Legit Reviews

Which current gaming console do you own and why did you choose it over the others?

If you own more than one of these, just pick you favorite. I have a few friends who are trying to decide. Thanks!

80s child wanted that NES/SNES/N64 gaming experience, love my Wii

I've been gaming since Atari, and I've had pretty much every gaming system at one point in time. I chose the xbox360. Actually my son chose it since he does most of the console gaming. I'm on the 3rd one now, (returned 2 already), so thats beginning to wear very thin. To be perfectly honest...between Vista, xbox360 hardware problems, and xbox live, I'm losing my patience with Microsoft.

I do love Guitar Hero 2 and Halo 3 isn't bad either.

Wii for mii.

The price was a big factor at nearly half that of the PS3 or Xbox360. But I was also more impressed with the motion sensing technology in the Wiimotes.

I have played and enjoyed every one, but don't own any of the ones listed.

If I were to buy one, it would probably be the xbox... less expensive than the ps3, and it has halo, gears of war, and medal of honor 4

Wife just bought a Wii to try and lose some fat - told her it will get her off the couch and moving ;)

Mike

I want a PS3 just so I can fold really fast too :p

I bought myself a Wii at launch and have loved it ever since. Innovative control scheme and just plain fun I have not yet (but want to) purchased either a 360 or PS3 because of their high price points. I can't justify spending that much on a game console.

Wii pwns, Metroid Prime 3's good too, and I can't wait for Brawl.

So I'm the only forum member that owns an xbox360? Interesting!

Looks like my friends may be getting a Wii. Thanks for your participation.

Rather interesting poll results! I had to vote none of the above, the last console I had was the N64 and I have no plans to change that anytime soon.

Game consoles certainly are much better these days, but I'd rather stick to a high-end PC and forgo the couple games I'm interested in for the various systems. Maybe if I was born a bit later when multiplayer via consoles was the norm when I was growing up things would have been different... but I got and still get my multiplayer fun in with the PC since that was what I grew up with.

Not to mention If I wanted a HD player and a great folding box I'd just grab a HD drive and a x1950XTX GPU for the system, since those easily outfold a PS3's Cell anyway.

GPU does not out fold PS3. There about equal. Now SMP would outfold those

i would opt for the Wii as the innovative controller scheme that Nintendo came up with really makes some of the games quite fun. Wii Sports is one great example and all of the mini-games in Wii Sports are a blast.

dicecca112 wrote:GPU does not out fold PS3. There about equal. Now SMP would outfold those

Well, do correct me if I am wrong but I don't see that. From what I see PS3s lead all in total work done, but GPU's lead in pure performance. My data comes from here: http://www.dailytech.com/PlayStation+3+ ... le6609.htm, and current data is here: http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/mai ... pe=osstats. Whether comparing only active "processors" or total past "processors" the smaller base of GPU folders means on average a single GPU computes more data than a PS3.

There is also the Folding@home wiki which claims this, and Stanford's page even states that the PS3 falls between the CPU and GPU performance-wise (PS3 section). http://folding.stanford.edu/FAQ-highperformance.html

Another thing to consider is that the GPU's actually included can be anything from a paltry x1650 or x1800 which fold slowly, to the by long and far x1950XTX which outfolds circles around the x1650XT and most other GPUs. Also this entire post ignores that Stanford adjusted down the points allocation to offset the higher return of results the GPU's output over a CPU. They actually do a great deal more work, but don't get as many points overall.

GPU tops out at about 600ppd
SMP tops out at 1760ppd for Dual and 3000 for quad
PS3 Tops out around 900ppd

GPU + PS3 = 1500

PS3 costs $500+ to fold
High End ATI Graphics x1950xtx $300
Dual Core Intel 200$
Dual Core AMD 140$
Quad Core Intel 279$

So if you go PS3 and GPU your gonna spend 800$
If you go dual or Quad your looking at 140-279$

I don't see it being even close.

And just because it has more flops than any other clients, doesn't mean its done more work. Performance wise is theoretical. It can do 10X the performance of standard PC, and it doesn't even come close to that. In the scheme of things, CPUs have done far more work than Ps3 and GPu combined. Just because they are capable of more work doesn't mean they have done more work.

dicecca112 wrote:GPU tops out at about 600ppd
SMP tops out at 1760ppd for Dual and 3000 for quad
PS3 Tops out around 900ppd

Where do you get this info from? In my googling I managed to find LR's F@H V8 article... However I fold with a 3Ghz Quad+3GHz Dual but not even my entire "farm" combined outputs a total 3,000PPD, and all clients are configured for higher point WU's when possible. I don't own a x1950XTX to test with sadly, but I still would like to see the results from a Crossfire x1950XTX setup. F@H does support Crossfire setups now. From this it would appear GPU's are better than folding on a dualcore AMD K8 rig. http://techreport.com/articles.x/11022 However Pande's blog seems to confirm what you are saying. He has some interesting posts: http://folding.typepad.com/

For the F@H stats, I was not aware the TFLOPS they give in their table are theoretical, where does it state this?? I was under the impression they were a current metric, because they actuall have gone down. Hardware costs are a none issue since I won't specifically buy hardware to fold on, I just use what I already have. But if you are going to bring those up, power consumption would be another issue... PS3 eats about 200watts during folding use which is comparable to a stock Quad PC.

Also, in you component costs for the PC you list only the CPU & video card... you need a few more components than that to run a system ;) And from what I've seen, the PS3 is a folding monster.

i picked PS3 because we have an xbox 360 sent it back twice and still has the problem. We have a nintendo WII and i think the graphics are crap and teh game play doesnt full make up for it so i would try my luck with a PS3

kappage wrote:i picked PS3 because we have an xbox 360 sent it back twice and still has the problem. We have a nintendo WII and i think the graphics are crap and teh game play doesnt full make up for it so i would try my luck with a PS3

I would suggest just buying games for your pc/mac, macs don't crash as often, but fewer games, but with pcs, they're always a step ahead, more peripherals (the logitech mx air would be nice), sometimes better graphics, easier save transfers, more content, patches, and mods (that's probably the best part), just to name a few things, but the ps3 is kinda like a pc considering the opera browser (which the wii has) and the capability to install yellow dog linux.

get a computer and start wow ;o

slayer22 wrote:get a computer and start wow ;o

You sad sad person.... WoW? i could spend a whole day arguing with the right and wrongs of WoW so lets just assume that you will loose and WoW sucks.