Sony PS3 RSX GPU still in development


Recommended Posts

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/25/rs...in_development/

So what were the tech demos running on?

585970524[/snapback]

Just like x360, running on desktop counterparts, what i find funny that x360 actually looked bloody good, yet PS3 running SLI 6800 looked like PS2 games.

Just like x360, running on desktop counterparts, what i find funny that x360 actually looked bloody good, yet PS3 running SLI 6800 looked like PS2 games.

585970613[/snapback]

I think the opposite :blink: :blink:, I think the xbox360's demo looks like xbox games, while ps3 games looked stunning (look at the killzone 2)

They were running on SLI 6800s I believe.

The PS3's power has barely been tapped because the CPU and GPU finalizations are likely to only make it more powerful.

585970605[/snapback]

or weaker. as if its not finalised that means the real world performance might be weaker

The PS3's power has barely been tapped because the CPU and GPU finalizations are likely to only make it more powerful.

585970605[/snapback]

At what cost ? Last I heard was that Sony was going to price the PS3 at a very low price point, I can only see them cutting corners to achieve that rather than increasing the speeds.

I'm sure 90% of the gamers will appreciate a lower price point while only 10% might be interested in a slightly more powerful console. I believe Sony will concentrate on the games side of things like they did with the PS2.

At what cost ? Last I heard was that Sony was going to price the PS3 at a very low price point, I can only see them cutting corners to achieve that rather than increasing the speeds.

I'm sure 90% of the gamers will appreciate a lower price point while only 10% might be interested in a slightly more powerful console. I believe Sony will concentrate on the games side of things like they did with the PS2.

585970679[/snapback]

Joy, we can look forward to Metal Gear Solid 4/5/6, GT 6/7/8, etc....

Don't tell me Killzone 2 was not real rendering.

585970709[/snapback]

It wasnt, if you researched a bit more it was a pre-recorded rendered video that they expect the game "might" look like, how they can figure that when the CPU and GPU are not even completed yet i have no idea.

Yeah... "Joy"... I guess you xbox fanboys don't like having good games on your system.  :rolleyes: I guess power and graphics is all that matters to you guys.

585970727[/snapback]

Im not a fanboy, i just dont enjoy sequel after sequel flogging the dead horse. Plenty of new games announced for x360 unlike PS3, all sequels and 2006 versions.

all the Xbox360 demos were real i dont think a single game was a pre render since they mostly was all playable ther @e3 and on g4Tv they had the peaple gieva live Demo of the stuff running

The only part of witch X360 was not shown was the Fact it was not shown Full quality graphcis and performance . Agian the G5s ther running Alpha hardware/softwar

Tools witch machines are not but about 1/3rd or less of the Acual Game console . The ATI graphics cards inside the DevKits and shown @ E3 are basicly the ATI X850 cards while ATIs finalzing the Real hardware for graphics witch is not based on any Desktop version of ther graphics card now and or Later but rather its own Technolagy and API.

Indeed, i played Halo but it was as generic as the rest of them and nothing like what the hype said it would be, Halo2 more of the same with crappy graphics/framerate.

585970767[/snapback]

same thoughts exactly... i got bored with halo 2 and never finished it... oh well. :sleep:

just why r u all so angry :D .... let's just wait and see :) ....

585970783[/snapback]

Because Sonys lying again just like they did with PS2, im not actually expecting much and i was underwhelmed with the E3 conference. I thought Killzone 2 was amazing till i found it was pre-recorded.

Indeed, i played Halo but it was as generic as the rest of them and nothing like what the hype said it would be (the flood especially got on my nerves), Halo2 more of the same with crappy graphics/framerate.

585970767[/snapback]

No first person shooter has ever been revolutionary. Going down to the roots of each of them, they're all get a gun and fire it at your enemy. What set Halo apart was the deep storyline and the extremely fun multiplayer (which rivals UT, a game that was specifically made for multiplayer and provides an extremely weak single player).

No first person shooter has ever been revolutionary. Going down to the roots of each of them, they're all get a gun and fire it at your enemy. What set Halo apart was the deep storyline and the extremely fun multiplayer (which rivals UT, a game that was specifically made for multiplayer and provides an extremely weak single player).

585970799[/snapback]

FPS should not be on consoles... they belong on PCs and should stay there.

No first person shooter has ever been revolutionary. Going down to the roots of each of them, they're all get a gun and fire it at your enemy. What set Halo apart was the deep storyline and the extremely fun multiplayer (which rivals UT, a game that was specifically made for multiplayer and provides an extremely weak single player).

585970799[/snapback]

There is no way in hell Halo 2 rivals UT2k4.

Also who cares if the PS3 GPU is not done yet, they still have a year to finish it. God forbid they try to generate intrest in their system by showing concept videos/renders of future games. So what if they are stretching the truth or lying about their specs its not like MS or a company tied to Xbox hasn't done it before.

Edited by jmole
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.