The PS3: Where's The Units?

to unnamd: Do you know that every component in the PS3 is more powerful? Or are you just saying that because sony told you so? I do not own any sony or microsoft gaming consoles. I game on the PC. Sony has a more powerful processor. At somethings. Physics probably, pure computation yes. But due to the very setup of the processor it is not suited to multiple inter related tasks that are running simultatneously and require the info from the other tasks around it to run. This happens because the cell can run 8 tasks at once(actually it's 6 because of the redundancy and the OS taking one each) but each cell must be told what to do by the first processor which divides up the work. If a cell needs info from something another cell is working on then that info must go through the head processor. This is your bottle neck. Physics are quite linear and so the PS3 has lots of physics computing power but is less suited to other tasks. The Xbox360 has 3 independant processors and so the bottle neck is removed but at the cost of pure grunt. Next up: Graphics As far as I can tell from sony's press they are basically running a geforce 6800. Which is no weak card as it has probably been tweaked and had more abilities to it. But the xbox360 is running Ati's DirectX10 card. The big difference is the Xbox has a unified shader architecture(sony makes no claim to having this). When running a pure processing comparison the unified architecture really does nothing but take that same card into the real gaming world and you will see what it does. Check gamespots review of the Geforce 8800(has unified shader). That card single handedly beats dual 6950gtx systems. simply this card is out running two cards which each have 50mhz on it's clock speed. Storage: Blu-ray is bigger. Does that matter? For the gaming PS3, no. The PS3 has access to 256mb of ram for its graphics card and 256 for the system. minus 64 for the OS. Games are big because of textures if you don't believe me look up kkreiger. It is 90kb in size and looks like quake 3 because there are no textures. With only 256 mb of ram there is simply not enough space to store higher level textures than what is currently in use. Or they can't get much bigger. This means blu-ray is only good for holding larger games but most games will not get bigger because that would raise the costs much too high.

spot on arguments and i believe that sony is not changing their attitudes toward customers as they should have. I see a certain arrogance that does not make me proud to be a sony customer right now, the lack of concern for price, shoddy cables, poor initial software in the system, and they did not even bother to redesign the controller. the points mentioned already in the article are correct - nobody is going to doubt how well ps3 can sell, but how long will it be before the facts outweigh the hype?

See, here's my problem with the PS3-bashing which seems to have started around the time of the last E3. All and I do mean 'ALL' of the reports bashing the ps3 do so comparing it to the xbox360. I can understand if you're not into the ps3 but the comparisons are always so one-sided I'm sure a 12 year old could counter the so-called arguments why microsofts offering is better. I could type a huge list of reasons why the ps3 is superior to the xbox (appart from the obvious reasons that every single one of it's components beats it's xbox couterpart) but yknow what I don't see the point. I'm not some fanboy like some who claim themselves to be 'balanced journalists'.