slowmo said:
I've disproved your lame theories many times before mate then you either run away from the discussion or no doubt as you'll do now hit the report button in a effort to hide the fact you lost the debate. Mandatory install are never a positive for the Bluray drive and given all almost the entire 360 catalogue could be installed to the HDD with and benefit form the super quick access times its certainly not a selling point for the PS3. It doesn't matter how many times you replicate data onto your bluray drive, that only decreases seak time, in terms of pure reading throughput the DVD drive is faster. You can band around all the averages claims you like but you cannot hide from the fact that the data that needs streaming fastest will be stored in the fastest areas and as such will be read from the disk quicker than with a 2X Bluray drive. Putting replications of data on a Bluray drive will not increase its throughput and organising the image better helps less than on the 360 because of the fact it reads consistantly across the entire disk. I see you and Mike moved the goal posts across to trying to proclaim the advantages of HDD installations now, do we take it you've lost this argument and are now making excuses for the lesser performance of the Bluray drive in the PS3. |
You would like people to believe that, wouldn't you? EVERYTHING you have talked about has already been debunked in the past page or two. You sound like a broken record with incorrect info. Smart people already understand that HDD installations have advantages. And, your "lesser performance of the Blu-ray drive" argument is...wrong. Data is packed closer together on Blu-ray. That decreases seek times over the same amount of data, etc, etc. Worst case scenario, on a DL-DVD worth of data, Blu-ray drive and DVD drive in these consoles are even. Just re-read the information presented to you and just refuse to accept the science (like normal).
BTW, what's the average seek time on finding disc two to put in the X360?
