Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Next-Gen Console CPUs Not Up to Hype

Posted by timothy on from the psss-they're-game-consoles-pass-it-on dept.

rAiNsT0rm writes "Anandtech follows up their initial in-depth coverage of the Xbox 360 and PS3 CPU with the real truth about the next-gen consoles' Poor CPU Performance. From the article: "Speaking under conditions of anonymity with real world game developers who have had first hand experience writing code for both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 hardware (and dev kits where applicable), we asked them for nothing more than their brutal honesty. What did they think of these new consoles? Are they really outfitted with the PC-eclipsing performance we've been lead to believe they have? The answer is actually quite frequently found in history; as with anything, you get what you pay for."" Update: 06/30 21:11 GMT by Z : The original article disappeared from Anandtech, so I've changed the link to point to the story as hosted by Google Groups.

3 of 783 comments (clear)

  1. Xbox 360 twice as fast as Xbox? by nokilli · · Score: 0, Redundant
    From TFA:

    ...real-world performance of the Xenon CPU is about twice that of the 733MHz processor in the first Xbox
    Oh man, why not just kick them in the balls too while you're at it!

    Can that really be true?
  2. You mean hype is exaggeration? by mikeophile · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Say it isn't so!

  3. Informative by kublikhan · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I'm glad you guys are all having fun ripping apart the article. Yes we knew these consoles were over hyped, but I for one found the article to be informative. Now we know roughly how powerful these consoles are. Rougly twice the power of an original xbox, or roughly twice the power of a pentium III 733. Time and time again I read online how it doesn't make sense to play games on an expensive PC when you can get a console instead. Don't want to pay $1000 every two years for a new PC? That $1000 dual Nvidia graphical system is a f!@# joke to you when you can get a new console once every 5 years for $300? Fine. Valid arguments. "acceptable" quality/performance at a "reasonable" price is certainly a good route to take. But don't expect to see quality and performance at the same levels as that new $1000 system. I think the line "You get what you pay for" sums it up nicely.