Abandoning cell was the worst mistake of sony...

abandoning cell was the worst mistake of sony. bloated x86 and its incompetent lazy devs made ps4 deprecated the very first year it's released.

But user the good old x86 architecture is much easier to use for incompetent lazy devs.
No one wants to bother with learning a completely new system for every console nowadays.

this

x86 is a fucking mess, but cell wasn't well designed either.

t. designed my own processor once

>8 years into the generation, some PS3 games looked a bit better than 360 games
That really paid off

so i was watching some random video on youtube on why you should buy a PS3 in 2016 (was just some guy listing good exclusives) and I saw this comment.

idk why it pisses me off so much it just does. why is this guy saying "10 year old hardware" like it's a PC or something. why are PCfats so fucking stupid like everything revolves around the hardware. i bet he was assuming you'd buy a PS3 to play multiplats on or something.

sorry it just made me mad

>incompetent lazy devs
Thats the main problem.

where'd you get the idea he's a pc fanboy?

Because consoles are pretty much always ten years behind I guess

the api was faulty, not the architecture. they still write in the same language (C++ mostly). They just needed to read the CPU documentation, to learn its weaknesses and powerful ways. otherwise it's just powerpc, which most compilers can take optimization advantages. it had specialized cores that was able to handle LOTS OF linear data.

whatever, they just needed to avoid certain pitfalls. nothing else. they are just lazy incompetent fucks.

the faulty api thing is, ps3 SDK is shit and had slow learning curve.

almost 10 years, it can still handle modern games (yes slow but it can handle at playable rate). if you can feed it the correct data, it can still execute it very powerfully.

he is a faggot who's unable to appreciate old gold games. his gaming life is just about following the newest one.

>Adopting Cell was the worst mistake of Sony.
FTFY

nope. if you are targeting at least for 5-6 years into the future, x86 and PC graphics and chipset must be your worst enemies because of it's competition. every hardware gets easily deprecated in 1-2 years, especially PC GPUs. you need to design a unique hardware and chipset that is only and only specialized for gaming. not other bloat shit.

rightfully so fuck this

the power of the cell was dogshit anyway, ps2 on the other hand was a miracle

He later talked about his PC.

He has an AMD CPU.

ps2 was miracle because PC hardware industry was still in struggle between each other and they still weren't able to come up with standards. it was fucking hell, lots of graphics APIs due to vendors being in competition, CPU incompatibilities, AND THE WINDOWS CANCER, that's the important part. You manually needed drivers, your computer gets crashed every time and OSes at that time were unable to perform graphics applications well. PC was a mess at that time and PS2 was way ahead of its time. it was great. sony specifically targeted gaming.

PS3 on the other hand was a cheap way to access good games for its time. because nvidia and intel were rising the prices to very high levels. in order to play a good looking game, you needed really expensive hardware. ps3 was also great for many years along with xbox 360.

So he's using 10 year hardware himself. He's just clueless to that fact.

nah dude they looked a lot better, at least the first party ones

Semi-custom x86 is actually a good thing for consolefags and PCfags, PC ports will hopefully get better and consolefags will get more ports that might have stayed PC only

Devs couldn't be bothered to take advantage of Cell's capabilities. Most multiplats just targeted the 360 and the devs treated the PS3 like a crippled 360. Sony should have just done what Microsoft did and make a custom CPU with PowerPC cores, or they could have gone with x86 or some other ISA

cell is PPC already with SPU cores specialized for linear computing.

Cell was dumb

I don't blame sony for trying to be innovative but there's just no place for hardware innovations in the tech industry anymore.

PS3 was pretty good

It has 1 PPC core vs 3 in the 360. Microsoft also put a lot more focus on the GPU in the 360 with a better GPU core, more memory, and a dedicated cache for the GPU to improve bandwidth.

PS3 was a shitty mid range GPU with shit bandwidth and a mediocre CPU with a bunch of highly specialized co-processors embedded in it.

because it is
even ps3 exclusives made by sony are shittier than any xbox360 game

I always understood it that the Cell was weird and could perform GPU tasks, and although the RSX alone was weaker than the Xbox 360 GPU, the RSX + Cell was more powerful. The PS3 can't be treated as a simple CPU + GPU configuration (and if it is treated that way, the results will be weaker than PS3).

That's what I heard anyway.

Did you rob the local Gamestop?

>the results will be weaker than PS3

I meant 360.

I think that was at least gist of what the Cell was intended for but it wasn't until many years later that devs actually started using it like that.

ps3 was used as giant number of nodes for scientific computation. it had a really great computation power for linear calculation.

It's not easy to say definitively which console(360 or PS3) is better but the 360 had a significant advantage being a lot more straightforward in its design. If it wasn't for the RROD issue the 360 probably would have blown the PS3 the fuck out of the water sales-wise because during the first years the 360 was the one that was actually getting games.

>only one getting games
Maybe if you like shooter-of-the-month.
360, and Xbox in general, has terrible selection of exclusive titles.

PS2 was dogshit hardware wise compared to the Xbox and harder to develop for