Id like to speculate who would have the most powerful fucking thing on the market and who will have the most inferior hardware.
Id like to speculate who would have the most powerful fucking thing on the market and who will have the most inferior hardware.
U GAIZ JUST DONT LIKE CHANGE , (builds a artificial foundation here)
Game.Com 2 will be the most powerful by a full 7.2 bits.
ALL HAIL THE 1 2 P
Originally Posted by THE 1 2 P
I fail to see the point of Nintendo as an option.
Since they are all getting their CPU's/GPU's from other company AMD/INTEL/etc. I would expect Microsoft and Sony to be running about the same horsepower. It has been suggested that both Microsoft and Sony may have the same GPU (or essentially the same). The Wii-U seems to be more of a mystery so far.
Last edited by Griking; 04-05-2012 at 11:50 PM.
How long do you actually notice how great the graphics are anyways? Once I get into a game, it's all about the gameplay and such. I really couldn't care less about how powerful the next gen systems are.
I'm guessing it could be Sony but probably only by a small margin. At least especially if they are going to hold out longer than Microsoft to release theirs.
Yeah, and it will probably play out the same way it did for the PS3. Unless the next Playstation gets an equal share of the North American market early on, MS will end up as the lead platform again. I guess it could be different this time though, since Sony isn't going to use a bizarre CPU like the Cell.
Last edited by Griking; 04-06-2012 at 01:44 PM.
That's true. Atari 2600 was weaker than almost all of its comptetion even within the same company, NES was weaker than SMS, Game Boy was weaker than Game Gear, Genesis and SNES were weaker than Neo Geo, 3DO and Jaguar, PS1 was weaker than N64, PS2 was slower than Xbox or Gamecube, Wii was weaker than Xbox 360 and PS3 and Nintendo DS was weaker than PSP. But the lesser powered system always seemed to come on top with only a slightly weaker system usually being sort of forgotton about.
I think what matters the most actually is who has the cheapest system. A lot of people always want something new to enjoy for the next 5-10 years and some people would rather just buy the one that is the cheapest but still has decent games.
The Phantom 2 or Indrema 2 for the win!
Microsoft's efforts seem to be more on software and media experience. If Sony manages to get the best gaming performance, it will have to compete against Microsoft's slower but better rounded platform. They're probably going to have very different design philosophies.
Sony or MS for sure.
I really don't give a crap. Powerful does not equal fun.
Atari: 2600, Jaguar
Microsoft: XBox, XBox 360
Nintendo: NES, GB, GBC, SNES, N64, GameCube, GBA SP, Wii, New 3DS, Wii U
Sega: SMS, Genesis, Game Gear, Nomad, Sega CD, 32X, Saturn, Dreamcast
Sony: PS1, PS2, PS3
Wanted: 7800, Neo Geo CD
The Emotion Engine's CPU was an ungodly powerful CPU for it's time, and it beat the crap out of both the Gekko and the Pentium III. It just had bottlenecking issues which limited it's full potential. The GameCube had it's fast as hell 1T-SRAM, not too mention it's GPU was directly linked to it's CPU for quicking processing. The Xbox had VRAM out the ass, but it's system RAM and VRAM were SLOW.
Wow, I just realized I forgot quite a bit about the sixth generation hardware. Then again, I did just wake up about half an hour ago....
My Game Collection
"I am only what you see me as." - Obsidian Rose