PS3 Virtua Tennis 3 in 1080p

By Tom Bramwell Published 18 September, 2006

SEGA serves up high resolution.

Virtua Tennis 3 will run at 1080p on PlayStation 3, according to reports from Japan.

1UP explains that during a SEGA press event in Tokyo this weekend, the game was shown off on high-resolution displays, while nearby placards declared it was running in 1080p.

Up to now, very few developers have managed to hit the PlayStation 3's highest single-monitor resolution, although some are hopeful of being able to do so.

Speaking to GamePro recently, a Sony spokesperson said that Insomniac is another aiming for the high resolution with Resistance: Fall of Man.

"Right now the game is at 720p and we are aiming to have it reach 1080p by the time the game is wrapped," the spokesperson said.

PlayStation 3 is due out in the US and Japan this November, with a European release set for March 2007.

Virtua Tennis 3 is due out on PS3 and Xbox 360, with PC and PSP versions also in development.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (172) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • paulf #1 5 years ago

    thats really nice, now all we need is someone to sell a tele that can handle 1080p for less than the price of a small car, mind you by the time ps3 comes out over someone might

  • Xerx3s #2 5 years ago

    Virtua Tennis 3 will run at 1080p on PlayStation 3 =! "Right now the game is at 720p and we are aiming to have it reach 1080p by the time the game is wrapped," the spokesperson said.

    Not that it really matters though.

  • LFMartins #3 5 years ago

    "Right now the game is at 720p and we are aiming to have it reach 1080p by the time the game is wrapped,"

    Read the article.That´s a quote about Ressistance.Virtua Tennis 3 was displayed already at 1080p.

  • JHuxley #4 5 years ago

    This'll be the way of things to come. More developers will take advantage of the feature as they learn more about the console. No brainer.

  • Darren #5 5 years ago

    Now that's really good news and seems to hint at the PS3 being quite a graphically capable beast after all especially considering how detailed both Resistance and Virtua Tennis 3 are, with the latter running at 60 fps I believe. Shame that it'll be a long before I get to see those games running in 1080p though... :(

  • SeesThroughAll #6 5 years ago

    LOL at people who can't accept that developers are already producing games in HD.

  • drumbaby #7 5 years ago

    This is so unfair. Sega Tennis for the Xbox 360 could easily match this if it had been in development for the same number of aeons the PS3 version has. There will be no difference between the two systems' graphics where cross platform titles are concerned. None I tell you!

    ;)

  • penhalion #8 5 years ago

    Virtual tennis has a very limited field of display so 1080p is possible. I don't think this is the case with Resistance hence the 720p with (jump on the bandwagon) hopes of hitting 1080p.

    It's kind of like saying we have space invaders running at 1080p i.e. it's not like there is anything major going on (on screen) to stop you doing so!

  • asphaltcowboy #9 5 years ago

    +1 for penhalion

  • SeesThroughAll #10 5 years ago

    @ drumbaby:

    But chances are that X360 owners will still be able to take a 1080i output and de-interlace it, which would be as close to 1080p as one could get. So everybody can enjoy HD. Of course, if the PS3 can output 1080p, why not use the feature?

    Gotta love Sega :) I wish they came back with an uber-powerful console. They would kick BOTH Fony and M$ a$$e$.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 10:31

  • JHuxley #11 5 years ago

    @penhalion

    ....yeah...that's it. Space Invaders.

    :|

  • Machiavel #12 5 years ago

    It's pong at 1080p, whoo-hoo!

  • spongebob #13 5 years ago

    I think some MS spokesperson thought this was not going to happen (for games to run in 1080p). Here we go.

  • SeesThroughAll #14 5 years ago

    I think some MS spokesperson thought this was not going to happen (for games to run in 1080p). Here we go.

    Whenever a Sony spokesperson makes a wrong guess, it's because it was bullshit. Whenever a MS spokesperson makes a wrong guess, it's because what he said was "taken out of context".

  • Xerx3s #15 5 years ago

    LOL at people who can't accept that developers are already producing games in HD.

    Yeh, it must be really hard for ppl to accept the first HD games like VT3.

    Oh well.

  • kangarootoo #16 5 years ago

    Somehow, in some way, this is bad news.

    I'm not sure quite how yet, but I'm sure you guys will help me with that one if you dig deep enough ;)

  • Xerx3s #17 5 years ago

    Whenever a Sony spokesperson makes a wrong guess, it's because it was bullshit. Whenever a MS spokesperson makes a wrong guess, it's because what he said was "taken out of context".

    Who says he was wrong, aiming for and getting there are two different things and powerfull marketing tools. Besides, he said first year iirc (bash my head in if I'm wrong ;) ).

  • Darkedge #18 5 years ago

    "Yeh, it must be really hard for ppl to accept the first HD games like VT3."

    err 720p is a HD format. 1080i is a HD Format. 1080p happens to be the highest but that doesn't make VT3 the first HD title - any 360 title did that at launch LAST YEAR.

  • Carpathian #19 5 years ago

    edited and removed due to my stupidity and cross reading of two unrelated stories in the same news item.

    Mondays, eh ? Who'd 'ave 'em !
    Edited by 3 at 18/09/06 @ 12:11

  • nickthegun #20 5 years ago




    Somehow, in some way, this is bad news.

    I'm not sure quite how yet, but I'm sure you guys will help me with that one if you dig deep enough ;)

    Well, to be fair, you dont have to dig very deep.

    Up to now, very few developers have managed to hit the PlayStation 3's highest single-monitor resolution, although some are hopeful of being able to do so.

    Hopeful? Some developers are 'Hopeful' that they make use of one of the consoles main selling features? I bought a new car the other day because I was assured that Ford were 'Hopeful' the 5th gear would work......

    I know you were being sarcastic, but despite the VT news being good (looking forward to seeing it) the rest of the article isnt massively positive.

  • MaxiSleep #21 5 years ago

    Given that the Ps3 has a 7900 gt class cpu it is not surprising that games with reasonably small environments can do 1080p (I run 2560x1600 for many games on my pc)

    BUT I believe that for larger games the memory constraints will cause issues. Assuming double buffered screens you save 35MB of ram approx by going with 720p vs 1080p (assuming no aa overhead etc). And in a machine with 512mb in total that is a LOT of textures

    I was surprised that both sony and Msoft did not go with 1 gig of ram for the consoles, because that would make 1080 p (or 1080i for xbox) rather easier to support in long run.

  • asphaltcowboy #22 5 years ago

    Carpathian:

    The "Right now the game is at 720p and we are aiming to have it reach 1080p by the time the game is wrapped," comment isn't referring to VT3 at all... it's about Resistence!

  • Frogger #23 5 years ago

    I thought that all games were natively 1080p...

  • #24 5 years ago

    Can't you run most PC games in 1080p if you have the hardware?

    The only difference is that the PS3 is a console - thusly meant to be played round the TV with a few mates (especially games like VT3).

    For the price of a TV that supporst 1080p and the PS3, you could buy one hellova PC, and play a lot more games, at a lot higher res. than 1080p, at a lot higer framerates. - Go Figure.

    IMO 720p/1080i is about the right price point for the current TV tech market. We are already begining to the the downside of developing for higher resolutions (unreadable text etc.). I think a lot of people on this site forget about the large majority of the market that still play their games on a SCART < 30" TV
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 11:09

  • spongebob #25 5 years ago

    Can't you run most PC games in 1080p if you have the hardware?

    Sure, 1080p means non-interlaced (progressive) 1920x1080 resolution. You just need a telly that supports that or a video projector that is capable of showing that. Or if you want you can also use a monitor.

  • spongebob #26 5 years ago

    LeDilettante: THAT really matters. Given how my family can't distinguish between SD and HD TV, I'm sure they'll spot the difference between 1080i and 1080p.

    Would you like to tell us what program source have you used when you've tested your family if they can spot the difference. Also, please enlighten us what kind of a screen you have.

  • JediMasterMalik #27 5 years ago

    1080p isn't really a feature, it's more of a capability. Which is NO bad thing.

  • Garulon #28 5 years ago

    "Now that's really good news and seems to hint at the PS3 being quite a graphically capable beast after all especially considering how detailed both Resistance and Virtua Tennis 3 are, with the latter running at 60 fps I believe."

    Well it'd have to be, otherwise it's functionally identical to 1080i, isn't it?

    1080i/60 = 1080 line Frame sent in two 540 line fields, fields sent 60 times a second
    1080p/60 = 1080 line Frame sent in a single 1080 line field sent 60 times a second

    If they're only updating a 1080p display every other frame, that's the same visual resolution and frame rate as 1080i/60.

  • Stormflood #29 5 years ago

    For the price of a TV that supporst 1080p and the PS3, you could buy one hellova PC, and play a lot more games, at a lot higher res. than 1080p, at a lot higer framerates. - Go Figure.

    So you're comparing the cost of a PS3 + 1080p HDTV to a PC + cheap LCD monitor? How about comparing the cost of a shit hot PC rig to a PS3, both on the same display...

  • rhinoxious #30 5 years ago

    Will the real 1080p please stand up . . .

    Some questions -

    1. is 1080p at 60fps, or at 30fps, no one knows yet and it makes a huge difference.
    2. is it true 1080p, or like PGR3's upscaled non-720p
    3. Will we see more games in 1080p over time, as the console is pushed technically, or less because as the graphical bar is pushed upwards, with games competing for the best possible 720p graphics, there actually becomes less spare power to do 1080p.

  • JediMasterMalik #31 5 years ago

    I'm gonna get a 1080p LCD monitor for my PS3, only costing me a extra £550.

    Plus I can use it on the PC aswell, so good all around for me. :D

  • LetsGo #32 5 years ago

    Why are people shocked? The PS3 is more powerful than the 360 afterall....

  • rhinoxious #33 5 years ago

    "I'm gonna get a 1080p LCD monitor for my PS3, only costing me a extra £550"

    Make sure it supports HDCP, otherwise you may be unable to play blu-ray discs at 1080p in the future.

  • spongebob #34 5 years ago

    Some of you people are going to have some crappy time playing fun games in the near future.

    Take Garulon for instance. Sounds like he's going to be spending time counting the frames per second and doing math instead of concentrating on the game experience.

  • JediMasterMalik #35 5 years ago

    @ Rhinoxius - It does, through DVI I beleive. :)

  • JediMasterMalik #36 5 years ago

    Maybe you shouldn't be asking a woman about these things. My mum still asks me how to copy and paste. :p

  • Eighthours #37 5 years ago

    Resistance being at 1080p would be very impressive indeed.

    However, seeing as VT3 only has to display a maximum of 4 highly detailed characters, and is hardly a graphical powerhouse, this announcement doesn't mean very much - and is no indication in itself that a whole loadof PS3 games are going to run at 1080p.

    But as I said, if Resistance can do it, then it's impressive. I doubt it will though.

  • rhinoxious #38 5 years ago

    Why are people shocked? The PS3 is more powerful than the 360 afterall....

    I'd like the PS3 to be an amazingly powerful console, after all you'd have to be some kind of sad rabid fanboy to want something to be worse, just so that your console looks better.

    What I dislike is Sony's posturing over 1080p/real HD, it's a standard that hasn't come of age yet, but sony keep trying to push it as a technical advantage over 360, it simply isn't.

    It's also largely unrelated to how powerful a conso;e is, it's what you do with the pixels onscreen, not how many you have! I'd rather see an army of a 100 soldiers in 720p, fighting on a massive battlefield, then look at two tennis players, or two brawlers in 1080p.

  • DrDamn #39 5 years ago

    Does it really matter to 99% of the gamers who don't have 1080p displays? Probably not, unless devs end up spending too much time trying to support this which they could have spent optimising for 720p.

    It is quite funny to read the comments from people who previously claimed it wouldn't be done now claiming its the wrong sort of game. :-).

  • JHuxley #40 5 years ago

    Christ...from the moaning going on in this thread, you'd think Sony were shitting through your letterbox, not offering a neat little feature.

    Who cares if not everyone will be able to take advantage right away? If you've got a TV capable of displaying 1080p, this is good news. If you haven't, I'm sure 1080i will look great too. Get over it.

  • holloguts #41 5 years ago

    .... and it's hoped someone, somewhere can get hold of a TV that displays it. Let's face it, 1080p TV's are rare at the moment and will be for some time. If you buy a HD TV in the UK, under £2,000 then your gettting a 720p tv.

    Most PS3 fans shouting we told you so, will never see a 1080p TV and most won't even get a HDTV at all. So really, the developers are wasting a lot of time (and probably money) even bothering.

    I will be buying a HDTV next week. It will be 720p (as practically all of them are). Perfect for gaming on the 360 and PS3. Still, good luck to the developers and Sony. I just don't want foolish gamers on SD tv's (or 720p tv's) harping on about how good something is that they will never even see.

  • Steroyd #42 5 years ago

    Why are people dissing PS3 games outputting 1080p.

    I don't think people was bitching that MS was supporting 720p/1080i resolutions on the Xbox.

  • Calgon #43 5 years ago

    Well first off is it actually confirmed to be running at that resolution as of now? or do we just have some people at the event who seem to think they can tell if it's 1080p or not by simply looking at it?(in which case they could well be wrong)

    @Disc: Sorry but thats nonesense, the resolution is nothing but fillrate bound and a) The SPEs have nothing to do with that b) As its fixed(clock speed * the number of pipes) you can not do anything to help that other skimping elsewhere to save bandwidth. c) 360 and PS3 are much different thanks to the newer Xenos tech but its fair to say they are pretty even in fillrate(in raw terms PS3 has a slight advantage but this is meaningless>> for example add textures and 4xAA and the 360 has a 2x advantage... its just not supported as MS thought it was too early for that... I agree).

    Still I suppose for the very few its a nice option to have, I do wonder if it will be at the expense of framerate though, for those that said they have the option for some PC games to do that: Video cards can have twice the available memory and around twice the bandwidth with their on-board memory than what the RSX will have>>> RSX = 256MB @ 22.5GB/sec >>> 7900 = 512MB @ 51.2GB/sec.
    Edited by 2 at 18/09/06 @ 12:24

  • Yossarian #44 5 years ago

    hey cool, 1080p

    I'd be pretty surprised if they could get Resistance up there. that would pretty much confirm the PS3 is considerably more powerful for me

  • Xerx3s #45 5 years ago

    err 720p is a HD format. 1080i is a HD Format. 1080p happens to be the highest but that doesn't make VT3 the first HD title - any 360 title did that at launch LAST YEAR.

    Someone obviously missed my sarcasm.

    As for 1080p; if they manage to do it on VT4, good for them. However, a dev should question himself where the balance is between getting it/costs in and how many ppl will actually have a 1080p tv.

    I.E. If building this feature in will delay your game by 2-4 months (and thus miss xmas) while only 1% of your target audience has the means to use it, your not doing something very effective. You might want to consider releasing it through the online service after the game is launched.

    Now if something like 20%+ had acces to 1080p, it would be a different story of course.

  • Steroyd #46 5 years ago

    Seeing how we're on the subject of the mythical 1080p resolution...

    <a href=http://www.evilgamerz.com/index.php?ac tion=fullnews&showcomments=1&id=6908>Rumours of EA is aiming to hit 1080p with Army of two</a>

    Translation from dutch is required.

    Also somewhere on 1up is a pic of a PS3 running VT3 in 1080p (or so they claim) so it looks like they have actually hit that res.

    <a href=htt p://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3153716&did=2>VT3 running in 1080p</a>
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 12:20

  • cooper #47 5 years ago

    "Why are people dissing PS3 games outputting 1080p."

    Because fanboys are supposed to criticize any feature in consoles they don't own.

    EDIT: or they don't plan to own, given the PS3 is not out yet ;-)
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 12:21

  • kenty #48 5 years ago

    i run most my PC games as 1200p (1920x1200) and my graphics card is nearly two years old so 1080p isn't really a big deal :p

  • Calgon #49 5 years ago

    @ Yossarian great!, good for you but it wouldn't confirm anything to anyone who knows what the fudge they are talking about :p

    *sips brew and sits back with a sigh*...Ah well they never learn do they? I thought everyone knew with the 360 they simply chose not to support it, it simply cannot output that resolution(even though it would be just as capable as the PS3 of acheiving it). Well we'll just have to wait till those people realise that with 360 they thought more about 720p/1080i with a much better AA solution(4x @ 60fps lets see how the comparison fairs at those settings when the time comes :D).
    Edited by 3 at 18/09/06 @ 12:38

  • Garulon #50 5 years ago

    "Take Garulon for instance. Sounds like he's going to be spending time counting the frames per second and doing math instead of concentrating on the game experience. "

    The game experience is unrelated to visual fidelity now? Look, if Resistance actually did 1080p/60 - that is, 1080 lines at 60 frames per second, that'd be FANTASTIC. At 30FPS there's no difference - you might as well plug a 360 playing Perfect Dark Zero into a 1080P-capable telly, let it decode the fields into progressive and call Perfect Dark Zero a 1080P title.

  • JHuxley #51 5 years ago

    Calgon - you seem to be pretty set on proving the PS3's 1080p feature as useless by spouting a load of technical jargon that seems impossible to prove either way. Why the hang-up?

  • Garulon #52 5 years ago

    "Christ...from the moaning going on in this thread, you'd think Sony were shitting through your letterbox, not offering a neat little feature. "

    It's "moaning" because unless the game is running at 60 frames per second there's no advantage over 1080i/60. _None_. With all the "more powah" crap debunked and the BluRry shown up for the slow, unnecessary trojan-horse it is, Sony are working their way down the bullet points to try to justify their obscene cost over the XBox 360. I imagine they'll try to spin BlueTooth at some point, or the three extra USB ports. :)

  • Calgon #53 5 years ago

    @disc wouldnt culling on the CPU(especially with the PS3 architecture) be way to slow to give any advantage?(infact maybe worse you only have so much bandwidth and culling can be costly here) and sorting code is usually a given isnt it?

  • Calgon #54 5 years ago

    JHuxley I never said it was useless(even though I dont need it and would much prefer 720p with 4x AA ;) ) I was just illustrating to those who are jumping the gun on the whole power comparison issue.

  • Calgon #55 5 years ago

    @disc because its already been brought to our attention that the Cell cannot read from the GDDR3 memory at the same speed as RSX can but nothing is stopping them they just have to determine whether it's worth it for the reason they want to use it(ie will it just slow things down or not).

    edit: :D thanks herod that was a big booboo(not seen that diagram in long while and Im knackered) but the point still holds up Cell will still have to read from GDDR3(thats where the framebuffer is afterall... a work around for any Cell framebuffer processing could be transfering pixel data from GDDR3 to XDR and then back to GDDR3 but thats still not ideal nor efficient).
    Edited by 11 at 18/09/06 @ 14:40

  • JHuxley #56 5 years ago

    Fair enough Calgon. Still seems like conjecture at this point though.

    @ Garulon: funny how all these experts on the comparitive strengths and weaknessses of next-gen technology come out of the woodwork to post on a comments section of a gaming website. Wait and see, that's all I'm going to say.

  • Garulon #57 5 years ago

    "@ Garulon: funny how all these experts on the comparitive strengths and weaknessses of next-gen technology come out of the woodwork to post on a comments section of a gaming website. Wait and see, that's all I'm going to say."

    Wait and see if 1080P/30 is the same as 1080i/60? No need, it _is_.

  • foxy2006 #58 5 years ago

    this will improve the game to no end.
    really.

  • Calgon #59 5 years ago

    Disc: right back at you o_0 as you can see there was no point bringing that up theres no advantage to it... oh now I think I know what you mean if you meant the comparison to PC video cards(back tracking?) then the bandwidth is still around half(ie not much better at all and you will still have less memory than 512mb available dedicated to graphics).
    Edited by 4 at 18/09/06 @ 14:17

  • Calgon #60 5 years ago

    Garulon indeed it is you must understand they dont really care, they just see this as a way to justify the long wait and expensive price for the hardware, so they can say "well its more powerfull innit!" when its not really a good indication of anything of the sort.
    Edited by 2 at 18/09/06 @ 13:35

  • spongebob #61 5 years ago

    The real reason why you should go progressive and not interlaced lies in the HDTV screens. See, progressive material looks better on video projectors and big ass televisions.

    Here's the explanation why it's better to have progressive picture on DVD:
    [link url=ht tp://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-5020359-1.html
    ]http://re views.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-5020...[/link]

    And guess what, it's not just Sony's PR words for PS3 and their TVs:
    "1080p is sometimes referred to in marketing materials as "True High-Definition" or "Full High-Definition". 1080p is currently the digital standard for filming digital motion pictures. Directors such as George Lucas (in Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith) shoot their digital films in this high definition mode to be shown in theaters equipped with 1080p digital projectors.", says Wikipedia on 1080p.

    And here's what some jerk says on CNet (David Carnoy
    Executive editor, CNET Reviews):
    "Progressive-scan formats such as 480p, 720p, and 1080p convey all of the lines of resolution sequentially in a single pass, which makes for a smoother, cleaner image, especially with sports and other motion-intensive content."

    Whatever, you know. I am quite sure that small tag there is just a marketing ploy. Just like it's better to watch 480i, 720i than progressive, it's just a Sony's trick to make you think 1080p is better than 1080i. Of course it is because Xbox 360 can't push it. If it could, it would be for real.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 13:48

  • drumbaby #62 5 years ago

    'this will improve the game to no end. really. '

    Only its looks. Really.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 13:48

  • spongebob #63 5 years ago

    I bet the same people who think 1080p is crap think PCs should be able to display only 800x600 resolution. I mean, bigger monitors and bigger resolutions are not needed and they don't enhance anything, right?

  • Garulon #64 5 years ago

    "1080p is currently the digital standard for filming digital motion pictures."

    Yes, at 24FPS, which gets ITC'ed up to 30Hz (or 25HZ for us PAL fans). Again, 1080p30=1080i/60

    "Progressive-scan formats such as 480p, 720p, and 1080p convey all of the lines of resolution sequentially in a single pass, which makes for a smoother, cleaner image, especially with sports and other motion-intensive content."

    Frame rate equals smoother images, which is why 720P/60 beats out 1080p/30 or 1080i/60 (=1080p/30) for sports etc. Interlacing is irrelevant on modern displays (ie a HD CRT should display the whole thing at 100Hz anyway so no flicker, and LCDs don't flicker at all, ever).

    "it's just a Sony's trick to make you think 1080p is better than 1080i."

    1080p/60 IS better than 1080i. 1080p/30 is EXACTLY THE SAME. Pushing a game as "1080p" at 30FPS is a sleazy marketing trick. Do you see?

  • Calgon #65 5 years ago

    I cant see why they are having a difficult time understanding that:

    1080i @ 60fps

    and

    1080p @30fps

    ARE the same workload, its simple logic.

  • JHuxley #66 5 years ago

    Hang on a second...aren't you assuming the PS3's 1080p mode is 30fps? Where did you get that info from?

    And considering devs are struggling to implement the feature at the moment, isn't it more logical to assume it's 60fps as, like you say, there's technically no difference between 1080i/60 and 1080p/30.

    If it was just a marketing ploy they'd use it on all games, not just a few.

  • kangarootoo #67 5 years ago

    @JHuxley

    "Who cares if not everyone will be able to take advantage right away? If you've got a TV capable of displaying 1080p, this is good news. If you haven't, I'm sure 1080i will look great too. Get over it."

    Amen to that.


    @FluffyTucker

    "Jesus Christ, this country needs a policy of shooting kids that leave school without an English GCSE."

    I would say amen to that too, but I think the logistics of finding that many bullets make it a futile desire. How about we say this country needs a policy of poking said kids in the ey with a pencil? The pencils can always be reused you see.

  • captainrentboy #68 5 years ago

    None of this is really very interesting or surprising is it?We all knew that the PS3 could output at 1080p(Not that it's of much use to the masses at the moment),and by god it's doing it,whoopedydoo!
    It's amusing how most of you lot will jump into battle with eachother over absolutely any bit of news,always firing off your well revised list of specifiacations and what not at each other.Keep it up,I love it,makes me feel less geeky :)

  • Hughes. #69 5 years ago

    All of this (now seemingly inescapable wave of anti-Sony toss accompanying every Sony article), seems to be based on the assumption that not a single person in an entire group of proffessional games journalists can tell the difference between a game running at 30fps over one running at 60fps.

    Instead of projecting opinions of others motives about people being happy about this because they are trying to justify the price, consider that for months MS execs and obnoxious forum Sony-haters have been saying that 1080p would be impossible to achieve, and now they'll have to eat it. Seeing trolling negative doom-mongers and proffessional corporate nay-sayers proven wrong is reason enough for anyone who's read months of this baseless crap to be happy.

    What does it matter if not many people have TVs that support it yet? Playstation's have a 10 year life-cycle. You want to tell me that having this option available from the get go is a bad thing? Sorry Sony, your new console isn't shit enough for us right now, go away and come back when it's a bit more compromised. Perhaps you'd prefer they follow the MS business model and produce a 1080p upgrade console in a couple of years, with games that launch PS3's won't be able to play?

    And as for LeDilettante deciding it's a useless feature because he just bought an HD TV that can't run it, well, I guess everyone else on planet Earth should wait till you change your telly?

    But of course I'm very moved by the old primary school playground favourite "I could do that, but I don't wanna!" on behalf of 360 not supporting it, suck your lollypop and shut up.

  • Calgon #70 5 years ago

    JHuxley some of us arent assuming anything till its comfirmed(which is a much better attitude because we dont even know for sure if its even 1080p at all yet) and even if it was confirmed, Ive just been explaining theres a whole lot more to the big graphics debate.

    Im done now though, Im hungry and tired(made spelling mistakes and errors in just about every post today... but Ive fixed-um-up good enough now) :D dinner time.
    Edited by 3 at 18/09/06 @ 14:25

  • Steroyd #71 5 years ago

    /laughs at nearly reaching 100 comments because one game hits 1080p res.

  • Tayl #72 5 years ago

    @Hughes
    +1...!!!
    That was almost arousing.

  • Hughes. #73 5 years ago

    It was the "suck your lollypop" bit, right?

    Hear me say all these spicy things and more on my premium rate chat-line 0898-739 739, that's 0898-SEX SEX!

  • Calgon #74 5 years ago

    Hughes. is that what they call a strawman arguement?

    I dont recall anyone debating whether PS3 can output 1080p, see if the Sonyfanboys dont even understand whats being said than how the hell can they even begin to determin if anyones been "proven wrong"?

  • kangarootoo #75 5 years ago

    @Calgon

    "strawman argument".

    Oh thankyou! I've been trying to remember that term for soooooo long. That mechanic gets used on here daily and I just couldn't bloody remember what it was called.

    That Wiki page is going to save me so much typing in future :)

  • Garulon #76 5 years ago

    "Hang on a second...aren't you assuming the PS3's 1080p mode is 30fps? Where did you get that info from?" It's nothing to do with the PS3 supporting 1080p at either 30Hz or 60Hz. I'm fairly sure it can do both.

    "And considering devs are struggling to implement the feature at the moment, isn't it more logical to assume it's 60fps as, like you say, there's technically no difference between 1080i/60 and 1080p/30."

    We _know_ Resistance is 30FPS. It's most likely they're struggling to push the vertical resolution up from 720 lines to 1080 lines; there's _very_ few 360 games that are 1080-native (Prey IIRC is one of those); if they can't do it they'll leave it at 720p and let the PS3 scale it up to whatever you want.

  • Garulon #77 5 years ago

    And I think this whole thing would be lot easier if there were game journalists who took the time to actually LEARN HDTV standards, rather than tippity-tapping Sony press releases unthinking into Eurogamer. All it would have took was one of you EG types asking "1080p/30 or 1080p/60?" for the whole edifice to come crashing down.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 15:00

  • JHuxley #78 5 years ago

    @Garulon

    Our own lovely Eurogamer attests to Gran Turismo HD running at 60fps, although if that's true 1080p or not isn't really mentioned - [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=65220 ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...[/link]

    Either way, you're just speculating.

  • Hughes. #79 5 years ago

    @Calgon

    Your inability to remeber it happening doesn't mean it didn't happen. If you expect me to provide links to every instance of aforementioned trolling simply because you either, didn't see it /have forgotten it /are pretending it never happened; I'm not in the habit of doing exhaustive weeks of research and providing a bibliography for forum posts. The evidence of my own eyes over months of gaming talk is not negated by your own ignoarance of it, nor does it make it a "strawman argument" a phrase which allows you to delude yourself that there is a nice way to call me a liar.

    Your cheap usage of the word fanboy in an attempt to dismiss what people have said is plain ignorant and does nothing to raise the value of the non-technical aspects of your argument. But clearly you prefer the "bullshit baffles brains" approach. Spout enough numbers and people will go "Huh?" and shut up.

  • uiruki #80 5 years ago

    I don't think this should surprise anyone. VT3 is a first gen Lindbergh game, which runs on a 3ghz p4 with a 6800 gt (not even a gtx). The PS3 is running some insanely hyped processor with a speedy core clock and a 7900-class gpu. Why wouldn't they be able to take it and up the res, given a bit of time? It's not like Sumo aren't any good at ports.

    Now, if AM2 bother their arses to put vf5 into 1080p I'd be a bit more impressed, that game is even more detailed, particularly the backgrounds.

  • Hughes. #81 5 years ago

    @LeDilettante

    Thank you for maintaining civility when responding to my serious question about whether Sony should wait until you are ready to buy a new television before releasing their console. Some people might respond by calling me a retard, I'm sure we're both glad that there aren't many offensive little piss-stains like that on the internet!

  • Garulon #82 5 years ago

    "Our own lovely Eurogamer attests to Gran Turismo HD running at 60fps, although if that's true 1080p or not isn't really mentioned -

    That's definitely 1080p/60. That's fine.

    "Either way, you're just speculating. "

    Speculating on what? That 1080p/30 is the same as 1080i/60? Because it _is_.

    I feel sorry for Resistance, a launch-title "tick the boxes" FPS that's suddenly pimped out like a ten-dollar whore because it's the only major title Sony have right now that they can use to push the "strengths" of the PS3:

    "It needs 22 gigs!" Because it has the same game binaries multiple times for different languages on the same disk.

    "It's 1080p!" except at 30FPS (proven multiple times) it's the same as 1080i.

    Watch out for horrid tacked on "six axis" support for the poor thing any day now.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 15:15

  • captainrentboy #83 5 years ago

    On a different matter,I just tried to have a discussion on the Bungie/Halo 3 forums,about Halo 3 and Resistance,just stated that Bungie need to get a bit more exciting info out about their game before the positive Resistance hype goes into overdrive.The sad fucks on there tore me to shreds.It seems you can't in any way have a doubt about Halo 3 on Bungie's forums :)

  • ronuds #84 5 years ago

    It's funny how happy everyone is, even though it's something the PS3 touted from day 1.

    Like, "they finally didn't lie about something!" The Sony camp must be celebrating... "we finally pulled off something we said we were going to!"

  • Hughes. #85 5 years ago

    Yes, if only they crippled PS3 for the 10 years of its life-span, during which time no 1080p capable televisions will be sold anywhere in Europe!

  • JHuxley #86 5 years ago

    "Speculating on what? That 1080p/30 is the same as 1080i/60? Because it _is_. "

    No, speculating that PS3 games will be 1080p/30. Just because one game can't quite reach 1080p/60, doesn't mean that the PS3 isn't capable of it. Wait and see.

  • SeesThroughAll #87 5 years ago

    Thankfully X360 does not support 1080p

    ?

    So if a console can output at a slightly higher resolution, it's a bad thing?


    :D ROFL
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 15:24

  • SeesThroughAll #88 5 years ago

    I provided my reasoning for that in the post.

    Yes, and it really shouldn't affect you if the videogames development is skewed towards US audience. Why should you care? Just because you hate americans?

    It doesn't matter for which region they care to provide the higher resolutions, if at some point all regions will benefit from it.

  • Garulon #89 5 years ago

    "No, speculating that PS3 games will be 1080p/30. Just because one game can't quite reach 1080p/60, doesn't mean that the PS3 isn't capable of it."

    Where have I said that the PS3 is incapable of it? I imagine anything of a sufficiently limited graphical complexity like fighting games, tennis games, and direct PS2 ports (hello GT HD!) would easily be capable of it - basically you just need to (a) have 1080 vertical lines in yer frame buffer and (b) output at 60 frames per second.

    I'm just pointing out that _unless_ the game is 60FPS, 1080p is the same as 1080i.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 15:30

  • Hughes. #90 5 years ago

    "What matter is the next 5 years, The kind of people who fork out for all the latest HD tech are not going to be playing PS3 until 2017. They will get PS4 when it comes in about 5 years and perhaps 1080p will be more meaningful then."

    You appear to have the future mapped out in a little fantasy world in your head. It's a shame you aren't in charge of every game company's strategy, Nostradamus.

  • 3william56 #91 5 years ago

    See, this is the only reason I'm pissed at Sony for the delay in the PS3. I don't mind the shortage, and can wait to see the PS3 before deciding which toy to buy next. But another 3 months of geek w*nkers spouting off 100 posts about a console they've never used, and games they've never played is just making being a game player an utter f**king drag and taking EG from being a fun place to hang out at lunchtime to a tedious dinner party full of boring opinionated pseuds and loud mouthed tossers.

    Christ, stroll on March just to shut these pr*cks up.

  • ronuds #92 5 years ago

    Even in America, there aren't that many people toting a tv that can display at 1080p. I don't know anyone who has one. I don't even know anyone who knows anyone.

    And why are all the 360 fans getting so bent out of shape? Who cares! The games for both systems are going to be mostly the same with each getting a few select exclusives. So maybe the PS3's games will look a tad better... get over it. The xbox now looks better than the PS2 and nobody seems to care. The PS3 has a year and a half on the 360 - it's bound to look at least a LITTLE better. And the fact that it will only be a minimal graphical difference is a testament to how well the 360 was built from the beginning. I'll take 720p and Live anyday to anything Sony has to offer.

  • SergioAguero #93 5 years ago

    @ Le Dilletante

    "THAT really matters. Given how my family can't distinguish between SD and HD TV, I'm sure they'll spot the difference between 1080i and 1080p."

    That is hilarious! And sums up so much of what HD is about right now: so much
    cock waving nonsense!

  • ronuds #94 5 years ago

    "Go vist the PS3 forums at us.playstation.com, Plenty of peolpe seem to have them, And they are always posting deals on the latest 1080p tvs which seem cheaper than many of the 720p screens over here."

    The people on the PS3 forums hardly represent the majority. Sure, the hard-core gamers ran out and got their 1080p sets, but most people still have regular old sets.

    Unfortunately, Europe always seems to have to pay double what Americans do, and you have to wait twice as long for everything.

  • Hughes. #95 5 years ago

    @Wonga

    I made no projections about it being widespread, I mocked the fact that the arguments of those against its implementation rely on such televisions NEVER even coming to Europe, to be of any merit.

    I agree that based on current experience PS4 will be here in 5-6 years, but there are less than a quarter of XBox owners who have made the jump to 360 even a year after its launch. The usable lifespan of a console does not end immediately after its successor is launched. As PS2 is still selling strongly, and is likely to do so for quite some time, a similar situation with PS3 offering 1080p games as superior to launch games as the outgoing consoles last games were to their first can only benefit from this ability.

    I didn't realise calling you Nostradamus was an insult, but I suppose he was a bit of an ugly git, so I apologise for any offence caused. It's just that to me, your prediction that technophiles won't buy a PS3 until 2017 seemed a little unlikely, but then, with Sony's record for product avauilability, you may have a point.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 15:50

  • SergioAguero #96 5 years ago

    @ Le Dilletante

    lol

    I'm just about to upgrade and my girlfriend is very non-plussed, although
    she did say HD looked nice when we saw some feed at Curry's recently.

    Have you been up-scaling DVD as well as your Sky HD watching?

  • Calgon #97 5 years ago

    Hughes. no the only one trying to dissmiss anything they dont like is you my friend with nothing more than a pretty weak arguement(which I pointed out you never understood in the first place) to back you up.

    The statement by the MS chap was more along the lines of:

    1080p @60fps is going to cost(yes it will!, its simply a heavier workload and we cant overlook the fact that 360 and PS3 are pretty even in the fillrate stakes), its not that it cant be done its just common sense that at that resolution they will have less resources then for other aspects of the visuals such as textures or shader effects and AA(especially on the PS3) which also rely heavily on fillrate, where as a 360 game could easily take advantage of that(since its more powerfull and capable for a start ;) ) and may look better in the end as a result. So is it really an advantage if they have to sacrifice compared to what 360 will be capable of at 720p/1080i? *which lets face it alot more people will beable to appreciate right now*

    Hughes I can see what you are trying to do: "its all bullshit, PS3 is gonna be way powerfull man and 360 is shit" no sorry the only one trying to "shut people up with bullshit" is you.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 15:54

  • captainrentboy #98 5 years ago

    ........Come on guys,we can do it,I think we can stretch out a story about screen resolutions to around 1500 replies.
    Hmmmm,the 360 sucks,it can only do a pityful res of 720p.It blows,it's sooo last gen.
    There's the fuel chaps.

  • drumbaby #99 5 years ago

    Just because the PS3 is obviously better in every way, it doesn't stop the 360 being an okay machine.

    ;)

  • Steroyd #100 5 years ago

    I feel sorry for Resistance, a launch-title "tick the boxes" FPS that's suddenly pimped out like a ten-dollar whore because it's the only major title Sony have right now that they can use to push the "strengths" of the PS3:

    "It needs 22 gigs!" Because it has the same game binaries multiple times for different languages on the same disk.

    "It's 1080p!" except at 30FPS (proven multiple times) it's the same as 1080i.

    Watch out for horrid tacked on "six axis" support for the poor thing any day now.

    <a href=http ://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/732/732786p1.html>Fall of Man preview</a>

    <a href= http://blogs.ign.com/Ted-Insomniac/2006/09/07/30283/> 12Gb of level data alone.</a>

    They're aiming 1080p.

    And the game is already going to implement tilt to shake off the Chimera that latch onto you.

    Maybe Sony's pimping the game because it's attracting alot of attention since E3 maybe?

  • Garulon #101 5 years ago

    "Hmmmm,the 360 sucks,it can only do a pityful res of 720p.It blows,it's sooo last gen. "

    Sadly incorrect as the 360 can easily do 1080i/30, and would be able to handle (say) Dead Or Alive 4 at 1080p/60 if it had any way of actually _emitting_ that; currently there's about 1 TV in the Western hemispehere that supports 1080p over component, and even then only 1080p/30.

    Can we get the Nintendo Wii nutters in? Their shitty console can barely do VGA; I'm sure they've got loads of reasons why anything higher than 480p is a Bad Thing for Humanity. :)

  • Rambaldi #102 5 years ago

    When are these suckers going to realise that there is no discernable difference between 720 and 1080 (at the disctances that regular folk sit from a TV before you '1024x768 beats 800x600 4eva' PC boys pipe up) until you break the 40" barrier. Will all the people planning on spending 5k on a 40+" 1080p TV please stand up?

    /tumbleweeds

  • captainrentboy #103 5 years ago

    Ahhh,you bit onto what was blatantly a joke :) I friggin love the 360,I've got one it's great,infact i'm pretty sure it'll ground the PS3 into the ground......Anyone else?

  • Garulon #104 5 years ago

    "Maybe Sony's pimping the game because it's attracting alot of attention since E3 maybe? "

    (a) How do Sony measure this? Do people write in going "Wow! Killzone 2 was a total lie but please tell me more about your generic 50s/Sci-Fi FPS. PLEASE!"

    (b) How do _you_ know?

    "And the game is already going to implement tilt to shake off the Chimera that latch onto you."

    Does that sound _good_ to you? Or tacked on as in "why don't you just waggle the thumbstick instead?" tacked-on? Also, didn't that game mechanic die in 2002?

    ("DEAD RISING?";) "Shutupshutupshutup I can't HEAR you"
    Edited by 2 at 18/09/06 @ 16:13

  • Calgon #105 5 years ago

    Steroyd: 12Gb of level data alone.


    I wonder if people are thinking what Im thinking: Is it going to be apparent that this space was necessary(it will have to be shown to be bigger than any FPS we've seen on any platform, theres still only 512mb of ram afterall and lets not get silly and bring the hard drive into this like the PS3 is the first platform to feature one) or are they being purposefully wastefull to push the point about blue-ray? what about load times? Are we atleast in agreement that loading data off the "slow-ray" drive will take longer than it will on the 360 drive?
    Edited by 3 at 18/09/06 @ 16:20

  • Garulon #106 5 years ago

    "Are we atleast in agreement that loading data of the "slow-ray" drive will take longer than it will on the 360 drive? "

    Oh man, I've tried that one more than a few times - it goes alright until somebody thinks CAV is some kind of magic goes-faster-pixie-dust that fixes the rotational latency of the thing, then they just stop listening. 12Gb sounds interesting though. At PS3's 9MB/s read time would mean something like a cumulative load time of 37 hours, _uncompressed_. (sorry, missed a decimal point)

    Of course, if they gave out compressed figures that would kinda spoil the argument for BluRry, wouldn't it? :)
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 16:25

  • Hughes. #107 5 years ago

    @Calgon

    Thank you for clarifying the position originally stated by the MS representative. The statement cited is one which has clearly been mis-represented by many trolling forumites on gaming websites. But, this one-off statement was only one part of what I said, the more important being the months of trolling based on that mis-representation. If you choose to ignore that part purely to maintain your view that people are just trying to justify a higher price to themselves, rather than enjoying watching trolls try to turn the argument around to an anti-Sony angle again. Maybe you need to re-inforce your negative view of people who prefer Sony's consoles?

    "Hughes I can see what you are trying to do: "its all bullshit, PS3 is gonna be way powerfull man and 360 is shit"

    You quite obviously can't. At no point have I made any such statement, or even a statement that could be mis-interpreted that way. I have offered no suggestion of greater power for the machine than the article itself suggest, I have no information that suggests either machine is much more powerful than the other, nor derided the 360 for anything other than the fact that it chose to limit itself to 720p, which actually seems to be cause for celebration among some people here. Go team!

    *cough*
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 16:26

  • Xerx3s #108 5 years ago

    Wait and see, that's all I'm going to say.

    Best comment in this thread. Let's just wait a year or 2 and then there will be brilliant games on all platforms that will look great in their own way. And, yes, we will actually have fun with them instead of pulling hairs over a fucking screen format. Tjees.

  • Garulon #109 5 years ago

    "nor derided the 360 for anything other than the fact that it chose to limit itself to 720p, which is an entirely factual position"

    Huh? XBox 360 is 720p and 1080i, always has been. Mine's running at 1080i right now. Do you mean the requirement by Microsoft that all games render internally to _at least_ 720p? I don't see that being any different to Sony's requirement, as the vast majority of PS3 titles will also be 720p, so they must have a similar requirement.

  • Hughes. #110 5 years ago

    And nobody's called my premium rate sex-chat line either!

    What a waste of all my typing!

  • Garulon #111 5 years ago

    "And, yes, we will actually have fun with them instead of pulling hairs over a fucking screen format. Tjees."

    Well like the majority of 360 owners I've been having fun with mine for getting on a year :p

  • Hughes. #112 5 years ago

    Still plenty of spare time for Sony-bashing in forums though. If I were to take the amount of time 360 users spend writing about the PS3 rather than playing their games as an indication of how compelling a machine it was, I might come to the conclusion they're not worth having. Good thing I'm a more charitable soul than that.

  • Hughes. #113 5 years ago

    I supsect I might actually think Killzone 2 is shit compared to VT, if the first Killzone is anything to go by.

  • Garulon #114 5 years ago

    "Still plenty of spare time for Sony-bashing in forums though."

    It's difficult to get away with playing Gotham at work, even during those "slack" moments. At home trust me, the 360 gets plenty of playtime. And there's not enough time in the World for one person to comprehensively bash Sony, given how everything they've done for the past couple of years should be accompanied by clown music.

    They even have second-rate astroturfers, who can muster up no more than a "wait and see" when presented with HDTV facts. You'd think they'd at least have briefed them with ATSC standards given they're pushing this train-wreck of a console as "true HD" (or at least attempted to during June).

  • Calgon #115 5 years ago

    Hughes. Well its nothing to do with people prefering Sony consoles as far as Im concerened, Im not sure what you read now then or who you were addressing. I was under the impression that you were implying the MS chap was proved wrong somehow(my bad if not but thats how it looked).

    If some people prefer Sony consoles thats fine(they are the ones paying the money... I just hope its for the games they want to play and not in the hopes of a console that will blow everything away), Id prefer an even split in the userbases but thats about it. The only thing I dont like is misinformation so I might chip in when I feel like it, even though it can sometimes lead to simple bashing, it can also lead to a good debate and a few people might learn something. I dont think anyones celebrating 360 not supporting 1080p, its just that the reallity is the PS3 games that do support it may not really be a cause to celebrate either, it all depends on what else is being done and whats missing compared to the top 720p 360 or even 720p PS3 games at that time.
    Edited by 4 at 18/09/06 @ 16:52

  • SergioAguero #116 5 years ago

    STOP.

    Sony's new box has now become the MOST BORING OBJECT EVER RELEASED

    since the invention of consumer electronics.

    I'd rather stick a fucking toaster under my TV and burn £500 with a blow-torch
    that type or read another word about it.

  • Hughes. #117 5 years ago

    "It's difficult to get away with playing Gotham at work, even during those "slack" moments."

    Pah! Excuses, excuses. Portable generator, handheld TV, hide it under your desk. When the boss asks what the noise is you tell them you've got bad indegestion.

  • Garulon #118 5 years ago

    "I'd rather stick a fucking toaster under my TV and burn £500 with a blow-torch
    that type or read another word about it."

    I dunno, the console is boring, but watching Sony PR run around like the Keystone Kops whilst people allegedly in charge of the largest electronics company in the world say contradictory things in the Press has been endlessly amusing to me. It'll be a bit of a downer when the thing's in people's homes and it's obvious it's basically an XBox 360 with BluRry. For £425.

  • Garulon #119 5 years ago

    "When the boss asks what the noise is you tell them you've got bad indegestion."

    The Vrum Vrum noise of the cars or the DVD drive noise?

  • Hughes. #120 5 years ago

    @Calgon

    An even market split would be my ideal too, hopefully pushing big two to achieve higher standards in 1st party software. I certainly won't be benifiting from any kind of HD in the near future, but as a console with a theoretically long lifespan, I'm sure it will get utilised well at some point. Whether it will make a difference I can see without a magnifying glass is another matter.

    @Garulon

    I was thinking the generator might make a bit of a racket, you'd probably need to issue earmuffs to co-workers if this is going to work as a plan for stealth gaming.

  • JediMasterMalik #121 5 years ago

    [link url=http://www.247 electrical.co.uk/epages/twentyfourseven.storefront/EN/Produc t/SAMLE40F71BX?SOURCE=AW
    ]http://ww w.247electrical.co.uk/epages/tw...[/link]

    Pricy, but certainly available for tech freaks. :)

    [link url=http://www.fotoconnection.com/viewitem.ph p?IndexID=40642&RefTag=froogle
    ]http://ww w.fotoconnection.com/viewitem.p...[/link]

    Damn americans, getting things so cheap. ;)
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 17:18

  • kangarootoo #122 5 years ago

    @SergioAguero

    Yes thats right, the PS3 is boring. So boring in fact that every thread even slightly related to it quickly balloons with positive and negative passion. So much so that even you post a comment yourself telling us how bored you are of it.

    Enjoy that toast.

  • Vic #123 5 years ago

    Good to see that Garulon isnt an MS fanboy obsessed with bashing PS3. If your so convinced that few PS3 games will play in 1080p at 60fps, why dont you just sit back and wait to be proven to be right? I dont undertsand why you feel the need to say the same thing over and over again, and deride the PS3 constantly. Was your dad sacked by Sony in the past or something?

    And who the hell was saying that Xenos is better than RSX? On paper it might look slightly better, but its employing unified shaders- Its a jack of all trades, master of none. I have a friend who is a complete PC and console techie who owns a 360 and isnt a sad fanboy like most on here, and he says he wouldnt be surprised if RSX combined with Cell walks all over anything 360 can offer.

    Overall, I think its fine that Sony have given people the option. If you like 360, then just buy one. People on here are talking like PS3 is £425 because it supports 1080p. Complete nonsense.

  • ThatMuddyFunster #124 5 years ago

    "Don't be such a retard. Please show everybody where they can buy a 1080p HD TV in Europe. Oh and try and find a model that you don't need to mortgage for. Oh and I mean a TV that's able to display all 1080 horizontal lines, not just accept a 1080p signal and rescan it."

    There's are several affordable 1080p TVs out now or on the horizon. The Sony X Series (available now), Sharp XD1E (available next month) (ignore the 1080i info on the Sharp UK site as that is incorrect), Samsung F71, etc. The 42" Sharp will be around £1,600. OK, retard???

  • drumbaby #125 5 years ago

    Once upon a time it was 'Oh, PS3 will never do a single 1080p game.'

    Now it's changed to 'Oh, but even so, noone will ever be able to take advantage of it.'

    And soon, as 1080p TVs inevitably drop in price, and people DO take advantage of it, we can all look forward to the next change of tack. :)

  • yagisencho #126 5 years ago

    We have two HD sets in the house, neither of which offer 1080p. Maybe I'll pick one up in a few years when the price is reasonable (same goes for the PS3).

  • Yaz #127 5 years ago

    That's right LeDilettante, and for games running at 30fps, there's no difference between 1080i and 1080p on a 1080p TV that deinterlaces properly.

  • ThatMuddyFunster #128 5 years ago

    "Yes, I'm the retard here. I paid about 350 quid for a 720p/1080i capable set. No way I'd pay over a grand for TV. 1600 for a set, is this a new meaning for the word 'affordable'? You must be so clever."

    £1,600 for a piece of kit like that is not a massive amount of money. Even a 1024x720 plasma goes for around the same price. You're now getting 1080p sets for the same price or a little more than 720p. You seem to be in your own insular little world where whatever your opinion is, that's the way it has to be and everyone else is incorrect. I wonder why you even bother communicating with other people and don't just sit in your arm chair and wallow in your own magnificence. Oh but of course, you couldn't agree because that would ruin your argument. Silly me. Perhaps you do indeed need a mortgage for £1,600.
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 21:06

  • Bill_Gates_Bitch #129 5 years ago

    You fucking idiots! If you $ony fanboys think your getting a better console just becasue one game outputs in a slightly higher-res. I hope you've all got cash to burn when you need to spend £500 on a console and a grand on a hdtv that actually fucking supports 1080p. I hope you enjoy that microscopic difference in graphics. Sure they can do a tennis game, when you've only got two characters on a screen, but an fps or a game like dead rising (360 exclusive), there's no chance in hell theyd be able to do that in 1080p unless you like your games to play like a slideshow. Xbox 360 has a slightly more powerful gpu than the PS3 and can easily output to 1080i if the developers wanted, but most games aren't going to because the framerates will be crap. Maybe for a sports or fighting game, but that's about it. I have a message for all you rabid mindless $ony fanboys who swallow all the $ony bull$hit and come back for more....go home and die!
    Edited by 1 at 18/09/06 @ 21:05

  • MaxiSleep #130 5 years ago

    vic said
    And who the hell was saying that Xenos is better than RSX? On paper it might look slightly better, but its employing unified shaders- Its a jack of all trades, master of none. I have a friend who is a complete PC and console techie who owns a 360 and isnt a sad fanboy like most on here, and he says he wouldnt be surprised if RSX combined with Cell walks all over anything 360 can offer.

    Hmm vic

    So why unified shaders the next big thing?

  • Lex_Luthor #131 5 years ago

    The damage control engines are runnin' at maximum captain, they cannae take anymore!

    :)

  • IronGiant #132 5 years ago

    Amusing how many losers think it's clever or helping gamers the world over to try to slag off Sony, PS3 or any of it's features. The PS3 is outputting at this resolution for some games, great news. Only rabid fanbois or retards would spend so much effort trying to explain why it doesn't really matter. Get a life.

  • Vic #133 5 years ago

    Unified shaders the next big thing?

    I think you've been reading too much of ATI's PR team. Nvidia realise that unified shaders wont be neccessary for a few years yet.

    So far our best information on the RSX makes it a 7800GTX with 28% more clockspeed. Combined with Cell big things will happen. It could be a while before devs starts using Cell for graphics though, as it'll be a pain to program at first, but its very specialized and powerful and able to work in conjunction with RSX. The 7 SPE's are less flexible than a general purpose CPU, but they add considerable power to the Cell in specific application types. That extra power provides flexibility in terms of what you can do with the CPU in real time.

    As for Xenos being more powerful, there is no solid info but based on raw specs and initial dev comments the opposite seems to be true. Xenos is weaker overall than the RSX. Not by much though. Also, remember MS included two threads per each of the three cores of the CPU. Parallezing code among three processors caused lots of anguish on PS2, and will undoubtedly cause similar difficulties on 360.

    This is why I think PS3 will open up a significant (but not huge) gap in its second and third-generation games.

  • ChromeMud #134 5 years ago

    @ Vic
    "Parallezing code among three processors caused lots of anguish on PS2, and will undoubtedly cause similar difficulties on 360"
    Of course,you coded on all three platforms,so the PS2 and 360 are very similar in architecture.
    What the f**k are you smoking???

  • SeesThroughAll #135 5 years ago

    The 7 SPE's are less flexible than a general purpose CPU, but they add considerable power to the Cell in specific application types.

    What gamers want to know is if among these applications are games.
    Edited by 1 at 19/09/06 @ 03:07

  • Calgon #136 5 years ago

    Vic: You are the least convincing techie Ive seen on EG and that says alot.

    As for Xenos being more powerful, there is no solid info but based on raw specs and initial dev comments the opposite seems to be true. Xenos is weaker overall than the RSX. Not by much though. Also, remember MS included two threads per each of the three cores of the CPU. Parallezing code among three processors caused lots of anguish on PS2, and will undoubtedly cause similar difficulties on 360.

    hahahahaha! :D WTF? I hope Im not the only one who realises how funny that paragraph is(especially the last bit... in-order processing is something that makes alot of devs groan but the situation will be far worse with Cell than it will be for Xenon for a number of reasons *I'm hoping I didnt really need to explain that but there it is*)


    Xenos and RSX isnt an apples to apples comparison and unified shaders arent the only new or unique feature it brings(RSX is basically an off the shelf part whereas Xenos is a custom designed GPU to perfectly fit a CONSOLE, this being the 360). Your statement was innacurate, in raw theoretical terms, in a few areas(such as pixel shading/processing power which I'll admit is important to devs these days) the RSX looks to be stronger(which is the only dev comment that holds weight infact I dont think Ive heard anything other than that supporting RSX) this is of course only theoretical and on paper(even the strengths RSX has are minimal --you could easily say that Xenon is the stronger overall with just the spec sheets because its plain to see its simply more powerfull in alot of ways-- but everyone should know by now that on their own theoretical specs can mean very little in the end) but this would not be fair to Xenos which doesnt have your traditional pipeline like RSX does and it has its more unique features to weigh in(which any fair comparison should take into account and when they do Xenos is clearly ahead). The more you look at the things that matter(ie closer to IN-GAME circumstance) the better Xenos starts to look over the RSX. So no overall Xenos is the stronger of the two. The hardware comparisons will usually conclude: CPU > Cell, GPU > Xenos *and since Cell is unproven this could change yet*

    Cell has had an increasing number of skeptics since the day it was announced and this is justified, and even if these skeptics are proved wrong it appears TOO specialised to some critics(we already know its behind Xenon in some areas) and this could be a bad thing because it could well be that most of its strengths wont be a big help to game developers when all is said and done(even though in some ways it appears good on paper I dont think I need to repeat the old saying...).

    Im sure devs will eventualy find out a good way to use some of Cells strengths but I doubt the Cell > RSX combo will ever beat out the Xenon > Xenos(these were actually designed/made to work together as a pair for a start and they each have their strengths over the PS3 offering) and if it somehow does(this would have to mean that Cell is even more super awesome than Sony told us it was... which I doubt), certainly not by a significant margin IMO.
    Edited by 8 at 19/09/06 @ 05:13

  • spongebob #137 5 years ago

    Garulon: It'll be a bit of a downer when the thing's in people's homes and it's obvious it's basically an XBox 360 with BluRry. For £425.

    And since Xbox 360 is best console ever (right?) why is it a bad thing that PS3 is like an Xbox 360 with Blu-Ray? It's more expensive now, but it has different set of games right from the start and I bet among them we will see some fun and cool games that you might enjoy. Or not. And some of them might run in 1080p. Or not.

    PS3 = Xbox 360 with Blu-Ray. How can that be bad for Xbox 360 fans?

  • Les #138 5 years ago

    "And soon, as 1080p TVs inevitably drop in price, and people DO take advantage of it, we can all look forward to the next change of tack. :)"

    drumbaby +1 or 2 even ;)

  • spongebob #139 5 years ago

    @Garulon
    Just make sure you got a really good 1080i screen with your Xbox 360 before you start comparing the performance on it to PS3 with a 1080p screen + game running on that resolution.

    Here we go, quoted from ps3forums:

    "Again, you didn't answer my question.
    Is it the same if you run a game 30 fps @ 1080p and 60 fps @ 1080i?

    Sorry, but I will have to say, it depends...but at least my post has a link to an article that helps explain my answer.

    If you have a 1080p signal then you will be able to get the full 1080p 30 fps as expected.

    But with 1080i, your biggest worry will be hour your TV handles the input.


    More than 48 percent of the displays I tested failed to process and deinterlace the 1080i signal properly, losing up to one-half of the vertical resolution. How is this possible?

    A number of TV vendors opt to use a simpler and cheaper way to process 1080i signals. They do it by handling one 540-line field at a time and upconverting the one-half-resolution picture to the given digital HD set's native resolution. To get a sense of how askew this is, note that HD displays have 720, 768, or, in the case of the highest-resolution HDTVs, 1,080 horizontal lines.

    Cheap, unsophisticated signal processors simply take a single 540-line field and synthesize all the missing lines of information to create the number of lines of the display, which can be 720, 768, or 1,080, depending on the display's native resolution. This method of scaling results in a softer picture accompanied by motion artifacts.

    That four consumer electronics companies (JVC, Hitachi, Pioneer, and Toshiba) have been boasting for the last couple of years that their displays properly process all the 1,080 broadcast lines at once should help further illustrate the importance of proper signal processing of 1080i broadcasts. According to our tests, these displays really do.

    [link url=http: //hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/0506halfrez/
    ]http://ho metheatermag.com/hookmeup/0506h...[/link]


    So with 1080p, you relieve the TV of having to process the 1080i signal and you do not have to worry. Otherwise, make sure you get a TV that passes the tests mentioned in the article.

    As for the fps that you mention, many assume that because you are comparing a 1080i signal that has twice as many fps, that somehow helps to look the same. But it is not just display speed that is the problem (as mentioned above, the TVs are displaying progressive anyway so in 1080i 60 fps, there is no painting of every other line that would need to happen twice as fast in order to get all lines displayed in the same amount of time as 1080p 30 fps). If you do 1080i at 60 fps with a TV that does not process 1080i well, you simply end up with twice as many frames per second of badly processed 1080i, compared to the same 1080u signal at 30 fps.
    Edited by 1 at 19/09/06 @ 09:02

  • Garulon #140 5 years ago

    @Vic "Good to see that Garulon isnt an MS fanboy obsessed with bashing PS3. If your so convinced that few PS3 games will play in 1080p at 60fps, why dont you just sit back and wait to be proven to be right?"

    Because I like educating people? And I also enjoy pointing out Sony's desperate lies? And my point wasn't that very few games will be 1080p, my point _was_ that Resistance Fall Of Man at 30 FPS is technically equivalent to 1080i/60. Excuse me for trying to teach fanbois something; It's a shame your too religiously hung up on the PS3 to listen. :(

    "On paper it might look slightly better, but its employing unified shaders- Its a jack of all trades, master of none."

    On Paper it looks massively better; unified shaders mean they can automatically be pixel _or_ vertex shaders dynamically - you get 48 "ALUS" that can be 24 Pixel and 24 Vertex shaders, or if your doing an early Z-pass of your geometry, you can have 48 Vertex shaders. The RSX can't do this.

    And Calgon, IIRC the fillrate advantage of the RSX has been pretty much eliminated since the RSX and GDDR3 was downclocked to 500MHz/650MHz. It's now worse at drawing plain old triangles than Xenos. Just FYI :)

  • Steroyd #141 5 years ago

    On Paper it looks massively better; unified shaders mean they can automatically be pixel _or_ vertex shaders dynamically - you get 48 "ALUS" that can be 24 Pixel and 24 Vertex shaders, or if your doing an early Z-pass of your geometry, you can have 48 Vertex shaders. The RSX can't do this.

    And Calgon, IIRC the fillrate advantage of the RSX has been pretty much eliminated since the RSX and GDDR3 was downclocked to 500MHz/650MHz. It's now worse at drawing plain old triangles than Xenos. Just FYI :)

    All that doesn't matter because the Cell processor can draw triangles (hence the close relationship between Cell and RSX), that's why games like Lair and Metal Gear Solid seem to be in the overkill area when it comes to the amount of triangles used.

    You can't judge the graphical grunt of the PS3 in the RSX alone because the Cell processor can help in that area also because of it's specific design.

  • Larkhill Jo #142 5 years ago

    Virtua Tennis 3 on PS3!! Good news.... shame I only have a black and white TV.
    :-(

  • foxy2006 #143 5 years ago

    @drumbaby

    "only it's looks.Really"



    it's called sarcasm

    /goes back to sleep

  • #144 5 years ago

    What IronGiant said:
    "Amusing how many losers think it's clever or helping gamers the world over to try to slag off Sony, PS3 or any of it's features. The PS3 is outputting at this resolution for some games, great news. Only rabid fanbois or retards would spend so much effort trying to explain why it doesn't really matter. Get a life. "

    There is nothing more to say, case closed.
    Edited by 1 at 19/09/06 @ 11:50

  • Calgon #145 5 years ago

    Garulon no way... so the roumers were true? I said that here ages ago that we could see them downgrade the clockspeed... of course they said I was crazy!

    When did that happen btw? cant beleive I missed that one. There are more roumers that they may do the same with Cell now(the 2 threads of the 64 bit PPE @ 3.2Ghz would have an easier time feeding the 6-7 32bit SPUs if they were at 1Ghz or so. Just a roumer... for now :D).
    Edited by 3 at 19/09/06 @ 13:23

  • miiiguel #146 5 years ago

    Honestly, can someone tell the difference between a 1080p and a 1080i TV with a contemporanean de-interlace method ?, I mean, can you actually see the odd and even fields on a Samsung 1080i ? When I was searching for an LCD I used a 1080p video and watch it a 1080i and a 1080p and the only difference I noticed was the price.
    But then again, I cannot tell the differecence between a decent MP3 and a CDA file, but my neughbour, even uses gold cables in his soundsystem...

    JediMasterMalik: I rather have a Samsung that does 1080i very well that a..., how is that?... "westinghouse"...! LOL!

    Why do people keep on comparing 360 with PS3? The damn later doesn't exist!!! I bet a years wage you haven't touched one yet, and you wont until next summer, at least! How can you say it's better than Xenos, oh "Mr. perfect-english-Vic" ? Compare with your PS2! That's a fair comparision 'cos you can play it now, as you could 8 years ago.
    And..., will 360 games magically, esoterically start to be unplayable bad if PS3 sells cazillions consoles?, will 360 gamers be forced to not enjoy their machine if Sony releases 7 games that do 1080p ? I can't play Dead Rising tonight, because of PS3's VT3 allegedly, sometime in a distant future will do 1080p ? I doubt...
    Edited by 3 at 19/09/06 @ 13:48

  • Calgon #147 5 years ago

    Steroyd thats nonsense the triangle setup is on the GPU and that is limited(not sure limited is the best word to use) to 275million/sec. Cell may do vertice/vertex generation(but all modern CPUs will be up to the task of anything that Cell can throw out there including Xenon... may even be stronger and as Ive said before Xenon and Xenos will be a much better pair working closely together because they were made for each other, the same is not true with Cell and RSX), perhaps some minor vertex transformation too?, these are another matter though and I doubt thered be many situations where 360 devs would go anywhere near the 500million tris/sec rate(they dont need that many for a start and theyd have no ALUs left for anything else, unless they also use the CPU, the unique cache locking feature of Xenon would be very usefull in this area ;) ) but this is one of 360s strengths over the PS3.

    edit: As for drawing at the actual rendering stage to the framebuffer the split means that the best way is to have the framebuffer on the GDDR3(where the cells read spead would be 16mb/s and the write speed would be 4gb/s which is simply nowhere near as good) other ways will be possible but innefficient as Garulon has said(and I said a few pages back). The bandwidth situation is much better on 360 with Xenos having a neatly integrated memory controller(much better than Xbox was apparently) with access to all available GDDR3 memory which can be split between CPU and GPU as devs see fit and a 10mb dedicated framebuffer with very high bandwidth and its own logic(frame buffer operations such as Z and colour access patterns can use up alot of bandwidth so this is good advantage over the PS3, motion blur, AA, HDR and other frame buffer effects will be better on 360 too).
    Edited by 6 at 19/09/06 @ 17:03

  • Garulon #148 5 years ago

    "Just make sure you got a really good 1080i screen with your Xbox 360 before you start comparing the performance on it to PS3 with a 1080p screen + game running on that resolution. "

    The thing is, if you have a TV capable of 1080p it should also easily be capable of deinterlacing a 1080i/60 signal into a 1080p/30 one. If you _don't_ have a 1080i display (happily, as I have a HD CRT 1080i is _All_ I have) then it doesn't matter as it can't display the 1080p signal anyway, right?

    "Garulon no way... so the roumers were true? I said that here ages ago that we could see them downgrade the clockspeed... of course they said I was crazy! "

    It's quasi-offical, in that no ex-cathedra announcments have been made but pretty much all PS3 devs know about it. So far it's just GPU/GDDR3 downgrade, as far as I can tell Cell and XDR are still the E3 published speeds.

    "I mean, can you actually see the odd and even fields on a Samsung 1080i ?"

    Nope :)

    "You can't judge the graphical grunt of the PS3 in the RSX alone because the Cell processor can help in that area also because of it's specific design."

    Actually, It can't. I mean sure it can write to the framebuffer just like RSX can, but the Cells' READ speed from the Framebuffer (if you have it in GDDR3 RAM) is so awful you couldn't use it for any post-processing effects. You can shove the buffer into XDR and play with it there, but you lose a bit of RAM and perf that way. You can also render out straight into XDR, but then the Cell's bandwidth is heavily compromised.

  • Garulon #149 5 years ago

    "Amusing how many losers think it's clever or helping gamers the world over to try to slag off Sony, PS3 or any of it's features. "

    I read that as "Stop telling me the truth about the PS3!" Fine, just stick the old head in the sand, stop reading the posts, and in March 2007 hand over the best part of five hundred quid and grab those ankles :(
    Edited by 1 at 19/09/06 @ 15:08

  • Calgon #150 5 years ago

    Anyway as fun as its been neither machine will ever make the other one look "shit" so the "its all about the games" arguement has never been stronger than it will be this coming "next-generation battle". So we could see many great games as the years progress and I have to say... I do like great games. :D
    Edited by 2 at 19/09/06 @ 16:05

  • drumbaby #151 5 years ago

    "I read that as "Stop telling me the truth about the PS3!" "

    Quelle surprise. :/

  • Vic #152 5 years ago

    Interesting comments Calgon, spoilt by some mistakes along the way. Btw, that first response to my post seems like a just a series of your opinions, with no substance to back them up.

    Remember that Unified shaders were not used in nVidia’s or ATI’s top end graphics cards this generation. It doesn’t say that unified shaders are not the path for the future for both manufacturers, but it does suggest that now(2005-2006) unified shaders may not be up to par with the horsepower that can be put on a fixed function pipelined architecture. Whether or not the Xenos is actually up to par with the future GPUs that may have unified shaders will not be known until they are released and many more programmers start to actually use them and see what areas need improvement to make the architecture more refined for actual use.

    Many people talk about the 10mb eDRAM but the exact nature of the AA advantage you speak of is limited to certain resolutions and pixel depths. Effects that may increase frame buffer size are FSAA, HDR, alpha blending, and z-buffering. Depending on the combination of these effects, the frame buffer size may exceed the 10MB capacity of eDRAM and force developers to come up with a tile rendering solution if they want to use the eDRAM perform those tasks. If a tiling method is used, a performance hit is still present but not many people are aware of the exact nature of what this hit actually is.

    As I have been reminded by an article I read recently, 360 has more general purpose computing power, while PS3 is more specialised in nature. Ageia and other companies are proposing a new major piece of hardware on PCs to aid in processing physics in games. A certain type of processing is needed, and it is not found in traditional desktop CPUs with general purpose processing power. PS3 will surpass 360 as its CPU is built for GAMING, not running operating systems and application. What is does is give the ability to run general purpose applications faster. If the 360 had a web browser, the design for such an application would work better on a general purpose CPU. Running multiple general purpose applications is where the most benefit from a multicore general purpose CPU is held.

    Also, you cliam that PS3 incorporates a PC-like design, forgetting that the bus that connects the Cell (and XDR RAM) to the RSX is significantly different from a 7800GTX in a typical PC setup. This bus has significantly greater bandwidth than a typical PC GPU has and could allow the Cell and main memory to play a bigger role in graphics. Cell will do anything you like, available memory space and your patience/competence permitting. Cell's a freely programmable general purpose multiprocessor, so it can do raytracing or whatever else you as a programmer might think of, although perhaps not in realtime.

  • Calgon #153 5 years ago

    Vic the only posts lacking any real susbstance are your posts(its simple marketing speak which was already being contested with the SOUND information I provided) and I did not make any mistakes nor forget anything of relevance to my points. You have already displayed a lack of understanding of the nature of these architectures(which I pointed out in the first quote from you) so I suggest you tell your "techie friend" to post himself. Youve failed to discredit the advantages of the USA(based simply on the unknown?... wait and see?)and if there werent clear advantages neither ATI or NVidia would be going there any time soon which they are(Xenos was on a different schedual to ATIs PC roadmap, MS may have actually pushed for this knowing this is where DX10 allowing 360 a chance to keep up somewhat and this was a perfect opportunity for ATI to get the USA right first, all funded and perhaps assisted by MS), You cannot dissmiss the 10mb of e-DRAM advantage either, 10mb always meant that tiling would have to be used(simple maths on the footprint required for HD resolutions would have told you that, its been known since Xenos was first revealed) but theres no denying that this is still a better scenario than the PS3 one because you WILL still save shitloads of bandwidth using it, thats why its there(no its not perfect but they will find a good balance soon enough and we will start to see its benefits more and more).

    The RSX vs Xenos arguement was over ages ago if you knew anything, Xenos wins, its that simple and of course Sony are going to tell you Cell is all powerfull because they can get away with it, for now because its unreleased and unproven(how much interest has it received outside of Sony's own PS3? the server market has a few coming from IBM but thats about it and they are highly priced, its already looking like a failure compared to what Sony was expecting).

    Cell was not built for soley for gaming, despite what Sony want you to beleive(one of its only strengths touted from the start has been decoding multiple streams on the fly which could tie in with blu-ray perhaps?... multimedia processor does not equal gaming processor, Sony fanboys are focussing on a select few things some of which may or may not even be true), why can't you see that the SPUs are essentially hacked toshiba DSPs working in parralel?(not dissing the Cell with that but theres no magic going on here is all). I garrantee you, the Cell will deffinately not be as good as Sony hypes it up to be or as it appears on paper(thats always been Sony's game since the PS2 arrived before they even started on the PS3 they learned those tricks). Ageia have been cosying with Sony and outlining the similarities with Cell they have because: a) Sony's presence would be beneficial to them. b) They have a product to sell.

    The "certain type of processing needed" is floating point and with Cell its most likely limited more than Sony want us to beleive, in the types of floating point operations it(supposedly... ie they have yet to prove any of this) excells at. PPUs may never take off either, this veiw is further strengthened with ATIs physics solution which I think is a much better direction to head in and we could see Nvidia follow suit if they haven't made plans already. What do you think is better?: a card only made for Physics or a card that can be used for either graphics or physics?(people are already using crossfire and SLI, so this sort of thing would be a much more natural transition and better value for the consumer).

    You haven't told me anything I haven't read yonks ago and I can see through any weaknesses in that sort of marketing speak.

    This bus has significantly greater bandwidth than a typical PC GPU

    Only to main memory and it needs to be... this was the case with Xbox too(also one of the benefits brought with PCI-express too though... 16x = 4Gb/s > this includes CPU reads and writes from video memory = better than the measly 16mb/s Cell read), its because the very nature of consoles allows them to do this but memory is expensive and Consoles cant be too expensive to produce. With PC GPUs/Graphics-Cards they can have their own onboard GDDR3 memory of up to 512mb with much higher bandwidth than any memory in the PS3(twice as much as XDR and all of it can be used for graphics you simply cannot compare and with PCI-Express this even less of an issue now). The bus between Cell and RSX(excluding RSX to XDR/main memory because Cell might need this for you know... operations other than graphics and that would hinder it --its still not effecient, any other ways you could care to mention would be worse still-- if Cell talking directly to the RSX was what you were also hinting at that) is not new, 360 has already had that in mind from that start ;) , only with the 360, Xenon can also lock the cache which would then be made available exclusively to Xenos(again a 360 feature and signs of more thought in the design process about the close relationship between these two components) which could have some interesting implications.

    Cell will do anything you like, available memory space and your patience/competence permitting. Cell's a freely programmable general purpose multiprocessor, so it can do raytracing or whatever else you as a programmer might think of, although perhaps not in realtime.


    Haha that's a keeper that is :D

    Now you've just completely lost the plot, I can tell you built up to that at the end by pretending you know what you are talking about. Most CPUs can "do anything you like"... duh? it depends how fast they can do them or its pointless even trying... unless you want 5fps gaming but surely thats not "the real next-gen"? Put it this way if it was all that good at graphics processing in general, why did they change their original plan? --which was to have mutiple Cells handle everything(3 of them I think)-- because its way WEAKER than a GPU thats why! and your dreams of SLI like performance with the two working together are unfounded(even if they were originally designed to work together which we know they certainly weren't, so it was never going to happen) when held up to this simple but very true to logic(keep dreaming! ;) ).

    PS3 will surpass 360 as its CPU is built for GAMING, not running operating systems and application.

    Thats also a keeper! ;) and I'll say it again PS3 will NEVER surpass 360 by any significant margin. This is pointless at the moment, so I will just say lets wait and see(and once the first year's out of the way if Sony start using the "untapped potential" excuse its final if we find 360 has better graphics, and come the 2nd-3rd year if they do fall behind they will stay there).
    Edited by 16 at 20/09/06 @ 00:12

  • #154 5 years ago

    I can't wait to see a tennis game running in 1080p, gosh, it will be like soooooooooo amazing.

  • Calgon #155 5 years ago

    Im sorry for that long post to rest here, I did say I was done here but he addressed me personally afterall. Plus the sort of stuff he was spouting was pure Sony propaganda/marketing-speak which I hate, not that he was overly convincing anyway with his analogy of: "Xenon = General purpose only = web browser and word processing = not usefull for games...." WTF?... Hello! Xenon designs started after Cell, when MS went to IBM they already knew what were up against and its not an off the shelf part either. MS and IBM designed this for GAMING first and foremost you only have to look at it to realise that(dot product features ect).

    Wait and see peeps! \0/ 360 FTW!!!

    I will try and stay clear of this thread after this since its all gone too far into the system war again.
    Edited by 3 at 19/09/06 @ 21:59

  • sonsonate #156 5 years ago

    your, you're, lol...

    the eDrama continues over the intangible!
    i could understand arguing as to whether a game is fun or not, but its resolution? c'mon...

    makes for a fun read though.


    this article says it all: [link url=http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34288 ]http://ww w.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?...[/link]

    Yeah, so keep bugging about what player you'll buy. I'll be taking the hybrid, kthxbye! [link url=htt p://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4201
    ]http://ww w.dailytech.com/article.aspx?ne...[/link]

    i wonder if EG will be around so we can argue if PS(X) and XBOX(X) can produce that resolution at 60fps without stuttering...oh, and the cost of the included HDHD (high def holographic disc)

    PS: OH, oh, oh! The TV too! that'll make for some reading.

    console wars spawn console whores and format wars spawn format whores.

    i, on the other hand, will be no whore. after all, what is there to argue?

    as you were men!


    haha, just kidding.

    /runs
    Edited by 1 at 19/09/06 @ 22:37

  • captainrentboy #157 5 years ago

    Jesus H Christ Calgon,where do you find the time to write massive posts like that?I get bored of writing replies on forums about two li....

  • animal_mother #158 5 years ago

    Calgon, get out more often son.

  • Vic #159 5 years ago

    @Calgon

    Your comments about RSX and Xenos are not as unequivocal as you would have us believe.

    Lets look at what Developers are saying:

    Xenos has a vertex shader advantage over RSX but with Cell helping RSX, it makes comparison much more even.

    RSX has a pixel shader advantage over Xenos.

    RSX has 332 m

    The edram in Xenos gives frame-buffer bandwith advantages although ps3 has a bandwith advantage for everything else and possibly some frame-buffer advantages too.

    Thats from 2 developers from psinext and beyond3d forums.

    RSX will be at a disadvantage to Xenos when it comes to framebuffer effects thanks to its 128-bit bus and 10mb of eDRAM. However, a lead developer on Heavenly Sword (yes I know its being developed by Ninja Theory, but he is in a psoition to say) has said there are ways of getting HDR+AA on PS3 games with nowhere near as much hit on RSX's power as some people have tried to make out. And remember, HS will also be presented in 1080p glory, possibly at 60 FPS :).

  • Vic #160 5 years ago

    In fact you talk about on-paper specs until your blue in the face but practical tests are more relevant.

    Unified shader technology is the direction that PC graphics are going to go. Nvidia have the G80. The thing that always struck me as kind of odd about the Xbox 360 is that it has a very early version of the architecture in that it seems to be rather under powered to run games like Oblivion. Gamespot ran a comparison on Oblivion on a low end, mid-grade, and high-end PC to see how the 360 verison matches up.

    PC's with the 7800 and 7900 were both more impressive than the 360 and that was at the same resolution, which we all know PCs can have higher resolutions than x720. The good news for Sony is that RSX will probably be at least as powerful than the Xenos. Also, 1080p is not going to be a big stretch of the imagination since a 7900 can run extreme resolutions on PC that no TV in the next three or four years is going to support, albeit at a fair strain. However, I'm sure there'll be many games running in 1080p that will look optimal when compared to 720p with higher quality graphics settings.

    The question is, are unified shaders that much of an advantage this generation?
    Edited by 2 at 20/09/06 @ 00:25

  • Calgon #161 5 years ago

    Vic get over it! Xenos is stronger and more advanced than RSX thats just the way it is. The only real bandwidth advantage PS3 has now is the XDR which is less than 256mb after the OS has taken a chunk and less once Cell has taken its share for other tasks, how much do you think this will help? Not alot since its effectively only 3Gb/s faster than 360s GDDR3. There are no framebuffer advantages on PS3 at all(use your eyes the facts are there this will be done on PS3s GDDR3... best case scenario), these operations will be more costly on the PS3 including AA, HDR and motion blur.

    Lets look at what Developers are saying

    We will do that, most seem to be giving Xenos the nod now and we certainly wont take the word of an annonymous forum poster whos less convincing than you are(sketchy springs to mind), not even Nvidia have tried to defend that and if they had worked on a solution you can bet we'd know by now.

    I suggest you give it up I have a feeling this could go on and on and on before you realise youve been powned!(haha joking but how many time do I have to say it lets just wait and see now, you know like with the obviously overhyped Cell, the real question what can we expect from the real world perfomance of Cell?)


    edit: Oh and Oblivion is a first gen 360 title based off UE3 which I dont think says anything bad of the 360 because they did a good job, lets have a look at Gears of War when its out then or any of the newer games based off that engine. Lets not forget although UE3 is very scalable and supports many platforms its not a 360 engine(and although theyve recently added multithreading for GOW there wont be AA in any of the games based on that engine which highlights this... before you get chuffed its to do with how they implement shadows and the bandwidth restraints without the help of the e-DRAM so the problem would be far worse on PS3 and many PC set-ups) , futhermore the reason you're not seeing benifits of the USA is maybe because its not a DX10 engine? What it does show though is that the USA featured in the xenos holds up well even at this early stage then does it not?
    Edited by 4 at 20/09/06 @ 06:54

  • Vic #162 5 years ago

    Err...PS3 has 256MB of very high speed XDR main RAM running at 3.2Ghz, and 256MB of GDDR graphics RAM running at 700Mhz.

    Anonymous developer? Eh? Those interviews were in PSNEXT, and I think I'm more inclined to believe them than you.

    First you start yet again stating the supremacy of Xenos, then you say 'lets just wait and see now'??

    GOW. Fine. But how will we compare performance with a PC running a mid/high level graphics card? I dont remember seeing a PC release on Epic's schedule.

    My points are valid, which is why you probably ignored many of them. But your right lets wait and see. Comparions of games, particulary the 2nd and 3rd generations should tell us a lot. Your obviously someone that hopes MS does well in the next console war (I'm guessing your an America citizen?) and I'm sure with their new piece of kit, MS will have lots of good games, and at least solidify its 2nd place in the console market this gen.
    Edited by 1 at 20/09/06 @ 00:57

  • Calgon #163 5 years ago

    Err... was there any point to repeating that? but I suppose since you where overly cocky in that post I will address a few things.

    Once PS3 OS weighing in at 96mb(as apposed to 32mb on 360) has taken it's share of memory from XDR(64mb) and GDDR3(32mb) we are looking at 192mb XDR and 224mb GDR3.

    GDDR3 on 360 is 700MHz but industry insiders and developers have reported a clock decrease in the PS3s RSX(now 500Mhz) and GDDR3(now 650Mhz), Sony havent announced this yet but given the amount of bad press theyve had recently you can see why(probably much closer to launch) but this isnt the sort of thing these types of people comment on without some certainty.

    Cell and XDR are unchanged as of yet I beleive, but simply stating the clockspeed of the XDR memory suggests a lack of understanding perhaps you need educating, afterall this was concerning frame buffer bandwidth was it not? (probably the part where I said only 3Ghz advantage over GDDR3 and limited by sharing it with Cell would not go a long way to support the PS3 having an advantage here)

    Yes the XDR clock is 3.2Ghz but when calculating bandwidths(for the record GDDR3 apparently still has a lower latency which would actually benifit CPU performance more... so it seems this XDR decision was made just to give the CPU access to higher bandwidth with a lower pin count*thinking about future revisions with smaller PS3 and costs perhaps?*, which is probably the arguement you should have made rather than contesting the framebuffer bandwidth) the multipliers are:

    Effective clockspeed * Bus Width(in bytes, that means you devide by 8 if you didnt know ;) )

    So XDR has an effectivve clock of 3.2Ghz and the effective clock of GDDR3 would be 700Mhz *2 = 1.4Ghz or at 650Mhz = 1.3Ghz to clear that up.

    The Bus Widths are: XDR = 64 bits wide GDDR3 = 128 bits wide. Recent PC GDDR3 memory is typically 256 bits wide, one of the things pointed out by PC enthusiasts when the specs for both machines were released.

    PS3

    256mb XDR - 3.2Ghz * 8bytes = 25.6 Gb/s
    256mb GDDR3 - 1.3Ghz * 16bytes = 20.8 Gb/s

    360

    512mb GDDR3 - 1.4Ghz * 16bytes = 22.4 Gb/s

    PC GDDR3

    ATI X1800 XT - 1.5Ghz * 32bytes = 48Gb/s
    Nvidia 7900GTX - 1.6Ghz * 32bytes = 51.2 Gb/s (it also has twice the amount of ROPs to work with too = 16)

    PC GDDR4 *starts at around 2Ghz but still 256 bus width*

    2.0Ghz * 32bytes = 64Gb/s


    So now weve cleared that up --it will be more than likely the framebuffer will be on the PS3 GDDR3-- we can better judge the frame buffer bandwidth comparison.

    Frame Buffer Bandwidth

    Xbox 360 Edram - 256.0 GB/sec (dedicated for frame buffer rendering)
    PS3 GDDR3 - 22.4 GB/sec (shared with other graphics data: textures and vertices)
    PS3 GDDR3 - 12.4 GB/sec (with 10.0 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)
    PS3 GDDR3 - 10.0 GB/sec (with 12.4 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)

    PS3 GDDR3's lower clockspeed would mean...

    PS3 GDDR3 - 20.8 GB/sec (shared with other graphics data: textures and vertices)
    PS3 GDDR3 - 10.0 GB/sec (with 10.8 GB/sec subtracted for textures and vertices)

    Anonymous developer? Eh? Those interviews were in PSNEXT, and I think I'm more inclined to believe them than you.

    I thought you said this was a website forum post which would not classify as a valid source(atleast not a quote as hazy as that, also even though it's visuals are overrated IMO compared to even some of the other PS3 games in developement, is there a link to where he's promised 1080p with HDR and AA @60fps or even @30fps for that matter? did he even say thats what they are "aiming" for? you need to back this up or dont bother posting it).

    First you start yet again stating the supremacy of Xenos, then you say 'lets just wait and see now'??
    ...
    My points are valid, which is why you probably ignored many of them.

    I never ignored any of the points you made(first statement was just an ignorrant way to pretend you won in some way), you simply havent given justification to dismiss any of the 360s strengths at all(which you where desperately trying to do... PS3 Fanboy? and no Im not American nor do I own a 360). Enough with that though we can throw numbers around all day, the point I was making is its definetly not looking like the PS3 will have a "significant" graphical edge over the 360(so it has alot to prove before any PS3 fanboys like yourself can say that without getting laughed at ;) ).

    Yes as Ive said a more even split would be ideal, but this is not what Sony wants, they showed signs they were feeling threatened at E3:05 with pre-rendered footage, along with the the words real-time or in-game and most importantly "coming soon" which is the impression they've wanted to give for over a year now(so people might hold out a bit longer, then a bit longer rather than picking up a 360 in the mean time and finding out that its actually a great console and looking at the expensive PS3 at launch and thinking "whats the point?";).

    Why do you see every comment as an attack on PS3 which arent in agreement with your "PS3 Supremacy" veiws? This would go against the word of every none partial Devs comments so far for a start. It's also a waste of both of our time in the end, let PS3 hit the market and then lets see some proof(games) or maybe just play those games you want(nothing wrong with that...only mine will cost less and look better :D ).

    Edited by 11 at 20/09/06 @ 18:46

  • Steroyd #164 5 years ago

    This comments section doesn't matter now because MS is now supporting 1080p with their next dash update LMAO.

  • captain_cupcake #165 5 years ago

    Gamers ahoy! If, like me, you're a bit of a geek, you're no doubt aware of the buzz surrounding Microsoft's new gaming technology, KNOB 360.

    KNOB - which stands for Kernel Network Object Blocks - is part of their Multi User Gaming System for their next generation of consoles.

    Microsoft's first poke at the platform, KNOB 1, failed to rise to the occasion, with gamers, devcos and publishers disappointed with its flaccid performance. This version, however, looks to be a whole lot bigger.

    A Microsoft spokesperson agreed to give us a soundbite on KNOB 360:

    "KNOB 360 offers the power and flexibility to truly enable network gaming and easy connection to backend services."

    Microsoft seemed to have learnt from their previous mistakes. KNOB 360 now operates on a virtual machine, called a CLR (Cunning Lingual Rimtime), designed to abstract and manage the codebase, while offering a suite of tools for developers to get to grips with.

    Other experts weren't so ebullient. One market analist confided, "Until now, none of the big players have had the balls to handle KNOB", but conceded that there had been "a groundswell in popularity since the first release."

    In the gaming market, KNOB 360 looks set for deeper penetration, with fanboys trumpeting KNOB in preparation to slotting it into their entertainment centers.

    Whether it will come up rosie, we'll have to see...

  • Garulon #166 5 years ago

    "This comments section doesn't matter now because MS is now supporting 1080p with their next dash update LMAO."

    Yeah, that's hilarious! Do you think Sony will take the little cardboard "1080P" signs off their tellies now? :)

  • Vic #167 5 years ago

    Still not getting it..

    The RSX is always using 8/24; however those 24 pixel pipelines have 2 ALU and are just as good as 48 pixel pipelines in the xenos;

    on top of those the 8 vertex pipelines are able to push 1 billion vertices/second while the 48 pipelines of the xenos can push max 500 million vertices/second, which means those 8 vertex pip.. are equivalent as 96 in the xenos.

    so in Xenos space, the RSX got 96/48 constant vs 0/48 or 16/32 or 32/16 or 48/0

    summary:
    - general processors (unified shaders arch) are less efficient in some ways than specialized ones
    - the Xenos has always less computational power, in every scenario, and its unified architecture wont necessarily make up the shortfall.

    Hopefully the xenos got some advantages like the EDRAM, free AA, 10bit HDR etc.
    which might make the difference sometimes, and when it doesn't, then the RSX power does the difference.

    Like you say, enjoy 360, and I'll enjoy PS3 games designed with HDD as standard, 1080p as standard, with higher res textures due to Blu-ray's capacity through my HDMI cable :). And Garulon, a 1-2m HDMI cable doesnt cost £60 :L.

    I think I'll get by on FFXII, MGS4, VF5, Tekken, Dead Rising, Bioshock, Warhawk, GT Vision, Heavenly Sword, DMC 4, UT 2007, Spiderman, Resistance: FOM, Coded Arms Assault, Eight days, Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier, Lair, Kingdom Hearts 3, God of War 3, Wipeout etc etc.

  • Calgon #168 5 years ago

    Still not getting it..

    I can see you dont get it at all and you keep switching topics randomly as a result, maybe its because you dont want to beleive it?

    Judging by your botched analysis and summary I can see you dont understand Xenos at all especially in regards to the USA and the advantages it brings over the standard pipeline.
    I infact in a few places it appears as though you are making things up, perhaps this will finally clear up the nonesense youve filled your head with?

    The RSX is always using 8/24; however those 24 pixel pipelines have 2 ALU and are just as good as 48 pixel pipelines in the xenos

    First off yes the RSX has essentially 48 ALUS (24 x 2 per pixel pipe) but these are standard pixel processing ALUs they can only be used for that, but this is why people thought it was powerfull at first.

    ...on top of those the 8 vertex pipelines are able to push 1 billion vertices/second while the 48 pipelines of the xenos can push max 500 million vertices/second, which means those 8 vertex pip.. are equivalent as 96 in the xenos*ROFL WTF????*.

    Actually its just outlining your lack of understanding vertex processing was never a point raised by anyone outlining the strengths of the PS3 its always been soley pixel shading power (we know theres always more to the equation than that though in the real world performance though right? I'll get to that) again lets see where you went wrong:

    RSX - 8 Vertex units - Yes

    RSX - 1 billion vertices/s - Yes

    Xenos - 48 pipelines - Yes 48 but No these arent pixel pipelines they are Unified Pipelines.

    Xenos - 500 million vertices/second - haha :D NO

    You see I think think what you did was take the TRIANGLE SETUP which is twice as great on Xenos than PS3:

    RSX - Triangle set up = 250 Million triangles/sec *max amount it can handle, but thats not bad*

    Xenos - Triangle set up = 500 Million triangles/sec

    If you knew anything youd know that Xenos can be in situations where it will trounce RSX in vertex processing(possibly particle performance too).

    Vertex Shader Processing

    Xbox 360 - 6.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)*granted not going to happen*
    Xbox 360 - 2.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 16 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
    Xbox 360 - 1.5 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 12 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
    Xbox 360 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec (using only 8 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
    PS3 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec (8 vertex pipelines)


    summary:
    - general processors (unified shaders arch) are less efficient in some ways than specialized ones
    - the Xenos has always less computational power, in every scenario, and its unified architecture wont necessarily make up the shortfall.*sounds like a "lalalalalala.... I cant hear you"


    First off the USA is all about reducing overhead and IMPROVING efficiency over the standard pipeline we have now. Why is this? Well because a GPU like RSX will have seperate pixel and vertex shaders which may be powerfull enough in some cases(like the RSX's pixel shading abilities) but one side will usually holding the other back somewhat at all times(this is wastage as theres trasistors sat waiting which is why you'll never see anything close to the peak pixel processing figures... these figure look better on paper marginally). With Xenos once devs really get to grips with it we will find this is not the case here as its designed so every transistor is in use(pixel or vertex).
    At the end of the day the OVERALL output of Xenos is higher and its easy to see(which is why theres a general agreement that Xenos is the better GPU) --with the improved effeciency and unique features along the line-- that the Xenos > Xenon has enough to keep up if not surpass Cell > RSX where realtime GRAPHICS are concerned.

    Now lets show some more figures since you made so many baseless conclusions there(simply what you want to beleive rather than any factual reasoning):

    Pixel Shader Processing Raw/without Textures (Pixel ALU x Clock)
    Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines) *again not goint to happen since 360 needs atleast 8 of those for vertex processing*
    Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
    Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
    Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
    PS3 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (24 pixel pipes = 48 ALUs)

    Now it appears we can see the extent to which those claims of more shading power came from as it appears the RSX has a 4.0 billion advantage when all things are even(8 vertex and 48 pixel PS3 > 8 vertext 40 pixel 360) right? So even at a level that suits PS3 best the difference is 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec to 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec but can we really ignore the improved overhead and efficiency benifits of the USA? And it cirtainly doesnt look like a big difference to begin with does it?(even if it turned out that its 550Mhz which is doubtfull now thats 26.4 Billion Pixels/sec ie not much better)
    Lets dig a little more and see what was meant by the final output of Xenos being better all the same though(without accounting for effeciency which couldn't be done yet anyway):

    Filtered Texture Fetch *differences are though that xenos has 16 texture units seperate rather than 1 on each pipe like RSX which has its advantages too*

    Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
    PS3 - 12.0 Billion Texels/sec

    Vertex Texture Fetch

    Xbox 360 - 8.0 Billion Texels/sec
    PS3 - 4.0 Billion Texels/sec

    Pixel Shader Processing with 16 Filtered Texels Per Cycle (Pixel ALU x Clock)
    Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using all 48 Unified Pipelines)
    Xbox 360 - 20.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 40 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
    Xbox 360 - 18.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 36 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)
    Xbox 360 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (using 32 of the 48 Unified Pipelines)*
    PS3 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec (24 pixel pipes = 48 ALUs - 16 = 32 ALUs) *

    At PS3 level(16B Pixels/s) the remaining 16 Unified pipelines on Xenos could be used for vertex processing giving 2.0 Billion Vertices/sec thats twice as many as the PS3 could do.

    So you see Xenos has the power, effeciency and more advanced tech and there are more situations where Xenos will have a greater output than RSX than vice-versa unlike you were trying to suggest.

    Im done in this thread though so dont reply here, if you wish to contest any of this(since you seem to think you know what you are talking about) I suggest you head to this site: http://fo rum.pcvsconsole.com/viewthread.... which is a forum much better suited to this kind of discussion and a place where this has been done in great detail.

    Oh and yes buy a PS3 if you like the games(Id stick to discussing games if I were you)
    I think I'll get by on FFXII, MGS4, VF5, Tekken, Dead Rising, Bioshock, Warhawk, GT Vision, Heavenly Sword, DMC 4, UT 2007, Spiderman, Resistance: FOM, Coded Arms Assault, Eight days, Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier, Lair, Kingdom Hearts 3, God of War 3, Wipeout etc etc.

    When were Dead Rising and Bioshock confirmed for PS3 btw though?
    Edited by 8 at 01/10/06 @ 02:59

  • Vic #169 5 years ago

    Good to see your admitting the situations that RSX will be superior in. Some of those other figures you mentioned were pulled of your arse though. There's an atricle being written by a programmer who is working on both machines, and will be giving his opinions to an independent mag. I'll definately be putting it up on here, no doubt I think you'll be surprised (and possibly embarrassed) about the advantages RSX has over Xenos. The fact is, people keep banging on about how Xenos works closer to its optimum performance (95% has been quoted), but devs are finding ways of getting the most out of RSX for longer, by unloading simpler more basic graphical tasks to Cell. Which is where RSX's superior horsepower comes in.

    Bioshock has been confirmed for PS3. Dead Rising will more than likely be released sooner or later.

  • Calgon #170 5 years ago

    Vic haha nice try Ive corrected you so many times and those figures are correct. You were the one quoting incorrect figures(I suggest you read that post again, it destroys your arguement even on a theoretical level which is interesting since effeciency, reduced overhead and other unique Xenos hardware features only strengthen the claim that the realworld performance of Xenos is likely much higher than RSX )... admit it you are in over your head here, I can see you dont really understand any of it.

    There's an atricle being written by a programmer who is working on both machines, and will be giving his opinions to an independent mag.

    Sounds good, should make for an interesting read then, I shall look forward to his thoughts. :) I do think though we should stress he's only giving opinions and he might not have worked with either of them that long yet(especially the PS3). The more I hear about real world performance comparisons the better 360 sounds though to be honest, theres been alot of reports of that even before the clock decrease. Like I said it will be interesting all the same though.

    Which is where RSX's superior horsepower comes in.

    RSX has pixel shading power and thats it(and you can see for yourself what was meant by marginal by so many dev even moreso now), on its own thats not enough, not nearly enough to consider it powerfull overall and Ive just shown you why(not my fault if you dont understand it the calculations have been explained). With the help of the Cell, RSX is still limited by its overall output which is still less than Xenos in most cases and certainly not enough for the significant margin you speak of in any circumstances. Its always been complete bollocks, Sony need to justify that price, its not going to have bad graphics at all but its a 360 with blue-ray at the most.

    All I was doing was exposing you for the bullshit you spouted earlier, prentending you actually know the differences between the 2 machines in detail(it was obvious from your first post to your last this is not the case) , but with some of the most obvious mistakes that could be made, which just shows you're a fanboy wanting to spread the lie of Sony and no understanding of the hardware. Relax Sony arent doomed! it will still sell, its not a bad machine, I have never said any of that.

    Why dont you visit that forum I suggested perhaps make a new thread and see what kind of response you get?

    [link url=http:/ /forum.pcvsconsole.com/folder.php?fid=12
    ]http://fo rum.pcvsconsole.com/folder.php?...[/link]

    I will look out for you there unless you tell me you have nothing more to say on those matters.
    Edited by 2 at 21/09/06 @ 19:04

  • Bates #171 5 years ago

    "1080P doesn't matter! 1080P is all hype!"

    lololoollolollollollooloololololol

  • Vic #172 5 years ago

    'The more I hear about real world performance comparisons the better 360 sounds'.

    Calgon, its all in your imaginative mind. The more you talk, the more you try to convince yourself. And while you're correct in some parts of your analysis, your fanboyishness shows through the more you type. You're just not being balanced in your appraisal, and also underestimating the likely effect the relationship between Cell and RSX will have on game development. The difference in graphics between PS3 and 360 wont be as big as between Xbox and PS2, but PS3 has the more powerful combination of CPU and GPU, despite ATI's pronouncements regarding how great its custom-made chip is. In the second and third-generation games, you can expect PS3 to start pulling away, and not just in terms of graphics, but also special graphical effects and physics. PS3 will just be better at handling more things on screen at once due to its far superior processing power.

    But like you say, its all about games, and I think we can expect some corkers for PS3 at TGS, :).

  • Calgon #173 5 years ago

    HAHA how old are we? Vic youve just taken my criticisms of you, reworded it and thrown it back at me(0 points for originality). Youve even taken my arguements about Sonys hyping of Cell and applied it to ATI and Xenos(fine but I know who Im more likely to trust to deliver closer to what was promised out of those two ;) )... how low can you get though?

    There was no point in bothering with that post because youve added nothing to your arguement(oh and by the way streaming between Xenos and Xenon --actually designed with each other in mind unlike Cell and RSX-- is covered on 360. Only Xenos will have full access to the 1mb Xenon cache along with this dedicated 24GB/sec line for streaming with Xenon which is 360 only, a couple of threads could be dedicated to helping Xenos if developers want to). Cell will not be the super CPU you're hoping for PS3 wont "pull away" I garrentee you will eat those words or simply fool yourself into beleiving it(rather than admit that you got caught up in Sony's hype machine and spat out).

    Infact what it comes down to is you are a nothing more than a blinded Sony fanboy the increasing amount of hypocracy in your posts is getting to the point of irritating now too. You go ahead wait for that "significant advantage", getting your jollies only once a year when some Sony dev throws out a few "untapped potential" comments("oooh its gotta happen soon then... cant wait to show those 360 fanboys";) or simply fooling yourself that you're getting something better("I swear there must be a few more shader effects in this game";).

    Enjoy that wait, meanwhile I'll be enjoying that more advanced(discounting the uneeded Blue-Ray with HDMI and overpromised Cell...) , efficient, balanced and powerfull hardware and the games I will eventually pick one up for ;)(at a much cheaper price).

    No more replies now though, this is just getting dumb you are boring me!

    *Checks clock* I think its time for a celebratory beer! Oh and btw dont be a douche all your life m8 ;)
    Edited by 4 at 22/09/06 @ 20:01

  • Vic #174 5 years ago

    "By the way streaming between Xenos and Xenon --actually designed with each other in mind unlike Cell and RSX-- is covered on 360."

    Err...yeah, but uou were wrong once again on that topic. Hyping up 360 with all kinds of hyperbole, already spouted by ATI's PR team.

    "you are a nothing more than a blinded Sony fanboy"

    This is funny coming from someone who does nothing but criticise Sony, and laud MS as some kind of gaming nirvana.

    "Enjoy that wait, meanwhile I'll be enjoying that more advanced, efficient, balanced and powerfull hardware and the games I will eventually pick one up for ;)(at a much cheaper price)".

    More advanced? Surely even you're not that thick?...And while you're buying expensive MS add-ons (like a £60 Wi-Fi adaptor lol) I'll be sitting in my lounge happy that Sony included these things as standard.

    "Oh and btw dont be a douche all your life m8 ;)".

    What the hell kind of diss is that you uptight prick? Get back to playing those great 360 games, like err...Prey and Oblivion :). Thats what I love about the machine, so many quality exclusives...