PS3 could cost up to $500

The PS3's graphics put the Xbox's to shame, I was reading in an article where Allard (Xbox's bitchass 'spokesperson') said that graphics should only go so high blah blah, saying the PS3 is putting in too much hardware that they don't need.

Bullshit, the more the better. We're American, we want more!

But the graphics chip (when the PS3 was still being designed) was like 10x the graphics potential of the 7200GTE (PCI express card, I think 7200 something..). Which is amazing. People have been saying the graphics are very close to reality, and from shots from E3 it's geared up to be the fucking shiznit. Just for gaming.

And then you have the secondary computer concept. Which is also very pheonomenal . All of the media functions that go along with it, the UBER stoarge on the Blu-rays that they are using and the fact that it's playstation is enough for the fanboy in me to put back a little of each paycheck solely for this console. Actually, I've had enough for it for a long time, just waiting for it to drop and it's MINE BITCHES!

D3V you forgot also to mention RSX (nvidia powerful graphic cards) will be in hand of develapor in december.

The graphics for the 360 is around 32bit I think.

The PS3 has made a phenomenal jump to 128bit graphics. For those who don't know, that's something crazy like 128 shades for each indiviual colour whether it be red, mauve, turquoise or sky-pink!

Yes but then you have to ask yourself is it nearly as powerful as a computer?

Nearly as powerful? NEARLY as powerful?!

Look at the specs of the thing! The PS3 is an entertainment SUPERcomputer. Put a good computer up to it and it would smash it to the ground!

http://www.ps3portal.com/?page=ps3_tech_specs
http://www.ps3portal.com/?page=ps3_cell

Mm... but. The thing about consoles is that they are made specifically for playing games, (stuff like media centers are just add-on benefits) and are mass-produced for that purpose while computers are not. This gives consoles an advantage in price, but a major disadvantage in flexibility. Computers can have mixed and matched parts, be overclocked, custom cooled, and so on.

Also, the technology behind these systems is very... linear. The technology is already at least a year old and will only get more outdated as time goes by. Meanwhile, computer technology is constantly evolving.

The President of NVidia said that the PS3 has the graphical power of two Geforce 6800 Ultra's in SLI. The current generation equivalent is the 7800 GTX, which without SLI is only about a 10% difference from what the PS3 can allegedly do, and in SLI is more powerful. The next generation of 2006 will likely be at least 50% more powerful than that. It will take the console game makers a few years to really utilize the technology (which has been shown time and time again in the past) so by the time the PS3's potential has been tapped, it will be old news.

Put a good computer up to it and it would smash it to the ground!

This is false. Sure the PS3 is impressive, but it's not better than a top of the line PC.

Top of the line psh. The PS3 can still do more not having to process an operating system with many other processes int he background.

Your computer isn't top of the line, and if you do have a damn 7800GTX you need to die.

The PS3 can do more without an Operating System? That's just a ridiculous thing to say. The PS3 has a relatively small amount of RAM, and with computers a gig of ram is nothing unusual. It EASILY makes up for the resources of an operating system

And what operating system in particular? You can run games using Wine on Linux, and that uses significantly less resources than Windows XP for instance.

I agree with grav.....games are played best on a computer...Whats the most gamers allwoed in a serve ron the xbox? 24? 30? ....the computer can have thousands of gamers on a server simultaneously.....the gaming experience is better on the computer anyway.