DPAD's Michael "Optimus" Perry goes beyond the range of an average review and breaks the PS3 and 360 down piece by piece, giving us a never before seen analysis of arguably the most heated debates in our recent console memory. PS3 or 360?
As if.... The best read for a long time... All flame wars or fanboy comments about mines better than yours should be posted to this..
Exceptional read, hope every1 on here has a long look.
I told you's over and over again that the 360's and PS3's processors/CPU's where in-order execution (which is inferior) and not OoOE (out-of-order, which is superior). And that this made their claims (Sony's & MS) of their speed (GHz) inaccurate and uncomparable to that of the PCs. And i said that their speeds are really closer to not only a 2.8GHz processor, but even lower than that! like say 2.4GHz! Or even less! I would say their 3.2GHz processors speeds are hovering between that range (2.4GHZ & 2.8GHz). And I got news for you's they both use a 128-bit bus to RAM from their gfx chips. Weak! very weak, most better performing gfx cards use a 256-bit bus, and the new cards are gonna start using a 384-bit bus (well it might actually be a 256-bit bus plus a 128-bit bus). 128-bit buses are usually reserved for computer's lower to midrange gfx cards. Hate to burst your bubbles kiddies, but the only reason why you see the 360 or PS3 match a PC is because when you design for the PC, you have to program the game for the weakest gfx cards, in order to be able to make it compatible for everyone. Whereas on the consoles, you can program it to take advantage of the full capability of the system. But raw powerwise. The consoles are still inferior to the PC, heck they were that way even when they came out. Yet you fools buy into all the marketing hype that comes out of these companies (and yes MS is guilty of it too, though I will admit that Sony is worst at it). If you programmed a game on the PC for only the X1950XTX or the 7950GTX, and a 3.2Ghz processor then it would look much better than anything on the 360 or PS3, but then only people with those configurtions or higher would be able to play that game. You are cutting of the majority of you ptotential customers. They dont do that!
All I know is my PC is a 3.2ghz machine with 2 gig of RAM and a 256 meg 9800xt Pro Radeon and my 360 wiped the floor with my PC as far as games and smooth play are concerned.
My PC would not even run Fear unless I REALLY DUMBED DOWN pretty much everything. But my 360 runs it FULL BORE.
So compare what you want ..... my 360 is the better machine for games BY A LONG SHOT.
My 360 has NO OTHER HEAVY TASKS other than do one main function ... PLAY GAMES ... and it does it very well. No wack load of extra crap running in the background.
I was always a PC Gamer fan but got sick of dumping money into it .... in comes the 360 and I am VERY VERY HAPPY and IMPRESSED !!
Hm, that's funny cuz my PC has a overclocked 2.4GHz Barton w/ 1GB RAM running at 2-2-2-11 and a 9800Pro overclocked to 451MHz/387MHz DDR RAM. And and nForce 2 400Ultra chipset and i can run FEAR with all the setting up except for the "soft shadows" with Anisotropic filtering at 8x (something the 360 version does not do) and Anti-aliasing 4x and it runs at between 20-30 frames per second. The 360 version has lower res textures and runs at 30fps. So I dont know what you talking about, but you may wanna see what you're doing on your PC cuz its not looking to good. And P.S. Pentium 4's suck. But its still a faster processor than the 360's.
And upgrading you say, eh? hm, let's see, a AthlonXP Barton (not even the 64bit yet) and a 9800pro with a NF2 board sound really recent doesnt it? Get the [email protected]
Buddy, if you are trying to TALK ME INTO going back to a PC because it is so much better .... you are wasting your breath.
I will not try to convert you, so don't try to convert me !!
My PC game days are done for a while. The 360 to me is a killer machine with killer graphics and I have no desire to hope back onto my 19" monitor with my 67" set and my nice HT setup only a hallway away.
No more reading the side of the box for specs only to find out I need to downplay my setting to have it run nice.
And to get a decent video card, I will not pay these kind of prices .... JUST FOR THE VIDEO CARD
( http://www.futureshop.ca/ca... )
Not to mention I would have to upgrade my motherboard to a PCI-E to take full advantage of what the cards offer.
See what I mean ..... "MONEY PIT"
It is very obvious you are a PC fan. If you have not noticed.... this is a heavy populated CONSOLE gamer area. You may want to preach on another area of the forum....
Hmm, try this spot
Oh dont even let me get into how much better CoD2 looks on the PC, or Oblivion (which has way more tress and foliage) and how bout how much smoother (framerate wise) Condemned is or Prey on the PC.
The "TREES" in Oblivion on the 360 look fantastic. And I don't know "ABOUT" you, but Prey runs smooth as silk on the 360.
Im not trying to convert you. I could care less what you like. But when people make claims that are wrong, I'ma say something. And there is alot more trees and grass and foliage on the PC version. And once again, on my PC thats at like 20-30 frames. The 360 version runs at like 30frames, but stutters alot. And Prey may run fairly smooth on the 360 but its running at 30fps, whereas on my PC its running at like 40-60 fps. I am not a PC fan, a 360 fan, a Sony fan and a Nintendo fan. I like'em all. But I see to many people get to excited on this site and say things that are just straigth up wrong. And i am trying to correct people. Its one thing to say you like GoW more than Mario. Thats fine, thats an opinion, i got no problem with that. But if someone is trying to say that the PSone has better graphics than a 360 then I'ma step in and say something. But yeah its fine to like your 360, just dont be irrationable about it. That's all (and Im not saying that you are being irrationable, Im just saying "anybody" being irrationable)
Well let's just say this .... if you are a person in my case ... that to get your PC up to snuff you would FOR SURE have to dump more money into it than you would for a 360 , the 360 may very well be a better choice.
I don't count trees or frames per second, I can only go by what I see and experience during game play. And with my 360 on a 67" Samsung 1080p DLP set ..... I "REALLY" like what "I" see.
To get the same game experience from "MY PC" .. it was much more logical to buy the 360.
BTW, the PS1 to 360 gap is MUCH LARGER than let's say the PC to 360. In this case I would be on your side saying the same stuff.
Fact is, since you have not sat and played at "MY" PC you cannot very well say "MY CLAIMS ARE WRONG". And although I appreciate what you are trying to do by correcting folks with claims that according to "YOU" are wrong , at 33 years old I really do not need you "CORRECTING ME"
Awesome article... sounds like the 360's GPU is a powerhouse and the PS3's CPU is very strong. Both consoles have their positives and negatives, coming out basically equal. BRING ON THE GAMES
The author forgot about branch hints for the SPEs, and apparently didn't know that what in-order architecture calls for is a new way of coding. He seems intent on making it seem as if the Cell isn't built for current X86 coding, which it isn't. It just requires a different way of thinking.
What bothered me is that he ignored the Element Interconnect Bus (the most important part of Cell) and the XDR RAM connection, in addition to making it seem as if the Xenon can run branch-heavy AI functions better than Cell, due to the fact you can't branch code on Cell. But wait, Xenon suffers from the same problem, so what gives?
Assymetry isn't as bad as the author makes out either since there's only two types of processors in the Cell. One for general purpose, and 8 for SIMD/general purpose. Come execution time, games spend 85% of their time executing SIMD code so if anything the Cell was catered around that need.
I could go on and on, but the point is that this article was poised to make the 360 look better and the PS3 look worse. In fact the author spends 90% of the time critisizing the PS3 while ignoring the flaws of the 360. And then proceeds to say something like "But that doesn't mean Blu-ray is worthless."
"The RSX is pretty much a 7800GTX class GPU in some cases its worse in some cases better, nothing that is really new. Now the same can’t be said about the 360’s GPU at all."
"Now the 360’s GPU is one impressive piece of work and I’ll say from the get go it’s much more advanced than the PS3’s GPU"
He says the Xenos can do 500 million polys a second, and then says:"The PS3 GPU’s triangle setup rate at 550MHZ is 275 million a second and if its 500MHZ will have 250 million a second. "
Where he got that number is beyond me since the old nVidia 7800 can do over a billion vertices a second.
This is the most biased article I've ever seen, and unfortunately I've seen these statements before on forums from people like TopGamer. Most of what the author, Michael Perry, states seems to have been copied and pasted from anti-PS3 gamers.
The author made a pretty funny mistake when comparing the Xenos's 48 ALUs to the RSX's unknown number of pipelines. Pipelines and ALUs are not the same, as much as this guy wants you to believe.
His conclusion states: "While both consoles shine in some areas, they do have their softer spots." Ironically, he said nothing bad about the 360, and spent most of his tame praising it instead. He also succeeded in making the PS3 look like a POS that couldn't outthink a tortoise, and I'm sure this thing will quoted for years to come.
On page 10, there's a list of where he got all his 'enlightening' information. http://dpad.gotfrag.com/por...
Oh look, John Carmack's being quoted. He's never touched a PS3 dev kit in his life, but I'm sure he's the one to go to. ^_~ Point is, ignore this crap.
Haven't checked in for quite a while, but it's good to know your still an idiot.
LOL GET A LIFE.
Has someone forgotten what a vertex is and what a triangle is? For the brain dead among us:
A triangle is a shape made up of 3 vertices.
275million x 3 = 825 Million
It adds up the the approximated 1 billion you gave.
Get a life, get a brain, get out of here.
This is the type of post we get when a fanboy reads something that is blatantly opposed to what he believes. Complete denial.
Exactly. 1 billion VERTICES/second = 333 million polys/second. 333 million < 500 million.
For those who didn't take Geometry. A vertice is simply a line between two points. You get 3 points connected to make a triangle (polygon). Next, you guys simply divided 1.1 Billion vertices a second by 3 in order to get a smaller than 500 million number for the 7800GTX.
Unfortunately, it's not that simple. One polygon has 3 vertices. 4 polygons connected to each other have 9 vertices. 9 polygons connected have 18 vertices. You can see that the more polygons you have connected, the higher that ratio becomes, from 1:3 to 1:2, and it only increases with polygon counts.
And games don't consist of individual polygons floating around. They're connected at the 500~500,000 level to form characters, objects, and entire levels.
The polygon number for Xenos was also calculated assuming that nothing was skinned and that the ALUs were dedicated solely to Vertex processing.
Draw out the polygon figure if you don't believe me. You'll see that it depends slightly on how the polygons are configured, but barely. I'm a 3D artist so I know these things. It's kind funny that all of you simply accused me of being an idiot when your math skills definitely aren't up to par. Learn something, then get back to me. ^_~
My math skills are up to par and I can tell you that vertices is the plural of vertex. Vertex means corner. Yes, corner as in angle. Lines are drawn between the vertices, they are not the vertices themselves. Sorry to have to split hairs like that but I would ask that you bring your own math up to par before giving a math lecture to others lest you end up misinforming them.
great read. both are complex and both are going to have great games.
Very interesting!! At the end of the day, everyones a winner, regardless of what console you have. If your a lover of all consoles (there are a few of us on here ya know!) then the next 5 years will truly be memorable.
Good Find. WOW. It basically confirms in detail what I have been saying for months now. But its all proven in one nice place. BTW...I beat Gears of War and I'm bout to play Insane mode. Its clearly the best game ever created. This article proves once and for all which is the most powerful console. Now that, thats out the way. Lets play some Great games. Thanks Microsoft.
DJ...its not too late to Jump In buddy. Many gamers are jumping in on the 17th when they stand in line and can't get the ps3 due to limited amounts. They will then jump in with a free game...Gears of War or COD3 most likely. WOW. Reading your post DJ, I can see you are frantically trying to do damage control. Only problem is...you are a fanboy. Your opinions on this site aren't respected. You never have links to support your false claims...well, except when you post links from PS3 forums from other ranting fanboys. This is the most detailed thorough comparisson yet. And its not biased at all. He is just completely Honest and not blinded by the type of fanboyism you suffer with daily. Its so clear that you are Jealous and its sad to see you struggle to save face. Just stop it man. The war is over buddy. Either Jump in and get the 360 or wait and get your ps3. Either way...Just be happy dude. You loved your ps2 and it was clearly out classed by the xbox. No biggie right? So its no big deal that the 360 is a better gaming machine this time around either. Just play what you want and stop with the Fanboy rants. If you have money dude...just be a gamer like me and get both consoles. If not. Get what you want and be happy.
How are links from the ps3forums any more biased than the links you post all the time:
Microsoft's biased and innacurate calculations: http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...
And the interview with the Microsoft Employee: http://arstechnica.com/arti...
If you could please explain to me how those links are more credible than, oh lets say, this link
I would really appreciate that.
"Only problem is...you are a fanboy. Your opinions on this site aren't respected."
You have the nerve to call someone a Fanboy is incredible.
You've got to be bipolar.
the article was a nice read, but i'll leave the debating about which is more powerful between PS3 and 360 to Sony and Microsoft. as a gamer all i care about is the games. GOW is gorgeous; however, i've hard a lot more fun playing FFXII with last-gen graphics (8 hours of shooting aliens, gorgeous graphics notwithstanding, just can stand up to 80+ hours of rpg finesse, in my opinion). so since GOW was SOMEWHAT of a let down (just a bit), my anticipation for the following has been whetted even more: Alan Wake, Fable 2, Bioshock, MGS4, Halo 3, Assassins Creed, Heavenly Sword, White Knight Story, Motorstorm, Elveon, Ratchet and Clank 5, FFXIII, NGS and a few others. sure, these games LOOK like graphical marvels, but more importantly they look FUN.
Im with you on that Zypher, and certainly im waiting for FFXII to drop also!! FF7 is probably my fav game thus far, but all the FF`s to date have offered countless hours of entertainment also.
I'll take countless hours of gameplay over a fps anyday. FFXII with last gen graphics closing in on some of the regular 360 games. Gears while fun is just way to short for a game. I'm not a fan of this new gen of games where all they think about is online play. I want a story I want to play the game. And FFXII is all that and then some. I played Gears beat it and ran right back to XII ^^
and give credit to the people on this site who already knew this and get at some people who continue to make an @ss of themselves even though the information is presented right there in front of their face.
First of all I would like to thank unknownunknown for this is proably the best article ever posted.
1. 256 mb - 32 mb for the os can be dedicated to graphics. More memory from the cell can be used as well but that sint optimal and comes at a price in terms of performance just as top gamer been said.
2. DJ unless you have links to back up what you say pleas shut the hell up for you dont know what you talking about and its funny how you think you know more than developers (carmack) but you dont. I also believe that you were the one who said that Mark Rein didnt know what he was talking about when he said that Gears of War couldnt possibly be done on the ps3 due to the ps3s memory constraints. You sad sad fanboy.
3. Yes the 360 gpu is the better and more advanced of the two which is probably why sony is so reluctant to release the finalized specs of the RSX just as the mart said.
4. Ubisoft- Remember what they said about A.I. for the 360 in comparison to the ps3 but then changed their comment for damage control with sony and not hurt the little sony fanboys feelings. Hmm. Enough said. O and Jade Raymond fine.
And as the article said ps2 had more gflops on paper than xbox as well but I think we all know which console was the most powerful of the last gen now dont we? Damn I love it when stuff like this happens.
O and the 360 is actually more capable of 1080p than the ps3 is. 6 times more capable I believe. Interesting.
I also want to point out that HS looks amazing and is being developed for the ps3 despite all the hurdles of the system so think how great games are going to get on the 360 whos system is very developer friendly and and has less far less hurdles in terms of development and better development tools.
I shudder to think how things would be today had microsoft never entered the gaming industry.
And I bet you some sony fanboy is going to come at me wit sum bullsh!t and try to twist my words as always because the truth hurts but you know its all good and you know who you are.
You can't accept that I take the word of Tim Sweeney over Mark Rein since Tim Sweeney is lead programmer of Epic Games? Mark's a VP, that's it.
And yes, EE was more powerful than the Intel Pentium 3 (Xbox) in terms of floating-point calculations, despite being clocked at less than half the speed. If you compare the PS2 and Xbox versions of MGS2, it's obvious that the Xbox version couldn't handle the SIMD-heavy stuff like rain physics. What Xbox had was more RAM, a wussy CPU, and a great GPU thanks to nVidia. PS2 had no general purpose power, and look at the kind of games they made on that sucker. And yet, now Microsoft claims that games are mostly general purpose calculations? Come on. They're only saying that because that's all their console is really good at. Even Tim Sweeney shot down their 'General Purpose' accusation a year ago.
" O and the 360 is actually more capable of 1080p than the ps3 is. 6 times more capable I believe." What a f-ing wild claim. I guess that explains why PS3 had 1080p output from day 1 while Microsoft spent a year and a half trying to create an update. I'm sure it's because the 360 is '6 times more capable'. LOL
No matter what is posted you will shoot it down. Here's another post:
"When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3."
i've seen this line before and my question towards it is "WTF"?
But just glancing at that last IVvidya article makes it obvious that the author has no clue. He calls the SPU's of Cell for DSP's, probably citing MS sources as that was how they've categorized them in multiple interviews, when in fact they are not.
In fact it seems like the entire article is a writeof of earlier MS half truths.
"How are links from the ps3forums any more biased than the links you post all the time:
Microsoft's biased and innacurate calculations: http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...
And the interview with the Microsoft Employee: http://arstechnica.com/arti...
If you could please explain to me how those links are more credible than, oh lets say, this link
http://ps3forums.com/showth... I would really appreciate that."
Sorry, but analysis's made by O-F-F-I-C-I-A-L sources who have gaming hardware and software as their area of expertise are far more credible than anything said or calculated by gamers on either side. I cant believe u think that a forum consisting of nothing official but rather just theories made by fans who could be 7yrs old for all we know could possibly be more credible than the words of the clarified experts (even if theyre biased, that doesnt mean theyre wrong, its just like how in the commercials one company explains how their product is superior to the competitors).
I don't really get how you can somehow try to argue that the sources that TopGamer repeatedly cites are objective.
If Phil Harrison, an O-F-F-I-C-I-A-L spokesperson, and an O-F-F-I-C-I-A-L source, claimed in an interview that the ps3 was 5 times as powerful as the 360 there would be tons of people out there rebuking his claims. By your logic however, his statements would be deemed more credible because of his O-F-F-I-C-I-A-L status as opposed to anyone else on the internet.
Did you even read the link I posted? I'm not linking to fanboy rantings; that would get us nowhere. The author of the link I posted obviously had a grasp of technical knowledge beyond what a 7 year old could muster, and it appears beyond the capabilities of Matt Lee, your trusted O-F-F-I-C-I-A-L source.
"even if theyre biased, that doesnt mean theyre wrong" This quote just sums up the illogical nature of your argument. Some biased sources are somehow much more credible than other possibly biased sources. Everytime you and TopGamer make these claims I have to post links to disprove them. Then, instead of responding directly to them, you hypocritically disregard them as biased, while ignoring the inherent, and blatant, bias in your sources.
honestly, there are so many opinions (official or not) about one being more powerful than the other that at this point i don't believe anything anyone says. however, i'd be more inclined to ignore an OFFICIAL'S comparison about his/her product and the competition's, simply because his/her views would naturally be biased towards his/her own product.
and then was put in charge of the Xbox Game Technology Group, or some crap like that. How he got into such a high level position requiring an enormous amount of talent is mystery, even to fellow developers. Why anyone would listen to what he has to say (let alone about the competition) is beyond me.
Then again, it's hard to argue with people that have no understanding of programming, CPU architecture, or anything remotely technical and simply just copy and paste from web forums in a sad attempt to justify their biased views.
My friend Christie is a CS major, and when I showed her just the picture of the Cell CPU she was intrigued. When she found out the specs and how the damn thing worked, she nearly fainted. I've had others look at it too and most of them were shocked at what they saw (and in a very good way).
Apparently, the more you argue with people the harder they work to reaffirm their original beliefs. Some eventually see the truth, while others lag behind and stick to the past. It feels wierd correcting the statements of the same people day after day, but I guess someone has to do it.
So at what point will you learn DJ?
that person is just a gamer, no developer, not a sony nor ms employee, but a SONY fan. u call that proof that the ign article and other sources are rubbish? psh, watever. GIVE US A REAL SOURCE.
idk why even bother doing this, ul just call whatever i say BS anyway, even if i were to post a link from sony itself admitting that the ps3 is inferior to the 360.
Have u posted any links from official sources that actually prove my sources wrong?
Has sony already proven some of the downgrade rumors wrong?
Did sony ever deny any of microsoft's or ATI's statements, or any other official statements declaring the 360's superiority over the ps3?
Why? Please, tell me...
If the ps3 really were superior to the 360, would sony have already stated why and laid out all the facts by now?
There, now that we have that straight, I still expect that you will instantly deny all of this when it is so far still pure fact. U have the nerve to call me and others fanboys when u urself are also a fanboy? Thats kinda hypocritical isnt it? I'm a fanboy too, but at least I'm man enuf to admit it.
If he's such a big fanboy then you should be able to read what he wrote and prove it to be illogical (the definition of a fanboy involves defying logic to justify the irrational superiority of one game console)
And no, I would not consider myself a fanboy. I plan on owning all three consoles, and I don't just go around bashing 360 games, or the console itself. I just respond to you and TopGamer when you make claims that the 360 is so much more powerful, that Sony sucks, that the 360 has more bandwidth, that all playstation games suck, etc.
And if you did post a link from Sony where they say that the ps3 is inferior to the 360 I would believe it. I'm just not going to believe links where Microsoft says the ps3 is inferior to the 360.
In conclusion, I implore you to read that link and point out any inconsistencies you find, particularly in his rebuttal to Matt Lee's statements. It shouldn't be so hard to do if he's just making it up.
21 - icdedppl,you're right
shadowgamer - 5 Minutes ago | Let him/her speak
the "MODS" blow!! they don't care what is being posted or that some people don't try to have intelligent conversations.they even post crappy news stories over legit stories.and you wonder how it got posted.what they should do is wipe all accounts and start new.but when you start an account,you have to decide what game system you're more interested in most.
the mart,thammer,top real multi account deal gamer for 360,bill gates, ps3fan and others on the ps3 side, don't contributes.they don't try to have intelligent discussions on the ps3 side or the 360.they just flame.but call themselves gamers.
so i'm calling you out mods,but you won't be doing anything.until you fix some things,you're site will never be legit.
also,that's a lot of articles that come from 360 chipset supporters than coming from an even balance.what games are carmack making for ps3 again?i failed to catch what games he was making for ps3?somebody find that for me and post a link.
Is because the Mods dont' make the news up. They just get it published. Fact of the matter is....Sony put themselves in this position. Fact of the matter is...there isn't a lot of good news for the overpriced under performing ps3. Fact of the matter is... Most developers are totally behind the 360 and have issues with the ps3. The news is the news. If it don't favor your console of choice...what do you want the mods to do. News ain't fair. News is News. And right now if you are ONLY a sony fanboy....you have to be concerned. Developers, video game annalyst, editors, programmers.....They are all saying the same thing. Sorry its not in support of the ps3. Its called LIFE. Get over it. Is it hard for you to swallow? The truth? Just buy the console you want and be happy with the choice you make. But don't expect everyone to lie just to make it fair in YOUR EYES. The Truth will always prevail. And the writing is on the Wall. Thanks Microsoft
What the hell are you talking about?. Buy your PS3 and leave it alone why does it have to leaps and bounds more fowerful for you to support the PS3?. The all time greatest console seller is from last gen and 360 owners still play it like crazzy. PLAY THE GAMES!!.
Why should we take anything he says as truth? Oh thats right if you read it on the internet and it supports your position it must be true!
Reasons why i love this man:
1. He calls people out on their bull, and sets it straight
2. He actually knows what hes talking about
3. He is not biased, he openly admits systems strengths and weaknesses
People had better not debate this article, youll lose.
P.S. all this is worthless if the games are crappy
Now what sony fanboys? ha ha ha ha ha... This guy goes into incredible detail and shows he knows exactly what he is talking about. He is obviously being completely honest and unbiased. It's just impossible for sony fanboys to accept that the 360 is better for games. WOW. Get over it. Whats the big deal. Its not the first or the last time you have seen proof to why. You just won't allow your brains to digest the COMMON sense info that has been presented by people in the know. Not fan boys going on a rant in a forum for sony fanboys. Is it really that complicated. Article after article...time and time again...Facts have been presented which clearly shows the 360 is a better next gen gaming platform. And to stay on TOPIC. This guy has pages and pages of detailed FACTS. And its impossible for any of you fanboys....DJ and others to even attempt to discredit all the Facts and details he is laying out. NONE of you are developers with any experience with the 360 or the PS3. All sony has ever said is the same ole song. The Cell does more floating point operations. And MS has never denied that. But this guy explains why it isn't as important as Sony would like people to believe. In detail. WOW. He lays it out in plain and simple terms that anyone with common sense can understand. I wonder if DJ has even read the whole article. You have become a sad case DJ. You when from having a little respect on this site. To fan boy rants and desperate damage control...all due to the fact that you aren't a gamer. You don't look at things from a gamers perspective. You only see SONY. And your brain won't allow you to see the TRUTH behind the numbers. ALL sony fans need to re read this article and get informed. The sad part is most 360 owners already knew all this months and months ago. Get a clue and grow up boys. Buy the games you want. The war is over. The 360 is the most powerful next gen gaming system. And it just so happens will have the largest fan base for years to come. Whether it will keep the number 1 spot is yet to be written in history. But I don't think its a far stretch to say "most likely 360 will own this whole next generation". Thanks Microsoft. And thanks to the author of this article for finally getting the Whole Truth out and nothing but the Truth.
P.S. The truth to sony fan boys is like kryptonite is to Superman.
I'v been reading this type of stuff for ages i'm baffled on why gamers couldn't tell by PS3's jaggy-less PS2 looking games and the game pics that clearly looked like the Dev's were having trouble deciding what to put in the games and what would make them look the most next-gen that they could; with the limited capability of not doing as much at any given time. (Color, shadows, lighting ect). Play games and get over it, it's what 360 gamers have been doing when people tried to brainwash gamers in thinking they were playing a console 3 times less powerful.
Ok I'm sorry I'm no genius, I don't know everything about computer, graphics, architecture nor do I plan on pretending like I do. But from what I have read and what I understand to be true, I don't understand the claim as how this article is biased...He knocks both companies/machines for marketing numbers that are theoretical and don't always have anything to do with games...It's pretty apparent that when marketing these machines Microsoft AND Sony do choose the "Bigger number better machine" mentality. They pick the biggest numbers that their machines can theoretically produce and use those as selling points. If anyone would love to dispel this, oh please do because you know it's true...Ok secondly he gives the nod to the PS3 CPU over the 360's...so if it's biased wouldn't he make some bullsh*t claims as to how the 360's is better? He's entirely correct in describing the two, ok yes 360 has 3 dual core CPU's, and the PS3 has ::GASP:: 1 PPE and 7 SPE's so once again he's still NOT being biased, he goes on to claim that the 360's is much much easier to develop for, and has more CPU L2 cache memory, and that certain codes, AI, will be easier to run on the 360. So wait wait he's saying the 360 is easier to develop for? OMG he's so BIASED, we all have known this for a LONG time...Also states the PS3 is much more capable of having alot more things going on at once, AI, Cloth psychics, etc...which once again is true and actually is...wow this is for you "DJ" a COMPLIMENT and a NOD towards the PS3 architecture...Than he goes on to state what the whole world knows...The Xbox 360 GPU is new and is part of the brand new future line of ATI's Graphics processors, it's far superior and advanced over the PS3's, please please unless if you have a link don't try and dispel this, it's true just face it. The ps3 CPU is superior, the Xbox 360 GPU is superior, ok theirs performance hits and advantages on both consoles. This article is not biased and is very informative, and I think settles alot of things I wasn't 100%on...I do find it interesting though that he says the 360 is more capable of doing a 1080P game over the PS3, oh no no "DJ" we have no idea if this is true yet so you need to shut it and wait and see...but how he states that the more efficient GPU would make higher resolutions smoother seems logical, if it's practical we'll just have to wait and see...Ok anyways the only thing he knocked the PS3 on was blu-ray saying it wasn't entirely necessary yet, but haven't we been saying this for a while? I don't know but I enjoyed this article and anyone who is going to try and dispel any of this without articles please save your time. oh and did anyone notice this poll on their...
Will you be camping out for a Wii or PS3?
30% got my 360
32%PS3 All the way
Why should I provide a link to dispel something that you have no proof of in the first place? Where's your link? Where's your published article?
What the author did was choose to be underhanded and a bit subtle with his deceit. Yes, the basic facts are there, but then the author construes it with his biased opinions and purposefully leaves out very important information on the PS3 side. In order to hide his intentions, he leaves a few hints of praise for the PS3 components, but ultimately spends a majority of time boasting about how great the 360 is and refrains from critisizing his console of choice . Best example is the L2 cache description. He says that Xenon has more L2 cache than Cell. While that's true, Xenon shares 1 MB of cache between 3 PPEs while Cell dedicates 1/2 MB of cache to 1 PPE. On top of that, there's 2.5 MB of on-chip memory on the Cell, versus 1 MB of on-chip memory on Xenon. Cell has more memory per thread.
It's very easy to leave out important facts, and the author does a fine job of that. Seriously, leaving out the EIB is like selling a car without the gearbox. Nothing will run properly.
His strategy: Make the PS3 component look worse. Make the 360 component look better. Say both components have their advantages and disadvantages in order to trick people into thinking he's impartial. Rinse. Repeat.
It's nothing new; I've seen this approach dozens of times. He probably could've gotten away with it if it weren't for the dumb segment on RSX vs. Xenos.
Good god, hes praising the 360 GPU, not the 360. What the hell is your problem, everything has to be knocking the PS3! Guess what, the 360's GPU is quite nice, the closest card to DirectX 10 right now, and a lot of future is in that card. Chill out. Just because he doesnt support your views, he isnt underhanded. Im sure he left out stuff about the 360. But if he went into full detail it would have been hundreds of pages. Those machines have more then you know in them.
Also, if he had done away with the GPU vs segment, that would be cutting out a major part of the console. They wouldnt be consoles without the graphics cards. The GPU's are more powerful then the CPU's in both.
" P.S. The truth to sony fan boys is like kryptonite is to Superman"
hahaha i thought u passed grade 2 but i was wrong
by the way a bullsh*t article the ps3forums article is way more accurate.....for me its a more authentic source, i am a computer engineer and the ps3forums guy knows what he is talking about....
anyway anyone who has a problem with my point of view can suck my balls so make a line after u disagree u all shall be rewarded
that's too funny
Very interesting read (though I cant say I understood it all!) and in the end a conclusion was reached that should satisfy absolutely zero fanboys! PS3 and 360 are basically the same, lets all just calm down and leave this to the one thing which should have been most important from the start, the games which get released!
The fanboys coming on here and saying this article is biased sure is sad... If the article went the other way and concluded that the PS3 was more powerfull yes we would have the 360 fans saying the article is biased towards Sony...
We really cant win. Its my opinion that the 360 is slightly more powerful Im basing that on what I have read over the last few weeks and what I have seen too, such as the comparisons between ridge racer and Tony Hawks 8 e.t.c.
Come on Sony fans theres no way in hell you expected all this a few months ago. NO WAY! If I was a Sony Fanboy Id certainly be disappointed.. Yes I know future games will get better but thats not the point is it. After coming on this site for the last year and hearing sum of the Sony claims even at the PS3 launch I EXPECTED the games to look way better. I havent bought a console in awhile but now Ive seen a little of both machines Ill be buying an XBOX 360 in March 07. You can pick away at things as much as you want call me biased if you like, the truth is Im not biased at all I just think now the Ps3 is finally out it only shows how powerfull the 360 really is. Calling this article biased is really only showing how much of a fanboy you really are. Give the guy a break, like I ve said Great article keep it up and lets hope your not put off giving us more but your in fact having a really great laugh at the fanboy rantings....
it doesn't matter what's in the system.
people can argue hardware all they want. The winner will be decided by the games available, and the quality of the online service, exactly as it should be.
I agree with you, i stated that further up in the page, but according to phil harrision your buying the PS3 for its "potential".
was really interesting.
Just kidding, I knew the 360 was better for games all along!!!
whats the matter DJ the truth hurst that the 360 kicks that piece of ps3 crap and you dont like the truth.
Man you dont have a clue what your talking about,where this guy does,stop with the cut and pasteing jobs it just makes you look desperate.Why would anyone listen to what you have to say on the subject,this guys a pro ur NOT and any arguments you have dont mean a thing SO plz STOP your just making a fool of yourself
Xenos is more powerful than a x1900xtx and 7900gtx, man that is very impressive indeed. Us 360 gamers are in for some eye candy in the future and the present. Gears of War anyone?
PS3 got PWNED!!!
DJ is a newb me and the Mart have been schooling this fool forever. Never believe anything sony says, DJ does, that is how I know he is a gullible fool.
He never said the Xenos was more powerful than an x190 or 7900GTX, he said it was more efficient. You have to read it.
I am a programmer, a college graduate (computer Science), a beta tester, and embedded software engineer. But first and foremost I am a GAMER!
I read this post and it’s very bias. And if it was written with the PS3 getting all the “big up’s” and the X360 getting all the downs I would say the same thing.
But this is a blatant slam at the PS3, and 4 days before the system is released in the States. By a person that is neither in the industry nor has probably every played the system his self I might add. If he was a programmer that when rogue from a studio house of something maybe he would get some weight, but he cut and pasted information for everything. Forums, bias articles, bias interviews, and its supposed to be truth?!
Fact is, there are holes all over his post and I don’t have the time to address all of them. I m not too worried though because most of the people that read it will be people that have already made up there mind about the systems and have already claimed themselves as knowing everything about both systems and that’s with out programming for both. (key point) Hopefully though most of the people that read this article are open minded enough to,
1) take it with a grain of salt since it doesn’t come from a credible source and
2) understand that it is bias and say in will find my own answers.
If you go and look at my post you will see that I am and always have been very fair in my post. And I hate when people put up “hate post” just to get a buzz or to claim their system as great.
(If it’s that great go play it. I never will understand why, even if you have some free time, want to come and waste time on this site trying to add substance to your purchase with comments about good or bad articles, about your system or the competition. If you already have the system that you love, go play it and be happy let others be happy with their CHOICE as well. X360 fans always talk about choice, why don’t you let others have their CHOICE too! When the X360 came out PS3 fans where not all over you forums and post planting seeds of about and despair about the system.)
So here is a little something for everyone to think about.
1) “If” the PS3 is weaker in performance does it really matter?
They have been the market leader for Two cycles now and are working on their third. And “if” they get it Sony will be the only company to ever do it. Kudos Sony!
2) “if the X360 is weaker in performance does it really matter?
They have been the market leader in Online gaming and revolutionized how console GAMERS play together for years to come.
If it wasn’t for both systems who knows where we (I mean the real gamers) would be. Would we still be playing cart based games and sloppy 3D, cause lets not forget Nintendo was on top before this!!!
Breaking this up because I think that this should be heard and I would hate for people to skip over it because it was too long
“Jump In” and Welcom3” Chang3”
You quite obviously have a lean towards Sony because sony fanboys were bashing the 360 buyers long before and through the 360 launch. Your imagination runs away with you.
He pointed out many weaknesses about the 360's architecture, so how is that being biased towards the 360? Also, what the hell does playing the system have to do with tech specs? Maybe you should go back to school, hes talking hardware not software, so hes not in your field. If this were a games comparison it would be entirely biased, because each person likes their own games. But since some of the people posting here seem to know more then this guy, why dont they make their own tech spec comparison? Because its heresay info. It all is. Sony hasnt released some of their specs, so what the hell is everyone supposed to think about them? Im jumping around here, basically they will be around equally as powerful, and even if they arent, the onus of proof to be a lot better is on the PS3, because its supposed to be the better system right? Merely having a slight edge isnt enough proof, doesnt make a 200 dollar difference.
If you want to talk software let me know, im always in for a good old COBOL talk.
for me its not a matter of being biased. Its a matter of credibility. Who is Michael Perry? what is his credentials and experience in reviewing hardware in a fair impartial manner? As others from both camps have pointed out, anyone can write a blog article on the internet. Why is his article more credible then anything I have seen DJ write? As others have said, if this article had stated the PS3 was the stronger machine then the Xbox 360 guys would be saying the samething I am. Which is correct. If you want either side to believe an article its going to have to come from a impartial hardware review person that has credibility. Something like Tom's Hardware in the PC world.
Thing is people like this use software programs designed to benchmark the hardware. They understand the theroy and then test the reality. They do it for all kinds of hardware. In this article he talks about his interpretation of the information he has read about. He gives links to make it look even more credible. Most of those links are in regards to the 360. The only developer he points to is one who develops for the Xbox 360. (2 articles) His only references to the PS3, period, is the IBM white paper on the Cell and 2 pictues. One of the cell and one of facts Sony presented on the RSX. However he gives 3 links to articles on the 360 GPU. Funny how then in his opinion piece he is all praising of the 360 GPU.
Again at the end we have to trust he really truly fully understands the subject matter he is writting about. Second we have to trust that he has presented it in a fair and impartial manner. Third he gives no real world examples to back up what he is saying.
Now some have said that the evidence is the games that have been released for the PS3. Sorry but that does not cut it. The 360 had its fair share of graphically poor games at release. Did that mean it was not capable of creating GoW? Certainly not. All it ment was that the developer was not able to tap the power of the hardware. So don't go around and say because some of the PS3 launch titles are not up to par means the 360 is more powerful. Again all it means is those developers did not take advantage of the PS3 hardware.
At the end of the day both systems are going to have very impressive games. Far greater then anything previous consoles where capable of. So in the end if you think the 360 is more powerful then buy it. If you think the PS3 is more powerful then buy it. But please stop trying to convince everyone that your choice should be their choice because its getting old.
If Nintendo was still on top we would still be playing kiddy games and we would have never had games that changed the industry like
Great online experience
Even Gears of War!!
The list goes on and on!
Think about it, if games like killswitch never where made who’s to say that Gears would have ever been made!
These companies have done wanders for the gaming community but now we are just tearing each other apart for what?
Because you want to be able to say definitively that your system is the best. F-That!! Stop the fanboyism BE GAMERS, please we have enough problems with Jack Thompson!
In conclusion this article had only two good points
1)it showed how even if you write an 11 page article that looks technical, it can be very very wrong, so you can’t trust everything you read.
2)He actual said ONE thing right. In the end both systems are technical strong but they both are soft in spots, I just wish that he would have been as critical about the X360 as he was on the PS3.
I would write one myself, but I pick up my PS3 on Friday and i will be too busy playing it!
Anyone up for some GOW?
Anyone up for some R:FOM on Friday?
“Jump In” and “Welcom3 Chang3”
I'd play some more GOW with you but I am tired. Definitely hit the Resistance on Friday, though. Picked up the copy tonight. Holla!
I understand that people here and other sites bash the ps3 a little and the reasons you give for people to look at the systems equally are correct, and both systems will have good games, and both systems will have online and both will be pretty equal and the ps3 will have its exclusives and itS own super hot looking games and the 360 will have its exclusives and its own monster looking games, and the ps3 does some things better and the 360 does other things better, etc... etc...
But what you keep forgetting is the massive amounts of lies and bullcrap that some people just wont forget.
So now its not just spending 600 plus whatever else like a game and cables for hd and controller if needed, its not even about price but about principle.
Hey i saw in previews motorstorm and lair and some others and they looked nice, so i figured even with all the lies from sony and I dont need to go through the list but i will if you want just ask, but even with all the lies like they did with the ps2((emotion engine etc..)) I still am a gamer and loved the ps1 and wanted and still want a PS3.
Because even with the lies it looks like a nice system and I liked the features that it has, built in next gen drive, if it wins or not i like thats its built in, a bigger hard rive, i like that, multi card reader, i like that, NO rumble well that pisses me off but hopefully a third party can build it in a controller and skip the judgment for sony not being able to use it etc...
But I was told it is 3X more powerful then 360, I was told it was a super computer and thats just not the case, I know we can add a HD to the ps3 I know it has a browser and i know the premium is 600 but in the end will cost 900 with everything i need but money isn't the problem, this is the problem
I have a 360, I have the Hd-dvd for it, I have wifi for it and the camera and the wireless headset, And while in the first year I had a few games I liked, cod2, fn3, pgr3, oblivion,Graw and a few others that while weren't super next gen they did me justice and held me over plus the arcade and demos held me over until this October, it coulve been a better launch with more AAA titles but it was ok but NOW marvel alliance, splinter cell, GOW, cod3, tony hawk,wwe raw, rainbow six, with all these new games and more I have the next gen games I want, they look alot better then last year and GOW is the best game with the best visuals anyone has ever seen, I repeat GOW has visuals YOU have never seen before and the online experience eis perfect for me and is already built.
NOW, I could easily forget all the lies of sony and just go buy the ps3 in its infancy and play what it has for now and wait for better games with better visuals and control and wait for th eonline to get better with patches and grow with the system as it gets better and deal with little games for the first year and then be rewarded a year later with greatness just LIKE I DID WITH the 360.
But this is the whole point. After seeing the PS3 in action on a lcd and plasma with my own eyes properly connected, I saw something I shouldn't have, Games that dont look better then the 360 games. Graphics not up to par with bad textures and things slowed down badly. Ok so maybe its just the launch titles and they will get better.
But I dont care, I was told it would be superior, I was made to wait an extra year, I was told it would have all these things but not everything is up and perfect and graphically it doesn't stand up to Gow and other games, WHY does that matter, why be a graphics whore and not let good gameplay be the main FACTOR.
because WHILE I CAN LIE TO MYSELF AND FORGET SOME OF SONY'S LIES, I WONT BUY INTO THE PS3 BECAUSE ITS NOT WHAT THEY SAID, AND THATS THE FACT THAT THE PS3 WAS THIS MONSTER, AFTER 1 YEAR AND LONGER DEV TIME I SHOULDVE BEEN WOWED, i SHOULDVE SEEN THE GAMES AND SAID, WOW YEAH THATS A LITTLE BETTER THEN WHAT THE 360 IS DOING, YEAH ILL GET IT INSTANTLY. But instead I said wow this isn't that great, oh snap look at that and look at this its bad. Couple that with the fact that you got to spend 600 to get the premium and that upsets me enough,
So i cant get past it now and I have what I need in the 360, its all working and ready now, it offers me all the features that the ps3 will one day have up and running in a year or 2 that works similarly to the 360 with chat and video and full fledged online service so ill wait until then
I know deep down inside that I can live with the 360's games after seeing and playing cod3 and GOW, I can rest assured that games will look even better soon or near future, and that its not less powerfully then the ps3, even if the ps3 is mor powerfully the blew it in my eyes. When you make bold claims an lies like sony did then at launch you better have a few games that kill the competition in looks especially at those high prices for the public. thats the point.
they failed at that.
Written by Badcolo & agreed with 100%