By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - The PS3 not performing as bad as some claim?

@ HappySqurriel

Blu-Ray has its disadvantages; the main one being that the player is expensive, and the transfer rate is pretty low.
Due to mass production, Blu-Ray related production costs have already dropped significantly. HD DVD and Blu-Ray disc production costs are now about on par, in some cases scratch/smudge protected Blu-Ray disc production is even cheaper. With regard to transfer rates the PS3's Blu-Ray drive's average reading speed of a Blu-Ray disc is faster than the XBox 360's DVD drive while reading Dual Layer DVDs. XBox 360 drive speed = (3.3x to 8x) 7,46MB/s average reading speed of a Dual Layer disc: Drive specs The PS3's Blu-Ray drive reads at a sustained 9MB/s.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Around the Network

@ mrstickball

Cell prcoessor (right now, a piece of junk, and every dev has said they can't use it properly
There's a learning curve but developers are already mastering the cell faster than I personally expected. Problems relate more to multi-platform developers who have to learn PS3 specific development tactics and have to make PS3 specific adjustments to their game engines if they want to harvest some of the PS3's true potential. In July 2005 I wrote:
I understand that games developers may not be too fond of the idea of having to learn new ways to write their software. But according to the article at least they do seem to believe that multithreaded software is the way forward.
t will probably take some time before developers manage to get the most out of this platform, as has for example also been the case with the classic Amiga chipsets. The early Amiga games don't compare well to the complex graphics used by for instance game like Elfmania or Lion Heart.
So maybe this is why I am not as surprized as others by some PR statements. Please note, many actual developers are loving what's possible with the Cell, it's mostly the company PR spokesman who don't like this, allowing their devs to learn and additional dev costs for the PS3 version isn't what they like to do ($$$), so they rather make versions near identical across platforms. So I expect the most impressive games we will see from PS3-only projects (Sony projects, partner projects).



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

MikeB said: @ HappySqurriel Blu-Ray has its disadvantages; the main one being that the player is expensive, and the transfer rate is pretty low. Due to mass production, Blu-Ray related production costs have already dropped significantly. HD DVD and Blu-Ray disc production costs are now about on par, in some cases scratch/smudge protected Blu-Ray disc production is even cheaper. With regard to transfer rates the PS3's Blu-Ray drive's average reading speed of a Blu-Ray disc is faster than the XBox 360's DVD drive while reading Dual Layer DVDs. XBox 360 drive speed = (3.3x to 8x) 7,46MB/s average reading speed of a Dual Layer disc: Drive specs The PS3's Blu-Ray drive reads at a sustained 9MB/s.
Means nadda if sony won't lower the PS3's price. If Blu Ray is cheaper in some cases or on par...why is the PS3 600 big ones?



Erik Aston said: If Nintendo has the market share, they'll get the games, and people won't care if it isn't HD. And if the PS3 got a PSThwiimote, it would still be like getting 2 consoles for the price of 2. And actually, they'd be behind in developing Wii Sports-esque software, too. That applies to 360 also.
some game types: action, sports, stealth, rpgs, etc, will always look to graphical enhancements. MGS4 will not be on the Wii. neither will FF13. neither will halo 3. Do I really need to go on? there will be plenty of exclusives between the 360 and ps3 that gamers will want to play. most gamers that own a wii will also own a ps3 or 360. there are just too many games that will require the ps3 or 360 to play.



Death2009 said: Means nadda if sony won't lower the PS3's price. If Blu Ray is cheaper in some cases or on par...why is the PS3 600 big ones?
first of all, he was comparing blu-ray to hd-dvd. if you want hd-dvd (without hd-dvd games) on the 360 you'll need $600 (unless you get the useless core). secondly, it costs $600 because it has 40GB+ more space, wireless connectivity, and card readers. if you don't want that and only want a few GB more space (because the 360 uses quite a bit more of the "20GB"), it's $500. that extra $100 gets you a blu-ray player, blu-ray games, ability to use any usb keyboard, mouse, and webcam, free internet service, an HDMI port, etc. I think that's $100 well spent. if you want a 360 (15gb version or however much space is left) with an hd-dvd player, it costs you $100 more than a ps3 with all the same functionality...yeah...600 "big ones"



Around the Network

Interesting perspectives here, IMO the true next-gen wars are yet to begin though, current gen is still doing very well (PS2), consoles not being available globally yet and there are still shortages. Considering the PS1's huge delays for other countries compared to Japan and the console's initial slow sales, did anyone expect the PS1 to eventually sell over 100 million units at the time? @ windbane Nice post!

if you want a 360 (15gb version or however much space is left) with an hd-dvd player, it costs you $100 more than a ps3 with all the same functionality...
Except a XBox 360 with HD DVD drive isn't really on par with the PS3's Blu-Ray drive, the HD DVD drive cannot be used for gaming and one thing games seem to do well over the years is that they tend to expand significantly in terms of data usage. Also the XBox 360 HD DVD addon is half the speed of the PS3's Blu-Ray drive. Finally a Blu-Ray disc stores more data per layer and includes impressive protective coatings (must pass steelwool rubbing tests). With regard to movie playback, the movie quality is about on par between both formats, but in theory due to Blu-Ray's higher bitrate, while using identical codecs Blu-Ray movies should be able to produce better picture quality (next to this the PS3's HDMI 1.3 is also a factor here).



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Stromprophet - The x-box 360 has ALOT more power than your every-day home PC. (even the new ones) Welcome to the diffrence from a x86, to a RISC.



PSN ID: Kwaad


I fly this flag in victory!

Stromprophet said: I'd disagree that M$ will be able to sit. Which is in fact why they announced the new system they are coming out with to update the 360. A tri-core processor is already behind the game as Intel is already making Quadcores now. The cell in the PS3 has 1 cpu and 7 spes (1 in reserve so not used) so technically the Cell is an 8-core unit. I'd say the PS3 can wait the longest of all of them in terms of life cycle. It also has the most room to grow and continue improving graphics and functionality over the years. Motion is probably long term. It's a logical step in not only video game playing but also computer operation in general. It is especially so in the consideration of virtual reality, which is the long term video game mission. So motion is probably here to stay. I agree, Wii will not stay strong. At least not in the US or Europe. Maybe in Japan, where they seem much less concerned with graphics at the moment.
The Cell is NOT technically an 8-core unit. The SPU's of the Cell are extremely limited in what they can do in comparison to a full core. In the case of the PS3, the Cell has a single core and six spus. One spu is turned off to increase the Cell's yield and the one spu is reserved to the systems OS)



@ Darc Requiem

The Cell is NOT technically an 8-core unit. The SPU's of the Cell are extremely limited in what they can do in comparison to a full core. In the case of the PS3, the Cell has a single core and six spus. One spu is turned off to increase the Cell's yield and the one spu is reserved to the systems OS)
The PPE is a 64 bit processor core (with an Altivec unit), the 7 SPEs are 128-bit processor cores. SPEs offer both enormous strenghts as well as some weaknesses compared to more ordinary processor cores. But at the uses they excel they are many times more powerful than traditional processor cores. One of the SPEs is fully reserved for the SystemOS running in the background and should soon be put to some good use. IMO this can be looked at as a good thing as new additional system-wide features should not impact game performance.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Kwaad said: Stromprophet - The x-box 360 has ALOT more power than your every-day home PC. (even the new ones) Welcome to the diffrence from a x86, to a RISC.
You're High end PCs should outperform both the PS3 and XBox 360 but it isn't really a fair battle: http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2870&p=24 http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2870&p=22 In order to have your Geforce 8800 GTX SLi based system you will spend $600 per graphics card, to have the Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 you'll spend about $1200 for the CPU ... After you spend $3000 you'll have a PC which destroys the XBox 360 and PS3 in performance; at the same price you could have bought the XBox 360, PS3, Wii, DS and PSP and (about) 30 games ...