Rage Xbox 360 vs. PS3 Face-Off Video

so much of the rumors of the PS3 version looking better than the 360
mind both look quite nice but the 360 looks a tad crisper and possibly better textures?
Well looking forward to the face off article none the less

Eh back in 09 people were saying the Ps3 version ran 30 fps and looked worse.Atleast now the Ps3 version is close on textures and runs 60fps.All and all the 360 version has less pop in it does lose that 60 fps while effects get crazy.Is the 360 Version tripple buffer v sync?If so thtas why it drops to 45 fps.The Ps3 version runs sub HD and has screen tear ''only happens when theirs alot of effects going on''Even still the framerate stays 60 fps.If theirs a way for Id to atleast make the textures load in a bit quicker they need to make a patch.I heard a SSD knocks pop in on the Ps3 version out.Not sure if thats true or not but i would like to know.

It's going to be this way 90% of the time. The 360 has more memory to work with. Now, you look at both systems and say, "what are you suggesting? Both systems have 512mb of RAM..." True. Yes, both systems have 512mb of RAM but the 360 development consoles, however, are 1GB...unlike Sony's development consoles, which are still identical to the consumer models. What does this mean? This means that on the 360, developers don't have to hold memory back for the purpose of Debugging and other background programs. See, the full 512MB isn't available for the developers to use all of on the PS3. About 2 years ago, Microsoft had finally released a 1GB development kit that made maximizing the console, much easier. To my knowledge, Sony has yet to do this.

What's more? The 360 uses very little of the available 512mb to run the OS (around 30-40mb's), last I heard, the PS3 took around 90mb's to power its OS but they may have that figure down by now. Also, the 360 has an additional 10mb of RAM integrated into its graphics processor, which makes anti-aliasing (reduces jaggies), and anisotropic filtering (makes things cleaner and more detailed) come at not cost. It's the fact that this RAM is integrated into the GPU that is a real benefit.

Operating systems, Networking, Graphics API's, and development kits...it's what Microsoft does and the tools that they provide developers for on the Windows PC platform, are the same as the 360's development tools...this makes porting and developing for the 360 a breeze and very attractive for developers, whilst the PS3 kits require a steep learning curve and were very buggy. Sony has always been this way about their console, however. They never develop their consoles with the developer in mind...they keep creating these very complex hardware architectures trying to achieve this "supercomputer" status, hoping that everyone is going to drop their routine and be willing to jump on the Sony band wagon to learn how to develop on their console...that's not good business and what developer are managing to achieve these days, under the circumstances, is impressive. This is why Sony first party titles look very good, because the first party developers focus solely on the PS3 and are able to take the time to get to know it. Heck, Sony is paying these people good money to be patient, work with Sony on how to make the most of their complex and crazy console (just like the PS2), which was never a very game-friendly architecture to begin with.

Microsoft made a smart decision. They created a console for the developers. Something they can feel at home on and is a breeze to port for. Sony knew they were gambling on the PS3 and were hoping to inspire a trend. Heck, they took their hardware around hoping that they could market this unique piece of architecture off onto other industries and they just laughed at Sony. Sony was trying to build the ultimate computer at a minimum cost and has been using their gaming consoles as the guinea pig, hoping that in the long run, they've achieved more than a mere game console and making their architecture a new computer hardware trend. I bet you that next generation, they will follow Microsoft's footsteps and create a developer friendly platform, more similar to the PC...if not, then, they are being stubborn again and this hasn't been landing them anywhere innovative in the long run. I haven't put in a PS3 title (even though, I own one) and felt impressed about it any more than the next 360 title, or PC title. My only complaint about Microsoft, is while their cross-platform titles look better, their first party support is lacking...they literally have no "good" first party developers.

@latrodectus PS3 dev kits have had 1 GB of RAM for YEAAARS (before launch)

"What's more? The 360 uses very little of the available 512mb to run the OS (around 30-40mb's), last I heard, the PS3 took around 90mb's to power its OS but they may have that figure down by now. "

360 uses 32 MB. PS3 used 90 at launch and it has come down by over half since then.