9600GT = 2 x PS3 7800GTX
GTS 250 = 2 x 9600GT
GTS 250 = Radeon 5750
Radeon 5870 = 4 x 5750
Radeon 6990 = 2 x 5870

6990 = 32 x PS3

Yeah sure, you can even have 8 ghz, if you want. Or Intel even has a 48-core on a single chip (only for internal use). It doesn't imply technological progress. You have to consider the energy-consumption per computing power and how much of the hardware the software can use, since the software-performance isn't accelerated automatically like back then when technological progress used to happen. That is the problem.

Software is getting more complex while at the same time people need to be productive and assure solid software. From a software-technology perspective this article is sending you to the stone-age again.

Then pretend to go on knowing you know about technological progress. *sigh* I bet you don't even know how a FinFET works or even about 3d-ICs :/

How can having 48 cores in the same space not technological progress? progress has been doing the exact same thing (more stuff in the same space) for decades, just because you want to make a console look less like a heap of aging **** doesn't make it less so. The performance of components has grown faster in the last 5 years than ever, and the next 5 years will be even faster. Although a theoretical limit of MOSFET-esque systems does wave hello in around 10 years or so (primarily due to shrinking limits, but performance will still go up with such systems for a few years after). Although spin computing and quantum computing may provide an alternative by that time it is not certain by any means.

Also, performance per watt has been increasing dramatically over time. My 2500K at 5GHz? that uses about three times the power of a p4 for roughly 20x the performance. Moore's law is still being matched, and performance is going alongside it.

With regards to software? Different argument entirely.

Bottom line? Consoles are aging hunks o' junk in hardware terms

Don't continue this debate as you don't have a leg to stand on, you'll just be making yourself look silly.

9600GT = 2 x PS3 7800GTX
GTS 250 = 2 x 9600GT
GTS 250 = Radeon 5750
Radeon 5870 = 4 x 5750
Radeon 6990 = 2 x 5870

6990 = 32 x PS3

This (apart from a hd5870 is ~2.5x a hd5750, making the overall value 20x), and for the CPU side please remember that any kind of general computing functions on the ps3 are extremely slow. For proof have a look at the ps3 web browser (youtube videos can't even run above a heavily pixellated 240p) and when you press the ps home button in game.

Just letting you know I am a computer-engineer;)

Also, performance per watt has been increasing dramatically over time. My 2500K at 5GHz? that uses about three times the power of a p4 for roughly 20x the performance. Moore's law is still being matched, and performance is going alongside it. Wait two years and you will probably see what is really happening.

Also, performance per watt has been increasing dramatically over time. My 2500K at 5GHz? that uses about three times the power of a p4 for roughly 20x the performance. Moore's law is still being matched, and performance is going alongside it. Wait two years and you will probably see what is really happening.

Wait two years and we'll be on the 16nm node (bar any major cock ups) and performance per watt will again have increased. 16nm shouldn't be much of an issue overall, although things will get very difficult from there on in. The next consoles will be miles behind current PC's because the cooling required wont fit in the case. Performance per watt is going up, but that doesn't mean we don't need better cooling too as more power is still used.

Wait 10 years and we'll start nudging against the absolute limits of MOSFET-esque tech if things go to plan. However, there will be ways around that for a few years after such as chip stacking (although even in itself, that won't be perfectly thermally efficient). However we will be looking into completely different methods of calculation by then (and indeed, we do have working prototype qubits, although they're nowhere near perfect).

EDIT: what's a 'computer' engineer? People don't engineer 'computers' they engineer the components What do you specialise in?