Last I checked the PS3's GPU was about a GeForce 7500... what's your info on it?
It's equivalent to a GeForce GTX 7800, which I used for comparison.
Please don't do that "quote, a few lines of a response, quote, more lines, quote, more lines, quote, more lines" thing. It destroys the flow of conversation and splits a debate into numerous topics which diverges from the point we're trying to discuss. Seriously, it's very annoying and really makes me not want to waste time responding.
You acted as though I wasn't reading your posts properly, so I addressed every single point individually. You argued that I only had one point, now you say I'm discussing numerous topics.
You claim I'm not listening to you, but you're not going to accept my word that I'm not referring to Moore's Law in my arguments. If you insist on bringing it back into the discussion constantly when it's a dead argument, then we're not going to get anywhere in trying to understand where each other is coming from. You're trying to connect it to a similar sounding argument when in fact, they're not connected at all. You're not even understanding the bigger picture I'm trying to present or the comparisons I'm making when referring to other domains. Consider it your victory if you must, but if you want to continue genuine discussion and are genuinely interested in trying to understand where the other person is coming from, then try repeat that post again without referring to Moore's Law at all.
Okay, since you last time were trying to say you weren't referring to it, instead reread my post, but every time you read "Moore's Law", instead read "The belief that electronics improve exponentially", since the two are interchangeable.
But either way, my argument wasn't that your argument was badly founded (although it was), it was that the manufacturing cost per console would be in the thousands to make something 19x more powerful than the PS3.
You're trying to debate a very subjective value and trying to apply very strict mathematics to it, while all I'm doing is explaining that it's perfectly feasible considering that it's been several years since the previous generation, and depends on your definition of power. That's all.
We're talking in terms of a performance of a PC. As in FLOPS. Which isn't subjective.
We're trying to obtain a numerical answer here. You're saying 19x is feasible, so this is entirely mathematical, and when the best GPU in the world, costing twice the Wii U, is only 10x as powerful as the PS3, you're never going to get 19x. It's a ridiculous number and I'm really surprised that anyone read this thread and didn't just chuckle. Like.. some of you think this is possible. It's not even close to possible.
Alexrose, do you have any ideas of how hardware works from the inside? No more criptic tales from Moore if possible pl0x. That's bullshit from the point some tempers are trying to explain here.
I mean it's not funny to read anymore terribly long posts referring to a vague perception of someone, and you.
I was saying that Moore was bullshit, and that it has no relevance to the conversation. I then went on to show logically why the statement is ridiculous. For the second time. Yes, I understand how hardware works, I've been massively into hardware since I was 16, I've built 6 rigs and I've taken several computing courses in my physics degree.
edit: sorry, but you just can't compare gaming on PC and consoles, they're completely different and every side has their differences. And minds of developers too, some prefer to go easier and do PC ports, and some others prefer to release games on consoles. (programming on gaming on consoles is trickier, but it doesn't require that much hardware unlike today gaming pc's standards)
And when I mean gaming consoles, I mean even differences between one each other. They're DIFFERENT WORLDS. When some chip developer improves something, it's based off the same silicon, then adds stuff over it. The only way to do a fair comparison would be like someone said, doing a real benchmark. IE: C code under 2 different SDK's compiled for both machines. And start from there
We're not comparing gaming on PC and consoles. We're comparing the individual components within the consoles, from benchmarks, which obviously have to be taken on a PC, but that's irrelevant. If gpu A benches 2x higher on a specific rig than gpu B, then it doesn't matter what you plug that gpu into, a PC or a console; it still has the potential to produce roughly double the FLOPS.
Wow. Not only does your argument state that the CPU is weaker, you don't even have a source to back up such an asinine claim. Those so-called "developers", which you claim to have made that statement, are a bunch of pussies who don't have the testes to admit anything.
Here's a source:
http://www.eurogamer...-u-launch-title
So the gist of it is that you don't believe what the lead developer of Dynasty Warriors said to the press but you're happy to believe the off hand comment that the Wii U is 19 TIMES MORE POWERFUL than the PS3 from a
booth babe to
some guy. What a reputable source.
And even if the CPU is fantastic, which we have no reason to believe or disbelieve right now, as long as the GPU is only 2x as powerful as the PS3's, you could never get 19x more power out of the Wii U. It's a ridiculous assertion.
And about the GPU, the one from which it's based off of has been benchmarked, but this is a MODIFIED GPU, which means *gasp* there has been modifications made to it since it's a being used on a console.
And that's why I DOUBLED the power of the Wii U's GPU benchmark for the hypothetical calculation, which is a ridiculous overcompensation, just so you couldn't complain about that, and it still came up massively short.
Not only that, but I based the benchmark off of the 7800 GTX, which was MODIFIED for the PS3, and I didn't make any alteration to that result at all, even though the one in the PS3 would've been better than the benched one.
In essence, I biased the calculation completely in favour of the Wii U to prove a point, and it still didn't come anywhere near 19x as powerful.
Simply put, a PC cannot be compared to a console and vice-versa
I'm not comparing a PC to a console, I'm comparing the hardware in the PS3 to the hardware in the Wii U.
it's people like you who like to look for trouble and bitch about everything you don't agree with.
By comparing stats to discredit a ridiculous claim that the Wii U is "19x more powerful" than the PS3, which in reality would cost thousands per unit by using numerical values and logic, I am totally looking for trouble and bitching at people. Totally.
Meanwhile you're "bitching" to me because you don't agree with me. On a subject which is essentially non-subjective.
@
Veho:
@
SylverReZ:
