Noctis2.0 wrote...
By giving their system more advanced and difficult hardware, they effectively created a firewall that keeps out most ****ty developers. The difficulty and cost associated with such a system forces developers to create a game that will sell with gamers to cover the money spent in development, and the best way to make a game sell is increase quality. While the PS3 still gets it's piece of shovelware, do consider the difference in the amount of shovelware between the PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii. The difference is stunning. The Wii is almost entirely shovelware, and the Xbox 360 isn't too much better. The PS3, however, has a much lower percentage of shovelware titles.
Sony also saw an evolution in hardware. In a Central Processing Unit, there are two important aspects: the number of cores and speed. Speed is simple, it's how fast the CPU can process data. Cores are a bit more complicated. They can be thought of like arms. The more arms you have, the more multi-tasking you can do, however you can also be a bit more clumsy if you don't use them right. Splitting jobs and functions between these arms is called multi-threading. The downside is that, if not specifically designed as multi-threaded, the programs end up only using one core, rendering the others useless.
The Wii utilizes a CPU that doesn't even have standard cores, it's either 1 or 2, no one's sure, and only runs at 729 MHz (Pretty slow). The Xbox 360 contains a CPU with three cores clocked at 3.2 GHz. My own personal computer has FOUR cores clocked a 3.7 GHz. The PS3? The PS3 Features microprocessor are essentially just small, albeit more expensive, CPUs that have slightly more functionality. The PS3 features six microprocessors, running at 3.2 GHz. Basically twice the processing power of a 360. Besides those six, two more microprocessors are also featured on the device, but are reserved by Sony for use on the operating system. I can't imagine Sony NOT opening up those two extra processors for use by developers within the next two or three years.
While hardware has improved to the point of have four, eight, or on rare occasions even sixteen cores, the software and developers have yet to catch up. A lot of companies have expressed anger over the difficulty in getting this system to work. Many companies are using outdated software and engines. The Source engine, still in use by Valve software, is an extremely modified version of Quake from 1996, and therefore isn't naturally multi-threaded. The result is a very inefficient engine on any platform and a very difficult time on the PS3. The PlayStation 3 was designed to make use of multi-threading. Anyone that doesn't keep up with multi-threading is behind and won't do well on the system. Simple as that.
The reason games like Uncharted 2 and Metal Gear Solid 4 are impossible on the Xbox 360 are for those very reasons. The raw, hard processing power and ability to multi-thread six different ways gives developers a multitude of ways to design and optimize their engine. Even if the engines were rebuilt to work on three cores, there's just not enough power behind those three cores to keep up with the game.
tl;dr: The hardware is vastly different between the PS3 and Xbox 360, and the reason the 360 has been winning and garnering more games is because it's oldschool equipment that everyone's used to while the PS3 is on the leading edge.
[/rant]
Yes, I am a geek.
You are totally wrong on the cell processor. The subcores(SPE'S) have less ability compared to the main core. They are basically ALU's. Good at doing floating point and thats about it. They can't handle much logic and don't have access to main memory. Everything has to fed into their cache from main memory.
Both machines use multithreading. It is actually simpler to do on the xbox then the playstation because on the xbox all 3 cores are the same so any core can be used to run the thread. On Cell, you have two types of cores with different instruction sets.
If I were you I would quit speculating about things you know just a small bit about.
P.S. The cell and the xenon processors share many compents since they were both designed by IBM.
Modifié par jamskinner, 16 décembre 2010 - 04:34 .
Retour en haut
