Funny how varited dev opinions are.
One dev says 360 is better than PS3, other one says PS3 is better than 360 and now this one says they are equal.

Too Human's sluggish performance/ frame-rate shows that they are not the best people to talk about graphics. Please leave the professional talk of graphics to pros like Epic, Polyphony, Infinity Ward and such.

He's never worked on the Ps3, so I don't think his words count for much. I'd like to see what Infinity Ward or Ubisoft Montreal think of this subject, since they've made great looking games for both consoles.

and 1080p(native) vs 1080p (upscaled)

the best game him and his company made was on nintendo: eternal darkness.

i think he should make a sequal to that.

Meus Resistance should be on here any minute. He has no life so he spends all of it on here being biased and racist. He is a disgusting person and I highly encourage reporting him to the moderators. He sent me 3 racial PMs because of my flamebait posts. I may have fun on the forums but I NEVER attack anyone because of their race. Meus, you may me sick.

of coorperate exec's giving their 10 cents...

LETS HAVE SOME GAMING NEWS HUH?!?! or is that to much to ask from NEWS4GAMERS now?

Sony "CLAIMS" they have the most POWERFUL console....you know the same BS crap that comes out of every SONYfanidiot in here...."BLU-RAY!!, it's the CELL!! "Blow the 360 out the water graphics!!"

and...

the 360...while it never claims to be the "superior" console, it keeps pumping out GREAT games!! games that are even marginally better or even better than the PS3....

WHy is that?!!

As a PS3 owner from launch...Im still waiting on those SONY famous words "Blow the 360 out the water" graphics..

I dont want, slightly better...or even better....
I want WHAT they CLAIM!! For graphics to be "NOT EVEN CLOSE" !!!

Where is that at SONY idiots??!! where o where?? Let me guess....

WAIT!! WAIT B3YOND!!

well cant comment on killzone 2 yet but 4 GT5 yes PGR4 is better and what is so good about GT5 with no tire marks on the road, grass or gravel! is there going 2 be weather affects in the game?

why all the old news

Guys, calm down. He does even contradict himself, if you want. Somewhere in the middle he says, quote:

--snip--
There is potentially more power in the PS 3, he acknowledged, but it is harder to tap.

"You have to get the timing right," he said, since processing with the Cell requires a juggling act to keep all the sub-processors busy."

--snip--

He's pretty right about that, I'd say. But he's pretty open minded, IMO. So, what's the big deal here.

Edit:
Oh man, just saw the date!
--
By AEI Editors
Tuesday, October 31st, 2006 at 12:01 am in Dean Takahashi, Dean and Nooch on Gaming.
--

Either the date on that website is wrong, or that article is about a year old!

Isn't the only restriction disc space? Or am I a technological n00b?

I didn't even read the article. Lost interest when he said the PS3 has less memory. I'm sick of this argument. Both have 512Mb of memory, except PS3 is strictly split between CPU and GPU memory (256Mb each) while 360 has 512Mb SHARED by CPU / GPU.

So when he says the 360 has more memory, does he mean more system memory (CPU) or more video (GPU) memory? Because if 360 has more system memory then it has LESS video memory. But if he means has more video memory then it will have LESS system memory.

This guy is clueless about the PS3. He should just shut up and try to finish "Too Human".

PS3 still has far more of the games i like so i go with them

PS3 games are just...magically better? Has nothing to do with processing power or better architecture? This individual is obviously from the old PC days of programming, where SIMD isn't much of an emphasis, which simply means he needs more experience with this new architecture before he starts seeing performance differences between the two platforms. He is completely right about Cell; it's an intense juggling act to keep all 8 processing cores busy with data to chew through.

Timing is definitely the hardest part of programming Cell, and luckily, once you get it right, performance just shoots through the roof.

The interview was published on October 31st, 2006, more than a year ago...

If this guy ever devloped for the pstriple he would have a leg to stand on.

[just playin around]

Ps3 is succeeding in everything it wanted to...by that i dont mean awesome games and all...each game was like a test...AI..graphics...physics. ..all that is slowly increasing...well i have my hopes on it...by the gears of war wasnt anything big its just unreal engine that gave it the graphics it isnt something that was specially made...anyway i dont want bullsh*t msgs on me

well first of all halo is good but its just hype u knw i got millions of questions on the game :p
first of all master chief gets hurts by bullets but when he goes jumpin from space and falls down n all hes alive how can bullets even hurt his suit?? well graphically i wasnt impressed at all by halo 3 it looked like halo 2 and some redesigned weapons looked bad...well each consle has its profits lets just see who wins at the end rite

im sure sony will manage its way :p

All u freakn fanboys dont jump on me im not gay jump in ur ur box :p live with ur ring of fire lol

[just playin around] dont go hyper :p

Seriously...get a life man, and stop being a hipocrite ;)

"There is potentially more power in the PS 3, he acknowledged, but it is harder to tap.

"You have to get the timing right," he said, since processing with the Cell requires a juggling act to keep all the sub-processors busy."

Just as i thought good job Insomniac and Naughty Dog are doing just that...

By AEI Editors
Tuesday, October 31st, 2006 at 12:01 am in Dean Takahashi, Dean and Nooch on Gaming.

lmfao you guys are stupid

Who in the hell brought up a damn 2006 article?

No Xbox fan has ever denied the potential power of the Cell but PS3 fans will deny the lack of Ram on the PS3. How many devs does it take to convince PS3 fans that it lacks memory? answer: none because when the devs mention it they fave their fingers in their ears and screaming lalalalalalala can't hear you lalalalalalala.

It looks like the Playstation 3 is destined to suffer the same doomed fate as the Sega Saturn that disappointed a lot of people and sold very poorly!

Sega kept on saying things like, “The Saturn ‘potentially’ has more power than the Playstation and the Nintendo 64.”

But the fact of the matter was that the Sega Saturn never had developers take advantage of the hardware in special ways. The parallel processing of the Sega Saturn and Playstation 3 is too difficult to work with–it is very inefficient almost all of the time.

Playstation 3 has “processing power” based entirely off of Floating Point math calculations. Power like that is great for a computer spreadsheet, but finding ways to efficiently use processing power like that in videogames for the purposes of graphics is MUCH more difficult!

When it comes to Polygon Power, the custom Xbox 360 GPU from ATI is much more advanced than the Playstation 3’s Non-customized GPU that is based on four-year old graphics card technology. The Xbox 360 uses a custom GPU with Unified Shading, whereas the PS3 still uses the outdated Non-Unified Shader design.

And when it comes to Memory, the Xbox 360 is significantly better, just like the man said in the interview. The Xbox 360 uses the revolutionary new Unified RAM architecture, wheras the Playstation 3 still uses the outdated Non-Unified RAM architecture, which has been used for decades, and is now outdated.

Plus, the Xbox 360 is far superior to the Playstation 3 in online gaming.

Many legendary game developers have said that the Xbox 360 is very easy to work with and program games for; the Xbox 360 is very developer friendly. Xbox 360 takes all of the best developer features of the PC and combines them with the benefits of designing games for console hardware.

Silicon Knights did the right thing by making sure that the Too Human trilogy of games will be released as a console exclusive for the Xbox 360.

Xbox 360 is my favorite videogame system ever!

Ps. I have a PS3 as well and I am playing COD4 on the 360! One day, the PS3 will get some good games. I think it started with COD4!

the ps3 has 74 gigs to use on games how is that low memory? 54 gigs on blu-ray and 20 gigs hard drive standard and up...................

if sony says we need to use the at least 20 gigs you have on hard drive , for the most awesomest game ever , cool i dont care....i got a 200 gig on mine.... i give a shyt

and the ps3 CAN play 200 gig 4 layerd blu-ray disk

360 ONLY HAS 9 gigs standard

why do they keep saying this, and 2.0 will reduce memory needed to run the O.S.

Based on what I have seen both systems seem to be about equal. From a combined processing power stand point, there does not seem to be a difference greater than 15% between the systems. Sony claims 2 TFLOPS total performance, but yet does not say how their GPU is capable of producing 1.8 TFLOPS when even the most powerful PC GPU can't do 1 TFLOPS and they are allot more powerful then the 3 year technology in the PS3. The 360 as well 1 TFLOPS is questionable as well. The only way PS3 and the 360 can achieve 1 TFLOPS performance or higher is if they both have 512 bit or greater shader cores.

Anyways, more processing power (slightly) to the PS3, while more and better memory controller (slightly as well) for the 360. With more ram, no matter how you slice, you can do more on screen in terms of game code, textures, polygons, and special effects point blank. More processing power, or better FLOPS equals better Physics, streaming capabilities, audio, and A.I. Depending on the balance, both systems seem to be equal. Like articles earlier in the systems life, they said it will impossible to tell apart from one another.

While none of the next gen systems are close to being renewed with another sweep of system, the 360 2 or PS4, the next wave of gaming systems is really going to impress.

In 4 years or so, I can only imagine what type of technology they are going to have. I am guessing that each will have an incredible amount of system memory and who knows how many processors running at who knows what speeds.

I love consoles and I always will.

No installing software, no problems. Every game works with every system.

Don't get me wrong, I love my quad core, dual 8800gts 640mb computer, but not for gaming.

Leave it up to the consoles to show you what fun is!

COD4 is freaking awesome!
This is a great example of what this gen can do with only more promise in the future!

red popcicles are way better than purple ones....

Thought, isn't Silicone Knights kinda the equivalent of NaughtyDog or Insomniac? So he probably has a very close if not exclusive relationship with MS and the 360.
That being said, of course he is going to say that they are both equally as powerful.

Funny though, when the PS3 developers like ND and Insomniac talk about their games or the PS3, they never bring up the 360, they only say thing like "I don't see how we could make Uncharted without BluRay.", but this guy really has to invoke Sony's and the PS3 name throughout his article.

To be honest, I haven't seen a 1st party game on the 360 that visually matches a 1st party game on the PS3, so I would submit that not even a year into the PS3's life cycle, his theory is already being proven wrong.

He seems like a decent guy tho, doing his job for MS, can't hate on him for that.

this was an old post,and all developers realize that the 360 has even more raw processing power as well...not to mention the ease of programming on...almost all developers well come out and admit that ps3 is the less powerful console,in fact many have already,but most of you fail to read the all the articles...the ps3 has some killer games around the corner no doubt, but the gamers expecting the ps3 to be the xbox this gen,[much like how the original xbox blew away the ps2 in graphics] are in for a rude awakening...in fact the ps3 is the ps2 while the 360 is much like the original xbox..i believe the power between these two consoles is around the same as the original xbox to the ps2...its also known that sony begged developers to not mention the lack of true power in the ps3,as that would draw even less consumers to the ps3,thus developers would make less money..ports show the difference,even when developed on the ps3,then ported,the 360 games well look better..just leave THIS FACT alone..anybody that knows squat knows this obvious fact...fanboys who know nothing pleae dont reply....

uncharted could be done on 1/4 of a dvd 9 discs...are you guys still this freakin gullable..cmon..epic 50 hour+ rpg with beautiful graphics,amazing sound and amazing ai could be done on a dvd9,heck 5 full games called the orange box could be done on 1 dvd9 with room to boot...heck every pc game is done on dvd9..uncharted is nothing but a decent looking 8 hour adventure game...got it? good,its really simple logic at work...BLUE RAY IS NOT FOR GAMING,DESPITE WHAT SONY WANTS EVERYONE TO BELIEVE,its for cgi,movies and other space eating formats,not games.....they could put four uncharted games on one dvd9 and there would be room to boot..ok...p.s you havnt seen a 360 game look as good as a 360 game,really? its the opposite in fact, have you really looked at gears? or bioshock? both of those games couldnt have been done on the ps3 without removing some advanced lighting and shaders tricks...in my eyes heavenly sword is still the best looking ps3 game,and it doesnt hold a candle to gears..same with uncharted,it looks good,but nothing all that amazing..

Denis Dyack = no brainer

....seriously they believe their own opinions are better and more valid than that of developers and analysts and reviewers. Grow up and listen to them, 360 and ps3 are equal in graphical capability. The only benefit that PS3 has is blue rays storage space, but as of yet no one has seen it put to good use. I can't stand people who shut their ears to anything that they don't want to hear and cant accept facts.

http://www.gametrailers.com...

Famous quotes: Cell can't run games. Blu-ray is only good for movies. Hmm?

360 is a normal 6300 RPM citizen. PS3 is 1.6L engine that some folks seem to want to pump out power by adding cold air intakes and performance camshafts. Devs have to fine tune the PS3/pump out the power by spending more time.

Look at games like Heavenly Sword, R&C, Uncharted, UT3, Haze, KZ2 and GT5 prologue. Good time spent, equals to a great game.

But I think I understand why these devs keep bashing PS3....

They fear the power and potential it has against the rival system, because if they keep on putting up articles/podcasts like this, it fully means they don't want other devs unlocking the power the PS3 has to offer! So they will keep on saying PS3 has no memory, bla bla bla.

Thats real talk^

Uncharted will be GOTY!

Says the man who gets a paycheck from MS. Jeez.

no one said cell cant run games,but it sure as hell doesnt run them smoothly..its just not an effeicent design for gaming,theres no question about it..also uncharted looks great,but its nothing i havnt seen before,look at gears to refresh your memories..blue ray is what isnt needed for gaming..everybody knows this though,unless you like your cgi..

i just watched the trailor for uncharted,and it looks fun, but in no way are the graphics all that great...looks like a movie? are you kidding me, look at the 2d foliage,pixels galore and the lighting..or lack there of...the best thing about that trailor is the beginning music,before it turns all metal...dude look at gears man,if you want to see an amazing lookin game...seriously if uncharted is the best looking ps3 game,theres something seriously wrong with the hardware....

yes theres no difference between them two oh and theres no difference between the ps3 and the wii either, jack ass.

The article is from Okt 2006 !

OK obviousley the PS3 fanboys want a "Real" Developer to dis the PS3, well here you go:

"The latest shot in the HD-DVD / Blu-Ray battle has been fired, this time coming from Oblivion developer Bethesda Software. According to the developers of the game, the Blu-Ray drive data rates are slower than those on, for instance, the Xbox-360’s DVD drive.

Todd Howard at Bethesda said:

“Drive speed matters more to me [than capacity], and Blu-ray is slower.”

What does this mean? Well, in general, longer load times and more cacheing to the harddrive. In fact, in order to get Oblivion to load on the PS3 as fast as it does on the Xbox-360, Bethesda duplicated key data from the game, storing it on multiple places in the disc to lower access times. There’s no word on how much of the code was duplicated, but it still seems to go against Sony’s message that developers need 50GB of storage space. It sounds like, if the drive were faster, the HD-DVD standard of ~30GB / disc could be adequate."

Now I'll just sit back and wait for the Disagrees, Ignores, "Shut this User Up's" to pile up.

I think Mr. Dyack is wrong here...
...the Xbox 360 is currently a much better architecture for game development. ;)

@Vito4434 - First of all It's Kane & Lynch and Second all those games you just mentioned are coming to the 360 as well.. where the hell have you been? To far up your own ass to know something simple like that, or you just to stupid?

@Rikitatsu - Moron. 360 has more games in other genres than FPS.. and some of the big games coming up for the PS3 are FPS.. OMG! Wait a minute.. Kill Zone 2 is a FPS.. look at that.. so now it must suck, eh?

But, I don't know if I agree with what he has to say but he's the developer.. he probably knows more about this stuff then any one here.

when i see 180 run wardevil then i will say he is right, til then, he needs to go and drown himself

Well since N4G is allowing articles from October 2006 to count as news now, lets see if I can find some old pre-PS3/Wii launch articles to post...

"Will the 360 be able to stand up to the PS3 juggernaut this November!?!?"

"Can the Wii turn it around for Nintendo, or will it fall victim to the same sales as the GameCube?!?!"

The PS3 easily has more processing power. There's quite simply a lot more transistors in there. Even this stooge repeated that the PS3 has more processing power. It is true, what he said, that the Xbox360 has more "available" memory, meaning, the Xbox360's operating system takes up less RAM than the PS3's operating system.

What he fails to mention is that because, unlike the PS3, which can load data from both the hard-disk and blu-ray drive at the same time at predictable speeds, whereas the Xbox360 is not able to load from both simultaneously, that the Xbox360 needs to buffer more data in RAM, which pretty much negates the fact that the OS takes up a little less space. He also fails to mention the fact that since the RAM on the Xbox360 is built into the GPU, the CPU has to go through the GPU to access the RAM using the same path. This means that the more CPU work is performed the less bandwidth there is for textures and geometry. So simple games will look good and complex games will look bad. Things like physics, animation, etc will all get in the way of textures and geometry.

Bottom line, multi-platform or potentially multi-platform developers will always say that both platforms are equal and exclusive developers will always say that their respective platform has some advantage or the other. It's that simple.

It's also simple arithmetic that the PS3 has more processing power.

CELL: 25.6Gflops/processor x 7 processors
Xenon: 25.6Gflops/processor x 3 processors

The above comparison doesnt even begin to describe the real difference in "available" processing power since the Xenon is basically 3 of the CELL's PPE, by far the weaker of the processors on the CELL chip. Tests by IBM and others have shown that 1 SPE can easily get 5-10x the performance of the PPE. And there's 7 of those. Before you start bashing IBM as being biased towards the CELL, remember that IBM also designed the Xenon. They just don't bother to do benchmarks with it because it's a crappy piece of hardware and it's simply not worth the time or money to research and promote it.

As for the GPUs:

RSX: 56 alus at 500mhz

-48 alus dedicated for pixel processing (never has less than 48 available)
-8 alus dedicated for vertex processing

Xenos: 48 alus at 500mhz

-48 alus that can either be used for vertex processing or pixel processing in almost any combination.

Example:
Now, if a geometry heavy game like heavenly sword used all 8 vertex alus on RSX, RSX still has 48 alus remaining to render the game with all kinds of fancy pixel shader effects at 720P.

What if heavenly sword ran on Xenos? Well, for one, of the 48 alus, 8 would be used for vertex processing. This leaves only 40 for pixel processing.

If 48alus at 500mhz = 1280x720
then 40 alus at 500mhz = 1152x640

Coincidentally (or not) that's exactly the resolution at which Halo3 is rendered at. ;)

-

I own a 360 and don’t plan on getting a PS3, but even I can concede that the PS3 probably has more power, the trouble is with so many games being multi-format your only really going to see any kind of difference in exclusive titles.

But if you’re saying the choice is going to be games that look like:

Heavenly Sword
GT 5
Uncharted

Or games that look like:

Mass Effect
Bioshock
PGR 4

Then I’m more than happy

The Xbox 360 DEFINITELY CAN read data from the Hard Drive and DVD simultaneously.

The DVD of the Xbox 360 transfers data at a rate of 16MB per second, compared to only 9MB per second of the Blu-ray used with the PS3.

Games such as Halo 3 say on the back of the box "Hardrive," because they use the Hard Drive to speed up load times IF you have a Hard Drive. Halo 3 will work with the Xbox 360, even if you don't have a Hard Drive, but there are situations when the load times will be longer.

Soooo, you clearly need to get your facts straight.

*

Xbox 360 has plenty of games in every Genre, even unique Genres such as Puzzle, Party, RPG, Music, Real-Time Strategy, ect...

Playstation 3 has plenty of problems in several Genres.

In fact, there are Genres where the Playstation 3 has zero games currently available, and zero games planned.

For example, the Real-Time Strategy Genre.

Xbox 360 currently has three games available in the Real-Time Strategy Genre...my favorite is Command & Conquer 3. There are also five more Real-Time Strategy games in development for the Xbox 360, including Halo Wars.

Playstation 3 has zero games in the Real-Time Strategy genre that are currently available, and the Playstation 3 has zero games in development in this genre.

Last generation the Xbox 360 was the king of shooters, but the PS2 was the system that had all the genres covered.

This generation the Xbox 360 has all the Genres covered, but the PS3 falls short in many genres, because there are simply no games available in several genres.

The Playstation 3 can only display 275,000,000 polygons per second, compared to the 500,000,000 polygons per second of the Xbox 360.

That is the reason why games like John Madden Football 2008, NCAA Football 2008, All-Pro Football 2008, and many other games from EA Sports, 2K Sports, and so many others all run at 60 frames per second on the Xbox 360, but only 30 frames per second on the Playstation 3.

Gamespot specifically said in the review of those sports games: "The Xbox 360 versions run smoothly at 60 frames per second at 1080p resolution, while the Playstation 3 versions struggle to run at 30 frames per second at 720p resolution."

It isn't just sports games with that problem. Look at all the Tony Hawk Skating games, Tom Clancy Splinter Cell: Double Agent, and F.E.A.R. They have frame rates that drop below 20 frames per second on the PS3 and go into slow motion it is so bad...even though the Xbox 360 versions have very smooth framerates.

Oblivion is NOW BETTER on the Xbox 360!!!

When Oblivion was released a year later on the PS3, it used a new shader design...that had NOTHING to do with hardware technology; it was just something put into the new version of the game as a software program. The download was released for the Xbox 360 later on, but the PS3 fanboys always pointed out, "But when you compare the actual discs, the PS3 one has some advantages (although the Xbox 360 version also has advantages, and was ALWAYS rated higher).

Oblivion: Game of the Year Edition is now available for the Xbox 360, and when you now compare Oblivion on the Xbox 360 to Oblivion on the PS3, there is NO DOUBT that the Xbox 360 version is significantly better; that is why it is rated higher!

The Playstation 3 version of Oblivon is a perfect example that what this man is saying about the Hard Drive of the PS3 being used to help out with memory limitations is NOT true. Consider the FACT that the Playstation 3 version of Oblivion does NOT allow the entire world to exist in the game at the same time, like the Xbox 360 version does. This is because of the Memory Bandwidth hardware bottleneck of the Playstation 3.

Also, when it comes to RAM, the Xbox 360 certainly DOES have fundamental advantages over the Playstation 3!

For example, the CPU of the PS3 can NEVER access more than 256MB of RAM at any point. The Xbox 360 CPU is free to access up to 512MB of RAM if there was a need. With the PS3, there are plenty of times when the CPU needs more than 256MB of RAM, and the Video-RAM of the PS3 is actually using less than 256MB of RAM, which means that if the PS3 had a Unified RAM environment--like the Xbox 360's--then that unused Video-RAM could help the CPU, like it does on the Xbox 360. OBVIOUSLY, the Xbox 360 RAM design is much more flexible; it helps developers in ways that they enjoy working with.

Plus, it's important to remember that the original design of the Playstation 3 called for the used of TWO Cell CPU processors--each with two Threads that could Send signals to the SPE subprocessors.

However, when Sony saw the design of the Xbox 360, and they saw how much better the Xbox 360 was, then Sony was forced to redesign the Playstation 3 very quickly in a way that hurt the PS3 system. This is nearly identical to what happened with Sega and the Saturn. Sega saw how much better the original PS1 was, and they were forced to quickly redesign the Saturn in a way that used parallel processing that was difficult to work with and was more expensive. This is EXACTLY what happened with the Playstation 3.

The original design of the PS3 was not even supposed to used a GPU, because it was going to have two of the Cell CPU processors. But when Sony saw the revolutionary ATI GPU in the Xbox 360 that was Custom designed for the Xbox 360, and was 1.5 years ahead of its time (since the PC didn't see similar Unified Shader technology until January 30, 2007), then Sony was forced to removed one of the Cell CPUs in the PS3, and instead add a Nvidia GPU. But there was NOT time to custom design the GPU, so Sony was forced to included a four-year old generic GPU in the PS3. That is why people often point out the vast superiority of the Xbox 360 GPU.

Now that the PS3 only has one 3.2Ghz Cell CPU, it means that the PS3 has only two Threads capable of Sending signals to the six SPE sub-processors running parallel. Each of those six SPE processors is capable of Receiving a Threaded signal; however, the PS3 CPU is only capable of Sending two Threaded signals. This is where the hardware "bottleneck" of the PS3 reveals itself. Programmers often say that the PS3 has two arms (CPU Threads) that are trying to juggle six balls (SPE sub-processors). Obviously, that is NOT possible, and that is why the Playstation 3 hardware is such a BIG disappointment.

With the Xbox 360, Microsoft used a much newer and better form of technology. PCs often brag about their "dual-core" CPU design. The Xbox 360 actually takes that to the next level and used a "tri-core" CPU design, with each CPU using the most developer-favored videogame processor available--the PowerPC.

The Xbox 360 is literally the exact opposite when compared to the Playstation 3 in terms of hardware design and efficiency. The Xbox 360 has three 3.2Ghz CPUs, each with two Threads capable of Sending instructions. But the Xbox 360 doesn't the outdated parallel processing environment of the PS3. There are no "sub-processors" to worry about with the Xbox 360. The signals can be focused on CPU and GPU commands. This literally means the Xbox 360 has six arms (CPU Threads) that are being asked to juggle only two balls (GPU and CPU functions).

THAT is why the developers absolutely LOVE the Xbox 360 and can design games so much more efficiently for the Xbox 360.

THAT is why games are released so much earlier for the Xbox 360.

THAT is why the overwhelming majority of Xbox 360 games offer better graphic and online performance on the Xbox 360.

THAT is NOT going to change!

It may be easier to port a PS3 game to the Xbox 360 than it is to port an Xbox 360 to the PS3 (since the Xbox 360 is more powerful in terms of videogame performance--500,000,000 polygons for the Xbox 360 is more than the 275,000,000 for the PS3), but the Xbox 360 will continue to be the Lead Platform this generation for two reasons:

(1) Because the Xbox 360 is so much easier for developers to develop games for and experiment with new types of gameplay.

(2) Because the Xbox 360 has sold over Eight-Million more systems than the Playstation 3, and that lead continues grow by hundreds of thousands of systems each month, in terms of Worldwide Sales.

It's relative.

Using Madden 08 as an example, the 360 runs at 60 FPS and the PS3 at 30 FPS. The 360 runs 2x faster, literally, and it outputs TWICE as many pixels at 1080p, compared to the 720p of the PS3. Therefore, the PS3 needs to run at 60% (2x30%) in order to match the 360's 60%.

The PS3 does not have any real evidence that it is more powerful. When you try and say that the PS3 has "Seven Processors" compred to only "Three Processors" for the Xbox 360, you are comparing apples to oranges, because the PS3 does NOT have "Seven" Processors.

In reality, the Xbox 360 has THREE 3.2 Ghz CPU Processors, while the Playstation 3 has only ONE 3.2Ghz CPU processor. The "Seven" processors you refer to in the PS3 are NOT "CPUs" they are "SPE" Sub-Processors.

Whats the difference, you ask??? Here is a simple answer:

The Xbox 360 has three CPU processors, each with two Threads--for a total of SIX CPU Threads. The Playstation has only one CPU processor, with only two Threads, for a total of two Threads. The Xbox 360 uses the much newer "Multi-Core" design, rather than the outdated "Parallel Processing" design, like the PS3.

This means that the PS3 has Six parallel SPE sub-processors (seven parallel sub-processors if you count the PPE, which is almost never used) that want to Receive threaded signals from the CPU. The problem is, the PS3 has only one CPU, and only has TWO Threads to Send signals with. Denis Dyack says that the PS3 is a "juggling act," because he is making a reference to the Threads...the Playstation 3 has only two arms (CPU Threads capable of Sending signals), but it has six balls (SPE sub-processors) that need to be juggled. OBVIOUSLY, that is NOT possible!

With the Xbox 360, there are no subprocessors due to the next-generation of technology called multi-core processing. Xbox 360 has six arms (CPU Threads capable of Sending instructions) with only two balls that need to be worried about being juggled properly (the CPU and GPU functions).

The reason why we almost never see the PPE of the PS3 used is because developers would have to decide, "What is more important--Physics, or Graphics/Sound/Artificial Intelligence." I say that because one of those areas would need to be completely eliminated, since the PS3 has only two Threads to send instructions with. As of right now, the PS3 instructions are divided into Graphics with the one thread, and broken down into Sound and Artificial Intelligence with the other Thread. That is a TERRIBLE situation for developers to be in, and that is why the original design of the PS3 called for TWO of the Cell CPU chips.

The bottom line is that Xbox 360 has much better games with much better performanc. The overwhelming majority of multi-platform games are either noticably or significantly better on the Xbox 360. Even Oblivion, a game that has now been re-released in the form of a game called "Oblivion: Game of the Year Edition" is now better in every way on the Xbox 360--the ratings prove this.

All the PS3 owners have is numbers. PS3 makes a great Spreadsheet program, or a great piece of Accounting software, but it is a very poorly designed game system that developers don't like using. That is why EA releases games like Battle for Mid-earth 2, and Command & Conquer 3 for Xbox 360, but not for Playstation 3.

I'd rather have better, smoother graphics than numbers...and the ability to talk online, which is something very few PS3 games offer, but all Xbox 360 games offer.

Between both camps over which system is better. We've heard PS3 is better, 360 is better, and both are even. It's funny when people on this site try and go into detail as to why console"x" beats console "y". As if they're experienced developers who make games for a living. Anyway, my only question is has Dyack even studied the PS3 considering he's locked in with the 360? I kinda doubt he's tinkered with PS3 or even has development kits.

d.mitchel, once again you get this info from crystalmethgaming.org, it is never true, there are so many games on ps3 that make this infactual, Final fantasy 13 has billions of polygons on screen at once, so this killzones the number that you just posted, and final fnatasy 13 is cg in realtime, you just dont get that the ps3 has movie hardware, there can easily be a movie made in realtime on ps3, rendering is endless on ps3, any dream of visuals is possible on ps3, its how to present a cgi in playable form, they need a high budget, and they also need a longer development time with larger workforce, these things have only happened in a handful of ps3 games"

killzone 2
wardevil
final fantasy 13
and final fantasy 13 versus
GT5
Drakes Fortune
Railfan
Ratchet and Clank

notice all of these are exclusives

and i forgot HAZE, dropped from 180 and pc, funny that haze developer said ps3s rendering is unsurpassed, and this is what i already knew, but your saying,"cell is one cpu" and "the rest are sub-processors" and they arent full processors, if this was true then i know sony and ibm would have called it a supercomputer on a chip, and they wouldnt say the ps3 will never max out, and its future proof, and they wouldnt use it to make their movies, so please learn man with long article, both of you, you need to really know ps3 before saying these so called facts that come from xbox sites, its embarrassing

that me we can hold more memory i am tired of these guy coming in here writing about puting down the ps3 every persone that writeing puting down ps3 works for xbox they are trying to get use comfuse i own a ps3 i think it is the best overall i have be a playstation fane siecn pl1 came out and i was telling ever one at this time that the ps1 was going to take sega out of buissness that happen man i teel ever body go pick up a psm mag the one that comparess the xbo306 with the cheif and editer of xbox mag and on the other side we have the chife and editer of psm mag that mag right there will tell you that ps3 will be the one takeing over the xbox lady was even say that she just does not like ps3 but that the have a real good syestem after a year the ps3 has been out then the war will be very close and is's been 1 year and now u get to see what the ps3 can relly do I AM TIERD OF THIS XBOX GUYS COMEING IN HERE F***KIN LIE ABOUT ARE PS3 LETS SEE IF WEW CAN GET A PS3 DEVELOPER IN HERE TO TELL US THE TURTH ABOUT PS3

EVERY SONY MADE GAME HAS BEEN EXSULENT THEY ARE GETTING BETTER AND BETTER THEY ONLY USED 30% OF THE PS3 POWER WHEN THE MADE UNCHARTED AND THAT GAME LOOKS BETTER THEN ANY GAME OUT THAT IS ON 360

Hey D**k, you've got quite a few howlers in there, but this one's a real beauty:

"The reason why we almost never see the PPE of the PS3 used ..."

Guess what, D**k, the PS3 won't even boot up unless the PPE is used! The PPE is to the PS3 what your Intel/AMD CPU is to your PC. It is always used!

Here's some advice from someone who actually develops software for a living ... the next time you want to demonstrate your promotional skills to prospective clients with a blatant promotional piece, try something that does NOT require you to know what your talking about ... like restaurant reviews.

I think people do need to understand that whether geting the 360 or the ps3, they're getting one helluva deal. This is not the first article from reliable sources that have constantly been working with both systems and find both to be astonishingly close in capability. Some articles from other such sources (They have been seen on this site) have described how the 360 is capable of 10-15% more graphic detail, while the ps3, due to the spe's (floating point processors) is just around 10-15% more capable of accurate physics. Really people, why all the fighting? The systems are close enough in hardware capability that if that is one of the factors in determining which console to get, you can just disregard the hardware and decide based on the games. We all have different tastes for games, there's no right or wrong in that aspect, so why people bash each other over that is beyond me.

Sounds like a amazing genuine Coder who actuality likes to crunch numbers and create results that are fulfilling to all.
This is why i got into graphics and games (to be amazed).Cause its refreshing to hear someone who likes to make the machine work no matter what!.
I remember Yu-Suzuki bragging about how he got the Saturn to perform at this amazing level.He found it challenging and he conquered it and the games were amazing later on ,Even Shemue was running on Saturn!
Thats Coding!

i dont know when the 360 thats comming out in 2013 got almost as powerful as ps3, but this must be a genie that granted this wish