31 replies to this topic

[The Video Gamer]

Funny I actually described it to my friends as having the power of a PS3 and a half.

[Tre]

Funny I actually described it to my friends as having the power of a PS3 and a half.

just by saying 50% more doesn't really tell anything. PS2 could of been only 50% more powerful than the NES. I don't know how much more powerful it actually was. Then again the Wii could have been only 50% more powerful than the Gamecube. It is hard to say. The point is that the machine is powerful. I think it is stupid it to compare it to the Xbox 360 and PS3. It should only be compared to the Wii. Just as the next Xbox console should be compare to the Xbox 360 and the next Sony console should be compared to the PS3.

[Ace]

"It is no longer thinkable to have a huge initial financial investment like that of the PS3."

I never really understood that quote...

[The Video Gamer]

just by saying 50% more doesn't really tell anything. PS2 could of been only 50% more powerful than the NES. I don't know how much more powerful it actually was. Then again the Wii could have been only 50% more powerful than the Gamecube. It is hard to say. The point is that the machine is powerful. I think it is stupid it to compare it to the Xbox 360 and PS3. It should only be compared to the Wii. Just as the next Xbox console should be compare to the Xbox 360 and the next Sony console should be compared to the PS3.

I think by 50% they mean 50% of the HD consoles and that's what I meant by PS3 and a half. And since people will be buying a Wii U, PS4 or Xbox 720 it's natural for them to compare them rather then their predecessors which people obviously won't buy. Also the way that Microsoft and Sony slag off each other and Nintendo it creates a competitive vibe which reflects on the fans.

[Tre]

I think by 50% they mean 50% of the HD consoles and that's what I meant by PS3 and a half. And since people will be buying a Wii U, PS4 or Xbox 720 it's natural for them to compare them rather then their predecessors which people obviously won't buy. Also the way that Microsoft and Sony slag off each other and Nintendo it creates a competitive vibe which reflects on the fans.

That is true about the consumers comparisons but to tell you the truth neither one of us know what 50% more powerful really mean. 50% could mean 10 times the power of those consoles. I said the previous consoles cause those that bought the Wii will not need to compare it to the other consoles for the fact they will buy the Wii U based on their enjoyment of the Wii and that is similar to the other consoles. If a person enjoyed the PS3 or Xbox 360 then they will look for their console to come out. Neither the Xbox 360 or PS3 use native 1080p. They are up converted to 1080i/p. In any case the power is no concern to me, I posted it because it is a good debate piece.

[Roy]

If this is true, we could see some great looking games. I mean, look at the PS3 now, and developers keep getting more and more out of it. Consider me excited.

[SaltyMeatballs]

I would say it's a bit more powerful. Double the power. Ignore the gflops BS, that theoretical power isn't important, it comes down to practicality.

The 2 tech demos which showed a bit of the horse power were a lot more impressive than any tech demo I have seen on 360/PS3. Also, Ubisoft created that Killer Freaks game in just 3 months and it was playable, graphics were already comparable to some 360/PS3 games. 3 months with new hardware... not bad at all.

Either way not a problem for me. I already have a gaming PC I didn't expect it to be more powerful than my PC, but with that boost in power plus the fact that console games are optimised for specific hardware the games will look very good on it.

If this is true, we could see some great looking games. I mean, look at the PS3 now, and developers keep getting more and more out of it. Consider me excited.

PS3/360 are bottlenecked by the lack of RAM (512MB is just not enough today), just more RAM on those would have made a big difference.

.

Edited by SaltyMeatballs, 14 June 2011 - 08:54 AM.

[Tre]

I never really understood that quote...

It means they will not be able to put as much money into the next Sony console as they did with the PS3.

[Guest]

Ignore the clock speed. The GC's clock speed was a lot slower than the XBOX's, but the XBOX still was only a tad better.

[sonicguy25]

I hope it's more powerful, but if it isn't I won't care. Graphics are near the bottom of my list of what makes a great game.

[MOFO]

No one knows anything for sure besides rumors
45-nanometer multicore IBM processor that's the "heart" of the console? That it's reportedly based on the sametechnology used in IBM's Jeopardy-winning Watson supercomputer? Thehunkof embedded DRAM that's "capable of feeding the multi-core processor large chunks of data to makefor a smooth entertainment experience"? The 32-nanometer AMD video processor based on the company's R700 series (used in AMD's last-gen Radeon 4000 series PC video cards) with 1GB of video memory
It may be it might not but I would

[Kinvara]

This "50%" just comes out of nowhere and probably means nothing but as long as it's significantly more powerful to the PS3 and Xbox 360 I will be a happy gamer.