PS3 vs PC

[ZenfoldorVGI]

bouzane said:

ZenfoldorVGI said:

NNN2004 said:
for all sony fans .. even when the ps3 is the lead platform for some games its still work better on the 360 .. why we still didnt see the power of the cell ur talking about until now ?? is it myth ?

 

Yes, it's obviously a marketing gimmick. Sony wants its fans to spout the "cell is awesome" propoganda, because it's a selling point, and it reduces cognitive dissonance. The cell is like any other CPU, it's just needlessly complex and inefficient, which was done in order to give it "edge."

That's my opinion, anyway.

Sony, Toshiba, and IBM spent billions of dollars developing the Cell processor and as a result it is being used to do such things as medical imaging, aerospace and defense, and seismic processing. The PS3 has clearly proved its computational power through Folding@Home in which the PS3 excells. Calling the Cell inefficient is just plain ludicrous, the SPE's are arranged in an extremely efficient manner which is why the Cell is such an advanced CPU. I fault the PS3 for its GPU, RAM, and low Blu-ray read speed, but to fault the Cell which is proven technology is just silly. Levy criticism where it is due, the Cell is not worthy of such criticism.

Didn't Sony drop support of the Cell as a future technology?

Perhaps your right. It's a generalization to blame any particular part of the PS3 for its general poor performance with multiplats.

It's just ironic to me that when, rarely, a game plays slightly better on the PS3, it's because of the 360's inferior technology, and when it plays poorly on the 360, it's because of lazy developers.

The PS3's processor doesn't matter. The GPU and ram does. If its limited by them, the the Cell doesn't matter.

As for the generalization of the Cell sucking, well in a way, it does suck. It's hard to use, for gaming at least. Anything that's hard to use, and doesn't give an advantage, when become compared to something very easy to use, sucks, in a way. Many, many games have paid the price because the developers couldn't figure out how to use the Cell.

In the end, the Cell is just a CPU. It might be slightly, technically better than some of its traditional cousins, but it's not innovation, or leap, like you're claiming. This technology isn't the future. It's probably destined to end in its current form. There probably won't be a Cell 2. It's simply a very complicated, but capable sidegrade in technology, with less room for expansion.

...and for gamers, it's nothing more than a talking point.