Is that why the Quad Core is slower than a Dual core? CPU limited... Dual core is faster than Quad core... That's multi-threading at it's finest! The more threads, the slower!

I just want to point out, that most games are multi-threaded, but the 90% of the power is always on 1 thread, then the other 10% gets distributed around elsewhere. That's the way (almost) all PC games are made. There are a few exceptions, and I'm sure BioShock is true MultiThread, but it's a 360 port, which is a multi-threaded conosle. 

 Worded like that, Then I have to agree. The 'WarHawk' Experience, is... unique. And very superb.

Well now, is it just me or has Leo-js post been getting angrier and angrier as of late.

Its like you've pasted a line where you just get really pissed off and irrational anytime something bad about the PS3 is mentioned. What the hell is wrong with you?

Oh, and LOL @ the irony of a PS3 fan criticizing another platform for lack of games.

(I think leo has lost all hope for the PS3, and is over compensating)

LOL at Leo

I'm sorry, but here's all I got to say. 

Oh Kwaad; how you haven't changed... still not reading things your posting about. 

For starters, Gabe talks about multi-threads in that link and how they are adapting. From what he says in the article, they sound quite excited about the possibilities but he does admit that its a bit of a bigger challenge than what they've done before. But nowhere is he crying in a corner - part of some sort of melodramatic PS3 fans wet dream.

And give me a break, the Cell is not that similar to a multicore X86. Sure, you can simplify it all you want to try and wrap your head around it, but its just not the same. Those little SPEs are a completely different ballgame, and its something you can't just learn overnight. Not only that, but its not something you can learn and then transfer to PC development, or any other platform. Basically, your learning to program in a different way just for the PS3, a system with a very small install base. Thats what I'd call brilliant from a technical perspective.

BTW, at the time HL2 came out, there is no way in hell you had a 6 year old PC that could "run it fine". For starters, it required DX7, meaning at the very oldest the PC would be about 4 years old. How I miss your exaggerations...        

I'd just like to say...those that bash the PC for being expensive or whatever typically don't know what the hell they're talking about. Most PC gamers are willing to spend more anyway, because it's not just a gaming machine...I wouldn't pay more than $300 for a simple gaming machine...paying $800 makes sense to me, because I use my PC for everything...all the many tasks it can handle...as well as play games.

And trust me, internet capabilities are much farther behind the PC than some console gamers try to make you believe. The ability to download anything, most of which is free...that's very important to me.

No it isn't... You were talking about PC developers, my statement was for all developers. Give a developer a fast enough single core processor and (s)he'll do anything with it. If threading is needed, it can be used anyway. But if you're forced to use multithreading, you're automatically losing in computing power and ease of programming. The only reason multicore exists is because it's harder and harder for hardware makers to make fast cores.

 Can we all jusrt claim he is an idiot. He also hates dual core processors too btw.

 Alright Leo-j... time to fess up about your Wii secret... ;)