Rumble Roses developer on PS3 & X360

[scooby_dooby]

at this point, i'm willing to bet in a old fashion DEsign (where everybody knows it inside out), than a new tech missing years and years of trial (that the old one had)

so by your logic, XeCPU would be preferable to CELL which is: "a new tech missing years and years of trial " ?

3 GP cores are certainly known "inside and out" much better than CELL and it's mysterious SPE's.

seems to me you've already decided PS3 is more powerful and are just trying to find reasons to support your pre-conceived conclusion.

 

[onetimeposter]

in my forum i would get you banned. No one reasonable can claim such a thing.

can you tell me the difference between Wankel rotary combustion engine and Otto combustion engine?
i had this discussion in engine forums lots of times.
Wankel its a f*cking efficient engine, 1300cc is enough to boost 300hp. Its a technology different and way Ahead of Otto engines.
But does it performs BETTER?..... no.

at this point, i'm willing to bet in a old fashion DEsign (where everybody knows it inside out), than a new tech missing years and years of trial (that the old one had)

Xenos is technologically better than RSX.

 

[dskneo]

Is there really a belief that the RSX will sginficantly differ from the G70? Wouldnt theyhave enough kinks to work out just going to 90nm, much less changing the architecture significantly?

J

theres no belief, theres nothing.... we dont know nothing about RSX.
Its like comparing Liverpool TEAM to Chelsea TEam when chelsea team is still to be announced.

 

[dskneo]

so by your logic, XeCPU would be preferable to CELL which is: "a new tech missing years and years of trial " ?

3 GP cores are certainly known "inside and out" much better than CELL and it's mysterious SPE's.

seems to me you've already decided PS3 is more powerful and are just trying to find reasons to support your pre-conceived conclusion.

but since when CELL is "new" tech?....... PS2 is using the same principle for 6 years now.
come on, you know better.

 

[onetimeposter]

theres no belief, theres nothing.... we dont know nothing about RSX.
Its like comparing Liverpool TEAM to Chelsea TEam when chelsea team is still to be announced.

So when Sony showed RSX specs at E3, that was fake?

actually PS2 did have a graphics card

Graphics Synthesizer (GS)

* 150 MHz (147.456 MHz)
* 16 Pixel Pipelines
* 2.4 Gigapixels per Second (no texture)
* 1.2 Gigatexels per Second
* Point, Bilinear, Trilinear, Anisotropic Mip-Map Filtering
* Perspective-Correct Texture Mapping
* Bump Mapping
* Environment Mapping
* 32-bit Color (RGBA)
* 32-bit Z Buffer
* 4MB Multiported Embedded DRAM
* 38.4 Gigabytes per Second eDRAM Bandwidth (19.2 GB/s in each direction)
* 9.6 Gigabytes per Second eDRAM Texture Bandwidth
* 150 Million Particles per Second
* Polygon Drawing Rate:
o 75 Million Polygons per Second (small polygon)
o 50 Million Polygons per Second (48-pixel quad with Z and Alpha)
o 30 Million Polygons per Second (50-pixel triangle with Z and Alpha)
o 25 Million Polygons per Second (48-pixel quad with Z, Alpha, and Texture)
* 18.75 Million Sprites per Second (8 x 8 pixel sprites)

 

[dskneo]

Xenos is technologically better than RSX.

it is..... will it be faster? you dont know.

 

[onetimeposter]

but since when CELL is "new" tech?....... PS2 is using the same principle for 6 years now.
come on, you know better.

Cell IS a new technology.

 

[onetimeposter]

it is..... will it be faster? you dont know.

Technically and theoritically it will be better and faster.

There is a REASON Nvidia recently said they are moving to unified architectures

 

[dskneo]

Cell IS a new technology.

i keep my statement.

CELL is a souped up PS2 EE. Main core with multiple vectors. 6 years in the trial in PS2.

 

[dskneo]

Technically and theoritically it will be better and faster.

There is a REASON Nvidia recently said they are moving to unified architectures

it is ...... but will it perform better?... you dont know.

 

[scooby_dooby]

but since when CELL is "new" tech?....... PS2 is using the same principle for 6 years now.
come on, you know better.

PS2 has a PPE with 7 specialized processing units?

Come on, lets be real. X360's CPU is much more conventional than CELL, and I thought that was the argument you were makign AGAINST the Xenos GPU?

So which do you prefer? Progressive technology? Or tried and true? You can't have it both ways.

 

[mckmas8808]

I have little doubt there's more potential in PS3, for non-graphics algorithms. And even if Cell is deployed doing helper work for RSX there should still be plenty of capacity.

I just wanted to point out that Xenos is far ahead of RSX both technologically and in terms of effectiveness.

Jawed

Me and a couple of other people are disappointed in you Jawed. Tell me where your hidden information is at about the RSX. We would like to see it.

 

[dskneo]

So when Sony showed RSX specs at E3, that was fake?

actually PS2 did have a graphics card

what specs? dot products? millions of transistors?.... is that specs? give me a break.


PS2 did have a rasterizer... not a GPU. EE did all the work

 

[onetimeposter]

what specs? dot products? millions of transistors?.... is that specs? give me a break.


PS2 did have a rasterizer... not a GPU. EE did all the work

yes those are specs.

 

[dskneo]

PS2 has a PPE with 7 specialized processing units?

Come on, lets be real. X360's CPU is much more conventional than CELL, and I thought that was the argument you were makign AGAINST the Xenos GPU?

So which do you prefer? Progressive technology? Or tried and true? You can't have it both ways.

oh come on now...... EE is a mips core with 2 vectors, Its at least 6 years old TECH.
CELL is a PPE core with 7 Spe's...... same exact principle with different implementation.

dont make me dumb here...

 

[scooby_dooby]

it is ...... but will it perform better?... you dont know.

If anyone would know it would be ATI.

They've stated it will be comparable to a 32 pipe conventional GPU.

That's all we know right now but I don't see any reason to be see negative or pessimistic, many of the more knowledgeable members on this forum seem to be very excited/optimistic about Xenos.

ATI is trumpeting it pretty heavily, it seems designed specifically for a console, it has several new tachnologies, what's not to like?

 

[dskneo]

yes those are specs.

yes they are... 1/10th of the specs. What about the important ones? Pipelines, i want the hear pipelines... shaders design, etc etc. THESE are the specs that matter

 

[onetimeposter]

Me and a couple of other people are disappointed in you Jawed. Tell me where your hidden information is at about the RSX. We would like to see it.

I think its time to realise that ATI has hit the nail on its head with Xenos. its a beast and the future of GPU , atleast for ATI. Xenos theoritically and technically is better and faster than RSX ingame

 

[scooby_dooby]

oh come on now...... EE is a mips core with 2 vectors, Its at least 6 years old TECH.
CELL is a PPE core with 7 Spe's...... same exact principle with different implementation.

dont make me dumb here...

ya because having 1 or 2 threads going at once is totally comparable to 9 at the same time...

 

[dskneo]

If anyone would know it would be ATI.

They've stated it will be comparable to a 32 pipe conventional GPU.

That's all we know right now but I don't see any reason to be see negative or pessimistic, many of the more knowledgeable members on this forum seem to be very excited/optimistic about Xenos.

ATI is trumpeting it pretty heavily, it seems designed specifically for a console, it has several new tachnologies, what's not to like?

i'm not being pessimistic... Onetimeposter hits my in the nerve by stating for sure UNKNOWN facts.

he is making up stuff, just like he does at Teamxbox.com