Not getting riled at all, just trying to clear up some misinformation.
Really, your statements are all over the place though.
Another reason to hate Sony and their formats.
- Thread starter akodoreign
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 170
- Views 14K
Really, your statements are all over the place though.
I don't have any particular problem with Sony, Blu-Ray or any other company or product. What I am beefing about is the rampant copyright abuse perpetuated by the RIAA and MPAA. That's what I got into this thread for. I don't care what company is participating in it. Not sure which of the next-gen consoles I intend on getting, but it's not going to be based on this. We have to remember, Microsoft is really big into this so-called "DRM" bull$hit too. Very few of these company's hands are clean when it comes to this stuff.
Not really , I just respond to each point people make. If it means making different arguments at the time so be it.
I can list the entire argument as a term paper if you want.
And what misinformation have you cleared up?
which part?
DVD9 faster than Blue Ray, Give me numbers that do not support this claim with source?
RSX core is slower than R500, Give me numbers that do not support this claim with a source?
Graphics cards mean more than CPUs in graphics rendering, Give me numbers that do not support this claim with a source?
There is 0% misinformation in any of this, you fail at clearing any of it up.
Oh yeah, Prove to me that Sony BMG is not trying to remove our fair use rights.... There was the begging of the argument wasn't it?
So you change your statements as it suites you to get into an argument is basically what you are saying?
Nope I am saying you dance around my arguments with other arguments so I have to counter what you are saying.
Also here is my source for GPU performance ATI Video Cards - console GPUs: ATI Xenos vs Nvidia RSX
With the Xbox 360 Xenos core running at 500MHz, and the PlayStation3's RSX
graphics core running at 550MHz, the non-techie press are calling the specs
a win for Sony. Is this really the case, though?
Richard is adamant that the extra graphics speed on paper is more than made
up for by the differing architecture of the Xenos. "That mere 10% clock
speed that RSX has on Xenos is easily countered by the unified shader
architecture that we've implemented.
"Rather than separate pixel and vertex pipelines, we've created a single
unified pipeline that can do both. Providing developers throw instructions
at our architecture in the right way, Xenos can run at 100% efficiency
allthe time, rather than having some pipeline instructions waiting for others.
For comparison, most high-end PC chips run at 50-60% typical efficiency. The
super cool point is that 'in the right way' just means 'give us plenty of
work to do'. The hardware manages itself."
The issue of unified versus split shader pipelines is a critical one that we'll
come back to in a moment, but I was curious as to how Richard felt the CPU
architecture between the two consoles makes a difference to the graphics and
overall power.
"The PS3 does appear to have a huge amount of CPU power with the seven Cell
cores. The problem they have is that CPU power isn't really what developer's
need - the bottleneck is really the graphics. Everybody is going
multi-threaded and multi-core - the Xbox 360 has three PowerPC cores, AMD
and Intel both have dual-core chips, so everyone is having to learn how to
write this stuff. But writing multi-threaded apps for two or three cores is
difficult. Doing it for seven separate cores, when the main core has a
slightly different feature-set from the other six, is very, very difficult."
Where is yours? Come on lets clear up some misinformation? I play that game, I'll be your huckleberry.
Now for the Blue Ray vs DVD 9 in speed
The comparison
Mb = megabits
MB =megabytes
Blu-ray 1x: 36Mbps / 4.5MBps
12x DVD: 66 - 132Mbps / 8.2 - 16.5MBps
At Blue - Ray 4x the Blue ray wins... But drives are at 1x currently.
The comparison
Mb = megabits
MB =megabytes
Blu-ray 1x: 36Mbps / 4.5MBps
12x DVD: 66 - 132Mbps / 8.2 - 16.5MBps
At Blue - Ray 4x the Blue ray wins... But drives are at 1x currently.
You said my posts were full of misinformation.
You said you were clearing up misinformation. So I am letting you.
Again, i never said the Graphics card in the PS3 was the greatest thing ever did i? Show me that post. I said it WOULD be the "best all around" I have also stated many many times that graphics are NOT the end all of the gameplay experience, even though the PS3 is no slouch in that department. So show all of the spec sheets you want. Thats fine. They are posted everywhere and most of them state different conclusions. Why? People are biased against what they either dont have, or have some hidden agenda.Nope I am saying you dance around my arguments with other arguments so I have to counter what you are saying.
Also here is my source for GPU performance ATI Video Cards - console GPUs: ATI Xenos vs Nvidia RSX
With the Xbox 360 Xenos core running at 500MHz, and the PlayStation3's RSX
graphics core running at 550MHz, the non-techie press are calling the specs
a win for Sony. Is this really the case, though?
Richard is adamant that the extra graphics speed on paper is more than made
up for by the differing architecture of the Xenos. "That mere 10% clock
speed that RSX has on Xenos is easily countered by the unified shader
architecture that we've implemented.
"Rather than separate pixel and vertex pipelines, we've created a single
unified pipeline that can do both. Providing developers throw instructions
at our architecture in the right way, Xenos can run at 100% efficiency
the time, rather than having some pipeline instructions waiting for others.
For comparison, most high-end PC chips run at 50-60% typical efficiency. The
super cool point is that 'in the right way' just means 'give us plenty of
work to do'. The hardware manages itself."
The issue of unified versus split shader pipelines is a critical one that we'll
come back to in a moment, but I was curious as to how Richard felt the CPU
architecture between the two consoles makes a difference to the graphics and
overall power.
"The PS3 does appear to have a huge amount of CPU power with the seven Cell
cores. The problem they have is that CPU power isn't really what developer's
need - the bottleneck is really the graphics. Everybody is going
multi-threaded and multi-core - the Xbox 360 has three PowerPC cores, AMD
and Intel both have dual-core chips, so everyone is having to learn how to
write this stuff. But writing multi-threaded apps for two or three cores is
difficult. Doing it for seven separate cores, when the main core has a
slightly different feature-set from the other six, is very, very difficult."
Where is yours? Come on lets clear up some misinformation? I play that game, I'll be your huckleberry.
You? You stated you took the other side simply because everyone here , in your view, was pro-sony/blu-ray.
Yeah, I have clearly stated my motives. So I don't know why you keep arguing with me. You on the other hand have not stated why It offends you so much that I dislike Sony.
Thats just the part i dont understand. If you took that side simply because everyone was the other way it makes no sense to me. Factor in that with the fact that you have no real experience with the product that you have stated is, and i quote, "horrible" and it is baffleing.
I guess if you want to let what other people think about a product influence whether you like it or not is fine. I prefer to form my own opinions. Hey, thats just me i guess.
The many times you have said the PS3 is "horrible", based on what?
Then you give out specs that can be spun either way depending on what side you root for.
Any person who has searched for specs on these consoles has seen the conflicting numbers spinning game going on.
Then go ahead give me the other side. From the 3 points I brought up.
Not even going to make you defend Sony BMG. thats how generous I am.
You know what the PS3 has, The Cell processor. and OMG it's powerful. And thats why my signature is my signature.
I'll go ahead and make the arguments for you since you are struggling so badly.
PS3 RSX core is 50mhz faster than the Xenon. This 50MHZ makes 10% quicker. But is older generation core. Kinda like using a 2.4 ghz P4 vs using a 2.0 ghz Core duo. But it is faster. (do not confuse faster for more powerful)
PS3 has more room for bigger games, In other words because I am to lazy to change disks every 20-40 hours of game play I should put up with a slower read time.
The controllers use blue tooth and the batteries are included. And when the batteries die (all lithium ions do). you will have to buy a new controller. and Sony didn't even bother to put rumble in it.
The PS controllers always have felt the best. You know what I'll give you the nod on this one. Although my favorite controller so far has been the old Xbox 1 Duke controler, Mainly because I have huge hands though.
Six-axes is teh bomb man. Well maybe. If they made a game that utilized it properly. this is where the Wii struggles as well. But the Wii is a bit more dedicated to motion control.
I'll go ahead and make the arguments for you since you are struggling so badly.
PS3 RSX core is 50mhz faster than the Xenon. This 50MHZ makes 10% quicker. But is older generation core. Kinda like using a 2.4 ghz P4 vs using a 2.0 ghz Core duo. But it is faster. (do not confuse faster for more powerful)
PS3 has more room for bigger games, In other words because I am to lazy to change disks every 20-40 hours of game play I should put up with a slower read time.
The controllers use blue tooth and the batteries are included. And when the batteries die (all lithium ions do). you will have to buy a new controller. and Sony didn't even bother to put rumble in it.
The PS controllers always have felt the best. You know what I'll give you the nod on this one. Although my favorite controller so far has been the old Xbox 1 Duke controler, Mainly because I have huge hands though.
Six-axes is teh bomb man. Well maybe. If they made a game that utilized it properly. this is where the Wii struggles as well. But the Wii is a bit more dedicated to motion control.
