Xbox 360 Fanboy

512 meg of Xbox vid RAM!!! PS3 is handicapped. I love it!!

Reply

Allright, so Lair couldn't be done on a 360, Conviction can't be done on a PS3, and Wii Sports can't be done on a Dreamcast. Just another day in the daily grind.

Reply

360 FTW again!

Reply

I love the entire Splinter Cell series. It's my favorite game hands down. With it being exclusive for the 360 I expect it to be top notch. I just hope there's better multiplayer than with Double Agent.

Reply

Just PLEEEEASE get the framerate smooth this time. The choppiness almost killed SC:DA for me. Amazing textures and lighting, but what's the point if it's choppy?

These screenshots make me leary of framerate again...

I'm new to the series (!) and it's quickly becoming one of my faves. A shame you can't get acheivements for the Xbox 1 games...

Reply

We have Epic and Gears of War to thank for the 512 video memory, not to mention the 1 billion dollars MS spent to make it so.

360 FTW indeed.

Reply

What's so hard about saying we were paid not to make a ps3 version of the game.

Reply

@7
Because it isn't true?

I was wondering if this article would make it to X360FB. Gawd know the PS3FB blog has been trashing the 360 lately.

Reply

Ever since the 2006 E3 when we saw the final specifications for the Playstation 3, it has been common knowledge that the Xbox 360 has more processing power when it comes to what can actually be applied to videogames.

Xbox 360 has more General Purpose CPU power than the Playstation 3, because the PS3 CPU isn't diverse enough; it's ideal use isn't for videogames, which is the reason why Sony originally wanted to have two Cell CPUs in the PS3, but couldn't afford to do so.

Xbox 360 has three CPUs, which is why the Xbox 360 has a lot more General Purpose CPU power. This is the reason why Ubisoft and Tecmo have repeatedly said that games like Assassins Creed will have better artificial intelligence on the Xbox 360.

stephentur, is 100% correct when he talks about the superiority of the Xbox 360 RAM. The Xbox 360 RAM advantage of being able to use up to 512MB of RAM for the CPU at any time is a very large advantage. The Playstation 3 CPU can never access more than 256MB of RAM at a time, which is why so many Playstation 3 games have framerate problems. Games that are perfectly smooth on the Xbox 360, like Call of Duty 3 and F.E.A.R. are terribly choppy on the Playstation 3.

ShaleX, you should know that the developers of Lair were recently interviewed and they pointed out that it is quite easy to port an exclusive PS3 game to the Xbox 360, because the Xbox 360 is more than capable of handling anything designed to run on the Playstation 3. However, those developers also go on to say that it is often very difficult to port an Xbox 360 exclusive game to the Playstation 3, because the Playstation 3 is much more difficult to program games for and doesn't have the necessary hardware resources. An great example is the way the Xbox 360 can display 500,000,000 polygons per second, while the Playstation 3 can only display 275,000,000 polygons per second. Another example is the way an Xbox 360 exclusive game would often have the CPU using a lot more than 256MB of RAM, while the PS3 would always be limited to 256MB. This is one of the reasons why Epic said Gears of War could never be achieved on the Playstation 3.

The Xbox 360 is getting so much more third-party support than the Playstation 3. This really is a great time to be an Xbox 360 owner, and a poor time to be a Playstation 3 owner.

I sure am looking forward to Splinter Cell: Conviction, Mass Effect, Halo 3, Command & Conquer 3, and Two Worlds!

Reply

Its not the memory that gives 360 better AI, its the processor.

360 has 3 powerful multi-purpose power pc cores, any of which can handle AI type math pretty easily.

The PS3 only has 1 power pc core, and i think 7 but only 5 active SPE cores? Either way they arnt as multipurpose as the 360s, and thus cant calculate AI as well. But PS3 owners can feel safe in the knowledge that they can run Folding@Home pretty quickly, but not as quick as most decent graphics cards :P.

Reply

Id just like to say Williams post at #9 is an excellent explanation of the difference between the consoles, and the exact reason PS3 owners drive me nuts over system performance, they just don't understand!

Reply

Well spoken William!

Now, to try your patience, run over to ps3fanboy and repeat it. Be prepared to watch heads spin, mouths foam, and get IP banned for speaking the truth.

Reply

thanks william for the explaination. i've been on the fence lately as to what console to purchase but this really sums it up. thanks again!

Reply

@ Steven: "Its not the memory that gives 360 better AI, its the processor."

@ William Said: "Xbox 360 has three CPUs, which is why the Xbox 360 has a lot more General Purpose CPU power. This is the reason why Ubisoft and Tecmo have repeatedly said that games like Assassins Creed will have better artificial intelligence on the Xbox 360."

Damn...learn how to read.

Reply

*William said:

Reply

To add more fuel to Sony's fire, don't forget about the ATI gpu in the 360 that clearly beats the nividia gpu in the PS3. The gpu has an extra 10MB EDRAM on the chip that gives the gpu core a true 256GB/sec bandwidth for compression. The PS3 only has about 25GB/sec to its 256MB VRAM.

Reply

Williams novel is good, but it misses some key points

AI:
True, the Xbox can have the cpu use more than 256 MB while the PS3 cannot, but to do this the Xbox will necessarily have to reduce the amount of RAM available for graphics to less than 256. The Xbox allows more flexibility in the tradeoff (a smarter, uglier game or a pretty, stupid game) while the PS3 somewhat mandates a specific performance level for both: 256 for video, 256 for cpu. So if a game is truly doing AI that the PS3 cannot, it is doing so by reducing the graphical quality (a simplification, of course, but generally true).

RAM and development:
Factor 5's statement was more along the lines of: if you code for the PS3, you can port that code to the Xbox fairly easily since you can allocate RAM however you want. The reverse is harder, however, as their is less flexibility in how you use the RAM. They weren't saying the 360 is more powerful, just more flexible, and that multiplatform developers would be smarter to code for the PS3 and port to the 360 rather than the other way around. So when developers say a game couldn't be done on the PS3, it really just means they couldn't simply "port it" or code it in the same way, not that it wouldn't be possible. What Factor 5 said is that if companies are simply porting 360 games to the PS3, they are going to look a bit worse almost by default: developers need to code for the PS3 specifically. Even if many developers remain lazy, having marginally better ports of PC games didn't seem to help the original Xbox against the inferior PS2. This is not too different than multiplatform developers making sure their games fit on a DVD even though they have far more room with Blu-ray: if they code for 25GB+ of space, it will be a bitch to work out on the 360 (and multiple DVDs is not always possible).

Processing Power
That the Xbox can display 500 million polygons per second during gameplay while the PS3 can only display 275 million is simply untrue. Do you have a source for this? Obviously, Gears of War aside (maybe), Resistance and Motorstorm look as good as the best of what the 360 has offered so far. If the Xbox 360 has so much more raw processing power and is so much easier to program for, why do the games for both systems look pretty much the same? Obviously, if the Xbox really had double the RAM and double the processing power, it would be evidenced in the games. My point being that the processing nuances of both systems are not as simplified as you present them. Primarily, for many tasks, the PS3's SPEs ARE more efficient than the 360's general purpose CPU's.

At the end of the day it will all come down to roughly equivalent graphics and thus the games. The Xbox 360 is in a much better position than the original Xbox in this regard, but the same problem of a shooter/PC port heavy lineup that only appeals to a very specific demographic still lingers. Obviously Sony is still in an infant-type phase regarding their lineup, so things seem good for MS right now but if the Wii is proving anything it's that the industry's old style focus on guns and graphics may be a dead end after all. We'll see.

Reply

James: does Gears of war have stupid A.I. when it completely owns Resistance or Mortorstorm graphically?

Reply

People really need to stop saying that RFOM looks "just as good as the best the 360 has to offer"... the PS3 was in existance just as long as the 360... Sony couldn't make the Blu-Ray tech in time for a launch when the 360 did... The developers were/could write there games years ago... the GPU in the PS3 has been around for a while and is nothing different to program for... the Cell wasn't new... actually the PS3 launch games had TONS of time to get the games together while Sony was trying to get things going. I totally expect the first offering of PS3 games to look good... they had the extra year just to play with their games and make them look better while Sony was trying to jam the Blu-Ray player in and get DRM figured out for it.

I wouldn't expect the PS3 games to look much better then they do now...

Reply

Why does James even post here? We all know he hates the Xbox 360...

If it weren't for the fact that I'm not infantile and have a live, I'd start doing the same thing he does on PS3fanboy.com and post negative comments every day of the week.

Reply