Rumor: PS3 hardware "slow and broken"?

by Christopher Grant on Jun 5th 2006 11:50AM

Another week, another PS3 rumor fire quickly decimating rational thought on the internet. We should start billing Sony for putting these things out. This time, British computing tabloid, The Inquirer, is running a piece titled, "PS3 hardware slow and broken." It's full of the usual Inquirer stuff: bad spelling, horrible grammar, and (most importantly) specious arguments. So, before we even get to what they're claiming, understand that their story could be considered entertainment, much the way the Enquirer is. Here goes:

An Inquirer writer had the good fortune to sit next to Anonymous Guy on a recent flight to Japan who dished about the PS3's new Cell and RSX chips. "Oh my God, did you hear? Cell is like, totally broken and junk. It's MBs are all, like, messed up where the GBs should be ... and stuff." Alright, that's not a direct quote, but a decent approximation. It isn't worth going through and breaking down the arguments since a little common sense would go much further.

Alright, internet, I know we're all still upset about "The Price." I know sometimes Sony says funny stuff that we all laugh at. (Too cheap? You kill me Kutaragi!) There are some kinds of rumors we're willing to believe. Yields are low? Alright, that happens. One of the largest and most well respected chip developers in the world, whose new, custom-built, ground breaking chip architecture has a huge design flaw that we extrapolated from a slide and a single-serving airplane buddy? See, it just doesn't seem as plausible.

In regards to a system as unique -- and uniquely complex -- as the PS3, this level of "journalism" seems woefully inadequate to tackle what may or may not be actual design problems with the processor. Places to look, if you're so inclined: Sony's Cell page. Too biased? How about one of Ars Technica's famously exhaustive looks at the thing ... in two parts. The Ars guys are part processor, it appears, and they didn't manage to identify some singular shortcoming that will doom the PlayStation 3 as an also-ran.

So go ahead. Read it, enjoy it, but please don't take it as Truth. The console wars are already ugly enough without the rumors.

See also:
Clearing up some PS3 confusion
Rumor: no pre-owned games for PS3?

[Thanks, I guess, to everyone that sent this in]

(Update: The misunderstanding evident in the linked story relates to the distinction between local video memory and local system memory. The slow read speed under discussion is indicative of the feature's lack of utility. This is even reflected on the slide's statement: "No, this isn't a typo ..." A contact at Sony confirmed this telling me, "Again I cannot imagine a situation where you have any SPU reading from the RSX local memory." Nothing to see here, folks.)

Source

Tags: PS3, Rumors

Reader Comments (95)

Local Memory refers to the CELL's access to the memory of each SPE, NOT to the Main Memory (256MB). The GPU-Local Memory (GDDR3) bandwidth is independant as well and not related to the CPU-Local Memory bandwidth. The CPU-Local Memory (what this article is refering to) is how fast the SPE's (remember each SPE has it's own memory store) write to their specific memory stores. CPU-Main Memory and GPU-Main Memory are different and are listed in different categories with different specifications.

I still not tend to believe this. Come on...Triangles.
This guy clearly does not know what he is writing about (the inquirer-guy, that is). Just look at the way he writes. If that is credible to any of you, please look at some real, better formulated posts why the ps3 is not going to win this gen console wars.

And you know...The article even had this nifty button at the bottom. It said 'flame author'. What good is a site that really gives you the opportunity to flame the writer :)
Just my 2 cents

Tell me you didn't really just bash the grammar of another publication.

Earlier today, Joystiq published the following sentence:

"Well, it turns out our readers aren't going to be spending less on a Wii so much as they'll be buying less PS3s."

Don't question the journalistic chops of another publication based on their grammar if you don't want us doing the same . . .

OMG SONY SET US UP TEH BOMB!!!!!11!ONE!!

Again, still confused. Local memory, according to various dictionaries on computer terms, means that only one processor can access the memory, nothing else. If this is actually local memory, as described in what I've read, then the GPU can't read it because then it wouldn't be classified as local memory anymore. The GPU is a processor afterall.

Well said Pii3.14. joystiq have the tendency of trying to tell us what to think about certain rumors, articles, consoles, sites or people. Can we at least read the post before is infected with negative comments about it? This reminds me of the negative start system you guys have in place. If someone does not agree with your post you give them negative starts in order to invalidate what they are saying. Are you adding a start system to the sources you get the news from? I'm sure that Enquirer would have -10 starts.

@LaughingTarget:

The presentation concerns the RSX chip. The memory is the local video memory, not local system memory.

I am no fan of Sony or the PS3, but this Inquirer story is too cheesy even for me. And people wonder why game "journalism" has such a low image.

@C. Grant: The simple fact that it was disproven at both sites before it even came here is proof enough to me that it didn't need to be re-posted.

As for my facts? You posted this at 11:50am my time and it was disproven a multitude of times on both Slashdot (8:29am to be exact) and Digg (I've been around long enough to know Digg is crap even though I loved the idea at it's conception). To prove how much crap flies at Digg all you have to do is look at the comments posted there. It took me a whole three minutes to identify the fact that this is Video memory, not system memory and they went on a flamefest of epic proportions. Apparently you didn't research any of the comments to say that the memory in question isn't system memory, but is Video memory. As far as other references, the only thing that comes to mind right now is the "faked" blu-ray fiasco that came along the line. The retraction article was posted before you even got the chance to post your story. Yeah, these are both Sony issues, sue me. That's all you guys report is "bad" (false) news lately. Yes the price is expensive. Get over it. Go back to playing your XBox. I don't care.

@ John V.: Local memory as stated in the photo is the Video memory, not the Local Cache on each SPE.

@Andir: Local Memory for the RSX is the Video Memory. Local Memory for the CELL are the local stores on each SPE.

http://ps3.vggen.com/news/news.php?id=1288

bladestar, andir, etc...

Don't be knocking Mr. Grant on his choice of articles. I would personally think it strange to not see such a "buzzing" story on Joystiq as I had already seen it on other sites. Plus it was being brought up in the comments section of another article, which was really getting things off on a tangent.

Besides, anything is better than Vlad's self-righteous editorials on the state of gaming journalism.

I've read "the Inq" for many years, and while they do like to hype and twist things, they often uncover dirty secrets and their sources are quite good.
(And be warned, British spelling isn't the one that's incorrect ;) )

Having said that it doesn't mean either sides are right / wrong. Local memory refers more to on chip level1,2 etc threadsafe cache. The cell architecture is different to a standard CPU, and if the access to main memory is quick enough (which with Rambus it could very well be) then it's not really an issue.

Lets see the same figures for the 360 before we critisize. (personally I hope the 360 whips those arrogant Sony whinges ;) )

http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/451/eichenberger.html

"The SPE's 256-KB local memory supports fully pipelined 16-byte accesses (for memory instructions) and 128-byte accesses (for instruction fetches and DMA transfers). Because the memory has a single port, instruction fetches, DMA, and memory instructions compete for the same port. Instruction fetches occur during idle memory cycles, and up to 3.5 fetches may be buffered in the instruction fetch buffer to better tolerate bursty peak memory usage. The maximum capacity of the buffer is thus 112 32-bit instructions. An explicit instruction can be used to initiate an inline instruction fetch.

...Data is transferred between the local memory and the DMA engine in units of 128 bytes. The DMA engine can support up to 16 concurrent requests of up to 16 KB originating either locally or remotely."

The SPE has 256K of memory (note: full pipelined, this tells me that the 16MB number is false if you do the math). The Local memory in reference here is one of the two sets of 256MB of memory available. They chose to use the word Local memory in the presentation (based on the RSX) to tell the developers that they should not utilize this pipeline for heavy lifting between the Cell and Video Memory. Even with 128 bit transfers at 3.2GHz speed you soon realize that this "local" memory is not the onchip SPE cache.

Hey I love the Fight Club reference. Single Serving friends on airplanes :D

I really got nothing to add other than, my mistake before on Philly Inquirer thought they were a linked media house. Didn't know the british version was just local. I read both on Slashdot so I assumed that they were both related my mistake. Thanks for info C. Grant.

Would everyone back off this guys balls? And how many times does it need to be repeated: THIS IS A FCKING BLOGGING SITE, the ENTIRE point is for the bloggers to give some facts about something and then state an OPINION about it, quirks, knocks, and jokes included. If you don't like the Joystiq writers' opinions, do everyone else a favor and go make your own blogging site and bitch about Joystiq is so wrong or biased or whatever the fck else and leave it out of the comments section here because NOONE CARES. The comments section is meant to stir up a little controversy and for people to post something at least HALF educated, not to flame Joystiq staff for doing what the PURPOSE OF THIS SITE IS.

..So anyways, the mere fact that the INquirer bears a similar name to The ENquirer should give a clue that the stories should be taken with a grain of salt.. The ENquirer isn't exactly known for printing 100% legit stories..

Seems like #50 is right. 16MB/s refers to the read speed of the cell from its local cache memory. Not sure what you would use that for anyway.

Thanks mrjiggles! You seem to really get it.

You really want to read articles without editorial oversight? Don't come here. That's what we do. We provide context to the gaming industry and a forum to discuss it.

Andir: I appreciate your comments. Really. They're thought out. I disagree that since some other sites already let their commenters have at it, it should be ignored here. We already had a bunch of discussion about it in the comments on other posts! It was coming here, whether we liked it or not. (And we didn't, which is why it was "late").

If you think the bad news re: Sony is isolated to this site, you need to get out more. If you think we're biased in our coverage, for starters, get in line behind the Nintendo Fanboys who say we hate the Wii, and the Xbox Fanboys who say we hate the 360, there's still a little bit of room at the end of the line. Secondly, stop reading us. I certainly don't make a habit out of reading sites that I think have serious editorial issues. I would rank The Inquirer amongst those sites, since this sort of piece is just really irresponsible to run. It frustrates me that I have to write about it lest legions of fanboys continue to cite its specious claims as Truth.

bladestar: Are you serious? We should just point you towards something and leave it at that? Why do you come here then? Of course we're not going to do that.

And Pii3.14, sure we make mistakes from time to time. You'll see that we often correct them once readers let us know about em. That's why we have comments. That's a key part of being a blog. But we'll change it. If we post something and get it wrong, we'll change it. Alright, so this story at The INQ is wrong. Has it been updated?

By all accounts, it does appear that Local Memory referred to the RSX's half of the system's RAM. The CPU's read/write speed to these locations is exceptionally poor, but it certainly isn't a major limiting factor.

It does prevent some "creative" uses of the hardware (such as using unused VRAM as a form of cache). It also means that software is forced into allocating 50% of the system ram for static textures, resulting in non-optimal use of RAM (ie: if you have < 256mb of textures, you're wasting memory; if you have > 256mb of textures you're forced to use part of main memory to swap textures around).

Just giving you a little bit of a hard time, C. I know you update when you screw up, and try to fix your mistakes as they come to your attention. I didn't realize that this thread was going to become a huge Joystiq hatefest, so at the time my little jab didn't seem so harmful. Looking back at all the bile spewed by your detractors--who still hit their refresh buttons every minute and a half--it does seem a bit liking piling on. Sorry about that . . .

You people can whine and cry about the Inquirer all you want, but I've noticed that 9 times out of 10 they happen to be right. And THAT is whay people bash them, the bearer of bad news and all that.

Thanks Pii3.14, no apology necessary at all!

And Quentin, if you're right, then great. But what sort of credibility would we lose if we had a 10% failure rating. If we ran specious, poorly researched claims just to get hits, we'd be run out of town. The comments would be on fire. It frustrates me that INQ can run this stuff, stick us with the job of dealing with the mess it creates, and not even correct their story. If this was the first time, fine. Thing is, they do this constantly.

@C. Grant: "Secondly, stop reading us."

Why? There are some posters that get past the bunk and post valid gaming stories. The mentality of the average gamer is to take everything given to them as truth (expecially coming from a gaming blog/news site/whatever). By posting "insider stories" (E3, etc.) you are a news site. By posting rumors your a "blog" site. I never said you should not post "rumor" stories. But if the "rumor" has already been devalued, then it provides no manner of justice to re-post it. Just because you didn't get the scoop doesn't mean you should post the original intent. It's not about right or wrong. It's about an ethical posting guidlines setforth by VC in another post. Yes you have rumors, but if you don't research the rumor and put in the information you know, your only giving half the story. (the completely bias side) I, like others like to know what the details of something are. We, as technical readers, will read further into it and post our findings if need be, but completly ignoring one side of the original sources (as you stated Slashdot and Digg) you are ignoring (being ignorant) to the facts. By posting random one-sided thoughts and only backing them with an opinion about a particular news source is hardly unbias.

I simply stated that the information was there. You should have been informed that this article could have been talking about Local Video memory instead of Local system memory. By not posting that you have proven to me that you know very little about the technical aspect of the system and will blindly post anything that gets attention. We'll call this story a loss-leader. Your willing to take a reputation hit in order to get people to come to your site. Poor performance.

FYI, I will continue to read the site contrary to your advice and I will continue to post the truth that I know. Unfortunately, nobody will read these comments (I mean it's my opinion right? The original post is fact!) so the gaming community will continue to get dumber by the minute.

/sarcasm on
Thanks! Those of us intelligent gamers love you for making gamers as a whole look like morons.

As one well informed poster said:
"OMG SONY SET US UP TEH BOMB!!!!!11!ONE!!"
/sarcasm off

So can someone explain to me how the Cell is better at processing more data, but not performance oriented?

This is a serious question. I never understtod this statement.

@duscrom: The Cell was built from the ground up to process media stream data. It's not marketed to desktop PCs, so you'll probably never see it in that market (even though Linux runs fine on it.) Media data can be processed in a more efficient manner than current processors. These differences are processor intensive in the fact that more is going on in the core than is being communicated outside the core.

"The overarching goal was to create a new architecture that could process the next generation of broadband media and graphics with greater efficiency than the traditional approaches of ultradeep pipelines and the ganging of numerous complex and power-inefficient out-of-order RISC or CISC cores."
-- PDF - http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/D9439D04EA9B080B87256FC00075CC2D/$file/MPR-Cell-details-article-021405.pdf

I don't understand your question. The Cell can process tons of data, but not in your typical manner. It's design makes it more efficient at handling multiple threads of data (as needed in multimedia applications) rather than taking the brute force approach used by Intel in single thread achitecture. Intel did realize that this needed to change and they took the first step when they released HT Techonology in the Pentium line. The Cell just takes it that much further by starting out with the synchronous processor design instead of trying to retrofit it.

Andir: Since I'm not conversant in the technical aspect of the story, I didn't feel qualified to comment on it. I read through the Slashdot posts, and the Digg comments (some of them), but don't see how those qualify as legitimate sources of news. I can't verify their comments. I pointed readers towards the source, while encouraging them to be skeptical. Still don't know what you mean about not repeating it. This isn't a week later. This wasn't pre-E3 news. This happened this morning. I posted it a couple hours later after it gained a significant amount of steam. I felt it was important to throw a skeptical voice out there. Why do we have comments, so you can make the points you have.

Your elitist comments do little to further your argument. By your logic the only people qualified to write about politics are politicians, tech journalists have to be engineers or programmers, etc. Once again, if or goal was to get hits with credibility-reducing stories, we'd make this stuff up like the Inquirer does.

Andir:
your point is void.
"So go ahead. Read it, enjoy it, but please DON'T TAKE IT AS TRUTH. The console wars are already ugly enough without the rumors."
this was taken directly from the last line of the post.

Seriously Andir, I've gone through all your comments and there is a seriously pedantic anti-Joystiq thread in many of them. Furthermore, there is a very strong "pro" PS3 thread through all of them. You have the audacity to criticize us for being fanboys and inciting fanboy riots (or "fanboi" as you seem to prefer spelling it) when you write things like, "The 360 is nothing more than a computer that's been beefed up. The Wii is a computer with a revolutionary method of control and a solid base. The PS3 is a step into the next generation by providing the space for games to expand, the processor that really does have the potential to process data at extraordinary rates, and a backing of games to help it along the way." There are dozens of posts that read just like this, while simultaneously telling us why we're doing something wrong and how it should be fixed. Your displeasure has been noted.

This argument is over.

Well, Christopher Grant, I can tell you have an obvious bias about the Inquirer. While they do publish news with unconfirmed sources, I have never seen them blatantly lie. I mean, they have a PICTURE from a SONY presentation. It must be photoshoped or something!

http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MTkzMzQsLCxobmV3cywsLDE=

@ozymandias: I was pointing to the fact that it was disproven before this was even posted. Thus the need to post it was void.

@C. Grant: I never said I wasn't a fan of one system. In fact I think I said in one of my many posts that I will most likely buy a PS3 and/or a Wii (in fact I'm waiting on the DS Lite), but will never by a XBox for my own personal reasons. I have gone through pages and pages of pro MS/360 stuff from pre-release. If I were to put a ratio on it (purely a guess) I would say you posted 5 favorable to 1 unfavorable story about the 360. In fact, some of those posts even criticize the PS3 before the 360 was released. I'm not going to post my results here as you clearly limit link counts per post to 3. I have yet to see an abundance of favorable posts about the PS3. I'm all for rooting for the underdog, but posting the release specs on every game to come out for the 360 (page 60 or so if you want to check) at launch is a little outlandish.

To tell you the truth, I could care less what the ratio to good/bad posts are. I threw that number in there to prove that you (Joystiq) do have fanboy tendencies. I have been watching these hate filled PS3 posts to provide meaningful input when I can so that the informed consumer will hopefully read beyond the title of the story. Most of the time I'm met with extreme pressure from those that can only criticize the price of the PS3 and by quoting false specs or assumptions.

I apologize for the negative Joystiq karma coming forth. In that I can agree that I have been quite harsh if you look at my posts on a filtered basis, but you have to look at it form the users perspective sometimes. It's been nothing but degrading news about Sony for the past 18 months and happiness and joy (disregarding the post-release 360 woes [crash, power brick,?]) for everything else (especially the Wii). Anyone with database access could show you that evidence. I'm positive.

"This argument is over."

At this point all we can do is agree to disagree since you no longer feel like backing your post/opinions. Have a good day. I look forward to correcting the next wrong PS3 post.

@Basheron: It wouldn't matter if it was photoshopped, the idea that the Cell NEEDS fast access to the video memory is assuming that the memory will be shared as in the 360 (which isn't the case). You can clearly see that the local memory is used for video rendering only. The Cell can write information to it but there would be no need for it to read it back. Once the cell is done with it's data, it's rendered to the screen and has no need to recall that data.

Just an observation, but I've noticed more and more contributors posting their displeasure in regards to articles. Of course there's always going to be criticism. That's what blogging is all about. But I think some of the replies are the result of the stances taken, in what appears to be designed to incite response. The door was opened, so don't be surprised when someone comes through.

For example, I was initially compelled to respond to the portion about the Inquirer with their "bad spelling, horrible grammar, and specious arguments." Okay... Classic 'Pot calling the kettle black.' Joystiq, among other blogs suffer from the same issues.

But outside of that point, I really enjoyed the contributions here, and felt that I learned something new today.

I think this was a needless dustup between two great sites. The Inquirer is much better at finding real news than Joystiq. They are also better writers, if you are into British humor. Joystiq is a much better blog (and let's not kid ourselves, the Inquirer isn't much different than a blog really) and has wonderful links and commentary.

I do have that run-for-the-exits feeling when a blogger speaks about journalist ethics, ESPECIALLY where tech journalism is concerned. I think Grant's slam of the Inquirer was really unnecessary. Its possible that the Inq's Demerjian is simply wrong. But there is nothing to believe he is making this up other than the fact that it may be bad news for certain fan boys. The Inq often notes when things should be taken with a grain of salt. They did not do that here. And the author has his name all over it. It'll be there for all to see if the PS3 hits the shelves on time, in volume, and smokes the doors off the Xbox 360. The Inq will be damaged by it if that is the case. So, this will work itself out.

I do think he many not understand the tech. He probably talked with a developer (who likely was not just some anonymous guy, but rather a regular source) who hates developing for the PS3. I don't know. I think many of the commenters here have done a lot better job of shedding light on where the PS3's design actually makes sense. But, Grant offered none of that. A link to 15 month old article based on the press released tech specs does not count as a debunking.

Tech specs and real world development are not the same things. Its quite possible that the total package of the Cell/nVidia/Rambus design is F'd up. Its also quite possible that Sony et al nails it and the Inq will look silly. But the fact is that the PS3 isn't out yet and there was nothing presented at E3 that made one think that November is a realistic date for the PS3 to be out in volume with a lot of playable titles. The Xbox 360 is out and works quite well. The PS3 is untested and unreleased. So, rumors and speculation is all we have.

Kudos to LuckyT and Cabbage for some quality comments.

(P.S. - I almost certainly mispelled some things and have bad grammar. Try judging the content, yo!)

Both articles seem to show a lack of comprehensive understanding of what's really important to the developers. That being said, neither wrote a professional article, and both should be taken with a grain of salt.

C. Grant, I love joystiq, that’s why I keep coming here. I'm not saying that you shouldn't put your opinion (this is about opinions) but what bothered me a bit is that their article was about the PS3 hardware not the integrity of the source. I mean, what's the point on you posting something that even you believe it's not worth reading. Why should we read it then? Also, should I trash your post just because I find a grammar or spelling error?
That’s what I meant to say. Maybe I said it the wrong way for which I apologies. The negative start system tends to make people hostile I hope you guys are aware of that.

Oh no! You guys should buy the most powerful machine because that means that it is the most fun! more polygons=more fun, don't you know? I'm totally freaking out because I was wanting to buy a ps3 but now since the basket balls in a basket ball game won't look exactly perfectly spherical I am forced to buy a 360. wait.... Pat! you say that the ps3 is actualy more powerful? wow I am confused. Now im going to buy a ps3.

Maybe I should just buy a wii and have more fun for less money. But then again I'll have less fun because there are less polygons.

Oh well...

So is the PS3 100% backward compatible? 80%, 60% 40%?

Will Sony games really cost US$10-$40 more than other formats?

Is it true that there will advertising in the games that we pay for?

Is the PS3 getting a 12 month limited "Toy" warranty or a grown-up 3 or 5-Year Warranty like most other home entertainment components on the market?

What is the cost to replace a faulty Blu-Ray drive?

Did Sony guarantee that they will never bundle Spyware into their products again?

RE THE PERFORMANCE THING:
I remember the Sony speal that the PS2 was so powerful, so super-computer-like that Sony was worried it could be used to build missile guidance systems... My PS2 must be broken because its not as fast as my fisher price Game Cube - So will the PS3 really be (Super-Computer-Like) this time or will it be slow and broken? Are Sony giving us all guarantee's that it will be at least as fast as the XBOX 360 or are they just talking out of their bottom as usual.

Sony should just set the record straight.

Oh come now. You demonstrate the very qualities that you were trying to impugn The Inquirer for. By even *trying* to be above them, you lower yourself below them.

As for Sony, are they likely to make a mistake sometime soon? As history is a guide, more than likely. That is a company which has been shown to be succesful not from continued evolutionary brilliance, but occassionally revolutionary accidental fortunes. They take chances. Said chances are not always right. And said chances are not always their own IP either.

As for The Inquirer, it is a first landing news site. They, much like many other quick reporting sites, operate at the speed of the internet. Keep in mind it was originally started as a blogging level news site. Factual inaccuracies are typically self-edited and whatnot, much more reliably than your local print or broadcast television media for that matter. Apparently they do have some incredibly keen sources.

Plus the Inq is occassionally funny and interesting. Whereas this article was injuriously and insipidly insulting. And yes, the console wars are already ugly enough without such selfserving vanity. It's competition. Get over it. ;-p

The games will decide. That and the missteps of the corporate handlers. Those two things have always plotted Fate's course.

I don't know.

Two things.
If this is to be expected, why would they say "No, this isn't a typo" in the presentation?
Still, no one is addressing the fact that they are getting yields at 60% of the expected. So aside from the 4MBps issue, it IS slow and broken.

Yes, no?

However, as someone else stated, we didn't see anything at E3 that led us to believe the PS3 would be out this November. I don't believe it, and haven't believed it for awhile. And now they ARE putting the PS2 chipsets into the PS3 when they already were having trouble fitting everything inside?

Time will tell gentlemen and lady.

Andir: You could tell that C. Grant was cringing in dread while posting this. He did tell us to take it with a grain of salt. I mean, for God's Sake, the author of the Inquirer add said he was talking to someone on an airplane about it.

"single-serving" nice reference. With the rumors of a PS2 in a PS3 the split personality theme really fits.

[quote]All I know is that the Inquirer's story reeked of BS and generalizations.[quote]

Funny, I've pretty much thought the same thing about every statement Sony has made about the PS3. :)

"I'm all for rooting for the underdog..."

Actually, PS3 is the underdog. They've yet to release a console and they look like they're plagued with problems. (even though this might not be one, if it was problem free they would have released it already). It's price will ultimately kill it. In a Japanese magazine 88% of the people polled agreed it was too expensive. Kind of looks like they're losing Japan.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060530-6939.html

... and when you lose Japan

_____________
|/ |
| (_)
| |/
| |
| /
|
_|___

That's funny, the article you posted put PS3 in 3 of the top 10, with the 360 at 1 for 10 and the Nintendo systems at 6/10. I'd say MS was the underdog in Japan by that result. They haven't really lost Japan being the top of the two expensive systems.

Indeed the inquirer doesnt have a valid arguement on the subject.

There are a few forums where PS3 developers post, and many articles in which developers expressed their opinions on the PS3's development and they seem very satisfied with the performance.

The article pointed by Joystiq is another example among many others where they analyze the PS3's architecture and truth be told Inquirer acted like amatuers in that article.

In just one statement of an anonymous guy(?), and one(?) slide they managed to form a complete(?) conclusion about PS3 being an inefficient, underperforming, weak piece of hardware with huge inexplicable bottlenecks as if there was no Research and testing at all. Its illogical for PS3 to have such huge issues especially if they are so "obvious" and serious.

I dont think Nvidia, Sony and IBM would have let them slip under their noses or just ignore them without caring about the consiquences.

There is no logic in that. Inquirer is the only source where such undetailed and unprofessional explanation is given to the public that the PS3 is such a problematic hardware.

So many other credible sources dedicated to hardware research have given much detailed, professional and unbiased analyis on both the 360 and the PS3 and their conclusions have nothing in common to Inquirer's claims.

Previous 50 Comments

Rumor: PS3 hardware "slow and broken"?

Reader Comments (95)

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:05PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:06PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:12PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:23PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:25PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:26PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:36PM Andir30 said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:38PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:43PM Andir30 said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:49PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:54PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 3:56PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 4:00PM Andir30 said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 4:01PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 4:17PM zsavior said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 4:19PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 4:43PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 4:53PM chrisgrant said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 4:56PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 5:26PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 5:44PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 6:19PM chrisgrant said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 6:43PM Andir30 said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 6:50PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 7:50PM Andir30 said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 8:20PM chrisgrant said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 8:32PM easo said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 9:04PM chrisgrant said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 9:29PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 9:31PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 9:40PM Andir30 said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 9:47PM Andir30 said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 10:45PM Starcade said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 10:46PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 11:27PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 5th 2006 11:52PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 1:32AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 8:21AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 10:40AM EfylSetaf said

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 11:08AM Mal F4cti0n said

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 3:51PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 4:51PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 8:34PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 11:08PM Andir30 said

Posted: Jun 9th 2006 5:11AM (Unverified) said

Info

Description

MSRP

Release Date

Genre

Developer

Publisher

Rating

Breaking News

Tomba! comes to PlayStation Network as a PSOne Classic this summer

Featured Stories

Analyst estimates Amalur IP worth $20 million, 38 Studios employees head to job fair

Ghost Recon: Future Soldier review: More than just a soldier

Entering the Rzhev Meat Grinder in Company of Heroes 2

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW