ps3 or xbox 360?

Home  \  Off Topic  \  ps3 or xbox 360?

Both ps3 and xbox 360 are coming out soon and i was just wondering what everyone was gonna choose between the 2.

posted by  A-cord

the 360 for the following reasons:

1) 3 well-powered processors, each focusing completely on one thing vs one super processor handling everything (new technology makes me nervous).

2) expensive 360 model has wireless controllers vs the same controllers (or so its rumored)

3) much better storage devices

4) even though the 360 wont have the new DVD's for storing kick ass games with a whole bunch of graphics and such like the ps3, its gonna be a WHOLE lot faster than the ps3 in loading everything

5) squareenix is finally gonna make games for the xbox!

6) Halo 3!!!

7) a very close friend of mine will buy the ps3 and we will exchange

8) ps3 is going to be too expensive

9) cuz the X and K are my favorite letters

10) microsoft has a huge online gaming community, while sony will have to start building it up (ps2 online doesnt compare to the xbox in that area).

11) to play halo 3 against my online buddies!

posted by  Inygknok

The PS3 by far:
1) The medium-low resolution settings on the PS3 are the HIGHEST settings on the 360
2) I have tons of PS2 games
3) PS3 wont be too expensive. Max $300 prolly $250-200. They cant make it too expensive because it could loose it standing as the most sold systems ever
4) I like Sony (?)
5) I can easily take Gran Turismo over any Halo, anyday

:laughing: :2cents:

posted by  StiMan

Ps3 is gonna start at $350 jsut like the last 2 systems.
The controllers will be wireless and you can have up to seven (weird number) being used on one system.
Load times will only be faster on the 360 b/c the environments and graphics will be much more limited.
The dvd discs or "blu-ray" on the ps3 will have a 50 gig max compared to a 8 gig dual layer disc.
Rumor is that the 360 will be pretty cheap b/c it won't come with wireless controllers and it won't come with a hard drive
Ps3 will come with a hard drive though smaller so its less expensive and you can still use memory cards to take your game with you and such.

Ill be the one of the many getting the ps3 in march :thumbs:

posted by  GonnaDie4TheGov


1. Gran Turismo 5
2. ive only got ps2 games
3. XBOX SUCKS!!!!!!!!!! :2cents:

posted by  ahoo

quite a compelling argument you've got going there buddy :thumbs:

posted by  GonnaDie4TheGov

yes indeed, i was supposed to add this after sucks, :2cents: see...

posted by  ahoo

PS3 hand down. Imagine playing games that look like the Final Fantasy movie!!

posted by  elchango36

I will buy which ever system has Grand Turismo and Final Fantasy games on it.

All so I have ps2 games so another pro for ps3.

The loading times don't bother me as I can wait a little bit longer for something a whole lot better. :mrgreen:

posted by  GreekWarrior

Official PS3 Specs

Here are the official technical specifications for the PS3, taken directly from Sony:

Cell Processor
PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz
1 VMX vector unit per core
512KB L2 cache
7 x SPE @3.2GHz
7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE
* 1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
total floating point performance: 218 GFLOPS

RSX @550MHz
1.8 TFLOPS floating point performance
Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels
Multi-way programmable parallel floating point shader pipelines

Dolby 5.1ch, DTS, LPCM, etc. (Cell- base processing)
256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz 256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz

System Bandwidth
Main RAM 25.6GB/s
VRAM 22.4GB/s
RSX 20GB/s (write) + 15GB/s (read)
SB< 2.5GB/s (write) + 2.5GB/s (read)

System Floating Point Performance

Detachable 2.5" HDD slot x 1

USB Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0)
Memory Stick standard/Duo, PRO x 1
SD standard/mini x 1
CompactFlash (Type I, II) x 1

Ethernet (10BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 1000BASE-T) x 3 (input x 1 + output x 2)
Wi-Fi IEEE 802.11 b/g
Bluetooth 2.0 (EDR)

Bluetooth (up to 7)
USB 2.0 (wired)
Wi-Fi (PSP)
Network (over IP)

AV Output
Screen size: 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
HDMI: HDMI out x 2
Analog: AV MULTI OUT x 1
Digital audio: DIGITAL OUT (OPTICAL) x 1

Disc Media
CD PlayStation CD-ROM, PlayStation 2 CD-ROM, CD-DA, CD-DA (ROM), CD-R, CD-RW, SACD, SACD Hybrid (CD layer), SACD HD, DualDisc, DualDisc (audio side), DualDisc (DVD side)
DVD: PlayStation 2 DVD-ROM, PlayStation 3 DVD-ROM, DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW
Blu-ray Disc: PlayStation 3 BD-ROM, BD-Video, BD-ROM, BD-R, BD-RE

Xbox 360 System Performance Specifications

Custom IBM PowerPC-based CPU
Three symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each
Two hardware threads per core; six hardware threads total
VMX-128 vector unit per core; three total
128 VMX-128 registers per hardware thread
1 MB L2 cache

CPU Game Math Performance
9.6 billion dot product operations per second

Custom ATI Graphics Processor
10 MB of embedded DRAM
48-way parallel floating-point dynamically scheduled shader pipelines
Unified shader architecture

Polygon Performance
500 million triangles per second

Pixel Fill Rate
16 gigasamples per second fill rate using 4x MSAA

Shader Performance
48 billion shader operations per second

512 MB of 700 MHz GDDR3 RAM
Unified memory architecture

Memory Bandwidth
22.4 GB/s memory interface bus bandwidth
256 GB/s memory bandwidth to EDRAM
21.6 GB/s front-side bus

Overall System Floating-Point Performance
1 teraflop

Detachable and upgradeable 20GB hard drive
12x dual-layer DVD-ROM
Memory Unit support starting at 64 MB

Support for up to four wireless game controllers
Three USB 2.0 ports
Two memory unit slots

Optimized for Online
Instant, out-of-the-box access to Xbox Live features with broadband service, including Xbox Live Marketplace for downloadable content, gamer profile for digital identity, and voice chat to talk to friends while playing games, watching movies, or listening to music
Built-in Ethernet port
Wi-Fi ready: 802.11a, 802.11b, and 802.11g
Video camera ready

Digital Media Support
Ability to stream media from portable music devices, digital cameras and Windows XP-based PCs
Ability to rip music to the Xbox 360 hard drive
Custom playlists in every game
Built-in Media Center Extender for Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005
Interactive, full-screen 3-D visualizers

High-Definition Game Support
All games supported at 16:9, 720p, or 1080i, with anti-aliasing
Standard-definition and high-definition video output supported

Multi-channel surround sound output
Supports 48KHz 16-bit audio
320 independent decompression channels
32-bit audio processing
Over 256 audio channels

Physical Specs
Height: 83 mm
Width: 309 mm
Depth: 258 mm
Weight: 7.7 lbs.

I have no idea what any of it means but there you go. :thumbs:

posted by  GreekWarrior

Ya, lol. Wonder how long it took him to formulate his post. :laughing:

posted by  StiMan

yeah....basically these game consoles have more power/memory/basically everything ovewr my computer. grrreat. :laughing:

posted by  SuperJew

They out power like every computer in the world. (Well... PCs...) :laughing:

posted by  StiMan

Do you really need extremely good graphics, unless you've got an HD enabled TV?

I would have preferred the 360 before reading this thread, but now it seems that the PS3 would be better.

posted by  chris_knows

PS3 for sure. Its all about the games, and the Xbox has lost its place as holder of the best graphics.

Gran Turismo 5 bitches!!! Grand Theft Auto!!!

That and PC, because my beast of a computer owns all.

posted by  Oomba

um, i dont think anyone read wat i said. the expensive 360 model WILL have the wireless controllers (sony copied the idea tbh), and also a big HD. the cheap model wont have wireless controllers, and a smaller HD.

posted by  Inygknok

Except that it owns none of the next gen systems. :doh:

posted by  StiMan


I have gave stingy Bill Gates enough of my money.

Complete BS you have to pay to play xbox live.

Playstation doesnt charge for online.

Hardly nobody plays madden on xbox live during late hours while theres hundreds on playstation servers.

posted by  coolnuttz

The wireless controllers were not xbox's idea. The wireless controllers first debuted in North America with Nintendo's Wavebird wireless controller. Spec wise, the Cell cpu is supposed to overpower all three of the 360's cpu's together. Its so powerful, Sony/IBM are going to sell them as supercomputer cpu's to big corporations. But the RSX graphics chip in the PS3 is slightly weaker then ATi's R500 chip in the 360. Although the RSX chip can support higher resolutions, the R500 has better fill rate and better AA, PX shader, texturing.

My opinion is that from the standings right now, the 360 has a upper hand with earlier release. But by the end of next year, it will lose alot of market share. The PS3 overwhelms it visually, and probaly won't cost a lot more. The PS3 also has a much larger library because they have much more third party support. They basicaly have all the japanese game publishes except for Tecmo.

Also the squareenix games promised for the Xbox won't be the same ones released for the PS3, so don't expect the new final fantasy game to launch on the Xbox. The one based on Vincent Valentine.

posted by  aerith

I'm thinking of buyin a Nintendo Revolution first, and then a PS3 later on, when the price drops.

Technical Mumbo Jumbo: Although it does not support High Definition. Its price point will be at least 50- 100 dollars below that of the PS3 and the 360. Even though it has no HD-support, the video card used for it is a modified ATi R520 core, which boasts better specs then both the 360's and the PS3's video cards. It uses a single dual core IBM powerpc chip. This core is clocked faster then the Powerpc chips in the 360.
And then there is the PPU (phyics processing unit), which is a chip designed to process the physics of games. The Ageia Physx chip is also found in the PS3. It normally takes a cpu alot of power to process simple physics, but with the PPU which is designed to process physics, it takes huge amount of stress off the CPU so it can do other things. Just like how CPU's take much more power then a GPU to process graphics-related things like textures. The PPU is better suited to processing physics.

Quencher: The quencher for the revolution is the most important thing; the way you play the games. No matter how good the graphics are; if you have a bad control scheme, the game is only mediocre. With Nintendo's new take on gaming, it spawns a lot of possibilities. Imagine playing a FPS with that controller. You move the body with the nunchuk attachment joy stick, while to move your head, you just move the controller in any direction instead of trying to use the damn two joystick configuration of the other two consoles;which can be very frustrating to master at times. Also, it has g force sensors, so you can play hack and slash games, and instead of hitting a button, you swing the controller like you would a real sword. Makes boring games a lot more fun.

posted by  aerith

PS3, no comparison. Playstation has been the #1 system ever since it came out in 1995. Nintendo and Microsoft can't compete. Plus, who would want to farther contribute to the Microsoft juggernaut.

posted by  thunderbird1100

well hmmm i dunno, ive had playstation (regular) and xbox, it seems xbox is a much bigger pain with like breaking and shit, but the ps lasted a long time and i love the games, alhtouh i never got the ps2 i think i might go after the ps3 :)

posted by  Stem

I'm wanting a PS3, mostly because of GT5. If the next Super Smash Brothers game is very good, I'll look into a Revolution. This from a die-hard Nintendo fanboy too. PC gaming has stolen my

posted by  jedimario

PC gaming is always the best, best graphics by far, console graphics are always a step behind the latest and great video cards. The only games I can't stand playing the PC that I love playing on my PS2 are SPORTS games. Especially NCAA 2006 and Madden 06.

posted by  thunderbird1100

To answer the fact that a PC cnat own a next gen are quite wrong. Check out alienware. Also the Pentium D is an amazing processor. Known as the "Dual Core" allows for much better gaming. Basically it makes itself into 2 processors so a 2.8 is like a 5.6...scary :mrgreen:

posted by  newyorker

Correct..and lets keep note that not every person can afford a $2500 Progressive TV, but most people can afford a $400 flatpanel LCD monitor.

posted by  newyorker


and on the note of someone waiting till the price drops... don't hold your breath too long it will more than likely be awhile, I believe the XBOX systems are costing around 600 to make, and PS3's will cost around 650 to make, and PS3 will also be around 400$ when it debutes... I guess companies are just loosing more and more per system as technology advances... I saw this somewhere about how much it costs to create them..... can't remember where though. :banghead:

posted by  Pythias

Well if I remember correctly, its $399 for the regular Xbox 360 or $499 for the premium version at Future Shop around here...

posted by  car_crazy89

Around here its $100 less for each one. :mrgreen:

posted by  newyorker

Well thats cause we use Monopoly money or atleast thats pretty much what it's worth :wink2:

posted by  car_crazy89

I call the money bag :laughing:..

And I still don't have any money :doh:, although it would probably explain why I suck at monopoly :laughing: :doh:

posted by  chris_knows

It doesn't matter what brand computer it is, Dell, HP etc... As long as it uses the same processor, same video card and same amount of the same speed memory, it will be as fast as the next computer.

AMD > Intel

'nuff said. :mrgreen:

posted by  thunderbird1100

I personally find this very hard to believe. If they're losing $200+ on each system they make, then for each system sold they would have to make that up in games. Seeing as for the most part each game costs $50, each person would have to buy 4 games to match that $200. Of the $50 you pay for a game, Microsoft gets a fraction of it. I have no idea what the actual numbers are, but all the developers and publishers must make a profit too. And Microsoft would not be making anything it couldn't make money on, no business would, it's bad business. sure it gets their name out there, but for what? People will buy more 360's, thus Microsoft would lose more money. Same thing goes for the PS3. These companies (probably Sony more so than Microsoft) can't "afford" to lose money on gaming consoles.

posted by  jedimario

Can't forget all of the promotions for the 360 just about everywhere you turn...

posted by  chris_knows

I'm sorry, that is just plain lying. The AMD 64 CPU's completely own the Intel CPUs. For example a AMD X2 4800+ (dual core) is 807 dollars usd while the Intel D 840 costs 999 usd. But according to benchmarks, and other tests, the cheaper AMD will out-perform the Intel at every single task. Its not only that, the lower AMD 4600+ at 650-700 will also outperform the Intel 999 usd chip at 90% of the tasks. Heres the best comparison ive seen so far between the two chip families.

here (

posted by  aerith

And as for the best setup you can possibly get; this is what i would get if i had an unlimited amount of money;

AMD X2 4800+ or AMD FX 57 CPU

Asus SLi with a Nforce 4 chipset or the upcoming ATi RD580 Crossfire chipset which is supposed to outperform the Nforce 4 in a lot of tasks according to AnandTech; here (

Mushkin Redline Low Latency 2x 1024mb sticks of PC4000 DDR ram

Creative X-Fi Fata1ty sound card

1 Western Digital Raptor 74gb drive

2 Maxtor Diamond Max 11 SATA II 300gb harddrives

2 ATi X1800XT, or 2 Nvidia 7800 GTX 512mb

Plextor DVD writer

This setup will probaly cost you around 3500 usd, not including the case, and powersupply you would need. Or watercooling, which you will probaly need to overclock.

posted by  aerith

i'm getting a revolution. screw both the xbox and the ps3. mario pwnz them both.

posted by  enron fever

lol VERY true, but, as a car person, you can't just ignore the Gran Turismo series, unless you're rich or something and actually have those same opportunities in real life.

posted by  jedimario


posted by  aerith

MArio, pssshhh I stopped playing MArio games after I got out of diapers 18 years ago. :laughing:

I haven't liked nintendo because they seem to focus on more "kiddy" games than anything for the past two systems.

posted by  thunderbird1100


well don't get me wrong, when i had my xbox i ate, slept and breathed FORZA, but mario has always just been a reliable standby. most of his games are just damned good fun. plus, the ability to play all the NES, SNES and N64 games my little heart desires is just too tempting.

and if nothing else the revolution is the prettiest of the new consoles. the xbox looks like a fashion accessory and the PS3 looks like a fax machine. not too sure about it's remote -- er i mean "controller", but i won't knock it till i try it.

posted by  enron fever

Yeah cause everyone knows Metroid and Resident Evil 4 are kiddie games.

posted by  jedimario

Your Message