Epiphany Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 PS3 hardware - SLOW AND BROKEN Before people jump on the inquirer sucks bandwagon, please note they were right about the 360 rumors of two SKUs, the GPU rumors for the 360, the initial PS3 rumors, the Wii rumors, GeForce 3 rumors, etc... The Sony hype train has been derailed.
10k fists Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 The hardware is not broken, nor is it slow - more along the lines of inefficient for a gaming console. The article was poorly written and put together, but their sources are accurate. It just shows that Cell cannot effectively use the memory pool of GDDR3, but that the RSX has a command/processing bandwidth for geometry and vertex data from Cell at 4GB/s. Pretty much, if it's not on that slide, then it's most likely junk in the article.
Cantousent Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 Frankly, I still don't know what's what. How pervasive is this alleged problem and how reliable is the source. If they've been right in the past, the question is, how reliable is the information they have for this moment. I guess what I'm getting at is, perhaps this situation has improved for the PS3? If they're dealing with old info, then Sony could have seen this problem long ago and fixed it. Furthermore, do they have time to work with the hardware? It's not hitting the shelves for some time to come as I understand it. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends!
10k fists Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 Their source is the Berkley report, I believe. Highly reliable. It's just the manner in which the Inquirer delivered the message, it was just wrong and full of nonsense. Will developers be able to work around these issues? Yes. Will it take more time? Yes. It all goes back to what I've said for over a year... Cell is more powerful than Xenon, but harder to program for. Xenos is more powerful than RSX.
Gorth Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 Yup, no doubt about it. Time to buy a new PC. No consoles to my liking in the vicinity the next couple of years :-" “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
Dark_Raven Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 Fatality !!!!! Hades was the life of the party. RIP You'll be missed.
Setzer Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 Article was written by a Microsoft rep or Fanboy - take your pick.
Meshugger Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii for the win! (w00t) "Some men see things as they are and say why?""I dream things that never were and say why not?"- George Bernard Shaw"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."- Friedrich Nietzsche "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." - Some guy
Llyranor Posted June 5, 2006 Posted June 5, 2006 You mean, Epiphany FTWii (Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)
10k fists Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 Article was written by a Microsoft rep or Fanboy - take your pick. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why is that? You do realize that the Inquirer has bashed the 360 don't you?
Judge Hades Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 I see it as irrelevant. People will buy the console which has the games they want to play regardless of Specs as long as those games run well on those systems. Beyond that who gives a smeg?
Plano Skywalker Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 the main "problem" with the 360 is that it can only barely be called "next gen"....what is the cliche? something about "many hands on small maps". the maps may be a little bigger but not NEXT GEN bigger. other than that (and the fire hazard fiasco at launch time), the 360 is a solid console and will have many more first-rate exclusives this time around (exclusive, as in no other platform PERIOD) and an even better LIVE system and more premium content. the PS3 is trying to reinvent the wheel it would seem with both a highly dubious architecture and a proprietary DVD format. I personally think they are really pursuing it more as a next gen DVD player than as a gaming system....they are expecting to sell units based on the DVD/home theater aspect and letting gaming come second....that is my hunch, anyway.
LostStraw Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 As much as I love to bash the PS3, this article is nothing but FUD. The "Local Memory" is the memory attached to the RSX. That the read performance for the Cell from this memory is dreadful is no surprise. This is exactly the same architecture that has been traditionally used in PCs. Reading graphics memory from the main processor is usually really really slow. This memory is where you store textures and other graphics data. The main processor will usually have little need to read from this memory. If it does, then, as apparently Sony says, you just get the RSX to write to main memory instead. This is a non-story. People have dealt with this for PC games for a long time. www.slashdot.org Go ahead and read through the comments, many people say the same thing as the comment I just quoted.
Cantousent Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 Sony has a vested interest in selling blue-ray, that's for sure. I actually like the idea of buying the better system rather than spending it for the game library. To be honest, I don't game much on my xbox. ...But it's a great way to entertain children who visit, I'll play a game every now and then, and it takes the place of a dvd player in my home. I just don't like the way Sony is billing the system and I don't really need a different player right now. I've got one that works. If I were going to get one for the home-theater aspect, I'd have to research more. I don't like the idae of buying a blue-ray. That's especially true after I've seen the blue-ray movies their making part of the initial line-up. Now, if I didn't have anything right now, I'd be more likely to take the risk and buy a PS3 based on what appears to be better system specs. Even then, the PS3 doesn't seem like a clear cut winner. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends!
LostStraw Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 (edited) I don't think I'd call it a clear cut winner either. Even if it does contain the ability to out perform the 360, I wonder how many companies will really try pushing the platform (with it's bad reputation of making programming difficult). I wouldn't buy a PS3 unless it comes down in price, same for a 360. The Wii is the only console on my list right now, but that's because I'm poor . Edited June 6, 2006 by LostStraw
Craigboy2 Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 the main "problem" with the 360 is that it can only barely be called "next gen"....what is the cliche? something about "many hands on small maps". the maps may be a little bigger but not NEXT GEN bigger. other than that (and the fire hazard fiasco at launch time), the 360 is a solid console and will have many more first-rate exclusives this time around (exclusive, as in no other platform PERIOD) and an even better LIVE system and more premium content. the PS3 is trying to reinvent the wheel it would seem with both a highly dubious architecture and a proprietary DVD format. I personally think they are really pursuing it more as a next gen DVD player than as a gaming system....they are expecting to sell units based on the DVD/home theater aspect and letting gaming come second....that is my hunch, anyway. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Honestly, Sony isn't trying to "reinvent" anything. If anything it's Nintendo, there the only ones really trying anything new. "Your total disregard for the law and human decency both disgusts me and touches my heart. Bless you, sir." "Soilent Green is people. This guy's just a homeless heroin junkie who got in a internet caf
213374U Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 (edited) Congratulations, Epiphany. Now we're all impressed at the size of your e-penis. Now run along. I see it as irrelevant. People will buy the console which has the games they want to play regardless of Specs as long as those games run well on those systems. Beyond that who gives a smeg?Apparently, some people decide which console to buy not based on games available, but graphics bandwidth and other crap nobody gives a f*ck about. I mean, there have to be people like that, right? ...RIGHT!? Edited June 6, 2006 by 213374U - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
StillLife Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 (edited) Apparently, some people decide which console to buy not based on games available, but graphics bandwidth and other crap nobody gives a f*ck about. I mean, there have to be people like that, right? ...RIGHT!? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I've always thought the three top manufacturers currently all have a different enough catalogue of games for that to be the deciding factor in which one a person oughtta go with, but what do I know? Apparently that doesn't work for everyone I guess. Edited June 6, 2006 by StillLife
10k fists Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 the main "problem" with the 360 is that it can only barely be called "next gen"....what is the cliche? something about "many hands on small maps". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Huh? Too many "" - it's impossible to tell what you're saying, and what you may be pulling out of someone elses brain. Both the 360 and PS3 are fully next gen, they carry all of the graphical features that distinguish them appart from the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube generation.
Judge Hades Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 They do? I really don't see much difference in graphical appearance in a game for the X Box to a game for the X Box 360. For example take King Kong. Graphically the games are practically identical to me.
mkreku Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 Interesting numbers, for sure. I can't wait to see what developers can do with this piece of machinery when it finally hits store shelves. Sony are known for making un-orthodox solutions to hardware problems. I mean, the Playstation 2 is a beast to code for and it's not built like an ordinary home PC, but it works well and these last few years we've finally been able to witness the true strength of the setup (God of War, Resident Evil 4). I fully believe the Playstation 3 is in trouble as we've seen from the release delay (and not only because of Blu-Ray specs), but I also think this article exaggerates those problems. I mean, I've seen the Unreal Tournament 2007 demo movie, and any computer that can churn out stuff like that is bound to be one powerful piece of equipment. We'll wait and see. Funnily enough, I kind of secretly wish for Sony to fail. I would love to be able to play my vast library of Playstation 2 games on my next console, but for Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now