stef10
Member
+173|6955|Denmark
ok, yeah I have seen a lot of videoes and so on about info that completely is untrue about these consoles. Mostly the ps3 is bashed by having some bad ram. and so on. I will now give you info that most likely is true about certain things.

Processor.

Xbox 360 has 3 cores that are independent and which runs all at 3.2 ghz. They are symetrical. thats really nice and gives you are a lot of independent power.

the ps3 has a one big core which has 8-9 smaller cores or spe´s. some say 8 spe and others say 9. They each run at 3.2ghz. some have said this is a bad idea and some have said its good. tests have shown that the ps3 processor is 10% better in areas. But really this is also about how you use and program for it. I feel that its true energi is a lot bigger. both coming from the news and from universities.

GPU.

the xbox 360 has a GPU called the xenox that runs a 550mhz. the special about this is that MS have said its build from some large prototype that ATI has

The ps3 uses RSX which is made by Nvidia. It also runs at 550mhz and Sony said its quite stronger that 2 6800 in sli.

Ram.

ok, a lot of videos have completely shown some very misleading info on the ram of the ps3.

xbox 360. the xbox has 512mb ram which runs at 700mhz. its gddr2. both the CPU and GPU shares that which is very good so if the GPU needs a bit more it just takes but of course the CPU will loose some.

the ps3 ALSO has 512mb ram. 256mb reserved to the CPU and 256 MB reserved to the GPU.

The ram that runs the GPU is at 700mhz like xbox. BUT the ram that runs the CPU is at 3.2ghz and its XDR which is quite enorm.

Another thing people talked about was system memory bandwith which the 360 claims to have 5 more times of. dont know how important that is
and if ps3 can compensate for it.

Of course Ps3 has been quite happy about blu-ray which can hold 50gb. xbox 360´dvd-rom can hold 15gb. The downside of blu-ray is that it takes longer to load.

I know I am a tech newb but I read these info on independent sites.
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6916|Stealth City, UK
Without decent optimised games for each platform none of that means anything.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7055|SE London

The PS3 specs are better (by quite a long way).

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Without decent optimised games for each platform none of that means anything.
But that's true too.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-07-24 07:46:52)

stef10
Member
+173|6955|Denmark
Nope, you are right. But the time will past. Really the thing that is nice that if you buy one of them you wont get fucked.

bash vid.


Last edited by stef10 (2007-07-24 07:57:11)

stef10
Member
+173|6955|Denmark
The#1Spot
Member
+105|7013|byah
Thats funny that 360s are crap. My PS2 lasted 5years before the motor for the lense to read the disk stopped working I also have the controller that came with it. It even survived a 4000mile moving trip. Sony consoles are the way to go.
teek22
Add "teek22" on your PS3 fools!
+133|6854|Bromley, London

I think that they are almost the same in terms of power. There are spectacular game for each, 360 has gears of wars. PS3 will ahve MGS4.
If you are too buy one I think it should be on what types of games you like. I personally would by a PS3 because of the games that come out on it, for example: MGS4, God or War 3 (whenever it comes out) etc. etc.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7055|SE London

The#1Spot wrote:

Thats funny that 360s are crap. My PS2 lasted 5years before the motor for the lense to read the disk stopped working I also have the controller that came with it. It even survived a 4000mile moving trip. Sony consoles are the way to go.
[sarcasm]And of course the PSX was the most durable console ever[/sarcasm]

Sony invented the crap breakable console. Before the PSX virtually all consoles were much more durable.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard