wait..wait..
but saw at ign.com bout 360vsps3 spec..ps3 Dimensions=13.5" x 3.25"..
Xbox 360=10.25" x 2.5" 
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614783p1.html

so which one is true?

wait a sec, whats the diffrences between cores and SPEs?? from the ps3 spec only mention SPEs? does this means its only got 1 core?

btw, from what i read, 1 core on xbox is multithreaded at least 2...

.. hmmm

Hmm, Sony up to the same old BS as usual. As to my knowledge, the xbox 360 has a four fold advantage over the PS3 in regard to raw processing power. The Sony unit (CELL) has a tested output of somewhere in the area of 200-250Gflop. Now architectural differences aside (We'll get to that later), the tri-coreIBM PowerPC processor in the 360 can perform well over a Tflop (emphasis on "well over"). Some claim it to run closer in the range of about 1.2Tflop (Unconfirmed). I saw the whole presentation for the PS3, and I felt that deja vu all over again. Sony claims that it's graphics core adds on an additional 1.8Tflop of processing power for a total of 2Tflop. ??? ... ??? ... ??? . WOW! And I thought with the release of the PSP that Sony was finally ready to step up to the big boys' table... I was wrong. The absurdity of their claims can't even be measured, as a graphics core has nothing to do with the systems CPU. To put it simply, SCEI is lying, again. And simply is trying to their way out of another technology spoof (and miserably failing). Cell is no where close to the power of microsoft's processing solution, and just as last time when they claimed that their "emotional engine" was on top, it ended up about 1/10 as fast as the marketed number. This isn't to say that the PS3 is inferior to the XBOX 360, only that we have seen this before and obviously microsoft came out on top. As far as developing goes and coding, this system looks even more rediculous than the emotion CPU. Many argue that the PS2 was more powerful than the xbox when people learned how to use it, but to be honest no one (except maybe bungie) ever dug that deep into the XBOX's power. My guess from the lineup of 3rd parties this time around (a vast majority of Sony's staples hoping on the XBOX360 bandwagon) that sony has finally run out of marketing tactics to appease the consumers, and with development costs skyrocketing, I think developers will put more consideration into what system they decide to base their games. But this is really just fuzz right now. Most consumers are terribly educated and will usually just listen to whatever the cool crowd says. Last gen, Sony had overwhelming support from pop culture, which made playstation into the cliche that took out nintendo. I think already with microsoft's MTV marketing campaign and sleek design (not to mention billions of dollars) that they will push sony out of the market. But this all remains to be seen. One thing is for damn sure. CELL is no where near as powerful as the 360CPU. It's almost unethical to compare them.

From /. the "ps3 produces 1 TFlops theory" is pretty much bunk. Yes, it can do that, but only if you disable all other functions and have the entire processing speed dedicated to nothing but the benchmark.
Ie, you benchmark your computer by running nothing but benchmark utility... no directX, no background programs AND most importantly, NO OS (like windows).
All the discussion about Gigaflops are just marketing smokescreen. The PS3 has more power, but is irrelevant until the developers figure out how to get the juice from the processor "array". We'll only see real comparison around February, when the PS3 SDK has been out for long enough and there are enough 360 games out to compare with what is coming.

ty
spring 2006......in malaysia  ???