No matter whether Nintendo Co., Microsoft Corp. or Sony Corp. wins the video game console war, there already is one huge victor: International Business Machines Corp., which designed and makes the microprocessors for all three units.
me to (True )
(was it 15 years ago?)
Good for them considering the fact they lost apple's contract.
to all sides in a war is a good means to a fast profit but can also be very dangerous. In this case, a massive meltdown in the games industry like the one in 1984 would hurt IBM if they are depending too heavily on the income from their chip foundries to keep their books balanced.
they provide 512MB GDDR3 ram for Xbox 360 and 256MB GDDR3 ram for PS3 and ram for Wii dont they??? or is it pc gaming market???
the notebook hard drives for the 360. Sony went with Seagate for PS3.
providing HDTVs for 360 displays ;)
would be cool if AMD join the party, who would you think would choose AMD for their CPU: Sony, MS or Nintendo? That would make IBM a run for their money
i dont like the headline, i mean all consoles are build with IBM processors???????????????????? ????????????????.......so DUHHHHHHHHH
what if MS secertly paid IBM, to tell them what was going into the PS3 with the cell an everything, then had them to build a better one for gaming for the x360.you know they were working on the cell an Ps3 an the zenon around the same time. the only reason why the PS3 wasnt released was because of the blue-ray part of the system!! you know this is a dog eat dog world,so never say what couldnt happen!!! just a thought!! could have happen you never know!!
more like Nintendo going to IBM and asking them "what's going into the 360 and PS3? Really....and how much does it cost?" :gasp: "....what you got over there on the bargain rack? WE'LL TAKE IT!"
Cell took $400 million, 4 years to develop, and was put together by a crapload of engineers from IBM, Sony, and Toshiba, the hd-dvd dudes. Xenon is just a triple-core G5 with cache that runs at half the speed of its cores. It was originally going to be dual-core, but Microsoft insisted on three since they didn't want it to look like a copy of AMD and Intel's offerings. Microsoft wanted the cheapest offering, and they got what they paid for.
didn't help the PS3 much though did it DJ?
This typical BS from you, hardware is secondary to software engineers. I know a software guy who once got Half-Life to work on a 586 computer for the fun of it. It looked like Sh!t but it worked. You can have the 30 of the most powerful processors in the world on one computer and it won’t matter. Just ask the people who make these games its all about the video card and the memory. “Memory is the key factor in Digital Media” I do computer generated art and when I compress the image its lack of memory that slows my computer not the processor. (Memory is Primary)
Let's think about this for a second. One company designing the same part for 3 competing consoles. How could they possibly make one better than the other. Would they intentionally make one worse, they need to be trying to give every company the best possible. That is a terrible situation for everyone involved because one will always end up feeling cheated and that comes back to IBM then. If you have three different companies then it's much easier because each company making the chips has a different knowledge base.
really that stupid!! I mean come on, he rants like he's intelligent which I think he is, but he just wont accecpt whats going on with his beloved PS3!! its been know for a while that the cell is great, but not that great for games. he said MS went the cheap route, you can bet your a$$ that MS didnt cut any corners when designing the xbox!!why would MS cut corners, I guess to save MONEY RIGHT!!last thing!! if what he said was true then that really makes sony look stupid, they spent all that money on the cell an rsx an games still look an run better on the cheaper xbox!!
the fact that games run better on the 360 is that developing for it is much easier, the PS3 is a little more challenging if you wanna get the full power out. as some devs say its only a matter of time when you start seeing the little differences in terms of graphics and stuff; at the end the PS3 is going to show the more superior power it has, but i asume its going to be a minor difference... sony is not as stupid as you think in investing millions of dls in the cell + rsx, just because you dont read all the details in what cell + rsx are capable of doesn't mean they're not great in games... the company is not runned by stupid kids like all of us posting sh!t in the site you know? its like trying to bash bill gates for not knowing what they did with the original xbox, clearly they were testing the water for a new money making market...
Samsung doesn't make the hard drive for the 360. You just keep making things up don't you. For those of you who don't know this....DJ pretends like he knows things but if you pay attention you will find that he makes up most of what he says. This is one example. DJ....Enlighten us on how you know the 360 hard drive is made by samsung. ha ha ha ha ha...
the cell an rsx not being that great for games aint something I made up off the top of my head. Its being said by developers, dont get me wrong, not all developers are saying that but a few are!!an im not going to take the time to post any links because if you've been on this site for a while you would already know that it had been posted!! you guys fail to understand why us xbox fans dog the Ps brand so hard, especially now!! all sony did was dog the xbox, cut it down for it own personal gain, talked about the games,the tech, the launch, everything, an sony fans fell for it like always.sony said the ps3 was 2-5 times stronger the the xbox1.5,HD dont start until we say so,MS was wrong for releasing 2 sku's an my favorite, with the power of cell we can take gaming into 4D,an that the graphics the ps3 can produce can only be riveld by top motion picture companies!!then to come out the gates like they did is not only a shame but embarrising!! they were supposed to show thier superioty from the start,not in 6 months or a year like people are saying now!! because guess what its not like the ps3 will get better an the xbox360 is gonna stand still.so with that being said I dont think the Ps3 will ever be able to show a conviceing advantage over the xbox!!not in graphics,not online,an not features!!
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.