hero or zero

[oxygenuk]

i think ps3 is now zero, after e3 anyway, what do you guys think, do any of you want a wii or 360 instead now?

http://www.dvhardware.net/article11494.html
The bad news about Sony's upcoming PlayStation 3 console continues to flow in. One of the first bad things we heard about the console was about a year ago when Sony's president Ken Kutaragi claimed the PlayStation 3 would be expensive.

I remember some sites stating that this may be a trick to fool Microsoft but later it turned out the PlayStation 3 will in fact be launched for $499 or even $599 if you want one with a 60GB hard disk, HDMI support, Wi-Fi and Memory Stick, SD and CompactFlash card support

The cheapest Xbox 360 only costs $299 and the model with a HDD retails for $399. Additionally, according to some rumours Microsoft is planning to drop the prices to respectively $219 and $299 in October.

If this is true the PlayStation 3 will be very hard to sell. The PS3 has the advantage of having a Blu-ray player but by the time the PS3 is on the market Microsoft will have launched its HD DVD add-on drive. The price of this HD DVD drive isn't officially announced yet but according to some rumours it may be close to $100.

At this week's E3 show Microsoft said it thinks the PlayStation 3 will be way too expensive, pointing out consumers will be able to buy both the Xbox 360 and Nintendo's Wii console for the price of a PlayStation 3.

About a year ago Sony defended the PlayStation 3 by stating the PS3 is "a box made of future technology opposed to Xbox 1.5, which seems to be a combination of things available today." However, this week The Inquirer talked with several game developers and heard they aren't really impressed by the performance of the PlayStation 3. The performance isn't really there yet in many cases and they say that both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 don't have enough horsepower to run state-of-the-art PC games like Crysis. Game developers say they are disappointed because they aren't able to do what they've planned to do.

However, Sony's president Ken Kutaragi is still confident they will reach their shipment targets and he even points out the console is "probably too cheap".

In the meantime, Microsoft owns 100 percent of the next-generation console market and it's up to Sony and Nintendo to steal marketshare from the Xbox 360 console.

[Infernal]

I think these threads need to stop being made...

[Fats]

^Ditto to that, it's getting out off hand and starting to really piss me off.

[pari]

This PS3 smashing/slamming/trashing seems to be never ending... All the articles says, talking with developers, developers say PS3 and 360 are same but no names.. might be becauses the developers want to have their anonymity? Only our resident developer cum expert (CPI) can answer it for us. PS3 & 360 have different strength which system has overall edge, my (non-developer but hardware guy) answer PS3.

[woundingchaney]

This PS3 smashing/slamming/trashing seems to be never ending... All the articles says, talking with developers, developers say PS3 and 360 are same but no names.. might be becauses the developers want to have their anonymity? Only our resident developer cum expert (CPI) can answer it for us. PS3 & 360 have different strength which system has overall edge, my (non-developer but hardware guy) answer PS3.

I think this is pretty well said. Both the PS3 and 360 have their strengths and where as I dont necessarily believe that the PS3 has the edge hardware wise I do believe that in certain areas such as physics it could prove more useful (although it may be a while before we see this come to fruition, especially since programing has to be specifically geared towards the cell), where as the 360 may have an edge on graphical enhancements such as motion blur, AA, post effects in general and possibly a more useful memory architecture, but one cant discredit the advantage of BR storage (although it is easy with a 200 dollar price tag attached).

Really Sony showing was unsubstantial and I do agree that these threads arent needed in such abundance what is it that we should expect from many of the Sony fans?

Games should speak for themselves and both consoles have excellent titles headed their way (infact such a plethora I made up my mind to invest in both early in this generation). I will probably remain mostly gaming on the 360 due to Live, although if Sony can overcome my doubts I may switch over to them if they prove they can establish a worthwhile free online structure (although I have doubts).

Play what you like and dont buy into marketing propoganda.

[Nameless]

Oxy, I would have to agree the PS3 sucks threads are starting to get old... The moderators need to put an end to this madness!

I already own a 360 and will get a PS3 at launch.
At this time I have no interest in the Wii.

[Domination]

http://tpl4life.com/images/smilies/haha.gif Some of the things I hear are just beyond me. No need to comment any further.

[jaxmkii]

I think these threads need to stop being made...agreed

[makeitlookreal]

The PS3 is not at all a ZERO.

It is most definantly an improvement upon the PS2 in many regards, at least an equal to the XBox 360, and is leaps and bounds ahead of the last generation nintendo system called Wii.

However, I would agree that over the past several days my conclusion is that the PS3 is not nearly as impressive as I had hoped. But the same goes for the Wii and the XBox 360 as well.

To put it bluntly, over the past several days none of these systems have demoed a consistant stream of games that are graphically what I would call clearly "next-gen." The truth is that I had hoped we would all be blown away by the graphical quality of the games that would be demonstrated this E3, but it did not happen. Let me explain further.

Lets just throw the Wii aside, because it is obviously a inferior piece of junk! Probably, by the time it is released you could buy a clearly superior PC for almost the same price! It is only supposed to have less than a 1GHZ processor, a weak graphics card, and 512MB of "flash" RAM plus some other memory here and there. Lets say it costs $299 at release. For that kind of money you could buy an equivalent PC, RAM, and cheap graphics card! It's not next-gen, and is actually an example of the design Nintendo should have used to WIN "last" gen!

Lets move on to the PS3 and 360. Neither system demoed games with consistancy supurb graphics. Many games had certain things that looked good and some even had elements that looked GREAT. But very, very few of the games brought everything together in such a way to make a truly realistic clearly NEXT-GEN looking game.

Additionally, many games such as TEKKEN and MOTORSTORM were released that simply look like another generation of PS2 games. For PS2 they would be GREAT, but for next-gen they are very poor indeed!

Now, will there be any fun games for the PS3? Sure there will be for some people. Many people will probably have fun with Wii games. Probably, there are a lot of people that will have fun with their old PS1 games for years.

For many people, GRAPHICS which is what next-gen is mainly about (not that other things such as physics don't matter) is what attracts them to a game more so than just game play. Personally, when I think of something being "next-gen" I am hoping for something very realistic (not perfection of course) that combines GREAT backgrounds, GREAT environments, and obviously GREAT looking CHARACTERS that are NOT made to look CARTOONISH, PLASTIC, or ANIMATED!

When it comes to what I am hoping for I saw VERY little this E3. I saw little from the PS3, little from the 360, and none from the Wii.

However, the PS3 is not a ZERO. Neither is the 360. And to some folks the Wii will not be either.

If I had to give the PS3 a certain number of points out of ten I would give it THREE.

One for simply producing another machine.
One for managing to keep people happy who don't care about graphics.
One for producing a few games that come close to looking next-gen.

I would rate the 360 the same.

[pari]

I think this is pretty well said. Both the PS3 and 360 have their strengths and where as I dont necessarily believe that the PS3 has the edge hardware wise I do believe that in certain areas such as physics it could prove more useful (although it may be a while before we see this come to fruition, especially since programing has to be specifically geared towards the cell), where as the 360 may have an edge on graphical enhancements such as motion blur, AA, post effects in general and possibly a more useful memory architecture, but one cant discredit the advantage of BR storage (although it is easy with a 200 dollar price tag attached).


The CELL processor in one helluva of a processor and its going to take time to program CELL. Its similar to EE programming but this time better support due to IBM involvement. I can say for sure, IBM is invovled big time in compiler development for CELL. Graphic wise I do not know and would take cpi's input, but processor wise definitely its CELL. XeCPU could have been better if MS was not worried about the cost. MS not worried about cost of 360 is a complete BS, XeCPU is an example for that... This I am saying because of being in the processor industry, know what BS everything talking. CELL & XeCPU is like learning to fly a fighter jet and propeller plane. Can you learn to fly a fighter jet or propeller plane in a week?

[makeitlookreal]

By the way, I do want to say that unless the issue is a lack of total RAM for the system I think with the power of Cell and the RSX there is little that a current PC could do that the PS3 is not capable of doing.

The issue is that the PS3 is not a PC and PC developers are NOT going to understand how to best optimize a console.

Except for the RAM issue I do NOT for a moment underestimate the power of the PS3 compared to ordinary computers TODAY. Now, a year from now I believe that PC's will probably surpass the PS3, but not yet.

[woundingchaney]

The CELL processor in one helluva of a processor and its going to take time to program CELL. Its similar to EE programming but this time better support due to IBM involvement. I can say for sure, IBM is invovled big time in compiler development for CELL. Graphic wise I do not know and would take cpi's input, but processor wise definitely its CELL. XeCPU could have been better if MS was not worried about the cost. MS not worried about cost of 360 is a complete BS, XeCPU is an example for that... This I am saying because of being in the processor industry, know what BS everything talking. CELL & XeCPU is like learning to fly a fighter jet and propeller plane. Can you learn to fly a fighter jet or propeller plane in a week?
The cell processor is one hell of a theoretical processor. I see no indication how it is an all around superior processor in its architecture sure it has its strong points but there are weaknesses as well. I dont think the cell is the second coming that many seem to believe. I believe that it is superior to Xenon in certain areas/tasks but its overall superiority is still unproven.

I see nothing inadequate about the Xenon, other than of course the difficutly of multi core programming. Much as I see nothing inadequate about the Cell other than its overall programming difficulty.

[Handycrap101]

PS3-Hero
This thread-Zero

Now I can see where this post was driven from and where most come from. And that is price. I won't make this too long for you to realize why the PS3 is an amazing value and product. You fail to see, as well as the article author is that the PS3 is NOT a gaming console. You can argue me all you want on that but it is not just for gaming. It is an entertainment console. Same goes for the PS2.

As a matter of fact. I happen to know a few people who purchased the PS2 simply for it's DVD functionality and hardly played games. People purchase Playstations for different reasons. So to compensate for that versatility and capabilities the console must be priced high for what it can potentially do for you. I can take 3 features from it that (for me) are well worth the purchase of 600$ and that I can't get ANYWHERE else for a single package this cheap. They are web browsing, high def gaming, and high def movie media. You find me 1 thing in the planet that can do that for under 600$ and I will give you a medal.

Some folk need to look outside of the box and realize what you are getting. And that is a state of the art entertainment media console.

[pari]

By the way, I do want to say that unless the issue is a lack of total RAM for the system I think with the power of Cell and the RSX there is little that a current PC could do that the PS3 is not capable of doing.

The issue is that the PS3 is not a PC and PC developers are NOT going to understand how to best optimize a console.

Except for the RAM issue I do NOT for a moment underestimate the power of the PS3 compared to ordinary computers TODAY. Now, a year from now I believe that PC's will probably surpass the PS3, but not yet.

I doubt desktop processor would see that much improvement unless they go more than dual core. And right now even dual core is overkill for desktop, the OS are not completely optimized for dual core (ie symmetric processing). Games can take advantage of dual core, but once going over dual core its a challenge. Quad-core, Oct-core makes sense for the server side processor and that too if they are running concurrent operation and the data are all in the cache memory i.e., more suitable for database servers. We (When I joined) did dual core quite a while back and never released. At that time the OS were not ready to make use of symmetric processing and even today its not great. CELL would keep its crown for a while and on gpu side I cannot answer.

[Domination]

The cell processor is one hell of a theoretical processor. I see no indication how it is an all around superior processor in its architecture sure it has its strong points but there are weaknesses as well. I dont think the cell is the second coming that many seem to believe. I believe that it is superior to Xenon in certain areas/tasks but its overall superiority is still unproven.

I see nothing inadequate about the Xenon, other than of course the difficutly of multi core programming.

and the fact that it still functions as just a CPU. ;)

[LaLiLuLeLo]

sigh..
PS3 has a higher peak performance than 360.
360 isn't as complex to program with (thanks to the cell)

[woundingchaney]

and the fact that it still functions as just a CPU. ;)
Ummm are you sure about that Dom. ;) Ill have to reread some articles but Im not completely sure how accurate that is.


Surely we arent going to go into the proposed graphical features of the Cell as well (lol), couldnt that be a downside to the Cell a gpu trying to function as a cpu (Lol).

[woundingchaney]

sigh..
PS3 has a higher peak performance than 360.
360 isn't as complex to program with (thanks to the cell)
Theoretical peak performance





I just kidding here.

[pari]

The cell processor is one hell of a theoretical processor. I see no indication how it is an all around superior processor in its architecture sure it has its strong points but there are weaknesses as well.

Xenon is good, but what is Intel doing to improve the performance, adding memory controller on to the chip to improve the memory bandwidth and latency. Athlon has memory controller (DDR2) built inside and has HT to give good performance. If one is looking at the processor speed and the memory latency issue a different picture arises. The initial RISC architecture idea originated on based on the memory latency. All the things that are being done is to hide the memory latency to improve the performance. CELL architecture is based on the fact that processor speed has increased tremendously along number of cycles needed to access the memory and working with that fact to improve the perfomance.
If you look at all the Intel server chips(Itanium especially), they have huge amount of memory (which includes L3). If you look at the die photo, the core area and memory area are about the same. I believe its Itanium that has about 26MB of L3 cache that is monstrous for a processor but again its a server side processor.

[Sephiroth_VII]

Btw, that PoS is quoting The Inquirer:

About a year ago Sony defended the PlayStation 3 by stating the PS3 is "a box made of future technology opposed to Xbox 1.5, which seems to be a combination of things available today." However, this week The Inquirer talked with several game developers and heard they aren't really impressed by the performance of the PlayStation 3. The performance isn't really there yet in many cases and they say that both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 don't have enough horsepower to run state-of-the-art PC games like Crysis. Game developers say they are disappointed because they aren't able to do what they've planned to do.
Rule no. 1 of BullShit: If an article uses The Inqiurer and/or Sponge as a good source, it's BS.

[woundingchaney]

Xenon is good, but what is Intel doing to improve the performance, adding memory controller on to the chip to improve the memory bandwidth and latency. Athlon has memory controller (DDR2) built inside and has HT to give good performance. If one is looking at the processor speed and the memory latency issue a different picture arises. The initial RISC architecture idea originated on based on the memory latency. All the things that are being done is to hide the memory latency to improve the performance. CELL architecture is based on the fact that processor speed has increased tremendously along number of cycles needed to access the memory and working with that fact to improve the perfomance.
If you look at all the Intel server chips(Itanium especially), they have huge amount of memory (which includes L3). If you look at the die photo, the core area and memory area are about the same. I believe its Itanium that has about 26MB of L3 cache that is monstrous for a processor but again its a server side processor.


I wasnt really referring to the hardware componant architecture of the chips (mem controll, process speed to cycle comparisons) but more along the lines of cores threads spes ppe cache and memory architecture surrounding the processors within the consoles.

But I see what you are getting at.:wave:

[Domination]

Ummm are you sure about that Dom. ;) Ill have to reread some articles but Im not completely sure how accurate that is.


Surely we arent going to go into the proposed graphical features of the Cell as well (lol), couldnt that be a downside to the Cell a gpu trying to function as a cpu (Lol).

First of all, this has already been demostrated in several different demonstrations already. Unless, you're willing to ignore that, I really can't see how this can be argued. Even now, the Xenon has shown no sure results.

Secondly, the Cell is not a GPU nor will it be working as THE GPU, but it is capable of a few things that a GPU just isn't that great at doing. For that, it acts as a cousin.

[woundingchaney]

First of all, this has already been demostrated in several different demonstrations already. Unless, you're willing to ignore that, I really can't see how this can be argued. Even now, the Xenon has shown no sure results.

Secondly, the Cell is not a GPU nor will it be working as THE GPU, but it is capable of a few things that a GPU just isn't that great at doing. For that, it acts as a cousin.
Im not aware of any demonstrations Dom., no results as to its ability to process polygons or act as a gpu support???? And what demonstrations are you referring to on the Cell the tech demos that dont necessarily apply to games or have shown little usefulness in games. The cell seems to be a great media processor, which leads to many questioning its usefulness in a gaming environment.

Im fairly aware of the Cells theoretical abilities but that in itself doesnt make a superior processor nor does it mean anything unless it is put to use and if so what compromises are to be made to incorporate these features???? The Cell seems to be the most vague piece of the PS3 puzzle in which we are told it can do these things but yet why and to what extent are these capablities of the Cell needed, required, or even warranted.

[Infernal]

Wounding what about those demos at E3 last year that showed the Getaway and that gas station demo rendered with just the Cell. I highly doubt the 360's CPU could come anywhere near that alone.

[Domination]

Im not aware of any demonstrations Dom.

WarHawk, terrain, Alfred Molina just to name a few. I don't see how much more can be denied of this before you finally realize that maybe the processor is capable of these things. It's not just a CPU for physics or any other set tasks. It and RSX will handle graphics, too. This subject has been beaten to death.

[woundingchaney]

Wounding what about those demos at E3 last year that showed the Getaway and that gas station demo rendered with just the Cell. I highly doubt the 360's CPU could come anywhere near that alone.
Im fairly sure any processor with enough memory could do many of those demos (and enough time, lol), although Im not questioning the Cells abiltiy to render Im questioning its overall usefulness in games. Hence forth its great that the cell is so capable at graphical usage but what about all other aspects of gaming. Im quite aware of cells strong points but to deny any weak points and simple state that it is a superior processor because it has advanced graphical abilities doesnt necessarily make for a superior processor.



I did not intend to start yet another Cell vs Xenon debate, rather point out that once again I believe the Cell may be another case of Sony marketing.

[woundingchaney]

WarHawk, terrain, Alfred Molina just to name a few. I don't see how much more can be denied of this before you finally realize that maybe the processor is capable of these things. It's not just a CPU for physics or any other set tasks. It and RSX will handle graphics, too. This subject has been beaten to death.
I never said it wasnt but what does any of this have to do with the Cell in a gaming scenario. Surely we arent under the impression that Cell can run full gaming code and throw an Alfred Molina demo out just for laughs. The Xenon would be capable of doing these things as well, only accept most likely not as easily as the Cell, but that doesnt make the cell a better processor for a gaming environment.


Im still unaware as why Xenon wouldnt be able to do many of these things, but I am letting the debate lie and once again I didnt intend to start yet another Cell vs Xenon debate.

[woundingchaney]

ooops

[Domination]

I never said it wasnt but what does any of this have to do with the Cell in a gaming scenario. Surely we arent under the impression that Cell can run full gaming code and throw an Alfred Molina demo out just for laughs. The Xenon would be capable of doing these things as well, only accept most likely not as easily as the Cell, but that doesnt make the cell a better processor for a gaming environment.


Im still unaware as why Xenon wouldnt be able to do these things, but I am letting the debate lie and once again I didnt intend to start yet another Cell vs Xenon debate.

The Cell didn't run that Alfred Molina demo by itself; The 7800 GTX helped out. But I believe the GTX did the shaders while the Cell did everything else - like lighting on the face or the skin being penetrable by light rays. Basically, it made the skin look realistic. Dispite how many would like to downplay that demo, that has a lot to do with the gaming environment. This could apply to anything within the game if given the task.

Also, I'm not saying the Xenon can't do this per se, but because it was never architected to handle such task like these on it's own, that is what makes it incapable of these results. Microsoft was looking for a GPU first, not a combination of the two, which is why you have two seperate entities.

[stanDarsh]

I created a thread for these types of things a couple of days ago. You can be as disappointed as you want, but keep it to that one thread, otherwise it brings the forums down too

Here is the link:

http://forums.e-mpire.com/showthread.php?t=56352

Now please stop making these kinds of threads.

Thank you

-Andy