From what I've seen the PS3 looks like a technically superior machine to the X360. The seven core cell processor is truly a revolutionary piece of hardware, making it a true multitasking machine. The PS3 will be able to handle a LOT of stuff going on at once.
Additionally, according to Microsoft, the X360 has about a teraflop of overall performance. According to Sony the PS3 has over two teraflops of overall performance. I don't know how much of that is statistics bending though.
My apologies Chicken. I misinterpreted your post. Now, back to the topic at hand...
The processor in the PS3 may be more powerful than the XBox360's, but with 7 cores and less than stellar development support from Sony, it's going to take the average developer a long time to tap into the power of the system. Sure, you'll see MGS4, DMC4, FF, GT, and Killzone look amazing, but look at how long it took the non-AAA development teams to get used to the PS2. The PS3 is even more complex from a programming standpoint. 360 on the other hand has a much more streamlined design, uses DirectX, and has Microsoft behind it giving rediculous support to developers through XNA.
Then there's the topic of the GPU and Ram. PS3 has a couple of bottlenecks that the 360 isn't hampered by. For one, ATI has opted to go with a unified shader model in the XBox360, which means that the 48 shader units can be used for either pixel-shading or vertex-shading depending on the situation. PS3 on the other hand, is going with the standard model where they split the shaders between pixel and vertex in hardware. While they haven't confirmed a number of shading units yet, the GPU in the PS3 is essentially a souped up 6800 (meaning 24 shader units total are likely -- 12 for pixel and 12 for vertex). Even under the best-case scenario, which sees nVidea upping the number of shader units to match ATI's chip in the XBox, you're looking at 48 units total, with 24 dedicated to pixel-shading and 24 dedicated to vertex-shading. If a game needs heavy pixel shading but no vertex shading, you're looking at 50% of the performance of the X360.
There's also the issue of memory. The PS3 uses 256MB of R system ram @ 3.2ghz and 256MB of GDDR3 video ram @ 700MHz. The XBox 360 uses a unified memory architecture which features 512MB of ram that can be allocated to system memory and video memory as needed (meaning if a game uses less than 256MB of Ram for the world, AI, etc... it has more memory than the PS3 to dedicate to graphics). Now, some would look at the PS3 and say it has significantly faster Ram because half of it runs at 3.2Ghz as opposed to the 700MHz Ram in the X360, but the difference isn't as great as it appears.
R Ram uses a 64-bit bus, as opposed to GDDR3 ram which uses a 256-bit bus. If you calculate the speed of the memory with this in mind and look at in terms of bandwidth instead, the difference is marginal.
There's also the extra 10MB of embedded DRAM at 256GB/sec. bandwidth right on the XBox360's GPU which serves as a rediculously fast frame buffer, allowing hi-definition resolutions with virtually not hit on game performance.
The systems are more equally matched than Sony's numbers and CG "game demos" would lead you to believe. It should also be noted that most XBox360 games at E3 are actually running in real-time with actual code and AI on dev-kits that are running at roughly 1/3 of the systems total power. Of course they aren't going to look as good as CG representations of what Sony speculates its hardware can produce.
[edit] On a side-note, I fucking hate automatic smiles.
Hooray, I just saw pictures of all the new consoles side-by-side. The revolution is the only one that isn't completely ugly--and it's not fucking silver.
I've been doing some more reading, and I think I'll definitely stick with Nintendo. Maybe once there's a way to bypass copy protection I'll grab a PS3. There's no way I'm ever touching the X360 with my bare hands.
-has a killer of a backwards compatibility list (legal, of course)
-they're being honest. think about it, PS3 46 times faster than the PS2? what?! lol
before you judge the revolution, all we have been officially told is that its small, its called the revolution and will be using HD-DVDs and will go online. the revolutionary new feature(s) have yet to be announced. so... relax nintendo-slaters.
its also the prettiest of the bunch.
nice to see them all using PPC processors too, just like the Cube. at least these console makers know where the power is. anybody know what the Xbox 360's (lol, what a name) development kit is? google it and drown in oceans of irony
one last thing; specs mean shit all to me. i dont care what speed the thing runs at, im after innovative new games. not a controller that looks the same as last time with pretty much nothing new except for numbers. cant believe im one of the few clickers who cares for innovation.
I have pretty much lost all interest in modern games and consoles. I doubt i will buying the PS3 and definately not 360. I might consider the revolution but it depends.
I find myself playing on my NES lately more than anything esle (with its 'RIPSPEED' ~1.5 Mhz Processor)so i doubt i will buy any of them to be honest.
Chicken14528: well as for 360 sucking compared to PS3. it does. PS3 actually has tech demos that look good. and what 360 had none, only game trailers that were only a portin better than the last gen. so theyve got the 3 processors but it doesnt seem theryre doin much with em. as for the rev part, yah i missed that stuff. and watch who your calling a sony fanboy. ive got a ps1 and 2 games compared to a gamecube and about 20 games. and i also remember saying if killzone was ingame. getsome glasses and quit being such a bitch.
one of the best ingame things they had was the unreal engine, and guess what? gears of war for the 360 uses the unreal engine, so i fail to see your logic
and pete, its pretty obvious that killzone was just prettied up to make people drool, its not a correct representation, compare the unreal engine, which was actual ingame, to killzone, and youll see what i mean
Jay, you might wanna read that. Revolution will play standard DVDs, not HD-DVDs. As for the revolutionary new features; their last "innovation" was a stylus that left 10% of their market (those of us who are left handed) unable to use the system properly. If they're too innovative with the Revolution, they'll alienate developers and get even less 3rd party support this generation. I love Nintendo's first-party games, but if they intend to survive the next-gen they're going to have to compete. Releasing a system that they've gone on record to say is significantly less powerful than the other 2, but contains revolutionary features that could cost them 3rd party support in the name of innovation (their words, not mine. i'll find a link if you'd like), is just asking for commercial failure. Zelda, Mario, and Metroid can't support them forever, as much as I love them.
I will agree that the Revolution has the sexiest system design of the new systems tho. You're also probably right about the PS3 numbers being inflated, but I don't think it's quite as rediculous as you think.
The jump from XBox to XBox 360 is roughly an increase in power 15-fold, which is a pretty reasonable assessment if you look at processor speed, bandwidth, flops, graphics performance, etc. The PS2 is significantly less powerful than the XBox, and the PS3 (at least on paper) is slightly more powerful than the XBox 360. 46 times is a stretch, yes, but not much of one.
well i dont want to argue about something so insignificant. im probably not going to buy any of them. it was just an opinion which is exactly what the post was asking for. im sorry that you find everyone so annoying and that people make mistakes. but keep it to yourself.
oh right Kirby so making numbers bigger is innovation is it? id rather play something new and interesting that something dull.
and about the DS leaving out the left handed folk; have you go three hands? if your left hand is on the screen and your right hand is on the buttons (instead of the Dpad, yea?), all games i've seen so far for the DS can flip the D-Pad for the Buttons (noticed each side of the DS effectively has 4 buttons). so in Mario you can run by pressing left on the D-pad instead of X. simple? no? it caters for any handedness quite easily.
also that article on the Rev was on the 13th wasn't it? even though they announced that plain DVD's will require an accessory? Nintendo also signed up to the HD-DVD 'treaty' months back. so yea...
Sony supporters shouldnt worry though. they'll probably steal a few ideas off the Rev for its next console. nothing to worry about!
its a teeny tiny GB just a hairline bigger than an iPod mini. the screen isn't as wide as a GBA cart either, but its to use an LCD screen that puts the PSP to shame, and a 10 hour battery life with backlight!
i reckon that was made as a cheap alternative to the GBA SP, and a good idea too. saves me damaging my SP for one!
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
