This guy can say whatever he wants, its all about how the devs utilize the rsx an d the cell. john carmack said it himself, the ps3 is hard to develop for but in spec, it is a opowerful system.
When developers to optimize there game for ps3 you get games like kz3,uncharted,gow3, and infamous 2. Gow3 was the first game to use MSAAx16 from pure CPU power not even heard of from desktops. That's usually done by the gpu. Ps3 does everything in parallel unlike the xbox, you have to pretty much everything to do but when you do you get great games. Xbox has a more powerful gpu but ps3 exceeds that because its spe's or spu's can help out, they alone can render graphics.
Well....it seems more like they release stuff in roughly six month type cycles, but it took Nvidia over a year for Fermi to come, man, the 285 and 295 were their two best cards for well over a year.
@Usul573 AMD updates their graphics lineup once every year, but since it's done gradually rather than all the products at once, you may end up with the feeling the cycles are shorter. NVIDIA doesn't have a fixed cycle though. The 8 series and 200 series had a larger life cycle than the 9 and 400 series, for example.
uncharted 2 and gran turismo 5 use the ps3's processing power (cell) as good as possible. and yes, 360 could handle them. just probably not with the same graphics.
@nooblet911 Yeah on a 20GB disc where they'd need about 50 discs for one game. The Xenon processor in the Xbox wasn't made to handle the stuff that the Ps3 could do.
Cryengine 3 will come out soon, as well as Crysis 2. Uncharted may have the best graphics in CONSOLES, but Crysis 2 will rip that title away like candy from a baby once it comes out for Xbox 360 and PS3. It will definitely be downscaled though, with full graphical functionality only available to PC gamers. Trust my words though, Crysis 2 will BLOW EVERY CONSOLE GAME YOU HAVE EVER SEEN OUT OF THE WATER. I have an Xbox 360 btw.
once again, in order to play crysis 2 you will need a $6000+ system. i can play better games on consoles for only $300. uncharted 2 currently holds the title for the best game in the last 2 game generations (origonal pokemon games are the only games above it) its metacritic and game rankings score is higher than all of the halos and gears of war games. killzone 2 also has a much higher score than crysis.
you have fun playing crysis 2 while i play better games at 20x less price.
It's all personal preference if you think about it. Whatever suits you/me best. What we can't deny is that Crysis and Crysis WARHEAD are the undisputed graphics/tech kings.
A Core i7 + GTX 295 system can be built for AUD$2000 which maxes out Crysis at 1920x1200. I have a PS3 too and Uncharted 2 is the best looking console game but you clearly know nothing about hardware and only listen to the marketing used aimed at people like you.
Actually they optimized Crysis 2 to work on Consoles, considering how Crysis 1 was never put out on Consoles. It will surely run and look better on the PC especially with DX11 optimization and graphical improvements. Its still amazing what they are doing on old DX9 hardware though that you get on your Xbox or PS3. Its sad though that developers have to dumb down games so they can be put out on consoles and thats the truth.
@AphexDreamer true but direct x 10 and 11 are not much different then 9. There are minor differences that can only bee seen if compared side by side. Crysis on DX9 looks hell amazing still.
but remember ps3 has 256mb or video memory which is really low in todays day.
Don't mean to be rude but MW2 was the least impressive. Textures look horrible almost like PS 1 but thats my only big gripe. The Best looking Console game to date though is Uncharted 2. Thats what you should be calling impressive.
It's an engine, built off an engine, built off an engine, built off the Quake 3 engine. It was mostly rewritten each time though, so I don't really know if you can say it's the same engine.
@Usul573 I'd still say is loosely based on Quake 3, I mean you still see blurry textures and some dated effects in the game. IW isnt as savvy as id tech or epic games to make it from scratch. They could probably but their not known for game engine creators, just game makers.
You're wrong. Crysis 2 won't look as detailed on consoles than it's PC version, but it will still look better than every console game out there today. Look up the technology powering it and do some research. I'm right; you're wrong.
Ppl who play games on PC fail to see the point. Every few months you have to shell out cash for hardware so that you play the latest games. Whereas with any console, the games will always work. PC gaming is very expensive.
I have a GeForce GTX 260M hooked up to a Core 2 Duo and I can run Crysis in max detail with the reality mod @ 30fps. I'm sure the PS3 would shatter to bits before running Crysis in high detail. I only console game for Halo 3 and Gears 2........Gears 1 runs at 60fps with DX10 and Anti-Alising on my machine.....PS3 Blows.
yet no pc can run uncharted 2 while ps3 can. naughty dog (the geniues behind uncharted 2) has said NO pc that is in the market today (late 2009) can run uncharted 2 like the ps3 can. it would have to be downscaled. it would need about half a dozen of your pc to run uncharted 2.
furthermore, ign, gamespot, gameinformer, CNET, gametrailers, etc. have ALL said uncharted 2 has the BEST graphics in video games. and guess what, the game with the best graphics before uncharted 2 was uncharted 1.
Smells like a PS3 fanboy. Like always, using fallacious arguments and source-less statements.
If you get to the technicalities, half dozen of my PCs would equate to a 12 core processor with a combined speed of 30.60 Ghz and 6 graphics cards that are individually, marginally more powerful then the RSX. Those six cards would then equate to a core speed of 3.6 Ghz and a shader speed of 4.8 Ghz. Think before you say something as retarded as what you said.
have you completely forgotten about the cell proccesor? it takes my pc (3.2 intel e8500 dual core) about 2 days to complete a folding@home data. my ps3 can finish the same data in about 5-6 hours. cell is still faster (in terms of number crunching) than any other processor out today.
and where did i pull out false in formation? why dont you actually go to gamespot or cnet and read a review of uncharted 1 and 2? they CLEARLY state that they have the best graphics ever.
I read through the entire GameSpot review and not once did I see the part where the reviewer claimed the game had the "Best Visuals Ever". Uncharted 2 is visually impressive, but does not beat Crysis in terms of technicality and graphical fidelity. The game does not even come close, but it does compete with other lower-division graphics games such as Gears of War 2 and Killzone 2.
and a high end pc like yours will cost $4000 plus, most likely around $5000-$6000. i can get better games than you on my ps3 or 360 for just $300. thats about 15 times less than a pc. not to mention a sony console's life cycle is 10 years while you have to upgrade your pc atleast every year yo keep up with the consoles.
I can play all XBOX 360 and PS3 games that have been ported to PC with max settings. Even higher than those used on consoles. I get 50-70 frames per second. No, it's not to keep up with the consoles. As long as my hardware is more powerful than that of consoles, I don't need to upgrade. What you probably mean is to keep up with technology. We know it advances in quantum leaps and that's why PC gaming outshines console gaming. We can upgrade.
sucks i hate system gaming now. They said the highest graphics was 6800 geforce... that is so shit these days lol. I got a 9600gso for 70bucks and it runs as good as the rsx. Or maybe not as good but still pretty close... now with the new gtx250's and w/e they just like pwn the shit out of systems.
screw you ps3.
When i first saw this video back when it came out.. i was like wow best graphics.. now wtf, cant compare to cyrsis.
"build the worlds most advanced gpu" :D like airraideagle said this gpu is 7800gtx downgraded version, nowadays this gpu worth a shit of pile, even xbox 360 gpu is better, be honest they failed, cell cpu cant help to much to rsx for advancing in graphics, almost all multiplatform xbox 360 games looks better than ps3, KZ 2 and uncharted 2 look nice but just in directx 9.0c, comparing with crysis directx 10 these games graphics looks awful, ps3<xbox360<pc
You do realize that this is E3 2005? Sony in no way uses DX9 while in fact their API is based on OpenGL and Cg. Also 3rd party games look the same, but when it comes to 1st party Sony beats the Xbox360 hands down. Of course DX10 and 11 will look better. Consoles are always behind PC's if you just realized that.
yeah you right my mistake, rsx not using directx 9, just xbox 360, but opengl and Cg as you say cant compare with dx10 or dx11, and whats keeping rsx alive is just what rsx connected to cell brand engine, without it, rsx is peace of shit
I do agree that DX11 is better, only because its NEW technology. They say that Nvidia's strengths are in its software. OpenGL 3.0/3.1 is comparable to DX10 so lets not rule out that OpenGL or even Cg can catch up.
I have already seen the top of the top 360 game like gears 2 I think the 360 has already reached its limit you cant go any higher than that. while the ps3 is still yet to be discovered, proof of this is MGS4 / Killzone 2 / God of War 3 / Uncharted 2.
BTW the GeForce 7800 I am speaking of is the original one that came out in mid 2005 with 256 MB RAM, *not* the later, faster version with 512MB, or the 7900.
from the beginning when introducing the Nvidia RSX for the ps3 they mentioned it is a Custom GPU based on the 7800GTX and its also faster than 7800GTX.
Yes the Xbox360 GPU is powerful than the RSX by itself but its also connected to the Cell which will make it powerful than the 360. Alone its nothing though but again, it has special capabilities.
@KevinCroner in GPU terms "power" means speed... quality is a TOTAL different thing... shaders etc make the games realistic.. and thats what PS3 has quality graphics (uncharted 2,3 GoW 3 etc) not a single xbox 360 game can come close to this quality...
@Emeengor Yes, you are correct. No Xbox 360 game can match a "quality" (Exclusives in general) game that is optimized for the Playstation 3. The only thing the Xbox 360 has over the Playstation 3 is the x4 MSAA(anti-aliasing) and easier developer tools but the Playstation 3 has a weird but usefull version, MLAA (Almost 16x aa but blurs image quality on edges. Games like Killzone 3, Uncharted, God of War III use this). Been a long time since I seen this video and I'm glad to see your response. :)
@KevinCroner in GPU terms "power" means speed... quality is a TOTAL different thing... shaders etc make the games realistic.. and thats what PS3 has quality graphics (uncharted 2,3 GoW 3 etc) not a single xbox 360 game can come close to this quality...
Final conclusion is: GPU on the ps3 is amazing but not as good as the big buck pc ones. Having that said, because it can be SO MUCH more optimized, games look much better and can outperform many pc games.
not to smash but they also use the cell to accelerate the rsx in optimized games and since the cell processes in parallel it acts just like gpu's on video cards and with 6 for the game running at 3.2ghz it add a lot of graphics capability
i have to say it.... the gpu in the ps3 is faster than the 360's but im only compairing them buy there clock speed. i cant seem to find out anything else about the gpu's of both cos all i get is "its custom built" bla bla bla.
excuse my typo i meant processing but anyway until that day comes ps3 remains an equal in visual presentation and physics wise to pc but frame rate qulity wise it isn't flawless like pc but isn't that far off.console gaming deserves more credit then alot people are giving it.
cod 4 scratched the surface of the ps3 sheer processingenuity power when compared to games like metal gear solid 4,gran turismo 5 prologue,killzone 2 and newer games to come.pc gaming is over rated and only makes minor improvements to the qulity of the games because i haven't seen any from from a graphics stand that ps3 was capable of yet so until ps3 reaches it's limit your statement means shit.
LOL you are interested faggot, you asked: What do you know about graphics cards? He replied, I work at eVGA. OWNED BITCH, don't just change the subject.
it would be nice if you if you said what type of 8800 it was and the resoulution and settings because please rember that cod4 on the ps3 was proberly only running on the PC medium setting
Do u remember when they made Pentium 4 Hyper threading. It basically means the 4 cores that you have in the computer is fast but now it will have hyper threading making calculations even faster on each CPU making it faster and more efficient. They released a new quad core called the intel i7 which intel reports is 40% faster than its current quad core CPU
Appule69, stop being a cow. I got a PS3, WII, and my own rig. Seriously, the xbox was a good console, but the PS2 raped it by a mile. Xbox 360 was the worst console I've played period. Anyway, most of the 360 exclusives came to PC. Nvidia Rapes ATIs products. the STRIKER II EXTREME was not designed by ATI, it was designed by Nvidia (SLI-Technology baby FTW!!!)
ATI has topped nVidia many times. I love ATI's cheap and extremely powerful cards. The 4870 shits on the 280 in price to performance. Same with the 4850.
It was dated when released. My computer stomps all over this pile of shit. Tha ps3 can't even handle crysis. Uncharted's level were small and repetative. PC>PS3. BTW, Lost via(which iz a multi-platform game) matches if not surpasses Uncharted.
BTW! Crysis is a good game, but it would be better if there wasn't any big problems with the gameplay. Even the best computers will experience Framerate drops and etc.
nVidia just launched the GeForce GTX 280 for $650, while ATI launched the 4870 for $300, and it performs almost as good. Who sucks now? nVidia is fucking up big time.
WTF! How can you even tell? Are you going to play real-life simulators on your PC or what. You realize the nVidia SLI-Technology rapes ATI with a mile-long dick!
HAHA! I'd rather spend $600 on two 4850's, and get MUCH BETTER performance then a single $650 280. It makes a hellava lot more sense then spending $1300 on two 280's.
Where the fuck did you hear ATI is better than NVidia. I bet you don't even have the money to afford either one. i've tested them, Nvidia is better and rapes ATI by a mile. I Fried 3 ATI cards in the past 3 years and the drivers suck ass!
Ahen, many people agree that ATI is the much better choice this time then nVidia. I was very pro nVidia with the 8800 series. ATI's drivers are fine. And ATI is the MUCH MUCH MUCH better value this round. Its your own fault you fried 3 cards.
Well people have their reasons, but I would still go with NVidia. NVidia on the PS3 RSX unit is a much better unit than the 360s ATI unit and then the unit fries then causes the RRODs. I've been through many ATI cards, but I would rather go with the 8800. Ask someone comparing 4850's and 8800 GTX, see which one they will choose and make a video for proof.
The 4850 runs much slower than the GTX 280 anyway and you are saying the that the 4850 is much better. PLZ MOFO! look up the specs and actually try them out instead of sitting your fatass on the computer looking at products that you can't afford!
I didn't say the 4850 is better then the 280, two 4850's in CF are much faster then the 280 and are still cheaper. And going SLI with two 280's is $1300. its fucking stupid to spend that much on two video cards when there is a much better cheaper alternative. And two 4870's in CF is a hellava lot cheaper then two 280's. Price to performance is MUCH more important then just spending a shit load of money for SLIGHTLY better performance. The GeForce 200 series is NOT worth the price they sell for.
Actually the GTX 8800 runs faster than the 4850 if you actually test them out. The GTX runs smooth and slight FPS drops here and there. The 4850 is an average unit wishing you got a 8800 GTX instead.
Btich you are soo fuckin stupid. If you combine 3 8800GTX with SLI, it will have more power than the CrossfireX combined with 4870s. Using a 8800GTX with a 780i or 790i mobo will beat the 4870 with a 790fx mobo.
they didit lie about the PS3s power dumbass they just haveit comeout with games that use its full power KILLZONE 2 only uses %60 of what the PS3 can do
@amartinez97 Who knows, it's probably 60% of what they knew they could do. not knowing 100% of what they could do. Not meaning full power of the system, but full power of what they know about the system.
@amartinez97 Game developers are actually paid money to license for both systems by not taking full advantage of the PS3. That way, Microsoft would get owned, basically, when everyone sees the true capabilities of the PS3's processing power.
@winternight119 That is ridiculous. The reason why developers don't always use the little extra performance they can get from the PS3 is that, for that to happen, they would have to develop a different engine for the PS3 version so it can use the SPEs properly, and that would increase the development cost of the whole game.
@amartinez97 Killzone 2 only uses 60% of the PS3, because it has many low res textures, very tech going on, as in no real time soft particls, dynamic global illumination, SSAO, advanced AI ect. Killzone 2, believe it or not, is far from a technical feat. I mean come on, no cool tech, a lot of low res texturing, hidden by poor lighting, and simple/low poly geometry in the environments. It's a good looking game, and it has a nice art style, however it's not anything to brag about in the graphics.
what the fuck are you talking about? How can kz2 look as amazing as it does and still have all those flaws you mentioned? I'm no graphics expert, but if killzone 2's graphics have all those flaws, it should look weak right?
@RapturousDemise It doesn't look amazing, I stated that. I said it looks nice. But is not the technical achievement, or graphical powerhouse PS3 fanboys think it to be.
@amartinez97 To right :P, though developers admitted to reaching pretty much 100% of it's power on Uncharted 2 , Not a bad thing cause that game was beautiful to look at.
@amartinez97 Damn for real? , you know that makes alot of pc hardware useless because they have so much more potential to unlock I'm going to guess being limited by console D:
@JSUTSGJ Well its not that bad, Crysis 2 has the best graphics i have ever seen on a console yet, and i truly mean that i think Crysis 2 is hte best we will get untill the next gen of consoles.
@amartinez97 imagine how the graphics would look if they did not have that pop in. they would have to decrease the overall image quality to make it possible. and uncharted 2 still looks great compared to crysis 2
The 7800GTX 256mb was the very first GeForce 7 series card, and it wasn't a whole lot faster then the previous gen cards, nVidia did a refresh of it soon after it launched with the 512 meg version then with the 7900GTX, which was about 50% faster. Not to mention the RSX only has a 128 bit memory bus, instead of 256.
It depends on the application. Modern games are pixel shader and fill rate intensive and in this arena a 8800 GTX is roughly double the performance of a 7900 GTX which is roughly double the performance of a 6800 Ultra.
Increased memory size mostly attributes to greater texture detail and resolutions rather than shader complexity. So running a game with
PS3 settings and more graphics memory wouldn't be an advantage.
This guy can say whatever he wants, its all about how the devs utilize the rsx an d the cell. john carmack said it himself, the ps3 is hard to develop for but in spec, it is a opowerful system.
Flexasaurus1 3 months ago
2:28 - STICKSTY frames per second XD
TudyCoolboy 8 months ago 3
is my 8400gs more powerful than the rsx?
SPECTRE9200 9 months ago
@SPECTRE9200 no its not. It may have twice the memory as RSX 256 over 512. BUT the RSX can reder quicker than the 8400gs
geforce68ultra 8 months ago
@geforce68ultra oh well im building a new computer soon and im putting a either 6850 or a 6870 :) Honestly in my opinion ATI is better
SPECTRE9200 8 months ago
@SPECTRE9200 6870 perfect decision ;)
geforce68ultra 8 months ago
@geforce68ultra
RSX has access to 256 MB video RAM and 224 MB of XDR RAM.
MegaShot419 6 months ago
@MegaShot419 and your point is?
geforce68ultra 6 months ago
When developers to optimize there game for ps3 you get games like kz3,uncharted,gow3, and infamous 2. Gow3 was the first game to use MSAAx16 from pure CPU power not even heard of from desktops. That's usually done by the gpu. Ps3 does everything in parallel unlike the xbox, you have to pretty much everything to do but when you do you get great games. Xbox has a more powerful gpu but ps3 exceeds that because its spe's or spu's can help out, they alone can render graphics.
Thall7308 9 months ago
Sounds like he's talking more about the 8800GT.
wootlanter 1 year ago
mw2 has good textures for the people,but stuff like cars and mountains look like a shiny ps2 mod
OpticalxXxYoroxXx 1 year ago
the ps3 graphics card should be updated to a better one. it would so awsome
Mountaind33w 1 year ago
@Mountaind33w
They would have to release a whole new console to do that.
dchains 1 year ago
@Mountaind33w
It is NO WHERE near as limited as the PS2 was though.
It still impresses me what they can do on the PS3.
Not that the graphics chip isn't outdated, but still.
Usul573 1 year ago
@Usul573 lol, what graphics isnt outdated a month after it comes out....
d3tach3d 1 year ago
@d3tach3d
Well....it seems more like they release stuff in roughly six month type cycles, but it took Nvidia over a year for Fermi to come, man, the 285 and 295 were their two best cards for well over a year.
Usul573 1 year ago
@Usul573 AMD updates their graphics lineup once every year, but since it's done gradually rather than all the products at once, you may end up with the feeling the cycles are shorter. NVIDIA doesn't have a fixed cycle though. The 8 series and 200 series had a larger life cycle than the 9 and 400 series, for example.
NewLynxChannel 1 year ago
Funny thing is that they're not lying at all about this stuff, we already have proof.
LegionOf3 1 year ago
Their Solution: 60 Frames per Second with High Quality Graphics.
The Result: WipEout HD & Street Fighter 4.
Wow.
Dont get me wrong, I own a PS3 myself but I also hate liars.
leck0rkuchen 1 year ago
its just a geforce 7800. in some ways, the 360's radeon 1900 is better.
nooblet911 1 year ago
@nooblet911 Can the 360 handle shit like Uncharted 2 and Gran Turismo 5?.....nope.
LegionOf3 1 year ago
uncharted 2 and gran turismo 5 use the ps3's processing power (cell) as good as possible. and yes, 360 could handle them. just probably not with the same graphics.
nooblet911 1 year ago
@nooblet911 Yeah on a 20GB disc where they'd need about 50 discs for one game. The Xenon processor in the Xbox wasn't made to handle the stuff that the Ps3 could do.
LegionOf3 1 year ago
how come many multiplatform games look better on the 360 then? even once exclusives like tekken.
nooblet911 1 year ago
@nooblet911 Because the 360 is easier to program and make games on.
LegionOf3 1 year ago
@LegionOf3 and have shitty graphics
MBJH17isbackonlyone 1 year ago
have nothing against the RSX but Nvidia sucks compared to ATI
if amd hadn't acquired ATI my god would Nvidia be suffering
AlienHybridX 1 year ago
@AlienHybridX no not really, id say nvidia is better..., though i have ati due to it being much cheaper =p
0wn4geK0 1 year ago
too bad all of these are out-dated now. a gaming PC now a day, is a lot more powerful
anttrap321 1 year ago
@anttrap321 too bad your cpu cant emulate graphics.
snikrepak 1 year ago
Cryengine 3 will come out soon, as well as Crysis 2. Uncharted may have the best graphics in CONSOLES, but Crysis 2 will rip that title away like candy from a baby once it comes out for Xbox 360 and PS3. It will definitely be downscaled though, with full graphical functionality only available to PC gamers. Trust my words though, Crysis 2 will BLOW EVERY CONSOLE GAME YOU HAVE EVER SEEN OUT OF THE WATER. I have an Xbox 360 btw.
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
once again, in order to play crysis 2 you will need a $6000+ system. i can play better games on consoles for only $300. uncharted 2 currently holds the title for the best game in the last 2 game generations (origonal pokemon games are the only games above it) its metacritic and game rankings score is higher than all of the halos and gears of war games. killzone 2 also has a much higher score than crysis.
you have fun playing crysis 2 while i play better games at 20x less price.
stalat 2 years ago
It's all personal preference if you think about it. Whatever suits you/me best. What we can't deny is that Crysis and Crysis WARHEAD are the undisputed graphics/tech kings.
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
Ya with a great computer,if u have a slow pc crysis may as well be a ps1 game.
risseer 2 years ago
A Core i7 + GTX 295 system can be built for AUD$2000 which maxes out Crysis at 1920x1200. I have a PS3 too and Uncharted 2 is the best looking console game but you clearly know nothing about hardware and only listen to the marketing used aimed at people like you.
RiseDarthVader 2 years ago
Actually they optimized Crysis 2 to work on Consoles, considering how Crysis 1 was never put out on Consoles. It will surely run and look better on the PC especially with DX11 optimization and graphical improvements. Its still amazing what they are doing on old DX9 hardware though that you get on your Xbox or PS3. Its sad though that developers have to dumb down games so they can be put out on consoles and thats the truth.
AphexDreamer 2 years ago
@AphexDreamer true but direct x 10 and 11 are not much different then 9. There are minor differences that can only bee seen if compared side by side. Crysis on DX9 looks hell amazing still.
but remember ps3 has 256mb or video memory which is really low in todays day.
henrox555 2 years ago
Yeah they are doing amazing things with DX9 still and I'd agree that DX9 and 10 are not so different, but DX11 is big with its tessellations.
AphexDreamer 2 years ago
@henrox555 Suppsedly the RSX can access 256mb of XDR ram when necessary. Half a gig, descent enough.
essboarder23 2 years ago
PS3 and 360 are no joke though.
MW2 on my PS3 was pretty impressive.
Usul573 1 year ago
Don't mean to be rude but MW2 was the least impressive. Textures look horrible almost like PS 1 but thats my only big gripe. The Best looking Console game to date though is Uncharted 2. Thats what you should be calling impressive.
AphexDreamer 1 year ago 12
Ah don't be crazy, MW2 had good textures and everything.
Uncharted 2 probably is the best looking console game to date, that was something special all right.
Usul573 1 year ago
@AphexDreamer
Ah come on, I can see PS1/PS2 textures from like a mile away.
Usul573 1 year ago
@AphexDreamer Uncharted 2 or Gran Turismo 5. Everyone forgets that one.
LegionOf3 1 year ago
@AphexDreamer Uncharted 2 is now the technological ceiling
KingdomTree 1 year ago
@KingdomTree Hardly my friend youtube.com/watch?v=Q-ATtrImCx4
AphexDreamer 1 year ago
@AphexDreamer URL Incorrect, Sorry!!
KingdomTree 1 year ago
@KingdomTree Sorry yo watch?v=THaam5mwIR8
AphexDreamer 1 year ago
@Usul573
MW2 graphics engine is based heavily on a recoded Quake 3 engine. Its not very demanding.
Fatmouse25 1 year ago
Yeah I know, it's not too demanding and doesn't need too powerful a graphics card to do.
Still, it's pretty good. Is it seriously built from way back on the Quake 3 engine?
The types of shaders and everything are an entirely different story.
Usul573 1 year ago
Hey looks like you're actually right.
It's an engine, built off an engine, built off an engine, built off the Quake 3 engine. It was mostly rewritten each time though, so I don't really know if you can say it's the same engine.
Usul573 1 year ago
@Usul573 I'd still say is loosely based on Quake 3, I mean you still see blurry textures and some dated effects in the game. IW isnt as savvy as id tech or epic games to make it from scratch. They could probably but their not known for game engine creators, just game makers.
Fatmouse25 1 year ago
No it won't period. Crysis 2 won't be as detailed as uncharted 2. when it comes to consoles. On pc, well that's another story.
gabinomojarro 2 years ago
You're wrong. Crysis 2 won't look as detailed on consoles than it's PC version, but it will still look better than every console game out there today. Look up the technology powering it and do some research. I'm right; you're wrong.
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
LOL believe what you want to believe xbot. You know nothing about hardware, stfu.
gabinomojarro 2 years ago
Xbot? You're a complete idiot. Fuck off, ignorant tool.
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
im sorry everyone under me for what i said about you
Wely155 2 years ago
everyone under me is a faggot
Wely155 2 years ago
Ppl who play games on PC fail to see the point. Every few months you have to shell out cash for hardware so that you play the latest games. Whereas with any console, the games will always work. PC gaming is very expensive.
skyzrblu 2 years ago
I have a GeForce GTX 260M hooked up to a Core 2 Duo and I can run Crysis in max detail with the reality mod @ 30fps. I'm sure the PS3 would shatter to bits before running Crysis in high detail. I only console game for Halo 3 and Gears 2........Gears 1 runs at 60fps with DX10 and Anti-Alising on my machine.....PS3 Blows.
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
*aliasing
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
yet no pc can run uncharted 2 while ps3 can. naughty dog (the geniues behind uncharted 2) has said NO pc that is in the market today (late 2009) can run uncharted 2 like the ps3 can. it would have to be downscaled. it would need about half a dozen of your pc to run uncharted 2.
furthermore, ign, gamespot, gameinformer, CNET, gametrailers, etc. have ALL said uncharted 2 has the BEST graphics in video games. and guess what, the game with the best graphics before uncharted 2 was uncharted 1.
stalat 2 years ago
@ stalat
Smells like a PS3 fanboy. Like always, using fallacious arguments and source-less statements.
If you get to the technicalities, half dozen of my PCs would equate to a 12 core processor with a combined speed of 30.60 Ghz and 6 graphics cards that are individually, marginally more powerful then the RSX. Those six cards would then equate to a core speed of 3.6 Ghz and a shader speed of 4.8 Ghz. Think before you say something as retarded as what you said.
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
have you completely forgotten about the cell proccesor? it takes my pc (3.2 intel e8500 dual core) about 2 days to complete a folding@home data. my ps3 can finish the same data in about 5-6 hours. cell is still faster (in terms of number crunching) than any other processor out today.
and where did i pull out false in formation? why dont you actually go to gamespot or cnet and read a review of uncharted 1 and 2? they CLEARLY state that they have the best graphics ever.
stalat 2 years ago
I read through the entire GameSpot review and not once did I see the part where the reviewer claimed the game had the "Best Visuals Ever". Uncharted 2 is visually impressive, but does not beat Crysis in terms of technicality and graphical fidelity. The game does not even come close, but it does compete with other lower-division graphics games such as Gears of War 2 and Killzone 2.
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
and a high end pc like yours will cost $4000 plus, most likely around $5000-$6000. i can get better games than you on my ps3 or 360 for just $300. thats about 15 times less than a pc. not to mention a sony console's life cycle is 10 years while you have to upgrade your pc atleast every year yo keep up with the consoles.
stalat 2 years ago
I can play all XBOX 360 and PS3 games that have been ported to PC with max settings. Even higher than those used on consoles. I get 50-70 frames per second. No, it's not to keep up with the consoles. As long as my hardware is more powerful than that of consoles, I don't need to upgrade. What you probably mean is to keep up with technology. We know it advances in quantum leaps and that's why PC gaming outshines console gaming. We can upgrade.
DeMoNsLaYeR818 2 years ago
sucks i hate system gaming now. They said the highest graphics was 6800 geforce... that is so shit these days lol. I got a 9600gso for 70bucks and it runs as good as the rsx. Or maybe not as good but still pretty close... now with the new gtx250's and w/e they just like pwn the shit out of systems.
screw you ps3.
When i first saw this video back when it came out.. i was like wow best graphics.. now wtf, cant compare to cyrsis.
pc gaming ftw.
pc for life.
hen555 2 years ago
"build the worlds most advanced gpu" :D like airraideagle said this gpu is 7800gtx downgraded version, nowadays this gpu worth a shit of pile, even xbox 360 gpu is better, be honest they failed, cell cpu cant help to much to rsx for advancing in graphics, almost all multiplatform xbox 360 games looks better than ps3, KZ 2 and uncharted 2 look nice but just in directx 9.0c, comparing with crysis directx 10 these games graphics looks awful, ps3<xbox360<pc
vegetaholic2 2 years ago
You do realize that this is E3 2005? Sony in no way uses DX9 while in fact their API is based on OpenGL and Cg. Also 3rd party games look the same, but when it comes to 1st party Sony beats the Xbox360 hands down. Of course DX10 and 11 will look better. Consoles are always behind PC's if you just realized that.
xanarkandXX 2 years ago
yeah you right my mistake, rsx not using directx 9, just xbox 360, but opengl and Cg as you say cant compare with dx10 or dx11, and whats keeping rsx alive is just what rsx connected to cell brand engine, without it, rsx is peace of shit
vegetaholic2 2 years ago
Comment removed
xanarkandXX 2 years ago
I do agree that DX11 is better, only because its NEW technology. They say that Nvidia's strengths are in its software. OpenGL 3.0/3.1 is comparable to DX10 so lets not rule out that OpenGL or even Cg can catch up.
xanarkandXX 2 years ago
directx is more popular than opengl, so directx performing will be greater than opengl in a future and now
vegetaholic2 2 years ago
Generally, with PC's still controlling 90% of the market. There is still huge support behind the Khronos Group, so i don't see why not.
xanarkandXX 2 years ago
I have already seen the top of the top 360 game like gears 2 I think the 360 has already reached its limit you cant go any higher than that. while the ps3 is still yet to be discovered, proof of this is MGS4 / Killzone 2 / God of War 3 / Uncharted 2.
alkikurazz 2 years ago
All RSX is, is a DOWNGRADED version of GeForce 7800.
Nvidia took a 7800, and cut half of the pixel pipelines/ROPs, from 16 ROPs down to 8.
This cut the fillrate from 6800 Mpixels/sec @ 430 MHz with the 7800 to 4000 Mpixels/sec @ 500 MHz with the RSX.
They also cut the bus width in half from 256-Bit down to 128-Bit, thus cutting the external memory bandwidth from 54 GB/sec to 22 GB/sec.
The Xenos in Xbox360 is, overall, a much better GPU than RSX in PS3.
airraideagle 2 years ago
BTW the GeForce 7800 I am speaking of is the original one that came out in mid 2005 with 256 MB RAM, *not* the later, faster version with 512MB, or the 7900.
airraideagle 2 years ago
Comment removed
alkikurazz 2 years ago
show the source where you got that information,
from the beginning when introducing the Nvidia RSX for the ps3 they mentioned it is a Custom GPU based on the 7800GTX and its also faster than 7800GTX.
alkikurazz 2 years ago
Yes the Xbox360 GPU is powerful than the RSX by itself but its also connected to the Cell which will make it powerful than the 360. Alone its nothing though but again, it has special capabilities.
KevinCroner 2 years ago 3
@KevinCroner in GPU terms "power" means speed... quality is a TOTAL different thing... shaders etc make the games realistic.. and thats what PS3 has quality graphics (uncharted 2,3 GoW 3 etc) not a single xbox 360 game can come close to this quality...
Emeengor 7 months ago
@Emeengor Yes, you are correct. No Xbox 360 game can match a "quality" (Exclusives in general) game that is optimized for the Playstation 3. The only thing the Xbox 360 has over the Playstation 3 is the x4 MSAA(anti-aliasing) and easier developer tools but the Playstation 3 has a weird but usefull version, MLAA (Almost 16x aa but blurs image quality on edges. Games like Killzone 3, Uncharted, God of War III use this). Been a long time since I seen this video and I'm glad to see your response. :)
KevinCroner 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KevinCroner in GPU terms "power" means speed... quality is a TOTAL different thing... shaders etc make the games realistic.. and thats what PS3 has quality graphics (uncharted 2,3 GoW 3 etc) not a single xbox 360 game can come close to this quality...
Emeengor 7 months ago
Final conclusion is: GPU on the ps3 is amazing but not as good as the big buck pc ones. Having that said, because it can be SO MUCH more optimized, games look much better and can outperform many pc games.
iluvwiki 2 years ago 2
not to smash but they also use the cell to accelerate the rsx in optimized games and since the cell processes in parallel it acts just like gpu's on video cards and with 6 for the game running at 3.2ghz it add a lot of graphics capability
hbkfitz 2 years ago
the world's advanced gpu the world has ever seen? lol 4 dat
slaveknight 2 years ago
the GPU from the 360 is better but everything else PS3 Rules
mavswi 2 years ago
i have to say it.... the gpu in the ps3 is faster than the 360's but im only compairing them buy there clock speed. i cant seem to find out anything else about the gpu's of both cos all i get is "its custom built" bla bla bla.
never find any proper specs of either of em
AJATOMICA 2 years ago
excuse my typo i meant processing but anyway until that day comes ps3 remains an equal in visual presentation and physics wise to pc but frame rate qulity wise it isn't flawless like pc but isn't that far off.console gaming deserves more credit then alot people are giving it.
hardkoregamer1981 2 years ago
cod 4 scratched the surface of the ps3 sheer processingenuity power when compared to games like metal gear solid 4,gran turismo 5 prologue,killzone 2 and newer games to come.pc gaming is over rated and only makes minor improvements to the qulity of the games because i haven't seen any from from a graphics stand that ps3 was capable of yet so until ps3 reaches it's limit your statement means shit.
hardkoregamer1981 2 years ago
the thing about rsx is that it work with the cell processor which make the actually rsx more powerful than its really is by itself
InternetGangsterLMAO 3 years ago
Sorry but 1 9800 GTX = 2 RSX. I hope next playstation have 10 years ahead hardware.
RLHubner 3 years ago 2
sorry but ur wrong it is better than the rsx but its not better than 2
mattmattmattmatt07 3 years ago
Do you know anything about GPU's ?
RLHubner 3 years ago 2
Let me guess all you did was look that up on the internet. Which means you don't know anything about GPUs
GlitchersByTheSecond 3 years ago
I work on eVGA.
RLHubner 3 years ago
OWNED
assasincomedy 3 years ago
don't really care mate. I laugh at these fanboys! LOL I don't care if he works at "eVGA"
GlitchersByTheSecond 3 years ago
LOL you are interested faggot, you asked: What do you know about graphics cards? He replied, I work at eVGA. OWNED BITCH, don't just change the subject.
assasincomedy 3 years ago
What i dont get the rsx makes 60fps on cod4 easy wen a 8800gt can JUST get 60 fps maxed out
assasincomedy 3 years ago
Game optimization, the CoD4 for Ps3 was the one which Infinity Ward most worked on.
RLHubner 3 years ago
the 99% of the time devs work on the 360 version, then just port to ps3, hardly utilising it's power. Pisses me off.
solidsnackumzzz 2 years ago 2
well, you know what they say, making games for the ps3 is harder than making games for the 360.
hollow334 2 years ago
Which is a shame, because a game utilizing the PS3's true power would be awesome.
KyleKatarn145 2 years ago
true, very true.
hollow334 2 years ago
thats why sony has more first party devs than nintendo and microsoft combined and were lucky they utilize it
hbkfitz 2 years ago
it would be nice if you if you said what type of 8800 it was and the resoulution and settings because please rember that cod4 on the ps3 was proberly only running on the PC medium setting
ICommentonVideo 3 years ago
i found this video quite interesting. i'm not sure why but it gave me chills. lol
DarthXephron 3 years ago
booooooooooring!
okkim28 3 years ago
PC gaming - 4 GPUs!
DreadRaptor85 3 years ago
Whoohoo
RLHubner 3 years ago
now its 4 with hyper threading.
CSplayahata 3 years ago
What is hyper threading? (I'm still learning about computer hardware.)
DreadRaptor85 3 years ago
Do u remember when they made Pentium 4 Hyper threading. It basically means the 4 cores that you have in the computer is fast but now it will have hyper threading making calculations even faster on each CPU making it faster and more efficient. They released a new quad core called the intel i7 which intel reports is 40% faster than its current quad core CPU
CSplayahata 3 years ago
im new to this kind of stuff, very cool though.
SAS22ndregiment 3 years ago
Well i can run lynix or xp on my ps3 that alone owns the 360
sheldini2008 3 years ago 2
lol it said the 360 has 60m transistors lol. it has 337m
oxman7 3 years ago 2
actually he was talking about the original XBOX learn to read
sheldini2008 3 years ago
He is talking about the PS3.
DILDOlover 3 years ago
Appule69, stop being a cow. I got a PS3, WII, and my own rig. Seriously, the xbox was a good console, but the PS2 raped it by a mile. Xbox 360 was the worst console I've played period. Anyway, most of the 360 exclusives came to PC. Nvidia Rapes ATIs products. the STRIKER II EXTREME was not designed by ATI, it was designed by Nvidia (SLI-Technology baby FTW!!!)
coolboy499 3 years ago
ATI has topped nVidia many times. I love ATI's cheap and extremely powerful cards. The 4870 shits on the 280 in price to performance. Same with the 4850.
Appule69 3 years ago
Don't you realize ATIs drivers suck balls and I've been through many ATI cards and they did not last very long!
coolboy499 3 years ago
The entire GeForce 7 series was incredibly underpowered anyway. The 8800GTX is about 130% more powerful then the 7900GTX.
Appule69 3 years ago
Do you even know what you are talking about?
coolboy499 3 years ago
Yes I do.
Appule69 3 years ago
The GeForce 7 was just a reworked GeForce 6, Which resulted in an under performing graphics card.
Appule69 3 years ago
It was dated when released. My computer stomps all over this pile of shit. Tha ps3 can't even handle crysis. Uncharted's level were small and repetative. PC>PS3. BTW, Lost via(which iz a multi-platform game) matches if not surpasses Uncharted.
McTDEUCE 3 years ago
BTW! Crysis is a good game, but it would be better if there wasn't any big problems with the gameplay. Even the best computers will experience Framerate drops and etc.
coolboy499 3 years ago
Yay ATI sucks ass
coolboy499 3 years ago
nVidia just launched the GeForce GTX 280 for $650, while ATI launched the 4870 for $300, and it performs almost as good. Who sucks now? nVidia is fucking up big time.
Appule69 3 years ago
WTF! How can you even tell? Are you going to play real-life simulators on your PC or what. You realize the nVidia SLI-Technology rapes ATI with a mile-long dick!
coolboy499 3 years ago
HAHA! I'd rather spend $600 on two 4850's, and get MUCH BETTER performance then a single $650 280. It makes a hellava lot more sense then spending $1300 on two 280's.
Appule69 3 years ago
I'd rather spend my money on 2 8800s
coolboy499 3 years ago
My mistake, It's $400 to CF two 4850's, they perform better then two 8800GT's.
Appule69 3 years ago
Where the fuck did you hear ATI is better than NVidia. I bet you don't even have the money to afford either one. i've tested them, Nvidia is better and rapes ATI by a mile. I Fried 3 ATI cards in the past 3 years and the drivers suck ass!
coolboy499 3 years ago
Ahen, many people agree that ATI is the much better choice this time then nVidia. I was very pro nVidia with the 8800 series. ATI's drivers are fine. And ATI is the MUCH MUCH MUCH better value this round. Its your own fault you fried 3 cards.
Appule69 3 years ago
Well people have their reasons, but I would still go with NVidia. NVidia on the PS3 RSX unit is a much better unit than the 360s ATI unit and then the unit fries then causes the RRODs. I've been through many ATI cards, but I would rather go with the 8800. Ask someone comparing 4850's and 8800 GTX, see which one they will choose and make a video for proof.
coolboy499 3 years ago
The 4850 runs much slower than the GTX 280 anyway and you are saying the that the 4850 is much better. PLZ MOFO! look up the specs and actually try them out instead of sitting your fatass on the computer looking at products that you can't afford!
coolboy499 3 years ago
I didn't say the 4850 is better then the 280, two 4850's in CF are much faster then the 280 and are still cheaper. And going SLI with two 280's is $1300. its fucking stupid to spend that much on two video cards when there is a much better cheaper alternative. And two 4870's in CF is a hellava lot cheaper then two 280's. Price to performance is MUCH more important then just spending a shit load of money for SLIGHTLY better performance. The GeForce 200 series is NOT worth the price they sell for.
Appule69 3 years ago
when the HD 4000 series performs ALMOST as well, and is less then half the price.
Appule69 3 years ago
Actually the GTX 8800 runs faster than the 4850 if you actually test them out. The GTX runs smooth and slight FPS drops here and there. The 4850 is an average unit wishing you got a 8800 GTX instead.
coolboy499 3 years ago
no the 4850 is just as fast at the 9800gtx if not faster so your 8800gtx loses idiot
blueballgamer 3 years ago
Btich you are soo fuckin stupid. If you combine 3 8800GTX with SLI, it will have more power than the CrossfireX combined with 4870s. Using a 8800GTX with a 780i or 790i mobo will beat the 4870 with a 790fx mobo.
coolboy499 3 years ago
ROFL i was talking about ONE single card you fucking faggot rofl
blueballgamer 3 years ago 2
You actually believe those benchmarks? If you do, I have to call you a fucking ignorant snob.
coolboy499 3 years ago
haha ya i know. They lied about the PS2 and they now lie about the PS3's power.
CSplayahata 3 years ago
I've played the KZ2 beta and it is fucking amazing.
coolboy499 3 years ago
they didit lie about the PS3s power dumbass they just haveit comeout with games that use its full power KILLZONE 2 only uses %60 of what the PS3 can do
amartinez97 3 years ago 9
@amartinez97 true so true buddy and killzone 2 was amazing and so was the fps rating so fuckin high
thunderkiss641 1 year ago
@amartinez97 Who knows, it's probably 60% of what they knew they could do. not knowing 100% of what they could do. Not meaning full power of the system, but full power of what they know about the system.
LegionOf3 1 year ago
@amartinez97 Game developers are actually paid money to license for both systems by not taking full advantage of the PS3. That way, Microsoft would get owned, basically, when everyone sees the true capabilities of the PS3's processing power.
winternight119 1 year ago
@winternight119 That is ridiculous. The reason why developers don't always use the little extra performance they can get from the PS3 is that, for that to happen, they would have to develop a different engine for the PS3 version so it can use the SPEs properly, and that would increase the development cost of the whole game.
NewLynxChannel 1 year ago
@amartinez97 Killzone 2 only uses 60% of the PS3, because it has many low res textures, very tech going on, as in no real time soft particls, dynamic global illumination, SSAO, advanced AI ect. Killzone 2, believe it or not, is far from a technical feat. I mean come on, no cool tech, a lot of low res texturing, hidden by poor lighting, and simple/low poly geometry in the environments. It's a good looking game, and it has a nice art style, however it's not anything to brag about in the graphics.
BigdogWitBigdog 1 year ago
@BigdogWitBigdog *very little tech going on* sorry
BigdogWitBigdog 1 year ago
@BigdogWitBigdog
what the fuck are you talking about? How can kz2 look as amazing as it does and still have all those flaws you mentioned? I'm no graphics expert, but if killzone 2's graphics have all those flaws, it should look weak right?
RapturousDemise 11 months ago
@RapturousDemise It doesn't look amazing, I stated that. I said it looks nice. But is not the technical achievement, or graphical powerhouse PS3 fanboys think it to be.
BigdogWitBigdog 11 months ago
@BigdogWitBigdog
And by amazing you mean what? Crysis running maxed out?
RapturousDemise 11 months ago
@amartinez97 To right :P, though developers admitted to reaching pretty much 100% of it's power on Uncharted 2 , Not a bad thing cause that game was beautiful to look at.
JSUTSGJ 9 months ago
@JSUTSGJ Actauly it was just 80%, Crysis 2 i believe uses 100% though.
amartinez97 9 months ago
@amartinez97 Damn for real? , you know that makes alot of pc hardware useless because they have so much more potential to unlock I'm going to guess being limited by console D:
JSUTSGJ 9 months ago
@JSUTSGJ Well its not that bad, Crysis 2 has the best graphics i have ever seen on a console yet, and i truly mean that i think Crysis 2 is hte best we will get untill the next gen of consoles.
amartinez97 9 months ago
@amartinez97 it does not. ill be impreesed with crysis when it has the same great framerate as uncharted 2, with no object and texture pop in.
machstarfox 9 months ago
@machstarfox Texture pop in does not make graphics look bad, just realy close up on some objects for a few seconds.
amartinez97 9 months ago
@amartinez97 imagine how the graphics would look if they did not have that pop in. they would have to decrease the overall image quality to make it possible. and uncharted 2 still looks great compared to crysis 2
machstarfox 9 months ago
Fuckwang it isnt 07 anymore. Get to the times of GPU's.
assasincomedy 3 years ago
of course rsx is dated now. ITS BEEN OUT 2 YEARS AGO. IT WAS REALLY ADVANCED WEN IT CAME OUt
linkingens 3 years ago
No it wasn't, the 8800GTX was launched 2 weeks before the PS3. The RSX is a piece of crap.
Appule69 3 years ago
Oh shit RROD on the ATI!
coolboy499 3 years ago 2
actually, the 8800 GTX was released around the launch of the ps3, the 8800 GTX alone was more advanced than the RSX.
hollow334 2 years ago
all i need is a lord of the rings free roaming game for the ps3 and the rsx and im in heaven :)
unforgiventeen 3 years ago
what the hell?
anyways saying Uncharte is not an HD game is just fucking bullshit^^ second best game after Crysis for me:D
LordSande 4 years ago
From what I've seen the environments in Uncharted look pretty small, So 720p was probably easy to do.
Hellsing2o2 4 years ago
Also, the everything looks relatively static (vegetation and whatnot).
Hellsing2o2 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
My 8800GTX pwns PS3. The RSX it just a GeForce 7800GTX 256MB which is slow and outdated now.
Hellsing2o2 4 years ago
OK,can u tell me how to measure power of a GPU,I dont know how to~_~....
kinky4kiki 4 years ago
The 7800GTX 256mb was the very first GeForce 7 series card, and it wasn't a whole lot faster then the previous gen cards, nVidia did a refresh of it soon after it launched with the 512 meg version then with the 7900GTX, which was about 50% faster. Not to mention the RSX only has a 128 bit memory bus, instead of 256.
Hellsing2o2 4 years ago
It depends on the application. Modern games are pixel shader and fill rate intensive and in this arena a 8800 GTX is roughly double the performance of a 7900 GTX which is roughly double the performance of a 6800 Ultra.
Increased memory size mostly attributes to greater texture detail and resolutions rather than shader complexity. So running a game with
PS3 settings and more graphics memory wouldn't be an advantage.
morgs2020 4 years ago