Slashdot Mirror
PS3 vs. Xbox 360
The Guardian Gamesblog has a point by point breakdown of the Xbox 360 and PS3 spec sheets, comparing and contrasting the two consoles based on what we know about them so far. In the end, they come to the rational conclusion that for gamers what will end up deciding the battle is the gameplay. From the article: "We've pretty well reached the point of complexity with dual analogue sticks, analogue triggers and four face buttons, so while you can expect to see more content in terms of things happening, not much originality was on display. Gameplay advances will come from peripherals and Sony really showed that off with their kooky EyeToy games. Nothing wrong with controlling two bondage-clad Japanese spy chicks via videoconfering in my mind :)"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's funny that when Microsoft and Sony say that innovation will come from peripherals, people suddenly start to listen. But if Nintendo suggests the idea, everyone starts calling their downfall.
I just caught this on a forum in gamespot, so take it as you like:
---
Mark Rein Reveals That Most PS3 Demos Are Not Realtime!
2005-05-17 16:10:06: Written by SD6
Mark Rein of Epic Games revealed to VE3D that only a select few of the games and demos shown during Sony's press conference were realtime.
In addition to the Sony demos being shown by Phil Harrison, the Epic and EA presentations were the only third party portions actually running on the PS3 in real-time. But most of those movies, which I probably watched 3 or 4 during rehearsals for the event, look very achievable and some were probably rendered on the actual box but in non-real-time. When a system is year away, heck even with a system is 6 months away, it is reasonable to expect the power of the dev kits would still only be a fraction of the power of the final system.
--
Anyone else saw that coming a mile away?
Anyway, yes ps3 presentation was a lot more spectacular than xbox but if you check the actual specs you will realize they are pretty similar they both have free internet access, wifi capabilties, and although sony tried to hide this similar physic and graphic capabilities (Actually unreal 3 runs on xbox 360 too so the demo shown by sony most probably runs on xbox360 too).
Actually if you check the new Sega game trailer, well thats actual footage from the ps3 and as you can see is basically identical to the 360 footage shown.
And no, contrary to popular belief, "not realtime" or "prerrendered" does not mean "the machine can still do that, and therefore is powerful enough to do it so we shouldnt judge it down" it actually means any machine even your grandpa 486 can pull a video like that if you give it enough time to render it.(and the needed ram and disk space) if its not realtime its a fake and can not be used to judge the machine, period.
Go ahead MOD my day!
More opinions here
"Isn't it a little premature to be doing comparisons on these?!?!"
Is it even worth comparing them based on graphical prowess? The PS2 is significantly inferior to the XBOX when it comes to graphics, but its game library is far richer. It is for that reason alone I have a PS2 and not an XBOX.
"Derp de derp."
In case you don't read this old article.
You know, one from when people were so excited about all the USB ports and the Firewire port and the PCMCIA port on the PS2, how it could render Toy Story in real-time and movie studios were looking at using them for render farms. Where it would be easy to edit home movies on the PS2. And how it was HD compatible so you could play all your games in HD.
Or how Sony stated that the PS2 would be a viable entertainment platform for 10 years.
Does anyone actually expect the PS3 to ship with the 255 different ports on the thing that the E3 demo one had? I sure as hell don't. I expect the PS3 that is sold to be a substantially different machine. The Xbox 360, however, will be little changed.
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
It took me forever to buy an Xbox. I wanted one, but every time I went to the store, I'd stare and the box and just feel compelled not to buy it. No problem buying games though.
Nintendo, hell yeah I'd buy it. Sony, yeah, what the hell. M$...eh, not so much.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So does this mean that the PS3 and XBox 360 will be as powerful as Sony and Microsoft promised the PS2 and XBox would be?
I took the time out to compare and contrast between the Xbox 360 & PS3 and I came to to this conclusion.
Xbox 360 has a CPU FPS of 115.2 GFlops
PS3 has a CPU FPS of 218 GFlops
Xbox 360 has a GPU FPS of around 884.8 GFlops*
PS3 has a GPU FPS of 1.8TFlops
Xbox 360 has a combined FPS of 1TFlops
PS3 has a combined FPS of 2.18TFlops
Xbox 360 has a DVD-ROM
PS3 has a BD-ROM
Xbox 360 is WiFi ready
PS3 is WiFi built-in
Xbox 360 has 3 x USB 2.0 ports
PS3 has 6 x USB 2.0 ports
Xbox 360 has support for 4 wireless controllers
PS3 has support for 7 wireless (Bluetooth) controllers
Xbox 360 uses Memory Units
PS3 uses MS Standard/Duo/Pro, SD standard/mini & Compact Flash Type I/II
Xbox 360 has support for select Xbox1 games
PS3 has support for PS1 & PS2 games
Xbox 360 has support for 1 720p & 1080i display
PS3 has support for 2 480p, 720p, 1080i & 1080p displays
Note:
* Derived from subtracting published Overall System Floating-Point Performance of 1TFlops with reported CPU GFlops
Source:
Wikipedia's PS3 Tech Specs
Official Xbox 360 Fact Sheet
Xbox 360's reported CPU GFlops