• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Teh Funny: Xbox 360 vs. PS3

CaptainABAB

Member
OK, so Major Nelson (XBOX Live guy) has a 4-part blog series on the xbox vs. ps3.

http://www.majornelson.com/

I skimmed through most of it but I don't see how I can take it seriously when I see stuff like...

The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth.

Ummm...that isnt how bandwidth is calculated.


Even funnier are the comments (which have been restricted to the 4th post to keep things in one place)

http://www.majornelson.com/2005/05/20/xbox-360-vs-ps3-part-4-of-4/

Please tell the following person is joking...
TheBigmac Says:
I have a question that has been floating in my mind, maybe the major is the right man to answer it.

We all know that The Playstation 1 was a 32 bit console right? It’s inmediate competitor was the Nintendo 64, Which as stated in his name, was a 64 Bit console. Then came the sega Dreamcast which was the first 128 bit console release, Followed by the Nintendo gamecube, The Playstation2 , and my most beloved posession, The XBOX, which are all 128bit consoles right?

My question is, Which would be the denomination in bits for the Xbox360 or the Playstation3? Is it 512 bits now? or maybe 1024?

Why doesn’t anyone mention this factor in the specifications of the new consoles? Is this factor not relevant anymore? Well, those were like 5 questions but, if the major could enlighten us, or maybe someone who knows the answer to this… here’s a 6th question:

Am I the only one who wonders about bits today?

Answer: yes!

These are interesting claims. Your calculations look and sound pretty solid, so I’m inclined to believe them. I know hardware decently well, and everything checks out, far as I can tell.
My only concern is that Major Nelson is a Microsoft employee, and will be perceived as biased. For some reason, console wars always become very emotionally involved and PS3 fanboys and fangirls will go nuts over this, especially after everyone else said the PS3 is better.

And the bits keep on coming...

TheBigmac Says:
Legion, I feel like when dad told me there was no santa. All my videogamer life I’ve been thinkin’ about bits, and now it turns out It doesn’t matter anymore. By the way I didn’t know the XBOX had a 32 bit processor. I always thought it was 128bit since it was at the same generation as the pS2 and the gamecube. But if it really is 32 bit then i guess the bit count is not an accurate measure of the console’s true power. If someone would’ve said something like this in the ol’ times of the Super Nintendo, He/she would’ve been burnt at the stake. You know, herecy and stuff. ahh…. Those old afternoons in the 16 bit era.
 
While the bandwidth math seems ridiculous, I can see some reasoning for it. Look at the PS3. 2 big RAM pools you can be utilizing at the same time. Obviously they are seperate, but if you were to utilize the system fully, you would be making use of a larger bandwidth number.
 
It's the same **** that was posted in that TXB thread.

That thread got locked I hope this one will also.
 
yeah, that's not so much lol funny as lol sad. Or, more accurately, lol take myself out to the parking lot and place my head under the tires of an F-350 roflmao.
 
The Xbox was a 32-bit console and the PS2 a 128-bit.

Conclusion: Bits don't mean shit anymore.
 
akascream said:
While the bandwidth math seems ridiculous, I can see some reasoning for it. Look at the PS3. 2 big RAM pools you can be utilizing at the same time. Obviously they are seperate, but if you were to utilize the system fully, you would be making use of a larger bandwidth number.

Yeah, but the edram only has 10MB. Sure, you can do some work with that and avoid trips to the unified ram, but when you do you still have the same old bandwidth.

For example, Intel chips have L1, L2, L3 caches. But nobody uses the speed of the access to those caches to determine the chipset bandwidth.



I guess my shock comes from not really visiting that many other discussion boards.
 
CaptainABAB said:
Yeah, but the edram only has 10MB. Sure, you can do some work with that and avoid trips to the unified ram, but when you do you still have the same old bandwidth.

For example, Intel chips have L1, L2, L3 caches. But nobody uses the speed of the access to those caches to determine the chipset bandwidth.



I guess my shock comes from not really visiting that many other discussion boards.

Yeah, adding edram bandwidth seems silly.
 
Top Bottom