Fat PS3 or Slim PS3?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Posted by PiscesAnimeGirl (234 posts) 4 months, 23 days ago

Poll: Fat PS3 or Slim PS3? (33 votes)

Fat 48%
Slim 48%

Which PS3 do you own and/or which one do you think is better? I currently own a fat 60GB PS3. I've never had a slim nor used one so I can't comment on it.

#1 Edited by lLazzerl (14 posts) -

I've had my Fat ps3 for almost 2 years , never had a single problem except Bf4 freezes and stuff...but that's another story. Anyway , i've recently changed it's hard drive to 1tb and still running smooth as usual. Hopefully it keeps alive untill end of the year when i get my ps4.

#2 Posted by anarchy1621 (10 posts) -

I'm gonna go with the Slim. It takes up just a little less area overall which matters in cramped entertainment centers & the big bonus is it has better cooling capacity. Heat is the enemy in these machines so better cooling is a must.

That being said I do still dearly love the looks of my original Fat 80GB model. Its near flawless after almost 6 years of dependable service & great gaming. I've upgraded the HDD to a 500GB just recently without a hitch. The thing is built like a tank & it shows.

#3 Posted by SlyRoxas97 (59 posts) -

What? They're the same, except the slim has a significantly bigger hard drive and a lower failure rate lol.

#5 Posted by stationplay_4 (442 posts) -

i have the fat 40gb but i replaced the hard drive with a 500gb one and have never had a problem. never had a slim though.

#6 Posted by Megavideogamer (5242 posts) -

I own all 3 versions of Playstation 3. The Playstation 3 phat. The fabled 60Giger. The regular PS3 slim 320GB model. and a Superslim 250GB launch model of PS3 super slim.

So I would say Regular Slim, Phat, and then last place is Superslim. I and not really thrilled with the build quality of the superslim. It seems "cheap" compared to The Phats and the regular slims. I'd hope that Sony would have done the top loader model like the PS2 9000 and 7000 series. The sliding door is just "meh"

#7 Edited by Smashbrossive50 (2878 posts) -

The "Sumo" PS3 was my choice,yet I don't use it very often 'coz it doesn't have that amazing "Titanium/Silver/Platinum Banarang" controller

#8 Edited by BH14 (1660 posts) -

After considering hardware build, value price, hard drive size, features, size, energy usage, failure rate, heat and noise, I would rank the types of PS3 like this...

Slim PS3 > Super Slim > Fat

Toss up between Slim and Super Slim. I actually use my Super Slim lot more than my Slim though especially because it came with a 500GB hard drive rather than my 120GB Slim. Thinking about upgrading to a 500GB or possibly 1TB hard drive for the Slim. The Super Slim is really great though because it has a nice compact size, looks good and I like the sliding door feature. I would take a brand new super slim over a used fat or slim so there should be no debate there. The thing that kind of bothers is Sony trying to push 12 GB Super Slim for $199.99. A 12 GB is useless and making the customer pay an extra expense by purchasing a hard drive so the super slim doesn't "really" cost $200. I bought an Assassin's Creed III bundle 500 GB Super Slim (brand new) for only $220 with free shipping and no tax like a year ago and sold Assassin's Creed III for like $32 so the 500GB Super Slim cost me like $190 with free shipping and no tax. I highly suggest that gamers get at least a 500 GB PS3 because of PS+ with the instant games and the discounts of digital games. I was one of those people who always said "I always prefer disc over digital" but because PS+ has been so great with instant games and MORE BECAUSE OF THE DISCOUNTS. I currently have 19 instant games and 45 purchased digital games. When it comes to systems, always choose brand new and opt for a huge hard drive if you are PS+ subscriber.

#9 Edited by marcheegsr (2431 posts) -

I prefer the slim over the fat and super slim. My fat ps3 died too early but my slim is going strong for many years. I heard the super slim is noisy but I haven't played one yet.

#10 Posted by SoNin360 (5213 posts) -

My 80GB fat has been running well for over 5 years now. I had to upgrade the hard drive a few years ago, and I've still had no issues with it. I did have to restore my system once, but that was my fault, and I had my saves backed up anyway. If my PS3 were to die, I would just pick up a slim as that's pretty much all you find in stores aside from the Super Slim, which doesn't look appealing and essentially requires a hard drive upgrade out of the box.

#11 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69080 posts) -

i got the slim, not the super slim

#12 Posted by 187umKILLAH (1337 posts) -

I've got a 7 year old 80 gig fatty and had no issues with it until last week when it finally stopped reading discs, so saving up to buy my first slim. I never had any cooling issues with it, it's been a great reliable console.

#13 Edited by lensflare15 (6173 posts) -

Aside from a broken hard drive a few years ago (which wasn't too difficult to replace), my 80 GB PS3 has worked wonderfully for the 5 years or so that I've owned it. Never owned a Slim myself, but I believe they are quieter and less fragile, so I would have no reservations about buying one if my current console broke down for good.

#14 Posted by DivineSword (15738 posts) -

i got the slim, not the super slim

Same, still plays perfectly till this day!

#15 Edited by ShepardCommandr (2150 posts) -

I had a launch 60gig model but it died on 2012 so i replaced it with a slim.Never had any problems since and i am quite pleased with it.

#16 Posted by GTR12 (8921 posts) -

80GB fat here with 2TB+ shared space, up to 10TB available, its also got a DIY water-cooling upgrade with my PC, so its quiet.

#17 Posted by betamaxx83 (351 posts) -

I like them all but the PS3 super slim was just trash. The build quality and the disc drive felt so cheap.

#18 Posted by ctzzs (7 posts) -

I also own a 60GB PS3. The old PS3 looks like a true beast compared to the slim one. Too bad that my PS3 got the YLOD, i should fix it as soon as possible.

#19 Edited by BH14 (1660 posts) -

The fat ps3 were the worst of the 3 for many reasons.

1. Reliabilty? It easily had the highest failure rate at 15% within 2 years. As years gone by and sony learned from their mistake, they improved the reliability of the ps3. YLOD was really prone with fat.

2. Energy? It used a lot of energy which made it overheat. Every single fat ps3 got extremely hot that you could fry eggs and bacon on it. Heat would mess up with sodering and you get ylod.

3. Noise? A fat ps3 is so loud and sounds like a chopper with the fan. Impossible to watch a movie with background noise.

4. Hard drives? It was originally 20 and 60 GB at launch. Way too small. I know it could be replaced but that is an extra expense. Sony was making bigger and bigger hard drives for ps3 through the life cycle. Glad I got 500 GB super slim for $190 with free shipping and no tax before they were pushing out the 12 GB.

5. Hardware size? The fat is so huge. When it comes to technology, you want compact size. The super slim size is so much better than the huge fat.

6. Price? You have to consider the prices as well for each model. How much the fat, slim and super slim was at the time and what was the best value? I spent like almost $330 after tax for 120 gb slim..... I got a brand new 500 gb super slim for $190. During black friday, you could have gotten 250 gb super slim bundle with the last of us and batman origins for $199.99 plus tax.... sell the games and you are looking at $150 250 gb super slim. We all remember the very high price of fats. You have to consider price. Buy cheaper used fat? I would never ever buy a used system with all those years of wear and tear.

#20 Posted by RossRichard (2306 posts) -

Fat for the full BC.

#21 Posted by Solid_Max13 (3482 posts) -

I've still got my 60GB Fat upgraded the HDD to 500GB and still working and loving it, it's now 8 years old and still working flawlessly not had an issue.

#22 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69080 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride said:

i got the slim, not the super slim

Same, still plays perfectly till this day!

Same here. I have only had minor issues with it freezing sometimes. But that's about it

#23 Posted by 187umKILLAH (1337 posts) -

@BH14 said:

The fat ps3 were the worst of the 3 for many reasons.

1. Reliabilty? It easily had the highest failure rate at 15% within 2 years. As years gone by and sony learned from their mistake, they improved the reliability of the ps3. YLOD was really prone with fat.

2. Energy? It used a lot of energy which made it overheat. Every single fat ps3 got extremely hot that you could fry eggs and bacon on it. Heat would mess up with sodering and you get ylod.

I'm not sure where you got this info from but mine never got extremely hot, it got warm but not hot enough to fry food on lol. Maybe it has something to do with the temperature in your country contributing to the consoles overheating as my country rarely gets very high temperatures, but I do like the idea of a console and frying pan in one!

#24 Posted by PiscesAnimeGirl (234 posts) -
#25 Edited by Dogswithguns (10670 posts) -

I liked my fat PS3, but it broke.. my slim kinda slow and freezes too much.

#26 Posted by sukraj (21641 posts) -

I have a fat 60gb ps3

#27 Posted by special-ops (111 posts) -

I prefer the Slim PS3 because it has 250GB and it will last for years compared to the Fat PS3.