Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Some quick graphical info.
  • Subject: Some quick graphical info.
Subject: Some quick graphical info.
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Oh yes I did!

There is a lot of questioning about Halo Reaches graphics going around and I wanted to clear something up concerning PS3 vs. Xbox360 graphics (since so many comparisons are being made between Reach and Killzone 2)

Correct me if im wrong but the Xbox360 can in fact handle Killzone caliber graphics.

Xbox 360 - 500 Million Triangles/sec
PS3 - 250 Million Triangles/sec

Shading: (at full power)

Xbox 360 - 6.0 Billion Vertices/sec

PS3 - 1.0 Billion Vertices/sec

Pixel Shaders (full power)

Xbox 360 - 24.0 Billion Pixels/sec

PS3 - 16.0 Billion Pixels/sec

Equal shading without textures.

For the most part, the Xbox360's drawback isn't generating great looking games but rather the memory it takes to process such power. The Xbox360 does have a compressing ability which I don't understand.

To sum it up, I think Halo Reach has real potential to become one of the greatest looking games this generation. I think we need to remember that its not graphics that matter, but the gameplay.

Oh and R.I.P. Pikmin. <3


  • 08.09.2009 9:21 PM PDT

I wish I was still legendary.

Where did you get your statistics from?

  • 08.09.2009 9:30 PM PDT

How to spell "space"?

S-P-ACE! SPACE!

Yeah, Reach has the potential to look amazing, but I think it will just look slightly different than Halo 3. Yes, it's too bad there was never a Pikmin 3 :(

  • 08.09.2009 9:32 PM PDT

Every game has the potential to become one of the greatest looking games :l

  • 08.09.2009 9:32 PM PDT

"Once Bungie takes over the world, The Marty Army will take over Bungie and then we'll really have some fun."
-Marty O'Donnell

"Condemnant quod non intellegunt."

Make Bungie.net More Enjoyable: Read & Follow

You can't just say, 'Oh, shading takes this long'. You can't. If I'm applying a simple bump map, then, yeah, it'll be really fast, but if the shader is raycasting for near photorealistic rendering, it'll probably render at about 0.5-2 frames per second. I'm sorry, but you either need to articulate the exactly specification of what you call a 'shader', or get better facts.

  • 08.09.2009 9:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Oh yes I did!

Posted by: llamalizard
Where did you get your statistics from?


Knowledge from years of fighting with people about specs. I didn't get my info from this but it looks like this guy has it right (I googled words from which I posted)


http://forum.teamxbox.com/showpost.php?p=9235572&postcoun t=11

The stats are consistent with most sources.

You can probably check them with Wiki (although not always a reliable source)

  • 08.09.2009 9:36 PM PDT

Actually though most of those are probably right (im not about to check every one) the difference is in the brand. The 360 uses an ATI GPU while the PS3 uses an Nvidia GPU. Anyone who has done any research into GPUs for PCs knows that ATI will always have higher numbers, at least in shaders, and with things like GDDR5 RAM, etc. Yet the architecture of the cards makes them perform about the same (actually, recently ATI has started to edge out Nvidia, but Nvidia was at the top for a looooong time.) Specs don't help much when comparing different companies unless you truly know the differences in the way these things work/perform, so to help me explain more imma just post a link this will explain it better than I ever could.

[Edited on 08.09.2009 11:01 PM PDT]

  • 08.09.2009 11:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Oh yes I did!

In the end they are actually very similar though

  • 08.10.2009 11:46 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Gamertag: The U2 RoKKeR
Week 14 Asthetic Artist Interview
Founder of Mythic Photographers
Proud Aberrant Archetype of Aberrant Designs

~RoKKeR~

I really want Bungie to take a "reach" (pun not intended) with the graphics in this game. They really need to put forth the effort to make this game look really good.

Also, it doesn't have to look like Halo, because it isn't. Yes, it says "Halo" in the title, but that doesn't mean that it has to be exactly like Halo 3.

I am hoping they branch out while making this, and I hope they do it well...

  • 08.10.2009 11:57 AM PDT

Posted by: xo u2 rokker
I really want Bungie to take a "reach" (pun not intended) with the graphics in this game. They really need to put forth the effort to make this game look really good.

Also, it doesn't have to look like Halo, because it isn't. Yes, it says "Halo" in the title, but that doesn't mean that it has to be exactly like Halo 3.

I am hoping they branch out while making this, and I hope they do it well...


I agree.

I won't lie, Halo 3 looked great, but I felt a little cheated once I started it up; all the screenshots I'd been shown displayed beatifully crisp graphics that looked nothing like the jaggy sight on my HDTV. I'd certainly take gameplay over graphics any day, but I wouldn't mind if Halo: Reach just blew everything else this generation out of the water.

  • 08.10.2009 12:07 PM PDT