MikeB said:
The PC and PS3 aren't easily comparable, one runs Vista and the other a far more optimised embedded OS, one will be optimised for to the bone the other will not.
You are correct that the full potential of the Cell processor hasn't been shown yet. IMO that's not a surprise when dealing with regard to radically new innovative hardware. For example early Atari ST (which was good compared to Macs and PCs of the time) to Amiga 500 ports ran better on the Atari ST, small enhancements started to pop up in the coming years though, after 2 years the first eye few eye opener titles started to appear:
http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=e5ic3Fy-tVY
But it took until around 6 years to see the Amiga 500's gaming potential fully realized. Personally I expect a similar timespan with regard to the PS3, like I stated a year before the PS3's launch. If we talk about other advantages like Blu-Ray disc and default harddrive they should show much quicker.
I think the PS3 will be viewed as a cutting edge gaming system for a long time due to this growth. It also potentially paves the way for a Cell based PS4, which should thus be much easier to adapt to for PS3 developers.
Since the days of the Amiga, NeoGeo and later the BeBox we have said heavy multi-processing will be the future. The success of the x86 IBM PC this delayed progress for a decade but now it's being realized.
|
There have been developers entirely devoted to the cell processor for nearly 4 years and it hasn't really broken away from the performance of the XBox 360 or a 3 year old PC. Its about time that you admit that the Cell is not a magical, law of physics breaking, processor and it is very similar in performace to the other processors. Certainly, there will be improvements over time as developers work with it, but it isn't a cutting edge gaming system anymore and it never will be again.
