Why is that? I ve seen it over and over, and more recently with RE5 trial. The XBOX file is always, in my experience, smaller, despite being the same exact demo! may it be that more assets are stored to suit each resolution (I doubt it)? is it "overhead" of sorts? better quality audio? compression? I have to know
PlayStation fanboys say the graphics are better (they do look nice in several instances) so I'd guess that it is something to do with that. MS using some kind of compression is possible, sure.
I have never ever seen a ps3 version of a multiplatform being a better looker than its XBOX counterpart, and I own both (And do comparisons when possible). That said, RE5 is 900+ mb on the Ps3 whereas it fits on a CD on the XBOX, compression seems plausible but I doubt that they would differ to such a degree so it must be something of an overhead or libraries even?
I dont know exactly why that might be but I know the 360 SDK has alot of compression utilities that the 360 can use to un archive very fast and it makes the loading times alot shorter.
Yeah, I know! That's why i said fanboys, too ;-) hehe. How much size difference are we talking on the demos? Could be Microsoft megabytes. Just like Microsoft minutes, they are a law unto themselves! They seem to like rounding to the nearest whole number, i.e. 1024 goes down to 1000.
I'm pretty sure that this has been standard practice for years. It's not a Microsoft thing. It's an inaccurate representation of actual memory created by bad math and marketing genius.
The biggest advantage 360 has is it's 512mb of regular ram. So more textures can be loaded into memory compared to ps3s 256mb ram. I'd imagine if it had as much ram as 360, ps3 could probably give 360 a run for it's money with its more powerful processor.
If I hadn't already burnt the RE5 demo to a regular CD I d consider that possibility, but it fit in below 700MB! whereas the PS3 version is around 960 MB(I think). It must be their compression tools I suppose.. I wish someone with actual development experience would post his view though to clarify
The PS3 has 512MB too, it´s just divided into 256MB for graphics and 256MB for system usage. Whereas the Xbox has 512mb unified memory and programmers can use it as they see fit. I´m sure that you can use some of the 256mb system mem from the ps3 to store graphical data (or preload textures p.ex.), but I don´t know how easy that is. But then again, back in the Gamecube times, Factor5 stored program data in the dedicated (and slow) sound effect memory...
whoah there! what you just said sounded like some rip-off from a cheap gaming website. The "slow" memory is not audio memory. It CAN be used for audio memory however but it's called AUXILIARY MEMORY and was placed there to simulate cartridge benefits by giving the coder the ability to preload any assets or code in order to speed up the relevant processes involved. Animal Crossing for example, on the GC, is loaded entirely into aux-mem on startup and you can keep on playing the entire thing even with the disc removed. It's 16MB DRAM (81Mhz) and can only be considered "slow" if compared to the uber-fast on-die 1T-SRAM amounting to 3MB(1MB texture buffer 10.4GB peak bandwidth, 2MB frame buffer, 7.6GB peak bandwidth. Courtesy of MoSys). There's also additional 24MB of System memory, also 1T-SRAM, clocked at ~324Mhz. If you look only at the Mhz rating, the N64's 500Mhz RDRAM seems faster, but there are other considerations as well to evaluate before passing judgment. i.e N64's memory has a 9bit bus whereas 1T-SRAM has a 64Bit bus resulting in a theoretical bandwidth of 562.5 MB/s and 2.7GB respectively.
I dare say that the PS3 version of RE5 is smoother. I don't think it has anything to do with my TV set (an EDTV CRT) where my PS3 is hooked up, but there's no screen tearing or "blue line on top" unlike the 360 version. Does anyone else agree on these points?
I played both demos on 360 and PS3 and they look the same, feels weird though to play an RE on a Microsoft machine... I'll check on your comments Barcode didn't notice anything so far, the only difference is that my PS3 crashed just before the Chainsaw guy on level 2 of the demo... not a good sign... I have no idea why the demo is bigger on the PS3... Would need to ask Capcom about that...
Im running RE5 on the 360 ( and as of about 2 weeks ago, with a vga cable instead of component), and I have not noticed any of the screen tearing you or others have spoken of Barc0de. Maybe im just lucky:shrug:. I havent seen it running on the PoS3 ( HA!!!! anyone who was offended by that needs to realize it was just a joke), so i really cant make any comparisons there. To be fair, most multi-console games ive seen on both have looked exactly the same, however there have been a couple of games where ive noticed the 360 has better texture detail, but on the flip side ive seen a couple of ps3 games that had better lighting than their 360 counterparts ( and for that matter, ive seen ps3 games with worse lighting). All i know is either way both systems sure put out some purdy graphics, lol.
It might be the level of audio compression that causes the difference in the size between the two consoles, but that's just my guess.
which version I d buy..hmm.. RE5 on the PS3 would offer me FREE co-op but the 360 has the better controller.. that said, aiming is a breeze on the ps3 (didn't expect that) and I think slightly more accurate than the 360.
Both versions are almost identical. It's up to your choice. (Thee mou den to pisteyw oti milaw se ellhna sta agglika...)
