Print

[yaazz]

How much could sony have sold for if they didnt REQUIRE bluray? I bet they could have undercut 360 by a lot!

Games on regular dvds, but play bluray movies anyways in the higher SKU, then the cheaper, only ps3 model is priced below the X360, duh

stupid sony trying to make everyone need their fancy bluray discs... hell I dont even own an HDTV!

[Johnny Johnson]

Well, I'm not sure if Sony would have been able to beat 360's price by not including Blu-Ray, but they certainly could have matched it.  Plus they would have most likely been able to stick to their Spring 2006 launch date.

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(Johnny Johnson @ Jun 2 2006, 08:31 AM)

Well, I'm not sure if Sony would have been able to beat 360's price by not including Blu-Ray, but they certainly could have matched it.  Plus they would have most likely been able to stick to their Spring 2006 launch date.

im not even sure if they could have kept the original spring date either.  the Cell chip was being produced during the month of january and had yeild problems, as the company found it difficult to produce them at a fast rate.  im not sure if they got their yeild problems sorted out but if they did launch during the springs (without a BR drive) there would have been major shortages.

as far as the price is concerned, there are two big factors with the ps3.  blue ray and the Cell chip.  while the bulk of the high price is on the onproven technology of the blue ray drive, you also have to remember that sony has spent years and years (not to mention billions of dollars) developing the Cell chip.  so im sure that also plays a factor, which is a shame since there really is nothing special about the Cell chip when there are already chipsets being made by Intel and AMD that outperform the Cell chip (and the Xenon chip for that matter).  

[calderra]

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ Jun 2 2006, 02:18 PM)

you also have to remember that sony has spent years and years (not to mention billions of dollars) developing the Cell chip.

I still don't get what all the fuss over the Cell chip was about when it came out, because it had such crazy heat production.

IBM: "So it has 9 cores?"
Sony: "Yes."
IBM: "And monster heat production?"
Sony: "Yes."
IBM: "How's that different from 3 of our Apple G5 chips running on one motherboard?"
Sony: *billion-dollar tears*

Reeeaeaal exciting, there.

[paranoia4422]

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ Jun 2 2006, 02:18 PM)

im not even sure if they could have kept the original spring date either.  the Cell chip was being produced during the month of january and had yeild problems, as the company found it difficult to produce them at a fast rate.  im not sure if they got their yeild problems sorted out but if they did launch during the springs (without a BR drive) there would have been major shortages.

Yeilds were fixed by disableing 1SPE in every cell manufactured(either 1 random one if they all worked or which ever one did not function properly)

We can assume yeilds are acceptable now.

[calderra]

QUOTE(paranoia4422 @ Jun 3 2006, 07:55 PM)

Yeilds were fixed by disableing 1SPE in every cell manufactured(either 1 random one if they all worked or which ever one did not function properly)

We can assume yeilds are acceptable now.

I thought that was to fix something on the chip, not to work with yields?
I was under the opinion all 9 cells (well, 8+master) were on the chip, and one had to be deactivated (because of heat, power use, something).