The CELLERON is getting PWNED!!! So is the RSX, just like the Acura RSX ugly and slow.

Enjoy which ever one you have.

this was basically a launch title on 360 and it looks better than the PS3 version which was polished for another 8 months for ps3. I think FNR3 is a great looking next gen game and people rarely bring it up when trying to diss x360 early or launch titles. Sony Fans are always fighting back with "wait another year till this and that game" but screw that why wait when I can have it now. PS3 games are always gonna lag behind which is sad.

""We're going to give the PS3 the benefit of the doubt in this initial round since developers might need more time to figure out how to maximize performance from the Cell and the RSX. If you look at the Xbox 360's first Madden game, Madden 06, you'll notice that it doesn't offer very realistic stadium shadows, either. The trouble with buying a console at launch is that you often have to wait for the second or third generation of games for the system to fulfill its potential. The PS3 didn't beat the 360 in this first comparison, but the games do look fine for first-generation titles. The real graphics battle will likely come next year.""THAT'S THE TRUTH RUTH

see children,ps3 is known to be harder to make games for and the final dev kits only arriving in late august.360 on the other hand is similar to pc development and has been out for more than a year.and it's first games didn't look any better than ps3 launch games.some were worse in comaprison.gears of war didn't come out at launch.it came ONE YEAR LATER.HMMMMMMMM......THAT'S THE TRUTH RUTH

one just launched and had games that don't utilize it's power yet just like 360 one year earlier.THAT'S THE TRUTH RUTH

this is another flame bait article.YEAH,THAT'S RIGHT.IT'S THE TRUTH RUTH.

(((force))) (((BULLSHIT)))deeper darks, bright vivid colours and more bright when things are suppose to be bright is what HDTV's does and the 360 matches the performance. Faded out, contrast up to high on a SDTV, is what PS3 games look like.

INCOMING FANBOYS
TAKE COVER!!!!!
ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Haha

Marcusfenix, that's the funniest thing I've heard in a while about the Bottleneck 3

The CELLeron hahaaa

Well this is just proving what the Wii/Nintendo like RSX coverup is about. It's weak. And Sony knows it. Already, games that had the time to work on from the 360 version release on they f*cked up.

Cross platform new releases are better on 360. The best game of this Christmas, Gears of War, it's on the 360.

Too bad. Celleron is good for having Linux. It's not a gameconsole, it's a computer... And it didn't perform any better then a PIII with linux

my emachines pawns both the 360 & PS3, bow down!

LOL i can see the celleron phrase catching on all the forums now,beta ray this celleron that lol let the flame wars begin

take it easy people dont get 2 excited they are just ports..

When Sony takes an extra year to bring out an inferior console!!

Thats why they fired the guy in charge.

It's alright!, it just takes some people longer to Welcom3 Chang3... I know it will take the masses to learn what gamers are starting to realize and only then people such as yourself will wise up.

the first games to come out for xbox were decent but didn't look all that special.but things started to look better a year later.the first ps2 games to come out for the system didn't look any better than dreamcast.so most of us continued to play dreamcast.some games looked worse on ps2.while dc was hittng its stride.dreamcast in it's first year didn't have great looking games.but they looked good.same with playstation.for example:tekken 1 compared to tekken 3.ridge racer and gran turismo 2.see the difference?

360's games like perfect dark,king kong,call of duty,etc were not that great for looks.fun,but not that great looking.now we have gears of war and soon halo 3,mass effect,alan wake(2008?),etc.dynasty wariors,dead rising and games of low budget don't push the 360.to assume that this is all the ps3 can pump out when it just released is to be an idiot with a severe blow to the head from a wrecker ball.

wii games will get better looking.ps3 games will get better looking and so will 360 games.but these are my questions:

name one company or developer outside of microsoft that says 360 is more powerful?

why is it IBM is not using 360 chips for more powerful tasks but they are using ps3 chips?and they are the ones that made all chips for nin,ps and ms.

name one company outside of ibm(the builders) that are using 360 for anything else?tvs,science,graphic farms,servers,cell phones,etc.

why do you believe that a system(besides wii)will come out one year later and not have more power in it?

is it because of system loyalty and fanboyism?

Oh yes, here we go again. First of all, I will say that XBOX 360 FANBOYS GET OUT OUT HERE IF YOU ONLY WILL DOWNPLAY PS3!

Thank you.

Okay, I'm a 3D artist. So, I know what I talk about. When I saw the very first image of NfS: Carbon, I already knew what people would say about it. And damn I was right. Better lightning doesn't mean more advanced lightning. I see more advanced lightning on the PS3 version. As the most people know, light doesn't go trough things. Which the Xbox 360 does. Especially to the right of the tree on the left side of the picture. You clearly see that it goes through and suddely like it if it was some kind of texture. And the hedges are way too light too. But aside from that, I see better slightly better textures. And the car is way more advanced than the Xbox 360 car. It has batter reflection, specular, colours and I've also noticed that the seats are alittle more detailed.

In picture number 2, is see way more detailed textures in the PS3 version. Also the windows on the building is more detailed. And again, the car is more detailed. And I think, the PS3 also has some bumpmapping. It a little hard too see on stills.

On Call of Duty 3, I have to agree that the PS3 version is too bright in the most cases, the Xbox 360 version can I'm some ways be too dark. But again, doesn't make it less complicated. Although I totally disagree with gamespot on the textures. Also, on the 3. picture the Xbox 360 version is alittle more sharp. But again, its not taken from the same frame, so it might be because of motionblur.

On Madden, I say that PS3 is way better on the visuals. Don't come say PS3 doens't have that lightning as Xbox 360 where half of the stadion is obscured by shadow. That's beacuse it's two diefferent games, with two different times of the day. And now, to really confirm that PS3 has better lightning, look at the crowd of ordiances in the middle of the picture. You see 7 very light strings on the Xbox version. On the PS3 version you see none. You know what these strings are? Stairs. A very good example that PS3 has way better lightning. Models and textures are of same quality.

Marvel is no difference in the quality. Again the PS3 version is a little more bright.

In NBA I see better textures and lightning in the PS3 version. Also PS3 version is more sharp.

In Fight Night Round 3 is see some better textures on the Xbox 360 version, some places. Else, no differences in quality.

So, remember, there is a difference of a good looking image, and a advanced image. Also remember that these games are ports.

I told everyone that when the ps3 launches it won't be as good as the 360. And sony fanboys would constantly say that the 360 is just an xbox 1.5 . They would say that xbox 360 games were just minor upgrades to the xbox system. They would say that the xbox 360 was rushed to market and wasn't really next gen. Every game that recieved 8's and high 8's they would bash and say its not an AAA game since it didn't get a 9. They would say that the ps3 launch would be when the next gen would really start. And now look at the situation we are in. Sony fanboys doing damage control every time editors say that the xbox 360 as of RIGHT now....Beating the ps3 in every game. Graphically and playability with smooth frame rates. WOW. Was I right or was I right? ha ha ha ha ha ha....Now all we hear from sony fanboys is excuses and telling us to wait and see next year. Wait and see and in the meanwhile spend 600 dollars on a console that is being out done by the 200 dollar less system. Thanks....But no thanks. Thats why I was so excited for the ps3 launch. I couldn't wait for the actual games to get released so everyone could see with their own eyes and play for themselves. The war is over. I said it before and I will say it again. The 360 is set to sell beyond 10 million by the end of the year worldwide and the 360 is beating the ps3 in terms of next gen graphics and gameplay. WOW. Is it really that hard to believe though. Xbox 360 fans have weathered a whole year of constant bashing by sony fanboys...and now Sony fanboys have recieved exactly what they deserve...and over priced under performing system. Take your medicine and we'll talk to you next year when there are NO games on the ps3 comparing to Halo 3, Fable 2, Blue Dragon, BioSHock, and so on and so on. 2007 will be incredible for sure.

And to #19....ha ha ha ha ha....Its obvious not only to the editors and the many many reviews that have been givenl....That the 360 is clearly better for games in this NEXT GEN....And I have played both systems and the screen shots don't tell the whole story here. Yes the 360 version looks better in the screen shots...but whats even more impressive is the difference when you play the games and compare. In every case the 360 version runs at a much better frame rate and thats when you can see the HDR lighting and AA differences. And hands down from my first hand experience...the 360 versions totally out do the ps3 versions. In my opinion its really not even close. And when you factor in how much you pay to even play the ps3...it can piss you off as well. There is no excuse for this BS that Sony has put on the market. And every excuse sony fans make....just shows how little sony fans know or understand about gaming in general. Yes the ps3 games will improve. But thats the nature of all video game consoles year to year. The 360 games will improve as well. But my point is....you spend less with the 360 and get a clear winner in this next generation of gaming. Thats good news for gamers everywhere. Next gen is here, its now, and its affordable people. Every year sony fans will call a time out while they get their butts kicked...."wait till next year" they scream with a passion. 2007 will come and go....you will hear the same sony fanboys yelling..."just wait for next year"....and so on and so on. Untill the next gen consoles ship and their is a new war being waged in the video game industry. The ps3 can't compete now with the 360...it will really be old news and sad when the next 360 comes out in 4 years. And True gamers will be ready and excited about the next best thing...from a company "Microsoft" who always delivers the goods....Thanks Microsoft.

which console do you own?

You're a JackAss, leave!, thank you....

Are you blind,or do your eyes see differenty to the rest of the human race

ps3 shots look washed out and bright. Like when your playing on a projector and someone lets in some natural light, like that. Also the 360 textures look better, sharper. The ps3 looks good tho, by in carbon the 360 rear view camera owns.

"WAIT TILL THE PS3 COMES OUT YOU XBOTS...YOU WILL SEE THE DIFFERENCE!"

the words used by many ps3 fanboys before the ps3 came out...so what happend? I'll tell you what happend. The ps3 is all hype...always was....always will be...I'm sure they'll get some good games eventually...but the 360 is the clear winner! Better exclusives, more AAA titles, and better online. And please dont give me ur complaints or excuses. I dont want to hear your whining. The 360 is better! End of subject. Just suck it up sony boys...and move on!

Take it easy greeny and knghty it's not just Killer Cop, the main online magazine also states Madden, NBA 2K7 and FNR3 looks better on PS3. Also fanbioys please answer shadows questions:

name one company or developer outside of microsoft that says 360 is more powerful?

why is it IBM is not using 360 chips for more powerful tasks but they are using ps3 chips?and they are the ones that made all chips for nin,ps and ms.

name one company outside of ibm(the builders) that are using 360 for anything else?tvs,science,graphic farms,servers,cell phones,etc

And I'll add one more:

Why is the PS3 the only system that offers true 1080p if it's inferior?

Don't worry bean, you won't need to give the PS3 as much time. Just this game http://media.ps3.ign.com/me... which already comes in April displays easily PS3's superiority:
Great graphics with hundreds enemies on screen ;-)

For starters perfect dark,king kong,and call of duty2 were lovely games for launch titles and for there time! As time goes by games will look better as with GOW but don't discredit 360 games just because PS3 games are not looking so hot! People need to stop comparing the launch titles and understand that PS3 comes nowhere close to 360 launch games and probably never will! I guess we should give it a year and another year and another year to give Sony a fair chance to catch up with 360 graphics! lol

This comparison is, to anyone with more than two brain cells completely null and void. I could probably produce the same results from any one of the consoles by using different TV's.I am convinced no 'blind test' would be conclusive.I will repeat my view that i believe 360 will prove to have better gpu in long term ,but that doesn't mean i think it will be the better console overall. Final point, i have to agree with the other guys about #19 i'm sorry, but this guy is confused to say the least.

haha "CELLeron" lol. thats funny. maybe we should call it "emotion engine v2.0" haha. just like ps2's "reality synthesiser" and how it was going to change everything about game graphics, only to soon become xbox's b!tch graphically speaking. lots o' hype - any real advantage = sony's marketing plan, round 2.

you made guesses just like everyone else.you didn't answer my questions above.it must be that i'm right about those questions.

FACT:ps3 is harder to develop for.not one company says ps3 is easier to dev over 360.

FACT:most games coming out for ps3 are ports from 360.360 is the lead platform just like ps2 was over xbox to make games on.so even if ps3 is more powerful,companies are going to make games on 360 to save time and money.

FACT:games never show the true potential of a system right off the bat.

FACT:not one company outside of microsoft has said the 360 is more powerful.not one developer has said 360 is more powerful.

FACT:even IBM is not using 360 chips for more advanced tasks.(this fact in particular)

FACT:even ports from pc didn't do 360 justice.same with ps2/xbox coded games like king kong.

FACT:microsft built better software for development.sony still has to TEACH how to develop for ps3.

FACT:microsoft is a better software company than sony.

FACT:sony is a better hardware company than microsoft.microsoft had to buy hardware.

FACT:sony sold 100 million plus ps1s and 100 million plus ps2s.and over 20 million psps.and this is not counting tvs,dvd players,music,movies,cameras,s ound systems,etc.

FACT:microsoft sold 24 million xboxs.then abandoned the system because it lost billions to get into the industry.and still bleeds money.microsoft failed to counter ipod and is now trying with zune.

FACT:technology doesn't go backwards,it goes forwards.ps3 has more built in features than 360.and has better backwards compatibility.there was a great quote from a eurogamer forum guy"sony is counting how many games don't work on ps3.microsoft is counting how many games that do work."that's sad.why can't i play my best games on the 360?

let's see anyone dispute these facts.....because it all washes out in the end.it comes back to who will have the best games for our gaming needs.whatever you choose is YOUR CHOICE.

And will be for quite sometime!!!!...FACT

The PS3 is a waste of money and should be cheaper than 360!

fact: xbot's like to twist everything around to make sony look bad.

are we forgetting that a lot of these games were released at the same time?

...and there's not that big of a difference except the lighting in places, and more detail in places for each version.

if anything what does that mean? if a launch ps3 game can look almost as good as a 360 game released at the same time after the 360 has been out for a year... that's bad news for the 360 , not the ps3.

but, unlike xbots, i'm not going to say that means the 360 has crappy graphics cause gow is obviously the best looking game so far. and these games could look as good as gow if the devs put a lot of time in for each on each console. so, since the devs didn't, why compare games that are not that great looking for the 360 or ps3? it's sure as hell doesn't show you what either console can do.

as far as framerate problems. the 360 has a lot of games with them, so does the ps3. the ps3 also has a game (resistance) with zero framerate problems. as does the 360

fact: in the end... it's up to the dev on what a game will look like.

NFS:Carbon....PS3 FTW (the second and third image proved it. the 360's version had extended lighting which looked over done and foggish)
COD...360 FTW (sharper and deeper contrast color level)
Madden....Tie
Marvel....Tie
NBA2K.....Tie
FightNight....PS3 FTW(PS3 ver. had better texture, 360 lighting was over done and was naturally fixed on the PS3 version)
Tony Hawk.....360 FTW (better road texture and better gamma level)
Tiger Woods....Tie

With the expense of developing on the ps3 and the ease of making a game on the 360, expect many many ports. That or 120 Dutchmen to make a game.

Rigth now the 360 is having the little edge in graphics. Just for programing side. One thing is for sure , it has show more for $400 than the PS3 for $600. Im not saying the Ps3 would eventually show us what it can do. Rigth now it delivered the same kind of 360 graphics. Thats not bad considering how 360 fanatics consider the graphics of the 360 that amazing. So the PS3 to show the same graphics quality as the 360 in its first bathc of games is a plus. One thing is sure. Even if the 360 could end up beaten the PS3 , its the worst hardware of the two. With all the dead consoles, overheating problems, red ligths of death and others; it would be difficult to early adopters as me to pay another $400 to get our hands in a new 360 just to see it die after some use. I preffer the 360 thanks to its expanding library of good games, but I will choose the PS3 thanks to its better hardware and future software. Believe what you want fanatics. Im not going to waste another $400 on a 360. Maybe when it gets the $200 price reduction, MAYBE. So compareing their graphics is nice. A bait for flame in this site. A joy to 360 fanatics to keep bashing. Just look at how smart the TOPGAYMER feels after posting his thanks to MS. LOL!! I dont see any mayor difference in graphics and I preffer a hardware who works for more than six months. So FANATICS IF YOU DONT LIKE IT GO FK URS ELF!!

Fact: Your right PS3 is harder to develop for, and only for one reason. Sony hasn’t made tools to make it easier to develop for. The Xbox360 has a Multi-core, while the PS3 has the Cell which is the use of parallel processors. Both you have to program for multiple processors and programming style is similar. However Microsoft being the software company has come out with a whole lot of tools to make programming easier for there console. Sony on the other hand has fail short here and there development tools are lacking, so developers have to create there own.

Fact: You are right about 360 being the lead platform. To add to what you said, this is the reason why you will see more games on the 360 in the future.

Fact: No one has said the 360 is a more powerful machine however numerous sources have said the 360 has the better graphic card while the RSX was based on old technology with predefined Shaders. The 360 video card has more shaders over all and can be allocated in anyway, which is the new style of video cards. Not sure how those extra calculations the CELL can do are going to make up for lack of shaders.

Fact: Consoles never show true potiental right off. However how long are we going to wait to see the PS3’s, according to Sony we were suppose to see more potential day one then the 360.

Fact: IBM isn’t using the 360 chip because they are looking to compete on the scale of supper computers. The idea with the Cell is that you can keep linking multiple cell processors together creating a massive computer that works together. 360 chip wasn’t designed to do that, it was designed to do everything a game required well. Sony on the other hand wanted there chip to hook up with every other device in your house that’s Sony and share processing, so it had to be able to do more than just games well.

Fact: Sony doesn’t have to teach there developers but to make better tools to cut down on development times. Developers on the PS3 have to make there own tools and do many basic task themselves. Many of the tools giving to developers were written at the hardware level much lower level code then what game designers normally work with. Sony’s fault, lack of implementation… You can make a super car that can go 0 to 60 in ¼ of a second but if it has no seat or controls for the driver what good is it? Should we be surprised when the driver looses the race? (Lack of implementation)

FACT: Sony has sold a whole lot, however they had one the biggest battery recalls, digital cameras, copy protected CD’s. Bottom line despite how much they sold the company as a whole is operating in the red and had to get a loan in order to ship the PS3. If you look at any reports about Sony before this year they weren’t doing good so it’s not a fluke. They have also lost every format war since BETA, UMD consider a failure. Not to say the PSP is getting its butt handed to it by the DS.

Fact: Dislike Microsoft all you want but they are the leader in Operating Systems. So they have the money to try out on ventures like the Zune. Take note here Sony had the music market share and lost it to Apple. Microsoft is trying to break into a new market with the Zune, one expects them to win right away but given time, it’s expected Microsoft with gain some portion of the market. On the other hand that’s more than what could be said about Sony, they decided they will rally the music industry to sue kids for downloading music and to infect peoples computers with rootkit virus. For all Microsoft’s failures they have many successes and it keeps them making money, Sony can’t say this (look at stocks Microsoft has made its investors more money then Sony).

Fact: Technology does go forward, as for features, other than the BLU-RAY and Cell I’m not sure what you are talking about. 360 can do all the same things and by this review it’s doing it better.

The reason why the Cell is being used for other things is because its best suited to be a PC chip. Nobody else is using Xenon because its best suited for GAMES. Now do you get it? This is why the 360 games look better even though its inferior as you fanboys say.

Im still gettin a Ps3, U guyz whine too much. The PS3 has been out for what only 2 or 3 weeks, Yall need 2 calm down seriously. We will all see come 2007 if the PS3 will be a flop or not IMO. PS3 wins me over in just their xclusives.

the CELLulite processor and torqueless honda RSX chip just got PWNED!!!

Cares seriously!?! Play the console of your choice and enjoy gaming

Fact: unless you have both console running the same game side by side at the same time, you wouldn't tell the difference! You should just be enjoying the game you have on YOUR console!

Fact: we debate this same exact subject every single day!

Fact: its like beating a dead horse!

Fact: there are 99% fanboys on this site and it doesn't matter which actually looks or plays better fanboy from either side will NEVER EVER away their opinion!

Fact: there see only 1% true gamers on this site who actually play games and enjoy them for what they are everyone else is just a fanboy who is here to represent their console or company of choice

Solution: get over it and enjoy games! Why can't we talk about the fun we are having playing GOW RFOM or Zelda?

Grow up, how many different ways can you hang from one consoles or companies nuts?

What more powerful tasks do you speak of? How do you define a more powerful task. Pfft, i just read #18s comment again and come on, what commpany would seriously use a 360 or a Ps3 to power a godd@m cell phone or a TV. And also, i think iv seen about 17 articles come up having some guy quoted about the 360 being more powerfull than the Ps3 and the same goes for Ps3, its all a load of cr@p in my opinion. I bought my 360 not because i new it would have better graphics or because i knew the clock speed of the proccesser was...ect. i bought my 360 because i play almost only fps' and know 360 will deliver lots of them, there is allready quite a few and i am very happy about it. MGS4 isnt enogh to get me to spend $600+ yet

"Fact: MSFT is a better software company than Sony"
No S*! We have a real Einstein here.

let's look at the features:almost full backwards compatibility.sony has more games and media that are compatible with the system.almost every disc type except hd-dvd.ps1 and ps2 games WORK.200 games don't work out of about 8000.that's 8 then thousand behind it.microsoft has about 300 that work.and most are not games that i want to be compatible.my best games DON'T WORK.for a SOFTWARE company like microsoft not to come up with a solution to this problem means they aren't interested in it that much.that's why peter moore let that slip out of his mouth.

built in web browser.built in rechargable controller.built in sensor for new type of gameplay.built in hard drive that can be swapped out.built in bluray player.WE ALL KNOW THAT IF bluray was not built in,the system would have been $399.for those that talk about supporting hd-dvd but don't have one.and for those that did buy it but dogged the ps3 for it for being there are idiots.actually hypocrites.

i said earlier that microsoft is a better software company than sony.that means support for games,support for development,support for online is going to be better.you can't expect a hamburger company to make a better ice cream sundae than the experts who do it all the time.maybe i should have been more clear.

sony's system out of the box is a better system.not for games.i said just the system on it's own.it's more expensive because of bluray.but then,that extra storage can be used for games.and truthfully,it's only a $100 dollar difference than 360 premium.

just because these are facts don't make me a fanboy of one system.these are just facts.yeah,sony is losing money in other places and for selling the system for less than its worth.things break.just ask SOME(I SAID SOME) early 360 adopters.my systems(ps1 and ps2)work.and they are the release ones.never needed fixing.don't stand them up,don't put them on carpet.let them breath.

microsoft has done a lot of things in software that make sony look bad.music in games,online play,download while doing something else,creating a community,upgrading the controller(with rumble).i have no problem saying this because i don't blindly follow sony.i was playing before sony even entered the market.i have more fun playing classics than some new games.and that's on wii,360 and ps3.

but the FACTS STAND.and can't be disputed.that's why people pick at other things because they can't dispute the facts.

but it comes down to what system you like.what games you like.what you believe the company is offering YOU over the other company.

The true power lies with the game developer and what the developer chooses to utilize, check PC games for instance, there are 2 main PC cpu manufacturers, AMD and Intel,and 2 GPU manufactures ATI & NVidia, both use the same architecture (x86) but each have unique multimedia technologies, if a game is coded to take advantage of say MMX2 or some other Intel tech along with NVidia tech that game would always play superior on an Intel platform along with NVidia, it would play on the AMD & ATI but more than likely not as good (i.e if both CPUs are identical in speed range and die package) I see most PC games now state "Plays better on Intel" etc

Same as with the dual core CPU if the code is not written specifically for them it's basically like having one core because the software wont know it has 2.

Or even the AMD Athlon 64, still runs 32bit software with no visual or underlying gains but that dont mean that it's inferior

to sum up... it's the software(games) people, you cant be comparing the systems... compare the game developers and final product.... both systems are great technological advancements but it's all up to the developers to tap their unique powers

that a software company who I have never seen make any form of hardware bigger than a keyboard can suddenly come out with the xbox and make it more powerful than the product of a company who basically makes nothing BUT hardware and has been doing so for over half a century? And now the 360 and PS3. I kind of knew that Sony would probably try to make the PS3 as powerful as their imagination would allow them to try and make sure that it was more powerful than the next xbox, but so far, as these screens are showing me, its not quite there yet. I know its hard to develop for and devs need time to learn how to program for it properly, but does Sony HAVE the time it might require?

To me, it seems that Sony were really pissed that a software company whose most complex piece of hardware (that I know of) is a keyboard can produce such a powerful console on their first try, after claiming that the ps2 is soooo powerful, and didn't think about the devs. They probably just tried to create something that looks and sounds unbelievably powerful in a blind rage with broken pride.

I hope they do have the time because as much as I'm disappointed from what I've seen from the PS3 so far, I want Sony to continue doing well in this industry. Imagine what would happen if they fell (I wouldn't want to, not when Microsoft is in this same industry because you know how Microsoft is already!). Sorry for the long post.

To be fair let's compare RR^ to RR7. Both launch games, and the 360 still spanks the P$3 version. Besides PC ports to the 360, which gave the 360 such a large launch library. 18 on 360 to 13 on P$3 with an extra 8 months. The 360 launch graphical standout is Project Gothem 3. This game handles the P$3 launch library without bringing GOW into the picture. Out of the gates the 360 trumps the PS3, end of discussion.

Development Time Comparison

Playstation 2 released on March 4, 2000
Playstation 3 released on November 11, 2006
Playstation 3 development time = 2443 days

XBOX released on November 15, 2001
XBOX 360 released on November 22, 2005
XBOX 360 development time = 1468 days

Graphics Comparison

Playstation 2 vs. XBOX
Winner = XBOX

Playstation 3 vs. XBOX 360
Winner = XBOX 360

Again, what is the excuse for the Playstation 3 having inferior graphics to the 360, and the Playstation 2 having inferior graphics to the original XBOX?

thats still not a fair comparison. the 360 has a hell of alot better development tools than the original PS3. so its really no question about time difference because MS provivded spec data along with specific game development tools while the devs for the ps3 had nothing but hardware and questions. and still the two consoles are as close as 10 and 9.

To End this discussion... The Xbox 360 has better graphics in present day, but the moment the devs unfold the true power of the PLAYSTATION 3 the graphics are going to surpass the Xbox 360, this time sony wins the graphics department, and by the way we all know its going to win again in the console race...
This is the final comment for this article... any other comments will not really matter

Have you noticed that hardly anyone argues about exclusives for the PS3, but they always whine and complain about the ported versions? The developers don't want to look bad. They take their time and make it good for the first system(360) and not so much on the second system(PS3). Therefore it probably won't look as good on the system it's ported to.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm not saying the PS3's ported games look bad. I actually think they are more than worthy first line-up releases.

The last time I checked the exclusives for the PS3 actually, IMO, look damn good. You know why? Because there is no option to make it good for one system(360) and slack off for the other(PS3). With PS3 exclusives developers can only make the game for the PS3, therefore they have to take the time to make it better. If they don't make it a good game.. it makes the complany look bad. There is no excuse.. (Hmm.. well it looks good on the 360, and it looks okay for the PS3.. we could make changes.. but that would be just too much work!)

It's not always the fault of the system, it's the fault of the developers, because they didn't take the time to make the minor corrections.

its a year older and its whooping ass!

This old article explains it all - pretty well
http://www.hardcoreware.net...
The following are Game Developer quotes -

"Being a video game developer (I develop for both, Playstation 3 and XBOX 360) people ask me almost daily which platform I think is better. These are my personal feelings, in no way does this reflect my employer.

Short answer: XBOX 360.
Performance: On paper, the PS3 is more powerful. In reality, it’s quite inferior to the 360. Without getting into too many details, the three general-purpose CPU’s the xbox360 has are currently FAR easier to take advantage of than the SPU’s on the PS3. I suspect a few years down the road some high budget, first party PS3 exclusive titles will come out that really take advantage of the SPU’s and do things the XBOX 360 can’t, but I don’t think the console is worth buying based on this speculation (for some it will be though, we'll have to wait and see how these games turn out).

Graphics: The XBOX 360 is a clear winner. The GPU is more powerful. It has more powerful fillrate, and far more pixel and vertex processing horsepower. Part of the reason is their choice of memory, and architecture of pixel and vertex procesing. I can’t get into details but the same vertex shader will run much slower on the PS3 than the XBOX 360. The 360 also has a clever new way rendering high definition anti aliased back buffers. To accomplish the same effect on PS3 is prohibitively expensive. For this reason I think many games will have no choice but to run in non-HD resolutions on the PS3 version, use a lower quality anti aliasing technique, or do back buffer upscaling. The end result in all cases is going to be noticeably worse image quality."

I quess PS3 fanboys are not going to be very happy about this

since the PS3 launch line up mainly consists of ported 360 games, doesnt that mean that the games for the 360 suck ass too, since everyone one of the Xbox fans keep saying that the PS3 launch lineup was the worst in gaming history. cause there is no real difference between gameplay of ports, just graphics and online

To End this discussion... The Xbox 360 has better graphics in present day, but the moment the devs unfold the tri core setup of the xbox 360's cpu....the next year and beyond games will leave the ps3 games in the dust. One thing the ps3 lacks is the HDR and AA use simultaniously and the 512 ram for graphics. SO no matter what devs do with the ps3...they will never be able to use hdr and aa simultaniously and they will never have a game as detailed as Gears of war or Prey. Those two games are ram intensive games. And years won't help the ps3 improve in what they are lacking from a hardware point of view. , this time microsoft wins the graphics department now and will only improve in years to come, and by the way we all know the first console to 10 million always wins the console race. Sony was the first to 10 million the last two gens...but this time MS will surpass 10 million before the ps3 hits 800k.
This is the final comment for this article... any other comments will not really matter.

P.S. Someone needs to give Nubreedlive the news flash. The war is over buddy. 360 is dominating in sales and the 360 is dominating in terms of 3rd party games, and the 360 is dominating with its unmatched console exclusive games that aren't even possible on the ps3 due to its low graphical fidelity. Its over buddy. Get over it and play your over priced inferior console...Or do you even have one yet? ha ha ha ha ha....Well, I do. And every time I whip it out to play....It makes me more elated about my purchase I made a year ago in the xbox 360. WOW. Thanks Microsoft.

Doing more damage control huh...ha ha ha ha ....Too funny. You hate the fact that the 360 is crushing the ps3 in terms of game graphics and game performance don't you? Its ok buddy. Get over it.

Now, what you cleverly hid in your false statement is this....

The 360 has 3 PPU's. The ps3 has 1 PPU. Thats a fact that you can't twist and change. It was a choice by Sony and as it turns out...MS was right when they said the the ps3's 7 spe's which you called cores....is not effecient for game code but more suited for math numbers calculating....better for video streaming but not actual game code. And you know what...it shows in the games out for the ps3....I can talk numbers all day...and the 360 clearly out performs the ps3 in every aspect...but the games speak 1000 words. And the ps3 games aren't up to snuff with the xbox 360. Thats a fact. So dream all you want about what the devs might or might not be able to do with the 7 spe's....but what we do know is the 3 PPU's of the 360 are crushing the spe's on the ps3. And thats without the 360s obvious GPU advantage. Its a wrap people. Its over. Sales, games, performace, online, is all heavily favoring the 360. Get over it.

DJ....

The 360 has 3 PPU's

The ps3 has 1 PPU identical to one of the 3 PPU's on the 360.

The ps3 has 7 spe's that are optimal for video streaming but not game code as the games out for the ps3 would clearly indicate. So keep making excuses for a 600 dollar system. Thats just sad indeed.

The 360 has NO spe's. Do you know why? The 360's floating point operations are done by the GPU. The ps3's SPE's and 1 PPU was a big mistake from a developers and gaming standpoint. But it sure does crunch a lot of numbers. Which helps with other none gaming applications....MS did the right thing as Carmack clearly stated...They made the ultimate gaming platform that is the best choice for next gen game developement. WOW. Its over DJ. Give it up buddy. Talk yourself into your purchase. But everyone else, even without having all the tech info, can see the 360 is spanking the ps3 easily. And the best is yet to come from the 360. Thanks Microsoft.

Are you all enjoying that much the next gen?? Did you forget last gen??. Well, I havent.Let me remind you about that. Last gen, games on multiplatform were ported from the PS2. At the end games like Need For Speed Hot Pursuit, Madden, Nba Live, Nba 2k, Mortal Kombat, Need for Speed Underground, and too many others looked better or at least equally good graphically on the three main consoles. Does that means that the PS2 was graphically superior to both the Xbox or Gamecube?? Hardly not. The Xbox was the graphical force last gen followed by the Gamecube. Games were developed for the PS2 first due to its higher install base. Same thing is happening to the PS3 vs 360. Sadly all the fanatics are judging the PS3 just for some of the first ports made for it. Its fair just to wait until some developer take advantage, if any, of the PS3. Then we will judge. I didnt judge the 360 just for the mere Xbox ports it received at first. Games like Gun or Tony Hawk American Wasteland didnt show the power of the Xbox 360. Again analizing the past gen, this seems usually. As all the negative comments. I didnt saw that huge difference. I like NFSCarbon on the PS3 most. It captures the dark feel of racing at nigth, but one thing Im impressed with its the quality and superiority of its textures over the 360 version. COD3 wins the 360. It really has better textures, but I find it too dark. The Nba 2k looks sligthy better on PS3, but moves snother on the 360. Ive played both and I prefer the 360 version, even if playing with the SIXAXIS is a blaze. The Marvel game is crap on any console. THawk looks better on the 360 and FNR3 looks better on the PS3; Im still have to play it to judge how good it moves. So to me the competotion its fair. Rigth now even when they are as graphycally good, Sony is in disadvantage because they promised more. Time may help the PS3 as developers get used to the console. The 360 is in advantage thanks to its developer friendy aproach. So its too early to call the next gen war ended. So FANATICS ENJOY IT, Because no matter what it will be fun all the way. FANATICS... IF U DONT LIKE IT...you know.

you could say the ps3 is getting it's ass whooped by the 360 right now, but all first party developers say it's a pain in the ass but very rewarding to get performance out of the ps3, but if you don't design specifically for the ps3 the game can come out as crap. I think 2007 will definitely be the year to compare the two. In March 2007 with the launch in Europe, thats when the games will start coming and by the end of the year thats when we should know which console has the best performance(I still think it will be close). I was waiting for a ps3 but the launch was lame and then hearing about a lot of games being better on the 360 I just went ahead and bought a 360. I figured I will get a ps3 when the games start rolling out. Plus I want to wait for them to fix most of the bugs, and add multitasking features with firmware updates.

is a very talented man, but he got where he is by programming for the PC. Of course he is gonna choose the 360 it's more familar to him.
It's easier to go in and program for, thats alway been known about Xbox systems. you say that the PS3 Cpu is better for crunching numbers. Well what is a game but a program that is all about numbers. yeah you see pictures but everything in a game based on numbers. Physics, lighting, pixels, color shades, everything that makes a game, a game is measured in numbers. The 360 is a very powerful machine but Windows as a OS is not that great for longitivity. There has been at least 10 new version or upgrades of the window OS since windows 95. Why, cause programers alway need more power on Window machines and processing power is always tapped in about the third year. Where as the history of the OS on Playstation machines have always allowed programmers to squeeze that little extra if they so choose to take that time to acutally do it. I personally think that the PS3 has a greater potential, but programmers and developers are gonna have to take time to acutally want to learn the PS3 system inside and out. If sony doesn't come out with dev tools that are more user friendly they will wind up the next Nintendo. Where all they get is ports and that 3-5 exclusive games a year. I don't want this to happen but Sony needs to remember one thing. Game development has gotten more expensive, I truly believe that the 360 has less "NEXT-GEN" in it's machine, but they have reached that balance between power and ease of use. But until they outright beat Sony. (and please people don't say they already have when it's only been out for 3 weeks) I will stand by sony as the machine that is right for me. They are still getting all the ports and they still have development teams that are dedicated to them and only them. This will be a good war to watch over the next 5 years.

why did you use this link a while back?: http://arstechnica.com/news... did you not read the whole thing? Guess not cuz its only additional evidence of the ps3's inferiority to the 360...
The 360’s OS uses only 3% of its CPU time on Cores 1 and 2, while Core 0 is free altogether, and 6.25% (32mb) of its 512mb RAM, this means that the 360 has more processing power available for in-game graphics and physics. Meanwhile, the ps3’s OS…
“In the case of the PS3 this equates to 12.5% of the available Cores on the CPU always reserved, an additional 12.5% sometimes taken by the OS, 12.5% of the available RSX memory and 25% of XDR Cell memory. Balancing these out, one could argue that Sony has removed up to 25% of the available CPU power and 18.75% of RAM for these features as well as others that are not mentioned here or will be added in future updates to the PS3 Operation System.”
Wow, 18.75% (96mb) of the ps3’s 512mb of total RAM, vs. 6.25% (32mb) of the 360’s 512mb RAM, say, that means the ps3 has 416mb RAM left vs. the 360’s leftover 490mb RAM for graphics…
I could be wrong, but isn’t 490mb greater than 416mb???
Sources:
http://arstechnica.com/news... <--the link you posted DJ, LMFAO!!!
http://ps3.qj.net/Inside-th... <--another unbiased source that states the same exact ps3 information from your link DJ, and also describes the 360 and compares them.
DJ, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT, ANYTHING YOU SAY CAN AND WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU...
http://news4gamers.com/News... 2.3 - That information's really old though.
DJ - 20 Hours ago | Let him/her speak
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any follow-up articles on what the final OS requirements are. Have you seen anything recent? I just remember a few devs saying that final OS requirements are smaller than what companies originally lay out, but I'm not sure by how much. With PS2 it was a 50% reduction in CPU/RAM requirements, but considering how much multi-tasking the PS3 has to do there's no easy way to predict.
"It's probably still 6 SPEs and the PPE available for game functions, but they might've freed up the 7th SPE for game functions (only devs know). "Sony is not considering having the OS periodically demand a second SPE." The 5 SPE possibility was shot down pretty fast.
http://arstechnica.com/news... That's the article in case anyone wants to see it. The info's 7 months old, but still a good read."

BTW, heres somethin else t look at: http://www.wii60.com/videog...

More complaining! More whining! ps3 boys are so pathetic! You guys defend your system like somebody offended your mother! IT'S JUST A VIDEO GAME SYSTEM!!! So what if its not as good as the 360! Whats the big deal??? I bet some of you guys leave this forum and think about ways to reply to the 360 boys...trying to sound all smart! Get a life kids! The ps3 is inferior to the 360. And so what if it is? Face the facts and move on!!! No big deal!

I wonder if BMW drivers hate on MERCEDES drivers and vice versa?

Did anyone else find the "hump-bug" in the last two Tiger Woods images? If you've played the original Prince of Persia or the first Mickey Mouse on the Megadri..uh..Genesis you know what I'm talking about =)If not...mouse on, mouse off...repeat.

When you roll over COD3 the 360 version look like Saving Private Ryan Compared to M.A.S.H.

BTW in the Majority of PS3 i see More Jaggies than the Fist of the North Chapters.

GOW has better graphics than any PS3 game. PS3 can't even RUN Gears Of War.

the end.

ya why ps3 going loose why ps3 graphics going too dark i dont know but developers know about that we getting ps3 only mgs4? nothing another good game on the ps3 high graphics im very sad about it why sony developers giving chance to win xbox360?

the console war is exactly the same as the middle east war there, were as sony is usa and are using ulterior motives like pushing blu-ray, were as usa is after their oil

We can now see that the Xenon > than the RSX. Whihc most people have known for a long time when comparing the specs. Every PS3 game has a white washed out look. So happy MS went with ATI this time. They will always lay the smackdown on Nvidia.

And one thing that is very obvious is Sony fan boys are not very happy right now. Just look at all of the name calling.

Is it really that bad if some one says the PS3 is not what it was hyped to be? Because it kinda true.

i couldnt give a crap. at the end of the day i own a 360 and I am well pleased with it. The PS3 at the moment and in the near future, does not offer me one game of interest. If MGS4 was a star title then I would consider one. The one thing that really guts me about PS3 though is the joypad, its awful, especially for FPS.

Ps3 just has a Washed-out Look for their washed-out Games.We New that this wash-out look was the future for them in the MGS4 trailers (That Piss-green color is the main pallette of choice among sony.).Among Other thing Have anybody ever seen Payback with Mel Gibson? If you did you know that the Color schemes is like a PS3 game Washed-out. I mean for Christ sakes There are still Jaggies. I really can't Believe that sh1t man Jaggies. Thats like so 2000. Not even Dreamcast had Jaggies.

*Cue the Theme Song for M.A.S.H.*

Hehe.. did I hit a nerve? By the way.. I don't think I posted a bad comment about your name being about halo. I, in fact enjoy that game. I just used it to reference the tie to your post. You like Halo.. Halo is played on XBOX.. therefore you would definately say YAY XBOX(360). That's all.. and oh about your avatar.. yeah.. I just found it amusing. Don't get your panties all in a bunch and don't call names. Maybe I should have put "lol" after my post. Because you took it the wrong way. I have nothing against Halo.. or your name. It's just that pic dude.. lmao it gets me. Up until last night I just thought you were a chick.. (until I checked your profile). My bad if I insulted you, but lol chill out. You need to go kill an alien (Halo/GOW) and let out the stress or something.. (LOL)

DOn't even think about this system [PS3] evolving - (who's got time for that?). The dev's did all they could. Judging by these pics the PS3 can't even do what the PSone did, sad. I guess I'll be returning both my Stations today since they both blow testes. Ok - Everyone go home already. It's over. Goodnite everybody. & Thanks (in advance) Microsoft. lol

"I love witty post like that FKN Unbelievable. The M*A*SH joke is the best. Because suicide is painless. OHJ GOSH LOL I'm laughing so hard right now it hurts. D@MN that was good. ~~I'll be whistling mash all day now.~~ "

Thammer1 and I'm Lying? Ain't that so true?

PS3 Sucks. I try to give the Benny of the doubt but once i saw the JAggies that Killed it for me. Maybe Sony Could just use one of them thingies like Men in Black to Zapped their fanboy's brains so they don't remember this system ever came out.

how can you can compare xbox360 games ported and modified for the ps3.. of course xbox looks better

FNR3(ps3)looks better than xb360 fnr3 period.

http://img364.imageshack.us...

The 360 came out, the Sony Fanboys said, just wait 'till PS3 gets here-- then you will see next gen. PS3 got delayed-- the Sony Fanboys said, just wait-- extra dev. time, PS3 games will REALLY blow 360 away! The PS3 came out, and cross platform titles look better on 360-- Sony Fanboys say, wait until next year-- PS3 games will OWN! So, how long do we have to wait, Sony, until the Next Gen truely arrives? At this rate, we could be waiting forever!

When PS5 Comeout and Tekken 11 is a Launch Game.

Timmy: gears of War on PS3 http://www.putfile.com/pic....
COD 3 on PS3
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

the xbox 360 is a next generation console and an excellent one at that. all this "ps3 is the real next gen" is a load of friggin rubbish. just because it has a newly and unproven disc format doesnt mean it is better than the 360. you buy a games console to play games, not to watch movies -FACT.

Sony boys are on the defense lately. And for the comment that Lair couldn't be done on the 360...that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. These guys said the same thing with their Star Wars games for the Gamecube and N64. I bet DJ is like 17 and PS1 was his first system. You guys will defent the PS3 even after Sony goes out of business.