which is more powerfull ps3 or 360?

Both are similar. Killzone2 are slightly better looking than Gears2 and multiplats are slightly better looking on 360.

"Which is more powerful A or B" topics are starting to get really annoying. Yeah, they were always annoying, but the amount of these topics just doesn't decrease. It's as if system wars is a "deja vu" machine...

Well, to answer your question I'll place the following staments:

Fanboy A: A because multiplatslook "1pixel"better
Fanboy B: B because exclusives look better than multiplats
Fanboy C: Are you series?

which is more powerful ps3 or 360? and dont go on about games , i just want to no, which is more superior and why? tanveerahmed2k8

360 because of the GPU and ram design

They are pretty even in power...While both machines have their share of better multiplats, The 360 seems to have an overall better Multiplats especially older ones (The recent games are too close to call these days), and the PS3 has the CURRENT console graphics king, Killzone 2. The Graphics King shifts around every six months or so it seems.

It's not a huge difference, other great looking EXCLUSIVE games According to the Critics are :

Killzone 2 (PS3) - 2009 and Current Overall Console winner so far, but the year is not over.

GeoW (360) - 2006 Console Graphics King

Uncharted(PS3) - 2007 Console Graphics King

GeoW2 (360)

Metal Gear Solid 4 (PS3) - 2008 Console Graphics King, although GeoW2 and Uncharted battle it out for this spot under KZ2 quite often.

You guys know what is hilarious?

While 360 and PS3 owners are counting little pixels, the PC stomps on both of them. It's kind of embarrassing going from playing Crisis and then seeing people on here comparing these games above. Stop the Pixel counting, if it's a HUGE DEAL, seriously, UPGRADE YOUR PC!

It's so worth it.

PS3 is superior by alot, but I doubt anyone will use all that power

I'm sure it can do parrallax occlusion mapping on a large scale, X360 just can't, and that is the biggest thing or graphics, it defeats normal mapping fo sho, even parrallax beats that though.

"Which is more powerful A or B" topics are starting to get really annoying. Yeah, they were always annoying, but the amount of these topics just doesn't decrease. It's as if system wars is a "deja vu" machine...

Well, to answer your question I'll place the following staments:

Fanboy A: A because multiplatslook "1pixel"better
Fanboy B: B because exclusives look better than multiplats
Fanboy C: Are you series?

Renjinrezo

having both consoles.

ps3 is more powerful hands down.

PS3 is superior by alot, but I doubt anyone will use all that power

I'm sure it can do parrallax occlusion mapping on a large scale, X360 just can't, and that is the biggest thing or graphics, it defeats normal mapping fo sho, even parrallax beats that though.

Master_Bland

CryENGINE 3 includes parallax occlusion mapping, for all supported platforms(1) e.g. Xbox 360, PS3, PC DX9, PC DX10.

Reference

1. http://www.crytek.com/technology/cryengine-3/specifications/

Paper on "parallax occlusion mapping"

2 http://ati.amd.com/developer/SIGGRAPH05/Tatarchuk-ParallaxOcclusionMapping-Sketch-print.pdf

Unified shader can handle parallax occlusion mapping i.e. notice vertex item in PDF page 28. In addition to the unified shaders, ATI Xenos also includes tessellation hardware.

With RSX, a texture fetch operation would stall it's corresponding pixel shaders and vertex shaders would be one of itsweak spot.

SPEs should be use to complement RSX's vertex shaders, vertex cull, Early-Z cull, geometry shaders/tessellation.

What PS3 does in raw theoretical performance I think 360 does better in smarter design.

Unified shaders means 100% of the GPU performance can be tapped at any one time, shared memory allows dynamic distribution between ram and vram tasks between scenes, better performance for general purpose applications makes the 360 CPU better for game logic.

having both consoles.

ps3 is more powerful hands down.

What PS3 does in raw theoretical performance I think 360 does better in smarter design.

Unified shaders means 100% of the GPU performance can be tapped at any one time, shared memory allows dynamic distribution between ram and vram tasks between scenes, better performance for general purpose applications makes the 360 CPU better for game logic.

ps3 is more powerful, anyone who disagrees is a fanboy

The both of them are pretty even.

which is more powerful ps3 or 360? and dont go on about games , i just want to no, which is more superior and why? tanveerahmed2k8

One has convinced large numbers of fanboys that it (teh cell) has magically properties yet to be fully uncovered and that paying more for something makes it better, except when they claim it is actually cheaper :)

The other has convinced large numbers of fanboys that design flaws are minor inconveniences that magically disappear with a warranty, and that paying more for something makes it better (XBL), except when they are talking about the console itself, when cheaper is better :)

Thus, I would say they are equally powerful in controlling weak minds.

ps3 is more powerful, anyone who disagrees is a fanboy

sikanderahmed

Both have good sides and bad sides. But I think I speak for the majority in saying the PS3 has the slight edge in hardware.

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

ps3 is more powerful, anyone who disagrees is a fanboy

ronvalencia

ps3 is graphically superior. uncharted beats any game on 360 graphically, i would say kz2 is on same level as gears 2, maybe a bit worse looking

Both have good sides and bad sides. But I think I speak for the majority in saying the PS3 has the slight edge in hardware.

Asim90

Refer to http://www.developmag.com/tutorials/141/BUILD-Defered-rendering

"Because you project your lights into the scene as a post-process, you're not lighting any pixels that are hidden behind any other pixels," says Jan-Bart van Beek, art and animation director at Guerilla, describing one of the advantages that convinced the studio make the early decision to use deferred rendering in Killzone 2."

PS3 exclusives use an efficient method for lights. This method plays nice on low-mid-range GPUs. Combination of CryEngine2's forward rendering and a "fat" GPUs like Geforce 8800 amounts to a brute force method.

CryEngine3's switch to deferred rendering for lights factors in console's GPU limitations (for PS3 and Xbox360). Console optimisations also benefits PC's low-mid-range GPUs like Geforce 8600 GT/9500** or Radeon HD 36x0** and it would scream on "fat" GPUs. **Most console ported games runs well on Geforce 8600M GT/9500 GS i.e. near max details and 720p.

192 pixel processorsronvalencia

Best not rely on numbers like that, like RSX's FLOP figure it is usually misleading and a poor indication of performance.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]192 pixel processorsAnnoyedDragon

Best not rely on numbers like that, like RSX's FLOP figure it is usually misleading and a poor indication of performance.

Most of the optimistic RSX's shader FLOPs calculations didn't factor in pixel shader stalling during texture operation.

Software will tell you which is more powerful. On paper the PS3 has a slight advantage but it seems much more because Sony has a much better first party developers that growing off each other. Naughty Dog and Insomniac both helped Guerilla with KZ2. GOW3 is getting help from Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Guerilla and Sucker Punch. The only First Party Exclusives that MS has is Halo, Fable, Forza, and some Rare Titles. Sony has a huge amount of First Party exclusives that they can rely on. Nonstop-Madness

PS3's Logluv (integer based) HDR methods can be use on the ATI Xenos (i.e. google in XNA forums). Halo 3 has sloppy way to work-around FP10 HDR issue i.e. render two screens per frame. This puts a strain on the eDRAM which resulted to a sub-720p output. H.A.W.K's console's optimisations enabled HDR + AA on DX9b Radeon X700.

"192 pixel processors" is not a FLOP calculation. It like stating 16-way SIMD Pure-Video unit for Geforce 7600/7700. The point was, ATI Xenos includes some specialize hardware functions. ATI DX10.1 GPUs also includes specialize hardware functions. I assume any one here can google 192 pixel processor's workload.

Most of the optimistic RSX's shader FLOPs calculations didn't factor in pixel shader stalling during texture operation.

ronvalencia

I wasn't suggesting it was the same as a flop figure, I simply gave it as a example of not to trust all on paper figures.

Frankly I don't hear much about pixel processors and I'm more familiar with shader piplines, so I'm not sure how to use that figure for comparison purposes. I just find many quoted console hardware figures to be far from reality.

Typical :?

Cows say that PS3 is far superior and everyone else say both are basically the same!

Typical :?

Cows say that PS3 is far superior and everyone else say both are basically the same!

PAL360

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

"192 pixel processors" is not a FLOP calculation. It like stating 16-way SIMD Pure-Video unit for Geforce 7600/7700. The point was, ATI Xenos includes some specialize hardware functions. ATI DX10.1 GPUs also includes specialize hardware functions. I assume any one here can google 192 pixel processor's workload.

Most of the optimistic RSX's shader FLOPs calculations didn't factor in pixel shader stalling during texture operation.

AnnoyedDragon

I wasn't suggesting it was the same as a flop figure, I simply gave it as a example of not to trust all on paper figures.

Frankly I don't hear much about pixel processors and I'm more familiar with shader piplines, so I'm not sure how to use that figure for comparison purposes. I just find many quoted console hardware figures to be far from reality.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

Typical :?

Cows say that PS3 is far superior and everyone else say both are basically the same!

Nonstop-Madness

I know! You just proved that you are not a cow :P

[QUOTE="Nonstop-Madness"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

Typical :?

Cows say that PS3 is far superior and everyone else say both are basically the same!

PAL360

I know! You just proved that you are not a typical cow :p

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="Nonstop-Madness"] They are basically the same, the only major difference is software. PS3 exclusives look better because all of Sony's First Party Developers help each other. Nonstop-Madness

I know! You just proved that you are not a typical cow :p

Yeah, everyone has preferences! Its easy to see the diference between a cow and a unbiased gamer ;)