@RossRichard: To be fair, the first guy had a better GPU(open box deal). Just for fun, here is a PC that costs $400-$500 and better than both.
Well of course your PC is better, the video is two years old. The hardware they would use now is completely different on both counts. However, the point will still remain. AMD is hard to beat in that price range. That is why going with AMD is a no-brainer for Sony and MS. Thus rendering this whole thread irrelevant.
AMD gave Sony and MS the CPU they wanted for the price they were willing to pay. Sony/MS didn't want the new consoles to be powerful, they wanted them to be cheap. Yes AMD is trailing behind Intel, but that does not mean their CPUs are garbage. I dare anyone to put together $400-$500 gaming rigs with Intel CPU and an AMD CPU and see which one is better.
Oh wait, that has been done already. By Gamespot, no less.
Wii U was marketed HORRIBLY and the system was reliant on a gamepad that nobody wanted. It's a shame, because the actual console is great and the first-party games are amazing.
Log in to comment