If anyone you should be a champion of keeping the mod's with their loose moderating.

Uhh... holy ****. That is just dumb. I have lost 90% of my respect for this site's forums because it is all. Wii is god Wii is god Wii is god PS3 sux PS3 sux PS3 sux 360 sux but not as bad as PS3 360 sux but not as bad as PS3 360 sux but not as bad as PS3 I post for laughs now. so ROFL @ you.

Reality has a known anti-SONY bias.

Here you go: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parallelization The term is commonly used when attempting to divide an algorithm into smaller subtasks, typically for threading or dividing into separate processes. It's worth noting that companies involved in selling processors and related products, when pushing their products, often compare them to supercomputers. They may indeed compare to older supercomputers, but the term supercomputer must be redefined fairly often. As the typical computer get faster, so too do supercomputers. Remember that the G4 processor was also a "supercomputer" according to Apple, since it had SIMD instructions in the form of Altivec. That's how marketing works. The Cell truly has an interesting processor architecture, and when optimized properly it will definitely be fast for operations which can be parallelized. The compiler should also provide a nice performance boost, as the processor's utilization should go up. It's not a modern supercomputer, but yes, it's fast when given appropriate input.

Gwaad, or should I say Captain Delano? There is no set rule for the size of sig, in fact I don't think there is a set rule for anything here. Maybe you can use your wisdom to explain how I should be banned for useing a copyrighted avatar instead, or better yet just sue me. No that thats out of the way, I'd just like to ask how I'm dumb? I've seen the light, and no realize that specs on paper are what makes and breaks a gaming console. Are you saying I'm dumb for believing in the power of Ken and the CELL BE? I think that might be hypocritical as you seem to be almost as devout as me. Maybe you just think I'm dumb because I can't spell or tell the difference between periods and commas? At least I'm not doing anything stupid like posting just for laughs....

In what way did I post trash talk? I said that the PS2 had very good numbers from benschmarks, better than the xbox and my cube, but honestly. If the PS2 were so much better why was it a need to make the ps2 version of RE4 worse than the Cube version? So I just said that benshmarks doesn't mean a sh*t. It is all about how you use it. I do belive that the PS3 is a mighty powerfull consol, but does it matter when it is very hard to program and most important does it matter when the game library isn't very large? I am into consols for the games not the hardware! Then I asked if you always buy the most powerfull consol? Do you (because you didn't answer the question, but you never do so I don't know why I answer you)? I agree that the cell is an intresting new CPU structure, but to state that intel and amd is f***ed because of it is a little bit silly. I can't see how microsoft would place it main product (windows) on PPC, when even apple have left the ship. So no Cell might sell well in upcoming products, but intel and amd wont be that much affected. There has been a number of good CPUs that could have beaten the mighty x86, which honestly isn't that good, but they have lacked software.

I think that Sony spent too much time developing this super fast chip, and not enough time teaching the developers how to use it. I don't think that you can expect any studio to utilize much more then 10% of this chip because of the difficulty in programming it. Since fewer and fewer developers are seeming comfortable with it, there is a definate disconnect between the power of this chip and quality of games out and planneed to come out for the system. I think that it is likely that Sony's system would beat the Xbox in similar benchmark tests. Since developing a game costs $20m instead of $5-10m for the 360. Some developers just cannot justify the risk of the platfor which is why they lost so many exclusives. Consumers, on the other hand, don't see benchmark results; they see demos, games on the shelves and commercials. Something that the 360 has more of and the PS3 has fewer of. I would love to see some monster apps come out for the PS3. I love great games. But until one comes out, I'lll wait.

In short: Playstation 3 = Sega Saturn Chips do not matter. You can have a system with $20,000 worth of Cell SPUs and PPEs and whatever. It doesn't make a better system. What makes a system better is strong documentation software for the workstations to actually UTILIZE that power. If they're running 10%, it's because the PS3's archatecture is very poor. In the case of Sega Saturn, it definately had a huge power advantage over the PS1. Nintendo had a even more powerful system in the N64. Did that help either out against PS1? Nope. Power is good, but when developers cannot use the power, it's useless. I doubt developers will really figure out how to use the PS3's "power" for another 4-5 YEARS. At that point, you "might" see a small increase in preformance versus the 360. You have a problem with the PS3 when most reviewers that review games like Call of Duty 3, Marvel Ultimate Alliance and many othe games, and state their dead even or even the 360 has the advantage. Why? Documentation. Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company. They have to be very proficent at making software work well on hardware - which is why most devs say the PS3 is a nightmare to dev for versus the 360. Wii is even better due to it's simplicity (although it's very poor compared to total power versus 360/PS3). Remember when everyone said that Assassains Creed couldn't be made on 360 due to power? Wrong. The PS3 specs have been vastly overinflated, and the Cell processor is at the heart of it. Konami made some interesting quotes about the cell processor: Their statements say that the PS3 would be better than the 360 in terms of graphics IF you had 400+ people working on 1 game to optimize the coding exclusively for the PS3. Unfortunately, most studios have 100 people (give or take) working on a game. They cannot afford to use the PS3 with its power. Which is why so many games have gone multi-platform. I have a question for you, Washimul: If the PS3 was so much more powerful than the 360, why is it that so many PS2 exclusives have gone to 360 as well, and not the other way around? The 360 has lost very little if any exclusives, whereas Sony has lost Guitar Hero, Resident Evil 5, Assassains Creed, Mercenaries 2, Virtua Fighter 5 among other games, and the only one that the 360 lost was Full Auto 2? Also, a quick note on Oblivion on PS3: Many might say "OMG, it's going to be better on PS3, devs say that the load times, textures, ect are better, showing that the PS3 is a better machine". Wrong. A patch is coming out shortly for the 360 to increase the draw distances and load times to make it equivilent with the 360. Why? Optimization. Bethsada has had a year to work on the PS3 version + learn from the PC and 360 versions. They've now gone back to the 360 and made it better. Not because the 360 is better, or the PS3 version is better, but because there was more time to optimize the 360. However, according to bethsada, quite a few people worked on porting Oblivion to PS3. When it came to updating the graphics on the 360 to match the PS3 version....It took 1 programmer a few weeks :)

Your a little off on what the SPE's can do. It is a misconception that the PPE has to schedule tasks for the SPE instructions can be sent to the SPE's as a whole without talking to the PPE. Any complaints you hear about the cell was normally made by PC based defs who have difficulty thinking out side the box. Seriously... why is that you do not hear any japanese devs complain? Do you think its loyalty? Or the sheer fact that they do not see an issue because the older GC and PS2 did not rely on general purpose coding........ oh noes!!!!! "3D graphics are also a huge application for SIMD processing. A vertex/vector(term used interchangeably in 3D graphics) is a 3D position, usually stored with 4 elements. X, Y, Z, and W. I won’t explain the W because I don’t even remember exactly how it’s used, but it is there in 3D graphics. Processing many vertices would be relatively slow on a traditional CPU which would have to individually process each element of the vector instead of processing the whole thing simultaneously. This is why MMX, SSE, and 3DNow! were created for x86 architectures to improve 3D acceleration. Needless to say, GPUs most definitely have many SIMD units (possibly even MIMD), and is why they vastly out perform CPUs in this respect. Operations done on the individual components of a 3D vector are independent which makes the SIMD paradigm an optimal solution to operate on them. To put this in context, remembering 3D computer gaming between low end and high end computers between 1995 and 2000 might bring up some memories of an issue that existed around then. Although graphics accelerators were out in that time period, some of them didn’t have “Hardware T&L”(transform and lighting). If you recall games that had the option to turn this on or off (assuming you had it in hardware), you would see a huge speed difference if it was done in hardware versus in software. The software version still looked worse after they generally tried to hide the speed difference by using less accurate algorithms/models. If a scaled down equivalent of the Cell existed back then, the software emulation would not have been as slow compared to a GPU." With the exception of VF5, when were these considered exclusive? RE4 showed up on GC first and..... Better yet I will take the bait If that is how you see it what happened to enchant arms, splinter cell double agent, wardevil, saints row, and Graw. Multiplatform games are not just born they are planned for. So for every lost "exclusive" that both the 360 and PS3 suffer you have to keep in mind it was most likely planned that way. So announced exlusive are becoming suspect especially when it is shown on another system. Projects assins was shown on a 360 before they tried to say it was a PS3 exclusive and bioshock has been shown running on PS3 hardware. Expect an announcement. "SPOnG: Okay, back to the game! Some of the optimisations you've made on the PS3 version, you've said, are going to make their way over to the Xbox 360 and PC versions [via updates] at some point in the future. Pete Hines: Yeah, there's a few things we've done that are non-platform specific that may be applicable to the PC or the 360. SPOnG: But some at the same time will be PS3-specific? Pete Hines: Yeah, quite a few of the optimisations done for this version are specific to the way the PlayStation 3 is designed, in the way it processes information… so those optimisations wouldn't be applicable to the other versions." I get that you are trying to downplay the announcements but it is a perfectly understandable knee jerk reaction. More people are trying to learn the hardware and simply put there are things that the PS3 can do that the 360 cannot, It is a vertex beast and no the 360 does not keep up.

I'd rather have 100% wii than 10% ps3.