X360 v PS3 Multiformat Face-Off, Round Three

By Richard Leadbetter Published 5 July, 2007

Clash of the Titans.

Page 1 of 4

Once again Eurogamer bravely ventures into the no-man's-land of cross-platform games development with the latest in our ongoing PlayStation 3 vs Xbox 360 features.

The objectives here are very straightforward. Due to the way that code is distributed by the publishers, Eurogamer tends to review the Xbox 360 games first, so the main aim is to play 'catch-up' and provide additional platform-specific commentary where appropriate. We're interested in any gameplay differences, along with peripheral or feature support exclusive to a particular console. But additionally, we're also keen on charting the progress of cross-format development more generally, so we also provide technical observations and comparison shots that highlight the similarities and differences between the various versions.

As always we do our best to ensure that the screenshots we take are of the utmost quality. Thanks to the arrival of a plush, new, slightly quieter Xbox 360 Elite (reviewed previously) and its all-important direct digital output, we're able to provide all screenshots on both formats via lossless 24-bit HDMI, hooked up to a HD capture unit, captured at both 720p and 1080p where appropriate.

Colour saturation appears to vary depending on the system and the game, but full-range RGB was a must on both systems (Xbox 360 spring update and PS3 firmware 1.81) with the same capture calibration used for both systems.

So enough of the technical fripperies and onto the stars of the show: the games themselves; a range of titles old and new, with much to discuss and then slag each other off about:

Page 1 of 4

Comments (172) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • MrsPacMan #1 5 years ago

    Hee Hee Heeee

  • squarepusher #2 5 years ago

    *elf ears twitch*

    they're coming...

  • #3 5 years ago

    Oh shit..............................

  • old_skool #4 5 years ago

    /grabs popcorn

  • squarepusher #5 5 years ago

    okami or this....

  • #6 5 years ago

    I have to say this to you Rodger Eurogamer, you have balls the size of an elephant :)

  • SeesThroughAll #7 5 years ago

    Why, of course the PS3 is shit! It's a miracle it manages to run Oblivion!

  • ccfb #8 5 years ago

    Was the Oblivion comparison done after the 360 patch that arrived at about the same time as Shivering Isles was applied?

    edit : 360.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 14:02

  • rotmm #9 5 years ago

    This is what I get when trying to enter the comparison galleries "We're sorry, but that page doesn't exist any more! It may have moved, been removed or may just never have existed in the first place. I don't suppose being told that really helps you much; why don't you try searching?"

  • MyPointIs #10 5 years ago

    Itīs a "Spot the differences you geek!" competition!!!

  • azurelas_2 #11 5 years ago

    Ok Eurogamer, now stop messing around and give us a Ninja Gaiden Sigma review!
    Please.

  • DUFFKING #12 5 years ago

    The only comparison where the PS3 has a genuine andvantage is the Oblvion ones with the sharper textures at a distance. Otherwise they look exactly the fucking same.

  • decibel #13 5 years ago

    They look... the same!

    Multiformat for the lose, to be honest.

    Bring on first-party.

  • urban #14 5 years ago

    sigh..you guys did a crook for the 360 then a overcrook for the ps3..PLEASE could you make these results more accurate in future

    /sarcasm

  • Daikon #15 5 years ago

    So they're all more or less identical.
    If I'd have to choose between getting a 360 or PS3 now I'd go for the 360 for three reasons:

    - Price of system
    - Rumble
    - Live

    Sorry Sony, you lose this round.

  • old_skool #16 5 years ago

    These "face-offs" are about as useful as me putting two different brands of sugar in my tea...

  • squarepusher #17 5 years ago

    Well this is a let down.

  • bauhaus #18 5 years ago

    Only tightwads purchase just one system

  • Katsumoto #19 5 years ago

    @ Daikon. I thought the same, but remember the BIG advantage PS3 has - reliability. After 5 days of owning a 360 and now over a month of Microsoft having it, you really need to take it into account over the other features. Remember the price will go down by Christmas.

    Atm I guess i'll stick with ps2 and wii!

  • SeesThroughAll #20 5 years ago

    The difference is that you sometimes have to keep certain fanboys happy by telling them that their prone to self-destruct hardware is oh so very superior. ;)

  • Eighthours #21 5 years ago

    Interesting how Vegas is basically rated the same. Most reviews I've seen of the PS3 version point to a few framerate problems and worse lighting effects.

  • IAmBatman #22 5 years ago

    Rainbow Six Vegas uses smaller textures in places on the PS3 version. I can't tell it from any comparison shots, I only know cause one of ubi's level artists mentioned it.

  • NewYork #23 5 years ago

    Forget rumble, the SIXAXIS tilt features are crappy all on their ownsome.

  • CitizenGeek #24 5 years ago

    PS3 games seem ... brighter o_O

  • Lim-Dul #25 5 years ago

    Holy macaroni!
    You could show me screenshots taken on both consoles all day long and I still wouldn't be able to tell which are which but for the captions plastered all over them. ;-)

    Yeah, yeah - in [insert absurd time span here] the PS3 will show its true power - I don't care - the XBox 360 is cheaper, has rumble, better online support and does about the same thing... However, I own neither console. :-D
    Edited by 2 at 05/07/07 @ 14:36

  • PearOfAnguish #26 5 years ago

    PS3 games seem ... brighter o_O

    PS3 seems to have some issues with lighting in several games, perhaps they're compensating for the lack of lighting effects.

  • sharpfish #27 5 years ago

    well... still the same thing we knew same time last year. 360 is BETTER than PS3... and will continue to be until Sony put out some proper first party games (GT5, Wipeout etc). These will probably show their uncanny knack of getting amazing results from inferior hardware.

    Right now though, for the other 90% of games/devs, the Xbox360 is obviously still the console of choice and not just because of it's generally better looking/performing multiplatform games but because of the sheer number of quality games too* **


    *and rumble



    **and price

  • afghan_jones #28 5 years ago

    @ashed

    If you cant see a difference, there must be something wrong with your eyes.

    I got so worried by this article that I have made an appointment at the opticians for next week. They were really busy though as loads of people were getting checked due to their inability to see any difference in next gen screen grabs.

    how about doing comparisons on a regular 28" SD telly with a Scart cable like what the 90% of the country without HD have?

  • ChromeMud #29 5 years ago

    It's predictable for Sony fanboys to state the 360 as unreliable everytime
    the comparison favours the 360 in terms of performance in games.
    Yeah,we know it's shoddy but it beats the REAL NEXT GEN in every other way...LOL :-)

  • SBfistfun #30 5 years ago

    teh power of teh cell!...


    ..oh

  • Overlush #31 5 years ago

    Conclusion: if devs bother to get off their arse, the PS3 is the better platform
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 14:54

  • SteveB #32 5 years ago

    They look virtually identical, but the 360 seems to generally have a better framerate which is a big difference to me.

  • bit_mite #33 5 years ago

    Interesting article. Makes me wonder - have *any* PS3 games used the SixAxis effectively? It seems to be something of a gimmick...

  • SeesThroughAll #34 5 years ago

    But it's still shoddy. What's the point of bragging about all that awesomeness when it's built in a way it will likely break down in a couple of months? Does anybody in their right mind call that good value for their money?

    That's quality, right there, keep it up ;)

  • Eighthours #35 5 years ago

    The contrast is very interesting between E3 2005 where Sony were claiming their console was twice as powerful as the 360 (EG basically agreeing), and now, where a PS3 port as good as the 360 version is a victory! Amazing how everything's changed around. I wonder what this year's E3 will bring us!

  • presbyterrorion #36 5 years ago

    More fanboy bitching.

  • BeersOfWar #37 5 years ago

    SUXAXIS!

  • Weezer #38 5 years ago

    Launch day Xbox360 still going strong. Yay me!

    Perhaps if I'd turned it on between autumn 2006 and last month it might have broken.

  • GamesConnoisseur #39 5 years ago

    Yeah, Sony crowd will always do 'LMAO, LOL your console always break down!', and Xbots do 'Your get crappy jaggies and my god inferior graphics for so called superior console WTF!'. I have both and like both but I think it is pretty much close level playing field when you take into account every pros and cons of each console. The only f**kwits are those who cannot see any merits at all of the 'rival' console!

    What it is all about at the end is the games, and hand on my heart I do prefer getting 360 version when virtually same as PS3, for rumble and achievements point! By the way yes my 360 did break down once in 1 and half year.

    I hope this will be the last comparsion article for a while, as I think around the end of year, as we would be in better position to gauge then.

  • dr_swin #40 5 years ago

    how do we know the ps3 is reliable. I havent turned mine on in over 2 months as there is nothing worth playing at present. plus there arent that many out there if the poor sales are to be believed. (stand by light seems pretty reliable though)
    Edited by 2 at 05/07/07 @ 15:24

  • BeersOfWar #41 5 years ago

    I'd take a potentially unreliable machine with tons of great games over a reliable system with hardly any games, any day of the week.

  • bioreit #42 5 years ago

    @ Katsumoto

    "After 5 days of owning a 360 and now over a month of Microsoft having it, you really need to take it into account over the other features. Remember the price will go down by Christmas.

    Atm I guess i'll stick with ps2 and wii!"

    Five days? Should have taken it back to the shop for a replacement. Immediate, no questions asked, easy.

    Worked for me 6 months after I got my 360. Barely noticed the downtime to be honest - only lost one evening of gaming and even that was a Thursday (pub-quiz night down my way).

  • Gurgeh #43 5 years ago

    "But it's still shoddy. What's the point of bragging about all that awesomeness when it's built in a way it will likely break down in a couple of months? Does anybody in their right mind call that good value for their money? "

    The failure rate since release is apparently about 30% which is shockingly bad, but it does mean that XBox 360s are not "likely to break down" but in fact likely to work.

    Neither the XBox 360 or the PS3 deserve anyone's money right now. When the heating problems of the 360 are solved it will be good value; the PS3 needs a big price cut and more games.

  • nickthegun #44 5 years ago

    "However, the Xbox 360 game has much more extra content on offer via the Xbox Live Marketplace (for a cost of course), including KotN and the more recent Shivering Isles expansion"


    You forgot Horse Armour, n00b!

    Ahem....but seriously.....was the 360 version the fully patched one? Because the Shivering Isles patch made a lot of difference. SMOKE PARTICLES!!

  • bioreit #45 5 years ago

    @ Gurgeh

    +1 for pointing out the negative points of both consoles.

  • onyxbox #46 5 years ago

    all of these games came out on 360 first... by the time they reach PS3 they've been passed to TEAM B to do the port and then it's hit and miss whether or not TEAM B and the game code is easy to port.

    This IMO is both good and bad for PS3... Good because it's obvious the PS3 can do better and bad because at the end of the day it doesn't matter if the development teams cut costs by cutting corners when doing the ports.

    So as it stands right now... 360 games that are ported to the PS3 have MARGINALLY better graphics and much better online functions.

    These articles are a load of bollocks really aren't they?

  • SeesThroughAll #47 5 years ago

    30% is WAY too much, it's even worse than the already exceptionally bad PS2 failure rate.

    30% means that one person out of each three will eventually see the RROD. Yes it means likely to break down.

  • bioreit #48 5 years ago

    SeesThroughAll needs to learn more about probabilities...

  • RichGL #49 5 years ago

    I can only see one very small comparison image for Oblivion? Where are the rest hiding?

    found em :)
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 15:39

  • SeesThroughAll #50 5 years ago

    First, I do know more about the laws of probability than most people here.

    Second, it's not about probability (33,(3)% is almost the same as 30% anyway), it's about quality control.

  • Clive_Dunn #51 5 years ago

    Engage the Infinite Improbability drive !

  • SteveB #52 5 years ago

    30% ? There is no definitive answer to how many have failed yet.

    What is apparent though is that there is a problem big enough for it to make headlines (unless Sony PR are the secret mastermind be hind it all. Ooooh Evil).

  • bioreit #53 5 years ago

    @ SeesThroughAll:

    "First, I do know more about the laws of probability than most people here.

    Second, it's not about probability (33,(3)% is almost the same as 30% anyway), it's about quality control."

    Right. So how can a figure under half mean something is "likely"? The two statements are not compatible.

    Likely means 'more chance of something happening than not', so anything under 50% probability is, by the very definition of the word, "unlikely".

    But then, I am forgetting that this is you talking about a 360, after all....
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 15:46

  • Gurgeh #54 5 years ago

    "First, I do know more about the laws of probability than most people here."

    You probably don't.

  • miiiguel #55 5 years ago

    360: heating problems? I do not intend to get into bed with it.

    The "360 problems" thing is really a internet thing, mainly in europe, where all consumer electronics, have a 2-year warranty. I mean, there are ppl here at Eurogamer (as in Europe) who says they had to pay for an extended warranty (I suspect they heard that @ an US forum).
    I only had a problem once with a console, and it was with a PSP, wich had 4 dead pixels and Sony refused to swap it, claiming they only had to do it if it had more than 5. And I was quite surprised they are right, there's legislastion that says that.
    Edited by 4 at 05/07/07 @ 16:00

  • Eighthours #56 5 years ago

    The "360 problems" thing is really a internet thing, mainly in europe, where all consumer electronics, have a 2-year warranty.

    Try enforcing that in the real world without going to court. After 1 year nobody wants to know, despite consumer laws.

  • skillian #57 5 years ago

    anything under 50% probability is, by the very definition of the word, "unlikely".

    Perhaps you should check a very dictionary?

  • miiiguel #58 5 years ago

    Eighthours: I don't know about the 360, as mine never had a problem, but my PDA broke after 20 months, and I had no problem in having it fixed for free.

  • jellyhead #59 5 years ago

    Am i confused but are some of the pictures switched in the a few of the comparisons?
    360 images are brighter than the PS3 images in most of the examples apart from a few later examples.
    did you adjust the TV settings or is the output so similar they've been swapped by mistake?

  • miiiguel #60 5 years ago

    be sure to keep the receipt, though.

  • Carrybagma #61 5 years ago

    Well, I think it's now pretty conclusive that the PS3 has the better graphics.

    Is EG going to do a finale to confirm this, or will there be more pointless comparisons?

  • infoxicated #62 5 years ago

    "Once again, Eurogamer incites the fanboys to make up the shortfall in page impressions required to glean our advertising revenue."

    Fixed that for you.

  • bioreit #63 5 years ago

    @ skillian

    Would "not likely" be better then? If something is likely, it is 'destined to happen'; something unlikely is 'not destined to happen'.

    Granted that "unlikely" can be used more to describe things that are almost never going to happen, but I think in this case, my usage was correct, no?

    If the failure rate is 30%, then that means that the 'success' rate is 70% - i.e. 70% of 360s do not fail.

    Therefore, you have a 70% chance of having a 360 working correctly for its entire intended life - meaning that SeesThroughAll saying "Yes it means likely to break down" was wrong.

  • miiiguel #64 5 years ago

    I care if my car breaks, I definitely do not whine if a console breaks, specially if I do not own it.

    It's amazing how some guys are obsessed with the "oh so great failure rate" of a system they don't own and do not (supposedly ;) ) want.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 16:30

  • Monkey_Puncher #65 5 years ago

    I get the feeling a lot of the these horror stories on forums about 360's breaking down are just Sony fanboys attempting to belittle the 360. There's obviously a problem with faulty systems, but it seems like every one and their dog has had 6 broken consoles in 5 weeks of ownership.

    I've had my console since launch and am yet to have any problems *touch wood*

    Even if it did break down I'd still stick with 360, you know why? Because the games and the online service mean that even with the possibility of needing it fixed, it's still well worth owning.

  • jellyhead #66 5 years ago

    Good for you Monkey_Puncher but the 360 reliability issues are the reason Ms haven't had my money yet. I'd get one if i thought i could trust it to work. Maybe after christmas when hopefully the new heatsinks are installed at the factory and maybe the 65nm chips are in too.

  • miiiguel #67 5 years ago

    jelly: buy a PS3, they don't break, and da awesome C3LL!!!
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 16:40

  • squarepusher #68 5 years ago

    Consoles and car ownership aside, you really are a complete tool, miiiguel.

  • miiiguel #69 5 years ago

    what's a tool ? I'm portuguese!, tool = screwdriver; hammer...????
    I bet it's not nice, but I can learn something nasty as well.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 16:46

  • Arwin #70 5 years ago

    Motorstorm, Fl0w, Super Rub-a-Duck are some of my favorite sixaxis supporting titles. A lot of the stuff that the Wii does is possible on the sixaxis, and I think we'll see that reflected in games soon enough, probably on PSN games in particular.

  • Dark_Phoenix_PT #71 5 years ago

    Miiiguel, he means you're a tool in the hands of the anti-christ microsoft.
    Btw, I am Portuguese too.

  • miiiguel #72 5 years ago

    Dark_Phoenix_PT: ok, obrigado. ;)

  • miiiguel #73 5 years ago

    Dark_Phoenix_PT: Did you ask for a tour over Crackdown ?
    I'd take games over reliability any day, it's 100% no fun to have no games.

  • afghan_jones #74 5 years ago

    @ashed

    I got that. I meant why dont they do comparisons on setups people actually have at home?

    Doing comparisons on super pimp HD tvs with full HMDI etc is irrelevant to 90% of people as they lack that set up. most of us are playing on SD sets with Scart leads so why not compare PS3 and 360 under these conditions as that surely is more relvant to more people.

  • the_sas_man #75 5 years ago

    These "face-offs" are about as useful as me putting two different brands of sugar in my tea...

    ___

    Actually different brands of sugar offer different sweetness. So be very careful

  • bigbadbeasty #76 5 years ago

    After my 3rd replacement in 18 months I gave up on my 360, and just sold it. It was a shame, but everyone around me at work is or was having the same problem :(

  • robg #77 5 years ago

    let's be honest about this "likely to work" crap - the point is the failure rate is far too high. Nitpicking over the guy's exact wording is not the province of intelligent, unbiased responses.

  • miiiguel #78 5 years ago

    the console has no games, it performs worse, it's more expensive...

    but..., but..., the other one is white, therefor sux!

  • old_skool #79 5 years ago

    Actually different brands of sugar offer different sweetness. So be very careful

    The point is they do the same job. Get it ?Huh huh ?Same job, play the same? Its not like one is sugar and the other is honey...oh 4 feck sake I can't take these analogies anymore

    /needs something stronger than tea

  • zuljin #80 5 years ago

    @bauhaus
    "Only tightwads purchase just one system"
    Lol!

    @robg
    +1

    @EG
    "...well-placed sources estimate as much as 35MB (although Sony continues to work to decrease this footprint in each new firmware)."
    Where the hell did you get that info from?

  • SeesThroughAll #81 5 years ago

    bioreit:

    30% as estimated is not an acceptable failure rate. From what I expect from any consumer electronics hardware, it's much more likely to fail than what anybody should deem acceptable.

    Just saying that anything below 50% is OK shows what a tool you are. But, yes, it's the XBox360, so we should excuse it.

    Oh, BTW, how clever of you, trying to exclude the part where I mention that it's quality control I'm talking about.

    Edited by 3 at 05/07/07 @ 17:41

  • miiiguel #82 5 years ago

    /is happy, knows tool/

    I'm a tool!

    Where this %'s came from anyway? who's counting?

    I bet if da C3LL had shown its power, the infamous failure rate of the 360 wouldn't be an issue at this discussion. Just a feeling, though.
    Edited by 2 at 05/07/07 @ 17:45

  • GamesConnoisseur #83 5 years ago

    warzin +1

    Lol a great take on the whole debate essentially!

  • AOFanboi #84 5 years ago

    <em>who's counting?</em>

    360 owners, it seems. I am constantly seeing posts saying "I am on my 3rd" and the like in forums whenever 360 reliability comes up.

    Face it: It is not reliable at all when you consider that the accepted failure rate for electronic equipment is much, much lower. If your digital camera breaks down, do you shrug and replace it - over and over again?

  • bioreit #85 5 years ago

    @ SeesThroughAll

    "30% as estimated is not an acceptable failure rate. From what I expect from any consumer electronics hardware, it's much more likely to fail than what anybody should deem acceptable.

    Just saying that anything below 50% is OK shows what a tool you are. But, yes, it's the XBox360, so we should excuse it.

    Oh, BTW, how clever of you, trying to exclude the part where I mention that it's quality control I'm talking about.     "

    1. Did I say it was "acceptable"? No. Stop putting words in my mouth.

    2. Did I say that "anything below 50% is OK"? No. Again, stop attributing words to me that I did not say.

    3. YOU stated that a failure rate of 30% among Xbox 360s (a number plucked out of thin air, I might add...) meant that the 360 hardware was therefore "likely" to fail. I was responding to that part of your comment. You later modified your argument to the "quality control" aspect. You have also modified "likely" into "much more likely to fail than what anybody should deem acceptable" - again, changing what you say from one comment to the next.

    See your quotes below for reference:

    a) "30% means that one person out of each three will eventually see the RROD. Yes it means likely to break down"

    and then six minutes later, after my comment, you switched to saying

    b) "Second, it's not about probability (33,(3)% is almost the same as 30% anyway), it's about quality control"

    You were saying that Xbox 360s were "likely" to fail, based on a 30% failure rate. I said that 30% meant they were not "likely" to fail, as this figure would have to be above 50%. You then changed the argument to "quality control".

    Why should I get embroiled in another discussion with you, when you have yet to reply properly to a point I raised in the first instance?

    4. Insults. What a way to prove how right you are, especially when you call me a "tool" because of something I never even said in the first place...

    Edit: Hadn't put my spelling hat on
    Edited by 2 at 05/07/07 @ 18:23

  • Lim-Dul #86 5 years ago

    1.Rough build great games
    2.Great build rough games

    Now if only they could get it on: Hybrid ftw.

    Like... Rough build, rough games? ;-)

    360 owners, it seems. I am constantly seeing posts saying "I am on my 3rd" and the like in forums whenever 360 reliability comes up.

    It is on the internet so it must be true! Forums! The most reliable source of information, ever! ;-)

    P.S. Seriously where do all these XBox 360 failure rates come from - I have several friends with XBoxes and none of them had any problems with them... Maybe only Korean 24/7 gamers are able to overheat the system with their blazing fast fingers. ;-)
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 18:23

  • SeesThroughAll #87 5 years ago

    Look, a last insullt: if people talk about 30% failure rate, it means people are referring to lack of quality control.
    Can you see the relation? Shall I make a drawing?

    Also, if you're picking on the argument that below 50% does not strictly mean "likely", the message you're trying to pass through is that anything below 50% is "not likely", which would seem to be acceptable. It simply is not the case.

    Go ahead and keep on mentioning my wording and twisting what I said to make it sound like what I said was wrong if it inflates your tiny ego.

    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 18:25

  • miiiguel #88 5 years ago

    Systemwars is so passé-
    Come play with us, we're doing DiRT now !

    Later.

  • Lim-Dul #89 5 years ago

    insullt

    Surely you must mean insulin. =)

    Systemwars is so passé-

    Right - especially since PCs own all consoles anyway (at least MY PC ;-). *DucksAndRunsAway*
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 18:25

  • bioreit #90 5 years ago

    @ SeesThroughAll

    Read what you say. Then read what I say.

    You say: 30% failure means Xbox 360s are likely to fail.

    I say: 30% cannot equal "likely". It would have to be over 50%.

    You say: It's not about likelihood, it's about quality control.

    You changed the argument, then you throw a hissy fit, then try and come over all smug and condescendingly superior.

    Just goes to show that you made a bad statement and can't back it up, so resort to straw-man arguments, disinformation and insults to try and get the hell out.

    And again, you say that because I say it has to be over 50% to qualify as likely, I must mean it is "acceptable". Where did I say that? Nowhere. All I was doing was picking you up on the bad choice of words - you then changed the argument instead of coming up with better terminology.

    And "not likely" does not equal "acceptable". I'd be the first to admit that there's a decent chance any 360 will die - mine went last Wedenesday, for example. But you should be more realistic and say that, rather than "likely".

    Your modified statement that the 360 was far more likely to fail than consumers should have to put up with I would have no problem with, as this is qulaifying it by referring to other devices.

    However, you chose to go for the absolute, which was that the 360 was likely to fail, meaning that if anyone bought one, there was a greater chance of it failing than not.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 18:32

  • SeesThroughAll #91 5 years ago

    LOL @ your hipocrisy. You're the one using the strawmat argument.

    Look, bud. 30% IS likely to fail. IN THE CONTEXT. It's hardware. It was implicit from start that I was referring to quality control. 1 console likely to fail out of 3 is too much, no amount of spin will change that.

    Instead of going to the point you childishly use arbitrary mathematical "definitions" to sound smart.

    Still too dificult for you? Whatever...
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 18:32

  • bioreit #92 5 years ago

    Well SeesThroughAll, I've pointed out your straw-man argument. If you're going to say that I've used one, then please, by all means show it to me.

    Point it out. If you can't, that's becuase it doesn't exist.

    And again, you add things to your argument after you made the initial statement: AFTER your first comment you mentioned quality control. There was no 'context' within which to place it, other than the absoluteness of 'the 360 is likely to fail'.

    Nowhere, before you were hauled up on the "likely" comment, did you mention quality control. Saying it was implicit afterwards just goes to show.

    If you had said this:

    "1 console likely to fail out of 3 is too much"

    right from the start, you would have found me in agreement with you. But you didn't say that and no amount of adding extra layers to a point already made will change that.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 18:37

  • SeesThroughAll #93 5 years ago

    Holy shit!
    You really are picking on me just because I used the word "likely" instead of saying "some chance of"?

    How fucking pedantic can you get?

    Whatever...

  • Lim-Dul #94 5 years ago

    Pass the pop-corn. This discussion is getting interesting...
    ...
    ...
    ...
    NOT!

  • penguin_overlord #95 5 years ago

    Why is it that Microsoft are not getting more of a roasting on the reliability of the 360? If this was the PS3, Sony would be getting extremely bad publicity but people still seem surprisingly loyal.

    But back to the face-off, 360 multiplatform games will likely look better than PS3 versions for some time to come until PS3 sales increase to a degree where it's worth developers putting more effort in. The PS3 is a very different beast to the 360 and games can't be ported across so easily. There's no doubt the PS3 is a superior piece of kit and first-party games like Resistance and Motorstorm already show that (better as they are than any launch games for the 360) but developers need to invest time in getting the most from it.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 18:50

  • bioreit #96 5 years ago

    Read what my profile blurb says. I am a "Linguistic Fascist".

  • captainrentboy #97 5 years ago

    ....Of course the PS3 launch games should've looked a bit sweeter than the 360 ones(Even though, arguably, only two of them did), the developers had an extra 8 or so months to work on them :/
    Aren't these EG 'news' items only put up to attract a load of argumentative comments from the giganticous fanboys from each 'side'? Because it always seems to have this same silly outcome,what ever the reasoning behind the EG post may be.

  • DjFlex52 #98 5 years ago

    "Why is it that Microsoft are not getting more of a roasting on the reliability of the 360. If this was the PS3, Sony would be getting extremely bad publicity but people still seem surprisingly loyal. "

    uhhh...maybe it's because the reliability issue is NOT true to the extent that the internet and forums have made it out to be...nah, that can't be the reason ;)

    I have so many friends on xbl and in real life that have no problems with the 360 (including myself who has played everyday for over a year without the 3rod happening) and I know a few who have had problems...defintely not 1 out of every 3...maybe 1 out of every 10 at the extreme.

    Edit: If 1 out of every hundred has a 360 problem, that would make 110,000 gamers complaining (not including lying 360 haters) in the forums which would give the impression that it's everyone.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 19:02

  • penguin_overlord #99 5 years ago

    I agree that the figures are probably exagerated and, unfortunately, that's not unexpected when things get picked up on the Internet. If the failure rate really was 30% I think Microsoft would have to halt production and it's possible some shops would refuse to stock it. However, there can be no denying that failure rates on the 360 are higher than for the PS3 and Wii.

    I find it interesting that Microsoft were so sure of overheating being a problem that they'd build the red rings warning into the 360. It reminds me of a line from the movie Broken Arrow - "I don't know what's scarier - losing nuclear weapons or the fact that it happens so often that you people have a term for it."

  • bioreit #100 5 years ago

    People I know with a 360:

    Me, three friends, my brother-in-law, the boyfriends of both of my housemates, a guy at work.

    Me and the guy at work both lost our 360s in the last month. One of the boyfriends is on his 5th, although he works in a second-hand game shop and keeps purchasing his own stock, so I think he's skewing the figures a wee bit!

    3 out of 8. Pretty much 1 in 3. I dunno, it seems like the figures could be around about that.

    Ironically, one friend has had his since launch - he plays it 40 hours a week at least (damn web designers, not a proper job at all....) and it's still going strong.

    Mine was a 26th October 2006 model, as was my brother-in-law's (we both got the Viva Pinata pack) - we play about the same amount. His power-brick is wedged behind his TV, in a pile of four other power adapters and two power strips, all underneath a radiator. Oh, and owing to being from Thailand, their flat is warm and humid (like 26 degrees C all the time!).

    His 360 is working fine, mine died last Wednesday. We're keeping an eye on his, though!

    I don't think there's much rhyme or reason - if they are going to go, they're going to go.

    To be honest, I'm not that fussed if they go. Yeah, my tune cuold change if I actually have to pay to get a replacement, but as long as I can keep swapping it out in Game, I don't care. I mean, if my GPU died in my PC but was otherwise an excellent card, I wouldn't sell PC and swear off PC games forever. I'd grumble, swap it out under warranty and carry on.

    I suppose it helps having a lawyer as one of your sisters though - our family tends to not pay such things as court costs, as several landlords have found out over the years...

  • DjFlex52 #101 5 years ago

    "Whats the point in comparing games that have not been designed to make use of the PS3's full capabilities. Its like running MAME on a Wii, PS3, X360 and saying 'the roms we tried all pretty much looked the same, although the Playstation 3 with its digital output looked slighly clearer than the other two machines. "

    The point is about multiformat games not games that are first party which for both machines are going to make use of each one's full capabilities.
    The fact is all we have to gauge on is what games are out NOW for both consoles and comparisons like this have been going on since the Atari 2600 was compared to Coleco and Megadrive to Super Famicon. Is it because Sony is not on top that all the gripers are in an uproar?

    "I find it interesting that Microsoft were so sure of overheating being a problem that they'd build the red rings warning into the 360. It reminds me of a line from the movie Broken Arrow - "I don't know what's scarier - losing nuclear weapons or the fact that it happens so often that you people have a term for it." "

    So it would have been better if it just broke down like PS2 machines did instead of having the red rings to let the consumer know they have a problem? Using a nuclear weapons analogy as an reference to a few shoddily made videogame machines is quite a stretch...jeez!

  • rotmm #102 5 years ago

    f3rrari,

    The Playstation 3 is higher resolution than an X360 - Not true at all. Where did you get that from?

    The Playstation 3 has Blu-Ray built in as standard - Yes, and? What does that have to do with games and the graphics therein?

    The Playstation 3 has digital output - As does the 360, so what is your point?

  • TRUTH #103 5 years ago

    CPU
    The Xbox 360 processor was designed to give game developers the power that they actually need, in an easy to use form. The Cell processor has impressive streaming floating-point power that is of limited use for games.

    The majority of game code is a mixture of integer, floating-point, and vector math, with lots of branches and random memory accesses. This code is best handled by a general purpose CPU with a cache, branch predictor, and vector unit.

    The Cell's seven DSPs (what Sony calls SPEs) have no cache, no direct access to memory, no branch predictor, and a different instruction set from the PS3's main CPU. They are not designed for or efficient at general purpose computing. DSPs are not appropriate for game programming.

    Xbox 360 has three general purpose CPU cores. The Cell processor has only one.

    Xbox 360's CPUs has vector processing power on each CPU core. Each Xbox 360 core has 128 vector registers per hardware thread, with a dot product instruction, and a shared 1-MB L2 cache. The Cell processor's vector processing power is mostly on the seven DSPs.

    Dot products are critical to games because they are used in 3D math to calculate vector lengths, projections, transformations, and more. The Xbox 360 CPU has a dot product instruction, where other CPUs such as Cell must emulate dot product using multiple instructions.

    Cell's streaming floating-point work is done on its seven DSP processors. Since geometry processing is moved to the GPU, the need for streaming floating-point work and other DSP style programming in games has dropped dramatically.

    Just like with the PS2's Emotion Engine, with its missing L2 cache, the Cell is designed for a type of game programming that accounts for a minor percentage of processing time.

    Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. That sort of mix makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games. In fact, when analyzing real games one finds almost the opposite distribution of general purpose computing and DSP calculation requirements. A relatively small percentage of instructions are actually floating point. Of those instructions which are floating-point, very few involve processing continuous streams of numbers. Instead they are used in tasks like AI and path-finding, which require random access to memory and frequent branches, which the DSPs are ill-suited to.

    Based on measurements of running next generation games, only ~10-30% of the instructions executed are floating point. The remainders of the instructions are load, store, integer, branch, etc. Even fewer of the instructions executed are streaming floating point—probably ~5-10%. Cell is optimized for streaming floating-point, with 87.5% of its cores good for streaming floating-point and nothing else.

    GPU
    Even ignoring the bandwidth limitations the PS3's GPU is not as powerful as the Xbox 360's GPU.

    Below are the specs from Sony's press release regarding the PS3's GPU.

    RSX GPU

    * 550 MHz
    * Independent vertex/pixel shaders
    * 51 billion dot products per second (total system performance)
    * 300M transistors
    * 136 "shader operations" per clock

    The interesting ALU performance numbers are 51 billion dot products per second (total system performance), 300M transistors, and more than twice as powerful as the 6800 Ultra.

    The 51 billions dot products per cycle were listed on a summary slide of total graphics system performance and are assumed to include the Cell processor. Sony's calculations seem to assume that the Cell can do a dot product per cycle per DSP, despite not having a dot product instruction.

    However, using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock.

    It is important to note that if the RSX ALUs are similar to the GeForce 6800 ALUs then they work on vector4s, while the Xbox 360 GPU ALUs work on vector5s. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8 GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS.

    With the number of transistors being slightly larger on the Xbox 360 GPU (330M) it's not surprising that the total programmable GFLOPs number is very close.

    Bandwidth
    The PS3 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and 25.6 GB/s of RDRAM bandwidth for a total system bandwidth of 48 GB/s.

    The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth.


    Why does the Xbox 360 have such an extreme amount of bandwidth? Even the simplest calculations show that a large amount of bandwidth is consumed by the frame buffer. For example, with simple color rendering and Z testing at 550 MHz the frame buffer alone requires 52.8 GB/s at 8 pixels per clock. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches.

    The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes.

    HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices.

    CONCLUSION
    When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment.

    However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3. Another bit of information sent our way is the final transistor count for Xbox 360's graphics subset. The GPU totals 332 million transistors, which is spit between the two separate dies that make up the part. The parent die is the "main" piece of the GPU, handling the large bulk of the graphics rendering, and is comprised of 232 million transistors. The daughter die contains the system's 10MB of embedded DRAM and its logic chip, which is capable of some additional 3D math. The daughter die totals an even 100 million transistors, bringing the total transistor count for the GPU to 232 million.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 20:17

  • DjFlex52 #104 5 years ago

    f3rrari,

    The Playstation 3 is higher resolution than an X360 - Not true at all. Where did you get that from?

    The Playstation 3 has Blu-Ray built in as standard - Yes, and? What does that have to do with games and the graphics therein?

    The Playstation 3 has digital output - As does the 360, so what is your point?

    @ rotmm
    I think his point like so many others is to show they don't know shite

    edit: @ TRUTH...thats all well and good but you know you just went way over their heads.
    The bottom line is....so far there's not much difference in graphics between the 2 consoles to warrant paying 200 dollars more. It's all about the games and until MGS4 and FFXIII come out on PS3, the Sony faithful (Sonysuck-ups) will bring up the 360's overall reliability because it's the only argument they have available.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 20:25

  • squarepusher #105 5 years ago

    lulz

  • captainrentboy #106 5 years ago

    Bloody hell, I thought posting maaaasive lists of each of the console's tech specs to prove a point stopped way back in 2006.
    Clearly, I was wrong.

  • DjFlex52 #107 5 years ago

    "Bloody hell, I thought posting maaaasive lists of each of the console's tech specs to prove a point stopped way back in 2006.
    Clearly, I was wrong. "

    @captainrentboy

    So did I....lol
    Me too :)

  • Penguinzoot #108 5 years ago

    "Bloody hell, I thought posting maaaasive lists of each of the console's tech specs to prove a point stopped way back in 2006.
    Clearly, I was wrong. "

    @captainrentboy

    So did I....lol
    Me too :)

    I'm pretty sure it's the same post he wheels out whenever he feels the need arises ;-).

  • old_skool #109 5 years ago

    wow wee , xboxen is so more powahful than da ps3zen that it leakz from da machinezen.

    Da powah of de 3 cores

  • Monkey-Wizard-Ken #110 5 years ago

    Low contrast and a high resolution graphics help to hide the PS3's AA/Ram problems. It was a similar story on the PS2.
    Amusingly (but not if you were a developer), the PS2 had hardware AA but it didn't work properly.

    @TRUTH
    You've just broken my brain
    Edited by 2 at 05/07/07 @ 22:09

  • TRUTH #111 5 years ago

    Games, power, online, exclusives, price, and PC/360 games - XB360 beats PS3.

  • RichGL #112 5 years ago

    This is fucking sad!

    I know that there is a lull during the Summer but is there any need to be actively goading people to argue about "which teh console is best?"

    How about some proper fucking articles? Tell us a story or something, anything but these willy waving competitions.

  • DrunKao #113 5 years ago

    Woooooo PS3!!! 360 hax shit!

  • SeesThroughAll #114 5 years ago

    Oh the astroturfers are here already!

  • bioreit #115 5 years ago

    @ STA

    All trolling and joking aside (from both of us :p), MS has just increased the warranty to 3 years for RROD failures.

    Not the other problems mind (still bog standard one- or two-year for those I'm afraid), but at least something is being done about the failure rate.

    Still say they're unlikely to actually fail, though.








    Sorry, couldn't resist :-)

  • captainrentboy #116 5 years ago

    Holy Jizzstains, I've only just read that on the Xbox forums. That's some pretty effing massive news, a three year warranty from date of purchase, it applies worldwide too, and if if you've had to pay before for any repairs then it'll be refunded.
    Finally, Microsoft have done a little something with regards to this problem.
    I think maybe the media backlash was getting a little to much for them.
    I'm predicting a huge war of the words from both camps on the related comments section on EG tomorrow.
    Should be fun :)

  • bioreit #117 5 years ago

    I'm readying my flaming-keyboard right now.

    It has special large keys, to aid with my typing while I am enraged (to prevent spelling errors in my rants).

  • SeesThroughAll #118 5 years ago

    bioreit: Well they had to, didn't they? ;)

    Their problem must have to do with a bad choice of contracted manufacturers. Not easy to just get out of.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 23:15

  • captainrentboy #119 5 years ago

    It's still not 100% perfect, as it only covers the three red lights problem, but it's still pretty darned good going.
    And I'd imagine the RROD makes up the vaaast majority of the problems out there anyway.
    The next thing they need to do is actually FIX the frikkin problem, more fans/heat syncs, whatever.
    I'm just wondering how the PS3 fanbois are going to try and turn this around tomorrow so that it's somehow NEGATIVE news, should be amusing.

  • Lim-Dul #120 5 years ago

    @TRUTH - wonderful post. Either you know your stuff around consoles or have a good source you're citing - anyway, I'm impressed that you bothered writing/pasting such a post even though it'll be read by total ignorants whining about red lights and whatnot even though they don't have the slightest clue how everything works...

  • DjFlex52 #121 5 years ago

    "I'm readying my flaming-keyboard right now.

    It has special large keys, to aid with my typing while I am enraged (to prevent spelling errors in my rants). "

    @ bioreit...LOL...make sure you have an extinguisher handy :)

    "Holy Jizzstains, I've only just read that on the Xbox forums. That's some pretty effing massive news, a three year warranty from date of purchase, it applies worldwide too, and if if you've had to pay before for any repairs then it'll be refunded.
    Finally, Microsoft have done a little something with regards to this problem.
    I think maybe the media backlash was getting a little to much for them. "

    To reiterate my point...if it was really 30-33% of 360's breaking down (NOT!), do you think cheap ass MS would have implemented a 3 year warranty? That'd be an enormous amount of repair costs (3.5 million broken 360s) for them to absorb. So I believe this is all media damage control by MS.

  • Darren #122 5 years ago

    I'm surprised that EG didn't mention the obvious aliasing in both Oblivion and Rainbow Six Vegas on the PS3 from the screenshots, or the fact that Splinter Cell: Double Agent on the PS3 runs without the ghastly v-sync tearing that does its utmost best to ruin the 360 version! As for Tony Hawk's Project 8, the framerate is dreadful even on the 360 so it's no wonder Neversoft resorted to using 584p instead of 720p to get round it. I always thought the game looked a little low-res like PGR 3 and Call of Duty 3, both of which are rendered at a lower resolution than 720p. So much for all games being true 720p, eh Microsoft? ;)

    As an owner of both consoles, I'd say that both are capable of producing identical graphics and effects for the most part such that most can't tell them apart but generally the PS3 does rougher looking anti-aliasing and inferior HDR lighting (except in Virtua Tennis 3 for some reason!). I suspect the AA issue is a result of Sony using the NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX for the PS3's RSX as on the PC it cannot do HDR lighting and AA simultaneously either unlike the 360's Xenos GPU (developed by ATI). I presume the games that do use both are maybe using the Cell processor to add "cheap" full-screen AA in post-production and letting the RSX handle the HDR. I'm just guessing though.

  • old_skool #123 5 years ago

    To reiterate my point...if it was really 30-33% of 360's breaking down (NOT!), do you think cheap ass MS would have implemented a 3 year warranty?

    Maybe all those retailers who are the source of that 30-33% figure are in bed with Sony. That makes sense. It's a conspiracy I tell you.

  • Darren #124 5 years ago

    @DjFlex52 - I don't want to particularly get drawn into this tedious discussion about the 360's reliability issues but surely the reason Microsoft are offering a three year warranty (if it *is* true, that is) is because it is cheaper than doing a full recall on the Xbox 360, which is what any other manufacturer would almost certainly have to do if their product had a 30-33% failure rate. Why else would they offer a three year warranty, hmmm? I don't see Sony or Nintendo doing the same but then their machines are considered reliable so they don't have to... ;)

  • Azazel #125 5 years ago

    I say: 30% cannot equal "likely". It would have to be over 50%.

    /goes off to consult textbook on fuzzy logic

  • DjFlex52 #126 5 years ago

    @DjFlex52 - I don't want to particularly get drawn into this tedious discussion about the 360's reliability issues but surely the reason Microsoft are offering a three year warranty (if it *is* true, that is) is because it is cheaper than doing a full recall on the Xbox 360, which is what any other manufacturer would almost certainly have to do if their product had a 30-33% failure rate. Why else would they offer a three year warranty, hmmm? I don't see Sony or Nintendo doing the same but then their machines are considered reliable so they don't have to...

    @Darren....Man, you are a true Sony nutcase or a serious 360 dissenter, aren't you? Do you realize all your points are based on "ifs"?
    First it's not if it's true...it IS true. MS has made a 3 year warranty on 360 with RROD.
    Secondly, if their product has a 30-33 % rate....they don't have one so that throws your argument out the window.
    Thirdly, we don't know the reliability of Sony and Nintendo (which already had a controller problem) since they have no f@#king games to play everyday...lol
    Lastly, so you're saying that electronic equipment shouldn't have warranties unless they are prone to break? COME ON!

    Edit2...I told you why they did it....because its timely damage control
    Edited by 2 at 05/07/07 @ 23:58

  • SeesThroughAll #127 5 years ago

    @Lim-Dul: Don't thank him, it's his job ;)

  • DjFlex52 #128 5 years ago

    "Maybe all those retailers who are the source of that 30-33% figure are in bed with Sony. That makes sense. It's a conspiracy I tell you. "

    @old skool..haha...good one!....So now I'll remember to tell everyone I know that retailers are the bastion of truthfulness.
    Edited by 1 at 06/07/07 @ 00:39

  • Darren #129 5 years ago

    @DjFlex52 - I'm neither anti-360 nor pro-PS3 as I own both machines (and the Wii as well) so :p and naturally, my launch Xbox 360 has died and been repaired. Oh and I went through THREE Xboxes too, my first died after 14 days, so forgive me if I'm not terribly impressed with Microsoft's "workmanship"! ;)

    I stand by what I said... Microsoft knew they were living on borrowed time with the increasing number of negative reports about the Xbox 360's reliability, e.g. the recent Micromart and the 30-33% failure rate ones, so they've finally had to admit to the public that there was a problem after all and offer a three year warranty to make up for it. If they hadn't then it would have been more damaging when the truth finally did come out because until today they've continually denied there was a problem! No other console needs to come with a three year warranty but then no other console is as unreliable as the 360.

    P.S. Where did I say that electronic goods should only have a warranty if they're prone to breaking? I didn't... but when you have a console as poorly built as the Xbox 360, the normal one year guarantee clearly isn't enough, is it? ;)

  • Carrybagma #130 5 years ago

    Anyone else totally ignore the article and go straight for the comments thread when something with a title like this is published? I doubt there is anything of interest in the article, whereas the thread that follows is packed-full of fun.

    Anyway. Back on track:

    Anyone think Halo3 is gonna be the most totally awesome game ever? Wait until you see the graphics in SP - you'll never want a PS3 again!

  • smelly #131 5 years ago

    ^^ LOL

    I've read the article.. and personally if people REALLY are that anal about differences in games.. then they really need to get out more.

  • DjFlex52 #132 5 years ago

    @DjFlex52 - I'm neither anti-360 nor pro-PS3 as I own both machines (and the Wii as well) so :p and naturally, my launch Xbox 360 has died and been repaired. Oh and I went through THREE Xboxes too, my first died after 14 days, so forgive me if I'm not terribly impressed with Microsoft's "workmanship"! ;)

    @Darren...you are making judgments by your experiences and I am doing the same. I haven't had a problem with mine and I've played it everyday since april 2006. I've played everything from Dead Rising (which rumors had blowing up my 360), GOW and Lost Planet up to Forza presently. I've played Burnout Revenge at least 5 days a week for over a year until the DVD is pretty scratchy. Everything still works fine except the occasional disc error on Burnout. I'm sorry that you went through 3 360's but that is not my experience or my friends on xbl or in real life. So my impression of MS' workmanship is different from yours....all i can say is...happy gaming :)

    As I said earlier...when did retailers become the bastion of truthfulness?

  • Calgon #133 5 years ago

    disc: are you sure about that?... I cant be bothered looking for it now but Ive read 128 per thread but both threads have to share the same execution unit.

    I'll check again properly tomorrow but it does appear to be:

    128 VMX registers(enhanced) per hardware thread,
    1 execution unit per core(ideally they should have had one per thread... and while we are on the CPU subject an extra MB of L2cache per core or even thread would have been very interesting... but its all more expense)

    I skimmed over it too but I noticed some of his figures are old ones, RSX = 500MHz after the clock decrease(which will affect fill rate figures and the like...).
    Edited by 3 at 06/07/07 @ 04:21

  • zuljin #134 5 years ago

    @TRUTH
    "The Cell's seven DSPs (what Sony calls SPEs) have no cache, no direct access to memory, no branch predictor, and a different instruction set from the PS3's main CPU. They are not designed for or efficient at general purpose computing. DSPs are not appropriate for game programming."

    mike mc goblue is that you? Next time try not to get your PS3 information of a fanboy site, try going straight to the source:

    http://ww w-01.ibm.com/chips/techlib/tech...

  • Xerx3s #135 5 years ago

    [myfavconsole]rulesanditoldyousolol.

  • miiiguel #136 5 years ago

    the point is, as f3rrari (I love the numbers thing that PS-only users usually use, just love it), so well placed:
    - if you don't know shit about what you talking about when someone proves you're wrong about stuff like "PS3 has higher resolution" (LOL!) - one just say "red lights, or some shit...!"
    Edited by 1 at 06/07/07 @ 11:20

  • Edward_Gamer #137 5 years ago

    The comparison of Tony Hawk Skater was not a good one at all.

    The differences between the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3 versions are very noticeable!

    The Xbox 360 version of Tony Hawk Skating has lighting that is infinitely better. If you want to see a good comparison, go to the screenshot comparisons that Gamespot has. Gamespot points out that the lighting is vastly superior in the Xbox 360 version.

    Also, the Playstation 3 version of Tony Hawk Skater doesn't even include Online Play! The Xbox 360 version lets you play online!

  • Edward_Gamer #138 5 years ago

    In Marvel Ultimate Alliance, the Xbox 360 version also includes much better shading. When the characters are standing in the lights, you can see shadows of the Xbox 360 versions in ways the Playstation 3 doesn't show. Once again, just go look at Gamespot for a side-by-side comparison.

  • Edward_Gamer #139 5 years ago

    Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion on the Playstation 3 does not have faster loading than the Xbox 360 version because of the Blu-ray drive. Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion is one of only two Playstation 3 games that use the hard-drive of the PS3 to help out with the loading times. The loading times of the PS3 version aren't impressive; it still takes quite a while to enter cities.

    The loading times of the Xbox 360 version of that game are longer, but only because the Xbox 360 version of Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion were developed on early Pre-Alpha development kits that only let the developers use one-sixth of the General Purpose CPU power of the Xbox 360. Those early Pre-Alpha development kits only let developers use one of the six CPU threads on the Xbox 360.

    The other game that uses the PS3 hard-drive to help out with load times is Rainbow Six: Vegas. The Xbox 360 and PS3 both received final versions of their Development Kits in the summer of 2006. Now that we are able to compare a PS3 game using the hard drive to help with load times to an Xbox 360 game built on the final development kit, we see that the Xbox 360 version of Rainbow Six: Vegas actually has slightly faster load times, even under those conditions.

    All other games appearing on both systems have MUCH FASTER load times on the Xbox 360, because the Xbox 360 transfers data at a much faster rate than the Playstation 3. The February 2007 issue of the Independent Playstation Magazine pointed this fact out, and it explained why this occurs. The Xbox 360 transfers data at a rate of 16MB per second, while the Playstation 3 transfers data at only 9MB per second, unless the hard drive helps with the load times. This is something very few games do--currently only two PS3 games do that. Just look at games like Fight Night Round 3 if you want to see an example of how much longer the load times are on the Playstation 3 under normal circumstances.

    Fight Night Round 3 also shows how much more advanced the lighting is on the Xbox 360 at all times. So does Tony Hawk Skating. Even the new Transformers game has much better lighting than the Playstation 3 version.
    Edited by 1 at 06/07/07 @ 11:34

  • Edward_Gamer #140 5 years ago

    Rainbow Six: Vegas is also a game that is a LOT BETTER on Xbox 360 in ways that were not mentioned by Eurogamer, but SHOULD HAVE BEEN mentioned by Eurogamer, because they are VERY OBVIOUS!

    The Xbox 360 is DEFINITELY the better version!!! Just look at the detailed review of IGN for all the comparisons. You can read it here, but I explain some addition factors such as pricing below. [link url=http:// ps3.ign.com/articles/799/799830p2.html
    ]http://ps 3.ign.com/articles/799/799830p2...[/link]

    There has never been a game released for both systems that used the Unreal engine that was better on the PS3. EVERY game that has EVER used the Unreal graphics engine is better on Xbox 360.

    The best game to ever use the Unreal graphics engine on the PS3 is the newly released Rainbow Six: Vegas, which was released SEVEN MONTHS later than the Xbox 360 and PC versions, yet STILL ISN'T AS GOOD as they are!

    I'm not just referring to the features the PS3 version of Rainbow Six: Vegas is missing, such as Controller Rumbling and Face-Mapping; although those are COOL features in the Xbox 360 version that are NOT found in the Playstation 3 version.

    When you play the PS3 version of Rainbow Six: Vegas, it feels very lame and fake, because the controller doesn’t shake. Also, like all the reviews say, the PS3 controller isn’t as good as the Xbox 360 controller, especially when it comes to First-Person Shooters and Third-Person Shooters. The Analag Trigger buttons of the Xbox 360 controller are also much better, and they make the Shooting seem much more realistic, and they make it more realistic when you stay close to the walls for cover.

    The Playstation 3 version of Rainbow Six: Vegas does NOT include the awesome Face-Mapping feature found in the Xbox 360 version. The Face-Mapping feature lets you use the Xbox 360 video camera to take pictures of your face from specific angles, and then your face is mapped onto the character in the game in an AWESOME way!

    The PS3 has such a difficult time using the Unreal engine that even Rainbow Six: Vegas cannot correctly process 1080i resolution; it has to be used in 720p if you want it done correctly. If you have a 1080i HDTV set, you will be OUT OF LUCK, because 1080i looks so bad that you will have to put it on 720p. But the Playstation 3 does NOT have the ability to upconvert resolution like the Xbox 360 does, so when your 1080i HDTV set receives the 720p signal, it will actually downconvert the signal to only 480p! That means you will have spent $600 on the PS3, and $59 for the PS3 version of the game to only see it in 480p resolution!!!

    It is a MUCH better idea to buy the Xbox 360 version of the game, because the Xbox 360 version is better in EVERY way! The Xbox 360 version has better graphics with more polygon detail, especially in the characters faces. The Xbox 360 version also has better resolution that can be upconverted all the way up to 1080p if you have an HDTV set that will accept the signal.

    You can read the review of IGN if you want a good explanation of this; they talk about it in detail.

    The PS3 version of Rainbow Six: Vegas also lacks the lighting quality of the Xbox 360 version, and the textures are NOT as good as the Xbox 360 version! The biggest difference in visuals is in the area of polygon detail missing from the PS3 version. There is a LOT of detail missing from the faces of the characters in the PS3 version of the game, because the PS3 doesn't have the polygon power of the Xbox 360.

    That’s why ALL THREE of this years Football games will run at 60 frames per second on the Xbox 360, but only 30 frames per second on the Playstation 3. The Xbox 360 versions of those football games will all work fine with 720p/1080i/1080p HDTV sets because Xbox 360 upconverts ALL signals to 1080p if you have a 1080p HDTV set. That is the major benefit of having a dedicated hardware device with resolution upconversion abilities like that. PS3 doesn’t have the ability to do that.

    Friend, I'm just trying to explain things clearly and tell you which version of the game is the best. There is absolutely no doubt about it, the Xbox 360 version is a LOT BETTER!!!

    The Xbox 360 version receives higher reviews than the PS3 version, and it is now $20 less expensive than the PS3 version! You can get the two downloads called Red Edition, and Black Edition for FREE now for your Xbox 360.

    If you aren't a fanboy, then you won't be offended. But if you are, I'm sorry, but the fact of the matter is, the Unreal Engine doesn't perform nearly as well on the PS3 as it does with the Xbox 360. Just look at the way Koei originally announced the game called Fatal Inertia as a Playstation 3 exclusive game, and then it was announced for both systems, but is now announced as an Xbox 360 exclusive game that will be released September 11, 2007. Koei says the PS3 version has been “delayed indefinitely” because they are having problems with the graphics engine of the game running properly on the PS3…and that graphics engine is the Unreal graphics engine.

    IGN has the most detailed review of the PS3 version of Rainbow Six: Vegas, and it compares just about every feature to the Xbox 360 version in great detail. You can read that information about the PS3 version of Rainbow Six: Vegas and the visual problems here: [link url=http:// ps3.ign.com/articles/799/799830p2.html
    ]http://ps 3.ign.com/articles/799/799830p2...[/link]

  • miiiguel #141 5 years ago

    but..., but..., M$..., and gates..., and it's white..., and..., and..., the red lights..., and...

  • Mick #142 5 years ago

    yeah thats all well and good, but my snes still kicks the megadrives arse.

  • Vin #143 5 years ago

    BUY A 360.

  • Edward_Gamer #144 5 years ago

    F.E.A.R. is another game that shows how much vastly superior the Xbox 360 hardware is to the Playstation 3 when it comes to videogame graphic processing power.

    F.E.A.R. won lots of awards on the PC and the Xbox 360 when it was released in 2006.

    Over six months later in 2007, F.E.A.R. was released for the Playstation 3, and it isn't nearly as good!

    The texture quality of F.E.A.R. on the Playstation 3 isn't nearly as sharp. The lighting isn't nearly as good either.

    It's bad enough that the Playstation 3 version of F.E.A.R. doesn't include the Rumble qualities that the Xbox 360 version does. But the Playstation 3 version didn't add any sort of sixaxis features.

    And the Playstation 3 version of F.E.A.R. is like so many other games that appear on both systems; the Playstation 3 version does NOT let you talk online while you are playing, even though the Xbox 360 version DOES let you talk while playing online. It's like that with almost all third-party games on the PS3. Games like Call of Duty 3, Ridge Racer, and so many others don't let you talk online while playing with the PS3, but they do let you talk online while playing the Xbox 360 versions.

    The worst feature of F.E.A.R. for the Playstation 3 is the way that the framerate drops below 20 frames per second at times! This game is one of the perfect examples of why the Playstation 3 now has a reputation for being a system that has poor framerates that are inconsistent and disappointing.

    The framerates for F.E.A.R. are very smooth on the Xbox 360 and PC. But on the Playstation 3, the framerate gets so low that sometimes the game goes into slow-motion and becomes unplayable, similar to the PS3 version of MLB 2K7. Games like that are why the PS3 has developed a bad reputation for poor framerates, and that is why this years football games will run at 60 frames per second on the Xbox 360 with resolution that will be upconverted all the way up to 1080p. But the Playstation 3 versions of those games will only run at 30 frames per second.

    If you want to see the most detailed review of F.E.A.R. that makes excellent comparisons of the different versions, look here at 1up: http://ww w.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=315...

  • miiiguel #145 5 years ago

    seriously, PS-only gamers fail to understand something, even if PS3 was "de facto" the "beast", wich as everyone else sees it's not, who would care? it's just hardware, what matters is the damn service, what it really delievers. If you have such skin problem with the brand XBox, hide it under something (like some sites did when promoting PS3), you can pretend it's Sony. Who cares? Just play the games, you just live once, believe me.

  • zuljin #146 5 years ago

    lol

    Has mike_mcgoblue got two new accounts?
    TRUTH &
    Edward_Gamer?

    I thought it was his trademark to talk absolute rubbish over hardware?

  • Calgon #147 5 years ago

    Disc - Calgon: Have you tried that yourself? Our results were different.

    Tried what? Developer or not I was actually correct... look it up(or ask around, there is 128 per thread but only one execution unit per core which is where the limitation lies)

    Also no they arent the same VMX units... there are quite a few differences between the Xenon cores and the PPE in Cell: one has custom/new VMX, dot product and other enhancements for gaming and one does not(they have different purposes... Xenon cores are expected to do more obviously).

    The floating point figures ARE missleading to begin with(its getting as bad as GPUs which used their own FLOPs calculations that suited their chip best in their figures... which is why theyve never held much weight) and although the 10-30% may or may not be true(how will you know what the average is? how many games have you worked on? for how many dev companys? ect) its basically saying FLOPs are far from the be all - end all when it comes down to making a game(which is true... people did get carried away with the FLOPs comparison).


    360 bandwidth? well the Xenos daughter die will save alot of bandwidth it would be severly innaccurate to dismiss it in any comparison but you are right it was missleading to add the two numbers together and compare total system bandwidth like that (this was done from both sides though, to deny that would be lying, its the nature of the game when any company compares their product to a direct competitor expect bias and skewed analysis). I see you are trying to imply 256 GB/s is not usable(and there you were complaing about the L2cache) since the parent to daughter bus is 32 GB/s by conveniently leaving out the fact that there is alot of internal logic for the bandwidth intensive tasks described so it WILL save alot bandwidth.

    Yes that was a biased article there have been many from both sides and that doesnt mean none of it is correct either though(its not all made up or lies, its called a spin on numbers, Sony where the first to do that if you remember that presentation).
    Edited by 2 at 06/07/07 @ 13:04

  • TRUTH #148 5 years ago

    It seems to me that every PS3 fan/owner (I have one too!) can't accept that this is the
    3rd Multiformat Round where 360 has won.

    Better graphics, better control, better features, better lighting, more detail - Look at Splinter Cell DA, Fight Night 3 on PS3 and you notice that graphic/detail/characters are missing in the backgrounds...Also the PS3 had 8+ extra months to improve!

    I don't remember any conversions from PS2 to Xbox looking or playing inferior. Actually they all played better & less time to convert.

    zuljin - No! but i think your finding hard to accept. Oh! VF 5 on 360 will have the arcade updated version & online, and improved animation - And had less then 7 months to come 360
    Edited by 2 at 06/07/07 @ 18:17

  • Carrybagma #149 5 years ago

    Of course, if you discount a heavily biased article written by someone in a marketing department, you must also discount everything published on the Internet. It's only fair. IBM are well-known Sony fanboys and all their engineers are biased, publishing biased specifications on the Internet. Oh. Hang about.... IBM engineers are unbiased and don't publish biased specifications - but only when describing teh bestest chips there are!

    Hey - I've just checked out those pictures on my 640x480 16 colour screen and the 360 is clearly better than the PS3

    Hey - I've just checked out those pictures on my mobile and the 360 is clearly better than the PS3

    Hey - I've just checked out the article title and the 360 is clearly better than the PS3

    Hey - I've just had a wank and the 360 is clearly better than the PS3

    And here's the proof.
    Edited by 1 at 06/07/07 @ 18:57

  • Calgon #150 5 years ago

    Carrybagma yeah because IBM(as a whole not just the ONE TEAM OF MANY they have there who worked on it) think Cell is their best chip theyve worked on dont they?(of course those who worked on it are going to big it up... doesnt mean to say thats the wider veiw held by the whole company does it?)... so much so that theyve put primary focus on Cell chips on their road map.... oh wait no they havent! They are still behind their own PPC core, infact its all quiet on the Cell front all around.

    "PS3 is the best becuase this whitepaper from some engineers who've spent years workin on it, think its super awesome and show some amazing theoritical specs"(what do you expect from whitepapers they ALL read like the best thing since sliced bread)

    Its quite obvious more often than not if there is any advantage it goes to the 360(yes this is due sometimes to 360 being the lead platform AND a stronger GPU, but they usually arrive later and with lower framerates or lesser visuals). I dont think the same would be true even if the PS3 were the lead platform and the 360 version were ported from that(360 is a more than capable machine which is better to develop for) but lets see there might be a few around(but from a developer perspective its just not worth it... 360 tools and devkits are better work with, easier to port to PC andPS3 development costs more and takes longer for results that could have been acheived far less painfully on 360).
    Edited by 3 at 06/07/07 @ 20:07

  • manic_mouse #151 5 years ago

    "Holy shit!
    You really are picking on me just because I used the word "likely" instead of saying "some chance of"?

    How fucking pedantic can you get?

    Whatever..."

    Your statement was factually incorrect. End of. Say what you mean, mean what you say and all that. A 30% failure rate does not mean a 360 bought today is likely to fail, because the only other outcome (that it doesn't fail) has a higher probability. Two options, one with a 70% probability the other with 30%. Which is more likely?

    If you can't convey your meaning using the English language you have a problem. Throwing hissy fits and name calling doesn't change this. Word yourself better in future if you didn't mean what you typed.

  • Carrybagma #152 5 years ago

    @calgon: Oh Ok. So the improvements in the PPC core are going to end up on the 360 then? (and I don't mean die-shrinks) If not, what's your point?

  • Calgon #153 5 years ago

    Carrybagma what improvements are we talking about?, you do realise that there are already 360 specific improvements to the core? Its derived from the PPC G5 core but has been enhanced/customized by IBM and the Xbox team. If you are talking about future PPC designs... that was brought up as an indication of IBMs faith in CELL(which doesnt look good).

    We do know Cell is the stronger CPU overall between PS3 and 360 but Xenon does have some advantages and 360 has the GPU(best to look at the systems as a whole they trade blows and each have their advantages. So judge the final output which is why people do these comparisons)
    Edited by 2 at 06/07/07 @ 20:24

  • Carrybagma #154 5 years ago

    so much so that theyve put primary focus on Cell chips on their road map.... oh wait no they havent! They are still behind their own PPC core, infact its all quiet on the Cell front all around.

    From this, I understood you to mean that the PPC was still being improved, whereas the Cell is not. If not, what are you saying?

  • Calgon #155 5 years ago

    Carrybagma: I do hope you weren't talking about the CPUs in the 360 and PS3(which is not doable on a console).

    I'll assume you were talking about PPC and CELL as product lines(for lack of a better term) and the technology behind them. No I was simply saying IBM doesnt look like a company that thinks CELL is where they want to vest alot of interest(not many plans being made by them with it).
    Edited by 2 at 06/07/07 @ 20:33

  • Carrybagma #156 5 years ago

    O I C

    IBM think 360 CPUs are their favourites then?

  • Calgon #157 5 years ago

    Carrybagma LOL is there any point in trying to explain to you? Forget 360 and PS3 for a minute.

    PPC is IBMs own technology, this has been their highest priorty chip for years, if CELL was really that promising they would be better off switching focus to that... they havent(infact there has been little interest in CELL outside the PS3 and even the XDR memory), is it likely that IBM beleive CELL is the second coming like many devoted Sony fanboys beleive then?
    Edited by 2 at 06/07/07 @ 20:47

  • Carrybagma #158 5 years ago

    Why switch focus to anything, when the two CPUs aren't in competition anywhere other than in the PS3 and 360? They make the Wii processor too, so where does that fit in?

    Do you honestly believe there is a 'pecking order' at IBM, where one design is favoured over others?

  • Calgon #159 5 years ago

    Carrybagma are you really that dense?(oh and Wii's broadway was again based off PPC technology like gamecube was IIRC, so it does fit in ;) ) of course they will get behind their strongest technology and incorporate that in future plans(I dont see why you cant see what Im trying to say but I cant explain it any simpler)... stop trying to wriggle out of this you are a terrible debator with very limited knowledge it would appear(its hard work explaining the simplest of things to you).

    You sound almost like you are unaware that PPC technology has been around ages this isnt just about the PS3 and 360(I have conceeded that Cell although not a clear cut winner is the strongest overall CPU between Cell and Xenon... that was quite a few post back perhaps you missed it, Im guessing thats the only reason you are pointlessly dragging this out with pointless questions and arguements which arent getting you anywhere)
    Edited by 4 at 06/07/07 @ 21:12

  • Monkey-Wizard-Ken #160 5 years ago

    Its getting hot in here

  • Carrybagma #161 5 years ago

    Well, it's funny you should put it that way, only, I've worked on PPC design for the past 15 years and had a hand in the Cell. My real name is even on some of those 'whitepapers' you mention, only no-one calls them whitepapers and I don't believe you've ever read one anyway.

    Your view on the position of IBM in these matters is painfully wrong. I very much suspect you have no clue as to how microprocessor design and manufacturing works, or as to how close-knit it really is. But hey - I've had fun stringing you along for a while. You dig excellent holes (for yourself).

  • Calgon #162 5 years ago

    Carrybagma you're a liar(thats really low to resort to that just because you're loosing :D... there is no way you have worked for IBM or had a hand in CELL I laughed out loud though... good sense of humor you have, and if you do then Im going to apply for your job tomorrow because you really dont know what you are talking about from the looks of it)

    Everyone who knows what is what can see clearly, you had no clue, infact every response was anything but related to what I was trying to say in the previous post(which is what was frustrating and the primary reason for me not beleiving you because you would have known exactly what I meant with me having to explain over and over... and if intentional shows you were really trying to avoid what was really being pressed by implying it meant something else... ie a pointless spin on my wording). Tell you what if your not full of shit, why not show me where I have been innacurate and back that up(otherwise the only person digging holes here is you, I can see you dont want to beleive me or want to beleive Im making things up... so you bluffed hoping Id retreat only, thats not the case Im not making anything up I do understand what Im saying).

    Oh sod it lol(I cant beleive he tried to pull that one :D), may aswell not have bothered even trying to have a serious debate.
    Edited by 10 at 06/07/07 @ 21:46

  • Carrybagma #163 5 years ago

    Nah. You're right - I'm just another Sony fanboy spreading lies about the 360.

  • Calgon #164 5 years ago

    Carrybagma: So by not taking me up on that challenge you are conceeding to being a liar? I dont care if you're a fanboy or not, its not very beleivable that you are an engineer working for IBM(blatant lie to gain credibility... theres no way youd be here acting like this either) Im sorry but its just more amusing than anything else(if Im wrong then how the hell could you get so confused at simple things which were absolutely correct? you wouldnt and youd never have contested them).

    Your view on the position of IBM in these matters is painfully wrong.
    What does that even mean? whats the point in saying that if your not going to say a) what you are refering to b) why its wrong and what is right ? There isnt which is why it looks like you are bluffing. Please tell us...

    spreading lies about the 360.

    edit: and who even said that? are you having a conversation with yourself or are do you just love strawmen?

    360 is simply showing it fairs better in IN-GAME circumstances and does have just as much if not more "untapped potential" as the PS3 for the future. PS3 has the CPU advantage(overall but not as clear cut as Sony fanboys like to beleive) 360 has the GPU advantage(including the daughter die/eDRAM) and a slight memory advantage.

    I was comparing two technologies not the PS3 and 360 CPUs(which for the last time now has already been said that the PS3s CPU is the stronger overall - but does lose out the 360s CPU in some areas too)... CELL was meant for more than PS3 considering the amount of money spent on designing it, hyping it, and successfully fabricating it but thats gone all quiet. PPC is a long established and successfull IBM chip technology but was dropped by Apple in favour of Intel's offering(which would mean if they did think they had anything better to offer with CELL... exactly it doesnt look like CELL is the second coming at all does it? whether the one in the PS3 is stronger than the one the 360 or not).
    Edited by 9 at 06/07/07 @ 22:23

  • Carrybagma #165 5 years ago

    Uh-huh.

  • RichGL #166 5 years ago

    Everyone here secretly wamts to bum everyone else.

    That's what I think.

  • smoothn00dle #167 5 years ago

    I use to dislike this Face off but at round three, I start to like it. Because it show the quality of graphic has more to do with the effort that the developers put into it than the hardware power. Those lazy port shouldn't even pass the quality test in the first place.

  • TRUTH #168 5 years ago

    The fact is 360 is better designed for games. Always look better/play better.

    Gears Of War would have trouble running on PS3 due to having less available ram. The developers did say this, and actually encouraged MS and showed GoW running with the Ram (less of it) on 360 and then running on the 360 with the ram that it has now built in the system...This was partly the reason 360 ended up with more Ram for games, as MS so the benefit of the difference.

  • admir #169 5 years ago

    wow so many stupid comments and from what i read most people dont know what their are talking about

  • SwedBear #170 5 years ago

    For a change a little comment about the actual article.
    Nice work! I like these articles. Not because I want the 360 or PS3 to "win". I think they are great as I own both and want to know which version of games to buy .

    It would be nice though, when games finally get released at the same time for both platforms, to get info on the merits of each version in each separate review. Or at least reviews of both versions released at the same time. Although first games need to be released at the same time. It's been a bit strange to see how PS3 versions have been delayed.

  • Khab #171 5 years ago

    Low-grade villains like Bullseye and the Winter Knight (who?)

    Wow. Well, not really a Marvel fan, are we? That's the Winter Soldier, aka Bucky.

  • TRUTH #172 5 years ago

    If you read my comment on 101-151 dated 05-Jul-07 20:16:04:... you'll understand why the PS3 is having trouble keeping up to 360. And this IS from very reliable game dev source...With now even PS3 Rainbow Six looking worse then the 360, added with a jerky framerate and less online features inc no face mapping. The PS3 is simply looking less and less worthy it's price for gaming, when compared to 360.

    I have both (PS3 is my brothers though) connected to my top Pioneer Plasma 50". And every cross PS3/360 games always look, play better on 360: F.E.A.R, Call Of Duty 3, Rainbow Six, Fight Night 3(360 had more background detail, more crowd characters, lighting, sfx), Madden 07, Tony Hawks, Ridge Racer, Splinter Cell DA... etc.

    Also having the PS3 connected by HDMI, and the 360 by RGB HD - The 360 still looks sharper and better. Friends of mine have already opted to buy a 360 having witnessed the games run side side on each console (please note i borrow most PS3 games), and having witness the proof, have ended up with a 360 . Proof is there: Seen it - Played it.

    Oh! 'The Darkness' on 360 looks sharper, better control, with a smoother framerate then the PS3 version. PS3 also looked a little washed out colors.
    Edited by 2 at 08/07/07 @ 23:33

  • rasomaso #173 5 years ago

    BLA BLA BLA

    I don't care.

  • Carrybagma #174 5 years ago

    Without wishing to re-light a boring argument over which CPU is the bestest, I thought I'd post a link to this article, by way of explanation for the following comment:

    Your view on the position of IBM in these matters is painfully wrong.
    What does that even mean? whats the point in saying that if your not going to say a) what you are refering to b) why its wrong and what is right ? There isnt which is why it looks like you are bluffing. Please tell us...


    It's a nice article, explaining how IBM collaborates to ensure success. Can you see what I was getting at now? (I suspect you won't, and that'll you'll instead answer a question no-one asked, like you usually do). IBM have no 'preference' - they go where the $$s are, as most businesses do.

    Note to gamers: The link and this discussion are very boring, so don't bother with it. I'm not even sure why I'm bothering. Posting a serious reply in a comments thread? Dear oh dear.
    /posts anyway