PS3 VS HIGH END PC

[bunkgoats]

Second, your friend is outside warranty, even if the others had high failure rate, which has nothing to do with your friend's console.

We are talking past each other. My friend's console is part of this specific lot, i.e. those manufactured before Jan. 1, 2006. So it has everything to do with his console. These were the consoles they said they would fix regardless of the 90 day or one year warranty.

Mind explaining how that fits in with the 100K mile warranty analogy. You're inside the warranty for your example and outside for mine.

No, both are outside the warranty. Yours is 76,000 miles out of warranty or 7 years. Mine is outside of warranty by 100 miles or 1.5 hours of driving.

The first 1,000 cost more than the pricing of 10K, versus 100K, and as you buy more and perfect the process and pay for overhead, the overall costs come down, even without a die shrink. They made 10 million sofar, a level of efficiency is not surprising, especially since they likely get better yields on both the power PC chips, and Xenos chips, as well as HDs and Memory costs have likely come down, even the expensive eDRAM that IBM has been increasing volumes for other commercial applications.

They knew they were going to build 10,000,000 plus since day one so the economy of scale was always there. Your eDRAM comment makes sense, as does your yield comment.

This is an example of the GoodWill, not a requirement. They an chose to extend that good will or not, your friend didn't have any right to it outisde of M$ own actions to generate good PR.

I don't totally agree with this. There are a few class action lawsuits that I have in mind. I will have to see how they parallel this. I have to go to bed now.

Why are you so snippy? Treat me as though I could be your friend, not someone you think may be your enemy. You have a lot to offer and you know graphic cards well. Your tone from where you engaged me was nothing short of confrontational. I bet if you were nicer you wouldn't waste so much time going through rounds of debate like this

 

[Shizamaaur]

u woudlnt be able to emu a ps3 or 360

Why would you need to when the majority of the games that come out for consoles hit PC's and they look better and have more content.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

We are talking past each other.

That's only because you're switching gears. Your original statement was that M$ owed him a repair or new one. And you said it was piss poor customer service, which it isn't the warranty is stated on the box. Seriously he's lucky M$ decided out of GOOD WILL to give him a repair, but it's not something that he was in any way owed him. Piss poor customer service would be if they gave him a hassle if his Xbox failed WITHIN warranty. People saying this and that are piss poor customer service screws up the whole concept of customer service. Your confusing customer service with PR/marketing.

No, both are outside the warranty. Yours is 76,000 miles out of warranty or 7 years. Mine is outside of warranty by 100 miles or 1.5 hours of driving.

I was talking powertrain which is 100,000 miles. Wanna skirt the issue fine, you know you have no basis for your statements, if you're truely trying to be 'engaging' then do so in a manner that would garner respect, don't avoid your own argument by pretending I'm saying something else.

They knew they were going to build 10,000,000 plus since day one so the economy of scale was always there. Your eDRAM comment makes sense, as does your yield comment.

They did not know they would build more than 10 million in the first year, and 10 million over 4 years is far different than 10 million in 1 year. You don't sit on inventory so, selling far more than expected (no PS3 competition) means larger orders and lower prices. And Why would you think that they would not build in price drops, if you agree that they were there, then instead of 4 years to reach those volumes they did t in 1 and also gained the price drops associated with it. Also economies of scale come from VOLUME not time, so this large numer/surge greatly affect their cost per unit.

Why are you so snippy?

Because you're talking through your hat, which is what this whole thread is about pretty much, very few facts or even attempts to look at the facts. Argue that it's a bad PR move and I'd agree, argue that it's poor customer service and I'll point it out.

Anywhoo, I'm off to ski, unless there's something new, I don't see any reason to belabour the point that your friend was neither owed one, nor are the X360 as expensive as they once were and the only recent source I've seen on pricing shows them to be profiting per unit, while you have nothing to show otherwise.

 

[Twisted_Sister]

Honestly, I'm getting a Wii (great for guests and kids)... but unlike PS3's, they are very hard to come by.

If I were to buy a higher end console, I'd go 360. So far it is owning PS3 with content and graphics optimization. Also, the PS3 has been a major flop to date. Plus, there may be some cross-platform gaming with the 360 and PC in the future... courtesy of MS.

However, I'll stick to the computer for high-end gaming and the Wii for mindless console fun.

 

[Gustafarian]

So let me get this straight. In the UK we have to wait 4 months for the privaledge of paying more for a console which has been stripped down. Go away Sony I am not bending over and taking this.

Why do we have to have a PAL version of the PS3? Does anyone still have a tele which can only do PAL? If you do then I would suggest going to a second-hand tele shop and buying a new one for 70 quid.

Do you remember when the PS3 was announced? I had an Athlon 3000 and a Radeon 9800. Back then I was amazed by how powerful the PS3 sounded. Since then PCs have advanced and the PS£ has not lived up to initial hype. Consoles are always better than PCs when they are announced but have fallen way behind by release date.

Bottom line is: PCs for games, DS Lite for MarioKart on the tube, PS3 for the people who don't know better.

 

[Blacken]

Oh lord. Battle of the novelists.

TGGApe,
Why is it I get a BaronMatirx vibe from you?

 

[turboflame]

Not this sh*t again



(at the topic not any particular person here)

EDIT: no seriously, you are attacking someone who said something incredibly stupid a whole year ago who then made another stupid post a whole year ago and then left.

Then you guys are just repeating what has already been said in the last 20 pages.

Anyway, happy anniversery PC vs. PS3 thread!

 

[maverick7]

mechluke your can pat yourself on the back for being a really big noob... you have no idea what your are talking about, and you appear to refuse what other people are saying... you have your facts wrong, and even after they were proven wrong, you still insisted that the ps3 is better...

sigh... there is no hope for your type..

 

[Twisted_Sister]

You Pro-PC guys are all NOOBS!

Heck, Nintendo 64 is better than todays PCs... afterall, it's a 64 bit game system. PCs are still predominately releasing 32 bit games.

I can even get it for $35 off of Ebay - whereas you guys are paying $1000-2000 for your inferior gaming rig.

 

[dannyboy714]

hmmmm... 64 bit huh?... well I have Nintendo64 on my computer with every game i've ever wanted and ummm... oh yea was all free. Not to mention Sega, Ninentendo, SNES and even games only released as full blown Arcades like the Beatmania series, Raiden & Killer instict one and two. All free and when graphics are tweaked the 64 bit is'nt missed nor is the clunky hardware, just throw in a usb controller and my hdtv and I'm set..however back to the meat of this thread.. I'll get the ps3 eventually just so I have another option.

 

[Twisted_Sister]

hmmmm... 64 bit huh?... well I have Nintendo64 on my computer with every game i've ever wanted and ummm... oh yea was all free. Not to mention Sega, Ninentendo, SNES and even games only released as full blown Arcades like the Beatmania series, Raiden & Killer instict one and two. All free and when graphics are tweaked the 64 bit is'nt missed nor is the clunky hardware, just throw in a usb controller and my hdtv and I'm set..however back to the meat of this thread.. I'll get the ps3 eventually just so I have another option.

I was kidding...

 

[maximiza]

I read this whole thread and found it amazing as it is sorta out dated. I plan on dowloading folding when sony releases it on friday but with the keyboard ability and mouse ability and rumors that yellow dog will have more options to access the cell in the future, it is sorta blurring the pc/console line making it fuzzy. definitly the pc has allot more upgrade potential but the costs also are allot more too. the money spent on upgrading a pc over 5 years compaired to a ps3 makes the pc costs allot more. Actually I don't know if you could even keep upgrading the same pc over 5 years.

 

[nottheking]

Well, the rules of the Internet say that when Nottheking comes to a thread and reads it entirely and responds with the whole thread's posts in mind, his post will increase the length of the entire thread by 10-50%. I simply don't have that much time free, so I guess I don't bother with most of it. 😛

I was kidding...

Well, it's also worth pointing out that for all the hype, the Nintendo64 is actually a 32-bit console. Yes, the original specs called for a MIPS r4300i CPU, which is capable of working entirely in 64-bit integer operations, (the hallmark of a 64-bit CPU) however, I have yet to find evidence that any production N64 actually shipped with that chip; it was, very late in development, decided to be too costly, and was quietly replaced with the NEC VR4300, which was effectively a "generic knock-off" of the r4300i. Though NEC claims the chip has "64-bit architecture," it appears by all respects to be a 32-bit chip; chances are they're referring to the unit's floating-point capacity.

However, what's REALLY interesting about the console is it's "Reality Co-Processor," the combined audio and graphics chip. As it turns out, the vector unit within it that was designed for audio processing was found to be re-appropriable as a Transform & Lighting unit, making the RCP the world's first GPU with such a unit, though it went for years before being used that way. (the first desktop chip with such a unit was nVidia's NV10, better known as the GeForce 256)

 

[NamelessMC]

It'd be useful for you guys to know, the graphics chip on the 360 is actually better than the PS3.

Sony was running short on time and couldn't find a manufacturer to make their custom design plan for their chip. They were turned down by ATI and went to Nvidia. Nvidia said, "Well on such short notice, we can give you this." "This" was essentially a slightly over-cranked 7800GTX.

That's why the Playstation 3 has dedicated ram for its video, which isn't a good thing for gaming consoles because memory is only used for game engine operations and graphics rendering. No reason to have dedicated memory to a video processing unit.

The actual bandwidth for the PS3's GPU is something like 22-25 GB/second.

The 360's actual bandwidth is something like 32-38.

If you want to compare a PC to a gaming console, use the right one, which is the 360.

 

[Heyyou27]

It'd be useful for you guys to know, the graphics chip on the 360 is actually better than the PS3.

Sony was running short on time and couldn't find a manufacturer to make their custom design plan for their chip. They were turned down by ATI and went to Nvidia. Nvidia said, "Well on such short notice, we can give you this." "This" was essentially a slightly over-cranked 7800GTX.

That's why the Playstation 3 has dedicated ram for its video, which isn't a good thing for gaming consoles because memory is only used for game engine operations and graphics rendering. No reason to have dedicated memory to a video processing unit.

The actual bandwidth for the PS3's GPU is something like 22-25 GB/second.

The 360's actual bandwidth is something like 32-38.

If you want to compare a PC to a gaming console, use the right one, which is the 360.

The bandwidth between the the 10MB eDram die and the GPU core is 32 GB/s while it's main memory bandwidth is roughly the same as the RSX's at 22.4GB/s. The PS3's RSX is actually a cut down Geforce 7900GT with fewer ROPs and a smaller memory bus. For reference, an 8800GTX with DDR3 at 2GHz effective has 96GB/s of memory bandwidth, which would completely kill both Xenos and RSX.

 

[nottheking]

It'd be useful for you guys to know, the graphics chip on the 360 is actually better than the PS3.

It's actually quite debatable. Because most of the specs are rather similar, and because developers will want games on both platforms to be on the safe side, and want as little work as possible, in the end, what you'll see on them will be identical.

Sony was running short on time and couldn't find a manufacturer to make their custom design plan for their chip. They were turned down by ATI and went to Nvidia. Nvidia said, "Well on such short notice, we can give you this." "This" was essentially a slightly over-cranked 7800GTX.

Actually, the RSX only exceeds the 7800GTX in clock rate. It has 8 of the 16 ROPS disabled, giving it the same writing capacity per clock cycle as the Xbox 360 (which has non-pipelined raster units, that work out to 16 writes per cycle, the same as 8 ROPs)

That's why the Playstation 3 has dedicated ram for its video, which isn't a good thing for gaming consoles because memory is only used for game engine operations and graphics rendering. No reason to have dedicated memory to a video processing unit.

Except one massive difference: it means that the memory interface there can handle JUST the GPU's memory calls, and none of the CPU's. While the same 22.4GB/sec of bandwidth the Xbox 360 has to its unified 512MB of GDDR3 has to handle not just the bandwidth for the graphics chip, but the CPU as well.

The 32GB/sec of bandwidth to the EDRAM buffer can only be used for writing directly from the raster units; and that is only a tile buffer, which must be re-written to the main RAM where the actual framebuffer, being the data that will be converted to a video signal by the RAMDAC, is located. Pretty much, it allows for some performance costs, such as the bandwidth cost of using AA, or the cost of layering multiple objects in a Z-based engine, are eliminated. However, plenty of other costs remain; each AA sample will still require texturing, lighting, and shaders.

The actual bandwidth for the PS3's GPU is something like 22-25 GB/second.

The 360's actual bandwidth is something like 32-38.

The technical bandwidth for the PS3's GPU is 22.4GB/sec; a 128-bit interface with 1.4GHz (effective) GDDR3 SDRAM.

A similar setup exists with the Xbox 360, though the RAM and its bandwidth are shared with the CPU. So technically, if you want to add it all up, the Xbox 360 has a base 0GB/sec of CPU memory bandwidth, things used for storing the actual maps, data, audio, scripting, core code, etc. Anything of that takes away from the GPU's bandwidth.

If you want to compare a PC to a gaming console, use the right one, which is the 360.

Either one will actually work, for the reasons I outlined in the first part of this post.

I equate both to about the same as a modern mid-range PC graphics card such as the GeForce 7600GT or 7800GS, or the Radeon X1650XT; those cards all post similar specs, and produce similar results.

The GeForce 8800 series, now that it's out, simply slaughters it. As I've put it before, A single 8800GTX contains more graphics power than every console design made in history COMBINED. A comparison of specs:[*:4db7e546a6]Xbox 360 "R500 Xenos"[*:4db7e546a6]Shader Clock: 500MHz
[*:4db7e546a6]Shader ops/clock: 48 (48 independent multi-purpose shader ALUs)
[*:4db7e546a6]Shader Performance: 24 billion/sec. (~96 Gflops)
[*:4db7e546a6]Memory Interface: 128-bit
[*:4db7e546a6]VRAM clock: 1400MHz
[*:4db7e546a6]VRAM bandwidth: 22.4GB/sec[*:4db7e546a6]Playstation 3 "Reality Synthesizer"[*:4db7e546a6]Shader Clock: 550MHz
[*:4db7e546a6]Shader ops/clock: 48 (24 pixel pipelines with 2 ALUs per)
[*:4db7e546a6]Shader Performance: 26.4 billion/sec. (~105.6 Gflops)
[*:4db7e546a6]Memory Interface: 128-bit
[*:4db7e546a6]VRAM clock: 1400MHz
[*:4db7e546a6]VRAM bandwidth: 22.4GB/sec[*:4db7e546a6]GeForce 8800GTX "G80"[*:4db7e546a6]Shader Clock: 1350MHz
[*:4db7e546a6]Shader ops/clock: 128 (128 stream processors)
[*:4db7e546a6]Shader Performance: 172.8 billion/sec. (~691.2 Gflops)
[*:4db7e546a6]Memory Interface: 384-bit
[*:4db7e546a6]VRAM clock: 1800MHz
[*:4db7e546a6]VRAM bandwidth: 86.4GB/secFor scale, I'd just that the EIGHTH generation of consoles, which should appear between 2010 and 2011, will likely have a graphics system comparable to the GeForce 8800.

 

[HungLo]

Nottheking also left out of his comparison that the 8800GTX has 768mb of graphics ram while the 360 and ps3 have 256 only. Did you guys see this article the other day how ps3s are out performing windows based pcs? The article says that ps3s are out performing pcs at folding@home calculations. It says that despite being outnumbered by 10 to 1 the ps3 outdid windows pcs by 200 trillion floating point operations per second. (Har! Har!) It's clearly another attempt by the sony hype machine to muddy the facts. Did this so called study take into account the age of the majority of these windows based pcs? and if so will they be having ps2s, ps1s, turbographix, and the atari 2600 doing computations for the ps3 side? Look I'm not here to fan the flames at all but PCs RULE! and consoles get Schooled! BEEOTCH! :lol:

 

[HungLo]

Sorry Mate I was under the impression the "cells" in sony's processor mimick hyperthreading in pcs? There is a lot of hype surrounding this CPU some of it justified but most of it not so much. Try installing a regular Operating system like windows or OS X on the ps3 then we'll see how powerful Sony's CPU is.

 

[fender22]

PC FTW.. DX10 which PS3 and 360 will NEVER have, this will allow PCs to go beyond anything that current console can do, and the same will happen with next gen consoles and new PCs.. Upgrade paths will allow PCs to pull ahead every time.

Yes yes, you could go buy a PS3 for the price of a very nice graphics card for your PC i.e. 8800GTX... but you will probably utterly waste a PS3..

PCs more expensive but are wayy better

 

[HungLo]

The fundamental design of the Cell Broadband Engine beside a regular chip architecturewise they are quite different but what I'm saying is what ht does and what a cell processors SBE's do is not entirely unalike. I'll give it to the cell's design though it can really flog floating point kernals.

 

[Heyyou27]

Nottheking also left out of his comparison that the 8800GTX has 768mb of graphics ram while the 360 and ps3 have 256 only. Did you guys see this article the other day how ps3s are out performing windows based pcs? The article says that ps3s are out performing pcs at folding@home calculations. It says that despite being outnumbered by 10 to 1 the ps3 outdid windows pcs by 200 trillion floating point operations per second. (Har! Har!) It's clearly another attempt by the sony hype machine to muddy the facts. Did this so called study take into account the age of the majority of these windows based pcs? and if so will they be having ps2s, ps1s, turbographix, and the atari 2600 doing computations for the ps3 side? Look I'm not here to fan the flames at all but PCs RULE! and consoles get Schooled! BEEOTCH! :lol:

Actually, when it comes to floating point calculations like Folding@home, the Cell kicks the crap out of even the QX6700. For everything else, the Cell is a lot slower than most modern CPUs.

 

[everett]

Dam that was alot of reading, Anyway I stated this in a thread kinda like this one before. I would like to see some 3dMark scores from the console guys? Oh.. Wait they can not run 3dmark :lol:

 

[fender22]

Yes yes, you could go buy a PS3 for the price of a very nice graphics card for your PC i.e. 8800GTX... but you will probably utterly waste a PS3..

There aint no probably about that.

:roll:

Hahaha, well other factors like CPU and ammount of RAM can come into play.. I didnt want some guy saying, "what if u had a P4 1.8GHz, then u wouldn't waste the PS3!"

So I put a fail proof probably in.. But almost anyone willing to spend the cash on a 8800 would know the ins and outs of bottlenecks exct.. unless they are a rich noob guy 8O

Dam that was alot of reading, Anyway I stated this in a thread kinda like this one before. I would like to see some 3dMark scores from the console guys? Oh.. Wait they can not run 3dmark

U read all that!? No 3dmark.. but they do have F@H, oh, we have it too.....
But they do run it really fast.. Oh, be we run everything else, for the most part, faster

 

[Sharp]

god i cant believe there are idiots out there that still think that a ps3 or ANY console is better than a good/moderate gaming pc. jesus christ can you smack some common sense into you? for chirssakes

 

[HungLo]

I would personally like to second the smacking idea. A ps3 for $500 - $600 or kick in an extra $300 - $400 and you get a quality gaming pc plus...Free porn for life!