daclassicgamingmaster posted on Dec 24 2005 at 12:39 AM said:sir. do I believe that you are insinuating that the xbox 3shitty is more powerful than the playstation3 shall be?boogle posted on Dec 23 2005 at 07:10 PM said:PSyMastR posted on Dec 22 2005 at 11:38 PM said:No offense sony, but it fits your stereotype very well.
Most sony fanboys want the most powerful machine on the market, even if it is lacking in some areas. So that is your main interest in the XGP?
Heh, they'll be disappointed with the PS3 then. Although no doubt they'll exclaim that the Cell has a higher peak theoretical performance than the 3 general purpose cores in the XBox 360. Ye, those SPEs without cache or direct memory access are really useful... GPU is more powerful tho, I'll give it that.
Indeed I am, in terms of CPU-grunt. The CPU on the PS3 is more powerful theoretically - but when you actually take note that the SPEs (the many 'cells') have no cache or direct memory access - you realise 8 or so processors are trying to read in data through a single memory controller - and without cache every instruction has to be read in fresh. Not only that, but they don't have a full instruction set either. I suspect much memory thrashing, and in short, the entire CPU system being starved of memory.
The graphics of the PS3 may well be better than the XBox 360's (afterall u can have the GPU do some absolutely amazing things all by itself through shaders), but the AI and physics will ultimately be better on XBox 360 due to the extra CPU power actually available, instead of theoretically available.
Last edited by a moderator: