Which ordinary CPUs might those be? Do you also belong to the "MGS4 has better graphics than Crysis" club?

Yeah and i'll pull out Japan numbers to prove how much the PS3 is sucking in Japan too... You forget online, casual and subscription services. Also there are markets such as Europe where PC>Consoles.

Blu ray can go away really... It won't be adopted for a long while as a medium for software delivery (If at all).

BTW your console of choice uses a GPU designed first for PC use. If the PC games market was not flourishing then that GPU would not have been developed. Its like saying Cars > Ships while forgetting that the ships deliver the fuel to run the cars.

Furthermore without the PC as the strong games platform that it has been and will continue to be, that Cell you love so much would be little more than a fart in the wind. There wouldn't have been the emphasis and development on the technologies required to make it possible.

Don't bother, MikeB favours hypothetical scenerios where the Cell processor breaks moore's law because in certain benchmarks it outperforms 8 year old PowerPC based processors 20 to 1. The fact that a PC can run the same game as the PS3, with higher quality textures, higher detailed models, at a (dramatically) higher resolution, and with 4 times the framerate will not make him concede that the PC is dramatically more powerful than the PS3.

For gaming potential probably all the mainstream x86 CPUs, but then you will bring foward the argument of more expensive and powerful PC graphics cards.

Crysis and MGS4 are two very different games. Art direction is dependent on personal preferences, polish and attention to detail probably the award goes to MGS4, performance demands probably goes to Crysis. I am the 'PS3 could handle a very good port of Crysis' club.

Compared to PCs the PS3 has technical and practical advantages as well as vice versa.

 Wow! Thats brilliant! I would say it deserves its own thread if I didn't imagine that such a thread would be full of anger and hate that would sully the brilliance of your post.

Moore's law just regards the amount of chip transistors. It's not an exact scientific "law" and mass R&D could easily break this "law" or you can just make bigger chips.

How to test your claim that the Cell is better than all the x86 CPUs for gaming? What do you mean by that? There must be a way to test it, otherwise it's an empty claim.

You're also in the "Xbox360 can't handle a MGS4 port club as well"?

Another thing, the Cell CPU is nothing on its own. Sure you can consider it a "platform advantage". So in saying that, consider the X86 architecture vs  the PS3.

Integer code - PC smacks the PS3 so hard it never gets up again. One punch knockout.

Now we have that settled, lets move to floating point.

The Cell has a huge advantage over the PC CPU in floating point. BUT as a platform the PC wins again, because now that GPGPU is developing the PC can take advantage of the MASSIVE floating point advantage sitting in the GPU for Physics and that same GPU certainly doesn't need a hand from the CPU to do anything else. Other code can easily be handled in integer on the CPU.

Ram? PC wins.

Crysis port - Wow thats a lot of nerve. Its one of the most ram/CPU/GPU intensive games out there and you call it an easy port? I call it your easy delusion.

Crysis would be a tough port, if only for the fact that the pc version appears to have little to no optimizations.

As long as the 360 keeps constantly releasing kick ass games, I am with M$ all the way. Spore is gonna be the king of all games this year though. I got the trial creature creator and can honestly say this game is gonna be fucking awesome.

Wow, this topic has gone from the 360 to the PS3.

Again ill ask the orginal question.

Has the 360 reached it's limit?