Griffith commented that the new PS3 processor is a cell processor, which is a new architecture for building processors. This new architecture is what will allow the PS3 to be faster than the Xbox360.
However, as Griffith also mentions, most games that are around today and are currently being developed for the PS3 are probably not optimized to take advantage of this new processor.
Here is a document explaining the architecture of the cell processor and compairing it to current processors.
Designed for the PlayStation 3, Sony, Toshiba and IBM’s new “Cell processor” promises seemingly obscene computing capabilities for what will rapidly become a very low price. In these articles I look at what the Cell architecture is, then I go on to look at the profound implications this new chip has, not for the games market, but for the entire computer industry. Has the PC finally met it’s match?
So just how much faster than current processors will the cell processor be?
The first Cell based desktop computer will be the fastest desktop computer in the industry by a very large margin. Even high end multi-core x86s will not get close. Companies who produce microprocessors or DSPs are going to have a very hard time fighting the power a Cell will deliver. We have never seen a leap in performance like this before and I don’t expect we’ll ever see one again, It’ll send shock-waves through the entire industry and we’ll see big changes as a result.
Griffiths_lazyness > Jeremys_lazyness
Some Cell Specs anyway:
Faster than 4 GHz
256 billion calculations (Gigaflops) per second
2.5MB of on-chip memory
Able to shuttle data to and from off-chip memory at speeds up to 100 gigabytes per second,
234 million transistors
Microsoft vs. Sony
Microsoft……….PWNED
Actually no one knows…I myself will get everything!
Microsoft isn’t stupid, even though the Cell will provide a much more powerfull machine if Sony isn’t carefull it could end up being another PS1 vs N64, in which the N64 was more powerful but due to the development restraints, cartridge capability problems, and lack of good development tools, drove the console into last place.
If it weren’t for Pokemon coming out at that time for Gameboy, Nintendo probably wouldn’t have neglected that proposal by Microsoft to buy them.
I still feel that in a few years time Nintendo will have to put it’s mouth where their feet are and take everything back they said. Nintendo fans might say that I’m a fanboy and I’m being pessimistic, but I see it more as being realistic.
Nintendo has some issues with the development of it’s software and outside the software houses, for example, in Portugal the Nintendo products have a horrible company distributing them, while the Dreamcast showed adds every night on various major channels and of various games, advertised in sport events, Nintendo did nothing.
The effect of that, and of the long development time they take to make games (such as Zelda 64 which can easilly be passed if you played the previous games) isn’t enough to quench the thirst of the console owners.
On the other hand, the Playstation had games coming out every week literally, and at least once a month there was an awesome one. I should know, I have about 20 great Playstation games that I haven’t touched that I wish I had the time for them, meanwhile I’ve finished all the N64 games I have and ended up giving it away cause there was nothing left on it to make me go back to play it.
But enough of this console talk, this comment is probably longer than the article itself already.
(I forgot to finish what I started in the first paragraph)
The reason why Sony should be carefull is that games can probably be easilly ported to the XBox 360, whereas the PS3 needs new software kits and new hardware that is still uncharted territory.
Still, compatibility isn’t enough for a console to win the biggest market share, porting games to Dreamcast was easy as pie but that didn’t save it, very unfortunately.
I guess that time will tell.
notebook computer