Print

[sunkist]

http://www.anandtech...doc.aspx?i=2461

They are popping these articles out like crazy.

[ninjax]

Well...simply put....That sucks  

[sunkist]

For all those people that say these systems will kill computers . Still should be great consoles though.

[twistedsymphony]

wow that was interesting

For those too lazy to read it basically the impression I got out of it was
-Xbox360 and PS3 will have CPUs significantly weaker than a Pentium 4 or Athalon 64, real world performance is no where near where they claim it is.
-Sony went with the Cell to promote their own tech, MS went with the Xenon so they could own the tech and lower the price of the 360.
-The Cell's SPEs are useless, as is the Xenon's ability to do 6 threads.
-The GPUs are great but neither will have fill rates capable of outputting 1080i/p graphics on "true" next-gen games (ported current gen games yes but probably not next gen games), as a result most developers on both consoles are shooting for 720p
-PCs will still be the leading edge in game tech, specifically with Ai and Physics because of the lacking CPUs in the Xbox360 and PS3

[brooksie48]

Sorry double post, but don't the devs only have dev kits right now?

[sunkist]

Well the article says they talked to developers with systems and dev kits, plus they are pretty good at figuring out how things work and I believe they have some insider info that they cannot totally let out.

[sunkist]

QUOTE(brooksie48 @ Jun 29 2005, 03:26 PM)

Sorry double post, but don't the devs only have dev kits right now?

[brooksie48]

QUOTE(sunkist @ Jun 29 2005, 05:51 PM)

The fact is these are still WAY better than current systems and should be awesome, plus its the games that make the system, not the hardware. All the systems should have great games hopefully.

[sunkist]

QUOTE(schwangschwing @ Jun 29 2005, 04:00 PM)

-The Cell's SPEs are useless, as is the Xenon's ability to do 6 threads.

[incognegro]

QUOTE

sony shipped around 4 times as many PlayStation 2 consoles as MS did Xboxes, regardless of the hardware platform, a game developer won't turn down working with the PS2 - the install base is just that attractive.  So for Sony, the Cell processor may be strange and even undesirable for game developers, but the developers will come regardless.

More and more they anger me

Im surprised MS pulled of such crap with there cpu

I dont really care how much they compare to PCs, pc gaming is just not attractive to me

Anyway I am a bit disappointed in MS, Sony is excused cause they dont care so why should i care.

[m_hael]

The article writer needs to stop guessing, extrapolating and generally making bad assumptions..... in my opinion the article is a sensationalised piece of crap.

[Twasi]

 I read this article when I woke up then immediately jumped on X-S to see what kind of talk was going on and this article got me down a little bit, Some of the things I probably mis-understood because the article came off to me as saying that both were incredibly week. I guess they mean weak compared to PC's that are coming out now . Anyways I thought they did have a devk it of some sort and were benchmarking it, but if they don't even have one I could care less what they think. They may know alot about computers but I fail to see how they can accurately speculate performance from spec's. Benchmarking it can reveal some pretty radical results.

[sunkist]

True they are not benchmarking it but they are passing along information from the people who are making the games for it which I would say is better than benching. These people need to know the consoles pretty well to design for it so if they say both are quite a bit down from what they could be and even current computers I would say thats some interesting info.

[m_hael]

QUOTE(sunkist @ Jun 29 2005, 07:42 PM)

...passing along information from the people who are making the games for it

[geo22]