Xbox 360 Price Announced
Posted 22 August 2005 - 09:01 AM
Posted 22 August 2005 - 02:55 PM
and i dont know how anyone can claim to know this until the systems come out. you are campaining for this thing and speaking in a way like you designed the system or have one already. the fact is that no one will know until they come out.
Posted 22 August 2005 - 04:00 PM
Posted 22 August 2005 - 04:01 PM
Posted 22 August 2005 - 04:35 PM
Posted 22 August 2005 - 04:48 PM
I'm sorry but I cant. as a computer science major and as a gamer since I was 5 I think I trust my sources (ign.com, gamespy.com, my professor who taught me Moore's Law!) better then I can trust you. I have nothing against you opinion here I just have a conflicting one and I feel like I should and do know moore (haha, pun) about it then you do. knowing whether the systems are done or not is not a very provable thing, but I still feel like something will come about proving me right to you.
Posted 22 August 2005 - 05:13 PM
Posted 23 August 2005 - 12:48 AM
Posted 23 August 2005 - 08:40 AM
Posted 23 August 2005 - 10:33 AM
OMG. You know nothing of what you speak. Dude PS3 WAS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO PLAYABLE AT E3. I f were to post your comments on an actual gaming message board everyone would go up in arms about how wrong you are. PS3 is not ready, plan and simple. Xbox was NOT ready at E3 either because NO ONE played EITHER system. if it was ready someone would have played it. Whatever happened at E3 was running on a beta system and NOT full speed. I'm done arguing with you over this because you keep telling me I know nothing about what it is I speak of while you provide nothing but a third person source while I told you I'm a computer science major at PSU with aspirations of getting into game programming. I practically live on IGN.com and gamespy.com. If I was someone else reading these posts I'd believe me more then you simply because I have much more rapport then you. YOur friend of a friend thing is just laughable.
Posted 23 August 2005 - 11:01 AM
The most logical reason that readers believe in PS3's power, though, may have less to do with E3 showings or marketing muscle and more to do with Moore's Law, which states that in general processing power doubles every 18 months while prices fall. The fact of the matter is, PlayStation 3 is set to release at least six months after Xbox 360, and possibly longer still, which in of itself suggests the machine will be more powerful.
That's all good and fine. But why, then, do only 10%, or 1,591 of readers polled, believe that Nintendo's next-generation consoled, codenamed Revolution, will be the most powerful of the bunch? The machine is expected to debut in late 2006, making it the last of the next-generation platforms. Doesn't Moore's Law apply? Apparently not. Nintendo has publicly stated on several occasions that its focus with Revolution is not raw processing power, but rather to create a small, quiet and affordable console.
That was taken form a tech site. by your logic and moores law which u talked about the revolution would be the best console.
And as far as the E3 comment whether or not there was a playable system there we donâ€™t know but all the reports I heard is that there was and it was running at 1/3rd the power. And also debug ones are already being used by developers.
On the otherside MS seems to be pulling the best game makers towards them. That could hurt sony. Nintendo makes great games themselves so they donâ€™t need 3rd party. I also should note I can care less which one is better or which has better games cause Iâ€™ll probably get both.
Posted 23 August 2005 - 11:41 AM
PS3 uses the most powerful and ahead of it's time piece of computer hardware in gaming history called the Cell Processor. Here's the best explanation I could find on it:
PowerPC-based Core @ 3.2GHz
7 SPEs @ 3.2GHz
512KB L2 Cache
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPEs
Basically, a single Cell processor is designed to act like multiple processors working together, or even independently. A Cell processor has a single PowerPC Architecture Unit (PAU) and multiple Synergistic Processing Elements (SPEs). A Cell's PAU dolls out instructions to its various SPEs, which can then independently work on tasks. So for instance, one SPU might be programmed to run a game's AI while another handles physics. Since each one acts independently, multiple calculations can be done simultaneously. In other words, it's very powerful. In fact, it's powerful enough to perform 218 GFLOPS.
I could not find the same type of coverage of the Xbox 360 processor on IGN b/c they had the PS3 FAQ readily available while the xbox 360 FAQ has been taken off the front page of it's specific channel (probably b/c it's been there long enough... ya know since it's further along in developement). But I did find this from gamespot.com
Here's this link in full, it's a really good breakdown of the two systems.
In summation I just proved that PS3 is more powerful thus ending this "argument." I also will not comment on the E3 coverage because I cant convince you that you're wrong about that since there is really no way to prove it one way or the other. I mean there is no stat which says: PS3 was finished at this point or that 360 was too. So on that I'll concede for arguments sake. But if you read what I posted that is stone cold facts and data from a well respected internet gaming information site that proves PS3 has more pure power then 360.
Also I should add that I hate PS2 and love my Xbox and that what I buy in the next generation is based on pricing, timing and games. Not alligances or a hatred for a brand name.
Posted 23 August 2005 - 11:50 AM
Posted 23 August 2005 - 01:28 PM
I think you might have missed that. they both are 3.2GHz processor's but the Cell is decribed as several (maybe even seven as it says) processors working together sharing the load. That is much better then the 3 processors described by the Xenon (360's processor).
At least we agree to disagree.
Posted 23 August 2005 - 01:37 PM
Posted 23 August 2005 - 07:30 PM
I honestly think no matter what Playstation will get the better ratings, and more people to buy the system, because the controlers are a lot easier to control. Which is a very big thing for some people. I cannot play the Xbox because everything is so damn big, but thats just me.
Posted 23 August 2005 - 10:12 PM
Posted 24 August 2005 - 09:02 AM
Posted 24 August 2005 - 11:09 AM