Xbox 360 vs. PlayStation 3: ps3 wins according to ign

The final winner of the tech throwdown is the PlayStation 3, capturing seven of the overall categories. Once again, both systems have their own unique strengths. But from a technical standpoint, the PS3 has more horsepower and support for a wider range of high resolution video and audio. But despite being a year older, the Xbox remains surprisingly competitive in some areas.

here

There have been a couple of threads already :P

Doesn't matter what IGN say. Technically they both beat the crap out of my Wii but I'm still hooked on Mario :) I love all my consoles and my PC equally, each for different reasons. Winners will be determined by gamer preference and not mass analysis

There have been a couple of threads already :P

lundy86_4

ok. i couldn't find any related threads... in the first page.

We need a sticky!

we know that ps3 is better,lets pretend 360 is better

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

There have been a couple of threads already :P

crimsonsabre

ok. i couldn't find any related threads... in the first page.

:x

Gosh damnit man, you must delve deeper into System Wars next time.





:P

waht is this, thread 5 of this topic?

we know that ps3 is better,lets pretend 360 is better

Vader993

Xbox 360 versions of multiplatform games have better graphics than PS3 versions 95% of the time. The reviews and comparisons prove these facts. You specifically mentioned some games from Rockstar, so I will talk about those two games right now: * Grand Theft Auto 4: This game runs at a native resolution of 720p on Xbox 360. This is the standard specification set for high-definition resolution. The PS3 version runs at a native resolution of only 640p, which technically does not meet the requirement needed to be considered "high-definition." This means the PS3 version is ****fied as "sub-HD." The Xbox 360 version of Grand Theft Auto 4 has "sharper" graphics with more detail in each texture due to the fact that the resolution is higher. The PS3 version has a "blurrier" look that fanboys try to say is "smoother." But saying that you like the PS3 version because it is "smoother" is the same as saying you like a VHS cassette more than a Blu-ray because the VHS version is "smoother" due to the lower resolution. Obviously the Xbox 360 version has superior graphics. * Red Dead Redemption: This is the exact same scenario as Grand Theft Auto 4. The Xbox 360 runs in true high-definition while the PS3 version runs at sub-HD resolution. The Xbox 360 version has more detail and sharper graphics due to the fact that the PS3 GPU and CPU cannot display that many polygons and pixels smoothly while still maintaining a steady framerate. Someone also mentioned Dragon Age: Origins. This game has pluses and minuses graphically on both the Xbox 360 and the PS3. The reason for this is because "space" is an issue due to the fact that more than 8GB of space is needed. The developers were forced to decide if they should include all the textures in the Xbox 360 version or leave some out because the DVD didn't offer enough space. Rather than leaving out textures, the developers decided to include all the textures with less pixel detail in each texture (a form of compression). This means that although the Xbox 360 version does run natively at 720p, it has a "blurry" appearance with less detail than the PS3 version. This type of problem occurs in less than 1% of third party games due to the fact that over 99% of third-party multiplatform games do not require over 8GB of space. The PS3 version of Dragon Age: Origins has graphic problems, too, though. The PS3 version has an unsteady framerate with graphic slowdown. The Xbox 360 version has a perfectly smooth framerate. Once again, this is because the Xbox 360 GPU is superior to the PS3 GPU. The Xbox 360 GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) is capable of displaying up to 500,000,000 polygons per second while the PS3 GPU is capable of displaying only 275,000,000 polygons per second. This effects graphics in several ways: * Framerate: Xbox 360 versions of games almost always have smoother framerates than PS3 versions. Sometimes Xbox 360 versions even run at twice the framerate as the PS3 version. Some sports games such as All-Pro Football, Madden, and NHL Hockey have run at 60 frames per second on Xbox 360 but only 30 frames per second on PS3. Similarly, games like F.E.A.R. and Splinter Cell have run at 30 frames per second on Xbox 360 but have droped as low as 20 frames per second on PS3, causing graphic slowdown and screen-flicker problems. * Resolution: Sometimes developers decide to make the resolution of the Xbox 360 version higher, since a game using 275,000,000 polygons as the Lowest Common Denominator is pushing the PS3 to its limit while still leaving the Xbox 360 with untapped resources. One example of this is Soul Calibur 4 which was originally designed as a PS3 exclusive. When Namco decided to release the game for Xbox 360, the developers decided to raise the resolution by 40%. The PS3 version runs at 1280x720p, while the Xbox 360 version runs at 1365x960p. * Polygon Detail: When developers create multiplatform games, they don't always want to use a lowest common denominator based on the PS3's weaker polygon power. When this happens, it means sacrifices are made in the PS3 version. For example, there are racing games where you can see waves of water moving in the background under bridges in the Xbox 360 versons. But in the PS3 versions you can see the waves of water, but they don't move; they remain still. This is one example of how the Xbox 360 GPU can display more moving objects and more polygons than the PS3. This is also why a game like Bayonetta has graphic objects that are visible in the Xbox 360 version, but not included at all in the PS3 version. For example, in the Xbox 360 version there is a beautiful clock tower in the background, but in the PS3 version that clock tower doesn't appear at all because it is made up of too many polygons for the PS3 to handle without framerate problems. Load times are also an area where Xbox 360 versions of games are superior to PS3 versions. The reason for this is because Xbox 360 transfers data at a rate of 16MB per second, compared to only 9MB per second on the PS3. One ****c example of how this affects gaming is Marvel Ultimate Alliance. In this game you need to swap characters literally hundreds of times over the 15 hours it takes to beat the game. Each time you swap a character in the Xbox 360 version it takes only three seconds to load. But in the PS3 version it takes a whopping eight seconds to load every time you swap a character. This means for eight full seconds you are staring at a blank screen. It makes a big difference that affects gameplay. Same thing with Tekken 6, which was originally announced as a PS3 exclusive. Graphically both versions are identical. The one difference is the Xbox 360 version loads faster. There is no doubt the Xbox 360 has significantly better third-party multiplatform software than the PS3. As far as first-party exclusives go, the PS3 has exclusives that do a better job of taking advantage of the space offered by the Blu-ray disc, which helps the PS3 show off some of its advantages. But the PS3 exclusive content from first-party developers still have plenty of problems. Some of these problems are: * InFamous: A game known for graphic glitches. Graphically this game is not impressive. * MAG: This game shows off the PS3 Cell CPU can handle a lot of mathematical calculations (MFLOPS -- Millions of Floating Point Operations Per Second) by allowing 256 players to play simultaneously. This is the one and only advantage the PS3 CPU has over the Xbox 360 PowerPC CPU. The original design of the PS3 called for the use of two Cell CPU processors, but Sony was not able to include two Cell CPU processors at an affordable price. Consequently, one Cell CPU was removed which created a lot of hardware bottlenecks and gave the PS3 a reputation of being difficult to program. This is why MAG has very disappointing graphics. In fact, even the PS3 magazines said that MAG "looks more like a high resolution PS2 game than a PS3 game." * Killzone 2: This game runs at only 30 frames per second and does not include any Co-Op gameplay in the story campaign. The PS3 CPU was not powerful enough to display high-quality graphics and offer co-op gameplay at the same time. Adding co-op gameplay limits what can be done graphically. Even the PS2 version of Killzone offered co-op. Killzone 2 has all sorts of interlacing problems in the distance when lots of enemies appear on the screen. There is even polygon pop-up which shows a short draw distance. * Gran Turismo 5: This game has been in development for over five years, yet it lags behind the competition. Cars in Gran Turismo 5 are made up of only 400,000 polygons. This would have been great compared to Forza Motorsport 2 in 2007, since Forza 2 displays only 100,000 polygons per car due to the fact that its graphics engine was based on the first Forza game from the original Xbox. But Forza Motorsport 3 uses a new graphics engine where cars are made up of 1,000,000 polygons per car. That means the cars in Forza Motorsport 3 have 2.5 times the polygon detail as the cars in Gran Turismo 5. What's even worse for Gran Turismo 5 is that the original resolution was supposed to be 1920x1080p. But the PS3 was not capable of displaying this level of resolution, so the developers were forced to reduce the resolution to only 960x1080p -- cutting the horizontal lines of resolution in half, which is very disappointing! Gran Turismo 5 runs at 60 frames per second while playing, just like Forza Motorsport 3. But Forza Motorsport 3 keeps the 60 frames per second framerate during replays, while Gran Turismo 5 drops to only 30 frames per second during replays. * God of War 3: This game tries to run at 60 frames per second, but there are times when it drops below 20 frames per second and causes slowdown on the screen. * Uncharted 2: Game looks nice, just like Heavy Rain and Alan Wake. Alan Wake shows Xbox 360 produces this same type of graphics in this genre with first-party exclusives. So, we can clearly see that Xbox 360 has software that speaks for itself in comparisons. When you compare first-party stuff it is apples vs oranges. But when you compare apples to apples with third-party multiplatform software, the Xbox 360 virtually always beats the PS3 with graphics, load times, and the number of people to play online with -- especially the number of people who have the ability to chat with a microphone while playing, since Xbox 360 comes with a microphone headset and PS3 doesn't. There are also ways of comparing "exclusives" due to the fact that PS3 "exclusives" such as Assassins Creed, Fight Night Round 3, Soul Calibur 4, and Tekken 6 all ended up being released for Xbox 360, too, and the Xbox 360 versions were better.Executor_84

i get it ps3 is better