ckmlb said: bugmenot said: In regards to RAM, you forget that Sony requires 74 MB (I think of the Cell accessible half) to be reserved for OS and other background Ops, where as Microsoft only requires 40MB. This makes a memory difference. Is this the latest number? I know that with every big update, the PS3 number is being reduced thus making this less and less of a factor. If you could tell me if this is the current number or the one at the PS3's launch then that would help in comparing.

The latest numbers were 52mb for the PS3 OS (as of 1.8, no idea if 1.9 reduced it further) and 20mb for the 360.

That was a great read and very well put together. I would like to thank you for putting so much effort and time into the post. On another site i also found an article that talks about the PS3 and the differed pixel shading.

http://research.scea.com/ps3_deferred_shading.pdf

@ Words Of Wisdom

Bias comes with experience. Yes, I have included some personal opinions like you see in as good as any editorial or review, but I have also tried to address points which were brought forth by XBox 360 fans in my prior discussions.

Like I said, I most certainly welcome well argumented counter perspectives.

You didn't actually think a positive PS3 thread would go down well, did you?

ckmlb said: bugmenot said: In regards to RAM, you forget that Sony requires 74 MB (I think of the Cell accessible half) to be reserved for OS and other background Ops, where as Microsoft only requires 40MB. This makes a memory difference. Is this the latest number? I know that with every big update, the PS3 number is being reduced thus making this less and less of a factor. If you could tell me if this is the current number or the one at the PS3's launch then that would help in comparing.

 

I've read: "

XMB Currently Uses: 64MB from XDR RAM, and 32MB from GDDR3 RAM and 7th SPU
Firmware2.0: 32MB from XDR RAM, 0 from GDDR3 RAM, 7th SPU can be used (no longer reserved)"

And

"PS3 SDK 1.80, OS memory reductions, new features

OS reserved memory: 48 MB (main) + 24 MB(vram)"

Software and thus operating systems can be optimised. Sony could even rewrite parts of the OS in assembler language for optimal speed and tiny memory footprints. Sadly most modern software never gets fully optimised like in the good old days due to software complexity (if something goes wrong, assembler is a far more difficult language). For the PS3 OS it makes sense as the fundamental hardware specifications won't change for many years to come, so devs are able to optimise for one uniform configuration.

@MikeB

Backwards compatability - Not all regions support this yet, even with some of the later firmware updates.

I know some firmware updates have improved compatability and picture quality but outside USA I think support is pretty poor at the moment. 

PS3 owners outside USA can you confirm/deny backwards compatability issues!?!

Generally speaking a nice write up.  Some of the technical details remind me of why I dont want to pay for things that dont enhance the games or my gaming experience.

Im not interested in DVD upscaling, a BluRay or HDDVD player being part of my games machine.  I dont know anyone from the previous generation who used a PS2 or XBOX as their primary DVD/CD player.  They always got a seperate player!

 Are we really going to see 100gb sized games on a PS3?!?  At what cost $£$£$£$£$£.  Many game budgets are already way into millions with production times of several years etc.  100gb!!!!  Will it really happen this generation??

Techs and specs are one thing, show me the games that take advantage of it all and I will part with my money.

Great, another PS3 fanboy who wants to tell us how much greater his console is than the pathetic Xbox 360.

Seriously, give it up. You like the PS3; we get it. Now go play the damned thing and stop talking about how great it is. You've finally gotten two games worth playing in the last two weeks, I highly suggest playing them.

@ tmbh

A majority of legacy PSX and PS2 games already work fine on PAL PS3s. I own a PAL PS3 myself and I can confirm ICO, Ape Escape 2 & 3, Jak 3, God of War 1 & 2 all run perfectly as far as I can tell.

IMO an important indication is that the God of War games work so well, they are probably some of the most demanding PS2 games ever released! So I guess eventually it would be possible to achieve 99% legacy backwards compatibility.



The concept art is often of higher quality and then reduced to suit the target platform. For PGR4 it was announced that the graphics had to be scaled back due to DVD limitations, so that would actually involve additional production costs. Also recording music for 7.1 output quality won't cost much more than producing 5.1 audio once you already own the equipment.

MikeB said: @ Words Of Wisdom Bias comes with experience. Yes, I have included some personal opinions like you see in as good as any editorial or review, but I have also tried to address points which were brought forth by XBox 360 fans in my prior discussions. Like I said, I most certainly welcome well argumented counter perspectives.

Wisdom and objectivity come with experience. Bias does not.


I see no merit in arguing that the console you like is deficient in any number of ways (true of Wii and 360 owners). The market seems to be showing that more than one console is welcome in a household as long as they are both enjoyable experiences and the overlap is minimal.

Rather than unproductively arguing the flaws of each console (or the merits at the expense of one another), I would prefer to focus solely on the positives. By making your post very pro-PS3 and anti-360, you have demeaned your own article into nothing more than flamebait. A shame it is.

You lost almost all of my interest after this:

To sum up the Wii, a powerful 32-bit console...

When the CPU (if an extension of the Gamecube's) is 64-bit. Obviously ignoring the GPU because we don't know.

I'll read your essay later.