HDTV Forum

Found a very interesting article describing both the systems' hardware. The main thing that I like about this article is that it separates marketing from real world performance. Both Microsoft and Sony have been throwing out huge numbers that ideally, are never achievable in a real world situation. Some are even there to mislead consumers who think larger numbers are better. The author also compares the console hardware to hardware that has been released for PCs. Personally, that gave me a pretty good idea of what each system was running. A lot of it is technical jargon that even goes over my head, but even so I was able to stay on the same page and understand what the author was trying to get across. It was eye opening for me and I hope it will be the same for you. Enjoy.

http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1

And now for my own comments: its very interesting to know that the PS3 is essentially running a 7800GTX. Ive had that card, and while it was a great card in its time, its has most certainly become outdated. The GPU the 360 uses is very interesting. From what I read, I would feel comfortable calling it a next gen GPU (as opposed to the PS3s). Being able to run 4xAA with no performance lost is very cool (though Ive read that the 8800GTX can do 8xAA with no loss) The study on Blue-ray disks was also very interesting. They made a very good point; while we've created ways to store more data on disks, we have not developed ways to pull the data from the disk faster.

Richard and I have both pondered whether or not the consoles are up to par with gaming computers. I am personally leaning more towards the answer no. While the 360 has been somewhat disappointing thus far in terms of image quality (Call of Duty 2 for instance looks incredible on a PC but lacks detail on the 360 and has horrible AA), it does however seem to have a lot more promise than the ps3. Based on the video card alone, I dont see how the ps3 will be able to keep up with the ever growing PC universe. The ps3 seems more so current gen to me than "next-gen". With that all in mind, I do however need to be honest; consoles provide a gaming experience that PCs just never have. PCs are really known more for FPS and RTS (First Person Shooters and Real Time Strategy) than anything else. You wont see platform games or RPGs on the pc (unless they are ported). Oblivion is the closest thing, but it in a sense is also a FPS. So in terms of the games that you wont find on pc, the consoles can certainly be considered next-gen, though if you want to be realistic, that really just means they provide the same games with better graphics.

This post was generated by an incognito spammer at the site and that spammer post has been removed

It seems like game developers find it difficult to develop games for the PS3.

"If your game starts on Xbox 360 you will have to re-engineer aspects of the game to run properly on PS3"

Developing games exclusively for the PS3 is different than engineering a game for the 360 and porting it to the PS3. It makes sense that developers would run into issues in that sense. The above snippet merely points out that the two systems are completely different and that developers need to view them that way. "Developers have to view them as two different machines not as a common platform." That makes developing games destined for both systems more difficult.

People have been talking, experts have been putting their 2cent in and you all have missed one major point in the whole mess. That is i own all three consoles the Wii , PS3, and XBOX 360 ELITE and i want to tell you that when i hear some of the comments you people make it just pisses me off, i have set up all 3 played all three and i also had to go out and buy extras galore for all three. The XBOX 360 has to have some sort of cooler additional to stock to even atempt to play for a long period of time, it is the only console out of the 3 that DOES NOT have wifi buit in you have to spend $100.00 extra for that, the cables are very clunky and don't fit together well, big block power supply sits outside of the main unit, and to watch HD movies you have to go spen another $200.00 and have more clunky cables to find a place for. So is it cheaper than a PS3 out of the box NO!!!!!!!!!! It's $600.00 just like the 60gig PS3. The PS3 has one cable that comes out the back no larger than a regular computer cable, everything else is inside the PS3, VERY NEAT!!!!!!!!! Microsoft is NOT a hardware company, and when you look at the XBOX360 it shows, plus add in the factor of a 30% failure rate, you pleople are high to ignore all the enormous short commings of the company. The graphics are great and the software is also but i think SONY did a very poor job of getting all the facts out, and the media didn't help either!!!!!!!!! ALSO NO PROBLEMS AT ALL WITH THE PS3 OR THE Wii !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you all have missed one major point in the whole mess.

How about them rather than us...

The XBOX 360 has to have some sort of cooler additional to stock to even atempt to play for a long period of time

Depending on where you are putting it that may be true. For us it is out in the open and has NEVER been a problem so we do not have additional cooling. It has run for days like that. Also, dust build up on the fan blades and cooling sections will reduce cooling efficiency but I have yet to figure out how to blow it out. Same can be said for the PS3.

So is it cheaper than a PS3 out of the box NO!!!!!!!!!! It's $600.00 just like the 60gig PS3.

WE have not said that either...

Is the 360 clunky with poor physical hardware implementation? Did the PS3 do better? I can agree with that completely. The Wii? Not really if the 360 is the comparison.

Our Wii, PS3 and 360 have been flawless so far, no problems to report.

One thing is for sure, it is in the users best interest to have either the PS3 or 360 in an area where they get GREAT ventilation as they both run extremely hot!

Yeah,developing games exclusively for the PS3 is different than engineering a game for the 360 and porting it to the PS3.

As another "power user" of game consoles (I've owned all three of them - 360, PS3 and Wii from launch day for each) here are a couple of quick personal impressions.

1. All three consoles are working flawlessly for me. No overheating problems. Just install them allowing for correct air flow.

2. While I can use wireless (and have) on all three units I greatly prefer a wired connection for all three. The numerous firmware updates almost make this the only prudent way to go. The last thing you want is to drop a wireless signal midway into a firmware update. That has the potential of major problems if the stars aren't aligned right. Invest in a smart ethernet switch and run one wire from your router to wherever your consoles are located. You won't be sorry (especially since my Dish DVR, my pre/pro and my HD-DVD player also use Ethernet.)

3. Without a doubt the strong point of the PS3 is that it's the best darn Blu-ray player out there and a tremendous bargain in that regard. The latest FW version (2.30) has finally added DTS-MA output capability so now the PS3 is a fully functional Blu-ray player - including Profile 2.0! The stand alone players are still a few months behind this (and not upgradable!). The Xbox 360 has the HD-DVD player attachment which does a nice job but the PS3 gets the edge in HD disc implementation.

4. Where the PS3 is seriously lacking is in games. While the siltuation has improved a bit, the number and quality of the games on the PS3 is totally eclipsed by what's out there on the XBox360. Visually they are similar, but from a gaming point of view the 360 blows away the PS3. And don't get me started about online activities. XBox Live does what it's supposed to do and does it very well. The PS3 version of this is still in the formative stages and it's been long enough out of the box to have done better than it does. Also, achievement points and Xbox Live rankings are much more effective than I thought it would be. As a gaming console I rate the 360 way ahead of the PS3.

5. The Wii has none of the fancy HD graphics, nor the HD audio codecs of its more expensive rivals. So what does the Wii have going for it? Simply that it's more fun to play. The games are extremely inventive and once you start, you forget that you are looking at "last Gen" graphics. It also has a lot of ingenious applications and some pretty cool online interactivity (weather channel, Miis, etc. etc.) The one downside is that the Nintendo servers tend to be down a lot more than the MS or Sony servers. Probably because they are being used a lot more.

In summary, I can justify owning all three consoles (not that I have to) because each has its strengths. Are any of these PC gaming machines? No. But I'm finding myself playing games a lot more (when I get the time) on the consoles than on my fully capable PC (up to date quad processor, 4 gigs memory, almost 5 terabytes of storage, etc. etc.) for one simple reason - convenience. I've gotten used to console comfort, controls, etc. Yes, the graphics on a modern PC are superior - but the difference isn't night and day.

And all this coming from a 65 year old!