Y Rockstar, en exclusiva para PS3...

pos no deberian no, los de la ps2 ya eran to bastos y este no se sabe ni lo k es... a saber

"título que aprovecharía las posibilidades del Blu-Ray Disc y el poder del chip CELL"
Menos mal, porqe limitar un juego por culpa de otra consola...

Porfavor para que me pueda creer una palabra de todo lo que sueltas. Indica tus fuentes, o quiza todo esto son maquinaciones de tus compañeros de patio de colegio??? Uh?

#35 Si... tendrán que limitar texturas,... gráficos, poligonos etc... debido al ridículo ancho de banda de ps3 con su memoria de 64bits y su poder gráfico casi la mitad de inferior que esa "otra consola" tan límitada...

360 tiene ciertos problemas de hardware... ya conocidos por todos, pero te aseguro que la poca potencia gráfica es su principal baza, en absoluto es un problema.

Es que comparar el tipo de chip que ati ha hecho para 360 con el que Nvidia le ha hecho para PS3, al de Nvidia le faltan como 400 Mhz más para llegar a una potencia de cálculo gráfico similar.

#39 Tamy dejalo, que a muchos solo les vale la evidencia de que, como la PS3 salio despues y mas cara tiene mas potencia, y si metes un juego en un Blueray se ve mejor.

entonces lo de "título que aprovecharía las posibilidades del Blu-Ray Disc y el poder del chip CELL"
se dice pa rellenar no?
anda, anda...
lo aprovechará en otro aspenco, hablate con un programdor de juegos y el te dirá...

#43 Explotar las posibilidades del Blueray me parece que sera que el juego estara cargado de videos en HD los cuales ocupan mucho, y explotar el Cell significa programar para el Cell, lo que supone que se dejaran un paston en I+D para conseguir algo de este chip.
Pero lo que realmente significa es que quieren hacer publicidad de la PS3 de multiples maneras, y esta es una.

Supuestamente el F1 explotaba el chip Cell, y viendo el resultado, casi es mejor que no se explote XD

Por cierto, tu has hablado con un programador de videojuegos para estar tan seguro de que Tamy se equivoca?, porque creo que Tamy ha dejado bien claro que sabe de Hardware, que es de lo que esta hablando.

Pues pensando que en este foro encuentras a bastante gente que trabaja en esta industria, y que otra gran parte realiza actividades altamente relacionadas con la programacion de software ... Puede que sea una opinion a tener en cuenta.

Vamos a poner un post de un tio que lo explico bastante bien hace un tiempo:

"The ps3 gpu has 24 pixel pipelines and 8 vertex pipelines just like the 7800GTX 512MB version and even performs the same number of shader ops per clock 136. What a coincidence its even clocked at the same core clock of 550MHZ that right there people is the ps3's graphics card there is one problem though the ps3 graphics card wont have 512MB of video memory it will have 256 that hurts it a quite a bit. It wouldn't have made any difference whatsoever if the 360 gpu was using the sort of technology you could find in today's top end pc graphics cards, but the 360 is using something no other videocard currently has.


The 360 gpu has much better than 24 pixel pipes and 8 vertex pipes the 360 has 48 pixel and vertex pipelines. Technology no current video card has.

360 is running the new unified shader architecture technology. Nvidia wont have something like that made as they've said themselves till their g80 product line so thats a major disadvantage for the ps3 right there. The 360 gpu has 24 more pixel shaders than the ps3 gpu and 40 more vertex shaders. This is a VERY big deal. Not only that the 360 can perform 2 shader ops per pipe, per cyle. Just this fact alone makes the 360 gpu amazingly superior to the ps3 gpu. The extra 50MHZ the ps3 gpu has makes no difference in this case even with the possibility that nvidia might up the core clock of the ps3 gpu to 675-700MHZ still wont make a difference because there is a clear technology advantage for the 360 GPU. The boost in core clock will help, but it still can't force the ps3 gpu to produce better graphics it'll just be able to sustain itself a bit better in the fps department.

(Note to everyone actually reading if the ps3 launches and the core clock of that graphics card is 550MHZ still... mark my words the ps3 will be in ALOT of trouble) Its already at a major disadvantage so they'll need to raise that core clock unless they feel extremely cocky and leave it at 550MHZ


The 360 gpu has many features that go beyond shader model 3.0 specifications and even has features that go beyond even directx 10 api (windows graphics foundation 2.0 for vista)

For those that don't know pixel shaders are a VERY big deal its a big part of what makes the modern games we play today look as graphically impressive as they do. Pixel shaders can be used to alter the lighting, color and surface of each pixel. This in turn affects the overall color, texture and shape of 3-D objects built from these pixels. Pixel shaders help to smooth out 3-D objects, giving them a more organic texture. This is what helps skin look more realistic, environments to seem more realistic (look of rocks the look of trees), materials such as cloth look more impressive just about everything. The 360 having the advantage in this area means the 360's graphics definetly superior superior to that of the ps3s and it isn't a minor difference. It'll probably take developers a year to truly find out how powerful it is, but when they do prepared to be blown away.

Summary for everything typed so far is basically this the 360 has 24 more pixel shaders which are what affect the impressiveness of the 3D objects we look at and go WOW if they are impressive and 40 more vertex shaders. Vertex shaders are important as well, but usually take the back seat in most high performance gpus with the majority of the shaders being pixel because of how important they are. That doesn't mean vertex shaders are useless though.


vertex shaders work by manipulating an object's position in 3-D space. "Vertex" refers to the intersection of two coordinates in space. You would map the position of an animated object in 3-D space by giving it a value. These values are the x, y and z coordinates. By manipulating these variables, a vertex shader can create realistic animation and special effects such as morphing. The 360 has a whopping 40 more shaders that can do things like this for it expect them to take advantage of that too. (realistic animation - a game called "cry on" being developed for the 360 by hironobu sakaguchi (final fantasy creator) people thought they were looking at a hand drawn picture only to find out they were looking at actual ingame graphics.)






The 360 GPU also has 10MB of embedded ram which by itself can handle advanced shadow effects, antialiasing, depth of field and other features ALL on the edram without having to use the 22.4GB/s of GDDR3 memory bandwidth on the gpu leaving that totally free for textures or anything else. The 360 gpu thanks to the large amount of bandwidth that comes with this edram can perform full scene 4xaa at no performance drop.

This 10MB of edram people might wonder what the hell makes 10MB so good? This 10MB of edram brings with it a MONSTER amount of memory bandwidth with it 256GB/s Combine that with the 22.4GB/s of GDDR3 memory and the 360 has a total of 278GB/s worth of memory bandwidth the ps3 has a total of 48GB/s. The ps3 will run into bottlenecks that will affect performance. This eliminates bottlenecks. Its also important to mention that with all this power the 360 gpu has its capable of ALWAYS performing at its max capability at all times it runs at 100% efficiency so it'll be performing at the best of its capability regardless 95-99% with 4xaa on.

Again something like this on die edram is technology no current videocard has.



Most videocards run at about 55-65% efficiency simply because when working with the older vertex and pixel shaders without a unified shader architecture pixel and vertex shaders can't share the exact same pipeline at the same time. If the gpu is performing vertex operations the gpu has to stall the pixel operations until the vertex ones finish being processed which lowers efficiency. With a unified shader architecture there is no waiting everything is going down those pipes with no stopping they don't have to worry about it being a pixel shader or a vertex shader or if this is a pixel pipe or vertex pipe it takes both at the same time. and with 48 pipelines dedicated to both you can imagine how much more efficent this is running than 24 pixel shaders and 8 vertex shaders that have to take turns cramming down a lower number of pipes. Think of it like an assembly line. The more assembly lines you got running the better.



Memory bandwidth is very important to keep framerates up in really beautiful graphics intensive environments and if developers program correctly for the 360 this will be no problem whatsoever. Regardless of how powerful the 360 gpu is if not given the proper time for the developers to optimize then you'll have less than impressive performance even if the gpu will perform at its peak rendering speed at all times. Same for the ps3. Alot is on developers shoulders no game from either of these system should ever have framerate issues unless it was rushed. Still the ps3 definetly needed more memory bandwidth to prevent bottlenecks


Again The ps3 gpu is basically a 7800GTX 512MB version WITHOUT the 512MB of video memory. The ps3 256MB of video memory and 256MB of system memory whereas the 360 has 512MB worth of ram dedicated to both video and memory. The 360 gpu acts as the consoles memory controller and does a damn good job too.



The ps3 gpu performs 74.8 billion shader operations per second. Combine that performance with the cell and the total shader operations for the ps3 is 100 billion.

The 360 gpu alone does 96 billion shader operations per second. It doesn't get any help in terms of shader ops from the cpu. Now notice the ps3 can perform more shader ops right? Sadly it wont make a difference in terms of graphics quality because again the 360 has 24 more pixel pipes and 40 more vertex pipes so that advantage is not as useful as sony would've liked.




Now I'm sure everyone has heard sony bragging about having 2 tflops while the 360 has 1tflop it should be noted that the ps3 has a great deal more floating point performance than the 360. Floating point performance is good for things such as graphics, multimedia and of course physics, but not as integral to artificial intelligence the 360's 3 cores are more suited to handle better ai. And its worth mentioning that it isn't enough to win just in floating point perforance there are other factors that determine a systems overall performance like memory amount, memory bandwidth, gpu, and the 360 wins in all those categories.


The total gflop performance for the ps3 cpu is 218 GFLOPS, but IBM has said only 75.9% of that will be achieved. So you are looking at like 166GFLOPS for the cpu likewise for the 360 probably only 75% will be achieved so you are looking at like 60GFLOPS for the cpu for the 360 dropping from 115GFLOPS. These high numbers for tflops set by sony are theoretical maximums for cpu performance, but they will likely never be attained.


Don't forget though the ps3 gpu performs 1.8TFLOPS so total floating point performance for ps3 is still pretty high about 1.96TFLOPS (no calculator, but its close I assume) The 360 gets like 850GFLOPS i'm assuming from the gpu since the cpu does 115GFLOPS and the floating point performance was ranked as high as 1TFLOP so total floating point performance for 360 taking into account the 360 also wont hit theoretical cpu GFLOP peak you are looking at about 945GFLOPS right below the 1TFLOP mark. Both are below the mark they listed, but the ps3 is closer to its actual tflop mark. Then again I don't recall what ibm has said regarding the 360 cpu's efficiency other than its the most efficient design they've ever made so technically the 360 tflops could be much closer to its 1TFLOP mark, but for the sake of it I'll just leave it as is.



Thats enough for me I think I satisfied the original inquiry about the ps3's gpu.

Its basically a 7800gtx without the 512MB video memory and sony has to raise that 550MHZ core clock to like 675-700 to help themselves a bit more even though it still wont be able to outperform the 360 gpu. Not with a 24 pixel pipe disadvantage and 40 vertex pipe disadvantage. Pipelines aren't always indicative of performance, but in this specific case unified shader pipelines versus the old separated vertex and pixel is a major factor.


The cell isn't as amazing for graphics as sony was making it seem sure it has some nice floating point numbers and performs some shader operations, but it isn't enough to overcome the limitations of the ps3 gpu. Don't get me wrong by no means is the ps3's graphics going to suck or be weak its just the 360's graphics card has a technology advantage that can't be ignored."

y este otro te explica con palabras llanas, pq el Cell por muy increible que sea... gráficamente no hará que PS3 supla la diferencia en calidad de gráfica respecto a 360:

"The cell is an amazing processor when it comes to video and streaming floating point, but it isn't as amazing for graphics as everyone thinks. The ps3's cpu is an amazing processor, but the videocard of the ps3 isn't up to par with the 360's and a processor wont be enough to force ps3 graphics to be superior than the 360's. A processor has different roles even tho it has instructions to improve the acceleration of graphics, but the fact still remains that what alot of people are thinking isn't possible.


Its to say that if I buy the most expensive amd processor around and try to play a new up to date game for the pc on a geforce 5800 ultra the system still wont be able to cut it in that particular videogame regardless of how impressive the processor is."

Tambien podeis dejar de desviar el post, no se si habeis leido el titulo

#49 Si, muy bonito, todos sabemos que sobre el papel la GPU de la 360 es mas potente que la de Ps3. Esa es la teoria viendo las especificaciones de hardware...

Ahora la realidad es que nadie sabe como funciona el Cell, a mi me ha parecido leer alguna vez que con la arquitectura del Cell, los problemas de memoria se solucionaban de otra manera gracias a la arquitectura del Cell.
Una 7800 de 256 de Vram, no esta nada mal.

No sabemos como se comunica el Cell con la GPU de Nvidia. Si el Cell es capaz de calcular todos los efectos que no puede calcular la GPU y servirlos sin mucha perdida de rendimiento, entonces la GPU podria sufrir una especie de MegaOverclock Turbo comprimido y dispararse la calidad grafica.

Tambien me acuerdo de haber leido que los planes de Sony al principio era poner un Cell de CPU y otro Cell de GPU, asi que supongo que en el Cell se podran calcular datos de la GPU.

Si el Cell los puede calcular, entonces le puedes meter Dx10,11, Shader Model 4.0 o 5.0, u OpenGL2.0 sin problema, solo tienes que programar el engine del juego para esas librerias. La ventaja de la 360 se esfumaria...

Todavia es muy pronto para saber que es lo que pueden hacer las consolas de nueva generacion y donde esta su tope

Los 3 cores y la GPU de la 360 pueden darle mucho juego a la 360. Y el Cell puede darselo a la Ps3.

#53 Los anchos de bus, la memoria, etc ... Todo eso no importa. Lo que importa es CELL!!!!!!!

#53 "Todavia es muy pronto para saber que es lo que pueden hacer las consolas de nueva generacion y donde esta su tope"

No te cansas macho xD

#58 Fotos por favor .