PS3 600 dollars? Sony is on crack

[Vigilance]

I think it would be more accurate to say that the PS3 is supposed[ to be more powerful than the 360. As you say below, we haven't seen a real one in action. Any assumptions we make right now, good or bad, don't mean much. It could very well blow the doors off the 360, or it could be buggy as all heck. It might be safe to assume that it's going to be roughly on a par with the 360 -- better in some performance areas, worse in others -- at least in terms of playing console games.

Right, except what Im hearing, from Sony no less, is that the PS3 is supposed to be 5% more powerful than the X-box 360.

I have also heard developers, like EA, say that 5% better isnt worth the money for them to do an upgraded design.

In other words, the developers will be porting the exact same graphics from console to console.

Chuck

 

[drothgery]

We havn't really seen what it can do yet, but its a far more powerful system than the xbox 360

I hate to sound repetitive here, but this just isn't so, and the specs that lay this out have been public for a long time.

The Cell (PS3 CPU) and Xenon (Xbox 360 CPU) are very, very similar in terms of capabilities. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Their CPUs are made by the same company (IBM), on the same process (IBM Microelctronics' 90nm), and all three of the Xenon's cores are almost identical to the main core in the Cell (Xenon has more cache and a few extra features; Cell has 7 sub-cores that are less powerful/more specialized).

They both have the same amount of memory (the 360 has 512 MB of unified RAM; the PS3 has 256 MB of main memory and 256 MB of video memory). They both have 2005-esque GPUs from leading PC video card makers (the Xenos GPU for the Xbox 360 is actually a more forward-looking design than the RSX, which is pretty much a GeForce 7800).

They both have a hard drive (the PS3's is larger, but this isn't really important for a game). They've got pretty much the same style of controller.

The only thing the PS3 really has to differentiate itself from the 360 is the Blu-Ray drive, and that's just not a big deal for games; if something's actually long enough that it doesn't fit on a DVD, spanning multiple DVDs works just fine.

Leading game developers say if you really, really work at it, the PS3 has a slight edge in CPU, the 360 has a slight edge in GPU (and most modern games are GPU-limitted), and the 360 is easier to code for. But at the end of the day, one system won't have better-looking games than the other (at least, once developers really figure the PS3 out; for the next year or so, you'll have 2nd-gen 360 games against 1st-gen PS3 games, and the 360 games are going to look better).

 

[takyris]

Right, except what Im hearing, from Sony no less, is that the PS3 is supposed to be 5% more powerful than the X-box 360.

Chuck, I'm not sure why you chose to write "except" there when what I said that the PS3 is going to be "roughly on par" with the 360.

I don't see what you wrote as a disagreement with what I wrote, unless 5% is a major difference for you. My argument was that we should assume that they're about equal as gaming systems... which appears to be your argument as well.

Could you clarify?

 

[DonTadow]

I hate to sound repetitive here, but this just isn't so, and the specs that lay this out have been public for a long time.

The Cell (PS3 CPU) and Xenon (Xbox 360 CPU) are very, very similar in terms of capabilities. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Their CPUs are made by the same company (IBM), on the same process (IBM Microelctronics' 90nm), and all three of the Xenon's cores are almost identical to the main core in the Cell (Xenon has more cache and a few extra features; Cell has 7 sub-cores that are less powerful/more specialized).

They both have the same amount of memory (the 360 has 512 MB of unified RAM; the PS3 has 256 MB of main memory and 256 MB of video memory). They both have 2005-esque GPUs from leading PC video card makers (the Xenos GPU for the Xbox 360 is actually a more forward-looking design than the RSX, which is pretty much a GeForce 7800).

They both have a hard drive (the PS3's is larger, but this isn't really important for a game). They've got pretty much the same style of controller.

The only thing the PS3 really has to differentiate itself from the 360 is the Blu-Ray drive, and that's just not a big deal for games; if something's actually long enough that it doesn't fit on a DVD, spanning multiple DVDs works just fine.

Leading game developers say if you really, really work at it, the PS3 has a slight edge in CPU, the 360 has a slight edge in GPU (and most modern games are GPU-limitted), and the 360 is easier to code for. But at the end of the day, one system won't have better-looking games than the other (at least, once developers really figure the PS3 out; for the next year or so, you'll have 2nd-gen 360 games against 1st-gen PS3 games, and the 360 games are going to look better).

I guess thats where we but heads. IF you're only looking at cpu speed you're kinda putting it into the same basket as a lot of processer. The thing that makes the cell predictions so much more positive is the architecture of the cpu and its functionality with higher end graphics processors. For programmers, that 5 percent is going to make the difference in realism and control.

As for only being 5 percent better, 5 percent is a lot in the normal consumers mind. Most consumers only care about better ,no matter how much it is. The cell cpus are just more capable than the 360 and even if its only 5 or , 10 percent, its enough of a marketing push to increase sales.

Plus we're talking about home entertainement machine. Whom better for the consumer to trust with home entertainment than sony, whom has decades of experience at creating home entertainment compoenents.

 

[John Crichton]

Isn't sony's new ps3 suppose to have equiopped tivo too? I know they were marketing for a home entertainment center.

If a TiVo-like ability was part of their plan then it would have been mentioned at E3 as a selling point. And with only a 100gb Hard Drive it would be a mistake as that wouldn't record much HiDef content. And HD is where Sony will make their money on the PS3 until a price drop, which will happen just as soon as BR becomes cheaper to make. It wouldn't surprise me to have the PS3 be in the $250 range by the end of it's 6-7 year life (if history is any indicator).

 

[Vocenoctum]

Chuck, I'm not sure why you chose to write "except" there when what I said that the PS3 is going to be "roughly on par" with the 360.

I don't see what you wrote as a disagreement with what I wrote, unless 5% is a major difference for you. My argument was that we should assume that they're about equal as gaming systems... which appears to be your argument as well.

Could you clarify?

I think he meant to quote DonTadow's "far more powerful". 5% isn't "far" to most folks.

The real thing is, will the user be able to tell the difference from a casual glance.

 

[John Crichton]

I thought I read the Wii comes with four controllers.

Link it up, bro. You may be thinking that it will have 4 controller ports rather than actual controllers in the box - but I could be wrong.

That would be a mistake by Nintendo, BTW. Controllers are easy money for console manufacturers.

 

[John Crichton]

Sony is banking on that, and they're going to be wrong.

Look, you guys can tell me 500 bucks isnt that much money all you want.

It's butt-load, actually. But not if you want the latest and best games. The bottom line is that the initial price for the PS3 is aimed at the overspending HD market. If you don't already have a HD video setup + a digital audio setup there is no reason to get a PS3 at launch. Those in that camp would be silly to pay that much for a launch system.

But down the line when the price drops and the games are must-have, then it's time to plunk down whatever they are selling the thing for. It's all about game selection. Even if Sony drops a bit in terms of exclusives compared to the last 2 gens it will still be a must-have system - just like owning a 360 will be (I hope) down the line.

 

[John Crichton]

So I don't think the "it's an entertainment center" line is going to sell them that many more units. They're making a console gaming system. I don't believe (and again, feel free to disagree) that many people are going to get the PS3 and supplant their existing digital recorders with what the PS3 offers.

For the entertainment center point, I agree completely (as I do with the rest of your post). However, you can't discount...

So, short version, Tacky thinks:

- Some people will buy the PS3 because they have a whole lotta free income.
- Some people will buy the PS3 because they are strict Sony fans (which includes liking games that are only available on Sony systems)
- Very few people will buy the PS3 because of the non-console features it offers

... the Blu-Ray player. It won't be like the DVD player on the PS2, which for much of the Japanese market is what sold-out the system for over a year because it was cheaper. But since BR & HD-DVD players are so scare (and selling-out all over the place) geeks will be much more willing to plunk down the dollars on a $600 player that also plays the newest games. For me, that is a huge selling point and may push me to get one at launch if there are a few games that interest me. I haven't gotten a system at launch since the Gamecube (oops).

Bottom line- new HD tech sells like crazy and companies can afford to charge high prices for it. Check out the $250 HD recievers that do nothing but make your TV able to get a HD signal. People have been paying those prices for years.

I'll say it again - this is a genius move by Sony. The PS3 will sell-out at $500-600 and then they can start dropping the price before the holidays in 2007 which is probably when we'll start getting consistantly good PS3 games (I'm not expecting much from the launch).

 

[John Crichton]

Plus we're talking about home entertainement machine. Whom better for the consumer to trust with home entertainment than sony, whom has decades of experience at creating home entertainment compoenents.

I think you can drop the TiVo-in-PS3 arguement, man. Even if it does happen, it will be an inferior product. If you want to talk about non-gaming extras look at what is confirmed and on board: Blu-Ray player. Seriously, that's a much bigger deal because it's newer tech and makes a set-up look even better because of the increased picture quality. HDTV owners aren't looking to watch SD TV shows on their HD set. We want the good stuff.