Devs Problems: Games use 30% Sony PS3’s Power & 60% Xbox 360’s
November 6, 2007 | Filed under Featured Comments
As we featured a really good comment the other day that was a little more on the 360’s side about Devs Problems and the lack of memory on Sony PS3, plus storage on Xbox 360.
We thought we should feature some news about games apparently using up to 30% of the Sony PS3’s Power and 60% of Xbox 360’s.
David Taylor makes this claim and even backs it up with some sources to where he got that information from.
Here is what David Taylor said:
And even though no one has a clue who this person is or if what they say holds any truth his claims will be repeated all over the place as fact by retarded 360 fanboys.
Devs who have worked on the PS3 such as naughty dog are saying they have only used 30% of the PS3s power.
According to the devs Motorstorm apparently only uses between 15% and 20% of potential:
See ps3.qj.net Under the hood of MotorStorm
EA said in December they were using 20% of the PS3s power:
See kotaku.com EA Games Use 20 Percent of PS3’s Power
On the other hand the developers of lost Planet said last year they were using 60% of the 360s power:
See the news on xbox365.com
This guy is just another hater hiding behind pseudo made up science and anonymity. There are no memory size problems at all with the PS3 if you know how to code for it. It has exactly the same amount of memory as the 360. In fact there is less of a strain on the PS3s memory because it can cache to the hard drive. Why do all these so called experts always forget about that?
The FACT remains that the PS3 is more powerful which is why Microsoft will not allow the 360 to essentially be bench marked against it in Folding@home. PS3 games are already at the same graphical level as the 360.
This statement really sums up what an idiot this guy is:
“All it will take is one REALLY good game, yet to come, on the PS3, with exceptional graphics and very heavy scripting, and it will absolutely bring that machine to its knees.”
Really? What like Ratchet & Clank did? Its also funny how Oblivion which is one of the most technically demanding games on any platform runs better on the PS3 than the 360.
Leave a comment | Get the latest news in our RSS Feed, Newsletter or follow us on Twitter.
Got a problem with a game, product or service? Let us know so the community can help
Folding@home is very good example. Why don’t M$ let Xbox 360 get on the Standford network to help humanity? Put 360 on folding@home, this will settle the argument “PS3vs360″ once for all.
Just DO IT!!! M$
Oblivion on my PS3 is better graphically and quicker loading than my PC and 360.
I like all my consoles but you just cant compare PS3 to a 360 - the PS3 whoops its ass and its only been out for like 8-9 months! PS3 is a power machine, if my 360 tried to play R&C it would burn up and go to the ring of death cemetery
Its NOT about power!! Hasnt the Wii taught us anything yet?? ITs about the games!! THe most powerful console has never won a console war ever! The one with the best games did! Neo Geo, Jaguar, 3do, CDI, and even xbox 1. Lair is best looking game so far and it sucks and Nintendogs is the ugliest ever and has now outsold Grand theft auto 3!!!
First off folding home has nothing to do with gaming. Second Rachet and Clank isn’t selling like crazy in fact Ace Combat 6 had a better opening. Third even after a price drop, bundles, and even a 40 gig sku the PS3 is still getting beat by the 360 in world wide sales. The memory constraint is a real issue and in fact has been the main culprit as to why most 360 - PS3 ports suck. Think about this why would it be easier to tranfer code from a “Superior” console to a weaker one? Its simple the 360 has MORE MEMORY or at least has memory set up to be used how developers want it to be versus the segragation found on the PS3. I also doubt one good game on the PS3 will stand against a whole shitload of good games on the 360 it hasn’t so far.
At last. Someone writing something worthwhile reading. I can’t wait for MGS, Killzone 2 and Little Big Planet. Then PS3 will be definitely worth having. I already think it is however, Warhawk is the best multilayer game out there..
And to eugene:
The wii is not doing better because it has good games. Many of my friends say they haven’t bought a new wii game for ages.. coz there’s none out!! The wii sells well because it’s made the market accessible to different markets, people who wouldn’t think of playing a games console before. Although in my opinion it’s just another way of pressing a button!
A
If Cell offered any real performance IBM would have used it in P, I, and Z series servers. They dont.
Apple who was offered the option of Cell would have taken it. They didn’t. In fact it’s pretty clear to all that Cell offers about the same performance as a high end PPC G4 or a low end G5. Both of these are obsolete in terms of being competitive to current CPU’s used in desktop PC’s and servers. Cell is quite zippy for a video game console - but don’t talk it up any further.
So in summary, COD4 on PS3, running at 1080p uses 30% of the PS3’s power (despite being out a year less than the 360), and the 360 version of COD4 runsd 720p** and uses 60% of the power.
**Talking native resolutions here, COD4 on the 360 can be displayed at 1080p, due the to 720p upscaler chip in the 360, but it’s no alterntive for REAL resolution.
In the last generation, Xbox was more powerful and had more “potential” than PS2, (and so was GameCube,) but all those power and potential did not help Xbox (nor GameCube) win the console war in last gen.
Why?
Because PS2 reigned supreme in the software department amongst the last gen consoles. Xbox might have few killer apps, (Halo and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic come to mind,) but PS2 undeniably had many, many times more better titles than Xbox had.
For this generation, Sony (and their fans) can keep on telling people how much power and potential PS3 has over Xbox 360, but all that power is not going to matter much - when Xbox 360 has so many more great titles. It’s just like how all the power and potential Xbox (or GameCube) had did not matter in the end.
People don’t buy a console to play the CPU or drive. They buy the console to play games.
Let’s take a look at the number of total and great titles Xbox 360 and PS3 have, and compare their libraries:
http://www.metacritic.com/games/xbox360/scores/
http://www.metacritic.com/games/ps3/scores/
Xbox 360 has THREE TIMES more titles than PS3 (i.e., 290 vs 96 at the time of writing this) and over TWO-AND-HALF TIMES more “green” titles (128 vs 49, green means good or okay games.)
Xbox 360 has 10 titles that rank 90% or over; over half of them are exclusives. PS3 has… one, which is not even an exclusive - the one title PS3 has that’s over 90% is also on Xbox 360 as well. PS3 still does not have a single exclusive that score 90% or above at Metacritic.
Don’t tell me that all those games do not matter, but somehow Cell, Blu-ray and “potential” do. I’m a gamer, and games matter to me. Cell, Blu-ray, and “potential” do not. I can’t play potential.
Next year, PS3 will have MGS4 and FFXIII, two very big titles. But that’s next year. And just as Halo and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic could not save Xbox from PS2, I wouldn’t count on a couple of big titles to make too much difference.
And if those two titles do turn out to be great system sellers, then gamers should get a PS3, NEXT YEAR, when the prices of PS3 will definitely go down (as they always do as time passes.)
Hmm, though it could be similar with COD4, he actually didn’t say anything about COD4. It is more a comparison about Uncharted Ps3 vs. Lost Planet 360.
I know that the PS3 are really more powerfull
that the X360, but what matter is the Games.
what afraid me is that the ?X360 has a poor lineup for 2008, and the PS3 and Wii still
really strong in this year…
The 3rl are past now, but the resolution of this
problem come too late, and now the PS3 and Wii
are too strong..
Good look for Mic, he will need this.
Bottom line:
Cell, Blu-ray, potential, or the “future” (as Sony likes to call it) does not matter to gamers.
Games do.
P.S. Oh, and the “future” is not PS3. The future is newer, better and faster consoles. As always.
Only Playstation 3
XBOX 360 Leave that garbage box…Picture can Draw giant….
Sony PS3 İD Me add friend
GTBlack
Oh come now.
From one “opinion as fact” to another. Not one of those “sources” is anything but thumbsuck heresay, most are even misquotes.
As far as 360vsPS3 in folding, there’s no question the PS3 will win every time. THAT’s WHAT IBM DESIGNED IT FOR! Pity they didn’t design it to play games. You will never see the PS3 Cell run at full utilization, 30% may very well be the best you ever get. It’s like a 5.7 litre Ford V8. I’ll take a 3 litre BMW any day.
The only “winner” is IBM. They got Sony to fund their research for cluster computing, got Sony to subsidise the cost of every Cell CPU, BS’d them into putting linux on the PS3, and now IBM can build it’s customers Supercomputer clusters of PS3’s for peanuts and from which Sony will never see a cents return on game sales.
It’s always the same thing with you guys. “Wait and see what the wounderful Gaystation 3 can do” WAIT AND SEE? Nobody waited to see what the X-Box could do. “Wait and see-Wait and see”, yall whine more than a spoiled child. Just admit that Sony made a mistake by using the cell processor before anybody learned to program for it. Gs3 may be supperior, but if noone knows how to program and use the power it contains, then it’s all crap. A word to the wise. Life doesn’t wait around for your learning curves Sony. I can see it now, just when game designers learn to program for the cell, a new X-Box will be ready for release. Then you guys can start the winning all over again. Grow Up!
360 does’nt have a scaler chip.
[Quote:]
The only other major change under the bonnet is the new HANA video display chip, replacing the old ANA version in the classic 360. This chip has erroneously been described as the silicon that deals with the 360’s inbuilt hardware scaling. In truth, Microsoft has now confirmed to us that it’s merely a video output chip - a means of transferring the framebuffer into all of the different signals: composite, s-video, RGB SCART, component, VGA and - the key addition with HANA - HDMI. Scaling itself is actually performed by the Xenos GPU (most likely using a variation of Lanczos resizing) so in that respect the Elite performs identically to the original Xbox 360. The presence of HANA confirms that there will be no aftermarket HDMI solution for the current model.
http://www.xbox-scene.com/xbox1data/sep/EElkulZpkkkmBkxNym.php
ps3 haters are sad little people.memory constraints? what last i knew ps3 had faster memory than the red hot burning 360. and as 4 cell being no better than a g5 mac cpu ,rubbish comments , cell is a untapped work ov art if you study its architecture more closely,if you knew anything about architecture in the first place, which it sounds like you dont. you would know this.idiots.
and by the way unlike you silly fanboys, my opinion comes from a mature and practical and hands on look and time spent playing and comparing all three consoles, and being a not so proud owner ov a xbox 360 /nothing but trouble/ and a wii/very last gen/ and a ps3 which i prefer, as its well built and classy looking ,not to mention a neat little package ov fun even though more games are needed but,not long to wait, hopefully…..
So let me get this straight … people think it’s a GOOD thing that PS3 games are leaving 70% of the PS3s power unused? How is that a positive? What good is that supposed 70% extra if developers can’t figure out how to use it?
You pay good money for a powerful system you want the games to take advantage of it, not leave two thirds of it idle.
“what afraid me is that the ?X360 has a poor lineup for 2008, and the PS3 and Wii still
really strong in this year…”
That’s quite a lie, and one that has gone from fanboy talk to common misconception. There are lots of great games coming out for 2008, maybe not as many as 07 but it’s enough to keep the wheel turning and keep PS3 from #1.
Doesn’t Ninja Gaiden 2, Fable 2, Alan Wake, Project Offset, etc mean anything?
youse keep going on about mgs4 and all that shit but dont forget that There will be a Gears of War 2 and maybe halo 4. not to forget that gta4 will have exclusive downloadable stuff just for the xbox. so while you gaystation fans are playing the last mission of gta4 and mgs4, ill be play GOW2, halo 4, and the downloadable stuff for gta4.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I have both systems.
I am an IT hardware technician.
If you want my opinion about this debate, then I have some facts about this argument.
There is a lot of fanboy crap on this page, and very few facts.
So here are some facts:
The Xbox 360s GPU is more powerful and EFFICIENT than the PS3s. It uses a UNIFIED SHADER ARCHITECTURE similar to the R600 dx10 ATI cores.
That means that each pipeline can produce vertex and pixel shaders, unlike the ps3 which has a fixed number of pipelines for each. Meaning that heavy pixel or vertex scenes can explot the xboxs superior architecture.
The PS3s GPU us based on an old nvidia 7XXX series which is a bit slow compared to newer cards, but still has a lot of life left in it with efficient coding.
This is an indisputable fact. Look it up.
The PS3’s cpu is theoretically more powerful than the 360’s cpu, in certain circumstances, and if the code is specifically coded to exploit the 1 multi threaded general purpose cpu, and 7 spus.
Low level tasks like folding @home can take advantage of all these processors.
HOWEVER!
Games developed in this way are expensive and hard to code, and share little in common with the xbox and PC systems, which have a far larger market share.
Programmes not coded VERY specifically for the PS3’s cell CPU, will actually run faster theoretically on the Xbox 360s cpu because it has 3 general purpose cores, and the PS3 only has 1. Indeed, the processing ability of the PS3s 7 spus are quite limited.
Coded to maximum efficiency, the PS3 processor is faster and CPU dependent programmes will run faster on it, like folding @ home.
However in the real world for MOST general software that is coded for all 3 platforms, the xbox is actually faster, as it has more general purpose cores.
Not only that but most games are more dependent, and the GPU is the bottleneck, not the CPU.
Indeed the 7 spus on the PS3 don’t even handle “graphics” as such, they are better for handling sound, physics and AI, freeing up the CPU itself (the one cpu).
You don’t believe me… LOOK IT UP.
Next up, the ram. the xbox gas 512mb of shared, the ps3 has 256 each for cpu and gpu.
This means that the ps3 is inflexible depending on how much ram is needed for each CPU or GPU, the xbox is again more efficient.
Next, the 10mb of embedded eram on the xbox provides superior (not free) antialiasing, but its there.
All this crap quoted by ignorant people who haven’t done their research about what “percentage” of the power of each system is used by a game is pathetic.
As generations of games pass on a system the coding gets more efficient, and the graphics get better.
Ever seen a final generation PS2 game? some of them look great.
Most current games only even use 1 core on the 360, they don’t even make multi-core games yet.
Both the PS3 and the xbox have a long way to go before they reach their limit.
If these games you lot are so easily quoting only use this or that % of the systems power, how come they slowdown when the screen gets busy?
INEFFICIENCY.
Both systems are well within their limits, and there are improvements to be made in each.
Titles developed for pc xbox and ps3 together will all be similar due to the costs of altering code across sytems.
If anything the xbox versions will be better due to the 3 cores vs the ps3s one core.
If games were coded at maximum efficiency for both systems, then believe it or not, they would be about the same.
The xbox has a superior general purpose CPU, and more efficient and powerful graphics.
The ps3 has a more powerful specific CPU, which can make up for the gpu being less powerful.
So noobs.
If any of you think you can argue with these facts, then post some links, don’t just pull numbers out of your ass like, this games uses X% of the power, blah blah blah.
I have and enjoy both systems, and have always been a sony fanboy with PS1, 2 and PSP, but the facts speak for themselves.
Conclusion:
The xbox is currently theoretically “more powerful” in this and probably the next generation of games, because it is more efficient and better suited to current games. However, cross platform coding means that these differences will matter very little.
In time, as the difficulties of PS3 coding become reduced and the technology becomes more familiar then these differences may decrease.
Did you lot know that madden 08 runs at 60 frames a second on the xbox, and 30 frames a second on the PS3?
Here is a link on a sony fanboy site stating just that:
http://www.ps3vault.com/madden-08-runs-30fps-on-ps3-but-runs-60fps-on-xbox-360-1713
the guy from EA says they have done it to perform as well as they can on each system.
This doesn’t mean the PS3 is half as powerful, but it’s harder to code for, and back up everything I’ve said.
If you want to argue with me, then post some facts and argument as I have attempted to do.
If not then I will assume you agree, or you are a 12yr old fanboy who spouts sony propaganda.
I love both my systems and can’t wait for MGS4 on ps3, and Mass effect on xbox, both will rule.
Blu-ray is a better format than HD-DVD by the way.
and the extra storage will come in handy for extra content for ps3 games in the future I hope.
I want both comanies to suceed, but the xbox is in most situations “more powerful”
Quoting Folding@home scores just makes you ignorant. It’s like saying a dragster is “better” than a formula one car, because its faster in a straight line, remember formula one cars go round corners.
Enjoy your squabbles noobs.
Fanboy Troll Alert!! - These idiots make me want to bin all my consoles.
@Woobie - So your telling me that that its good news the 360 is using only 60% of its power 2 years on? mmmmmm On the flip side next year when the PS3 games are using 60% xbox will be using 90% and then when PS3 is running 90% is this when 360 gets binned and you need to buy the 720Elite with External BluRay Addon and HD Addon and Wifi Addon
Although I know games are the primary (but not only reason) to buy a video game console, one has to look at the future. I say this because when I plunk down $399 for a console (Premium xbox with XBL or the 40gb PS3) I expect more than one year of hits. Microsoft has a played a good game getting more of the “satisfy me now!!” crowd while Sony is building up its PS3 so all the PS2 owners can finally see the time to upgrade. I mean seriously, the xbox360 has been out for two years and has only sold alittle over 13 million consoles and for the first full year it HAD NO REAL COMPETITION! That is sad, really. No doubt Sony has made some mistakes this generation, I would be totally blind to not see this but you have to realize something, while MS killed off last generation due to horrible licensing fees, Sony has had to try it’s best to keep the PS2 alive with it’s 120+million install base. Even if one says 30 million consoles were bought to replace old or broken ones (don’t work xbots I won’t even touch your sales number…RRoD anyone?) that is 90+million PS2 owners who so far, by looking at sale numbers, have not bought into the HD gaming and tv era yet. The 40gb sku (I have a brand new ps2 so for me BC is not an issue) price point was all I was waiting for to buy into the HD gaming era (HD tvs are still WAY too expensive for me lol). I bought me a 360 and had GoW, Lost Planet, LotR:BfME, R6:V, Viva Pinata, and CoD3 and enjoyed them but the 360 itself was only a half step forward to me. I mean you can go all the way but come on, $179 add on player, $99 wifi, $60 wireless headset, $179 120 gb HDD and a horrible failure rate all said to me, no thanks, maybe next round microsoft. The biggest reason I saw no future for the 360 for me personally because of the proprietary hard drives, I mean $99 for 20gbs and $179 for 120 gb is absolutely freaking ridiculous! Anyways just for any readers info, I loved the xbox more than the ps2 last year BECAUSE of the built-in HDD and power. I only dropped it because MS did. I think next round, if MS really listens to their customers (which seems to be against corp polocy) the next xbox will really be worth something instead of a good solution until the PS3 reaches its prime. Because lets be real, that is all that it is. Everything it was released to do has be done and do not say IPTV, because it is about the games remember?
@George.
Your Statement.
“I have both systems.
I am an IT hardware technician.
If you want my opinion about this debate, then I have some facts about this argument.”
Firstly , Im a musician and Use a Mac, So I know nothing of IT and Console Programming, and dont pretend to. But firstly , I know a lot of IT people that pretend to know more than the other… Its just like the ” I do Web Pages” Statement. I’m guessing by IT you mean programming for consoles??
I’m not pissing in anyones pocket… but If it interests you… which it did me, there is some seriously interesting “Tech Talk” on the following forums re: 360 and PS3.
Its quite non-biased because of the community. We can all learn something.
I think if there is any chance of FACTS , They lie here.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/forumdisplay.php?f=15
In case you haven’t noticed, this whole article was written by a Playstation 3 Fanboy who has absolutely zero technical expertise.
Someone needs to point out that the Playstation 3 can only display 275,000,000 polygons per second, compared to the 500,000,000 polygons per second of the Xbox 360.
That is the reason why games like John Madden Football 2008, NCAA Football 2008, All-Pro Football 2008, and many other games from EA Sports, 2K Sports, and so many others all run at 60 frames per second on the Xbox 360, but only 30 frames per second on the Playstation 3.
Gamespot specifically said in the review of those sports games: “The Xbox 360 versions run smoothly at 60 frames per second at 1080p resolution, while the Playstation 3 versions struggle to run at 30 frames per second at 720p resolution.”
It isn’t just sports games with that problem. Look at all the Tony Hawk Skating games, Tom Clancy Splinter Cell: Double Agent, and F.E.A.R. They have frame rates that drop below 20 frames per second on the PS3 and go into slow motion it is so bad…even though the Xbox 360 versions have very smooth framerates.
Oblivion is NOW BETTER on the Xbox 360!!!
When Oblivion was released a year later on the PS3, it used a new shader design…that had NOTHING to do with hardware technology; it was just something put into the new version of the game as a software program. The download was released for the Xbox 360 later on, but the PS3 fanboys always pointed out, “But when you compare the actual discs, the PS3 one has some advantages (although the Xbox 360 version also has advantages, and was ALWAYS rated higher).
Oblivion: Game of the Year Edition is now available for the Xbox 360, and when you now compare Oblivion on the Xbox 360 to Oblivion on the PS3, there is NO DOUBT that the Xbox 360 version is significantly better; that is why it is rated higher!
The Playstation 3 version of Oblivon is a perfect example that what this man is saying about the Hard Drive of the PS3 being used to help out with memory limitations is NOT true. Consider the FACT that the Playstation 3 version of Oblivion does NOT allow the entire world to exist in the game at the same time, like the Xbox 360 version does. This is because of the Memory Bandwidth hardware bottleneck of the Playstation 3.
Also, when it comes to RAM, the Xbox 360 certainly DOES have fundamental advantages over the Playstation 3!
For example, the CPU of the PS3 can NEVER access more than 256MB of RAM at any point. The Xbox 360 CPU is free to access up to 512MB of RAM if there was a need. With the PS3, there are plenty of times when the CPU needs more than 256MB of RAM, and the Video-RAM of the PS3 is actually using less than 256MB of RAM, which means that if the PS3 had a Unified RAM environment–like the Xbox 360’s–then that unused Video-RAM could help the CPU, like it does on the Xbox 360. OBVIOUSLY, the Xbox 360 RAM design is much more flexible; it helps developers in ways that they enjoy working with.
Plus, it’s important to remember that the original design of the Playstation 3 called for the used of TWO Cell CPU processors–each with two Threads that could Send signals to the SPE subprocessors.
However, when Sony saw the design of the Xbox 360, and they saw how much better the Xbox 360 was, then Sony was forced to redesign the Playstation 3 very quickly in a way that hurt the PS3 system. This is nearly identical to what happened with Sega and the Saturn. Sega saw how much better the original PS1 was, and they were forced to quickly redesign the Saturn in a way that used parallel processing that was difficult to work with and was more expensive. This is EXACTLY what happened with the Playstation 3.
The original design of the PS3 was not even supposed to used a GPU, because it was going to have two of the Cell CPU processors. But when Sony saw the revolutionary ATI GPU in the Xbox 360 that was Custom designed for the Xbox 360, and was 1.5 years ahead of its time (since the PC didn’t see similar Unified Shader technology until January 30, 2007), then Sony was forced to removed one of the Cell CPUs in the PS3, and instead add a Nvidia GPU. But there was NOT time to custom design the GPU, so Sony was forced to included a four-year old generic GPU in the PS3. That is why people often point out the vast superiority of the Xbox 360 GPU.
Now that the PS3 only has one 3.2Ghz Cell CPU, it means that the PS3 has only two Threads capable of Sending signals to the six SPE sub-processors running parallel. Each of those six SPE processors is capable of Receiving a Threaded signal; however, the PS3 CPU is only capable of Sending two Threaded signals. This is where the hardware “bottleneck” of the PS3 reveals itself. Programmers often say that the PS3 has two arms (CPU Threads) that are trying to juggle six balls (SPE sub-processors). Obviously, that is NOT possible, and that is why the Playstation 3 hardware is such a BIG disappointment.
With the Xbox 360, Microsoft used a much newer and better form of technology. PCs often brag about their “dual-core” CPU design. The Xbox 360 actually takes that to the next level and used a “tri-core” CPU design, with each CPU using the most developer-favored videogame processor available–the PowerPC.
The Xbox 360 is literally the exact opposite when compared to the Playstation 3 in terms of hardware design and efficiency. The Xbox 360 has three 3.2Ghz CPUs, each with two Threads capable of Sending instructions. But the Xbox 360 doesn’t the outdated parallel processing environment of the PS3. There are no “sub-processors” to worry about with the Xbox 360. The signals can be focused on CPU and GPU commands. This literally means the Xbox 360 has six arms (CPU Threads) that are being asked to juggle only two balls (GPU and CPU functions).
THAT is why the developers absolutely LOVE the Xbox 360 and can design games so much more efficiently for the Xbox 360.
THAT is why games are released so much earlier for the Xbox 360.
THAT is why the overwhelming majority of Xbox 360 games offer better graphic and online performance on the Xbox 360.
THAT is NOT going to change!
It may be easier to port a PS3 game to the Xbox 360 than it is to port an Xbox 360 to the PS3 (since the Xbox 360 is more powerful in terms of videogame performance–500,000,000 polygons for the Xbox 360 is more than the 275,000,000 for the PS3), but the Xbox 360 will continue to be the Lead Platform this generation for two reasons:
(1) Because the Xbox 360 is so much easier for developers to develop games for and experiment with new types of gameplay.
(2) Because the Xbox 360 has sold over Eight-Million more systems than the Playstation 3, and that lead continues grow by hundreds of thousands of systems each month, in terms of Worldwide Sales.
Well guys!
Potential? 30%? 60%? Would you believe them? Oh yes you can believe them, of course! But what is the truth? Its just numbers, estimates… 30? 60? And all estimates leads to ZERO. Especially for PS3. Why? Because of the unknown factor of CELL.
In PC/360 you could easily say, well yeah I only used 60%, in fact I only used a max of 4 hardware threads! Which in a CLEAR voice explicitly defines an UNUSED 40%.
But for CELL? Oh I’m using only 3-4 oout of 7 SPEs at the moment. Could you say you left 70% of potential out-of-the-box? Hell NO! Because to use the rest of the SPEs you’ll need to design a whole new concept of extracting its power which in itself takes up resources (memory, cpu cycles)
So the 70% untouched hardware resource can’t be directly equated to a 70% game resource.
Folding@home can’t and will NOT be ran on the 360! It’s not the issue of proccessing power (I think it can handle it will no problem), but who in their right mind will leave their 360 on over 24 hours while they’re at work or sleep?
To be honest, it IS about the games, and Sony has always proven to rule the games department over Microsoft. This particular generation of the console war is yet to be decided, but history proves Microsoft and Nintendo to be at the disadvantage here. For me, the games that SCEA puts out are what drove me to get a PS3, Tekken 6, Gran Turismo 5, Metal Gear etc, and the other noteworthy developers for Sony, Guerilla, Insomniac etc… I’m sorry but I was never into Halo, I was already obsessed w/ another better FPS at the time. So, Xbox never really drew me in, and Nintendo just turned me off by taking all of their awesome side scrollers and turning them into FPS’ (Metroid…you’re dead to me).
Re Del-vo - Oh yeah, and I’ve left my PS3 on virtually every day since I got it. It just gets used that much, Tekken, Warhawk, Ninja Gaiden, movies etc, and whenever anyone lets it idle, I put it on F@H. I can understand being hesistant to do so with the 360 as I’m aware there are hardware quality issues there, but I’ve not run into any such problems with the PS3.
isnt life funny . its like the gaming life every generation just keeps on standing still, in regards to console fanboyism, this console is the best that console is shit,well ive got an idea instead of moaning about every genaration of playstation or wii or xbox , just avoid the consoles that you dont like , if there that bad why even waste your breath slandering the things../// take it from someone who has listened to this crap since the 16 bit era.. its borin people///
Obvisiously from my previous comment, I prefer Sony products over Microsoft for my own reasons of my perception of quality and how long a product is supported but regardless of how I feel, I just say this, “Play what you choose, praise it if it gives you that much joy but then only talk about what you actually know.” Being that probably only 2% of people posting actually know what they are talking about, why is the internet filled with such slander? Really get a life people and enjoy what you bought or trade it in and get what you want. That is what I did, traded my 360 so I could get a PS3 when the price came down. Who knows, if the games keep coming in 08-10 and the hardware issues are nonexistant, I see no reason why I won’t get a 360 then, hopefully for 200 or so. I would own both but I just am not happy with the long term investment in MS’s current xbox right now.
The PS3 is over hyped and is buggy beyond reason. 3 of the 4 consoles that my brother purchased/returned ended up dying within a week, after being looked after like bars of gold.
It may be pretty, but it is shit!
dabizo,
The 360 leaving 40% idle isn’t good either. It’s obviously a lot better than the PS3 situation assuming there’s any truth to these claims in the first place, but it seems both of these consoles made things more complicated than necessary and probably should have stuck with a more traditional architecture. I am not a fan of this idea of consoles getting “better” as developers figure them out. All that means is that the games for the first few years aren’t what they could have been, and that ultimately we are getting shorter games with less content because it takes so much time to figure out how to maximize performance on these systems.
And before someone says it I’m not a Wii fan either, but for different reasons (no games I like).
No woobie your wrong. I had all three consoles. Wii,PS3 and the xbox 360. The was fun in the beginning but i dont like it anymore because it tiring and is so week it wont even be able to play most of the games coming on the PS3 and 360. eg Grand theft auto. And the wii is a pack of bullsh*t when it comes to online and graphics. It not my kind of a system. Xbox 360 was my favourit at a time. It had GAmes power and nice graphics and i nice online service but hate paying. But i hated the fact that it had short games and had bad disk space of only 9 gigs. but to me online doesnt matter about the fancy things you do, it matter that you can face your friends that arent in your house. PS3 is my favourite right now and i think it will untill the next gen comes. PS3 is getting the games now, Love the orginized to fit in your hands controller and six axis. It not like the wii but it put you in the game without you getting tired. and if you like singing around i think Eye toy would be for you. PS3 has always had games, look at PS2 and this gen, Power was important becuase it will take a huge gap form the PS2 to the PS3 and u will not the differnce. 360 graphics will look like crap after PS3 beat it and you will see why Power is important. Power makes the console durible for you to throw whatever at it and it would just play and do what’s it told. so PS3 is the winner and when 360 fanboys cant get anymore games one the Xbox because it has no power, well see if xbox won or PS3. Wii im sorry but nintedo need to make a more pwerfull wii 2 to become able to play future Games. PS3 rulessssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PS sold my 360, and bought games for my PS3 and wii
The PLAYSTATION 3 will always be faster and better than the Xbox 360. We have better games no matter what people say and our system doesn’t blow up like Xbox 360…
Wireless controllers, connection to the PSP and a powerful new graphics processor technology: Take a look at the PlayStation 3’s performance specifications as provided by Sony.
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 GFLOPS
GPU
• RSX @550MHz
• 1.8 TFLOPS floating point performance
• Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels
• Multi-way programmable parallel pipelines
Sound
• Dolby 5.1ch, DTS, LPCM, etc. (Cell- base 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)
• SB: 2.5GB/s (write) + 2.5GB/s (read)
System Floating Point Performance
• 2 TFLOPS
Storage
• HDD: Detachable 2.5″ HDD slot x 1
I/O
• USB: Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0)
• Memory Stick: standard/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)
Controller
• Bluetooth:(up to 7)
• USB2.0: (wired)
• Wi-Fi: (PSP)
• Network: (over IP)
AV Output
• Screen size: 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
• HDMI: HDMI out x 2
• Analog: AV MULTI OUT x 1
• Digital audio: DIGITAL OUT (OPTICAL) x 1
Disc media
• CD: PlayStation CD-ROM, PlayStation 2 CD-ROM
• CD-DA: CD-DA (ROM), CD-R, CD-RW
• SACDL: SACD Hybrid (CD layer), SACD HD
• DualDisc: DualDisc (audio side), DualDisc (DVD side)
• DVD: PlayStation 2 DVD-ROM, PLAYSTATION 3 DVD-ROM, DVD-Video (DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW), Blu-ray Disc (PlayStation 3 BD-ROM, BD-Video, BD-ROM, BD-R, BD-RE)
Woobie - That’s how things have always worked with consoles…always. Whenever a new technology comes into play, which is a commonality in the console industry, things are going to start off with what people know. And as devs become more and more familiar with coding specifically for console X, the better the games are going to get. I don’t think we’re seeing games that’re shorter ‘because’ of this, I just think that it leaves alot of room for improvement in all aspects of gameplay. Some games are just designed to be more visually attractive than lengthy. What bothers me, is half-ass developers who, rather than actually learn a new way of doing things (seriously…does anyone think that the PS3 is actually just going to….go away? I think Sony has a bit more invested in it than that), you have developers from lack-luster titles to begin with like Guitar Hero and Singstar, bemoaning the difficulties of coding for the PS3, or Dave Newell from Valve bitching (and to be honest…does it really look like Orange Box is going to push the limits of the Wii, let alone the PS3 or Xbox)… Wah wah wah, go back to school you stupid shits, this happens every single time a new console comes out…
It has definitely not always been this way. The first console I can recall where the games at the end of the lifecycle looked noticeably better than the ones at the start was the first Playstation. And even with the PS2 which is probably the most notorious for having games that looked better at the end it was nowhere near suggestive of the kind of extra power being tapped that is being implied in the comments here. If there is really up to 70% of the PS3’s power being unused at this point then there is clearly a problem. Why would anyone want to buy a console that the games don’t/can’t even take advantage of? Like I said both Sony and MS probably would have been better off going with more traditional architectures.
Also it’s GABE Newell from Valve, and if you don’t think the Orange Box wouldn’t push the Wii to its limits then you either haven’t seen the games in the Orange Box in person, or you have no clue about how much better the GPUs in the PS3 and 360 are compared to the Wii. The Orange Box games would have to be cut way back to run on the Wii.
IBM designed the cell-BE for gaming, only developers are not utilizing the IBM SDK 3.0 kit available to delve into all that power.
Maybe we will see a game that utilizes all that power and the 77FPS per processor.
I am hoping that Square-Enix will dive in so deep that the world will truly go,”WOW!” They have always been at the forefront with incredible story and graphics(except X-2)
Think about one important point here people. I have owned consoles from the atari 2600 days & i have never ever seen some many models come out from a console. Ps3 in one year have brang out ohhh lets see the 20 gig model, 40 gig model, 60 gig model & the 80 gig model - not even 1 year. Ps3 is finshed, its too expensive.
You buy the console for $1000au, second controller $60au, HDMI cable $80au,Blue raid controller $100au, aleast acouple of games $220 au. The toal is $1460 & i dont owe HDMI tv which means another $2000au. So to buy PS3 im looking at $3460, also if i want the bonus & 20 games, how much money will i need to pay.
The wii is $400au & xbox 360 $4600au
With all this money you might as well buy a monster pc or take a hoilday somewhere
“the1ej
It’s always the same thing with you guys. “Wait and see what the wounderful Gaystation 3 can do” WAIT AND SEE? Nobody waited to see what the X-Box could do. “Wait and see-Wait and see”, yall whine more than a spoiled child. Just admit that Sony made a mistake by using the cell processor before anybody learned to program for it. Gs3 may be supperior, but if noone knows how to program and use the power it contains, then it’s all crap. A word to the wise. Life doesn’t wait around for your learning curves Sony. I can see it now, just when game designers learn to program for the cell, a new X-Box will be ready for release. Then you guys can start the winning all over again. Grow Up.”
Thats A quote btw and a classic example of an x-box fanboy AKA Pricks, Hense Gaystation. He Says That the ps3 is “wait and see” Yes you are correct but a console war is not decided in 1 year its over a period of time such as 4-5 years… So if you think the x-box has won the battle you could be very wrong… or very right Its Yet to be decided. Personally I think that x-box had better games last year but this year I think ps3 has a much better line-up of games to come… and He tells Us to “Grow up!”…
Xbox 360 owns all i got the elite which is 3 times more memoray than the ps3 and i am playing in 1080p through my hdmi lead so why waste my cash on the ps3 when the xbox has much more games out there
i’ve heard a lot of people say that if games like uncharted use only 30% of
ps3 processing power, it’s a good thing. …actually it’s not. if a company is spending millions of dollars on a powerful system and only 30% of it’s power can be used, that means that sony is vainly losing its profits. sony is basically shooting itself in the foot by giving the system excess power. it also shows that the system is way ahead of it’s time and is the reason why there aren’t a lot of games on it, compared to the 360 and, more prominently, the wii. what sony should’ve done was use those extra millions to develop more 1st party titles.