Again with this.


The ps3 and 360 are almost identical when it comes to graphic. However, it takes more work to on the ps3 than the 360.

good read,

whats the big deal even if 360 has reach its peak, i think that by the time sony's ps3 reaches its peak performance the new consoles will be out so i dont give a shtt.

We may have a different definition of trolling.  I was just pointing out that you completely plagiarized some other person's post.  The problem with creating a thread like this is it really requires some technical understanding which I don't know you have.  Any time you copy and paste a post or original thought you should provide a link to give the originator credit.  Please feel free to provide any evidence of my trolling.

If you read the ars technica article you will see that IBM submitted the cell processor to be included on the list of super computers, they did not submit the 360 chip.  Since IBM created both chips, don't you think they would know which one is more powerful?  If the 360 cpu was more powerful than the cell, why wasn't it submitted as well?

We really don't need any more threads regarding technical comparisons between the PS3 and the 360.  Let the games speak for themselves.

Why should the Xbo360 has reached its peak? It´s still the cheapest way to get into HD gaming. The PS3 costs twice as much and doesn´t really offer any advantages in most of the games. A great margin of multiplattform titles is even superior on the Xbox360. So why should it magically stop selling? Just because it´s one year older than the PS3?

That's a very difficult argument to support with facts.  There have been many games on consoles that were considered impossible a year or two earlier, but which required either digging deeper into the hardware or coming up with creative ways to use the hardware or APIs.  A game like Shadow of the Colossus wasn't considered possible on the PS2 until the developer found a way to make it happen.

Selnor, I hate every thread you make....no offense.(eg. In yout graphical comparison thread u said that Far Cry 2 looked better than Heavy Rain) You seem to discredit the PS3 in every one and this one is no different. If the Cell is less powerful than the Xbox parts then why is the Cell used in most of the top 500 supercomputers around the world?

main reason the ps3 it's expensive it's due the blu ray drive, not the cpu also all come with a HDD compared to the 360

and they are advange having 50gb than 8.5gb to make games also optional HDD installation possible faster, speeds.

not all xbox360 can install games.

Killzone 2 is not out yet! Keep your post with games which are.

I hate this post... no offense!

Did you even follow the link, or why are you spouting nonsense ?

The cell is used in 3 Systems of the top 100, thats not my definition of most.

@dbot

I don't want to nitpick but the x360 cpu is based on the power architecture.

In the top 500 there are 60 power systems listed.

I know the chip is not identical, but neither is the cell.

The ps3 cell is not appropiate for supercomputers,

cause it's performance in dp floating point operations is to slow.

So they are using the advanced cell version Powerxcell.

btw.

i loled at the article, roadrunner is made of alot of opterons, but every opteroncore got a cell based coprocessor.

I guess even ibm can't do without standard architecture.

I'm amazed that you yourself is aware that you've been brainwashed yet don't try to do anything about it.