PS3 vs. PC

Effluo

Hey Everyone.

A couple of nights ago i was having an erotic dream about computer hardware when it was interupted as question formed in head.
The question was so baffling that it completely knocked the dream out of my head and alas i can remember no more about that sunset and my coy components.....


I've been looking for an answer and am really still very stumped!

Why are the ps3's graphics a machine that was launched 3 years ago more than comparable to a pc games graphics. Or are they better? Or what is the sceal with that?

I know that the ps3 has 7(useable) virtual cores and v high processing power, but it also only has 256mb of ram and essentially a graphics card that was made nearly 3 years ago by nvidia...

So can anyone answer my questions of why do ps3 graphics look so damn good?

AlmightyCushion

The PS3 has nowhere near the graphical capabilities of a mid range pc (dual core with 3GBs ram) with a decent graphics card. There is absolutely no comparison when you try to compare it to a high end pc.

For the record I actually own a ps3 so I'm not just talking out my arse here.

PogMoThoin

PS3 is similar to a 3-4 year old pc, the graphics card is equivalent to an underclocked 7900 series, but has half the memory bus width (128 bit). This sums it up

The GPU core is basically the same G70 used in the Geforce 7800GTX/7900GTX cards. From nvidia this was basically the most powerful design they had at the time, considering that this chip was chosen in advance of even the Geforce 7xxx series launch in 2005.

The primary difference between the desktop 7800/7900GTX cards and the RSX is that it has only half the local memory bandwidth, although it does have a fast (~20GBps read/~15GBps write) link to the CPU/Main Memory. I would think that this makes the performance of any individual game wildly dependant on how the bandwidth from Main memory is being utilized between the GPU and CPU, as well as how much additional processing you are doing with the CELL/SPUs.

uberpixie

Effluo wrote: »

So can anyone answer my questions of why do ps3 graphics look so damn good?

mad levels of optimisation: when you only have a very limited, tied down set of hardware to deal with you can really tweak things to look good. Same with any other console.

For the PC you are dealing with millions of possible hardware combinations, so chances are the gfx engine you are working with is a good bit more inefficent and will require more grunt to look good. (plus two different types of gfx cards that do things differently even thoug they use the DX10 spec Im sure also helps.....)

Effluo

I was thinking much the same that, for the fact that the game developers have only this specific hardware to work with.
Much like graphic card drivers i suppose? A new driver can bring about a huge improvement in the performance.

Looking at the ps3 playing great looking games at full hd still gets me wondering though.


Am I completely wrong in when thinking that computer gamers can suffer in terms of the graphics in their games, because the game was primarily launched on the ps3/xbox and made to try maximise the consoles hardware.

Or are games for both consoles and pc's developed in a completely separate way?

cheers

PogMoThoin

Effluo wrote: »

Am I completely wrong in when thinking that computer gamers can suffer in terms of the graphics in their games, because the game was primarily launched on the ps3/xbox and made to try maximise the consoles hardware.

Yes, consoles are holding pc games back. Graphics in games (and difficulty) are dumbed down for consoles. Crysis the last big advancement in graphics was released in Nov 2007. Since then nothing has really put graphics cards to the test. The 8800GTX people bought 2 yrs ago can still run any game released today with ease. The next Crysis is being dumbed down for consoles and released on multi platforms. DirectX 11 is nearly here yet they opt to develop for consoles

ED E

Not to start a flame war here, but how does the 360 compare?

PogMoThoin

Lethal_Bullet wrote: »

Not to start a flame war here, but how does the 360 compare?

It has a slightly better graphics card than the PS3 and a very efficient 3 core processor.

AlmightyCushion

Effluo wrote: »

I was thinking much the same that, for the fact that the game developers have only this specific hardware to work with.
Much like graphic card drivers i suppose? A new driver can bring about a huge improvement in the performance.

Looking at the ps3 playing great looking games at full hd still gets me wondering though.


Am I completely wrong in when thinking that computer gamers can suffer in terms of the graphics in their games, because the game was primarily launched on the ps3/xbox and made to try maximise the consoles hardware.

Or are games for both consoles and pc's developed in a completely separate way?

cheers

In a lot of cases the ps3 isn't even play games at full hd. I think GTA 4 was only playing games at 480p or something like that. There are a few games it plays at 1080p but most are at 720p or below.

Effluo

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

In a lot of cases the ps3 isn't even play games at full hd. I think GTA 4 was only playing games at 480p or something like that. There are a few games it plays at 1080p but most are at 720p or below.

Ohhhhhh....
And it's just stretched?

AlmightyCushion

Effluo wrote: »

Ohhhhhh....
And it's just stretched?

Basically, yeah. Change the resolution of your pc to 640 x 480 (If it'll even let you) and you'll get the same effect on your pc. Graphics wise, the PC is far superior to any console at the moment.

kaimera

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Basically, yeah. Change the resolution of your pc to 640 x 480 (If it'll even let you) and you'll get the same effect on your pc. Graphics wise, the PC is far superior to any console at the moment.

ewwww

Effluo

Just found this comparison thingy it includes xbox360, ps3 and a pc with a gtx280/ati4890 equivalent.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6202552/index.html

You can really see the difference here wow!

Also great video here.
Watch it in HD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Epx3JBvErfk

PogMoThoin

Eh, not a great comparrison, thats a console game, made specifically for consoles and ported to pc.

Here's 3 screenies I quickly took of Crysis fully maxed with 4x Antialiasing, I play this game at 1920x1200 (full hd is 1920x1080, this is higher) on a 24 inch monitor. Now remember, this game was released in November 2007

AlmightyCushion

I really wish more games would push things on the graphical front like Crysis. Sure graphics don't make the game but they are purdy to look at. Makes you feel like you're getting your moneys worth out of the pc as well.

Overheal

the crytek engine drives me mad. even with the 4650 i still have issues. Probably down to the processor, but even still, it pisses me off a bit.

Actually I like giving my card its run by playing Sins of a Solar empire.
Its not revolutionary graphics, but when youve got HDR and Bump Maps and all that **** -
for sometimes hundreds or even thousands of objects on screen - it adds up.
And space battles like this in 100 frames are gorgeous.

PogMoThoin

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I really wish more games would push things on the graphical front like Crysis. Sure graphics don't make the game but they are purdy to look at. Makes you feel like you're getting your moneys worth out of the pc as well.

Even Crytek got consolitis these days, next one is back to directX9 and made for consoles. We've not seen many anouncements about directX11 games, well only I've seen is Codemasters DiRT 2 and GRiD 2 (both same engine). Consoles have fcuked things up for us PC only gamers