Reply
First Son
Registered: 06/10/2005
Offline
2 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 10, 2005

How dared you quote someone of saying a stupid comment, when on the 1st page  you said the most misinformed thing. I was just passing through and did not even plan on posting on this board until you uttered your STUPIDITY

,

"You can't compare Xbox's Intel 733 MHz CPU to PS2's 300 MHz EE either.  So Microsoft was lying when they said Xbox is more powerful because it's 733MHz CPU is more powerful than PS2's 300 Mhz EE.  Saying Xbox's CPU is more powerful is like saying P4 3.8 GHz is more powerful than G5 2.5 GHz.  It's just Microsoft's smoke and mirrors.  The only reason why Xbox games look better is because it has a newer video card."

,

 Xbox have to be more powerful than the ps2 not only to handle the push of more graphical detail, plus to render more figures on screen with better AI hence in games ex. (NINJA GAIDEN, DOOM 3 witch ps2 can't handle). I was going to let it slide but since you became all arrogant when another has stated his/her opinion you had to be taught HUMILITY !

,

NOW SHUT YOUR MOUTH AND GET FACTS BEFORE SPEAKING FOOLISHNESS!!! 

Message 21 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Ghost of Sparta
Registered: 05/21/2003
Offline
15052 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 10, 2005

,
,
,nyckingpin wrote:
,

How dared you quote someone of saying a stupid comment, when on the 1st page  you said the most misinformed thing. I was just passing through and did not even plan on posting on this board until you uttered your STUPIDITY

,

"You can't compare Xbox's Intel 733 MHz CPU to PS2's 300 MHz EE either.  So Microsoft was lying when they said Xbox is more powerful because it's 733MHz CPU is more powerful than PS2's 300 Mhz EE.  Saying Xbox's CPU is more powerful is like saying P4 3.8 GHz is more powerful than G5 2.5 GHz.  It's just Microsoft's smoke and mirrors.  The only reason why Xbox games look better is because it has a newer video card."

,

 Xbox have to be more powerful than the ps2 not only to handle the push of more graphical detail, plus to render more figures on screen with better AI hence in games ex. (NINJA GAIDEN, DOOM 3 witch ps2 can't handle). I was going to let it slide but since you became all arrogant when another has stated his/her opinion you had to be taught HUMILITY !

,

NOW SHUT YOUR MOUTH AND GET FACTS BEFORE SPEAKING FOOLISHNESS!!! 


,
,

He never said it wasn't more powerful, he said the CPU was more powerful, not the whole system itself...
Tired of run of the mill Sega Forums? Join Sonic Blast with lots of discussion about Sega and Video Games.(Click the pics)


Message 22 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Ghost of Sparta
Registered: 10/21/2003
Offline
15686 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 10, 2005


nyckingpin wrote:

How dared you quote,someone of saying a stupid comment, when on the 1st page  you,said the most misinformed thing. I was just passing through and did not,even plan on posting on this board until you uttered your STUPIDITY

"You,can't compare Xbox's Intel 733 MHz CPU to PS2's 300 MHz EE,either.  So Microsoft was lying when they said Xbox is more,powerful because it's 733MHz CPU is more powerful than PS2's 300 Mhz,EE.  Saying Xbox's CPU is more powerful is like saying P4 3.8 GHz,is more powerful than G5 2.5 GHz.  It's just Microsoft's smoke and,mirrors.  The only reason why Xbox games look better is because it,has a newer video card."

 Xbox,have to be more powerful than the ps2 not only to handle the push,of more graphical detail, plus to render more figures on,screen with better AI hence in games ex. (NINJA GAIDEN, DOOM 3,witch ps2 can't handle). I was going to let it slide but since you,became all arrogant when another has stated his/her opinion you had to,be taught HUMILITY !

NOW SHUT YOUR MOUTH AND GET FACTS BEFORE SPEAKING FOOLISHNESS!!! 



Stay off the crack man
,
Message 23 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 06/10/2005
Offline
2 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 10, 2005

Stay off crack huh? WHERE DO YOU THINK I PICKED UP THE HABIT?

,

ALL I HAD TO DO WAS LIFT UP YOUR MOMMA"S MATRESS!

,
Message 24 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Ghost of Sparta
Registered: 10/21/2003
Offline
15686 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 10, 2005


nyckingpin wrote:

Stay off crack huh? WHERE DO YOU THINK I PICKED UP THE HABIT?

ALL I HAD TO DO WAS LIFT UP YOUR MOMMA"S MATRESS!



so thats where she's been hiding it, oh darn it!
Message 25 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 11/10/2002
Offline
8277 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 11, 2005

,
,
,nyckingpin wrote:
,

How dared you quote someone of saying a stupid comment, when on the 1st page  you said the most misinformed thing. I was just passing through and did not even plan on posting on this board until you uttered your STUPIDITY

,

"You can't compare Xbox's Intel 733 MHz CPU to PS2's 300 MHz EE either.  So Microsoft was lying when they said Xbox is more powerful because it's 733MHz CPU is more powerful than PS2's 300 Mhz EE.  Saying Xbox's CPU is more powerful is like saying P4 3.8 GHz is more powerful than G5 2.5 GHz.  It's just Microsoft's smoke and mirrors.  The only reason why Xbox games look better is because it has a newer video card."

,

 Xbox have to be more powerful than the ps2 not only to handle the push of more graphical detail, plus to render more figures on screen with better AI hence in games ex. (NINJA GAIDEN, DOOM 3 witch ps2 can't handle). I was going to let it slide but since you became all arrogant when another has stated his/her opinion you had to be taught HUMILITY !

,

NOW SHUT YOUR MOUTH AND GET FACTS BEFORE SPEAKING FOOLISHNESS!!! 


,
,
Can't tell the difference between CPU and GPU?
,
Message 26 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Sackboy
Registered: 10/09/2004
Offline
546 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 11, 2005
*Sigh* Just because your system has more power, doesn't mean it's better. It just means it has more power.

You have a lot of fun playing the only game worth buying for the x-box...and take your halo-worshipping self home.
Member of the Gamer Advisory Panel since 11/05/2004

------------------------------------

SOCOM and SOCOM 3 Beta: Solidfire
Monster Hunter: Aaralyn
Message 27 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Lombax Warrior
Registered: 06/11/2005
Offline
158 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 11, 2005
I just read this concerning Apple's future switch to Intel...

"... As it happens, Intel's was not the only alternative chip design that Apple had explored for the Mac. An executive close to Sony said that last year Mr. Jobs met in California with both Nobuyuki Idei, then the chairman and chief executive of the Japanese consumer electronics firm, and with Kenichi Kutaragi, the creator of the Sony PlayStation.

Mr. Kutaragi tried to interest Mr. Jobs in adopting the Cell chip, which is being developed by I.B.M. for use in the coming PlayStation 3, in exchange for access to certain Sony technologies. Mr. Jobs rejected the idea, telling Mr. Kutaragi that he was disappointed with the Cell design, which he believes will be even less effective than the PowerPC."

The New York Times "What's Really Behind the Apple-Intel Alliance" 11 June 2005 by John Markoff.

I'm just curious as to what Steve found disappointing with the cell design. Does anybody have any more information about this?
Message 28 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 11/10/2002
Offline
8277 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 11, 2005

,
,
,OSUbowen wrote:
I just read this concerning Apple's future switch to Intel...

"... As it happens, Intel's was not the only alternative chip design that Apple had explored for the Mac. An executive close to Sony said that last year Mr. Jobs met in California with both Nobuyuki Idei, then the chairman and chief executive of the Japanese consumer electronics firm, and with Kenichi Kutaragi, the creator of the Sony PlayStation.

Mr. Kutaragi tried to interest Mr. Jobs in adopting the Cell chip, which is being developed by I.B.M. for use in the coming PlayStation 3, in exchange for access to certain Sony technologies. Mr. Jobs rejected the idea, telling Mr. Kutaragi that he was disappointed with the Cell design, which he believes will be even less effective than the PowerPC."

The New York Times "What's Really Behind the Apple-Intel Alliance" 11 June 2005 by John Markoff.

I'm just curious as to what Steve found disappointing with the cell design. Does anybody have any more information about this?
,
,

I think people are not ready for change in terms of PC.  Going with Cell is a big risk for Apple, but big risk could mean big reward.  I think Steve doesn't want to take the risk.,
Message 29 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Survivor
Registered: 06/08/2004
Offline
2795 posts
 

Re: I thought the Cell processor in the PS3 was clocked at 4.8 ghz?

Jun 11, 2005


Llama Herder wrote:


OSUbowen wrote:
I just read this concerning Apple's future switch to Intel...

"...,As it happens, Intel's was not the only alternative chip design that,Apple had explored for the Mac. An executive close to Sony said that,last year Mr. Jobs met in California with both Nobuyuki Idei, then the,chairman and chief executive of the Japanese consumer electronics firm,,and with Kenichi Kutaragi, the creator of the Sony PlayStation.

Mr.,Kutaragi tried to interest Mr. Jobs in adopting the Cell chip, which is,being developed by I.B.M. for use in the coming PlayStation 3, in,exchange for access to certain Sony technologies. Mr. Jobs rejected the,idea, telling Mr. Kutaragi that he was disappointed with the Cell,design, which he believes will be even less effective than the PowerPC."

The New York Times "What's Really Behind the Apple-Intel Alliance" 11 June 2005 by John Markoff.

I'm just curious as to what Steve found disappointing with the cell design. Does anybody have any more information about this?


I,think people are not ready for change in terms of PC.  Going with,Cell is a big risk for Apple, but big risk could mean big reward. ,I think Steve doesn't want to take the risk.


yeah,,the Macs are doing ok but no wheres near what PC's are doing, Apple,realized this and want's to get a bigger market share. So faced with,wanting to make more money what would you do? Go with something people,know of and know it is good for PC's or go with something completly new,and no one knows how it will work in PC's?
Message 30 of 31 (20 Views)
Reply
0 Likes