Xbox 360, PS3 have equal power - Denis Dyack
Speaking to Mercury News, Silicon Knights head honcho Denis Dyack has provoked probable internet fanboy fury by stating that the power of the Xbox 360 and the PS3 were about equal. "Maybe the PS3 has more processing power. The 360 has more available memory. It's pretty much a net, net," said Dyack. "The public perception of the PS3 was that it was much more powerful. To developers, they look even." Which given that the Xbox 360 is a good bit cheaper than the PS3, is probably a good thing for Microsoft.
However he slightly confusingly goes on to say that you could get potentially get extra power out of the PS3, but it's tougher to tap. "You have to get the timing right," he said, referring to the PS3's sub-processors.
To be honest, either way, it doesn't matter too much. Consoles aren't solely made successful by their processors or graphics cards, but also by their games. The PS3 probably does have a lot of power locked away in it and admittedly, the Xbox 360's not been without hardware problems of its own, with all of the RROD problems it's had. But by making it difficult to programme for, as well as by making the hardware expensive, Sony may have shot themselves in the foot by providing two large disincentives for games developers to program for the PS3- a low user base and initially difficult development cycles.
Source:
Mercury News via CVG
Related Posts:
Silicon Knight's Denis Dyack on a one-console future
New Too Human Trailer goes live
Came straight to this page? Visit www.xboxer.tv for all the latest news.
Comments
"Maybe the PS3 has more processing power. The 360 has more available memory. It's pretty much a net, net," said Dyack.
Maybe? MAYBE? so he really doesn't know how much potential is in the PS3.
Reading interviews with actual developers like Naughty Dog who work on the PS3 (Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune), well they have clearly stated that they have only used about 30% of the power that comes with developing for the PS3.
No maybes, just fact. .
Posted by: jirky | November 6, 2007 11:27 PM
He is a PS3 Hater. Notice how mosts xbox fanboys are saying the power is equel and tru dumbasses say the xbox is more powerful. Sony fanboys an just say PS3 is more powerful because and 360 fanboys can tell Ps3 fanboy the opsite because it true. PS3 is Just so powerfull and is need in the future. Just like xbox 1. they had the chance to show the 2 gen a huge potential but mircosoft game up. PS3 did the same thing but wont give. It's already happening
Posted by: Perry | November 7, 2007 12:54 AM
wow this M$ lick ass are is funny.
if u got more prossesing power u dont realy need more ram,just like a pc.
ps3 is in world records and scientists love the ps3 more than the 360.
maybe,probably..........get a faq,developers say ps3 has more power,but it need to be discoverd little by litle,and yea ps3 is using 30% on games
360 is like 90%...so there not equal :(
Posted by: OMEN | November 7, 2007 1:00 AM
You guy's really don't have any idea what your talking about do you. Saying RAM does not matter makes you an idiot and a tool. Do you know anything about PC architecture. Do you even know what cache is.
Posted by: dumb asses | November 7, 2007 2:12 AM
"if u got more prossesing power u dont realy need more ram,just like a pc."
OMG, that is the dumbest sh*t I've heard all week. By your logic a dual-core should have like, what, 64MB of RAM?
Posted by: Pat O | November 7, 2007 6:10 AM
Like anything in today's market, popularity isn't based on processing power... it's on marketing, that's why it's one of the biggest sectors in the industry.
Quite frankly, if the xbox 360 didn't suffer the RROD error, the PS3 would have been out of the running ages before it even hit shelves...
From entrepreneurs' point of view, Microsoft HAD the upper hand. But because they oversaw the design flaw which caused the RROD and a 100 per cent failure rate, they failed to capture the PS Fans segment of the market. Since it's launch even those PS fans who had strayed into converting to the 360, left because they faced the RROD.
Ultimately, if microsoft were to sort out the RROD problem within the year (By rolling out the 65nm chips) and getting rid of the x-clamp and replacing existing systems with these new ones... they might stand a chance. Otherwise, the PS3 is only going to slowly but surely take the upper hand. Because it since hasn't faced any major set-backs.
There you go... it has nothing to do with performance specifics... but gamer experience... in the end a business rule is that "The cost of a service is not what you, or your customer, pay for it but what it would cost your customer to not have it."
Posted by: nutralware | November 7, 2007 6:49 AM
I've had my 360 and ps3 since they both rolled out and i'm still trying to justify the £400+ i spent on the ps3. Its all about games and i'm sorry but the ps3 just can't compete at the moment. Its just a dusty powerfull console sitting gameless under my telly.
Posted by: Nathan walsh | November 7, 2007 9:36 AM
That dude from Silicon talking bollocks again. STOP TAKING BRIBES FOOL!! Net and net he says, what a load shites he's trying to feed us. Does he realise that although this is a 3shitty website and that most of them believe anything they hear like sheep, there or some of us that know pure horseshit when we hear it. And how can he compare RAM and processing power. What a wanker. The 3shitty cannot even run folding@home properly. And we don't even know the FULL power of the PS3's cell just yet, so how can this fool claim to know what he's saying. Anyone who belives him, it quite sad really.
Posted by: john | November 7, 2007 9:42 AM
wow, that was the lamest article I've read all year. Get your facts together. I only have a 360 yet I know the PS3 is better
Posted by: Bob | November 7, 2007 11:07 AM
fucking fly to shit... all the fanboys go on a tirade reading this article... what? this guy is a developer and he's putting his reputation on the line by saying something like this. Go fuckin develop a game and see which console you will go for? huh? gimme a break and stop defending ur gameless, price fluctuating console... the only thing hurting the 360 is the RROD, which is a very big deal... if the 360 were as reliable as the PS3... sony would of had their asses handed to them by now... nuff said...
Posted by: inty2525 | November 7, 2007 1:13 PM
The PS3 is the most powerful console with the best specs ever made. You 360 fanboys think you’re so clever with your massive library of amazing games available to buy and play right now (And for the last 2 years).
Just look at the pre-rendered screenshots of Ratchet and Clank and GT5. They pwn anything on the 360. When these games actually come out you will see!!!!!!!
I definitely did the right thing spending £450 on my PS3, the other 5 PS3 owners who I play on line with all agree too. FOOLS!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: richard parker | November 7, 2007 1:43 PM
Well put Richard!! i wonder how many numb-nuts will notice the sarcasim though?
Posted by: Dead Red | November 8, 2007 12:25 AM
omg lol this is hilarious there are so many dumb asses in here its unreal. yeah the ps3 does have more powerful processing hardware thats true enough, but without the ram to utilise it its pointless. i just read through this forum and was literally laughin out loud cuz of the ps3 fanboys goin crazy and tlkin shit lmao. personally i think with some miracle programming and use of memory (the 6 spe's that are utilised have no dma - direct memory access-) the ps3 cud come out ontop game wise but i doubt it. did any of you know that apparently gears of war cannot be done on ps3 exactly as on 360 becuz of memory usage (or so iv heard anyway but id need to research into that in more detail to be sure). the ps3 has 512mb memory which is split into two pieces of 256 where the 360 has 512mb memory that is general purpose to the entire console (google the console specs dont just take my word for it). AND WHAT KIND OF A DUMBASS SEZ RAM ISNT A NECESSITY?!. if that was the case we cud all run vista on 64mb pmsl. and the ps3 is only using 30% of its power? who the fuck told u that lol. and besides the fact that the ps3 wil never be able to use its full potential becus of its architecture. on paper the ps3 is revolutionary (with its 'theoretical floating point performance') but in real life its a cheap bluray player (that wud be the reason to get it if u want hd lol) and a decent console nothin spectacular. o and for you who say the full potential of the console hasnt been filled stop using that excuse!! i dont wana buy a console then have to wait 5 years for a good game i want it straight away as many of you will agree. p.s. if u were a real gamer then u wudnt care what the console was its the games u shud crave. i mean hell i dont buy a console then sit staring at it for its life span. hell the only time i ever see my console is when im putting the games in lmao and no im not a 'fanboy' im just an up and coming programmer who wanted to correct a few wrongs. p.p.s. if i have gone wrong anywhere in here feel free to correct as long as you actually know what ur tlkin about :-).
Posted by: Jo$h | December 30, 2007 4:37 PM
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.
However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3.
Posted by: gibson | March 3, 2008 6:08 AM
Post a comment
Required fields marked by *