Joined: May 22, 2003 Posts: 23944 Location: NSW, Australia
Posted: Wed May 18, 2005 8:46 pm Post subject:
Hi all,
I read the specs on the PS3 and laughed really.
Nothing that is even close to XBOX 360.. lol (and the name is growing on me.. 360.. yeh baby)..
Fair enough the 7 bluetooth joypads but what do you expect.. SONY made bluetooth didnt they?? Dont they love to push their own products.. lol heheheh Thats why its got blu-ray too..
maybe i should whack together a comparison page or update the existing one with the new specs.
anyway, thats just my 2 cents.. Will be a xbox supporter from now on.. I used to love Playstation and PS2 but never again apart from those few games not available on any other system.
Joined: Jul 22, 2004 Posts: 41 Location: Australia, NSW, Sydney
Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 2:21 am Post subject:
forahobby wrote:
maybe i should whack together a comparison page or update the existing one with the new specs.
Actually could someone please put together a comparison page to show how the two consoles stack up against one another, as from what I have seen it is not so simple to compare the two as the specs provided are all worded to make that console sound better than it is, a plain black and white table would be appreciated fellas... or ladies _________________ WE ALL STARTED DIEING AT BIRTH
I TELL THE TRUTH AND IT HURTS
yea, i didn't understand what most of the specs meant lol a side by side comparison by someone that understands all them specs would be greatly appreciated. i still can't udnerstand why 7 controllers and not 8.... thats just kinda dumb to not make it even
Stalemete Xbox-HQ Enthusiast
Joined: Jul 22, 2004 Posts: 41 Location: Australia, NSW, Sydney
Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 5:05 am Post subject:
funkydopeloven wrote:
yea, i didn't understand what most of the specs meant lol a side by side comparison by someone that understands all them specs would be greatly appreciated. i still can't udnerstand why 7 controllers and not 8.... thats just kinda dumb to not make it even
This is just a guess and likely a wrong one but i would say that due to the arcitecture of computers eg 8bits to a byte, like SCUSI stuff only 7items because the first ID is for some sort of controlling card or device
Well that what i reckon it would be _________________ WE ALL STARTED DIEING AT BIRTH
I TELL THE TRUTH AND IT HURTS
yea, gotta be some hardware limitation, but i mean how akward is 7 players? sorry timmy you can't play, the teams would be uneven
JustAnOrdinaryPanda Xbox-HQ Experienced
Joined: Feb 24, 2005 Posts: 111
Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 1:22 pm Post subject:
Not surprised to see a highly XBOX fanboyish response from a site like this, but hey.
The 7 controllers is the one thing that I thought was a bit iffy, but apparently there's a port for a possible wired controller, so who knows.
I was surprised to see Blu-Ray listed as it was, after news from Sony and Toshiba that they were combining their Blu-Ray and HD-DVD projects. Maybe that fizzled out, or they're not changing that yet.
The specifications are actually pretty tight, it clearly has the edge in terms of the Cell processor, but only 256Mb dedicated DDR3@700MHz ram instead of 360's 512, though they insist it will be fully capable of utilising the 256Mb XDR@3.2GHz main ram.
The GPU's also have pretty similar specifications. There may be differences, but "nothing close"? Bit of a stretch...
I think the one thing we should be worrying about, is Sony's outright lying about the capabilities of the PS3. Remember the supposed PS2 capabilities, ridiculous.
Personally, I'm getting both, in terms of power I don't see there being that great a difference (and that's not what I've ever really cared about anyway), but PS has always had all of my favourite franchises, and the only thing my Xbox really had over my PS2 (apart from the kickass modding ) was the FPS.
But really, these specs don't matter much, follow the games, not the console.
sjohn Moderator
Joined: Oct 16, 2004 Posts: 1472 Location: Alabama
Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 2:24 pm Post subject:
Here's the specs, I think it will basically be like the PS2 vs the GameCube. Basically the same graphics, it's going to be more about gameplay in the next gen.
I personally say back to the old school days where graphics didn't matter, just make great games that you will want to play 20 years down the road.
the ps3 might end up being a more powerful machine but i think it doesnt matter. their bluray thing is completely useless and extremely risky (im sure they'll lose lots of $$$ on it). games and online gaming will be the center of the war between sony and ms. so far i have to say that ms has a more complete package... and btw sony doesnt have a cpu yet cos' besides the name cell, it doesnt exist
funkydopeloven Xbox-Hq Genius
Joined: Nov 30, 2004 Posts: 1942
Posted: Sat May 21, 2005 6:09 am Post subject:
i thought "the cell" was already patented which i thought meant they had a working one
rav3n2k Xbox-HQ Experienced
Joined: May 16, 2005 Posts: 109 Location: Australia
Posted: Sat May 21, 2005 6:43 am Post subject:
It only makes sense that it would have a patent...
As for the Cell itself, it's a great processor with some awesome architecture, but Sony forgot to factor in the difficulty in developing for it. I guess you could call it rumour or speculation, but word is that without spending immense amounts of time developing games (meaning we'll see less released), the PS3 will definately not be utilizing all of its "2 t/flops" of power. From what I've heard, it'll be using about half of that tops.
Then we can compare that to the xBox, which is using general purpose cores which are easily programmed for. (Much similar to "general" programming for PC or other/previous consoles).
Also, one might argue that they've seen that great Killzone 2 trailer/preview at E3. Well, it's funny, because that was pre-rendered and all Sony did was play it back. _________________ There are 10 types of people in this world: those who understand binary, and those who can't.
the ps3 might end up being a more powerful machine but i think it doesnt matter. their bluray thing is completely useless and extremely risky (im sure they'll lose lots of $$$ on it). games and online gaming will be the center of the war between sony and ms. so far i have to say that ms has a more complete package... and btw sony doesnt have a cpu yet cos' besides the name cell, it doesnt exist
I far from seeing Blu-ray as useless, and only possibly risky. The only risk posed is if they do indeed still go for a medium war, and they lose. But from all the talk of combining the projects, this is looking a lot less likely.
In terms of it's advantages, all of the consoles seem to be boasting nothing but HD for the new era, but the XBOX 360 won't even be able to play HD DVD content, as it only supports DVD9. Whereas the Blu-ray has theoretically 2, 4, 8 or even possibly 16 layers. It's predicted that if it survives, it will last a good 10-15 years due to this feature.
Blu-ray may appear useless now, but that's because we've only ever heard of games taking a maximum of a DVD9, the fact it holds 25Gb per layer, with a realistic possibility of 100 or 200Gb discs, means that it doesn't close off any possibilities, so even if it's useless now, it may not be a few years into the next gen.
Oh, and also the fact that they claim all Blu-ray drives come with writability out of the box.
And about the Cell processor not existing yet, that's hardly a disadvantage, as PS3 has at least a year to release. After all, 360 was only running on one third power Alpha units at E3. None of these consoles are finished yet, so that's just a wasteful/pointless comment.
The reason they've been playing back pre-rendered video is because the PS3 is unfinished. And personally I think they shouldn't have bothered, the PS2 can play that quality video if it's pre-rendered. So we have no idea whether the PS3 will actually be able to run that in realtime, let alone at full 60fps.
Though I guess they didn't want to try running on the current hardware, like the 360's alpha units framerate problems, so prerendered videos and hoped we'd believe it. The biggest problem will be simple lies from Sony.
The company's working on Cell have been talking about creating specialised development software from the beginning, they know more than anyone a processor that powerful is worthless if you can't even utilise all of it. How easy such devkits will make it is unclear, but it's not like developers are being thrown a PS3 and told to work it out themselves.
EDIT: In terms of complete package, I think there's no question. PS3 has 6 USBs (2.0), 7 bluetooth controllers, support for all networking 360 can and bluetooth on top, support for all disc formats 360 has and then blu-ray on top. And then a pointless to most people memory stick/duo slot. But I'll use it because I have loads of memory stick stuff.
The criticisms of PS3's pushing Sony's own formats, is irrelevant, as it still supports all that the 360 does bar an included hard drive. Only disadvantage is if it pushes up the price, but I don't see the price difference being all that much in any case. (nor would I care for all the PS3 is boasting)
rav3n2k Xbox-HQ Experienced
Joined: May 16, 2005 Posts: 109 Location: Australia
Posted: Sun May 22, 2005 12:49 am Post subject:
Blu-Ray discs are only dual-layered (to my knowledge) meaning that they can hold up to about the 50gb mark. That's still a lot of space, and I guarantee that a majority of the space used will be for videos. If they do plan to use HD DVD technology, then the discs will only hold 30gb on a dual layered media. I think that it may be better to stick with BD anyway, rather than combining technologies of BD and HD-DVD.
Then again, if PS3 aren't lying too badly, M$ might have something to worry about _________________ There are 10 types of people in this world: those who understand binary, and those who can't.
Blu-Ray discs are only dual-layered (to my knowledge) meaning that they can hold up to about the 50gb mark. That's still a lot of space, and I guarantee that a majority of the space used will be for videos. If they do plan to use HD DVD technology, then the discs will only hold 30gb on a dual layered media. I think that it may be better to stick with BD anyway, rather than combining technologies of BD and HD-DVD.
Then again, if PS3 aren't lying too badly, M$ might have something to worry about
No, it's been clearly stated from the beginning that the technology was designed to have multiple layers, read some articles, it's the main pushing point of Blu-ray over HD-DVD.
But the increase of video, means that a lot of extra content can be seen etc. Also, we may not see the need now, but a couple years down the line, there could be, so the extra space isn't closing off any possiibilities unlike going for DVD9s.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
HQ Network: 9,217 | 
Guests: 1062 | 
Members: 2 
Forums 
) was the FPS.
