PS3’s GPU ain’t got nothin’ on the GeForce 7800

[wraggster]

This is not speculation. It comes straight from the company that manufactures both the PS3’s RSX and the GeForce 7800 GPUs. True, you’ve got to be wary of the article’s sources, namely Team Xbox (a rival) and the Inquirer. But still, if nVIDIA is admitting (in the Official PlayStation Magazine) that its latest PC graphics chip, the GeForce 7800, is more powerful then the RSX GPU to be featured in the PS3, then Sony might have slipped a notch in the “mine is bigger than yours” bickering match with MS.

If the PlayStation 3’s launch is still a year away, and already we are seeing stronger PC GPUs, then you can hardly call the PS3 a “next-gen” console. As for the Xbox 360’s GPU (developed by ATI), Team Xbox claims that its technology won’t be matched on PCs until late 2006. Dag!

[disruptor]

First of all, I would find it highly unlikely that Sony would develop the PS3 with a GPU thats redundant before the console has even been given a definately release date. They will have been in close contact with nVidia for quite some time now, and would have known about the 7800. Also I would stress that graphics performance isn't directly linked to the GPU, there are many other factors which are just as important. I don't know enough about the intricacies of the PS3 architecture, but perhaps the system doesn't essentially need the biggest, bestest, most powerful GPU in the world to have amazing overall performance?

I personally wouldn't trust a thing Team Xbox says in terms of 'Ours is better than yours'. At least not until both consoles are actually on the market, and we can see how things run in reality rather than in theory.

On a side note, wtf?! First post? I would have thought this to be hot topic of debate for anybody interested in the next-gen console 'wars'. Or maybe nobody wanted to acknowledge the possibility that the 360 might be able to knock the socks off the PS3 in terms of graphics power?

-dissy

[Cap'n 1time]

Oh, yeah I even missed this one.. No, we try not to pick favorites around here before a release is actually made (we just have people joining that do sometimes). I do agree with what you said though. Performance isnt completely linked to the GPU.

I also very much dislike the constant ignorant fight "mine is bigger than yours." I believe that at a certain point at the height of an era, it dosnt really matter what graphics card you have in your console as long as it meets certain standards. A fine example of this being the previouse PS2 release. In terms of graphics, well lets just say the Gamecube and Xbox both easily rendered and displayed things better than the PS2. HOWEVER, in Graphics were comparable in that they were at least created for gaming and performed like you would expect them to (usually). The outcome was that the PS2 sold better than anyother console... and not due to a beefy GPU. Thats not to say that if the PS2 came standard with a voodoo 2 it would have sold as well... because the card could in a way continue to keep up with the current generation of games. It sold well, and THE SOFTWARE mostly sold it well.

So my point for you people that dont read my rants, is that as long as it can do its job, there isnt really a reason to complain. BUT IT DOES MAKE ME QUESTION THE PRICE TAG!

[disruptor]

What did I tell you!

sodding TeamXbox.

http://www.ps3land.com/news/article153.php

-dissy

[leggy]

Sony aren't wouldn't release a machine that ins't as good or (more likely) better than the opposition would they???