Microsoft Takes A Look At The Playstation 3	Site Map : Contact

Video Games @ Searchngo
M Rated Video Games Home : Video Game Resources : Contact : About

*Microsoft Takes A Look At The Playstation 3*	Quick Links:

Microsoft Takes A Look At The Playstation 3

Today on : Suzuki's , CSI’s , and the new Toyota Camry

Please take our . Microsoft takes a look at the Playstation 3 Posted May 20, 2005, 11:10 PM ET by Ben Zackheim Related entries: ,

Major Nelson has an exhaustive look at the specs of the PS3 vs. 360. Microsoft engineers sat down and took a look at what Sony placed on the table. Sure, the engineers are biased they made the 360 after all. But were sure yall will call them on any spinning. The four parter breaks down the battle by CPU, GPU and bandwidth. Ill leave it to the pros out there to make heads or tails out of it, but Majors conclusion wraps it up with a well-mannered glove in Sonys face. When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment. Microsoft seems to be comfortable with where they are hardware-wise. The one thing I can say for sure is they dont have anything to fear on the services side. Xbox Live! is alone at the top, and no one seems interested in trying to take them down. Yeah, everyones trying to throw in multimedia thingies, too. But unless those thingies make my games more fun&bah!

| | [82] Recent Entries

» (5/22/2005) » (5/22/2005) » (5/21/2005) » (5/21/2005) » (5/21/2005) () Reader Comments Posted May 20, 2005, 11:40 PM ET by BoB

That is what Ive always said. Oh, here come the Sony fanboys to complain! Posted May 20, 2005, 11:55 PM ET by tr1gunn

man, if this isnt totally bias piece of shit then i dont know what is. this guy is making an ass out of himself. i dont know why you posted this article. Posted May 21, 2005, 12:07 AM ET by

Would Tr1gunn like to explain how this system breakdown is a 'piece of sh*t' or doesnt he know why? Maybe he should ask the Sony rep. Posted May 21, 2005, 12:09 AM ET by Arch360

bias? all they said was the truth and that they were comfortable. whats so bias about that. and i agree with #1 "here come the fanboys to complain" Posted May 21, 2005, 12:17 AM ET by paintist

You guys also might want to keep in mind that more people play online games wiht the PS2 than any other console. ^ just for the OTHER side bias. Posted May 21, 2005, 12:29 AM ET by

"Xbox Live! is alone at the top, and no one seems interested in trying to take them down."Come on... I think Nintendo deserves a little love here. Mention their efforts at least. Posted May 21, 2005, 12:36 AM ET by caesar

ps3 is going to be better and hotter xbox 360 will be OK but not as ps3.thats a promise. Posted May 21, 2005, 12:36 AM ET by

This was a good read, but Major Nelson missed some major points that I think make the PS3 look worse than it is. I am a big Xbox fan, but I took the time to recreate some of his charts over on my site for those who care to get the most accurate depiction possible. Posted May 21, 2005, 12:44 AM ET by Gianni Gotti

I can think of no better way to play my PC re-treads than the Xbox 360! Thanks Bill! Posted May 21, 2005, 12:49 AM ET by jomama22

the #'s are almost completly wrong. And if you read it they change their #'s so many times when comparing to sony's. THey flat out lie, its pathedic. Here are links of people who accualy know what the #'s mean who cant belive m$ would do this. Engadget, i advise you remove this as almost everything on there is false info.and you want to complain about sony fanboys look at yourselves... Posted May 21, 2005, 1:00 AM ET by arch360

WTF> this is like ATTaCK of the fanboys. guys stfu.And ppl play online on the ps2 more than xbox what are you fucking STUPID?!and to clear things up they have never lied. its the sites that lie not them. they have not done anything wrong in this war so far. they have just released specs that were better than our expectations. and DELIVERED!for example with the ps3. what happened to 4.5 GHZ per cell? Posted May 21, 2005, 1:23 AM ET by Joe

Great post jerome you should go on the forums at xbox365 some times. # 8 Jerome Posted May 21, 2005, 1:29 AM ET by jomama22

#11, umm accualy more people play online with the ps2 then the xbox cus their are 4 times as many ps2's sold then xboxs. did you ever think of that? considering its free and all...maby you need a reality check.and shut up, they did lie, you want me to prove it? go read the links i made in post #10 and you will understand. www.beyond3d.com is an unbias site dedicated to the expansion of knowledge in the electronics field.YOU ARE THE FANBOY, not me. o and to let you know, major nelson is run by a microsoft rep. so that should tell you right there it is b/s. Posted May 21, 2005, 1:42 AM ET by Trank

This is vastly entertaining. Thanks, Joystiq! Look, you can't blame Major Nelson for defending his company's interests. Biased? No more so than Sony's hype machine. Did you also read that: "360 developers had to significantly reduce the image quality of their demos at E3 - which explains their lack luster appearance. Anti-aliasing wasn't enabled on any of the demos." Which means Xbox titles will look as great as we thought they would. Just as good as Sony's.Listen. These systems are going to be very, very similar in specs. The console wars will be won by the company that delivers the best features, service and software. Reality? There will be great games on all 3 consoles. This is an amazing time to be a gamer. Posted May 21, 2005, 1:45 AM ET by jomama22

#14 i would have to say this goes beyond anything sony has done. one thing is to just play cgi movies (which both sony and m$ did)but it is another to BLATINLY LIE about your competitors stats. thats just pathedic on their part. Posted May 21, 2005, 1:56 AM ET by Hebert

Whoa, this thing does this and that's better than that. WTF none of that matters. The machines still have to be programmed for. Designers in Japan seem to think the Xbox is easier to program for, and many have jumped ship. Game designers ability to extract result from the hardware will determine the best graphics. I also seem to remember Sony saying that hardware power doesn't matter. Before we get too far gone, not even Sony is arguing that Xbox live is more successful. Sony counts it's online numbers by systems with adapters and adapters sold. This is inaccurate. Multiples have been purchased and not all are actually playing online. Microsoft can actually calculate it's subscriber base and it is accepted as the fastest to reach 1 mil online suscribers. Even faster than AOL. You can argue hardware # and if this does that, but don't argue the overwelming success of Xbox live (even sony admitted they underestimated the importance of online gaming). It Makes you look biased, overzealous, and stupid. Posted May 21, 2005, 1:58 AM ET by Jon

PS3 folks are going to be screwed with first person shooters. I think the main reason 1st person shooters were not succesful on PS2 was because the controller. It just sucks and particularly for 1St Person shooter. It looks like this controller doesn't even have triggers!!! And is it just me or is this thing huge (PS3)! It looks bigger than original Xbox.What are they thinking releasing a huge ugly controller with a huge strange looking console knowing how much flac the Xbox took. MS adapts and changed their controller design now 3 times. They also adapted and changed the whole feel and look of their console. If Sony has chosen these rediculous and impractical designs, than they probably will stick to it. Also...where the crap is the Hard Drive for the PS3??? They don't list one as being standard! Is it just me or are they making all of their mistakes over again and adding all the mistakes MS made on the first XBOX! Does anyone actually believe that sony will ship PS3 any sooner than Christmas 2006? Just think about all the delays with PS2 and then with PSP happening now. They just don't have their act together. Sony wants us to believe they are coming just around the corner with PS3 and to hold off from buying 360, but I will not wait a year or more for a console we really know nothing about yet except some prerendered CGI movie of Killzone. I was at E3 and saw the 360 demos and even got to play one. The 360 controller is slightly smaller than the Xbox S controller and feels good. The Guide button worked in the game I was playing and will be a really cool feature. The Kameo Demo looked amazingly well ( I wasn't expecting it to be so cool). At one point in Kameo, the chick is riding a horse and trampling over what seemed like hundreds of charachters that were fighting against each other in a full on war. It's amazing they can render so many charachters all at once. And yes this was real time actual gameplay occuring right in front of my face. Call of Duty 2 gameplay looked amazing as well.The Gears of War Demo was amazing and may just be the Killer Ap for the 360 launch. Although If I remember correctly...the Xbox had a great launch, but from what I've seen at E3, Xbox 360 will have a spectacular set of Launch titles and features over Xbox Live. Youd be a fool to wait for PS3 given that it's vaporware until they show some real games. Posted May 21, 2005, 2:25 AM ET by Patrick

"Youd be a fool to wait for PS3 given that it's vaporware until they show some real games."NO M$ Suck0rs......haha...fanboys....wish they'd just go away.... Posted May 21, 2005, 3:17 AM ET by Michael

from the site: "detachable 20GB HD"i thought it was 40GB Posted May 21, 2005, 4:51 AM ET by Darl

#16: You wrote: "... BLATINLY LIE about your competitors stats. thats just pathedic on their part."First, I could barely understand what you wrote (spellcheck is a common courtesy), and second, that's your opinion. Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. I've spoken with several techheads I know who think Microsoft's specs seem accurate. We'll see when the systems come out now, won't we? Posted May 21, 2005, 5:00 AM ET by Boomhauer

Is it just me, or do the XBox supporters seem to be better spoken than the PS2 fans? Perhaps that's because we're older than 14. Posted May 21, 2005, 5:10 AM ET by Darl

Boomhauer, I hate generalizations, but yeah... I've noticed that, too. Posted May 21, 2005, 5:29 AM ET by Sergio

Jerome,Thanks for the additional analysis. Did you take into account that Major Nelson says that all three cores of the 360's CPU share 1MB L2 cache, while the Cell core has 512KB and each SPE has 256KB local memory (not cache)? That's 2.25MB of memory, not including DMA. Posted May 21, 2005, 5:35 AM ET by Heywood Mogroot

First off, that 256GB/s number is totally bogus, it's the theoretical GPU fillrate into the 10MB EDRAM framebuffer, not "system bandwidth" as claimed. If we're looking at bandwidth peaks, the 7-way vector cores' bandwidths to their 256k local storage memory would come in at, wait for it, 350GB/s (16 bytes/clock @ 3.2Ghz x 7).Also, Microsoft tries to minimize the FP capability of the PS3's vector units, but SIMD FP, contrary to their stupid claims, is where it's at for games, even AI (haven't they heard of fuzzy logic state machines???).As far as system bandwidths go, the PS3 has separate data buses, a 25.6GB/s internal bus (so the vector units can talk to each other and to the 512K L2 memory), the XDR RAMBUS channel, and the FlexIO link between the CPU and the GPU, while xbox has the memory controller in the GPU which means if there will be bandwidth contention between the CPU and GPU when the SIMD fur is flying. Also, xbox can only do 720p while ps3 can do 1080p x 2 channels. Who's going to have stereo, dunno, but the ps3 can do it, out of the box. Microsoft hacks also ignored other areas where Sony is pulling out the stops, like the bluetooth and 6 USB 2.0 ports (including 2 in the back). I would sell my left nut for a Linux kit for this baby. The xbox2 is nice and all, but the PS3 is just pure mind-blowing over-the-top insanity. Posted May 21, 2005, 5:42 AM ET by anthollo

the funny thing is, if you run the numbers the 10mb graphics frame buffer of the 360 is too small to be able to display any HD resolution with anti aliasing. Posted May 21, 2005, 5:43 AM ET by Sergio

Heywood,I can't remember if it was Anandtech, HardOCP, or someone else, but they intervied some engineers at ATI, and were told that the GPU could also handle 1080p. It didn't say if it could handle it on two displays. Posted May 21, 2005, 6:04 AM ET by Eric Pobirs

#24No, the Xbox 360 is plainly stated as supporting 1080i. They required developers do 720p as a minimum but mentioned many titles already including 1080i. A lot of it comes down to wha the developer is trying to do. For instance, is the progressive mode's virtues for animation greater than the detail offered by the interlaced mode? Also does the developer want to invest in the assets needed to do more than one of the modes properly?Both machines have a lot going for them but I'm just not inclined to pick a winner at this point. Sony appear to have an edge on several front but a lot of unknown possible issues as well. It remains to be seen where the problem may arise for developers that cause some of the performance to be lost on the way tot he screen. It gets pretty nebulous until there is retail hardware for regular folks to try out the games for themselves in realworld interactive conditions. A more interesting difference to me is that each company is playing out the anxieties fromt heir last generation. Microsoft, plagued by hardware costs, appears to be focused on a platform that will scale down smoothly. Sony, OTOH, is concerned with having no questions about their platform performance and is willing to take on a big cost burden to do it, along with still more expense to win the HDTV disc playback crown by sheer force of numbers for their Blu-ray format trojanned on a console, much as they scored big with PS2 DVD playback in Japan.Both of them are being cautious about production problems. The Cell is being delivered with a SPE disabled to allowed for a high defect rate in early production and the ATI video processor in the Xbox 360 also has redundant elements for the same reason. The rate at which performance demands is outpacing manufacturing capability is affecting more than Intel's P4 progression. Posted May 21, 2005, 6:05 AM ET by bored with these numbers

Where in the good green earth do people keep getting the idea that the PS3 is HUGE? Look at the photos... That's a DVD/CD sized slot, not one for records... Jon you sound lost. "Mistakes with the PS2?" Are you 12? Thing redefined home video games... Helped push the DVD outside of the videophile market and to normal people... Still strong sales. You sound like you just got into video gaming a year or so ago, when the XBox actually started selling... And by the way, no real problems waiting to buy the PS3... We'll all be playing XBox360!And some of you guys are spazzing over numbers that none of us understand beyond what is told to us by the companies themselves... So let's trace the path: XBox360 on MTV: "Sony is gonna lose!" E3 PS3 announcements and quick gloss-over of processors and power: "XBox 360 is gonna get smoked!" Major Nelson gets his team to write a wonderfully overwhelming technical report... Suddenly it's like the XBox added more processors! "Sony is gonna lose!" and next week, Sony will probably post a rebuttal to Major Nelson's page...Don't keep acting like you understand all of the jargon... Very few who do are even wasting time writing posts on these blogs. It's just too early. It's gonna come down to the programming. We can't know until next year when both boxes are out and in our houses... And it'll probably take another year just to see if one can outpace the other... Posted May 21, 2005, 8:02 AM ET by Dragon

This is actually somewhat funny. For one, Nintendo isn't getting dogged right now, and people no longer seem to care about what's really important about video games... the GAMES!! I couldn't care less about the numbers, as long as the games that come out are good. If numbers were my only concern, I sure as heck would never play the portable games, because they don't compare to the systems. I personally have no clue what all the numbers mean, but that's because I don't give a flip. When I choose which system I buy first, it's based on how many good games I wanna buy, not by processors, memory, and whatever other numbers you through at me. And not only is it the games that make my decision, but how much I trust the system not to break down. I know this is gonna sound a bit fanboyish, but that's the reason I like Nintendo. The first PS2 I got broke down for whatever reason, and I had to get a second one (which did last.) I've had 4 Playstations, and I think only one works (if I turn it on it's side.) The first X-Box I got stopped reading discs, got that replaced, and that one has worked fine. The Gamecube however, which is the only system I've ever gotten on release date, is still working perfectly with no kinks, and it's the original one I got. The X-Box one could have been a fluke (it happens, don't really know), but the Playstations breaking down, along with the PS2's, and the PSP thing with the square button (I'll let the dead pixels slide) just set me off Sony for a while. They tend to rush things, and fix it as they go along, so I'll wait untill they fix their system to work correctly. And between Microsoft and Nintendo, I tend to like Nintendo exclusives over Microsoft, and online gaming isn't my thing, so I know which system I'm getting. I know I rambled into a completely different subject, but my thought process is a bit off right now. Anyway, get over the numbers, and get the games you want. The only time numbers start to matter is when the game gets released for multiple systems, otherwise, it doesn't matter what the numbers are on Sony over Microsoft if you want to play Halo 3, you still gotta get the X-Box 360 to play it. Posted May 21, 2005, 8:30 AM ET by Heywood Mogroot

Eric, I've read that the ATI chip scales 720p to output 1080i. We can all agree that both machines (and even the Revolution most likely) will be amazing platforms that are worthy follow-ons, and totally outclass today's desktop PCs. If the PS3 didn't exist the xbox would indeed be an impressive platform. But looking that the systems side-by-side, IMV Sony has hit the ball outta the park. 7 wireless bluetooth controllers, 6 USB 2.0 ports, 3 (!) gigabit (!) ethernet ports, two HDMI outputs (!) for stereo or multihead gaming. And probably for the cost of a Mac mini, or less! I wish Apple had the huevos that Sony is showing here. Posted May 21, 2005, 8:52 AM ET by Dvdcr

Americans... xbox is only "easier" in USA... Posted May 21, 2005, 11:42 AM ET by funkonaut

Man, this is just more FUD from Microsoft. This pattern of behavior from them is really sad. They see a product, or competition, and they either buy them out or they spread FUD that the uneducated masses drink up like kool-aid.And people wonder why Microsoft is disliked so much. If they were honest in their business practices they'd have a lot more fans.Way to go, Microsoft. You've not only convinced me that the 360 is incredibly inferior to the PS3, but also that you're willing to sacrifice what little respect you have for consumers in order to make a quick buck at the expensive of your customers satisfaction. Posted May 21, 2005, 12:02 PM ET by Joe

What ever funkonaut # 32You want to look at things on a personal level thats you business!" This reminds me of people dis liking the Yankess calling them the evil empire. My advice to you Dude try to be more concerned about whats in your backyard .Your not God .Please stop playing Judge. Sony nor Mictrosoft are angels /Please lets leave the moral aspect of stuff out of the gaming world. You have a choice funkonaut you don't have to ever look at xbox360. I'm buying both systems becuse i like what they have to offer. I'm sick of the nay sayers in general. Peace!" Posted May 21, 2005, 12:05 PM ET by funkonaut

As I was saying... kool-aid... Posted May 21, 2005, 12:34 PM ET by Joe

funkonaut # 35 Lets say your rights ,lets say your wrong. why even waste your time feeding us what we already know. Example I know people who bought the PXS 2 or three times because it broke . knowing it's not durable product . I wonderful if you remember one of the producers of capcom claiming Sony purposibly makes thier system to break down in a short period of time inorder for you to replace it. So yes people do fell for the the kool aid on both sides. Thats leads me to believe that your like most fan boys you only see one way , thats happens to be narrow and closed minded. It's Sad Posted May 21, 2005, 12:39 PM ET by jon

well i am new to this can anyone tell me is ps3 is 256bit ? Posted May 21, 2005, 12:52 PM ET by Nick

Does anyone else find it funny that a company that creates so much hate from PC users can have so many fans just because they make a games console?!Neither of these companies cares at all about the consumer - all they care about is making money for their shareholders. They just want their box in your living room, so that they can get a slice of services like video-on-demand. Stop being so sad, learn to spell and just buy the console that has the best games. Posted May 21, 2005, 1:09 PM ET by Sergio

jon,The main core of the PS3's Cell is 64-bit, with the SPEs being 32-bit. The three cores of the XBox360's CPU is 64-bit. Posted May 21, 2005, 1:11 PM ET by Joe

I agree with you Nick about those companies really caring about the bottom line (making money off us!"As far a spelling is concerned nick even people who are educated misspell words every now and then. I know that for a fact!" Posted May 21, 2005, 1:21 PM ET by Sergio

"ATI did clarify that although Microsoft isn't targetting 1080p (1920 x 1080) as a resolution for games, their GPU would be able to handle the resolution with 4X AA enabled at no performance penalty."Source: Posted May 21, 2005, 1:22 PM ET by Chuck Norris

Just read this. Posted May 21, 2005, 1:36 PM ET by Chris Weber

I bought my PS2 on the opening day. I've used it since then more for watching DVDs than playing games, but I'd say I've gotten a lot of usage out of it. The only times it ever broke down on me is when my cats knocked it off the coffee table (4 times). Each time i was able to open it up, realign the laser, run a few tests, and start playing again.I've been very pleased with my purchasing decision, although I truely covet the smaller PS2 that is on the market now. Also for the record I don't even know if I'll buy a next gen console. I'll probably decide which one I'll want by christmas of '07. Buy then I'll have made my HDTV purchase as well. Posted May 21, 2005, 3:47 PM ET by rog27

This major Nelson article is a brilliant ploy and completely spun (but not to blame being a MS PR guy).It assumes that Sony would be going about programming in the same exact fashion as the XNA environment would afford for the xbox 360.This is typical given that Microsoft is a PC company at heart and would never want to bad-mouth the pc architecture and programming enviroment.The truth of the matter is that Sony's architecture blows the PC's architecture out of the water...albeit they go about things in a different, way-more efficient way.If you put Sony's console in a Microsoft programming environment - I would bet that Microsoft would win because Sony's console is not optomized for that (although, I'm not so sure MS's console would even win there).The truth is that Sony's API's are much more forward thinking and revolutionary than the dinosaur-like PC API's (even though Cell and RSX are compatible with those as well). The brilliance here comes from NVidias "Cg" API's which are C-based but allow for the development of highly-expedited CGI-like graphics and physics rendering. Yes, Sony's console will be easy to program for, as a MICROSOFT software engineer points out in his own journal. Yes, I said a Microsoft employee.Even more brilliant is the comparison of the GPUs. It pains me to see Major Nelson try and claim that the MS GPU is more powerful because of programmable "hybrid" shaders (which program in software by the way -- and are way, way weaker than dedicated hardware shaders, of which the RSX has many more than the R520). What's more is that Major Nelson assumes how many shaders the Sony chip has and has no factual evidence to make a comparison on. He makes the claim that because MS has more transistors on its chip (332 Million compared to RSX's 300 Million) that it's more powerful. What he fails to mention is that only slightly more than 232 Million of those 332 Million are processing logic (almost 100 million transistors are for the 10 MB of embedded DRAM - the frame buffer). This means that the RSX has about 70 Million more transistors for processing logic (the only thing that really counts in the comparison). This shows that the comparison is a farce. (IGN reference):"The daughter die totals an even 100 million transistors [10 MB EDRAM], bringing the total transistor count for the GPU to 232 million."His comparison of Memory Architecture is again a complete and miserable failure. Most of the number he put up in the bar chart has nothing to do with actual processing logic (the things that make your graphics, physics, ai, and sound come into being). Rather than explicity state this, he just clumps everything into one meaningless category. Most of the number he put up there refers to the Memory Bandwidth of the frame buffer. The only thing the frame buffer contributes to is Image Quality (Anti-Aliasing, which is important to some extent), but becomes less important at higher and higher resolutions for obvious reasons.In no way does the frame buffers memory bandwidth relate to in anyway to processing logic calculations. The reason it is so large is because of FSAA oversampling...in order to do anti-aliasing at high resolutions at say 4 to 8 times over, you need to locally store literally dozens of memory intensive, high-resolution "screenshots" of the same image and lay them over each other to blur the edges of the lines. I will say that ATI really excels in the FSAA department, but at the end of the day very good image quality does nothing to advance either the complexity of the graphics, physics, ai, or the sound...which are the most important part of a videogame experience. NVidia has it's own FSAA solution and while probably not as efficient as ATI's, it works well and doesn't deter from the four areas that I just mentioned that are the future of videogames.MS knows the XBOX 360 will not be as powerful as the PS3 (which makes sense...the PS3 will have been in development much longer), so it tries to make up by comparing its strengths, which are the following:Image Quality and Integer-intensive ApplicationsThe second part really pisses me off....because once again...Major Nelson lies calling games "general computing intensive programs", when in reality they are very, very highly floating point intensive and not very integer intevsive. In fact, I am seeing some ulterior motives being surfaced here. MS wants to turn your gaming console into a PC in the living room. The reason PC cpus have high integer performance is because they do highly-integer intensive computing and multitasking(eg. MS products like Microsoft Word, Excel, Access, Internet Explorer, Messenging, OS services, etc.). Now, do you want your game console to be transformed into a platform for office products and web browsing? I think not. Another cross-marketing ploy for MS to suck the life out of your wallet.The truth is that Sony's CPU and GPU are much, much more specialized for gaming (graphics, physics, ai, and sound) than MS's more general computing console. The cell works like a network of independent, specialized processors that can each handle tasks independently and have little to no lag time because of the lack of a bottlenecking bus. One of the SPEs is even dedicating to redundancy to ensure that clock-cycles are not lost when synching instructions together, making the cell uber-efficient. MS's cpu on the other hand has 3 cores which cannot act independently...they just take one task and do it at 3 times the speed. Sure they are more complex...but complex is not necessarily better - in fact, in this case it's worse.The best allusion to compare the cell with MS's processor is this scenario:The cell if it were an office environment:One high-level thinking Manager managing, working with, and delegating tasks to 8 very-well rounded technical employees.The MS processor in the office environment:Three high-level thinking Managers working concurrently on one problem together.Which is the proven way of doing business, you ask?The cell's way of doing business of course. It just works in the real world. And sadly, up to this point, hardware engineers have been too lazy to change the architecture to afford this kind of highly efficent, specialized work environment. PC champions would never, ever make you aware of this though. This would destroy their world. Imagine if Microsoft had to write OS's for Cell PC's in the future...you know how pissed off they would be? That's how nervous MS is here.Microsoft invaded Sony's space in the gaming world. Now Sony is pissed and making attack on MS's world with the Cell.If the Cell does catch on, PC people are in a whole world of shit. Posted May 21, 2005, 4:58 PM ET by paintist

I have one simple, small, short question: If the PS3 has 1 more year left of development will they be able to improve on any of the lacking features (lacking at least to the Xbox360)? If you want to throw in Moore's law, a year from now the PS3's technology will be a year old at its debut! So is any improvement to the hardware completely impossible for them to implement in this next year? Thats the sole thing that I am worried about. Plus I think that its clear that if the PS3 really does sell enough and gain a stronger community then it clearly leads to extra development of the Cell processor. The Cell processor is something that will/should permeate just about every product of technology. Its incredibly small and fast, perfect for mobile computing and considering its grid-design its immediately perfect for servers. I want the PS3 to flourish just because of the endless possibilities of the cell processor. Posted May 21, 2005, 5:24 PM ET by rog27

#45 I'm with you on that one.More good news for Sony fans. Looks like the KILLZONE video was in fact rendered with in-game "real-time" rendering. Thus, it is a true representation of what the game will look like on PS3. Here is what confirms it on Gamespot:"RUMOR #1: The Killzone PlayStation 3 tech demo was prerendered. Source: Forums all over the place, such as this thread on Evil Avatar. The official story: See below. What we heard: When the lights at Monday's PlayStation 3 demo came up, the audience members picked up their jaws off the floor...and began wagging their tongues. Like a game version of the Kennedy assassination, the audience quickly split into two camps: Those who thought the demo was prerendered, making it essentially computer animation, and those who thought it was rendered in real time, which means it would be close, graphically, to actual gameplay. The fires of speculation were fueled further by the ambiguous comments of Jan-Bart Van Beek, game eirector of the PS3 Killzone at Guerrilla Games, to the official PlayStation UK site."It's basically a representation of the look and feel of the game we're trying to make," he said. Then a post on the Eurogamer forums laid out a tantalizing conspiracy: Axis Animation, the same Scottish computer animation company that made a cinematic for the first Killzone, had been working on the E3 demo for months as straight-up CG. So how does Sony respond to the allegations? Far from being evasive, it met them head-on. "Yes, it is real time," a rep told GameSpot."So boo-ya XBOX fanboys. You can stop your annoying bitching and whining now and take some time to reflect on the fact that you were just utterly and completely mushed in the face. Posted May 21, 2005, 5:50 PM ET by Heywood Mogroot

"One of the SPEs is even dedicating to redundancy to ensure that clock-cycles are not lost when synching instructions together"? I thought this was to increase yields. If 7 out of the 8 SPEs work, Sony will still use the CPU (and if all 8 work Sony will disable one SPE)."MS's cpu on the other hand has 3 cores which cannot act independently...they just take one task and do it at 3 times the speed."This is wrong, totally wrong. The xbox will have 6-way multiprocessing, which in itself is pretty impressive, though it remains to be seen how the FSB holds up under this load. Posted May 21, 2005, 5:54 PM ET by Boomhauer

#47You neglected to include the conclusion"Bogus or not bogus?: Believe Sony? Bogus. Think Sony's lying? Not Bogus."Guess you believe Sony. When have they ever misled anyone? Posted May 21, 2005, 6:09 PM ET by rog27

#48 No, actually you are wrong...words right from a Microsoft software engineers mouth:"Think of today’s computers. You don’t have multiple processors, but you are able to run a plethora of applications seamlessly and concurrently. With the Xbox 360, developers will not have dedicated processors for each of their physics engines, etc, but the bus speed and the large unified memory will allow them to “hack” it and write software and libraries that will be just as good as if it had a dedicated processor. This actually puts more responsibility on the developers making it a little harder to program in my opinion than the PS3"Um, I believe the term used is "hack" it. To "Hack" it usually means to use software emulation to get similar functionality.So there, you my friend are wrong. The three cores will work concurrently on the same instructions and won't be dedicated, or specialized. The words right out of the horses mouth. Posted May 21, 2005, 6:13 PM ET by rog27

MS software engineer ... for reference to what I just stated. Posted May 21, 2005, 6:15 PM ET by Barabas

Xbox360 will rule!. Sony has already started the lying and has has a bad reputation for hyping up their products. Let the Techies tell the world about which system is better. Posted May 21, 2005, 6:23 PM ET by rog27

If Sony said that and they lied, they could in fact be liable for misleading claims, also known as false advertising. Sony's legal team would never let something like that get through. They would rather dance around the issue if that were the case #47. They did this "dancing" with the emotion engine until eventually admitting that some of the demos for ps2 were pre-rendered. But here they came right out and said...it is indeed "rea time". So, yes, I do believe them. If they lie, the consequences for them are much higher than if they make an admission otherwise.Did anyone notice the numbering is all funky on this site's comments? It keeps changing the numbering all around, making the references off. Posted May 21, 2005, 6:34 PM ET by Joe

The average gamer could careless about the techical shit microsoft and sony are talking about. Tf both of the systems are to much money only hard core gamers will purchase them. Remember sony came out with the all in one psx and didn't sell well in Japan because of the price. The PX3 is a power house I just hope it's not 450 without a water cooler . some what px3 is more powerful if the price is right I'd have the best of both world while fan boys bitch about who's sytem is more power full. I represent me peace!" Posted May 21, 2005, 6:35 PM ET by rog27

oh number #50 my dear boy..."hyping there machine"...welcome to the console wars. I also vaguely remember a tech demo for the XBOX with a mech and a woman in it, where MS claimed their games would look this good.Well its good to see that that claim materialized in the first generation of XBOX. PS2 made similar claims with their product. Both company's use marketing ploys and both have overhyped their consoles in the past. And both will continue to do so. But one will always be more powerful than the other. That's a fact too. How significantly more powerful has yet to be seen.But someone high up in EA has already been put on the record as saying, "the PS3 will have a bit more under the hood than XBOX 360." That is a good indication of which console is going to be the more powerful one, especially coming from a 3rd party developer who's committed to both platforms. Posted May 21, 2005, 7:11 PM ET by Boomhauer

There really should be some accountability for game companies who come up with intentionally misleading stats/demos when they hype their system.I guess this would be tough though because they would say that the demos represent what could be not necessarily what will be. Posted May 21, 2005, 7:27 PM ET by rog27

Any conspiracy theory about KILLZONE being pre-rendered can now officially be thrown right out the window.It is absolutely real time. Watch this video interview:& Posted May 21, 2005, 7:54 PM ET by Neila

I didn't expect that joystiq.com would post such a BS article...you would be better off rading the "enquerer" about "Evis is back"good riddens :) Posted May 21, 2005, 8:07 PM ET by Joe

rog27 # 55If that's real time gameplay in killzone2 then more power to the people. But lets not forget get about the hype surrounding the Matrix and Doom 3. As we all know they really didn't deliver on the hype. Lets say that those are the movie type of graphics one hope for in sony machine. if the game not cool or fun to play it won't sell like Madden or GTA serious. I'ma graphic whore my self but we must be aware the developers are lazy some times and feed us just eye candy for 39 & 49 of crap. Posted May 21, 2005, 8:30 PM ET by Heywood Mogroot

"The three cores will work concurrently on the same instructions and won't be dedicated, or specialized"This makes absolutely no sense. Multiple cores BY DEFINITION are parallel executing. What the MS engineer is saying is that there won't be a special math chip in the system, the physics will have to be done through the CPU's vector units. IOW, cores CAN'T "work concurrently" on the same instructions -- that would be running the same damn program simultaneously, and why would Microsoft do that -- what the guy is saying all the cores share the same PPC instruction set.Anyway if this doesn't persuade you feel free to wallow in your stupidity here. Posted May 21, 2005, 8:38 PM ET by Gil

ummm... i just read Anand's (www.anandtech.com) opinion on the ps3/xbox comparison and he thinks it's bunk. And yea, I trust Anand's opinion, he's my god. :)Here's the link to the discussion - &His post was #29:29 - Posted on May 21, 2005 at 3:47 PM by Anand Lal Shimpi Posted May 21, 2005, 9:09 PM ET by Gene Quagmire

Playstation 3's dad could beat up 360's dad. Posted May 21, 2005, 10:16 PM ET by Oomph

You got it, Gene. That's EXACTLY the level this discourse has sunk to. Posted May 21, 2005, 10:21 PM ET by Bmxpunk13

who cares about numbers, can anyone give me the numbers for the xbox and ps2 off the top of their heads. no. they are nearly the same, much like the xbox360 and ps3 are. I own a ps2 and an xbox and there is no significant difference in graphics. look how nice current gen games look and play running on a 733Mhz processor, imagine them on 3x3.2Ghz. they will be amazing on both systems. besides, developers hardly program games that use 100% of the consoles hardware, they need room to breath. that and the consoles would get extremely hot if they were being worked to the max constantly. everyone has an opinion, and my opinion is that I will buy an xbox360 because of online play and the media center extender features. once i hear more about the ps3's software and services i may get one of them too, but so far i am going with the xbox360 Posted May 21, 2005, 10:53 PM ET by Hal

#46: "Yes, it is real time," a rep told GameSpot." re: Killzone 2And you believe that?! Jesus Christ, were you born yesterday? Don't you understand the stakes here? Sony will do anything... ANYTHING... to stop losing marketshare. They are fighting for their lives. You guys just don't get it. This is corporate war. Lies are very easy to tell when you're threatened. Posted May 21, 2005, 11:14 PM ET by

Who cares?I just want to play better games.But i'm afraid i might have to buy a revolution if sony and microsoft don't make the gameplay any better. Posted May 22, 2005, 12:05 AM ET by paintist

Now you're just being desperate. Posted May 22, 2005, 1:11 AM ET by Tom

The thing I am flabbergasted by is that Sony is telling the same kind of lies it told before the PS2 was introduced, and many of you are believing them again. Did you learn nothing from history? Sony will make claims and then not deliver on them. The Killzone 2 sleight of hand is a perfect example of that corporate strategy. Oh yeah, it was "real-time," alright. Pre-rendered scenes triggered "real-time." Smoke and mirrors. Sony is pulling a Bill Clinton. It depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Posted May 22, 2005, 7:04 AM ET by

I'm still wondering why the floating point performance of the Cell has been made into such a big deal when it's only responsible for 218 gigaflops of the 2.18 teraflops of floating point performance. The Nvidia chip is doing 1.8 teraflops. Why is the floating point performance of the Cell being bragged about? Posted May 22, 2005, 7:24 AM ET by

But yeah, I love how many people have to say how these numbers don't matter, that we've forgotten what's important, meaning "THE GAMES!" No, no one's forgotten that. Everyone's aware. That's why I had to buy both an Xbox and a GameCube for this current generation. I love the Xbox platform, and it has had many great games, but no one can compete with Nintendo's first-party franchises. I'm sure I will enjoy the Revolution in the next generation for that reason. Look at how great The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess is looking. Even after watching all of the trailers for the next-gen games, I still want it more. Not only does it look great, I know the gameplay, story, and scope of the game is going to keep me entertained for a long, long time. Nintendo will always have a place in my heart because of this commitment to the games themselves. They're able to achieve a fricking lot without going overboard on the hardware. I'm admiring Microsoft's focus this time around. They seem to be making a very balanced, thoughtful platform. I have no doubts there will be something for me with over 160 games in development for it. Sony isn't as focused. They seem pretty directionless, not really knowing where they want to take the PS3. Wow, tons of ports, but how much is the average user going to be taking advantage of them? Two HDMI outputs is damn impressive, but how many people have two HD monitors/TVs sitting in the same general location? People who can afford that have surround sound setups, and they can afford to buy multiple PS3s. Very few games are going to take advantage of a second display, but Sony felt it was important? They just want bragging rights, but they're choosing very weird ways to obtain them. If the games really end up looking like the demos, I'll end up getting one, though. Demolishing a city in a big mech is fun, and with that kind of detail, wow. I don't think any of the new game consoles will disappoint as far as games are concerned. I think it will be fun owning all three next-gen systems and contemplating how much performance is sitting under my TV. That's the cool part about the numbers. "Wow, think of all of the amazing things I could do with this computational power, and yet I'm mainly using it for games. Yeah for that!" Posted May 22, 2005, 7:29 AM ET by

The disappointing part of all of these announcements is that dedicated hardware-accelerated physics is absent. Realistic physics are going to define the next generation of gaming, and while these new consoles will be leaps and bounds more capable of producing realistic physics, PC gaming is going to see more with the dedicated hardware. Posted May 22, 2005, 9:39 AM ET by Neila

If we follow Major's reasoning we can make the following statements:XBOX = 1080i = 540 fields /tvsPS3 = 2×1080p = 4×540 fields /tor PS3 is 4 times more graphics power than 360XBOX has 3 dual-cores running at 3.2GHzPS3 has 8 dual-cores running at 3.2GHzor PS3 is almost 3 times more powerful.Unfortunately this is just as bogus comparison of numbers coming from different system designs that is not applicable in practice (the same true of Major’s examples). And why on earth would Sony, IBM, and Toshiba go through all that trouble if they could just slap 3 PowerPCs and get a better system? This alone should be your major indication that Major is just playing with numbers. As a reference we can take a look at Intel’s CELL-like processor that unfortunately for us is still about 10 years away in their product line.In other words CELL is a new generation processor and cannot compare the numbers this way. There is no doubt that it will be more powerful (otherwise IBM would have just made 3-core PowerPCs and save a few billion in R&D), however until someone runs some sort of benchmark test on both machines those number comparisons are meaningless.The fact that the Xbox team had to use such tactic to fallaciously inflate the 360 performance is also a pretty good indicator that there are shortcomings when it comes to their hardware. Posted May 22, 2005, 11:25 AM ET by The Box

I think this disussion is meaningless. It looks like it going to be a close call. And faster performance is not the only thing that matters. Look at the sales PS2 after Xbox was introduced Xbox was 2 times faster but unless this big differents it never took the lead. Many game developers are having problems, microsofts buys many intrest in problem developers. I think thats the race we will have to look at. Who is going to bring the best developers to their system. And i think Microsoft(Bill Gates) is going to be the big winner. Sony is a muscito if you compare its sice to microsoft.....but until the next-gen war is not going on we will have to wait.... Posted May 22, 2005, 3:33 PM ET by Medius

Really, I agree with those who say that the battle will be won on the software side: that's where its always been won, and hopefully that trend will continue. With that said, this article is still pretty disappointing. I'm used to seeing the public get hazed with glitz and glamour, but this dog-and-pony show is aimed directly at the nerds. While I don't expect the tech sector to act any less like sheep than the masses (a trip to most forums will prove this truism), its still disturbing to see that corporations are starting to see and exbrace their ability to manipulate us nerds in the same manner they do those that lapped up the xbox MTV special. Its not surprising that this exists, really, but I can't help but pine for a day when the real gaming people flew under the corporate radar. Posted May 22, 2005, 8:03 PM ET by realgammer79

very insightful comments not all but most very informative. and for the ppl here who keep saying sony lies and sony will do or say anything becuse of the stakes, I want you to just be smart and look because actions speak louder than words: #1 MS presented a MTV boradcast complete with staged audience applause and celeberty gusts #2 they sent off this blog by major or whoever to confuse and excited uneducated gammers with misleading numbers at best becuse they feel threatened by Sony's momentem after E3. you say 'SONY' will do or say anything. well...from what I can see the only thing that sony has done is it's anual persentation at E3. yeah.. those low down and dirty.. how dare they show up, and with better hard ware too. is there no level to how low they will go, they even tell ppl that their equipment is more advanced than ours. we at MS would never do anything like that.just open you eyes right now and put things together. yes alot is riding on both MS and Sony they just have diff approaches to how to deal with it. but who is resorting to sneeky tactics here? and im not being bias if I had something dirogatory to say about sony I would but the only thing I could use is them using trumped up demos for E3. well the thing is I dont know that they are just fake demos. so it comes down to the question of who do you trust more MS or sony? and judging from what I have seen so far as showmanship and honor vs propaganda and name calling goes... I think I begain to get a picture of the ones who, as you put it, will do or say anything to sell their product. Posted May 22, 2005, 8:18 PM ET by Paul

#74: "celeberty gusts?" You mean like wind? Yikes, dude... How is blogging sneaky? Nelson simply posted specs to stick up for his company after the questionable accusations Microsoft heard from Sony. That's not sneaky, it's called rebuttal. Also, I know just as many techheads who think the specs he posted look accurate. Posted May 22, 2005, 10:49 PM ET by Neila

#75 thats called targeted misleading public disinformation (a-la WMD found in Iraq)and it may look accurate, but just "looks" and in fact is misleading informationbut you have to give them credit, a lot of people now are confused...I wonder if they pull the "be a patriot, buy American XBox". Posted May 22, 2005, 10:53 PM ET by realgammer79

....K, but techhead or not dosent make an expert opinion regarding two differnt architectures of these CPU's especially since sony's is a departure from the norm. do you compare two analog 19'in TV's to one 44'in flat screen w/ HD display? QUESTION, How are these two architectures being compared? anyone looking to find the wrong answer will always find it. Posted May 22, 2005, 11:20 PM ET by realgammer79

So I over typed the 'e' MR.#74 piiiicky. who cares you know what I mean. but really you can speculate all you want on how you thing the 360 is better than PS3 and I can go on telling you how your fugures are all "we have good reason to belive there are WOMD out their." but not even the most techno tech head knows for sure. thats why every time Nvidia and ATI produce a new card for PC ppl run benchmark test that tell unquestionably who has the best proformance. humm... you know what that's not a bad idea. I mean, this is such a big debate now and since both are claiming superiority that they should put their money where their mouth is(so to speak). Sony's machine against Microsoft's in a winner takes all contest of proformance. who's ever machine out proforms the other on the most applications will claim the spot as the most powerful console on the planet, and the other will simultaniously withdraw their machine from the market. seems fair if ppl are going around telling lies to gain recodnition. but something tells me sony would be happy to agree to such a proposition, I wonder about MS. Posted May 23, 2005, 12:22 AM ET by TiaMaster

Is everyone deliberately ignoring the fact that neither platform has playables that represent final product? Sony doesn't even have playables AT ALL...You people are arguning over something THAT DOESN'T EVEN EXIST YET. You all sound like you are trying to WILL your opinions into existence.The funny thing is, this post will just be ignored and there will be posts right after this one that continue the waste of everyone's time. Posted May 23, 2005, 12:27 AM ET by TiaMaster

>"but something tells me sony would be happy to agree to such a proposition, I wonder about MS."Screw Xbox360...Screw PS3...Screw Nintendo Revolution...What we need is DREAMCAST 2!!!!! Posted May 23, 2005, 3:01 AM ET by Paul

God, Neila... you must be one of those people who believes the government recovered a crashed UFO at Roswell. Listen, many more people are enlightened than you believe are confused. I have worked with excellent people from both these companies and, although conspiracy theories abound, the truth is that there are thousands of incredibly smart people working their asses off to put their best products to market. These are both excellent products. Sony is threatened by Microsoft's strategy right now, so they are saying whatever they need to say to blunt it. The Killzone 2 pre-rendered trailer fiasco is a good example. Microsoft is saying whatever they need to say in rebuttal. But it isn't disinformtaion. That's ludicrous. For example, have you played on Xbox Live? It is beautifully executed software. Have you played on the Xbox? It is easily a more powerful console than the PS2. Microsoft is no slouch. Consequently, to equate "alledged" military stratgey with Microsoft's 360 specs is just plain silly. What you have in this endgame is a lot of hard-working people clawing and scratching for market position. Again, I've talked to many a technical guru who says the 360 is a powerhouse. The PS3 obviously is. These are both excellent products, and I see a kind of toxic bias toward both companies depending on who you root for. I will be buying both consoles. The games are the thing that will decide this generation. And from "Halo 3" to "God of War" to "Resident Evil" there is, and will continue to be, thrilling gameplay on all three consoles. Add your comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry: inappropriate or purely promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted no need to use

or
tags. Your name (required): Your email address (required, will not be shown to the public): Your sites URL (optional): Do you want us to remember your personal information for next time? Yes No Add your comments:

ATOMS

BITS

RESOURCES

JOYSTIQ EMAIL

Privacy: Your email address will be used for Joystiq news only. We hate too. RSS NEWSFEED

LINK TO JOYSTIQ

Video Games @ Searchngo

Microsoft Takes A Look At The Playstation 3