By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
HappySqurriel on 05 April 2007
Edit Thread
davygee said:
HappySqurriel said:
It would be more powerful than the PS3/XBox 360 because it was released 5 years after the PS3 and 6 after the XBox 360 ... I didn't imply that they were going to have a better system than the PS4/XBox 720. By 2011 you will be able to produce a system which is small, quiet, cool, easy to develop for, is 4 to 8 times as powerful as the PS3/XBox 360, sell it for $200 or $250 and make a tiny profit.

The PS3 is console years ahead of it's time IMHO.  The Wii doesn't have crap graphics at all...they are very nice, but not as nice as the 360 or PS3.  I think the Wii will have a very short lifespan TBH.  It was released late 2006 and will probably be superceded by a new Nintendo system around 2010.  By then, the PS3 will be half way through it's lifespan and the 360 will be looking at a new model as well.

I would be surprised if either Nintendo or MS could come out with a more powerful machine than the PS3 in the next 3-4 years without the costs being astronomical.  Even at that, Nintendo will always produce a lower powered console for less money, that is their strategy.

Sony have made a huge step with including the BluRay player with the PS3, it's a gamble and hopefully will pay off for them if BR becomes a huge hit over the next 2-4 years.

I cannot see the PS4 being released any time soon and think the PS3 will have a solid 7-10 years as a base.

Also, I doubt you will see a more powerful machine than the PS3 selling for near $200-$250 for at least 6-7 years anyway. 

 

I think you have bought into the marketing hype of the PS3 more than anything else ...

Semiconductor technology is pretty predictable and through out all companies in the industry (AMD/ATI, Intel, Nvidia, IBM) the performance is very similar. Specialized architectures (like GPUs) gain higher perfomance than general architectures (like intel CPUs) at tasks they were specifically designed to do. The Cell doesn't really count as a specialized or generalized architecture and more closely matches the design of something like a digital signal processor; this should mean that it can obtain higher performance than a similar generalized processor, on more tasks than a specialized processor but it will be far harder to develop for.

Now, the reason I mentioned this was that in 4 or 5 years semiconductor technology will have advanced to the level where you can obtain 8 to 12 times the performance across all architectures; this means that the most generalized processor will be far more powerful than any processor that is available today.