|
PS3 vs Xbox 360
|
|
|
Stryfe
Junior Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 13:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey reason?? Ok I am getting my facts from the actual press release of the 360 and the PS3. If you look at the actual specs like CPU speed, video card graphic potential, and ram. You would agree that the ram of the 360 and the PS3 are the same 512MB right? The graphics cards on the 360 are running at 500Mhz and the PS3 are running at 550mhz. That is one aspect on how the PS3 is 10%more powerful. Lastly you talk about CPU's the CPU's in both the 360 and the PS3 are running at 3.2GHZ right? But one of the things that make the cell processor so great it that it can handle 7 lines of information at once. Now a regular CPU can handle two lines of information at a time and the GHZ is how fast it takes to get that information done. The 360 has three different processors each capable of two lines of information at once so it can process a total of six lines of info at once. Now if the PS3 cell processor can handle seven and the 360 can handle 6 that is about 14.7% more than the 360 that is why I said the PS3 is about 10%-15% more powerful.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. January 2006 @ 13:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
clock speed issnt always all. one card can have less clock and perform better. also, the 360 uses shared gddr3 ram for the cpu and gpu at i think 700 mhz. the ps3 uses 700mhx gddr3 for the gpu and 3.2ghz xdr ram for the processor. since it is split, it is more dedicated and can doesnt not have to be split by other connections. the ps3 will dominate load times with the cell, xdr ram, and bluray read speed.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
Stryfe
Junior Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 14:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah that is true but developers have already said that the PS3 is more powerful but not by much. So that seems to support what I had said earlier.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. January 2006 @ 14:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
it is more powerful, but im just saying clock doesnt always mean it all.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 15:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
What I was trying to show is that although its all still speculation, there's not much info on ps3 these people who are hired to analyse the info on ps3 in the podcast say exactly what me and others were saying, there is no large leap in power between the consoles, they also say that the cgi video's that we see (killzone for example) we are not going to see things like that until way down the line, developers that they have spoken too confirm this.
Also they talk about the dual output for 1080p that ps3 has which is sort of gimmicky as there are not many people who could afford 2 1080p t.v's and in addition the games would have to be programmed to support dual screens, and anubis they also say that ps2 internet was bad and they need to have something like xbox live in order to have a good plug and play internet experience. Futhermore they go onto say that sony seem to be dragging their heels a bit with the manufacture of their console, which does seem apparent. I just wanted to show that theese guy's work in close relation to sony's ps3 and this is what they said so its very interesting to note.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. January 2006 @ 15:04
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. January 2006 @ 15:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
there are rich ppl out there. plus, they are thinking into the future when 1080p and i are more common. they are also thinking into the future with the cell, bluray, and xdr ram. i believe the ps3 will truly be next gen.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 15:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
There are rich pple out their but most of the pple buying these consoles are not rich and certainly can't afford 2 1080p t.v's, also you need the games programmed to support this mode. But regardless yes it has the cell, new technology right, but just because the 360 processor is not totally new and original such as the cell does that make it totally inferior? I believe not. I think like I have pointed out before, if ps3 has the most original and newest technology ever but is just as or slightly more powerfull than the 360 then who cares? it all comes down to performance.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. January 2006 @ 16:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
which the ps3 passes over the 360 with flying colors where it matters.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
CrisKahn2
Senior Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 16:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
When u say performance do u mean how well it will play games?? You cant really judge a consoles performance. Only games will determine which console is better. Its like comparing 2 DVD players. Ofcourse you will say a $300 one sold at best buy would be better than a $50 one sold at walmart. Or is it? If it both plays DVDs the same then who cares if the $300 one has better cpu or what ever. Some $50 DVD players are even better cuz they play Vcd's and burned DVDs while the $300 ones dont. What i am trying to say is it all comes down to the games and the developers and who will make the best games for either consoles. You cant compare them until a PS3 comes out....for example how madden 07 on a PS3 will compare to madden 07 on the 360, both on graphics and gameplay. That will determine which console is better. So to judge a console on stats and how it performs is retarded. Obviously a 360 must not "perform" very well since it keeps over heating and freezin up all the time. In my opinion the PS3 is better if its going to come out with everything Sony says it will. Not based on graphics or games but based on more compatibility with new technologies and more options such as blue tooth bluray and PSP compatible and 1080p all backwards compatible and all that other good stuff while 360 only has everything a normal x box already has.
|
|
Stryfe
Junior Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 16:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
chimpanel agree completly with what you said. Most people won't be able to afford two 1080p t.v.'s. Especially since the only t.v.'s that are 1080P are fifty five inch or larger. If there is a t.v. out there with 1080p and is thirty two inch show it to me.
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 18:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes it won't be until far into the future when an average household can afford two 1080p t.v's. chriskhan when I say performance I do mean with games, but whilst its true no one knows exactly how each console will perform in the graphical department, by looking at what the experts and game developers who have dev kits say about the subject (such as hideo kojima, creator of metal gear) it seems they are both pretty much equal or ones slightly more powerful, but either way no big difference. As for compatability with good stuff the 360 can/will be able perform many tasks the xbox couldn't such as stream movie content or music from your p.c to your 360 and save movie files, video net chat as well as all the online market place and gamer zones.
But when you say good stuff I know ps3 has many ports so you may be able to do more things like edit photo's and plug in all manner of usb devices much like a p.c, but is that what a console is about? Consoles are for gaming mainly and a p.c... well a p.c is for everything and anything if they make ps3 into a p.c then its not really a console is it. I have my p.c for work apps and my console for simple plug and play gaming.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. January 2006 @ 18:26
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. January 2006 @ 19:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
its a console with benifits, i like to think of it that way.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
CrisKahn2
Senior Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 19:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
Why not have cool ports??? Its beter than not having cool ports. Its like saying the PSP is not a handheld cuz it can play movies and music and internet and homebrew and programs+apps....sounds like a P.C doesnt it. So lets take away all that and what do u have... a DS.
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 20:27 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Its like saying the PSP is not a handheld cuz it can play movies and music and internet and homebrew and programs+apps....sounds like a P.C doesnt it. So lets take away all that and what do u have... a DS.
Its not like saying that the psp is more like a p.c, if I took away all those features I wouldn't end up with a ds I would end up with a wicked handheld. PSP still has a massive screen, excellent graphics (gta is aewsome), analogue stick, and having owned both psp and ds I can honstly say is 10 times the quality. There's nothing wrong with having many ports on the ps3 it doesn't make it BAD in any way but it does sort of defeat the object of a console, I would not consider it a big advantage over the 360 because it has extra ports because my p.c does all that. I buy as do many others a console based on
1)type's of games
2)power
3)internet capabilities for internet games
this is because a console is mainly for games. If you have too many ports, add ons, no internet service (like xbox live) and so on it sort of becomes a console/p.c hybrid. I just wanna sit down at the end of the day, pick up a pad, press a button play some games and chill, thats what a console is about, simplicity, easy plug and play.
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
24. January 2006 @ 01:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
It has taken me about 20 mins to read over what everyone has said hear since I last posted. I find what chimpanel has said very true. I have also listned to the IGN podcast and find myself agreeing with it. Just going back to a past post, reasons writes that he only listned half way through the conversation becuase much of what was said was speculation. Well reasons are you intellignet becuase what on Earth was you expecting? What eles can they talk about unless they have the finished product in front of them.
On to this port and functions disscusion. It is better to have a console with more ports than fewer ports. However like Chimpanel says you buy a console for power, games and internet play so the amount of ports and functions will not give the PS3 an advantage in the battle between it and the 360.
|
|
rS_x_Jack
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. January 2006 @ 06:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
yo guys does anyone care about PS anymore. i used to love them until i played halo. and i used to love that until i played halo 2. and i used to love that until i played halo 2 LIVE. AMAZING i recomend the 360 is a much better choice. plus compare games like halo to the likes of jak and daxter. hehe i laff.
I don't want a signature. What do you mean I just wrote one?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. January 2006 @ 11:01
|
Moderator
|
24. January 2006 @ 06:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
rS_x_Jack - please edit out the swearing, it's against the rules ;-)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. January 2006 @ 08:01
|
Member
|
24. January 2006 @ 07:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
LOL he doesn't like PS, yet his name is RSX! lovin it!
There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those who know binary, and those who don't
|
|
rS_x_Jack
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. January 2006 @ 09:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
oops. sorry lethal b. and dude rs stands 4 reloading sheild (as in halo) so...yeah
I don't want a signature. What do you mean I just wrote one?
|
|
JuBei87
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. January 2006 @ 10:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
yeah lol.. well if there are members of sony being interviewed, whats the point in listening? it'll be biased towards them.. hmm..
|
|
HOWJORD
Member
|
24. January 2006 @ 11:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
Had a quick look for a 1080i tv, they are at about £3000-£4000!
|
|
JuBei87
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. January 2006 @ 11:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
tell me about it, they said t get the best out of the machine ul av t use one of those TVs! so if u dnt av one, it ent jus £200-400 for a console, but an extra few grand on top!
|
|
Stryfe
Junior Member
|
24. January 2006 @ 12:24 |
Link to this message
|
I bought an 32in HDTV it cost $550 USD but it is a CRT Philips. It all depends on what type of t.v. you buy. But keep in mind Toshiba introduced a new tecnology called S.E.D. telivisions, it is supposed to make plasma T.V.'s obsolete.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
24. January 2006 @ 19:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
i want an lcos tv, they are the best out right now.
anyways, sure halo is fun and all, but its slow and predictable. sniping is a sinch, and being sniped happens every few lives. boring. i love the unreal series, and it my and my friends opinions, it is much more fufilling than halo. sure halo has a decent history, but the gameplay lacks, it is so repetative and slowmoving.
so by the end of feb, ill expect we will know more on the ps3, and if not then sony will be in deep sh*t. if nothing comes out soon people will lose hopw and care less. i am moving farther from it and the months of nothing have gone by, but there will be nothing that could get me to buy a 360. imma stick with a new pc for now to tide me over.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
25. January 2006 @ 10:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
No anubis. Very very very wrong as usual.
I work in a electrical store and my compartment is the LCD and Plasma TV's so its my job to know everything about the TV's.
The best LCD TV on the market is the Sony Bravia v-version the second best LCD is the Samsung.
They both use the same pannel and made in the same facory but Sony have a better lighting system with a bright white floresent to show greens and reds better ( a common faught of most LCD's) also when viewing from an angle the Sony doesnt loose some colour and its prossesing chip is slightly more advanced. Both TV's a very good and nearly the same but Sony utalise the technology of the TV better.
|
