Sony caught using Fuzzy math?

[Matrix XII]

ahaha, take that phony sony.

and take that matty.

585936094[/snapback]

haha thats great!! "phony sony" :yes:

[-T- Member]

Why is anyone suprised at this, Sony always uses the smoke and mirrors approach to their systems. The level of hype they help produce ensures that mindless sheep will just go "ooohh playstation fast, me get playstation".

[Matrix XII]

and thats what people will do :(

[AlphaPrime]

So what? Microsoft said the Xbox was 3 times more powerful than any other console when it was first released. Every company's going to present their specs in the best possible way, heck, even Microsoft said Xbox 360 was the most powerful console at their conference, even when Sony's is still a bit faster.

Playstation 3 faster, Microsoft Xbox 360 easier

[TheLegendOfMart]

Do you have something against sony? Literally, Every product I own is sony, and im not kidding. From tvs to sound systems to laptops, desktops, they all work great. So what is your reason disliking them APART from a little math error mate? No flamming please, i would just like you to justify your reasons, thats all.

585937641[/snapback]

No i dont. I dont want to keep saying it but ive had every major console launch, Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, Sega, etc.. im not biased towards any or against any.

Sony just annoys me claiming this that and the other when in fact it is far from the truth, like the Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesiser they touted it as super powerful and that it would change the face of gaming, graphics wise PS2 sucked bad, they are doing it again with PS3, while the specs look and sound impressive the tech demos and game demos looked PS2 like in quality and people will buy it because of the Playstation brand, it saddens me.

Same with Nintendo they refuse to get with the times and produce a console thats half decent and shunning something like online gaming saying that its not viable at the moment even though Xbox Live has millions of subscribers and us PC users enjoying it for ages. Sure the games are what makes the console but having an uptodate console that rivals the specs of their main competitors surely wont hurt.

Im far from a Microsoft fanboy either before anyone starts about what i have in my sig, i was far from impressed with the xbox when it come out, it was basically just a low end PC in my eyes, i even bought one but i didnt really get into the microsoft thing...

But the next generation Xbox has impressed me to no end specs wise and the whole live experience just looks amazing.

[reinux]

So what? Microsoft said the Xbox was 3 times more powerful than any other console when it was first released. Every company's going to present their specs in the best possible way, heck, even Microsoft said Xbox 360 was the most powerful console at their conference, even when Sony's is still a bit faster.

Playstation 3 faster, Microsoft Xbox 360 easier

585937825[/snapback]

There's a difference between a short blurt to say that your machine is superior -- obviously something like "3 times more powerful" isn't to be taken too seriously, and evidently no one did take it seriously. On the other hand, something like 1.9 teraflops vs 1.0 teraflops, where specific numbers are given and they turn out to have problems, that's an issue.

[AlphaPrime]

There's a difference between a short blurt to say that your machine is superior -- obviously something like "3 times more powerful" isn't to be taken too seriously, and evidently no one did take it seriously. On the other hand, something like 1.9 teraflops vs 1.0 teraflops, where specific numbers are given and they turn out to have problems, that's an issue.

585937852[/snapback]

It's the same damn thing. Companies always find a loophole to make their product look better than it's competitor's. It's not just Sony, as many people seem to be making out it is.

[b mitchell]

Lest we forget, Sony's specs for the PS3 are not final yet. ;)

[nemo]

seems like certain people just have something against sony.. :unsure:

[TheLegendOfMart]

Its getting stupid around here, cant even say anything negative against anything or you get accused of fanboyism from a few certain individuals, no names *COUGH* GAMENEWS *COUGH*

[kaffra]

how does this relate to sony. Is there some rule that says it must be calculated as one?

[Gamenews]

Lest we forget, Sony's specs for the PS3 are not final yet.  ;)

585938123[/snapback]

You are right, it probably will get dumbed down like they did for PS2 and PSP.

[salis]

PSP isn't dumbed down, in fact they quadrupled the amount of memory before its release.

[Jesse Carlton]

the number of pipelines or whether they're combined wouldn't make a difference, the 1.0tflops is 1 trillion floating point operations per second, that's individual operation overall for the system per second.

it doesn't matter if you count the shaders seperately, it's still the same number of ops per second. orangesoul is a ms fanboy and is very biased

[Gamenews]

PSP isn't dumbed down, in fact they quadrupled the amount of memory before its release.

585939024[/snapback]

Yet they silently underclocked it by 100 mhz.

[magik]

the number of pipelines or whether they're combined wouldn't make a difference, the 1.0tflops is 1 trillion floating point operations per second, that's individual operation overall for the system per second.

it doesn't matter if you count the shaders seperately, it's still the same number of ops per second. orangesoul is a ms fanboy and is very biased

585939068[/snapback]

Orangesoul is quoting from outside articles, his opinion isn't stated. Learn the difference. :yes:

[jerry]

I honestly wouldn't mind making the effort to try to contact IGN and such with the correct data, since even though I'm more of a PS3 fan for my taste in games, I'm also sick of all this mud-flinging and confusion.

Anyone with me?

585937694[/snapback]

I second that. :yes:

[magik]

Yet they silently underclocked it by 100 mhz.

585939108[/snapback]

Just like the Cell processor will not run at this projected speed. It runs way too fast and it will overheat and fry, then it'll have to use the backup SPE (why do you think there's a 'redundant' SPE?), but what happens when that one goes up in smoke? Ah, Deja Vu from a sub-par quality console.

What will happen is the processor will be dumbed down/slowed down to avoid this and everything will be in roughly the same boat. Hey, bookmark this comment and read it come PS3 release. :whistle:

[Jesse Carlton]

Orangesoul is quoting from outside articles, his opinion isn't stated. Learn the difference.  :yes:

585939204[/snapback]

he did a thread comparing the 2 that was very onesided for xbox, that's what I'm using for my judgements.

[malebolgia Veteran]

Can someone please provide a direct link to the place where this is discussed on Beyond3D?

[iconboy]

First off, Orange is very bias towards the xbox 360 so when he reports something or even says something you have to take it with a grain of salt, be it pro xbox360 or anti PS3.

Think about this, whos fault is this miscalculation? All sony has done is measure their own hardware and post it, they didnt manipulate any of microsoft's numbers. They didnt change anything on M$'s side. And so what if they did, its Microsoft's problem to go and fix their own numbers not the competition. And if/when they fix it and everyone realizes that the xbox 360 is actually more powerful than thought, that can only be a good thing. Orange makes it seem like Sony was schemeing and committing sabatoge here... absolutley ridiculous.

Is this a reason not to buy a PS3? Helll noo, you would have to be stupid not to see that this is either Microsoft or ATIs fault, they are multi million dollar companies who dropped the ball on something and made a mistake, oops! get over it.

[TheLegendOfMart]

Yet they silently underclocked it by 100 mhz.

585939108[/snapback]

To save battery life, im presuming they downclocked it so when the battery tech becomes available they will clock it back to what its supposed to be running at. You'd all be complaining if it was running at 333mhz and youd be getting 30 mins from a battery.

[ReAnimation]

Just like the Cell processor will not run at this projected speed. It runs way too fast and it will overheat and fry, then it'll have to use the backup SPE (why do you think there's a 'redundant' SPE?), but what happens when that one goes up in smoke? Ah, Deja Vu from a sub-par quality console.

What will happen is the processor will be dumbed down/slowed down to avoid this and everything will be in roughly the same boat. Hey, bookmark this comment and read it come PS3 release.  :whistle:

585939250[/snapback]

I don't think Sony actually released what speeds the Cell would be running at in the PS3 until yesterday. With regards to the Cell having a disabled SPE the reason for this is not overheating its because of yields. By saying that the PS3's Cell will have 7 active SPE's they should'nt have to fail as many Cells during fabrication process, which means cheaper prices (hopefully).

[jerry]

Think about this, whos fault is this miscalculation? All sony has done is measure their own hardware and post it, they didnt manipulate any of microsoft's numbers.  They didnt change anything on M$'s side.  And so what if they did, its Microsoft's problem to go and fix their own numbers not the competition.  And if/when they fix it and everyone realizes that the xbox 360 is actually more powerful than thought, that can only be a good thing.

585939319[/snapback]

Read this:

Here's the problem the way I see it:

Microsoft released the 1 teraflops measurement before PS3 released the 2 teraflops measurement. What that means is that Sony had the chance to choose: do they want to measure both shaders together, or do they want to measure them seperately?

The answer's simple: do the latter, so you can make it look like your machine's twice as fast!

If Microsoft had measured the shaders seperately, and Sony didn't, Microsoft would have had hell to pay (let's face it -- if Microsoft were the one that said 2 teraflops, NOBODY would have let it slide the way some people on this thread are letting Sony off the hook), so you can't say it was "silly" on their part. It was a damned if they do, damned if they don't situation.

But fine. Let's say that's unfortunate but it wasn't deliberate.

What makes it worse though is the fact that Sony went ahead and made charts to compare Xbox to PS3, knowing the measurements were different, and pitched the PS3 as being twice as fast.

If it were miscommunication within Sony (and arguably nVidia) that led to the error, I think it's still legally false advertising, but forgivable. If on the other hand, they actually knew and went ahead anyway, it'd be completely unacceptable.

I personally think it's the latter, since the people at Sony benchmarking their machine must have known how the measurements were made, and must have had the final say on the machine's specs as presented to the public.

In either case, you could argue that Sony didn't lie intentionally, but Sony did at least misinform.

So what needs to be done is to make sure the media (which is already completely confused, especially after the whole Cell speculation and hype) starts correcting the whole error. I see no need to crucify either company over this, but I do see a need for people to be properly informed.

I honestly wouldn't mind making the effort to try to contact IGN and such with the correct data, since even though I'm more of a PS3 fan for my taste in games, I'm also sick of all this mud-flinging and confusion.

Anyone with me?

585937694[/snapback]

[Gamenews]

To save battery life, im presuming they downclocked it so when the battery tech becomes available they will clock it back to what its supposed to be running at. You'd all be complaining if it was running at 333mhz and youd be getting 30 mins from a battery.

585939320[/snapback]

Yet, Sony advertised it was clocked at 333mhz even during launch. There is also an alternative solution to all this. Better batteries? :rolleyes: