I don't plan on buying anymore controllers since I'll be getting a 360 at launch, and I already have 6 controllers (4 S-type, and 2 wireless).
Originally Posted by arjue
I use the Logitech Precision Controller, it's pretty much a mix of the duke (size) & the S-Type (button arrangement), it's also the most comfortable controller you'll ever hold.
Last edited by ∀ Narayan; 11 Jun 2005 at 01:55 AM.
I don't plan on buying anymore controllers since I'll be getting a 360 at launch, and I already have 6 controllers (4 S-type, and 2 wireless).
Check out my blog: ExHardcoreGamer.com
I think the Xbox also gained ground because AV-enthusiasts who have spent a lot of money on a nice TV wanted stuff that would at least somewhat take advantage of their TV's capabilities.Originally Posted by U K Narayan
For the next gen, MS will probably be reasonably satisfied with a 50/35/15 (Sony/MS/Nintendo) worldwise market share. That'd be an improvement over the current generation, and enough to establish them as a potential industry leader.
LAWLOriginally Posted by EvilMog007
I <3 Zboz
Seriously though, what are the overall advantages of a unified pipeline? How big a diffrence is 550Mhz to 500Mhz? What's all of this about proceedural rendering or whatever it was MS patented and touting? Is PS3 even finalized? Is the RSX even made yet? Are the Cell or Xenon processors much diffrent technologically being that they're both from IBM and both built for thier respective hardware and, most importantly developed around the same time with the Cell being newer (I suppose). Whats the story with the RAM too? Half of PS3s RAM is faster than the unified memory in the 360, while the other half is the same speed. While faster only 256 can be used by the RSX? Is this correct? So in theory could Xenos use more available unified memory if needed? Too many questions.
o_O
The Cell is significantly more powerful than the PowerPC architecture. I think what the main question that the GameSpot article raises is this:Originally Posted by Tracer
Did Sony do such a shit job designing the PS3 that even though they have better hardware components, the architecture pisses that advantage away?
Wheres the proof? I know youre not designing CPUs in Durham.The Cell is significantly more powerful than the PowerPC architecture.
I think the two biggest questions for the PS3 are:
01. Will Nvidia be able to deliver?
02. Will developers be able to use the Cell properly, such that it is?
I'm talking in terms of the chip lines. It's impossible at this point to compare the PS3's Cell to the 360's PowerPC specifically, because they are both proprietary. For the record, I do have buddies in Austin.Originally Posted by diffusionx
Are you really looking for answers to these questions? Or are you expressing frustration that all these buzzwords, specs, and graphs that both companies are throwing out muddy the water and do little to explain the picture to the average gamer? I think I can field most of those (within public information) if you're really curious.Originally Posted by Tracer
"The New York Times (free registration required) has an article that sheds a little more light on Steve Jobs' decision to move to Intel for the new Macintosh architecture. Revealed in the article is the fact that Steve met with Ken Kuturagi and rejected the use of Cell outright stating that he was disappointed in the design and that it didn't even match up with Power PC."
Didn't know where else to put it, but it supports the Power PC architecture, which is what X360's CPU is.Mr. Kutaragi tried to interest Mr. Jobs in adopting the Cell chip, which is being developed by I.B.M. for use in the coming PlayStation 3, in exchange for access to certain Sony technologies. Mr. Jobs rejected the idea, telling Mr. Kutaragi that he was disappointed with the Cell design, which he believes will be even less effective than the PowerPC.
Last edited by ∀ Narayan; 11 Jun 2005 at 09:36 PM.
As far as Jobs is concerned, he's probably right, Cell is not very suited to today's typical PC software and multitasking operating systems, let alone today's games, and a general purpose multicore processor would be much better for a PC.Originally Posted by U K Narayan
But that doesn't really tell you anything about Cell's potential when used effectively by custom software.
Bookmarks