If the ps3 didnt have the cell, would it better graphics?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for deadlyabdus123
deadlyabdus123

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 deadlyabdus123
Member since 2011 • 120 Posts
In the sense that all the R&D costs would not go to the cell and be used to take losses on Ram and better video card? As much as i love the cell, the smart idea would have to use a triple core bs cpu like the 360 has and just jack up ram and gpu power. If you ever went from a 7600gt gpu to a gtx480, you can see that gpu makes the most difference. I can even go to performacnce tests that shows, that most cases, cpu from the midstream to the extreme have little impact as much as gpu, especially at 720p res. SOny spent BILLIONS on the cell creation, it was a big mistake in my eyes. More ram and video is what developers bottlenecked themselves this gen. It sickens me.
Avatar image for deadlyabdus123
deadlyabdus123

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 deadlyabdus123
Member since 2011 • 120 Posts

Someone's jelly they don't have a ps3.

TheMoreYouOwn
add me, my psn is deadlyliquidx you just failed and got owned, owned!!!
Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

the cell was kinda a joke and i always felt it was a part of the design because of how it worked with blu ray movie playback but in the end it outperformed the 360 (if only by a hair) and justified itself.