By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
OriGin on 09 May 2007
Edit Thread
rocketpig said:
KruzeS said:
rocketpig said:

Seriously, where do you people get this stuff? The PS3 isn't even really that powerful when taking into consideration its primary objective, which is gaming. The cell is not a great chip for gaming. It's one hell of a server or supercomputer chip, but it's not particularly good for the non-linear nature of video game processing.

Servers? Now, that one's new!

Let me see... yeah, this is the right quote: “Seriously, where do you people get this stuff?”.

The Cell is great for gaming, er... I mean graphics, but isn't that what (PS3) gaming is all about? Seriously, bad for AI, game logic, etc. But great at helping out with real-time graphic effects in really dynamic environments.


You do realize that IBM developed the Cell for servers, right? That is its primary purpose and that's why IBM is touting it as their new big thing in blade servers.

And while the Cell is powerful, that I admit, I think 360's three symmetrical cores and more powerful GPU is the right move for gaming. And from the reports I'm reading from most developers, they're saying the same thing. Sure, it can help in real-time effects, but at the cost of AI. So how is that a good solution for gaming?


 In terms of taking advantage of the console straight away, but Sony have future plans for the PS3.  While what we are starting to see on the X360 isn't the best it can do, there isn't much more room for too much more improvement on that hardware, however the PS3 has a whole heap of power up it's sleeve.  

Look at early PS2 games and then at FFXII and God of War 2 and tell me those graphics are unbelievable for hardware from 2000.  

God of War 2 looks better than Zelda on Wii I believe.

PS3 has that scalability and it will increase as the future goes on, it's not doomed it's just not going to do well this year, it will pick up for sure.