The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

PS3 fat and PS3 slim differences

darksteeldarksteel Registered User regular
edited May 2010 in Help / Advice Forum
So, I'm about to take the plunge in buying a Playstation 3, but I don't really know the definitive differences between a PS3 Fat and Slim.

Aside from hard drive space (which I'm guessing is used exclusively for PSN stuff, saves, and installs) and the console's size, is there any significant differences between the two of them? I ask because where I'm from, the price difference between a Fat and a Slim is pretty dramatic (around a $100-$120 worth), so I'd like to save some money if I can.

shikisig6-1.jpg
darksteel on

Posts

  • PooshlmerPooshlmer Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    The only difference you'll care about is PS2 backcompatibility, which will cost you $500 or more. Otherwise the fat just has a few more ports and a slightly different interface.

    Pooshlmer on
  • BartholamueBartholamue Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Dude, just get a Slim. The fatty's advantage is being able to use Linux (which I think stopped being supported recently), easier HDD removal, and memory card readers (not sure if this is on the 40/80 gig version) but other than that, there is no advantage in getting a fatty over the slim.

    Bartholamue on
    Steam- SteveBartz Xbox Live- SteveBartz PSN Name- SteveBartz
  • Shorn Scrotum ManShorn Scrotum Man Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    The newer phats (the ones you'll be mostly likely to find) don't have any of the above listed advantages even. They reduced ports, got rid of memory card readers, and no BC.

    Might as well just get the slim.

    Shorn Scrotum Man on
    steam_sig.png
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Pooshlmer wrote: »
    The only difference you'll care about is PS2 backcompatibility, which will cost you $500 or more. Otherwise the fat just has a few more ports and a slightly different interface.

    Really?

    I paid $310 for my BC 80GB PS3. That was more than a year ago.

    Checking right now, I found a BC 80GB PS3 for $299 on eBay, buy-it-now, with a copy of Motorstorm, HDMI cable, and a DS3 controller.

    I see a 20 GB model for $275, and another 80GB for $285. Both BC.

    It's not $500.

    (Of course, all of these are used, so that is something to consider as well.)

    If you don't care about BC, this is all irrelevant of course. I used my PS3 as a PS2 player more often than not (between that, my Xbox 360, and my Dreamcast, I'm running out of space in my shelving unit, and I have 3 dead PS2s under my belt). Obviously, a BC PS2 is a must. Also, the larger PS3s seem to have a higher rate of errors or failure (just got to the Tech subforum here) than the Slims, which I myself have barely heard of malfunctioning. It's very low, in either case, however.

    Synthesis on
  • BartholamueBartholamue Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    The newer phats (the ones you'll be mostly likely to find) don't have any of the above listed advantages even. They reduced ports, got rid of memory card readers, and no BC.

    Might as well just get the slim.

    Hmm, I kinda had a feeling there were no memory card readers in the newer fats..

    Also, this may be of good reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation_3

    Bartholamue on
    Steam- SteveBartz Xbox Live- SteveBartz PSN Name- SteveBartz
  • MichaelLCMichaelLC In what furnace was thy brain? ChicagoRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I'd go Slim.

    I trade my 60GB in for a Slim recently and haven't looked back.

    MichaelLC on
  • darksteeldarksteel Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Since I'm one of those guys whose PS2 still chugs along as nicely as the day I bought it, I suppose I don't really have any need for backwards compatibility. And like Synthesis I'm starting to realize that space is a premium below my TV.

    Alright, slim it is then. Thanks for the help, guys!

    darksteel on
    shikisig6-1.jpg
  • emp123emp123 Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Plus, with the Slim you get power savings!

    And if you wait a little bit longer, Sony is releasing a newer version of the Slim with a 45nm core I believe that should lead to reduced power usage and reduced heat.

    Or you could just buy a Slim now, I doubt the difference will be that great. Unless you want the latest and greatest...

    emp123 on
  • GothicLargoGothicLargo Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Question...

    WHY THE FUCK IS SAKURA TAISEN V NORTH AMERICA ON PS2 AND WII?

    GothicLargo on
    atfc.jpg
  • atmaatma Deep RiverRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Because the game came out five years ago on PS2 in japan?

    atma on
  • GothicLargoGothicLargo Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    atma wrote: »
    Because the game came out five years ago on PS2 in japan?

    I get that much it's the porting it to Wii but not PS3 bullshit that annoys me.

    GothicLargo on
    atfc.jpg
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    atma wrote: »
    Because the game came out five years ago on PS2 in japan?

    I get that much it's the porting it to Wii but not PS3 bullshit that annoys me.

    Because there is no point in porting it to the PS3 when there are still more PS2s out there?

    Seriously, it's that simple. Plus, if the Sakura Wars games have a black sheep title, it's the fifth game. It just happens to be the one brought over to the United States.

    That, and the fact that the first game was remade for the PS2 and, again, not the PS3.

    Synthesis on
Sign In or Register to comment.