Rumble Roses developer on PS3 & X360
- Thread starter seismologist
- Start date
onetimeposter
Banned
SubD said:
hes a level designer. he knows what his programmers can do and what they cant
onetimeposter
Banned
macabre said:
rendering is not ingame.
Jawed
Legend
I expect Xenos to be about twice as powerful as RSX in shader code.
Shortly, we're going to see a cut-down, somewhat simplified version of Xenos (R520 - about 26 pipes total, not unified, about 1/2 the shader power of Xenos) perform at approximately RSX levels in terms of shading power...
Not to mention that RSX has effectively about one quarter of the fill-rate or less, of Xenos (RSX can do 2xAA in the same time as Xenos can do 4xAA, and Xenos has effectively three times the bandwidth to work with on top of that).
Xenon can transmit 20GB/s of vertex data to Xenos, while Xenos can suck in, effectively, another 16GB/s of texture data direct from memory.
If Cell is delivering all the vertex and texture data (from XDR) then it tops out somewhat short of the 36GB/s that Xenos can use. I can't remember the figure - is it 20GB/s? Of course you can deliver texture data from RSX memory, too - but that eats into fill-rate rather badly.
etc. RSX is going to look very old by the time PS3 is released.
Jawed
Shortly, we're going to see a cut-down, somewhat simplified version of Xenos (R520 - about 26 pipes total, not unified, about 1/2 the shader power of Xenos) perform at approximately RSX levels in terms of shading power...
Not to mention that RSX has effectively about one quarter of the fill-rate or less, of Xenos (RSX can do 2xAA in the same time as Xenos can do 4xAA, and Xenos has effectively three times the bandwidth to work with on top of that).
Xenon can transmit 20GB/s of vertex data to Xenos, while Xenos can suck in, effectively, another 16GB/s of texture data direct from memory.
If Cell is delivering all the vertex and texture data (from XDR) then it tops out somewhat short of the 36GB/s that Xenos can use. I can't remember the figure - is it 20GB/s? Of course you can deliver texture data from RSX memory, too - but that eats into fill-rate rather badly.
etc. RSX is going to look very old by the time PS3 is released.
Jawed
onetimeposter said:
Apparently, not only are you completely insane, you have trouble with understanding english as well.
Every game engine has a renderer -- the console Renders the game. Rendering just implies drawing the frames. It can be done fast (30/60 fps) or slow (1 frame per several minutes).
You guys don't give enough credit to the EDRAM which should make quite the difference - Xenos won't be bandwith limited, so it can utilize rendering techniques that may not be possible on the RSX.
Also, it has a builtin tessalator for HOS, that can only be performed on the CPU with the PS3, so this can 'free up' some CPU time on the Xbox.
Also, it has a builtin tessalator for HOS, that can only be performed on the CPU with the PS3, so this can 'free up' some CPU time on the Xbox.
Jawed said:I expect Xenos to be about twice as powerful as RSX in shader code.
Shortly, we're going to see a cut-down, somewhat simplified version of Xenos (R520 - about 26 pipes total, not unified, about 1/2 the shader power of Xenos) perform at approximately RSX levels in terms of shading power...
Not to mention that RSX has effectively about one quarter of the fill-rate or less, of Xenos (RSX can do 2xAA in the same time as Xenos can do 4xAA, and Xenos has effectively three times the bandwidth to work with on top of that).
Xenon can transmit 20GB/s of vertex data to Xenos, while Xenos can suck in, effectively, another 16GB/s of texture data direct from memory.
If Cell is delivering all the vertex and texture data (from XDR) then it tops out somewhat short of the 36GB/s that Xenos can use. I can't remember the figure - is it 20GB/s? Of course you can deliver texture data from RSX memory, too - but that eats into fill-rate rather badly.
etc. RSX is going to look very old by the time PS3 is released.
Jawed
is this all true?
God of War David Jaffe:
This is from the most recent Game Informer. He doesn't call out a specific person but he said that anybody even suggesting that the PS3 and 360 are close to the same level from a technical standpoint is on crack. He claims that the PS3 is far and away more powerful than the 360 and it's stupid for anyone to suggest otherwise.
This is from the most recent Game Informer. He doesn't call out a specific person but he said that anybody even suggesting that the PS3 and 360 are close to the same level from a technical standpoint is on crack. He claims that the PS3 is far and away more powerful than the 360 and it's stupid for anyone to suggest otherwise.
Jawed
Legend
If Xenos didn't have EDRAM, it would need something like 1GHz GDDR3 RAM (effectively 64GB/s - best available is 51GB/s) - perhaps more to keep up.dukmahsik said:
The arguments vary, because Xenos uses un-compressed data formats to perform blending (e.g. for particles) and anti-aliasing. Most GPUs (including RSX) use compressed data formats.
So you have to work out how to compare 22.4GB/s of compressed data format to 256GB/s of un-compressed data. I'm assuming that 256GB/s un-compressed translates into 64GB/s compressed.
Jawed
therealskywolf
Regular
I only have 1 problem. Developers don't seem to care about the EDRAM or Unified shaders, or whatever. Developers don't talk about it....Developers never compare it's performance to the RSX, nothing we never hear nothing.
All we hear is how CELL is this and that. Wasn't the GPU supposed to be the main show of a console? What's happening? DNa's? Sony doesn't want anybody talking about RSX and MS doesn't want anybody talking about Xenos?
I don't get it. PSM said some Dev (could be the shittiest one outthere.....who knows) thinks the Xbox 360 has some stupid bottlenecks, and being MS a software company i don't know why they didn't fix it (I've heard alot about the Cache...is 1 MB really not enough? Would it be troubling to go with more?), and Dave Jaffe (His opinion is biased...) said the Ps3 was far and away more powerfull than the Xbox 360 (he also said Half Life 2 sucked, and that the Xbox wasn't more powerfull than the ps2, so while being an awesome designer, the guy is full of shit) while Bungie says PS3 and Xbox 360 are on par with eachother, and it's art direction that will seperate games from both systems.
Then you have EA, that acts as Xbox 360 didn't even existed, all they talk about is SPes Spes Spes....F the Spes man, i want to know more about the RSX.
Then you have RARe, that has this insanelly beautifull game called Kameo, but never talks about strong points in the Hardware, they never hype it....MS never hypes the system, the only guys hyping the system are: Cliff B, wich surprised me when he said the game was still only using 1 thread on 1 core, it still wasn't optimized for Final Kit, but yet the game already looked better than on Alpha kits and was running smoother (The game was running at 30 Fps with drops), and on the other hand you have Carmack, that seems like he his in love with Xenos, actually he is the only guy that really talks directly about xenos.
It's confusing....and i just realized, i typed alot but didn't say anything. Wow...
All we hear is how CELL is this and that. Wasn't the GPU supposed to be the main show of a console? What's happening? DNa's? Sony doesn't want anybody talking about RSX and MS doesn't want anybody talking about Xenos?
I don't get it. PSM said some Dev (could be the shittiest one outthere.....who knows) thinks the Xbox 360 has some stupid bottlenecks, and being MS a software company i don't know why they didn't fix it (I've heard alot about the Cache...is 1 MB really not enough? Would it be troubling to go with more?), and Dave Jaffe (His opinion is biased...) said the Ps3 was far and away more powerfull than the Xbox 360 (he also said Half Life 2 sucked, and that the Xbox wasn't more powerfull than the ps2, so while being an awesome designer, the guy is full of shit) while Bungie says PS3 and Xbox 360 are on par with eachother, and it's art direction that will seperate games from both systems.
Then you have EA, that acts as Xbox 360 didn't even existed, all they talk about is SPes Spes Spes....F the Spes man, i want to know more about the RSX.
Then you have RARe, that has this insanelly beautifull game called Kameo, but never talks about strong points in the Hardware, they never hype it....MS never hypes the system, the only guys hyping the system are: Cliff B, wich surprised me when he said the game was still only using 1 thread on 1 core, it still wasn't optimized for Final Kit, but yet the game already looked better than on Alpha kits and was running smoother (The game was running at 30 Fps with drops), and on the other hand you have Carmack, that seems like he his in love with Xenos, actually he is the only guy that really talks directly about xenos.
It's confusing....and i just realized, i typed alot but didn't say anything. Wow...
Last edited by a moderator:
Is this not going through main RAM? Can't find any XB360 systemn layouts. I remember there was some direct cache access but can't remember the particulars.Jawed said:
Hmmm, we'd better stop here before another Bandwidth fight breaks out! There's all sorts of other figures like 30GB/s direct connection between RSX and Cell and we've been over the GPU's time and again. Nothing was conclusive in those arguments.
My main idea/expectation/'gut feeling' is even if XB360's GPU is much better, which I've said before I can well believe, certainly in IQ, will that make up for shortfallings in the CPU? If graphics is the only thing that matters in games then I'm sure we'd agree. But as I see it, maybe XB360 will have 4x AA when PS3 has 2x, and maybe XB360 will have more transparent particle effects, but in other areas like physics-based character animation, mesh deformations and algorithmic/procedural doohickyness, PS3 will have the peak advantage. And perhaps substantially moreso when considering peak performance in the hands of genius developers.