Originally posted by DR34MER:

---

Zippy:-

"so you are saying MS has done nothing wrong and the 360 is a next gen system....."

No I'm not saying MS did nothing wrong, but almost all technology consumer products are released in unfinished state, as jverhey already pointed out. For example look at how many PSX's and PS2's were continually revised and re-released.

---

The 360 launch/hardware makes the PS2 DRE's look great,add to it buggy launch titles like Quake 4...even today ts still walking off the damage the crappy launch did to it.

Quote:

---

To the second part I can only ask you, even when compared to the toughest of PC's, how many of those had DirectX Next (DX10) GPUs and 6 way Multi-core CPUs when the XBOX 360 was released. Even now the best nextgen PC gamers can hope for is 4 Way Quad Core, which isn't supported by any decent game engine yet. Admittedly the 360 lacks a High Density DVD storage/playback feature out of the box, but then so do PC's, and if Sony has backed the wrong standard, which only time will tell, then Blu-ray could be a lemon too and hardly something (for Sony fanboys such as yourself) to crow about.

---

My main problem for the 360 is
1.bad hardware (being revised in feb so thats nto a big issues anymore)
2.future(MS can only make it so far on the games its buys off and steals from the PC like Halo) also loading times and other issues whitch will only get worse as games get bigger.

3.Games the 360 will still have the same issue of game deveristy the Xbox had.

4.Price 300+ still a bit to much as the system is right now.

Quote:

---

"Not seen the HD DVD add on have you? its as screw up as sonys BR player so please theres little diffrance in MS and sony"

There's a world of difference between them, MS are still relatively new to the console market yet XBOX Live beats anything Sony has put online to date. Furthermore, with all the experience and return customers they have gained, Sony should have priced the PS3 more fairly, but it seems that they would prefer that their customers get screwed right now and in the mid and longer terms - as all of their strategies look as if they are geared to get the most of customers now (expensive PS3 pricing, forcing ppl to upgrade to 720P/1080P HDMI capable TVs) and in the future (pay as you go content, billable online service, Sony will release Blu-ray Hollywood/TV DVD content via FOX and themselves).

---

Ignored my statment did we MR MS fanboy? :P
Not seen the HD DVD add on have you?,its as fickle and quirky as sonys so as of yet theres little diffrence in them in HD/BR palyback them both have issues,all can be fixed via frimware and such but still...it should be better at the rices they have set (500-600 PS3,500-550 for the 360 with HDVD add on)

Granted Live was good however Sonys new setup hasnot been fully tested thus it can not be fully judged till feb or march.

BOTH SOny and MS want you to buy more content in order to finish a game,Sony on the other hand is so fcking arrogant that they think people will eat up their system and sadly the gaming horde will ;_;

Both MS and Sony are lost on how to give the people a coherent and working system,to me MS is more so because of the limited HD,questionable future plans next gen gaming.

Quote:

---

At least MS have been upfront with how they charge and what they will charge for in the future, also they don't want to charge like wounded bulls - or Mad Cows in this case. :P

"the 360 is hopg pog of stuff small without HD DVD gaming or HD cacheing for load times nd to improve textures the 360 will show its age in 2-3 years"

Hodge Podge (please stop murdering it) of small stuff? The console is small, granted, but the 'stuff' is BIG NEWS and CUTTING EDGE tech. I gather you know very little about GPU and CPU technology, so I'll just say that in 2-3 year time it will show it's potential well (it took the PS2 and original XBOX just as long to show theirs). HD Caching for load times DOES EXIST in XBOX 360, it caches game content all the time, but I fail to see how it's use could 'improve textures' with 512MB of GPU RAM available at any given time. Not sure where you've been but 'textures' have been replaced with 'shaders' in modern games and both the 360 and PS3's GPUs have more than enough RAM to cope with HEAPS of DETAIL - even moreso than the latest ATI X1950 or NV 8800 PC VGA cards.

---

If they have fully implemented HD caching then they should just stop now and move on to HD DVD gaming because its not helping the load times,maybe with the new HD they an do soemthign better but thats more money into the thing.
Compression of textures and stuff is a major problem on newer games look at Oblivion on the 360 and the PC and no not on a new super gaming PC either...

Mind you I am judgeing the 360 on its "current" games I know ti has at least 1/2 more power hidieng in it,Gear of war is one of the frist few to use the most of the 360s power,from there it might have alittle more,so in 2-3 more years it will be maxed out,the PS3 is a bit diffrent it can do "todays"(GrearsOW) 360 games out of the box and will only get better the PS3 simply has more power,not only dose it have more power but all the devs will be clinging to it like the PS2 that means the 360 is even more out of luck,BUT unlike the xbox days the 360 seems to have more devs and more types of games,if they can do something about the load times and such I will see even less diffracne in the 360 and PS3.

I am not focusing on games much just yet,both systems are new and dont have enough of games to fully judge them,currently I am judging the systems by power and potential the PS3 has the power and will have the games but Sony's arrogance has almost made me quite gaming the 360 is a hodge podge but its picked itself off the floor and is limping along well I am still not happy with it but meh I am like that,the WII seems to be the most balanced of the lot giving up alittle power to stay lite,cheaper and more innovative

Quote:

---

Oh Zippy and in terms of your scale of release earlier, I'd place the Dreamcast well above the N64 in terms of innovation, quality of gfx and games. Also, how harsh are you? Don't you ENJOY your gaming that much? You seem more preoccupied with concepts of VALUE and HIGH TECH rather than the games and the GAMEPLAY. You sure the Wii will really be right for you?

....

---

the DC was one hell of a system its a shame sega went to hell after begin forced to drop the DC,the N64 did a few things better hardware and the analog stick but was crushed by not moving to CD/DVD.
the DC came after it and after dual shock was in use so it borrowed some of its ideas,hell if anything the DC is soemthign like what nintendo would have made if they didnt stick to the damn carts *L*

As for enjoying games..I dunno over the past 5 or 6 years I see devs getting more and more lacks on creativity and design going for physics over level design and graphics over gameplay I dont know i things will improve any in this 7th generation of gaming...

So tell me oh great one what my basis is?
It seems thats one of your focuses.
-------------------
Andrew691
Sony easily could have made the PS3 HDMI port a add on and then charge 190 for it while cutting the pork off the PS3 to make it lean and mean...its fat and not very limber.
The PS3 would have been perfect if they cut it up into parts
Core with 20GB,usb,BT,Ethernet,1 wired pad for 299
Core with 60GB,usb,BT,Ethernet,1 wireless pad for 399
Card reader 50
wi fi 50
HDMI 190 (with cable even)

Sony could have done alot but like MS got lost and came out with half arsed systems...*sigh*

---

Zippy:-

1. Halo comes from the Macintosh, NOT the PC. Bungie were a Mac software company who diversified to PC yes, but Halo was launched at Macworld.

2. Your issue of 'bad hardware' with the 360, will be levelled at the PS3 and was certainly true for the PS2 (who's ignoring who's posts Sony fanboy?) in terms of the laser, the drives and overheating, so please have some PERSPECTIVE.

3. As for MS only being able to 'make it so far' (from the games it LICENSES, the same argument could be levelled at Sony. It's called EXCLUSIVITY and until recently SQUARE and ROCKSTAR were two such software houses who did games ONLY for Sony hardware first, everyone else later. Even their most exclusive partner Hideo Kojima (KONAMI, creator of Metal Gear games) is jumping ship showing lots of interest in N's Wii in the press. I wonder how far Sony will make it having only a spare few exclusives to launch from.

4. Who gives a rat's patout about QUAKE IV. It's long forgotten, people move on.

5. Texture Compression needing a larger hard drive??? What the hell are you talking about? Oblivion looks great for a PC port, especially in 720p, much better than the same on PC, especially in terms of the character faces. It also animates better on 360. Once again, we're talking SHADERS (which has nothing to do with the animation per se) and not TEXTURES. Texture Compression is OLD TECHNOLOGY these days and barely raises an eyebrow in developer circles since GPUs have been doing it in hardware for around 5 years. The issues that Oblivion has on the PC are more to do with it's MEMORY BANDWIDTH and the many CUSTOM TEXTURE SETS that people use willy nilly - not realising how they impact performance (by eating GPU bandwidth). The 360 doesn't suffer from either (It has 10MB of VRAM DEDICATED to ANISO16x/AF4X and heaps of VRAM speed/bandwidth FAR surpassing even the beefiest of PCs).

6. HD-DVD addon comments weren't ignored they were put aside because you're pulling something INTO an argument that hasn't even been released yet. It's obvious that you're doing so to protect your views on Sony and to equalise MS and Sony - making them both bad when this article clearly talks about a failure on Sony's part. Lame is the only word that comes to mind.

7. Disappointed with gameplay innovation? Do something about it. Don't pitch a fit that developers aren't being imaginative enough for your mind. Industries go through growth spurts in certain areas and plateau in others - the games industry is one such industry and there are only a finite number of minds and hours available.

Personally I just think you're enjoying having something to moan about. LOL

DR34MER

1.Halo was sloted for PC before MS came along and gobbled it up for the Xbox.


2.the PS2 did have alot of issues so dose the 360 that has not changed,not at least till the new hardware rolls out.but still they could ahve done better to deal wit such thigns insted of release it willy nilly like sony did with the PS2.
the PS3 needs at least 4 months of wet fanboy love before they start whineing about it breaking..like they did with the 360 and the PS2.

3.I see the 360 hitting its limit before the PS3 dose this is a issues but in all the power diffrance between the 360 and PS3 are like the PS2 and Xbox its enough to bitch about *L*


4.I cant move on I got Q4 for PC 50$ for oen of the most under par FPS's I have ever played,and becuse it was so under whelming I gave up on paying games new...altho BIoshock makes me rethink that *L*


5.MMmm mabye I am running on old info....in order to store and cache more games on the 360 a larger HD is needed and if you have acouple movies on it....the 360 as it is not is short on space....Mmmmmmmm
the new revision comes out in feb right?


6.IGN has a review of it several Xbox.coms has reviews of it are sayign that they would lie and say its better than it is?or diss it in some way?
Beside in 4 years the 360 wont be able to play most HDCP movies or play the at a limited resalution becuse it lacks HDMI,of coarse the PS3 seems to be having some issues in that aera right now to *L*

7.Are you saying its hard to question most devs and manufacturers?

I find it hard not to Sony and MS are meandering off into the same lack luster media center direction and the WII is the only one to show alittle gaming beef....the WII has beef but its lite beef *L*

Quote:

---

6. HD-DVD addon comments weren't ignored they were put aside because you're pulling something INTO an argument that hasn't even been released yet.

---

Actually it has been released.

Im normally a hardcore gamer but recently i havent been into it as much, and am thinking of nearly skipping the whole of this gen out completely or maybe getting one in a few years. Dont have enough money to keep up with my habit.

Quote:

---

3. As for MS only being able to 'make it so far' (from the games it LICENSES, the same argument could be levelled at Sony. It's called EXCLUSIVITY and until recently SQUARE and ROCKSTAR were two such software houses who did games ONLY for Sony hardware first, everyone else later. Even their most exclusive partner Hideo Kojima (KONAMI, creator of Metal Gear games) is jumping ship showing lots of interest in N's Wii in the press. I wonder how far Sony will make it having only a spare few exclusives to launch from.

---

It costs a LOT of money to keep a game exclusive, even then the devs could probably get more money from releasing it on both systems. So Sony would be forking out even more money just to keep exclusives, once the dev's saw the abilities of the 360 it changed their minds.

Very few games these days have anything new, with the exception of the WII with its controller nothing has really changed in games but graphics.

The fact that only with the last few versions of PS2 have they bothered to fix the laser issues really pisses me off, they've revised the system 10 times before it got slim then another 6 as slim aonly the last 3 versions have been any good.

---

...and Halo made it to PC, eventually. so what's the beef? I mean the same can be said about GTA III which took almost as long to reach PC.

How much time have you actually spent with a 360? I had one to play with since the launch for about a month or so. It overheated a total of 0 times, lost transfers twice while over the internet and never gave me any other issues. I hammered the poor thing, I really did.

Seriously, be sure you're not just relaying fearful stories that others are just relaying. I'm not saying that they don't have issues, I just don't see them as being as epidemic or worrying as you're making out. The 360 is going through a revision, yes, but I'd say that more likely a cost saving exercise more than a total overhaul to fix bugs. Most probably MS has found ways to fab the console more cheaply with less parts (most likely the cooler is being shrunk down and some chips being replaced for cheaper variants) - this is what Sony AND MS do with their hardware all the time. Sega and Nintendo have been known to do so too.

Andrew : My bad, been catching up on real life recently (father diagnosed with an illness, GF leaving the country) so I missed it's release date/reviews.

HD Video seems a bit of a lame duck at the mo anyway imho with 5 + competing standards - Blu-ray, HD-DVD, WMV HD and DivX6/Xvid and x264/AVC/VC-1. I think I'll just skip the pay for ones and use compressed video for now. I know you lose detail, but not DINERO! :P

heh

DR34MER
after how many years of milking it for the Xbox? only now Halo 2 is going to be on PC but for vister only heil MS hiel! ><

whoa whoa whoa...the revision for the 360 is a PLUS it means less than a 50/50 chance to get a bum 360 when you buy one I have had 6 friends replace there system and heard alot of horror story's of it,to me that was a big issue spending 400$ on a system only to have to send it in for repair or some crap.
with the new revision thats fixed one down 2 or 3 to go to make it prefect :P (games and price are the next 2 big issues)

I am tired of corporate dcking around MS and SOny are pros at it nintendo is sly enough not to get cought alot *L*
I am harshest on the 360 its been out the longest and has not improved much in 4 or 5 months I think it will get as good as its going to get for the system probably enough for me to buy it,Sony is evil and the PS3 to costly...so I think I will sit back and toss poo at it for awhile *L* that or ignore it till next November *L*

I have kept up with the HD/BR news it seems HD dvd and its players are just alittle bit better than the BR but not worth jumping on one format or the other 0-o
the only thign BR has is size and they are not useing it to help beat compression I wonder if they re still having DL issues 0-o

Good luck in life friend,both my parents passed away last year one of liver canser in march and the other of lung desaige we were all living together getting by in life, I been kinda out of it since ><
I was already out of it before then 0-o


Andrew691
at my last count its 11 PS2 revisions,5 PS2 slim revisions and counting 0-o

Andrew691
it suxs not to ahve the moeny.
I wil get each system it might take a year to get each tho ><

right now I am happy with playing demos and checking out what friends of my friend has :P

Gears of War PC looks ok I might tag that but I do know this..I MUST GET BIOSHOCK PC there is no questioning the voices in my head over it its a must get 0-o

Let's BIOSHOCK actually gets released, after what happened to RatBagGames there's no guarantee anymore. :(

Yeah already lost one to the C too n Dad's got emphysema. :(

Life's a bitch then people start leaving....

heres a link for Sony losing $200 per console http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/ps3-a-bargain-worth-840-powerful-as-a-supercomputer-215203.php

For one thing that pricing looks over-inflated and barely reflects volume discounts and for another what kind of company tells their consumers what something cost them to produce? No company does that and thus it's purely a marketing gimmick.

Andrew691
then let me put XP o it and make use of the dman thing :P

Zippy as of last check Gears ISNT coming to PC.

Also someone mentioned the 360 doesnt have HD-Gaming.. where the hell are you getting your source. 360 outputs up to 1080p. (some TV's only accept 1080p over HDMI or DVI but lots including mine accept it over the component) and I must say it looks GOOD

The lack of HDMI on the 360 is a bit of an issue. But the A/V port on the 360 doesnt output an analog signal and an HDMI cable/adapter can be added when there is a need. This is one thing I find better of the 360 over my PS3. It doesnt FORCE HD and CHARGE you for HD tech that a user (majority of users) with SDTV's aren't going to use. The 360 allows you to make the choice to add that later if you get a HDTV.

The current lack of need for either a HDDVD or BRDisc make both points moot ATM. Thing is people tend to say if you want to get an HD-DVD then the 360 is almost the same price.. Again.. $200 off because they arent forcing you to adopt a tech you cannot use isnt horrible at all. Lburna saying the 360 isnt a nextgen console without the HD-DVD is just buying into Sony's propaganda.. The 360 outputs in HighDef, currently my 360 games look better then my PS3 games.. COD3 in particular has large diffrences, with RR much better looking on the 360. Granted the 360 had a year more for devers to get used to it.. but did the Xbox 1 when released (a year later then PS2) not have better looking graphics then the PS2 did after a year.. sure did.

Also while Halo started out live on Mac as an RTS/FPS hybrid, then moved to PC, Bungie ran out of money for it and MS stepped in and said well here.. If not for MS STEALING it (LOL) it may never have seen the light of day.

The matter of this thread is Sony not allowing users of certain TV's the upscaling ability. Not what Wii has or 320 has.

Most of the comments that people are leaving are fanboy tripe. I buy into all consoles, cause I am a GAMER, but again like last gen SONY has underdelivered. Microsoft has delivered (so far) what they said, and Ninty, well ninty is still fun to play :D WEEEEE

LOL

320... should read 360... but then you already knew that :P

Phoenix09

Yes GROW is coming to PC,its not been confrimed yet but it should if it dosent so be it but its not been denied yet.

I believe they meant HD DVD gaming not High def gaming
the more I read abotu it 1-4 discs for a game is not new,HD cacheing can get better the 360 still has power left in it unused plus the 360 is better preiced than the PS3 but not enough to make it worth while for me....

if the 360 was launched a year later with more solid titles(coding as wel) and better launch hardware and full BWC it would have been worth 500 at launch as it is now its a still a hodge podge,the revision is a plus more games is a plus the price still needs to drop hell drop the core altogether and make the premi 250-300,get down and dirty and fight the Wii on price and massicure the PS3 price wise *L*

lol

Hell I agree with that.. MS is actually making money now on the 360 due to their ability to use 5 firms to make the chips and having standerd hardware... They can actually afford to drop the price $112 and break even on it.. and then ya it will push hard.

But MS isnt ready to push out Sony. Not this go around.. there is things to be said about competition.

Also, while I enjoy the Wii, I will never call it or compare it to a next gen console. It isn't and its not inovative at all, I have my MS Motion Sensing controller from the mid 90's. Its fun, but its not next gen at all. It is to the point now where the PS3 and 360 are in their own 2 man race... Wii is just going down its own path, and having fun doing it.. kinda like the simple brother of the two smart twins. They are always fighting one another and he is catching butterflies with a remote control :P LOL

Sorry I am not meaning to dis the Wii.. I like it :P It 's just not nextgen.

Phoenix09
neither is the 360 it's current gen(PC wise) in every sicne of it,the PS3 is not current gen.

the WII is a 1.5 system in power and so is the 360 well the more I look at its more a 1.7 system, *L* the PS3 a 2.5 system but between the price and sony I hate it 0-o,altho there are no worthy games so I can snub it even more :P


In the end the WII gets a o.5 point bonus because it makes full use of motion sensing if you cant understand that then you have no sense of things,the WII is leaps and bounds beyond any motion sensing gimmick thats been used over the years,the PS3 now theres a "gimmick" its updated tilt and play from the gameboy 0-o

I'll give MS props for seeing that 2 shoulder pads to each side is the way to make a pad (I hate where the Xbox black and white buttons are) but its more of the same no innovation in control just more of the same the same can be said for the PS3 the WII wins alone because of the complete new control scheme ,the PS3 will win for power and games leavening the 360 to lord over its fan base and thos that get it for its Exclusive titles.

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

cashman91
No one knows just yet so stop posting.......
or better yet make a thread make a thread in the PS3 forum and see if you can get a HDTV compatibility thread sticked....

---

any answers yet

I dont understand how you can think the PS3 is a 2.5 or anything more then it is... the PS2 when announced was said that its 'EMOTION' processor could run the same as a P3 733Mhz and output Toystory quality gfx. Same with the PS3.. they stated possible top proformance.. but their propriety tech couldnt do it. Same with the PS3.. their unproven propriety tech doesnt have remotely what they said it would have. I got this from another site but it is well worth the read so I will post here as well.

/Quote
There has been a long (and quite ridiculous) debate going on throughout this past year concerning the power of the xbox 360 vs. the power of the ps3. Why has this debate been absolutely ridiculous? Because the truly more powerful system has already been confirmed, but not publicly. Much of this may be very hard to understand if you’re not a tech-geek, so don’t say I didn’t warn you.


According to IBM’s white pages, the cell processor being used in the ps3 is considerably less powerful than what it has been hyped up to be.
Sony officially revealed the PS3 and for the first time at E3 2005, and claimed that their Cell processor would be capable of 200 GFLOPS.
One may wonder how they got that figure?  IBM's own white pages:
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerwork...ca=drs-#table4
As seen from the link (in Figure 5) the Cell has a theoretical peak of 201 GFLOP’s– running 8 SPE’s at 25.12 GFLOP’s apiece (Table 2). This is where Sony gets their 200 GFLOP figure from.

When physically tested however, only 155.5 GFLOP’s were actually achieved (see Table 4) with a total efficiency rate of 75.9%.
Because of manufacturing yield issues, the PS3 will only use 7 SPE’s with the theoretical peak for the PS3’s Cell processor being reduced to 176 GFLOP’s, each running at 25.12 GFLOP’s. Utilizing the same 75.9% efficiency, it is easily interpolated that the PS3’s Cell CPU will only be capable of 133.6 GFLOP’s.

The Xbox 360 has 3 general-purpose 2-threaded CPU's, which generates a proven 115.2 GFLOP’s which is dramatically easier for developers to utilize. By now it should be pathetically obvious that sony is no where near as far ahead as they try to lead you to think (keep in mind they claimed that the ps2 was more powerful than the original xbox, but were proven wrong publicly, since the xbox was indeed twice as powerful). The ps3 will, once you have taken into account thetotal amount of resources that will be used by their respective operating systems, end up with less CPU power available for graphical and physics processing than the 360.


http://ps3.qj.net/Inside-the-PS3-s-O...g/49/aid/21047
According to the (unbiased) site above, the PS3 will also constantly reserve 1 SPE** for running its operating system. Now that there is actually one less SPE reserved for gaming purposes, it is definite that the ps3’s cell will only be capable of 114.4 GFLOP’s for the purpose of game processing.

**SPE’s are floating point processors, they are also called DSP’s, and SPU’s. These floating point processors are NOT to be confused with cores, cores have far more prediction and calculation braches than floating point processors. As stated earlier, the 360 has 3 cores, each running at 3.2GHz, with 2 threads each. The cell also runs at 3.2GHz, but is the one and only core that the ps3 has.

Back to subject:
The 360’s OS on the other hand uses only 3% of its CPU time on Cores 1 and 2, while Core 0 is free altogether, and 6.25% (32mb) of its 512mb RAM, this means that the 360 has more processing power available for in-game graphics and physics. Meanwhile, the ps3’s OS…
“In the case of the PS3 this equates to 12.5% of the available Cores on the CPU always reserved, an additional 12.5% sometimes taken by the OS, 12.5% of the available RSX memory and 25% of XDR Cell memory. Balancing these out, one could argue that Sony has removed up to 25% of the available CPU power and 18.75% of RAM for these features as well as others that are not mentioned here or will be added in future updates to the PS3 Operation System.”
Wow, 18.75% (96mb) of the ps3’s 512mb of total RAM, vs. 6.25% (32mb) of the 360’s 512mb RAM, say, that means the ps3 has 416mb RAM left vs. the 360’s leftover 490mb RAM for graphics…
I could be wrong, but isn’t 490mb greater than 416mb???

Sources:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060413-6600.html
http://ps3.qj.net/Inside-the-PS3-s-O...g/49/aid/21047.

Now, the GPU (Graphics Processing unit). The 360’s Xenos GPU is also slightly more powerful for running current graphics engines and, in terms of complying with Windows Graphic Foundation 2.0 (compatible with future versions of Direct X, shader models, etc.) is a full-generation ahead of the RSX. "One of the key ideas behind a unified architecture is to move the GPU from a rendering only processor to a complete compute processor. Right now all the GPU does is render 3D and displays it on your screen (yes it does more like 2D, video etc... but for the point of this article we are talking about 3D). With a unified architecture the GPU becomes more. It becomes a processor that can do almost anything that needs code processed. This means the GPU can take on more functions like physics, AI, animation and many other processes that can benefit the gaming experience. DirectX 10 and a unified GPU architecture helps a video card become an all-in-one Swiss army knife of game processing. Those are the ideas at least, how it all works out is up to the game content developers"
(http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...0aHVzaWFzdA==). According to this article, the unified memory of the 360 and the unified shaders, developers have the ability to use the vector processing power of the GPU, which is a big plus as it allows the developer to use the shaders when they need extra processing power.

Sony could be in a lot of trouble considering the ps3 is much more expensive than its superior rival that is using long proven technology, while the ps3 is using technology that still has yet to be proven, and has been giving sony one problem after another, causing the launch delays.

The 360’s Xenos GPU is slightly more powerful for running current graphics engines and, in terms of complying with Windows Graphic Foundation 2.0 (compatible with future versions of Direct X, shader models, etc.) is a full-generation ahead of the RSX. "One of the key ideas behind a unified architecture is to move the GPU from a rendering only processor to a complete compute processor. Right now all the GPU does is render 3D and displays it on your screen (yes it does more like 2D, video etc... but for the point of this article we are talking about 3D). With a unified architecture the GPU becomes more. It becomes a processor that can do almost anything that needs code processed. This means the GPU can take on more functions like physics, AI, animation and many other processes that can benefit the gaming experience. DirectX 10 and a unified GPU architecture helps a video card become an all-in-one Swiss army knife of game processing. Those are the ideas at least, how it all works out is up to the game content developers"

"However, using Sony's claim <***>, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock.

*** Using sony's own claim against it. If sony really didnt make this claim, they most certainly would have taken legal action against MS, that is only fact.

It is important to note that if the RSX ALUs are similar to the GeForce 6800 ALUs then they work on vector4s, while the Xbox 360 GPU ALUs work on vector5s. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS."


ps3 GPU stands at 228.8 GFLOPS
360 GPU stands at 240.0 GFLOPS

I could be wrong, but isn't 240.0 GFLOPS higher than 228.8 GFLOPS???
/END QUOTE

Not to mention other sites are putting the PS3 up agains a 1.6Ghz PowerMac and reciving startling results..

http://www.geekpatrol.ca/2006/11/playstation-3-performance/

Technically that should be far more powerful, the fact is the SPE's arent cores but FPU's (floating point units. The only thing that the PS3 has over 360 is BluRay and that in itself is almost moot at this time because of the LACK of people with HDTV. Aside from that its nothing great.. That said the Cell runs on a base IBM G5 chip tricked out to Sony's thoughts.. the 360 also runs on it tricked out to MS thoughts.. The video card in the PS3 (named RSX) in just a Nvidia 6600 with a new name, and the one in the 360 is pretty much a ATI X1600XTX.

While PC's are currently now moving into the 4x4 stage, they werent a year ago, and for that matter PC's have a next gen every few weeks... when talking nextgen consoles PC's arent part of that. As well as that the 360 contains a subset of DX10 as well as the XNA tech. Crysis is coming to 360 (confirmed)and looks just as good as its PC counterpart.

http://games.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1396/Crysis/

As for GoW, MS has officially stated it WILL not be brought to PC.. Even tho Epic made it.. MS owns the property.. tis their choice. But we do know that MS likes to say no then surprise us later.. so this is still in the air.. but as of right now.. they say NO version of GoW for PC.

Phoenix09
Mmmm didn't do their coding homework that means it will take a year just to get games up to snuff...
But I am not looking at power alone,and since there are various coding techniques they can get a 50% boost but again cant judge the PS3 fully for another 6ish months it needs more units sold more games on it and more reviews of games and online.

PS3
1.0 BR(Like it or not)
1.0 hardware
0.5 hardware extras (HDMI)
---------------------------
360
0.8 hardware
0.5 hardware extras (HD DVD add on)
0.4 extras (fast stable onine)
---------------------------
WII
7.5 Controller (like it or not)
7.5 hardware


from everything I have sen the PS3 has more power(at 50% more than 360 at launch,and probably 30% more than 360s max) however I am unsure if it has it out of the box it should for that price but who knows.

Now that the PS3 is out we will know its true power soon enough.
If its not more powerful even more reason sony suxs

---

Zippy, just the RAM bottleneck alone restricts its performance. The hardware in the PS3 ISNT what it was supposed to be. Tech sites have proven that.. find any unbiased (IE not hired by MS or Sony) tech site and check the results.. its been proven. You cannot make hardware faster by coding.. its like saying if they worked harder they could make FarCry work on 400Mhz with a 8MB S3. Its just not possible. Also the seek times on the blue ray make it that much slower as well. If you really want me to put those comparisons up I will. The fact is the PS3 is a weaker unit.. not just coding but it fails with the hardware.. no matter what you do you cannot make 256MB of system RAM become 512.. it just wont happen. BluRay being in it, is nothing special and its has a slower seek time over the disc.

I enjoy Resistance on my PS3.. well, kind of.. Gears in my 360 gets more play time.. and the Wii is there for parties. I gots all three.. I have realworld play with them and have compared games on all three (COD3) The PS3 has closer draw, fuzzier texturing/shading, brownish blacks and well isnt up to what it was supposed to be.

Your ratings also make little sense.. .4 for the best Online service created.. (this said not by me but by PC Tech mags) how about removing points for SOny's broken online system? or giving low points because MS is giving the consumer a choice about HD Media and not forcing it down their throats? and well, MS's hardware is proven to be better and faster.. you can argue that until your blue in the face.. but it wont change. But still you give the PS3 a higher hardware rating.

Truly how much time do you play your PS3, 360 and Wii. Of said units what one have you had the most fun on.. and of said units have you had the best multiplayer online experiance?

Phoenix09
optimized driver/frimware and codeing DOSE improve things and sometimes drastically,look at the dffreance in first gen Xbox/PS2 games and this coding ALONE....

Tech sites can bitch all they want without games to back up their claims I would rather hold off dismissing the PS3 just yet

if anything I have always thought and figured the PS3 is, at best as powerful as the Xbox was compared to the PS2 now from some of the newer shows that they have not mastered the coding which means games cant run at max power on the system.

Ypu cant tell e coding dos not matter look at Q4 on the 360 >>

---

Yes compression techniques and shading techniques get better and allow the machine to produce better looking things.. TRUE. But if one machine has more powerful hardware then the other (360 > PS3), in the same amount of time that the PS3 takes to get better coding techniques the 360 will have had the same time.. the stronger performer (360) will then stay more powerful. 360 devers havent mastered that machine either.. they are both ready to open up and show us more then we have seen. But one can only go so far.. its a fact, the PS3 is limited by not only the RAM but by the lack of power the Cell truly has. But like the PS2 it will get better games, but it will top out before the 360 ever will. Hardware is hardware.

Hell the PS3 couldnt even make its launch games look any better then Xbox 360 launch games.. AFTER A YEAR OF EXTRA DEVELOPMENT!!! Come on, man. Facts speak for themselves.. what you think and feel wont change the truth.. Hell I think all games and movies should be free and I should be able to sleep with 40 women a night.. doesnt mean its true. I am starting to doubt that you even own either a PS3 or 360 and if you dont then you truly have NO basis for comparision of the units or their abilities.. just the same as a person with only one of them cannot truly say. People who dedicate their life to hardware and know the ins and outs have given REAL WORLD comparisons and proven 360 to be the leader in power.. NOW and LATER it will still have more power. What your sitting here telling me is This 3.2 (single core multi SPE) Ghz machine with 256Mhz can do everything your 3.2 (triple core)Ghz machine with 512MB can do and will eventually be better. The memory is the big thing man.. also the fact that the 3.2Ghz Cell operates in the same threshold as a 1.6Ghz Mac.. GAH!!!.

Your prowling of the net and reading Sony propaganda, and that of fanboys and not looking at the cold hard PROVEN facts is seriously clouding your judgement

Quote:

---

his 3.2 (single core multi SPE) Ghz machine with 256Mhz can do everything your 3.2 (triple core)Ghz machine with 512MB can do and will eventually be better.

---

Sorry should read 256MB.. LOL

Silly I R

Phoenix09
Ok,so whats so bad about letting all facts come together and and givieng the PS3 6 months before total write off?

the WII is worth getting NAO and in time will only get better it took the 360 1 year to improve and its still not worth the price.

Does all this mean the PS3 will be worth more than 400 even if it was more powerful than the 360 No dose this make sony a better corperation no I merely want all the facts before I pass judgment on a console.

---

I understand Zippy.

I have read lots of your posts on this site and usally I agree with you and dont even bother posting cause I would only be repeating what you say :P

Thing is, even in 6 months, the PS3 will still have the same power and the 360 will have the same power. Devers will learn new tricks on both to squeeze more out of both.. but the base starting point will always prevail. Like adding octane boost to a car, ya my 79 mustang will run a little better and maybe even keep up with a newer 'stang, but put the same boost into the better car and well, no hope.. What the consolewars will come down to now is what games come out on what system. Hell the 360 can look 1,000x better and lose because of exclusives.

In my opinion the 360 is well worth the money. Hell $399US for an HD system, that has a slew of amazing games on it.. Oblivion, GRAW, Gears of War, Viva Pinata, F.E.A.R, Lego Star Wars II (freaking awesome game if you like Starwars and Legos) COD2, COD3.. hell there are more but those are the ones that pop into my head right now, and others heading to it, Stanglehold, Alan Wake, Crysis, Blue Dragon, Halo 3..... I mean wow. Yes alot are avalible or will be on PS3, but at cheaper price for the console and a better graphical experiance then the PS3, the 360 price speaks for itself. Hell I blew so much money on the PS3 and so far have been massivly dissapointed with it. When I got my 360 aside from a few glitches here and there I didnt feel ripped off. Heck if my PC didnt do alot of things a console didnt do my recent purchase in the spring of my new PC would make me feel ripped.. $1500 on a system that my 360 so far can keep up graphically with.. BAH!

Again, I do like my PS3, its nice.. but it isnt what it was supposed ot be.. thats just the way it is.. I know its hard to accept.. hell one of my buddies still wont accept it even after playing and pretty much agreeing.. he just sits there in the corner now shaking his head and asking Why WHY WHY!!!!!