Join Date: Jun 2007
Re: Blu-Ray wins on Black Friday week.
In a day and age where any analyst can be bought and sold, I find it interesting that you'd accept one persons report on which console is better. I personally, am sick of the fanboy garbage, and M$ and Sony's propaganda machine. So, I actually did the research myself. The biggest problem in both these machines is a supreme lack of RAM, however, altogether, the CBE processor is vastly superior to the 360's, and hell, even any processor out on the market currently (accept for Suns new Server on a chip...that thing is intense), 3-Core PPC chip (7 cores vs 3 hmmm, not sure there...wonder who wins?). Secondly, both GPU's in these machines are relatively 'last' gen, when you take into consideration the 8800+ series lines from NVIDIA, and whatever half-assed attempt ATI has made on a DX10 card. However, that having been said, Sony made sure, with the inclusion of BR and HDD standard in all of their consoles, to allow for a serious amt of data transfer from disc to HDD into game, w/o the need for the extra RAM. This will hurt both machines (RAM), in the future, but the 360 moreso, than the PS3. The reason being is that, Microsoft has yet to start making games on HD-DVD's, nor do they have that option without alienating more than half or more of their install base. Microsoft cannot force their entire user population to get HD-DVD attachments, and therefore they cannot utilize the extra space available to them in HD formatting. Secondly, the PS3's data transfer rates are vastly superior to the Xbox (1 tflop vs 2 tflops). Again, PS3 wins. Thirdly, the RAM in both machines. Microsoft has 512meg of shared DDR3 @ 700 Mhz between the CPU and GPU, PS3 has 256 Meg dedicated to the GPU, and another 256 Meg of XDR Ram @ 3.2g dedicated to the CPU. Got any of that in your PC? Not yet, as Rambus hasn't released the 1g sticks to the PC market. It should be mentioned also, that the latency of the XDR RAM is FAR less than even DDR3 RAM due to the architecture of RAMBUS' chips.
Apparently, people neglected to read my post from earlier, but that's ok, I'll reiterate here. Currently, most games are designed with 1 core in mind, and I'm talking 95% of games here. The PS3's primary core, does not function the same as most PC's or the 360's primary core does. The PPE (Primary Processing Element) in the CBE (Cell Broadband Engine) stops, starts and schedules processes for the SPE's (Synergestically Processing Elements). Therefore, when porting a game to the PS3, developers need to remove processes from the PPE and push them out to the SPE's. This is being done with fantastic results by Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Konami (MGS4), Rockstar North (GTAIV), Polyphony Digital (Gran Turismo 5) granted we've yet to see these serious titles yet, but they are coming and the strides being made in graphical quality (Avg polygons from Gran Turismo 4 per car model 4000 vs avg polygons from GT5 200,000) are easily apparent. When you have lame developers like Valve's Gabe Newell, who refuses to adapt to new technology, dumping their game off onto an internal developer, who sucks no less (EA), this hurts the industry, not just the PS3. Thankfully, Sony has more internal developers than both MS and Nintendo combined, and are currently working on 15 exclusive titles for the PS3, so I don't personally have to put up with a shoddy work ethic, and developers who aren't willing to actually think outside the box (god forbid). Let Valve and EA die a slow death. The PS3 isn't going anywhere as long as BR is creaming competition in software sales (and it is, market penetration for BR players vs HD is vastly higher in BR's dept, and software sales are again, vastly in BR's favor) regardless of Mr. Newell's apocolyptic proclamations from the pulpit.. And the PS3's ability for long-term staying power, over the 360's is readily apparent to those who do a little bit of looking.
Last edited by Mornelithe; 12-07-2007 at 05:39 AM..