Information on PS3 specs (Yet again, this time appears to be a good source - with PS4 possible Specs, which I find amusing).

http://www.edepot.com/playstation3.html

Makes for long bed time reading...

Can't seem to find this level of detail for the 360 though :-/

greenmedic88 said: So does that means the PC version sold less? No one knows since PC sales are almost impossible to track given the unreleased DD numbers. Either there are less than 2m gaming PCs with the modest specs required to run L4D, it was pirated enough times to cut deeply into sales, or it actually sold better than the Xbox port. Either way, all sales of L4D were not restricted to the Xbox.

Thats not the point.

The point I was making is that the game sold really well in spite of the number of people who would have gotten it for their PC given the games modest requirements. Therefore the games impact was about the same as a bigger exclusive as it tapped a pretty much pure console audience for the Xbox 360 SKU.

numonex said: The PS3 is marginally better in terms of graphics due to having three times as many 3.2GHz processors (9) as the XBox 360 (3). In terms of overall game performance and frame rates the games are equal or marginally better on the XBox 360 due to DVD drive reading game discs faster than the PS3s Blu-Ray players. Mandatory game installations are required for most PS3 games due to slow reading of the Blu-Ray player in the PS3. Game installations are not required for the XBox 360 DVD game discs. *The PS3 exclusive games are marginally better than XBox 360 exclusive games in terms of graphics. **The multi-platform games PS3 and XBox 360 are equal or considered marginally better on the XBox 360.

Why people say SPEs are cores?  they are like cores in a way but still they are not..  and is not 9 is 8 SPEs, One is dissable, one is for the OS and 6 for programming games..

Xbox 360 has a 3.2ghz 3 core processor..

The Cell is a 3.2ghz single core processor with 8 SPEs (theorically cores), when only 6 SPEs is being use for gaming..

Mvp4eVa said: numonex said: The PS3 is marginally better in terms of graphics due to having three times as many 3.2GHz processors (9) as the XBox 360 (3). In terms of overall game performance and frame rates the games are equal or marginally better on the XBox 360 due to DVD drive reading game discs faster than the PS3s Blu-Ray players. Mandatory game installations are required for most PS3 games due to slow reading of the Blu-Ray player in the PS3. Game installations are not required for the XBox 360 DVD game discs. *The PS3 exclusive games are marginally better than XBox 360 exclusive games in terms of graphics. **The multi-platform games PS3 and XBox 360 are equal or considered marginally better on the XBox 360. Why people say SPEs are cores?  they are like cores in a way but still they are not..  and is not 9 is 8 SPEs, One is dissable, one is for the OS and 6 for programming games.. Xbox 360 has a 3.2ghz 3 core processor.. The Cell is a 3.2ghz single core processor with 8 SPEs (theorically cores), when only 6 SPEs is being use for gaming..

okay i will try to simplify it.

360 3 cores, it have 1mb cache shared between 3 cores (1mb/3), that and can also be thread into (6) 1.6ghz threads the gpu does most of the graphics job using xbox directx which its a console version of it direct x 9 version C.

ps3 have 1 PPE which is practically the core 360 cpu is based of, the ppe have but with 512kb all for itself. that can be threaded

into 2 1.6ghz threads.

then u have 7 SPU with 256kb l2 clocked 3.2ghz, the thing it's it can't be accessed directly  and have to be sync with PPE, it really small footprint to sync on killzone 2 dev walkthought showed only 2-4% of cpu use. they excel at parallelism.

something engines like the cry engine 2-3 use to make it graphics.

you have 8 threads for use for gaming, since the OS footprint have gotten smaller and the (9) SPE doing all the job.

most games use PPE and maybe 1-2 SPU especially ports for things like AI and physics, and use the RSX for everything.

but then if people moved some things like spu the RSX could focus on things it does best like HDR, textures, graphics in general.

thats only 6 SPE could make worlds difference if was actually use, but only uncharted have gotten a proper use of them... and there is still room for improvement.

 

Lets just say If I was a console I wouldn't want to get in a fight with the Ps3...haha

Quartz said: Information on PS3 specs (Yet again, this time appears to be a good source - with PS4 possible Specs, which I find amusing). http://www.edepot.com/playstation3.html Makes for long bed time reading... Can't seem to find this level of detail for the 360 though :-/

For those who hate long reading...here are the bits everyone is on about.... Cell Broadband Engine The Cell CPU has one 3.2Ghz PPE (Power Processor Element) with two threads and eight 3.2Ghz SPE (Synergistic Processing Elements). The chip serial number is CXD2989. The PPE is a general purpose CPU, while the eight SPE are geared towards processing data in parallel. One SPE is disabled to increase yield, so the PS3 can have at most 9 threads runnings at the same time (2 from PPE and 7 from SPE). Note that one SPE is reserved for the hypervisor, so PS3 programs can take advantage of 8 threads. Both the PPE and SPE of the Cell are 64 bit, and manipulate data in Big Endian. The Cell was introduced at 90nm and later PS3 model numbers starting with CECHG uses the 65nm version. 1 PPE (Power Processor Element) 3.2Ghz 64 bit, Big Endian 2 threads (can run at same time) L1 cache: 32kB data + 32kB instruction L2 cache: 512kB Memory bus width: 64bit (serial) VMX (Altivec) instruction set support Full IEEE-754 compliant 8 SPE (Synergistic Processing Element) 3.2Ghz 64 bit, Big Endian 1 SPE disabled to improve chip yield 1 SPE dedicated for hypervisor security 256kB local store per SPE 128 registers per SPE Dual Issue (Each SPE can execute 2 instructions per clock) IEEE-754 compliant in double precision (single precision round-towards-zero instead of round-towards-even) 90nm (235.48mm2 die size) technology (CECHF models and lower) 65nm (174.61mm2 die size) technology (CECHG models and higher)..... RSX - Reality Synthesizer The RSX is a graphical processor unit (GPU) based off of the nVidia 7800GTX graphics processor, and is a G70/G71 hybrid with some modifications. The RSX has separate vertex and pixel shader pipelines. The chip model number is CXD2982GB. The following are relevant facts about the RSX... Little Endian 8 vertex shaders at 500Mhz 28 pixel shaders (4 redundant, 24 active) at 550Mhz 28 texture units (4 redundant, 24 active) 8 Raster Operations Pipeline units (ROPs) Includes 256MB GDDR3 650Mhz clocked graphics memory Earlier PS3 Models: Samsung K4J52324QC-SC14 rated at 700Mhz Later PS3 Models: Qimonda HYB18H512322AF-14 GDDR3 Memory interface bus width: 128bit Rambus XDR Memory interface bus width: 56bit out of 64bit (serial) 258mm2 die size 90nm (earlier models) and 65nm (later models) technology..... Sorry it is really long winded, but saves countless peeps putting up specs loads of times... Everyone happy now? I'll quote my source again... http://www.edepot.com/playstation3.html Thanks :)

Sorry can't seem to get any breaks in it :(

Finality of it all, nobody buys a console for it's graphics power alone. A typical person would brush off all of your nerd rants, component comparisons, pixel counting, price/value calculations, and exclusive face offs. When a casual gamer says "PS3 is better" it's usually because of what they heard and saw for a split second. People are impressionable, so yes the Sony PR is doing an excellent job spreading the word.

Despite these sentiments and ideas about the 360 being inferior, it still sells over the PS3. This is a price-point issue, clearly. Since people aren't made of money and majority of people are still in fact, casual gamers - they will not meet that steep price unless they can either play games cheap (360) or play with other casual friends (Wii). They REALLY don't care about the hair-line differences in graphics like we do, lol.

In summary = Their knowledge isn't factual it's word of mouth - even if it's true.

Too bad 512MB of RAM is such a bottleneck... Even if 256MB of RSX ram is really fast, it's still a limitation.

Also the RSX isn't exactly the best GPU around.

True, but while this system was still in development (around 2005) it was probably one of the cheaper parts available but of reasonable performance after spending loads of cash on The C£ll :)