I really want to get a ps3

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,655
688
126
well the RRoD issue still exists in the Falcon and Jaspers, because they use the X-Clamp to hold down the heatsinks, which is kind of the root of the problem.

HOWEVER ... they are only the root of the problem when the console gets too hot and causes things inside to get too hot and start to warp. the Jaspers and Falcons run cooler than the earlier 360s, so in theory, should prevent some of the RRoD's that may have happened if they were earlier models.

i just fixed one of the first gen elites, and the motherboard on this thing was flimsy as hell. when i was trying to pry the xclamps off, the board would start bending. i had never seen any mobo this flexible before working on this one. it was kind of scary and i thought i was going to snap it in half a few times heh.

ok sorry for the off topic.

Granted, the Falcon I recently had RROD was just a few months short of me having it 2 years, and therefore lasted longer than my other Xboxes (though the one before may also have been a Falcon; can't remember for sure). It still did die and I currently have 2 Falcons (a replacement for the one that died and another Pro I bought on clearance to use for Netflix) and have just resigned myself to the fact that the one I use for gaming will probably croak.
 

jeff_rigby

Member
Nov 22, 2009
67
0
61
Um, no. First of all, the 360 can do native 1080p output, including rendering at that resolution internally. Second, most PS3 games are outputting at 720p with no upscaling from the console. Third, even if the 360 game is rendering at < 1080p, the internal scaler will output a 1080p signal, totally bypassing your high-end TV's scaler.

http://users.ece.gatech.edu/lanterma/mpg/ece4893_xbox360_vs_ps3_4up.pdf

"Xbox 360 - GPU renders for a 720p,16:9 display​
“HD” (but not “Full HD”)
Output hardware
interpolates up to higher resolutions if you have them
Playstation 3 - up to full 1080p​
Actually Resistance: Fall of Man will drive a full 1920x1200 display!

The Xbox can NOT do resolutions higher than 720P, it interpolates-fills in the dots-. Displaying high resolution pictures using a PS3 on a good 1080P monitor will display a picture with much more detail.


SPEs are more akin to DSPs than proper CPUs. But I know that little things like facts never stop fanboys, so, uh, here we go.

This is true. But, then again, there are also niche situations where the 360 will outperform the PS3.

True, the Xbox has three power PC processors and the PS3 only has two but in addition it has 7 SPE processors. This makes the Xbox slightly faster for "niche" applications like a web browser but the PS3 when the SPEs are used properly, better for graphics and audio. Too bad the Xbox does not have a web browser so we could see this difference.

The problems with the PS3 are almost exclusively from the non-intuitive way you do threading with SPEs, cache limitations in the SPEs, and a non-flexible memory architecture. Throwing in more SPEs won't fix this problem. Similarly, doubling the number of cores in the next-gen Xbox 360 will not make it appreciably more difficult to program for, although, as always, wringing out performance will get trickier and trickier (a common problem for applications that are not obviously parallelizable) as optimal thread count increases.

To make your above accurate explanation understandable, think of the power PCs as fully functioning people with a broad skill set and the SPEs as idiot savants. Give the SPEs what they do best and they do it better than a normal person.

For applications like a web browser that does not have predictable repetative tasks makes the Xbox with three power PCs slightly better. Processing audio or textures for a game is a repetative task that the SPEs can do better than the power PC.

It must be understood that there are several graphics processors in the Xbox GPU and the PS3 RSX depends on some of the Cell SPEs for the same function. So we can't say that the PS3 has 7 SPEs more that the XBOX when comparing processing power. This design difference makes it very hard to compare the two machines

I don't see why some people feel the need to defend their consoles to the death. Microsoft, for example, really dropped the ball when they didn't include better sound (7.1 TrueHD/DTS-HD) and HDMI-CEC. I will readily acknowledge and whine about that, because they're both features I could use. Similarly, Sony doesn't get a free pass from me. Neither does Nintendo.

We go back to the design criteria for both systems. The XBOX was designed as a game machine to sell as cheap as possible and to run on standard def TVs. The PS3 was designed with a 10 year life and included cutting edge hardware features like HDMI (not on the first itteration of the Xbox hardware design) and Hard disks as a standard feature. This made the PS3 much more expensive but SONY was targeting the high end consumer as they do in thier other Consumer products. The PS3 due to a hard disk included in every machine can evolve and may in fact be around for 10 years. The Xbox has gone through I think three itterations of the hardware while the PS3 has changed only the HDMI chip which now allows HDMI CEC commands.
 

nitromullet

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2004
9,031
36
91
"Xbox 360 - GPU renders for a 720p,16:9 display
&#8220;HD&#8221; (but not &#8220;Full HD&#8221;)
Output hardware interpolates up to higher resolutions if you have them
Playstation 3 - up to full 1080p
Actually Resistance: Fall of Man will drive a full 1920x1200 display!

The Xbox can NOT do resolutions higher than 720P, it interpolates-fills in the dots-. Displaying high resolution pictures using a PS3 on a good 1080P monitor will display a picture with much more detail.

Almost none of the games on either console are rendered at 1920x1080 so this is a moot point. I also don't believe the statement that the 360 can not do resolutions higher than 1280x720 is correct. Although, again, almost no games are 1920x1080 on either console so it is hardly a relevant point of discussion.

Resistance: Fall of Man is rendered 1280x720 - http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241 (these guys seem to know a little bit more about this than the author of your cited PDF)

What are you talking about? I could.

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/11/ps3-modern-warfare-2-experiencing-multiplayer-issues-patch-expe/
 
Last edited:

nitromullet

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2004
9,031
36
91
...anyway, back to the topic at hand...

Personally, I don't really think one should consider the prowess of either console hardware when picking a gaming system because a decent PC will out do either one in terms of resolution and image quality.

When trying to decide between a 360 and a PS3, I looked at features of each platform. The deciding factors turned out being that everyone I know who has a console has a 360, and at the time I wouldn't have been able to use my Harmony remote with the PS3 because it doesn't have an IR receiver.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
http://users.ece.gatech.edu/lanterma/mpg/ece4893_xbox360_vs_ps3_4up.pdf
True, the Xbox has three power PC processors and the PS3 only has two but in addition it has 7 SPE processors. This makes the Xbox slightly faster for "niche" applications like a web browser but the PS3 when the SPEs are used properly, better for graphics and audio. Too bad the Xbox does not have a web browser so we could see this difference.

A) The PS3 has one processor and 7 SPEs. Not two processors.
B) WTF are you talking about with this web browser nonsense? The 360 three core, dual threaded processor is better at general purpose processing such as you would find for stuff like AI while the PS3 is better at the type of processing you would do for graphics or physics because of the SPEs.

Both systems have their pluses and minuses but don't spread misinformation in the process.
 

Dumac

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,391
1
0
Most 360 games that I would buy I get on the PC instead, for obvious reasons.

As a result, I have way more games for my PS3 (20-25) than my 360 (5).

The PS3 has some great exclusives. Demon's Souls, Uncharted, R&C, Valkyria Chronicles, God of War, etc. Also, I didn't notice any graphical problems in these games, but maybe I'm not as discriminating.

Overall, I would recommend a PS3.
 

Xarick

Golden Member
May 17, 2006
1,199
1
76
Well guys since you all drug my thread back. I went on black friday and picked up a ps3.
I found that the exclusives I wanted were there. I also found outside of a few games I really want on the xbox most are also on the pc which is where I game most. I also have no bluray (well I do now).
I hooked this thing up to my 50" plasma popped in ratchet and clank and was blown away. Jaggies are not an issue here like I expected. I then popped in batman AA in which at the store I saw major jaggies and horrid shimmer. On my tv there are minor ones, but not noticeable unless I am staring for them. It runs great.
I just finished an hour of fat princess and am totally in love with my new ps3.
 

Dumac

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,391
1
0
Well guys since you all drug my thread back. I went on black friday and picked up a ps3.
I found that the exclusives I wanted were there. I also found outside of a few games I really want on the xbox most are also on the pc which is where I game most. I also have no bluray (well I do now).
I hooked this thing up to my 50" plasma popped in ratchet and clank and was blown away. Jaggies are not an issue here like I expected. I then popped in batman AA in which at the store I saw major jaggies and horrid shimmer. On my tv there are minor ones, but not noticeable unless I am staring for them. It runs great.
I just finished an hour of fat princess and am totally in love with my new ps3.

Good to hear. You are probably swamped, but try out some of the game I listed when you get a chance.
 

Adrenaline

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2005
5,320
8
81
Well guys since you all drug my thread back. I went on black friday and picked up a ps3.
I found that the exclusives I wanted were there. I also found outside of a few games I really want on the xbox most are also on the pc which is where I game most. I also have no bluray (well I do now).
I hooked this thing up to my 50" plasma popped in ratchet and clank and was blown away. Jaggies are not an issue here like I expected. I then popped in batman AA in which at the store I saw major jaggies and horrid shimmer. On my tv there are minor ones, but not noticeable unless I am staring for them. It runs great.
I just finished an hour of fat princess and am totally in love with my new ps3.

I have been playing my PS3 a crapload more than my 360 for a while now. When looking for blu-ray deals visit Amazon.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
I have been playing my PS3 a crapload more than my 360 for a while now. When looking for blu-ray deals visit Amazon.

Same here. After I finally got my PS3 I play it infinitely more than my Xbox. From Blu-ray to free PSN, upgradeable harddrive, Wifi, and much quieter than my 360, it's a great buy.
 

Adrenaline

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2005
5,320
8
81
Same here. After I finally got my PS3 I play it infinitely more than my Xbox. From Blu-ray to free PSN, upgradeable harddrive, Wifi, and much quieter than my 360, it's a great buy.

The PS3 runs so quiet it is ridiculous. I am debating on getting this for charging my controllers.
 

nitromullet

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2004
9,031
36
91
The invite system for joining friends was f'ed, but playing any other online game mode(ex. spec ops) was possible. So I played with 'randoms' for three days. Big shit. :rolleyes:

You asked what he was talking about... I answered.

Anyway, I think the argument was was that XBL, while not free, does have some advantages over PSN. For some being able to play MW2 on release day with all of its advertised features might be the killer app they were looking for, others may not care. The point is that PSN failed to deliver on what it was supposed to do with respect to biggest release of the year.

For what I've gotten out of XBL gold so far, the roughly $3/mo fee has been worth it. However, this has mainly been due to Netflix exclusivity, which it no longer has.

I think as time goes by the PS3 has become a more attractive console that it has been in the past compared to the 360, and if I was buying a new console today I might end up making a different decision. I'll probably stick with the 360 until the inevitable RRoD, and then I'll have to re-evaluate the available options.
 

kalrith

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2005
6,628
7
81
The PS3 runs so quiet it is ridiculous. I am debating on getting this for charging my controllers.

I've looked at those before, but then I started just plugging the controllers into my computer (via USB cables) when I want to charge them. It works out really well for me.
 

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
12,060
2,273
126
The PS3 runs so quiet it is ridiculous. I am debating on getting this for charging my controllers.

At least on my 40GB it ran quietly initially but after about a year it started going full blast fairly quickly even while watching a DVD. I just recently took it apart and replaced the thermal goop with some MX2 and it's gone back to being quiet again.
 

kalrith

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2005
6,628
7
81
At least on my 40GB it ran quietly initially but after about a year it started going full blast fairly quickly even while watching a DVD. I just recently took it apart and replaced the thermal goop with some MX2 and it's gone back to being quiet again.

That's interesting. Did it have a lot of dust in there too? My 40GB is still as quiet as the day I bought it, but I haven't used it nearly as much as I would like.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,639
6,522
126
what I've gotten out of XBL gold so far, the roughly $3/mo fee has been worth it. However, this has mainly been due to Netflix exclusivity, which it no longer has.

i own street fighter 4 on PS3 and Xbox 360.

the difference in the online play on this game alone is more than worth the $2.50/mo i pay for XBL.
 

nitromullet

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2004
9,031
36
91
i own street fighter 4 on PS3 and Xbox 360.

the difference in the online play on this game alone is more than worth the $2.50/mo i pay for XBL.

For those of us that don't have a PS3, what exactly is the difference between XBL and PSN?
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,639
6,522
126
For those of us that don't have a PS3, what exactly is the difference between XBL and PSN?

for this game, matchmaking hardly ever finds people who you have good connections with, if it finds people at all.

games drop often.

there is a lot more lag.

inviting people is a chore and not nearly as integrated as xbox live is where you can receive a message, click on accept invite and are in the lobby with them. to get in a game you have to be in a 'check invitations' menu option inside of SF4.

if you are talking about in general, well im not getting into that because a simple search of this forum or google can get into more details, and is a topic that has been discussed a ton on these forums already.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
for this game, matchmaking hardly ever finds people who you have good connections with, if it finds people at all.

games drop often.

there is a lot more lag.

inviting people is a chore and not nearly as integrated as xbox live is where you can receive a message, click on accept invite and are in the lobby with them. to get in a game you have to be in a 'check invitations' menu option inside of SF4.

if you are talking about in general, well im not getting into that because a simple search of this forum or google can get into more details, and is a topic that has been discussed a ton on these forums already.

Yes but that only happens if you have a ton of friends to play with. I hardly play with friends on XBL or PSN. Yes the XBL way to interact with friends is great but they are never on when I am so they both end up pretty equal to me and other people.

Games seem to drop and lag as often on both platforms.