Playstation 3 claims not allowed

[antowan]

BTW I am SR (Steven Robert) McDonald

Nice to meet you.

 

[boramk]

its waaay overboard

 

[KampfGherkin]

Niiice. Kotaku linked to the article.

http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/ps3/hey-sony-no-lying-in-south-africa-247332.php

Now I just wish that Telkom's "Touch Tomorrow" bollocks could, if ever *cough* dubious in claims *cough*, get this much attention around the world. :|

 

[PeterCH]

RISC processors (in dedicated purpose machines) are known to be many times faster than CISC processors (in pc's) due to their reduced instruction set. The processor is built specifically for a task e.g. gaming.

So Sony may be right in their advertising. But unless they provide some performance figures we'll never know.

You're generalising. It's like saying a Power Mac G5 using a PowerPC CPU
(RISC) is faster than a Mac Pro Xeon (CISC) processor because in PRINCIPLE
the RISC processor does the same type of calculation with fewer steps.
As you know the current generation of Intel CISC processors outperforms
the former PowerPC processors used by Apple.

 

[PeterCH]

It says most computers, not the fastest computer...

If you consider that most PCs these days in offices in SA are Celerons you'll realise that that claim is probably TRUE. Also consider that most PCs
in such circumstances have very poor built-in graphics cards.

If you compare this to gamers, you'll that that they own Core2Duo systems
with 8th Gen Nvidia and ATI 1950 cards in SLI and surely these systems
are at least on par with the PS3.

Still I'm willing to bet that most office PCs are low end outdated Celerons
with integrated graphics solutions used for basic email, word processing
and web browsing functions.

 

[Slinky511nx7]

The RSX chip was a last minute decision to adapt it for the PS3 after they scrapped using one of the cores for the graphics, unlike ATI who designed their chip specifically for the Xbox 360.

 

[Highflyer_GP]

If you consider that most PCs these days in offices in SA are Celerons you'll realise that that claim is probably TRUE. Also consider that most PCs
in such circumstances have very poor built-in graphics cards.

If you compare this to gamers, you'll that that they own Core2Duo systems
with 8th Gen Nvidia and ATI 1950 cards in SLI and surely these systems
are at least on par with the PS3.

Still I'm willing to bet that most office PCs are low end outdated Celerons
with integrated graphics solutions used for basic email, word processing
and web browsing functions.

Are you saying that their claims are targeted towards the computers used in offices, which aren't used for games anyway? How is that a fair comparison?

If they want to compare a gaming console to a computer, then they need to compare it to a gaming rig, not something that can barely run Office. And what about their claims that the PS3's gfx chip is more powerful than the best card out today? You think it can outperform an 8800GTX?

 

[kronoSX]

cna do they have a technical crew that knows things about technology

 

[ShaneelR]

You're generalising. It's like saying a Power Mac G5 using a PowerPC CPU
(RISC) is faster than a Mac Pro Xeon (CISC) processor because in PRINCIPLE
the RISC processor does the same type of calculation with fewer steps.
As you know the current generation of Intel CISC processors outperforms
the former PowerPC processors used by Apple.

I apologise. True it was a generalisation. It may not be so in all cases. But you also need to compare processors of the same generation.

 

[undefined]

8 times more powerful than most computers is a very general statement. RXX... twice as powerful as the most advanced graphics engine today.

Please...

And saying perhaps they were trying to compare it to most home/soho computers doesn't cut it either. That's ridiculous.

Anyway ASA ruled in our favour, rightly so, ( I'm L.Goller ), what I gather from this is that they were clearly trying to leverage on brand loyalty and most of the general gaming population being uninformed about this sort of thing.

Think about it for a sec, every schoolkid would be blurting these claims to his mate in no time and the snowball would continue to grow and grow and the claims would be spread and accepted.

It's unfair to the competitors full stop and it's blatantly misleading to the consumer. The truth should be known, let's be fair about things and level out the playing field. This seems to have backfired on Sony now though.

Also I have no financial interests in either Wii or the 360.