| ChronotriggerJM said: On topic, I agree in spades about SOME of the multi-plats, but I do feel that Sony made the right choice in the end going with the Cell tech, from what I've heard many games of today are being created with multi-threads in mind, as the aforementioned company Crytek was already doing so yes? Microsoft played is safe this generation, and in the short term it will definitely pay off, I just don't think it gives as much "potential" to hold out well enough for the "10 year" cycle. I mean if I try to think about it, Microsofts next box will do what for more power? Add more Cores? Sony's already on top of that, the next generation of games will almost entirely be multi-threaded, so it's been a pretty rocky and slow start for Sony, but I think they're riding the proper waves :D |
I am not sure I agree...Sony is tied to the cell where microsoft can purhase any technology that they would like.
In any case, the problem with the PS3 is not the Cell...its the RSX GPU.
ATI designed GPU in the xbox 360 is more advance than the Nvidia designed one int he ps3. This is most likely because sony could not afford to put the similar GPU in to a ps3 due to cost issues so they chose something that is similar with the Nvidias Geforce 7000 series. Where the ATI desigend one in the xbox is a simplified version of the current ATI GPU's on sale today.
Nevertheless, I don't really think sony did a bad job with the ps3 design and architecture. I just remember comments from their management that said things like "Xbox 360 is a xbox 1.5". When you say things like that and it turns out that 70% of the time Xbox 1.5 beats your next gen platform...ouch.
