If you infect the sales people...you then infect society...But the only problem with Sony's plan is when gamers see both consoles running side by side in walmart...they will look at the store reps like they are stupid when they say..."well sir, the ps3 cell is 3 times as powerful as the 360's.." But then the customer says..."but why does the 360 games look better sir?"... Ha ha ha ha ha...As the walmart employee frantically searches his Sony manual sweating up a storm. "I'll take the 360 thankyou". You can't fool my eyes with your mumbo jumbo buddy". Thanks Microsoft for always keeping it real. Under promise and Over deliver.

This is Wal-Mart we're talking about. Intelligent consumers don't ask Wal-Mart employees about ANYTHING....ESPECIALLY not electronics. They are, historically, the dumbest, laziest, most indifferent employees on the planet.
Secondly, if you were told that, and then saw the games comparisons, you'd have to be an EQUALLY stupid waste of DNA to believe that load of crap.

It's all theory, Sony...the proof is in the pudding. As of right now, with Gears of War being the best looking console game in HISTORY...your pudding is looking rather generic, and a tad thin.

The PS2 was super duper also.

Hahaha like the PS2 would be 10 times as powerfull as the Dreamcast or XBOX

RIGHT

Sony's lying machine instead of Sony's marketing they should name it

So thats how they executed the dreamcast, lying, lying, lying. God I hate sony, why can't they let the product sell itself, instead of teaching the employees to lie to the consumer. It should say the PS3 processor is 3 times more powerful at calculating how much cancer i have in my right lung.

Even Microsoft has said the Cell is a great all purpose chip. It's just not that great as a gaming chip. Any chip that is used to power cell phones can't possibly be good for high end gaming. They're talking about the CHIP, not the SYSTEM.

Yeah man, with gow out this is what I would be doing with my spare time. Ranting on a PS3 topic....wait I don't care for gow I'm getting a PS3 so that explains me. So why all the 360f@gs heating up the sony topics?

I know that nice new game isn't as fun or have you already beat the short story mode and no one is online yet because all your friends are still in school?

I can't get my copy til tomorrow so I have to fill the void with this, because no game now has my interest like GOW does...Oh and this is bull, this is complete and utter lying on the part of Sony, why is they can do things that seem illegal and get away with it? I mean come on!? It's 3 times as powerful as the 360? please, give me a break. Not to mention here's how it will go down in wal-mart to..."Oh no sir you don't want the Xbox 360, you want the PS3 it's 3 times a powerful, $200 more, would you like me to give you an IOU?" Their tactics are rediculous, fuc* Sony

Isn't it a little bit late to be measuring console p3nis length? We've been over this, and over this, and over this; no, it isn't "3 times more powerful", its CPU is marginally better than the 360, but its GPU is moderately weaker than 360's...

So how many fuucking times do we have to revisit this before you sony c0ckf@gs get it?

Oh, and it's funny how the best-looking game of this year, Gears of War(by a W I D E margin)is on the supposedly "weaker" console...

I LOL @ Resistance.

Is it also in the manual that with the PS3 you will have to load the game on the hard drive because of the slow transfer rate of the Blue-Ray player, or did they forget to put that part in.

And Scythesean, you wanna talk about mature? Here, lemme quote you:

"So why all the 360f@gs heating up the sony topics?"

Mature, huh?

I've never seen so much paniced fanboy FUD in my life, LOL!

You little sony boys are just frightened that Gears of War makes your wittle PwayStashun Twee look like the over-priced Piece Of Sh/t that it is.

Hey Sony fans, look here:
http://i99.photobucket.com/...

Fhuckers.

Overpriced? I think you are in for a rude awakening:

$399 Xbox360 premium + $199 HD-DVD addon = $598
Almoust the price of the future proof 60GB PS3. Xbox 360 sadly still lacks Wi-Fi, HDMI and offers only a 20GB HDD.
If you don’t care about Wi-Fi and can live with a smaller HDD, you can buy the 20GB PS3, which offers exactly the same what Xbox360 with HD movie playback offers, but for almoust $100 less and unlike 360 it’s future proof.

$399 Xbox360 premium + $199 HD-DVD addon + $99 Wi-Fi = $697
Still not future proof, no HDMI and no 60GB HDD, but costs almost $100 more, what a ripp off.

And have fun letting MS screwing you with their HDD. $99 for a 20GB HDD haha that's just too funny, PS3 buyers get 40GB for $49 haha

Over 60 seconds loading times in PGR3? Haha and MS fanboys are dissing some PS3 games that load 15 seconds, haha that's just too funny. Fanboys in denial haha

I'm surprised. It's been a year and a half, yet a lot of these guys still can't believe the PS3 is significantly more powerful. The evidence is there, but some of these guys will never be convinced; they're too far into denial.

Instead, they rely on rumors and post those rumors as fact, then call Playstation owners liars when real data is posted in order to disprove those rumors. It's a never-ending cycle. A lot of false spec sheets/formulas claim that the RSX only has the tech of a 6800, others claim that the RSX AND Cell were downgraded, or that the RSX has ALUs (Sir Nathaniel posted that one yesterday); it's all hopeful speculation by Sony haters.

Just more lies from Sony. Different day, same sh!t and quite frankly I believe the 360 is slightly more powerful than the ps3 simply because of more memory and unified memory architecture. And anyone who believes the ps3 is 3 times more powerful than the 360 is either a sony fanboy, ignorant, or plain stupid.

Alien- Somebody lied to you. Gears of War is a 360 exclusive and besides the ps3 isnt capable of running such a triple A game due to having only 256mb of memory.

dude that was funny, but go f!@# urself!

by the way i have a question for u guys

is gears of war coming out on ps3?

if i'm wrong don't blame me i'm just asking.
cause somebody told that they had a demo of GOW on ps3 and it looked good.

I don't have a problem if they said the Cell processor was a bit faster than 360s, but to say "3x faster". WTF.. and then people who think themselves intelligent on this forum (ie: Sony fanboys) agree with this sh!t.

how many science teams are using xenon for anything?yes.that's right:ZERO!no one is.how many are using cell for other things besides just being in a game system?too many to count.xenon is only good for 360.but that's about it.ibm built it.do you see them using it.NOT AT ALL!shows how powerful it is.but they're using cell.hmmmmm...which is more powerful again?

You know what the funny thing is about the Microsoft "junk"box ?? It's not better than the PS3 in any way. You know why ?? Cause even the richest man in the world, who could've made it the most powerful gaming machine that ever existed, for some reason didn't do that, otherwise there would be no debate. Gotta wonder why he did that don't ya think ?? He's got more money than SONY...a full staff of brillant minds...oh yeah, and a product that's not as good...period. The facts/specs prove this and so will the marketshare...again. So stop saying one is better than the other. It's classic Ford/Chevy and the people who insist that their widget is best are most often the people who are covering up the fact that it's not.....

You actually believe what a retarded walmart employee says? Dont u remember how sony killed dreamcast by forcing store employees to spread lies about the dreamcast, cut advertising, etc???--> news4gamers.com/gaming/News-34 1.aspx
I must first inform u that this site puts spaces in random parts of any links we post, so, use ur brain and delete spaces once u copypaste this to ur address bar (cant believe u never figured this out wen I posted links in the past, lmao):

The 360's tech advantage:
Now, here is the original claim by Sony before the downgrade:
"Using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8GFLOPS"
Did u see that at the beginning? USING SONY'S CLAIM, AND WE ALL KNOW U BELIEVE ANYTHING SONY CLAIMS. If sony really didnt make this claim, they most certainly would have taken legal action against MS, that is only fact. Obviously, ur definition of "analyzing" is denying anything that is actually fact--refusal to believe the truth, u only believe wat u want to believe, grow up, b a man and face the facts.
Epic recently mentioned that the ps3 is not capable of handling GOW, and Epic is a multiplatform developer--unbiased, just like Ubisoft who also have stated that only the 360 will be able to handle future splinter cell games. That just adds to the list of developers now revealing the 360's superiority over ps3.

Now to update that equation replacing the 550MHz with 500MHz:
52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * (updated speed-->)500 MHz = 208.0GFLOPS

Now, let's compare this to MS's GPU:
48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS.

I could be wrong, but isn't 240 GFLOPS greater than 208 GFLOPS??? Isn’t 240 GFLOPS also greater than 228 GFLOPS???

My Sources:
xbox 360 proven superior to the ps3 through a detailed analysis based on HOW THE SYSTEMS WORK, not just their numbers, THIS IS JUST LIKE HOW IN CLEANING PRODUCT COMMERCIALS, THE COMPANY WHO MADE THE SUPERIOR PRODUCT POINTS IT OUT, (Sony NEVER counterattacked this like they did the downgrade rumours, which is saying a lot): www.xbox360.ign.com/articles/6 17/617951p1.html

RSX Downgrade: dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/forums /thread/237189/

IBM’s own white papers on the cell structure: www-128.ibm.com/developerworks /power/library/pacellperf/?ca= d rs-#table4

22 - the cell chip can think a lot faster than xenon
shadowgamer - 46 Minutes ago | Let him/her speak
how many science teams are using xenon for anything?yes.that's right:ZERO!no one is.how many are using cell for other things besides just being in a game system?too many to count.xenon is only good for 360.but that's about it.ibm built it.do you see them using it.NOT AT ALL!shows how powerful it is.but they're using cell.hmmmmm...which is more powerful again?

All i got to say is:-
1:i hate xbox 360 fanboys 1/2 of them come up with no compelling argument and sware words!
2:PS3 chip in my mind is better (i agree not 3 times)
3:xbox 360 RAM 512 PS3 RAM 512 (that always anoys me)
4: stop moaning if u have a 360 thats nice i dont i chose to wait istead of complaining its better, just go play it! otherwise ur proving PS3 is better cause i know i will neva visit this site again wen i get mine !

that those ADVANCED CHIPS are used for?name one thing IBM is using it for(the company that made the chip)?the processors in the 360 is last gen tech.you can't name one thing.you can post big all day long.name one thing?"well..microsoft has gears of war"!name one game MADE BY MICROSOFT that looks better than gears?you can't.epic created an engine that even microsoft can't even best.and they got BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.gears can be made on ps3.you're getting pwned because you can't answer those questions.

you're looking like the guy getting slapped in the "sprint power up "commercial where the guy keeps pulling out his gun then slapping the guy over and over between putting the gun away.

the RSX has access to only 256MB, so it can only deliver 256MB textures, that is a big reason why the ps3 CANNOT handle Gears of War.
Since Epic is working with the PS3 hardware and the Xbox 360 hardware could Gears of War ever work on the Playstation 3? “256 MB of RAM makes a huge difference. There is no way we could ever do Gears of War on 256, we had trouble fitting everything on 512MB. We pushed the 360 to the limits.” Another member from Epic’s team chimed in with the fact that there are currently more Playstation 3 programmers than Xbox 360 programmers. “It (the PS3) is in our future. We always had plans for the Playstation 3 and an engine already runs on it.”
http://www.siliconera.com/i...
So far, u guys are still using randomness, that doesnt work in these kinds of arguements.
Reposting so no1 misses the TRUTH:
You actually believe what a retarded walmart employee says? Dont u remember how sony killed dreamcast by forcing store employees to spread lies about the dreamcast, cut advertising, etc???--> news4gamers.com/gaming/News-34 1.aspx
I must first inform u that this site puts spaces in random parts of any links we post, so, use ur brain and delete spaces once u copypaste this to ur address bar (cant believe u never figured this out wen I posted links in the past, lmao):

The 360's tech advantage:
Now, here is the original claim by Sony before the downgrade:
"Using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8GFLOPS"
Did u see that at the beginning? USING SONY'S CLAIM, AND WE ALL KNOW U BELIEVE ANYTHING SONY CLAIMS. If sony really didnt make this claim, they most certainly would have taken legal action against MS, that is only fact. Obviously, ur definition of "analyzing" is denying anything that is actually fact--refusal to believe the truth, u only believe wat u want to believe, grow up, b a man and face the facts.
Epic recently mentioned that the ps3 is not capable of handling GOW, and Epic is a multiplatform developer--unbiased, just like Ubisoft who also have stated that only the 360 will be able to handle future splinter cell games. That just adds to the list of developers now revealing the 360's superiority over ps3.

Now to update that equation replacing the 550MHz with 500MHz:
52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * (updated speed-->)500 MHz = 208.0GFLOPS

Now, let's compare this to MS's GPU:
48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS.

I could be wrong, but isn't 240 GFLOPS greater than 208 GFLOPS??? Isn’t 240 GFLOPS also greater than 228 GFLOPS???

My Sources:
xbox 360 proven superior to the ps3 through a detailed analysis based on HOW THE SYSTEMS WORK, not just their numbers, THIS IS JUST LIKE HOW IN CLEANING PRODUCT COMMERCIALS, THE COMPANY WHO MADE THE SUPERIOR PRODUCT POINTS IT OUT, (Sony NEVER counterattacked this like they did the downgrade rumours, which is saying a lot): www.xbox360.ign.com/articles/6 17/617951p1.html

RSX Downgrade: dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/forums /thread/237189/

IBM’s own white papers on the cell structure: www-128.ibm.com/developerworks /power/library/pacellperf/?ca= d rs-#table4

THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH, SO THATS WHAT I GIVE THEM!!! GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?

Ive got to say, out of all the bad news, this is prolly the only news that Sony can look up to against the XBox 360. Yes it is more powerful, but since when does power and a processor have anything to do with video games, or outstanding video games. XBox 360 sure beats PS3 in that department with the Video Games and Online (Xbox Live). But yea, the PS3 has toyed with me, but it is paying off, Ill explain myself. This morning a few of you may have noticed that I said Sony is crap and all of this, that was because I was uninformed that my Best Buy was getting 100 PS3's on Launch, so i dont have to camp out, and still get one after school. That I am happy for, Also, found out my father had gotten me a pre-order for an early Cmas present. SO You can say, I am once again a True Gamer. This still doesnt change the fact that I'll be playing my XBox 360 more than my PS3 this year, just cause when you take a look at games, PS3 has about 3 games I want, compare that to the 10 or so games I like coming on the 360. So although I am getting a PS3 now, and I have a little (very little) faith in Sony Still, I still believe Xbox 360 will win, but PS3 is a interesting piece of tech. so it all depends. If I didnt have what I have, and were only given one choice, Id pick the Xbox 360. Low Price, Good Hardware, EXCELLENT GAMES, True HD/Next-Gen System. PS3 is still good, for people that want the Ultimate costly system on the block. Why cant fanboys just get together and say that they will both succeed and they will both rock. XBox 360 will be slightly better, but who knows. Maybe by ext year, there will be amazing games for the PS3, thats why Im getting it, and Cant wait for Nov.17. GAME ON!!! (Also picked up Gears of War today, and if anyone says that game sucks, They need to stop sucking their mom's d!ck and get outta their parents basement, THAT GAMES KICKS ASS)

when you KNOW that i'm right.here is what you put in your post:

"We pushed the 360 to the limits."(epic)

so 360 can't do anything beyond gears of war.and it only has at most 8 characters on screen.and 4vs4 multiplayer because of the graphics.whooooo!THAT'S POWERFUL!"

unreal 2007 looks as good gears.that's epic.like i said,gears CAN be made if epic wasn't a lazy pc developer.this"TRUTH" ; you're posting on power is not backed by ANY GAMES.barely any games run at 60fps.and no games run in 1080p.where is this power?companies have had a year with the system.oh,it's got"HIDDEN POWER" like 1080p support.hahahahahahaha!!! do you want me to stop slapping you?

"17.1 - CHOICE
Cyclonus - 2 Hours ago | Let him/her speak
Guess what? You don't have to purchase the HD-DVD add on, IT'S OPTIONAL.
If you want a PS3, Sony is forcing you to buy their unproven Blu-Ray format. You don't have the choice.
So, your "argument", if one could be so generous as to call it that, utterly fails."

Uhmmmm can you choose between DVD and HD-DVD? Nope
Can you choose which HDD you wanna buy? Nope
Can you choose if you wanna play online to pay or not to pay? Nope
Choice? Nope haha

MART,you have got to be the dumbest,blind fanboy that i've seen posting in many places across the net for weeks.congradulations for being the fanboy of the year.take a bow.you follow microsoft religiously.i follow no company.i buy them all.i'm just posting truths that you just CAN'T ANSWER,and i've seen you talk about upcoming games for 360 that still didn't push the system to sell more than ps2.you talk about the two japanese games coming out and those games still won't sell in high numbers.why?it's not on ps3.you can't even bring yourself to admit that sony has done some cool things.just like i can admit that microsoft has done some cool things.you're not a real gamer.you're a follower.even "top real multi-account deal gamer "can't answer any of my questions.it's weak.come get your slaps too.with billions of dollars,microsoft can't make a game better than a third party company.(epic)that's fact.so they are going to use unreal because they suck at making great software.they have to buy it from someone else.you know that i'm right.everyone else knows that i'm right.you can't dispute it.ah..ah..ah.don't even try it.you're weak.microsoft's chips are weak compared to cell.that's fact because no one is using it for anything else.talk about leading edge.answer my above questions if you dare.you're a coward.

.

sony fanboys went beserk from all the great xbox 360 news....lol!!

now let me get back to THE game of the year...

peace!!

Give me PROOF, come on, all u guys do is rant rant rant rant lke a buncha 2yr-olds, u never back ur arguements with anything--but then again wat could u possibly back it with? ps3 fan forums? claims by other sony fans? Think of this as a court case, u need evidence to back ur arguements, simply claiming that someone elses claims based on evidence with no evidence of ur own only goes to show how wrong u r, and makes u look retarded.

Yes, thats right, I'm a thorm that will never go away, I will always be around to expose u for the liars u r, course u'v already done that urselves--lmfao!!! My arguement still stands...
the RSX has access to only 256MB, so it can only deliver 256MB textures, that is a big reason why the ps3 CANNOT handle Gears of War.
Since Epic is working with the PS3 hardware and the Xbox 360 hardware could Gears of War ever work on the Playstation 3? “256 MB of RAM makes a huge difference. There is no way we could ever do Gears of War on 256, we had trouble fitting everything on 512MB. We pushed the 360 to the limits.” Another member from Epic’s team chimed in with the fact that there are currently more Playstation 3 programmers than Xbox 360 programmers. “It (the PS3) is in our future. We always had plans for the Playstation 3 and an engine already runs on it.”
http://www.siliconera.com/i...
So far, u guys are still using randomness, that doesnt work in these kinds of arguements.
Reposting so no1 misses the TRUTH:
You actually believe what a retarded walmart employee says? Dont u remember how sony killed dreamcast by forcing store employees to spread lies about the dreamcast, cut advertising, etc???--> news4gamers.com/gaming/News-34 1.aspx
I must first inform u that this site puts spaces in random parts of any links we post, so, use ur brain and delete spaces once u copypaste this to ur address bar (cant believe u never figured this out wen I posted links in the past, lmao):

The 360's tech advantage:
Now, here is the original claim by Sony before the downgrade:
"Using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8GFLOPS"
Did u see that at the beginning? USING SONY'S CLAIM, AND WE ALL KNOW U BELIEVE ANYTHING SONY CLAIMS. If sony really didnt make this claim, they most certainly would have taken legal action against MS, that is only fact. Obviously, ur definition of "analyzing" is denying anything that is actually fact--refusal to believe the truth, u only believe wat u want to believe, grow up, b a man and face the facts.
Epic recently mentioned that the ps3 is not capable of handling GOW, and Epic is a multiplatform developer--unbiased, just like Ubisoft who also have stated that only the 360 will be able to handle future splinter cell games. That just adds to the list of developers now revealing the 360's superiority over ps3.

Now to update that equation replacing the 550MHz with 500MHz:
52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * (updated speed-->)500 MHz = 208.0GFLOPS

Now, let's compare this to MS's GPU:
48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS.

I could be wrong, but isn't 240 GFLOPS greater than 208 GFLOPS??? Isn’t 240 GFLOPS also greater than 228 GFLOPS???

My Sources:
xbox 360 proven superior to the ps3 through a detailed analysis based on HOW THE SYSTEMS WORK, not just their numbers, THIS IS JUST LIKE HOW IN CLEANING PRODUCT COMMERCIALS, THE COMPANY WHO MADE THE SUPERIOR PRODUCT POINTS IT OUT, (Sony NEVER counterattacked this like they did the downgrade rumours, which is saying a lot): www.xbox360.ign.com/articles/6 17/617951p1.html

RSX Downgrade: dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/forums /thread/237189/

IBM’s own white papers on the cell structure: www-128.ibm.com/developerworks /power/library/pacellperf/?ca= d rs-#table4

THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH, SO THATS WHAT I GIVE THEM!!! GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?

I'm no tech wizard, but I do have a little knowlegde of the basic's, also I don't usually get caught up in the whole spec game but the more I hear the more the curious I have become about this whole 512MB vs 256 MB RAM debate. I read the link you provided, this guy is obviously very smart, and even though he is "admittedly biased" (PS3forum) I think he try's to explain things factually, but honestly most of it was waaaay over my head, I'm just a simple common sense guy, so what I want to know is if you can point out specifically where this guy is talking about the PS3 having "access" to 512MB RAM, and is having "access" to 512MB the same as having the standard 512MB RAM?

Also, something that has always seemed strange to me is that Sony still at this point, less than 2wks before launch haven't released the final RSX specs?...I said that when TGS was over, and it just seems even more weird the closer to launch....Does that mean that it isn't good news?...I admit that my suspicsions are partly based on mis-trust of Sony, but do you or normal gamers think this is strange also?

LOL, am I the only one hear that read the article. “The Cell Processor is essentially as powerful as 3 Xbox 360 CPU’s” So in essence, Sony by their own admittance just stated that their system is as powerful as the 360, since the 360 has 3 CPU’s. It’s nothing more than playing with words, and looks like a bunch of you fell for the marketing gimmick.

Fact from all the developers state that both systems are about the same. The PS3 has the slight edge in Processor power, and the 360 with memory. ROTFLOL, besides a couple of posts, this thread is between 12 yr old fan boys.

And let’s get the PGR 3 Load time straight here, that was not the load time of the game, nor how long it takes to load it. The only time it ever takes that long to load a race in PGR 3 is when you are playing online and somebody is lagging badly.

Again, nothing but immature fan boy ignorance. LOL, just too funny……

The Xenon CPU consists of 3 G5 processors connected by 1MB of L2 cache. A single G5 processor performs 25 Gigaflops. Multiply that number by 3 processor cores, and you end up with the Xenon being capable of 75 Gigaflops.

The Cell processor is capable of 218 Gigaflops, which is 2.907 times more processing power than the Xenon. That's as easy as I can break it down. There is an added piece of data though. Current processors, such as G5's, Athlons, and Pentiums only achieve 75% of their theoritical flop count. The Cell processor is unique in that it can achieve 98% efficiency due to certain aspects of its architecture. So if you're wondering how this figure holds up when the PS3 relies on 8 cores instead of 9, that's why.

As for the guys claiming that the PS3 has only 256 MB of RAM:
http://www.us.playstation.c...

Oh! Whadya know, there's 512 MB of Ram in the PS3. And wait, it gets better. The CPU and GPU have dedicated memory pools, and the CPU's RAM runs at 3.2 Ghz.

In comparison, the 360's CPU is stuck with GPU RAM(no, i'm not kidding) that runs at 700 Mhz. Too bad.

AgentVX: "Fact from all the developers state that both systems are about the same. The PS3 has the slight edge in Processor power, and the 360 with memory."

-Actually, most developers have stated that the PS3 is more powerful, and are proud of the extra things they can do on this system compared to the 360. John Carmack has never touched a PS3 dev kit in his life, so taking his word over everyone else is a bit foolhardy. And as I just showed, the PS3 has a memory advantage as well.

As for GPU, we already know that story. 0.9Gigaflops (Xenos) vs. 1.8 Teraflops (RSX)The specs that have been released show the RSX having an advantage with HDR (128-bit and codeveloped with ILM), more dot products, more shader ops per cycle, etc, etc. Even ATI admitted that the RSX is more powerful than Xenos.

But what the hell do all these numbers mean to the average consumer? Not much. Our eyes are the best benchmarks of system power, and the PS3 impressed everyone at TGS. Even before launch, journalists could already see the 'PS3 Difference', and the power gap is going to continue to widen. Remember, it's not just about graphics, it's about AI, physics, sound, animation, and everything that happens behind the polygons.

Yeah, I think your explanation was somewhat helpful, but either way I think although both of us may have limited technical knowlegde, I would agree with you that:
"All in all, I think they seem like comparable situations."

-That's exactly why I usually try not to get involved in the "my hardware is better than yours debate", because I think it involve's too many variables, which are open to be charachterized either favorable or unfavorable, and with the safistication level of the tech, a valid explanation can be easliy mis-understood, when you try to compare apples to oranges. So I guess what it all boils down to in the end will be how well the dev's utilize the hardware (talent) and of course over time games will continue to improve....wow, imagine that -just like all the previous generations. Oh, and BTW, much respect to you too, Yo!

Okay let me get this out because i already know that half of you are gonna throw my comment way out of line. I am a PS3 fan but i just love gaming in general this is my passion.

Now with the start, Nobody killed the Dreamcast
it was just a machine that was ahead of it's time with some of the things it included. A strorage medium that was bigger then a CD a modem for online play and fully analog triggers and analog stick placed in a default postion, much like an Xbox control. At the beginging sega was claiming that jet grind radio would never run on the PS2 cause it had less available memory then the dreamcast. And for a long time this was the case. But if you look to last month, Capcom released Okami(there have been others but Oakmi used the PS2 full capacity). Now both games have cel-shaded graphics but if and only if the Dreamcast were still around Okami would never see the light of day on the dreamcast. Reason Dreamcast had GD disc which only held about as much data as the UMD's for the PSP hold. Which is About 1.8 gigs. as we all know that's not enough storage capitacy for any of today's games. Another thing that happen was that Developers learned to program for the PS2. Me myself i didn't buy a PS2 until about a year and a half after it came out. And i acutally had a Dreamcast which i played until the controller ports burned out. But what some people forget as well is that the Dreamcast had a version of Windows running as the system OS. As everybody in the Industry knows windows is the easiest OS to program for, that is why developers like ubisoft and epic can put out the types of games that they do. So automatically every Xbox fanboy shouts: "that's why the 360 is better then the PS3" Which if your a developer like ubisoft or epic you'd agree, but look at the history of these two companies Ubisoft didn't really become a household name until the orignal Xbox hit and Epic had been working with the windows OS since the begginging of the PC gaming era. Does that automatically make the 360 a better machine cause Developers are more familar with OS. well yes, but only until the limit of the machine is acutally met. Which according to epic it already did that with Gears of war. Now Gears is a beautiful game and come christmas i might have to get a 360 and GOW for my brother. But honestly if Gears is the limit of the what the 360 has to offer then what happens for the next roughly 3-4 years of the 360's lifespan. the 360 is a powerful machine no doubt, but it does have a Achilles heal. It still uses DVD as a storage medium. Which only grants developers about 9 gigs of space. And as everybody knows games are just getting bigger and bigger how long is 9 gigs going to suffice. Imagen what had to be left out of Gears of war for the game just to make space. The game started with intional builds taking up 3 DVD's, congrats to the boys at epic for making it fit on one DVD. So if you want to ignore the fact that the PS3 uses Blu-ray disc as a stroage medium then go ahead or the fact that IBM themselves have claimed that the chip they created is used for supercomputers. ( this was later updated recentley, as they stated that there was one chip they created that is more powerful)
Honestly the war that goes on between the consoles should not really be handled by fanboys who really have no idea what they base their judgements on other then they like the machine they own. Facts are facts if you look at the PC gaming scene MS always release a new version of Windows because chip makers start making more and more powerful chips that reach the limits of the the current OS within 2 years. Epic has said that they pushed the 360 to the limit and it wouldn't be surprising if that's true. I know that the PS3 is still very much unproven and i look at the PS3 like the dreamcast, it's being released to a market with a bunch of things against it. A Chip that on paper has more power then anything on the market (console or PC). A storage medium that is still very much up in the air on wether it will last, an OS that is very,very difficult to program for. But Developers have always been willing to learn a new OS if that means that they will put out a product that meets most of what they had planned. This has been the case with Sony If you look at all the multi-platform releases the only game that sells more for the Xbox then PS are any games with the Tom Clancey seal. Other then that PS has always out sold xbox games. even if the game was much better looking on the Xbox.
Where would you rather be on a system that from what we know has already been taken to capacity a short year after it's release or on a system that developers will more likely see chance to release a massive game that can only be released on the PS3 once all the secrets are unlocked and the developing community can make the Potenial a reality.

no surprise that the ps3 is more powerfull, look at motorstorm and resistance, thats proove enought, and they are launch games!!! oh and the ps3 has more games at launch then the xbox had, so wait a while and there will be far more games for the ps3.

Listen, I ain’t gonna get into any fan boy arguing here. From the experts that code for both machines, both systems are very similar and will perform very similar. I have a 360, and I love it, and I will even admit that I think that the PS3 in a short time will have games that look slightly better, a lot better, not a chance.

So you can cherry pick all the specs you want to make is seem like the PS3 is much more powerful, but the bottom line is the experts that program for the 2 machines more less state the same thing that both systems are very similar in performance.

I won’t even get into some of the horrible flaws of the cell processor such as the very small amount of local memory available to each SPE and how it is taking far to long when the SPE places a DMA request on the bus and waits for it to be fulfilled. This in essence limits each SPE’s from doing much more than a handful of tasks. And as many developers are already stating, the cell’s SPE array ends up being fairly useless in the majority of situations, or more eloquently stated that thought the cell has lots of theoretical horse power, for gaming it is rather lack luster.

Not to mention that the vast majority of developers prefer the general purpose cores over the cell, and agree that heavily multithreaded game engines are the future, not that the 360 is a great one.

And to turn the tables, I am not very impressed with the 360’s implementation with the general purpose core Microsoft either, they took IBM’s option which offered peak theoretical floating point performance vs per dollar but suffers with very narrow 2-issue in order execution core, and suffered with a branch predictor that’s not the best. Mix in the fact that one or two threads of execution for the game engine most likely will be used instead of the 4 to 6 threads that the 360 was designed to do.

As for your TFLOP stat, any informed person would know that these numbers are quite meaningless. Floating point operations can be anything. Anything that is executed on a FPU can be called a floating point operation.

Secondly, this refers to the whole system, CPU and GPU. GPU’s floating point processing power doesn’t mean anything if your are trying to run general purpose code on it and vice versa. And if you know anything about the graphics market, characterizing GPU performance in terms of generic floating point operations per second is far from the full performance story.

And thirdly, talking about peak floating point performance, you need to have enough bandwidth to keep the FPU’s fed, no mispredicted brances, no cache misses and the right code to make sure that all of the FPU’s can be fed at all times so they can execute at their peak rates. And given that the cells PPE is identical to the one on the PowerPC cores in Xenon, it must derive its floating point performance from its array of SPE’s. And since the developers are stating that they can’t use the SPE’s for a lot of tasks, it doesn’t matter what peak theoretical performace the Cell’s SPE array is, cause the SPE’s aren’t being used all the time.

I am not even going to get into your memory argument, the 360 has a slight edge in it’s implementation, not much, but it’s there. The PS3 does have a slight edge in real world raw power in the cell, but again, the cell is not some untamed beast that many fan boys dream that it is.

Personally I think both systems are great, but could have been better. The cell and general purpose cores are really rather lack luster in comparison what they could have done at the time. Simply by using Athlon 64’s or Pentium D’s processors would have made a noticeable difference in performance over both systems.

But that’s just my opinion.

Bottom line, the race for top spot is going to be closer than last gen, and that is great for everyone because it means that both Sony and MS are going to do more for you as a gamer. If it’s not as close, than unfortunately we are going to have, yes the PS2 was fun but boring at the same time, with the countless dull and horrible games that plagued the system with just a handful of very clever and fun games and peripherals.

Both systems will be good, and I hope the more expensive but sexier PS3 does good in order to keep both companies honest and trying their best.

After reading your post I guess that you disagree with my post when I state the following:
My post #39:
"That's exactly why I usually try not to get involved in the "my hardware is better than yours debate", because I think it involve's too many variables, which are open to be charachterized either favorable or unfavorable, and with the safistication level of the tech, a valid explanation can be easliy mis-understood, when you try to compare apples to oranges. So I guess what it all boils down to in the end will be how well the dev's utilize the hardware (talent) and of course over time games will continue to improve....wow, imagine that -just like all the previous generations."
-Thats not something I made up or just a belief its basic videogame history.
So basicly your whole post is making the arguement that the 360, after 1 year has reached its full potential with GOW.
kornbeaner post #40:
"Does that automatically make the 360 a better machine cause Developers are more familar with OS. well yes, but only until the limit of the machine is acutally met. Which according to epic it already did that with Gears of war."
-Have you ever considered that its just a figure of speech or creating hype to sell the game when Epic dev's say that they pushed the 360 to the limit, WOW, in all the years I've been playing videogames, how many times have I heard that statement from a developer prior to releasing a game for a console early in its lifecycle, and yup, everytime there were better games at least graphically at the later stages of ___ console, if you don't believe that then, I have to seriously question if you know the gaming industry, like the gamer you say you are, that statement alone can be interpreted many ways, one could say that he was only referring to the fact that they pushed the 360 farther than any game so far, also I hear statements that they only utilited about 40% of the 360, or that they didn't utilize all 3 cores....whatever?...who knows?...but the point is you can't say with a straight face that GOW2 can't offer improvements over GOW, seriously do you really believe that?
Well, if you insist on taking that statement so literaly because its what "Epic said"....then you have to also accept what "Epic said", about the PS3 not be able to run GOW with this statement:
“256 MB of RAM makes a huge difference. There is no way we could ever do Gears of War on 256, we had trouble fitting everything on 512MB."
-yeah you could argue that the PS3 has "access" to a total of 512MB RAM, but according to what "Epic said", either its not efficient enough or just not "available" at all to make GOW possible on the PS3.
-so by your own Sonyfanboy logic, this is the best that the 360 can do, but the PS3 is limited by not having the standard 512MB RAM and therefore will never even be capable of GOW quality/type game.

Oh BTW as far as the whole BD advantage of storage space over DVD9 is concerned, I would say that is correct more space is always a good thing, but I feel that it won't be neccessary for awhile, and even when it is do you think it would totally ruin the whole game experience if lets just say a game like GOW was on 2 discs, I mean is it really that bad if you have to get up off the couch and change the disc after ___ hrs of gameplay?....personally I don't think anyone would care....and history supports that too (RE4, etc.) as long as the game kicks azz....its a easy trade off vs. paying for a format that I don't want, delaying the console, risk of failure, unforseen problems with the drive, etc.

Nice...sounds like you know what ur talking about. I hate when fanboys just throw around numbers like there is no tomorrow!

whats wrong with sony? . r they scared ? . throwing out rubish like this tut!!!

same old sony smoke and mirriors :) .

u cant help but laugh at them :)

peace out :)

I disagree with this:
"GOW 2 will be out and will still improve. But how much time is gonna have to be spent with compression coding to get stuff to fit on one disc, even if it gets shipped on 2-disc. time is gonna have to set apart for compression leaving ideas out of the final product due to deadline."
-the biggest flaw in this arguement is that you assume developers have a set deadline that can't be broken when it comes to making games.....Wrong!, that can't be further from the truth, as evident in all the changes in game releases, they have target deadlines, of course they want to have their game finished by a certain date, but we all know that almost all dev's at some point or another change their deadlines because they just couldn't make it for many different reasons.....and yes we(fans) don't like it but "SMART" dev's do what evers neccessary to ensure they reach the full potential or more of the vision they had prior to development....this was some Cliffy B. stated they accomplished with GOW. BTW, again 2 discs won't be a problem its the content and the dev's skill that matters.

Also I disagree with your assessment of the Windows OS's compared to PS2 OS....of course dev's are still squeaking out everything they can from the PS2 because it dominated last gen and still has a considerable fanbase...so there still money to be made until the PS3 arrives and gains a legitimate market share....then eventually the focus will switch to the PS3.....uhm, I could go on but I got to run.
Peace!

is that sony lie 3 times more.

I will always be around to expose u for the liars u r, course u'v already done that urselves--lmfao!!!

Kmis87: that was bold of u to refer to what a fanboy on that forum said to be a reliable source, how did I know that would be the best possible way u could argue? No official sources? no developers? none of sonys BS?

My arguement still stands...
the RSX has access to only 256MB, so it can only deliver 256MB textures, that is a big reason why the ps3 CANNOT handle Gears of War.
Since Epic is working with the PS3 hardware and the Xbox 360 hardware could Gears of War ever work on the Playstation 3? “256 MB of RAM makes a huge difference. There is no way we could ever do Gears of War on 256, we had trouble fitting everything on 512MB. We pushed the 360 to the limits.” Another member from Epic’s team chimed in with the fact that there are currently more Playstation 3 programmers than Xbox 360 programmers. “It (the PS3) is in our future. We always had plans for the Playstation 3 and an engine already runs on it.”
http://www.siliconera.com/i...
So far, u guys are still using randomness, that doesnt work in these kinds of arguements.
Reposting so no1 misses the TRUTH:
You actually believe what a retarded walmart employee says? Dont u remember how sony killed dreamcast by forcing store employees to spread lies about the dreamcast, cut advertising, etc???--> news4gamers.com/gaming/News-34 1.aspx
I must first inform u that this site puts spaces in random parts of any links we post, so, use ur brain and delete spaces once u copypaste this to ur address bar (cant believe u never figured this out wen I posted links in the past, lmao):

The 360's tech advantage:
Now, here is the original claim by Sony before the downgrade:
"Using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8GFLOPS"
Did u see that at the beginning? USING SONY'S CLAIM, AND WE ALL KNOW U BELIEVE ANYTHING SONY CLAIMS. If sony really didnt make this claim, they most certainly would have taken legal action against MS, that is only fact. Obviously, ur definition of "analyzing" is denying anything that is actually fact--refusal to believe the truth, u only believe wat u want to believe, grow up, b a man and face the facts.
Epic recently mentioned that the ps3 is not capable of handling GOW, and Epic is a multiplatform developer--unbiased, just like Ubisoft who also have stated that only the 360 will be able to handle future splinter cell games. That just adds to the list of developers now revealing the 360's superiority over ps3.

Now to update that equation replacing the 550MHz with 500MHz:
52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * (updated speed-->)500 MHz = 208.0GFLOPS

Now, let's compare this to MS's GPU:
48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS.

I could be wrong, but isn't 240 GFLOPS greater than 208 GFLOPS??? Isn’t 240 GFLOPS also greater than 228 GFLOPS???

My Sources:
xbox 360 proven superior to the ps3 through a detailed analysis based on HOW THE SYSTEMS WORK, not just their numbers, THIS IS JUST LIKE HOW IN CLEANING PRODUCT COMMERCIALS, THE COMPANY WHO MADE THE SUPERIOR PRODUCT POINTS IT OUT, (Sony NEVER counterattacked this like they did the downgrade rumours, which is saying a lot): www.xbox360.ign.com/articles/6 17/617951p1.html

RSX Downgrade: dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/forums /thread/237189/

IBM’s own white papers on the cell structure: www-128.ibm.com/developerworks /power/library/pacellperf/?ca= d rs-#table4

THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH, SO THATS WHAT I GIVE THEM!!! GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?

I rest my case...

...good one. Looks like I got my daily laugh.

Holy hell, now that was the funniest reply on earth

"the xenon is the 360 gpu, the cell is the ps3 cpu einstein, comparing a gpu to a cpu is like tryin to compare a cd player to a cd, makes no sense"

The xenoN is the 360's CPU... the xenoS is the 360's GPU. So you wanna talk 'bout hardware and you don't even know the chips' names ? :/
And for your first statement, "3.2GHz isn't faster than 3.2GHz".

You missed the point of multi-core processors. Cell has one main core and 7 secondary cores running at 3.2GHz, so yeah, that's faster than 3 cores @ 3.2GHz. Because when one core is busy with a task, another core an do something else. That's easy to understand.

Why the hell do you think Intel and AMD are releasing dual core processors that have the same frequencies than single core processors. Would be a bit useless if it was the same thing, huh ?

Lots and LOTS of Controvusy

uh...mart...how dumb are you?

Seriously, you're a homosexual!!!

You're saying that Sony said the PS2, when it came out, was 10 times more powerful than the XBOX??? I mean, you would be SO RIGHT if the xbox hadn't come out like 3 years after the PS2....

However...you're stupid

The original xbox was a beast. It has a hard plastic cover case lined with a steel casing around the system components. Then, heavy duty plastic covering the mobo and the HD and the cd drive. The xbox was almost invinceable. It was bullet resistant, a weapon of mass destruction, and could survive falls off of buildings.

So, by this logic you could say that the Original xbox was a deadly weapon, shield, and should be feared by all.

The 360 and the ps3 cant say that, nor can any console before it. Only the pc can claim the same. (old heavy bullet proof cases that weighed like more than the human body and took hours to open up.)

Grammar "three times more powerful as you?"

If PS3's Cell is 3X more powerful and the GPU is also more powerful than the 360s, then why isn't it showing in the games? Surely a machine that is 3X more powerful can compensate for lazy developers.

GOW vs RFOM.. GOW looks better.. Don't say RFOM is a launch title so less development time. Insomniac has close ties with Sony and has been working on this title for a while. RFOM was shown at E3 2005.

RR6 vs RR7. Its a toss up between which looks better, but that's the problem. Shouldn't it look awesome compared to the 360? I mean considering how powerful the PS3 is.. Yes.. its running at 1080P@60fps, but from what I saw, they also gave up some texture details to compensate.

The rest FN3, Virtua Tennis, NBA 2k7 are minor upgrades that are attributed to extra development time. FN3 is a year old for goodness sakes. Would you buy it if it added nothing to the 360 version?

Now that Jim Ryan is gone just need to remove Herman Hulst from his position! And maybe give Shuhei the position he deserved.

This gen hasn't been the best for games, last gen consoles are still out there and now there's been talk of the PS6 and Xbox Two for a year or so. Many games this gen will be ported to next gen and the cycle will continue. The re-release of the Neo Geo AES+, games on cartridge for £70 ($95), gaming is going back in time. Gaming has gone pricing mad with the high cost of games, consoles and controllers. The men and women at the top are clueless.

It’s always interesting to hear behind-the-scenes stories like this, especially involving veterans like Shuhei Yoshida and leadership figures like Jim Ryan. That said, there are usually multiple sides to decisions at that level. It could be less about not “listening” and more about differences in long-term vision for PlayStation. Yoshida played a huge role in shaping the brand, so whatever the reason, his impact is undeniable.

If true, and I'm inclined to believe it is, it goes to show that Sony lost their way when they became more western/didn't respect the PlayStation origin story. Andrew House and Jack Tretton did great work, but they also didn't try to fundamentally change the PlayStation DNA. Ryan oversaw the death of Japan Studio and a live service direction.

I already figured this, good lord imagine if Shuhei took over instead, would've been a platinum era 😩

I miss the first three generations of PlayStation. The way they turned PS3 around, we knew they meant business. We were all worried for a bit there around launch. Eventually from 2008 they started shifting slowly. But since Yoshida was fired, it's never been the same. Still enjoy my PS5 daily. I got a backlog dating back to PS2 lol So I'm fine but new games aren't as appealing anymore.

It seems like we were thrown on to the worst timeline possible where everything is too expensive and the wrong people were put in positions that makes the world a shitty place. We could have had Shu as the head of PS but we got the shitty alternative. Same goes for everyone in power around the world. Doesn’t matter the company or country the majority of us got the shitty picks and the world is declining like never before. I do think PS can come out of this because of their studios, talent and IP but they need someone more in touch with gamers leading things like Shu was. They’re still the best place for console gaming imo but it could be much better than it is especially without the massive live service failures. The rest of the world I have a lot less hope for right now. Hopefully the pendulum swings back towards the good ole days but I’m preparing for the worst.

There goes illuminati distraction story

So now there's certifiable proof that Ryan was in fact "fired", as opposed to when it was first announced that he "retired", in order to save face.

There's another guy who recently "retired" as CEO of another large gaming company, after doing a dismantling job as lead for well over a decade.

seems legit, the business man, fires the one who has ideas to move the business forward.

Jim Ryan is the reason why we are entering year 6 since the PS5 launch and many of us don't feel like the PS5 has gotten started as yet.

I hope going forward, we will see a return to form.