XGuNn3rX
-
Posts
68 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by XGuNn3rX
-
-
What the hell. Why do you keep saying that the inclusion of a high capacity portable storage device is a bad thing? Are you blind? Do you not see that you getting powerful new technology for far less than what it is worth is a GOOD thing?! In case you were curious, here is the price for a Blu-Ray DVD drive:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16827131034
Yeah, that's right. $700. And that is an OEM drive, and it is sold on Newegg, which means it's actual retail / non-bulk price is quite a bit higher than that. Let's see here... a > $700 drive + $XXX 9-core processor + $100 60 GB notebook HD + $XXX high-speed RAM for $600. Any ignorant businessman could tell you this is a fantastic deal. Games aside, the PS3 is the best. It is the most powerful. It is the fastest. It offers the highest resolution and best picture quality. It has new, nearly-impossible-to-get technology. It costs less for you than it does for them. As far as the system itself goes, PS3 wins.
Which system ends up winning the sales battle, nobody can say. But this isn't about which system has the most marketing muscle behind it. It is about raw power and features. PS3 has them. XBOX 360 doesn't. Nuff said.
There is not a single game on the 360 that is 2 DVD's. Why is Blu-Ray player needed in the PS3? Because it plays movies? Well guess what, Microsoft has an alternative. If I want to watch HD-DVD movies, I can buy the 360 HD-DVD addon for HALF-PRICE (YOU GET A GOOD DEAL!
). If I have no use for HD-DVD's, then I simply don't buy the addon. No money wasted. 
Anyway who cares if you get a good deal? Sony is shoving an unproven format down your throat.
Answer me this (I think I already asked this), if I owned NO HDTV, what purpose would Blu-Ray serve me? Nah, I can answer that - Absolutely nothing.
And are you trying to say that you don't care what Sony puts in the PS3 (even if you have no use for it), as long as you get a good deal?
Oh, and having a more powerful console (one that isn't far from the 360's power) doesn't mean anything.
What Console had all the games last gen? What Console sold the most? And most importantly, what console was the weakest? Simple; the PS2. The 360 is in the same position that the PS2 was in last gen.
And raw power means nothing. And what features (other then Blu-Ray) does the PS3 have over Xbox 360?
-Edit-
Almost forgot.
PS3 (the person), if graphics only matter, where were you last gen with the Xbox (the most powerful system)? How come graphics matter all of a sudden?
-
Sony and Microsoft suck! If it weren't for the PS2 the*Sega Dreamcast would of lived on and Sega probably by now would of developed a new system.
Sega had no money left to support the Dreamcast. They were heading for death anyway. It's not Sony's fault.
man, how many times do i have to tell you?!? i paid AU$900 for the 60GB version. i dont care if you dont believe it. what you dont believe doesnt change the fact that the price of what i paid is what i paid!
nice screenshots. why dont you post a few of C.O.D 2? theres been reports on team.xbox.forums that theres no difference played from the 360 and a computer.
thats in your opinion to think what i posted was stupid. and this is my opinion thinking you are stupid for saying PS3 wont kick butt once its released. and how can you say the PS3 is expensive. i would like to see if you could get a BD player for less price than the PS3. BD players are far more advanced than the HD-DVD players, how can you not understand that?
this discussion/argument is going to get even more interesting when the PS3 is released.
Are you telling me that you got a deal or that EVERY single PS3 is AU$900?
How is CoD2 supposed to look better on 360? It's the same engine and everything, it couldn't look better. The fact that it looks the same as the PC is a good thing.
It doesn't matter what you get in the PS3. It's Sony's stupid fault for having that huge price and putting Blu-Ray in it in the first place.
And yes, this discussion will be good when the PS3 launches (which will probably be next year now since Sony haven't even started manufacturing PS3's and it's supposed to launch in November).
If the PS3 breaks the 360's sales record, I will be impressed. Too bad it's a small chance of happening.
-
No, I can't make accurate percentages from only a few people. But, being that in both of our cases the percentage was higher than the one quoted by MS, you have MORE reason to disbelieve MS's figures than you do to believe them. I for one don't believe them at all, because they are probably deriving their figures by units returned, instead of units that actually fail. None of my friends returned their units; they simply moved them out into the open to keep them cooler, or coped with the periodic crashings. So according to MS, 100% of those units were in perfect working condition. What a joke.
So MS is supposed to read minds now? And do you agree with my previous statement saying that Sony's console will be no better since it has new technologies?
You all can suck my jagon!
That was appropriate, wasn't it?
Sorry I was rude, it seems like that now after I re-read my post.
To display a thumbnail to the full sized image you just use the links that ImageShack give's which state it displays a thumbnail that links to the full sized image.
They weren't my pics, so I never got the links.
-
Due to the fact that hazelnut makes an important point (agree to disagree), and due to the fact that it is late and I am tired, I will try to keep my post concise.
First off, MS saying that they have a 3% defect rate isn't true by either your or my calculations. You said 1 out of 10 of your friends had a defective system. That is still a 10% defect rate in your case, over 3 times MS's calculation. And since 3 out of 4 (75%) of my friends ran into hardware troubles of some form, that means that the combination of your friends and my friends XBOX360 troubles ends up being a 29% defect rate. So in all three examples (including your own), MS has far more defective systems than they admit to. And BTW, I don't particularly appreciate you saying that my figure was "BS". Making obnoxious, uncalled for, and untrue statements does not win an argument. I don't recall ever lying to you, and I don't recall ever doing anything to intentionally offend you, or cause you to make crude statements. Keep your rudeness and bias to yourself.
I'm sorry, but I'm telling you the truth - I simply cannot believe that 3 out of 4 friends got a defect.
And how the hell can you say MS is wrong because of a few people? If none of my friends got a defect would that mean that there are no defects? No. The friend who also got a defect also got a defect PS2 years back. Out of all my friends, he only got a defect PS2. Does that mean that there were only a small percentage of defect PS2's? No, it was alot more. You can't make accurate percentages off of a few people.
Nice pics, but next time you decide to post so damned many can you at least use the option to display a thumbnail versus the full size image? Remember there's people still on dial-up, and those images make the thread load rather slow.
Yeah, sorry. How would I make it so they are thumbnails?
-
no, im paying AU$900 for the graphics and BD player. a console without realistic graphics will not attract people like me. and there are many graphics nut out there, i can assure you. getting the PS3 is cheaper than getting the state of the art computer and its cheaper than any other high class console.
heres some videos of GT Vision. go to the last video. http://youtube.com/results?search_query=GT...p;search=Search
So what you're telling me is you like being fed crap as long as the game has good graphics? Man, I seriously don't know what to say. I cannot believe the stupidity in what you just said.
And I'll say it again; the console is $1,000 for the 60 GB version. Even then, the 30 GB is still very pricey and is still more then the 360.
Maybe it's because I'm already playing in the 'next-gen', but that video didn't impress me one bit.
Here's some shots for Project Gotham Racing 3 and a few other games taken from a HDTV...
-
thats really determined by ones opinion. i think the PS3 has better graphics so im getting it.
GT Vision (not GT HD) is the best graphics i have ever seen and yet in the demo, they said it is only a glimpse of whats really to come. if i thought the demo looked friggin awsome, imagine what the full game would look like.
Honestly, I don't understand you. You're paying $1,000+ for a system only for the graphics? Sorry, but graphics don't make the game. Where's the gameplay? And where is this video/screenshot of GT Vision?
Ok, I'm going to get into this now...
360 is going to be on top. Why? PS3 keeps pushing it's dates back, plus all the 360 blockbuster hits are going to be released this thanksgiving and christmas holiday. About the time PS3 releases, it better release some blockbuster hits when it's released or it will fall hard.
The price, is another hit. I would think Microsoft will either lower the price of the 360 or come out with a special edition during the PS3 release. Microsoft has the edge, because they started the market early, they knew there would be some problems by rushing the release of the 360, but would have them ironed out in time.
Alot of developers are going to the 360 and now there are more and more Xbox only releases. Metal Gear Solid and KillZone is the only thing going for Sony right now. I just wish Metroid would go to Microsoft platform!
Blockbuster hits?
Can't happen. All the PS3 has is a bunch of EA games (yuck!) and a mediocre FPS that looks no better then Call of Duty 2 on the Xbox 360. -
yes, i am very confident that the PS3 will win next gen, theres no doubt about it.
the PS3 graphics are better than the 360. that is main reason im getting the PS3.
And you're so confident that it's going to win because..? Because the Playstation brand has a very large fanbase? Well guess what, people said that about Nintendo going into fifth generation (N64, PS1) and look what happened (they got beat by Sony). There is no way Sony is going to win next gen with that price tag. Sure, maybe you and me might be able to afford it, but the majority that made up the Sony fanbase can't. The console is too much, and I wont be surpised if Sony end up coming last place.
And so far the PS3 hasn't shown any graphics that are better then the 360.
-
What exactly does Playstation 3 offer to consumers that warrants a $600 price tag?
Better visuals? Nope.
More games? Nope.
More exclusives? Nope.
Innovative features/services? Nope.
Blu-Ray? An unproven format which could easily end up like the UMD.
-
@ XGuNn3rX: I can see some of your points, but I totally disagree with you on a couple things you mentioned.
1. You said that the XBox360 has a 3% failure rate. I'm not sure whom your source is, but I can tell you they are feeding you a load of crap. I have 4 friends who currently own an XBox360, and literally 3 out of 4 of those have failures of some form, most involving overheating (so at least in this case, that's a 75% failure rate). My one friend can't even play his for very long on it's side; it has to be standing up in a wide open space, otherwise it overheats and crashes after 20 minutes. And that is a brand spanking new XBox360 we're talking about, not a refurb. I checked out his fans and they aren't dusty or blocked; it is simply an awful design on Microsoft's part.
The fact that MS can't manage to properly cool a video game system that consumers have to pay $300-400 for is an outright atrocity! I wouldn't be surprised if in a year or two, thousands of people start having their XBox's die from heat. Any system that runs hot all the time will not last long (I build computers, so that much I can tell you with confidence).
Microsoft have said it is a 3% defect rate. You can choose not to believe that, but it's the only thing close to fact that you're going to get.
You claim that 3 of your friends got defects, which what I think, IMHO, is BS. I could probably name 10 people that I know of that got 360's on launch day. Out of all ten, one was defective, and it was as simple as taking the console back to the store and getting a new one. My friend was still able to keep his hardrive aswell, so he hadn't lost game saves or anything.
I have had ZERO problems and have been amazed by the quality of the product. The same can also be said for those 9 friends who didn't get a defect.
Even if you really believe that the 360 has huge amout of defects, you cannot deny that the PS3 will have worse. The CELL and Blu-Ray are new technologies and it's bound to happen. If your going to fork out $600US on launch day for the PS3, you better pray to god that Sony fixes/replaces it if you get a defect.
2. I don't see how you can consider Sony including a Blu-Ray DVD player in the PS3 a bad thing. The standalone Blu-Ray players cost around $1000, so considering that the PS3 has a dozen times more processing power and costs only half as much, that is actually an awesome bargain! Sony will literally lose money with each PS3 they sell (although they expect to make up that loss by games and Blu-Ray media sold). And as rridgely said, the PS3 games will be on Blu-Ray disks, so that drive will be a necessity. And if you're salty about the fact that the games are on Blu-Ray instead of cheaper, standard DVDs, consider this: games already exist that push the 4.7 GB limit of DVDs, due to huge levels and high quality textures. So most shiny new games will need more space to work with than a DVD can offer. So instead of having to switch disks every time you beat a level, Sony used a high density Blu-Ray DVD that can hold 25-50 GBs, so you won't need to keep track of and switch disks half a dozen times. In my humble opinion, that is a great idea, and in no way a bad thing.First of all, I recommend you read this: http://www.gamesfirst.com/?id=1132
And secondly, I don't care if I have to switch disks. I'm not lazy and I'd rather save the extra money then pay a few extra hundred dollars so I don't have to switch disks.
nice post, lokoike.
XGuNn3rX,
no point trying to convice us that the 360 is more worth getting than the PS3. PS3 will boost in sales because they have the next generation video player. it is cheaper to buy the in-built blu-ray player in the PS3 than getting one separately. in about a year or two or at the very most three, DVDs will be outdated. there will still be a few people thats using the DVD since its cheaper and smaller capacity. its just like the SVCD and VCD. they were very popular in the late 90s. and there probably was a discussion saying who wants a DVD and what kind of data would fill up a 4.7GB disc. and my gosh there are people now saying what kind of data would fill up a 54GB disc. 54GB discs arent all that big anymore. at the end of the year 300GB discs called Holographic discs will be out and at the end of next year 1.6TB discs will be out. with HD-DVD discs only reaching 28GBs for this kind of generation is foolish. its way too small.
dont worry about it mate. only time will prove you wrong.
You're so confident that the PS3 is going to win next gen, aren't you?
-------------------------------------
I thought this was funny...
Sony announces that first Blu-ray disc drive won’t play Blu-ray movies!
http://www.cnet.com.au/desktops/dvdburners...40091720,00.htm
-------------------------------------
And about the rumour of having HD-DVD games on the 360...
"I'm seeing lots of speculation about our upcoming HD DVD Player, and whether we have plans to publish HD DVD games. The answer is no.
Since announcing the Xbox 360 HD DVD Player accessory at E3 2006, we’ve been clear that it is designed exclusively for playing HD DVD movies. It will not play games on HD DVD.
At this point, we haven’t seen anything to suggest that next-gen DVD formats offer a better game experience than current DVD. What we do know is that these formats will bring added cost to game developers, disc manufacturing, and could even result in added costs and longer load times for the consumer, which would negatively impact the game experience. We are focused on making great HD games available to consumers now, and games like “The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion” clearly show that beautiful high def graphics and huge, immersive worlds to explore are possible on the DVD9 format."
http://gamerscoreblog.com/team/archive/200.../16/536859.aspx
This man speaks the truth.
-
Here's a reminder of the rules, XGuNn3rX.
5.Unacceptable Forum or News comments.While some members feel that post count is important, there are some posts that do not contribute to the community in any way whatsoever. Below is a list of unacceptable posts. If you wish to direct a fellow member to something that has already been posted, please do so in a courteous manner.-
"Old news" or anything similar.
-
"(Insert product or brand) sucks" or anything similar.
-
"I posted this x days ago!!!" or anything similar.
I would suggest you read our Forum Rules.
Remember, this is a discussion; don't try to instigate flame wars.
Maybe you should read the rules, since I broke none of them. None of my post was flaming and I never said any console sucked, just that the PS3 had been getting alot of bad news lately. If you want to abuse your mod powers, go ahead, but I didn't brake no rule.
-
-
""Harrison's comments are merely speculative."
Reading is your friend.
I understand that, but the fact that he is even suggesting it...
-
Nice to know you missed the part of the article that said, "Harrison's comments are merely speculative."
You should read this. Another dark day for XBox users.
XBox and EA screw their users privacy
----------
If you sign up to play EA games through Microsoft?s Xbox Live Service, Microsoft will provide your Xbox Live user account information to EA so that we can establish an EA Online account for you. You need an EA Online account to play EA?s Xbox Live titles. By signing up to play EA's Xbox Live titles, you agree that Microsoft can transfer your user account information to EA.
Information collected will vary depending upon the activity and may include your name, e-mail address, phone number, mobile number, home address, birth date and credit card information. In addition, we may collect demographic information such as gender, zip code, information about your computer, hardware, software, platform, media, Internet IP address and connection, information about online activity such as feature usage, game play statistics and scores, user rankings and click paths and other data that you may provide in surveys or online profiles, for instance. We may combine demographic information with personal information.
----------
One, I already knew this.
Two, it doesn't bother me.
Three, I have a choice whether or not I want to buy an EA game.
Four, another dark day? You mean for Playstation fans, right? There's basically bad news for the PS3 everyday.
And five, what's to say that Sony wont do that with the PS3?
-
Yeah but a lot of people still don't have high speed internet. So what about them? Maybe sony needed something to hold all the data from the games for those people.
I'm willing to bet that in 5 years (or when the Xbox 3, PS4 comes out), high speed internet connections will be cheap and a small percentage of people wont own one.
-
Well seing as the games will be on blue ray it would be pretty hard to play them without it... thats a pretty dumb point to make. HDTVs will become a lot more commen in the next couple years so the PS3's ability to play the content will be much appreciated. So your saying you pick 360 because you don't like blue ray? Thats pretty dumb when what should come first is the games. But the other features will add incentive for want one.
I'm not making my mind up on the vid format untill I see them myself. And yes I own an hdtv. A nice 50in Sony.
And Sony HAD to go with Blu-Ray, right?
Funny how they've been saying "Blu-Ray is the future" but recently said online distribution is the future instead of a disc format, something Microsoft has been saying for months (which is why the 360 has DVD only).
-
http://www.highdefdigest.com/feature_blura...comparison.html
A few comparisons...
"Whatever its merits as a film, 'Training Day' has made history by becoming one of the first titles to be released on both the Blu-ray and HD DVD formats. In our first head-to-head comparison, we found the HD DVD to be superior. The unfortunate cropping of the Blu-ray image, coupled with more noticeable compression artifacts and an overall darker cast, can't compete with the more consistently pleasing presentation of the HD DVD. Also a strike against the Blu-ray version is that both the Dolby TrueHD and Dolby Digital-Plus soundtracks have been dropped in favor of plain old Dolby Digital, and even the disc's menu navigation is more clunky and with less interactive functionality. Certainly, this Blu-ray release delivers fine video quality in its own right, but the format's backers will need to step it up if they are going to win the hearts and minds of early adopters over HD DVD. "
"I must say, our first Blu-ray versus HD DVD comparisons continue to yield surprises. I wasn't expecting to see much difference in video quality between the two formats with 'Rumor Has It...', yet the two discs did bear noticeable differences, with the HD DVD boasting better detail and a more film-like look. And Warner has again dropped the Dolby Digital-Plus option from the Blu-ray version. However, the Blu-ray is a good $5 cheaper than the pricey $39.95 list price the studio is charging for the HD DVD/DVD combo version, so at least Blu-ray has that going for it. But even with its higher list price, in this reviewer's opinion, the HD DVD release delivers overall better bang for the buck."
"With our second Blu-ray versus HD DVD battle on 'Kiss Kiss Bang Bang,' we again declare victory (although by a smaller margin) to the HD DVD verison. Most of the same problems we found with 'Training Day' on Blu-ray -- namely the picture cropping (though it is likely a player issue) and darker cast -- reappear again here. The absence of HD DVD's Dolby Digital-Plus tracks on Blu-ray is problematic, and I still find Blu-ray's clunky menu navigation quite irritating. Though with 'Kiss Kiss Bang Bang' Blu-ray has proven it can deliver moments of stunning high-def as good as HD DVD, it is still not delivering that level of quality as consistently. Very close with this one, but still no cigar."
Its not being shoved down their throat.. its just another feature. And it will be a much appreciated one if blue ray catches on. Just like the dvd player in the ps2 and xbox. Yeah the games are on them but as a feature they let them play movies as well.(MS even madey you buy that stupid $20 xbox remote that you needed to play movies.)
If 360 will never support it out of the box then it will never get those added sales as a multimedia equipment.(I guess to those with a media center pc it still could though) But if you don't play games thats a really expensive tivo.
Well 360 charges $60 for games on dvd so I'm expecting a little hike in the games. But I wait untill games become cheaper anyway to buy them. Unless its a mainly online game.
The point of you not seeing it side by side was that neither have I. So I cant say which is better but neither can you. You can make up an uneducated opinion but its no better then anyone elses.
Theoretically..
Lets say I had no HD-TV. Blu-Ray movies mean nothing to me, since the picture quality differs none from DVD and games are still being made on the 360 with DVD. Why should I be forced to buy a Blu-Ray player? The PS3 is nothing but a quick way to get a Blu-Ray player in your livingroom. It's being forced down your throat. If you want a PS3 but no Blu-Ray player, sorry but you're screwed.
-
I actually read the PS4 won't be using any discs. That you'll be downloading everything.
Snip:
-----
With just months to go before the launch of the PS3 and the debut of Sony's costly Blu-ray format, worldwide studios president Phil Harrison has hinted that the console's successor will not feature a disc drive. In a recent interview with Wired Magazine, Harrison speculated that the successor to the PlayStation 3 may be entirely based on digital distribution models for both games and media content.
"We have to change the business model. We have to find a new way to reach the consumer," he stated. Harrison went on to refer to Kart Rider, a Korean game which is offered for free. Consumers are then charged for upgrades enhancements via digital download - and more than 12 million people are currently playing the game. "That will be the business model for the future of games," Harrison declared, before stating: "I'd be amazed if the PS4 had a physical disc drive."
Clearly, when taken in context, Harrison's comments are merely speculative. However, it could be inferred that the company's vision of the future is focused very much on online distribution, rather than with the "future proof" Blu-ray disc format. Sony is set to launch the PlayStation 3 in November and has gone to great lengths to assure consumers that Blu-ray - which is in direct competition with the Microsoft-backed HD-DVD format - will be the dominant format for media storage, using the costly format as justification for the PS3's high price tag.
Anyone thinking Phantom?
-----
This is why you don't see Microsoft putting HD-DVD or Blu-Ray in their console. They've been saying online distribution is the way for awhile now.
-
The 360 dosen't even support HD DVD currently does it? I've heard that supposedly they are going to release an updated one that does in the future but what about all the early adopters?
The PS2 was a huge hit when it first came out because of the dvd player.(lots of people got it just for that) So if they can successfully convince people that blue ray is enough of an improvement over dvd then I believe it will sell.
To compare two vid formats you haven't seen side by side is kind of pointless. Much less fight about it.
I will say this, the PS2 had more and better exclusives then the xbox and thats why it sold so much more. Its all about the games, and if PS3 has the same amount of awesome exlusive games as the PS2 then it will rule the gaming market. I don't think the vid formats its going to decide which console is better for games.
Now if you want to say who will sell more to the people looking for a nextgen dvd player then the PS3 will still come out on top because will support it out of the box. Plus if people are buying it for a video player they will like the fact they can use it as a web browser, probably a dvr, and who knows what else.
If HD DVD does dominate the market then I'll buy an HD DVD player as well but not untill I see the improvement over dvd and determine for myself if its worth it. Also they better not charge more for the movies.
Microsoft have said time and time again that the 360 will never have an inbuilt HD-DVD player. Microsoft is only releasing a HD-DVD add-on for people who are looking for a HD-DVD player. It does not runs games and it's primary purpose is to play movies. You DON'T have to buy it, and you aren't getting a HD player shoved down your throat (Hint: PS3).
Wanna know something? A very small percentage of the world own HDTV players. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray mean nothing to them, because there is no difference from DVD, except the large space.
People wont be buying the PS3 for a Blu-Ray player, it's as simple as that.
Pointless that I haven't seen HD-DVD and Blu-Ray side by side? Not really. Even if I had seen them side by side and my opinion was still that HD-DVD was better, everyone would call me biased. The only proof I have is the many reviews saying that HD-DVD is infact better. Have you read the reviews from Cnet and everywhere else?
They better not charge more for the movies? Well it looks like you wont like Blu-Ray then, since it's said some movies and games are to be priced more. This is still a rumour, though..
-
And that article's not at all biased
. (on a side note the article would have a little more credence if you provided the source)I really don't see why you get so irate about it. It is what it is, does it really matter whether its not as good as a 'supercomputer'? (which is a completely irrelevant comparison IMO)
Did you read the whole thing? It wasn't just about the PS3 being a supercomputer.
He even showed you some links about HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, proving once again that HD-DVD is better.
Play whatever system you like for the games you like. Who cares what it can or cannot do. It's meant to do one thing primarily and that is to play games. If it doesn't have your favorite genre, then buy the one that does. Specs on a gaming console really mean absolutely nothing.
I personally think the PS3 looks fine. I may even buy one when and if Final Fantasy 13 comes out for PS3. I know Final Fantasy 12 will be out for the PS2 though.
I've followed the XBox and XBox360 and know that the XBox series always has issues. Even the 360 has issues, numerous, numerous issues. That to me would say which product is better. Who can come out with their hardware console and it does what it should without issues. One of the several issues for the XBox (or the 360, one of the two) had was overheating because of a poorly placed power supply. It didn't get the needed ventilation and frequently would shut down on players. I'd say that's a major hardware issue.
However, back when the PS2 came out there was an rumor where the DVD reader would go bad because people were playing DVD movies with it. Well, those geniuses who said that didn't realize that the games you play in the PS2 were also on DVD media, so it made no difference at all.
Overall, given the performance records; I'd say that the Playstation series is far superior to the XBox series.
The 360 has a 3% defect rate, something that is pretty good. PS2 had something in its 30's, because of the infamous disk read error.
-
I thought you might like this. It was taken from another board.
He mentions "Cows" alot, the reason being.. on this board every fanboy has a name. Cows = Sony Fanboys.
So the question is, just how powerful is the Cell? Simple: NOT THAT POWERFUL. Lets explore:The cell = 9 cores, 3.2 GHz
On top of this, the Cell is at this current phase, reliant on the RSX as a backup. In early cell testing, the RSX was used as both a GPU and a backup cell for data processing. Should the cell fill up or fail at any task, the RSX would take over that task and any others necessary until the CPU could stabilize. However, the RSX was in select cases overloading and then the ER protocols would force the data back to the CPU causing system failure and interruption with data streaming.
Also, the Cell only float 2 Teraflops where a sophisticated PC can run anywhere between 4 and 6. Your average supercomputer can hit over 100TB easily.
Furthermore, the Cell and RSX are restrained by minimal PS3 resources from the RAM. The mPS3 has 256MB of Main RAM, about enough for your average PC to run Microsoft office. Of course, the cell allows games to be played at higher speeds with less RAM because of its 9 cores for data processing, but eventually tehre will come a point where 256MB just wont be enough. Even now, games like Oblivion on the PC require 1GB of RAM to be run at max setting and the Xbox 360 with its only 512MB of RAM cant handle the max settings because of it. Its going to be a problem that will limmit the cell.
O yes, the arguement is back and better than ever. You could say, fresh cows revived it
I had some cows trying to convince me I was nuts, that the playstation 3 rivals "supercomputers" (he then proceeded to say orginal supercomputers which rival the processing and graphical power of most current day calculators...nice example cows) Anyways, I decided to check it out a bit more in depth. What I found was that the PS3 is not only an outdated piece of harware, but its farily low tech by "supercomputer" standards.
Below is a lost of the PS3 technical specifications. Keep in mind that much of it is give in take. It plays alot of stuff, but DVD, DVD R, DVD RW and DVD R+ are just fancy names for DVD.
PLAYSTATION 3 SPECIFICATIONS
CPU: Cell Processor PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz
--1 VMX vector unit per core
--512KB L2 cache
--7 x SPE @3.2GHz
--7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
--7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE
--*1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
--Total floating point performance: 218 gigaflops
GPU RSX @ 550MHz
--1.8 TFLOPS floating point Performance
--Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels
--Multi-way programmable parallel Floating point shader pipelines
--Sound Dolby 5.1ch, DTS, LPCM, etc. (Cell-based processing)
MEMORY
256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz
256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz
System Bandwidth Main RAM-- 25.6GB/s
VRAM--22.4GB/s
RSX-- 20GB/s (write) + 15GB/s (read)
SB2.5GB/s (write) + 2.5GB/s (read)
SYSTEM FLOATING POINT PERFORMANCE:
2 teraflops
STORAGE
--HDD Detachable 2.5" HDD slot x 1
--I/O--USB Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0)
--Memory Stickstandard/Duo, PRO x 1
--SD standard/mini x 1
--CompactFlash(Type I, II) x 1
COMMUNICATION
--Ethernet (10BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 1000BASE-T) x 3 (input x 1 + output x 2)
--Wi-Fi IEEE 802.11 b/g
--Bluetooth--Bluetooth 2.0 (EDR)
--ControllerBluetooth (up to 7)
--USB 2.0 (wired)
--Wi-Fi (PSP)
--Network (over IP)
AV OUTPUT
Screen size 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
HDMI out x 2
AV multi out x 1
Digital out (optical) x 1
DISC MEDIA
CD
PlayStation CD-ROM
PlayStation2 CD-ROM
CD-DA
CD-DA (ROM),
CD-R,
CD-RW
SACD Hybrid (CD layer),
SACD HD
DualDisc (audio side)
DualDisc (DVD side)
PlayStation 2 DVD-ROM
PlayStation 3 DVD-ROM
DVD-ROM
DVD-R
DVD-RW
DVD+R,
DVD+RW
Blu-ray Disc
PlayStation 3 BD-ROM
BD-ROM
BD
Now I will give you the specs of your state of the art Supercomputer vs the PS3 (SC to the left, PS3 to the right)
Nvidia 7950................RSX (comprable to the Nvidia 7900 in terms of raw power) clocked like a G70
4-6 TF of RAM....................dual 256 MB PCI (256 Main)
Dual/Tri Core 4.0 GHz pentium D celeron with hyperthreading..........1 VMX vector unit per core, 3.2 GHz
250GB-1 TF of System Memory...............80 GB of compact flash storage
Dolby 12.1 surround sound card.................7.1 surround sound output
Floating Performace - 80-100+ teraflops ..........2 teraflops
In terms of performance, the supercomputer can load over 2000 times as fast as the PS3, with superior output for graphics, sound, system cache and so on.
in comparision to this dell http://www.dell.com/content/products/produ...on=specs#tabtop the dell is superior
when compared to this alienware state of the art ALX model gaming PC, the PC is on top by a long shot http://www.alienware.com/product_detail_pa...DEFAULT#pdp-nav
heck, the PS3 is even beaten out by Apple Computer's iMAC:
1.83GHz Intel Core Duo with 2MB shared L2 cache
512MB (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Slot-load 8x double-layer SuperDrive
ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 128MB GDDR3 memory
So point is cows, the PS3 is comprable to a mid range PC, not a high end PC or a gaming PC that was built this year. PCs have advanced beyond PS3 with things like the PhysX Ageia physics card, the Nvidia 7950, Tri Core processing and so on. The PS3 falls into a range with the 400 dollar gateways in terms of sheer performance, which is sad considering atleast 50 bucks of teh gateway is going to pay for the monitor that is thrown in.
Basically, the only thing setting the PS3 above any PC or above the Xbox 360 is the Blu-Ray player. On the flipside, the initial reviews for Blu-Ray were negative, sighting its cost and size as a waste because its quality for the first titles was actually inferior to that of HD DVD, and it was comprable to regualr DVD9. Shame. http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-8900_7-5600201-1.html , http://reviews.cnet.com/Samsung_BD_P1000/4...7-31799185.html
So in a sense you are getting what you are paying for. A supercomputer would set you back 4-6 grand no sweat. The PS3 is costing 600 bucks, but its giving you a bit more than its costing you. Yes its true, from a technical standpoint the PS3 is cheaper than the sum of its parts (but so are most PCs, and so is the Xbox 360). That doesnt make it cheap, it means you arent paying premium so dont expect it.
to wrap up
>
Making a long story short, the cell is a breakthrough in modern computer science, but not a landmark. You need to understand, the cell was build specifically to run small applications and datastreaming that would not require it to overclock for any reason. It was built originally to run the new GE catscan machines and power Xray machines for medical useage. As far as raw power goes, the Cell is by no means the most pwoerful or the most advanced CPU that exists. It is build for small PCs and devices with less than 9 systems operating on them at low speeds.
keep in mind that nothing is certain or nailed in stone, and that above all, a PC isnt the same as a console. I give you the comparison because I dont ever want to hear the PS3 is a supercomputer arguement again, not because its fair. Also remember that the cell is restricted by the PS3, its maximum potential for speed and processing power as a CPU isnt fulfilled in the PS3 architecture. PS3 plays games and nothing else, so it economiizes to do so, but it isnt the best environment to examine the power of a new CPU or GPU.
-
if you havent then you havent experienced how the quality is really like. you should experience it yourself rather listening what most people will say. in your opinion, how many people is everyone? i can tell you now that not everyone thinks the HD-DVD is better than the BD. try asking people that is not in the Microsoft fanboy groups and see what sort of an answer you will get. before you do that. i can tell you now that not everyone thinks the HD-DVD is better, why? because i dont think it is. there you go, not EVERYONE thinks its better.
HD-DVD has got nothing to do with Microsoft or Microsoft fanboys. I'd rather believe the majority then your obviously biased opinion.
-
it depends what kind of game you make with awsome graphics. and i doubt you could.
how is the PS3 outdated? and as you said yourself. the PS3 isnt even out yet so how could everyone say HD-DVD > Blu-Ray? and you didnt answer my question earlier. "have you seen a video between a HD-DVD and a Blu-Ray?"
No I haven't seen HD-DVD and Blu-Ray in action, but everyone (and I mean EVERYONE) is saying that HD-DVD has better picture quality then Blu-Ray.
-
i think having good graphics means awsome gaming. it really comes down to ones opinion and perspective on a point of view.
So I could make the worst game ever made, with some of the best graphics ever seen, and you would like it? :|
XGuNn3rX,have you seen a video between a HD-DVD and a Blu-Ray? because i have. our neighbour has a HD-Blu-Ray player in their living room and they paid a little over AU$2,500 for it. i compared the two together and without much time. there was this immense difference between the two.
I've read the reviews. Everyone is saying HD-DVD > Blu-Ray.
xbox is a good console, awsome gaming and you the rest but what im saying is, its crap compared to the PS3. i have played many many hours on the 360. and everyone i know thats got a 360 is also prepared to get the PS3 when its launched.How is the PS3 better? Besides, the PS3 isn't even out yet, it could be a massive flop.
all microsoft fan boys only and probably will always say the PS3 is only slightly better than the 360. i dont blame you for denying the truth when you're a fanboy.So now I'm in denial? :| The PS3 is only slightly better then the 360. The PS3 is already outdated, much before its release.
-
awesome graphics does not mean awesome games
Very, very true. And besides, the PS3 is only slightly more powerful then the 360.
This is kind of boring because everyone has different tastes. My issue with the 360 is that for fps I would rather play on a pc. But Playstation has always had more/better games. Look at gamespot and look at the number of high rated ps2 games vs xbox or ps2 vs xbox and xbox 360.
I will probably get a ps3 when I can get the games for $20. I dont mind paying for hardware but $60 per game(ps3 or 360) isn't going to happen.
MGS4
Grand Turismo
Resistance Fall of Man
Army of Two
Devil May Cry
Tekken 6
Final Fantasy
Virtua Fighter
killzone 2
Ratchet and Clank
Plus the playstation still has a lot of big series that sequals havent been announced for yet.(like socom)
I'm willing to bet that the upcoming god of war 2 and zelda are going to be better than anything in the xbox 360s current catalog.
Games aren't all graphics anyway if its not fun who cares what it looks like.
I can agree with that everyone has different tastes. But you also said you prefer FPS on PC, but at the same time mention 3 FPS on PS3. What's the go? Out of my whole list I mention 3 games that are FPS. Xbox 360 doesn't just have FPS anymore.
there is a PS3 version of Splinter Cell Double Agent (SC4) http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/splintercell4/index.html
PS3 not only has better games but the PS3 itself has better specs for its console. not mention a next Gen video player built-in as well.
Well first of all, GameSpot only lists that because of a rumour. And second, the official SC4 website mentions no PS3 version.
And about the "next gen video player built-in", this picture best describes what I'm thinking...
http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/4853/blurayforcefeed2el.jpg
Anyway, I'm willing to bet some of you people don't even know half the games I'm talking about. You say "the Xbox 360 has no games" without actually knowing if it does or not. Have you seen Mass Effect? a RPG from the same people who made the successful KOTOR - Bioware. This RPG is going to be AWESOME. Saints Row? A next gen free roaming game that looks to compete against the GTA series. All I'm saying is, 360 has plenty of good games, but are overlooked for Sonys tired series (I.E, Final Fantasy, MGS4, etc.)
-
who cares if the specs are old as long as they are accurate.
Yeah and the 360 wasn't even out yet. Nor was the PS3. Oh, and I edited my post.
). If I have no use for HD-DVD's, then I simply don't buy the addon. No money wasted. 
. (on a side note the article would have a little more credence if you provided the source)
360 vs PS3
in The Lounge
Posted
More bad news for Sony, one less exclusive for the PS3, and one less reason to get a PS3.
Assassin's Creed confirmed for 360
Admitting to one of the worst-kept secret in recent memory, Ubisoft has finally confirmed Assassin's Creed for Xbox 360 by both Electronic Gaming Monthly and 360 Magazine.
Unfortunately, not much else is revealed, such as a release date or platform-specific content. Most of all, we want to know why they waited to confirm the Xbox 360 version, even though we all knew it was coming. As a developer and publisher, it would be the smartest decision to promote all iterations of the title. Was it to instigate hype, as 1UP's Luke Smith conjectures, or were there even more sinister deals being made behind the scenes?
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/09/01/finally-...firmed-for-360/
------
Want to know what's even worse? It looks the same on the 360 as it does on the PS3.