the credit of a totally untarnished hardware reputation,and creflo dollar am a little dissapointed with your comment i know deep down inside you there s a logical sony fan fighting to get out, p/s/ owned a 360 at launch myself to see what the fuss was about, and in all honesty the first time i switched it on i was going to take it back to the shop where i bought it,honestly thinking it was nt meant to run as hot as it did,just never felt right to me,/truth/it made me quite nervous especially when certain stories started turning to truth.in my mind and the mind of many others sony always have been and also always will be hardware gods.there to be commended for their hardware.......peace out people

[ssbains]

XBots cherish their RROD consoles, so let them defend it. Being a prior owner of a console, I must say the achievements, XBOX Online was sleek. Having my console die twice was not Cool. I gave up on my 360.

The PS3 is technically superior, the dev kits at publishers are now getting used properly. We are seeing the power of the new games. Its going to be a PS3 world in this next gen HD game year. Ken Kutaragi did a fantastic job in creating the console and his legacy will live on for years to come.

[morlac]

Its all about the games agreed, waiting for lucas arts to make them games for ps3 hooah. BLUE RAY much better and can hold more data 25GB/50GB compared to HD DVD 15GB/30GB. This means PS3 can make better games also cause it has more disc space hahaha. More disc space means a lot in gaming, more data more in depth of a game. You ever seen newer games how much disc space they require. Come on the better games are huge files. XBOX lost mad money to the hackers. They cracked XBOX 360 and Wii they are both modded systems where as PS3 updates it firmware all the time so they cant mod it. Of course you all want xbox 360 more because you know this illegal downloads.

[DevastationEve]

Back when I first started working on PCs, I had customized a desktop from Gateway (FTB 500SE). An AMD K6-2 500mhz, ran Windows ME and It had 64mb of PC-100, and a second slot for expansion. Everything was "onboard" ie graphics sound modem NIC and USB was built into the I/O template, and it had 2 free PCI slots on its mini-ATX "VIA MVP4" mobo.

First thing I did was buy a stick of 128mb of PC-133 (Bestbuy didn't carry PC-100) and saw improvements right away, though the 9x architecture of Windows was notriously unstable anyway. Later, I would buy a GeForce2 MX-200 32MB SDR (PCI variant) and a SoundBlaster Live! audio board.

The system ran better and I started to actually enjoy media on my PC. The GeForce was WOEFULLY behind with its meager 32MB and SDR at that. But REAL progress came when I first installed Windows XP. Being NT-born, XP had transformed my PC into a much more flexible system. And it just kept getting better from there, although my desktop would eventually show its age.

And that's when I built my first computer, from the ground up. In case you were all wondering why I chose such minimal parts, this was all done on a MINIMAL budget. But I dropped much better cash on my first total system build, sort of relishing in the complete awe I was experienceing. I bought:

AMD Sempron 2400+ (1.6ghz)
Asus A7N8X-VM mini-ATX (nForce2 Ultra 400)
ATI x1600 512MB DDR2 AGP8x
SoundBlaster X-Fi ExtremeAudio
2x Corsair 512MB DDR-333 (PC2700)
2x Seagate 250GB Ultra ATA-133 7200RPM
Plextor 52x34x52x16x8x DVD Burner
Antec TruPower 2.0 450watt PSU
Some generic Dynex case

The system was a BEAST compared to the cramped sh*t I was rollin' before! All because I had better funds. But if you noticed, I made the same mistake twice. In purchasing an x1600 with 512MB of "DDR2", I lost out on the performance I could have had with a board that had GDDR-3. Even then, it still had to do with cash. I'm just not hardcore enough to warrant the sudden credit-crunching binge of an elite system builder.

Maybe people just need to realize the stance that each manufacturer took on how they decked out their systems. Some like a stacked rack, others want a lean machine. If you want to say that XDR gives PS3 the edge, I'm behind you all the way. I know what it's like to build and then realize that "for a few dollars more" I could've had better. But, then again, a few dates later would've netted you a better wife, right? Take what you have and run with it! I'm having fun with what I have, and that's what matters most.

edit- that system was first built (and boooted) circa 2004, being finalized in 2006. I would later install Vista and experience the same thing I experienced on my first system: the birth of a new era in OSs...and the sudden need for more power.

Because of that, I currently own an HP Pavilion Entertainment Notebook PC dv9535nr. I figured I need to get out of the house more, but a 17" ain't really all that portable. Shoulda gone with a macbook air.

ANYONE THINKING OF BUYING A LAPTOP SHOULD FOREGO POWER IN FAVOR PORTABILITY!!!!
YOU'LL THANK ME WHEN YOU REALIZE THAT 1.5hrs OF BATTERY JUST DOESN'T CUT IT!!!!

[The Closing]

Mac Air doesn't have an optical drive built in so no thank you.

[ravenguard88]

Whoops, posted this in the wrong place.

[AuToFiRE]

The PS3 is an extreme powerhouse we see that it can play games and calculate data faster than some super computers, do we really care about ram?

[Ariexv]

That's great it's amazing for cancer research.... however when it comes to running games it should leave that to the big boys.

[bakasora]

How many years Sony plan and design this architecture.

[JBaby343]

You need RAM fast enough to keep up with all that the Cell is doing. Give both the CPU and GPU their own bank of RAM for what they need to do is very smart but making it so each can use the other's when needed it genius. I do believe the PS3 has just begun to show what it can do.

[GutZ31]

A little info about how the PS3 handles memory.
The cell broadband engine uses a direct link to its 256MB XDR memory, the size looks small, but running at 3.2GHz, its the exact same speed as the cell processor.
With a little math, you can see that scaling that number to around what the 360s own memory speeds are(about 700MHz), things become quite clear, the XDR memory becomes the equivalent to 1.9GBs of 700MHz DDR3 RAM.

This doesnt mean "oh the PS3 makes better games" or "all games look better on the PS3", this is showing, technically, the PS3 is at least two, to three times more powerful then the 360 in over all performance.

Another thing that people tend to mix up is the 256MBs of video memory, it is not used like a computers memory at all, it is post processing data that does not need to be done on the fly.
Most heavy graphical data is handled with the Cell processor and the 256MB XDR memory.

Because of how the cell is melded with the XDR memory, not only physics and calculations, as well as wire frame and basically any task you give it, will be calculated and spit out at the screen for your enjoyment.
An example of use for the RSX graphics chip is textures and shaders for post processing of objects, this is what can blur an image to the point of making it look that much more realistic with out taking from the quality, as well as not leaving jaggy lines made of pixels.

If you want more info on what all goes into the PS3, I would be glad to inform who ever has questions.

Also, for people wanting to blame the hardware for developers hardships, your better off blaming sony for not making proper software to make it an easier transition from there normal working platform.
As the PS3 is actually easier to develop on then most are lead to believe, the problems surface when trying to divide memory that is automatically swaped on the 360s 512MB memory, since the memory for the GPU does not work like the 360s, its pointless and just makes a game ported to the PS3 from the 360s code slow and full of error.

Again, any questions are open, and I'm not talking about game superiority(xbox360 has that in the bag so far), just over all performance.