mmparkskier

Yeah, after a little research I'm finding that the xbox's GPU is stronger, and it does matter. Put simply, it's just more powerful. I just don't like how people reference the PC cards and compare them to the consoles.

From an article comparing XBOX to PS3:

Performance

Here’s a tough one. On paper, the Playstation 3’s Cell engine is more capable than XBOX 360’s triple-core Xenon CPU. However, as our developer alluded to last year, the XBOX 360 is much easier to develop for. In other words, a lot of the Cell’s power is going to waste. Although that is expected to change eventually, as always seems to happen with Sony’s consoles (compare early PS2 games to current games, and the same goes for PS1), one year later we’re still waiting for someone to fully exploit the system. Another indication that the PS3 is harder to develop for is the fact that almost all multiplatform games arrive weeks – if not months – after their 360 versions.

As we said last year, we fully expect the PS3 to win this category – eventually. To what extent, we’re not sure (very likely it’s only going to be the blockbuster first-party titles that take full advantage of Cell), and when this will occur, we’re not sure either. Obviously, one full year wasn’t enough.

Graphics

This is a sticky subject for a lot of fanboys. A very common argument in most flame wars is that the Playstation 3 simply “has better graphics”. I’m not sure where that argument came from; Sony obviously did a good job of marketing the system. However, the argument is entirely false. The Xenos GPU on the XBOX 360 is superior the RSX on the PS3. This is one thing that didn’t change in the past year.

Xenos simply has more power – higher fillrate, higher pixel processing power, higher vertex processing power, and better memory architecture. If you look at multiplatform games and contrast the graphics on the two consoles, XBOX 360 almost always leads. Whether they use a higher resolution
or higher quality antialiasing, games often look better and/or play smoother on the 360. We looked at a handful of multiplatform games a while back, and this was always the case.

Again, we have to consider that Cell has the potential to help with graphics on the Playstation 3. As developers become more familiar with the platform, they are going to come up with new tricks to help games run smoother, and allow them to look better. However, one year after its introduction we aren’t seeing huge leaps (or even baby steps) towards this, except on a couple exclusive titles.

Source.

__________________

We Are Gr33n Machine

mocha989

yes thank you lol some brains finally.

__________________

Water cooling and Cooler Master Storm Sniper Black Edition Coming Soon."

OmegaNemesis28

I'm not one for comparing them specs to specs.
The 360 and the PS3 have had their fair share of bad ports and good ports. Most ports favor the 360, but there are some such as DMC4 and Burnout Paradise that favor the PS3 in comparison.

Though, I blame such ports on the developers who typically don't iron out all the differences. Such as, for example, the most recent one with Bayonetta. Sega threw the PS3 port to some 3rd party devs and it looks like utter crap for no legitimate reason. Yet, the PS3 has games like Uncharted 2. Sure, Uncharted 2 is done by Naughty Dog who under Sony's wing - but they are perfect examples that it isn't impossible to get a half decent looking games on there instead of the ugly crap like Bayonetta regardless of the GPU being 'lesser' then the 360. And I think quite frankly Uncharted 2 is the best looking game I've seen on a console and it manages 720p I believe.

__________________

mmparkskier

I just thought I'd share what I found. Also, Ratchet and Clank has always been Playstation exclusive, and I've heard that the most recent addition is great. Unfortunately I haven't had the chance to play it.

My point is, it's all about architecture and game developers, not so much raw computing power.

I don't think this helps the OP must, but he's too lazy to do his own research anyway. If you type a few words into Google, you can find a plethora of information comparing HD performance of the XBOX to the PS3.

__________________

We Are Gr33n Machine

mocha989

and Omega covered it all.

__________________

Water cooling and Cooler Master Storm Sniper Black Edition Coming Soon."

TestECull

Neither one of them can run today's games in true 1080P.


Mostly they run 1280x720, then they run the resulting image through an upscaler chip.

I used to have a 256MB X1900XT. Trust me. That thing wasn't going to be doing anything in true HD anytime soon. 1680x1050 was absolutely pushing your luck as far as widescreen went. I ran it at 1280x1024, and that ran fairly well. I'm sure a well-optimized exclusive with some on-CPU prerendering could run 1680x1050, but it would still have to upscale slightly.

__________________

ALiShaikh

Well.. Wipeout and a bunch of others ARE 1080p whatever your biased mind may think.
And anyways, the 360 CAN'T do 1080p. I mean AT ALL. Not even in a picture.
Proof

__________________

rduffy123

Get your facts straight, both consoles cant do 1080p. Forza3 is 1080p 60 fps. Lot of uninformed people in here, dont know what they talking about.

Wow idiots go learn to read something both do 1080p.

__________________
XBL = DuffyDidIt

Big L R.I.P

TestECull

Wow. Bad reading for both of you.


Do you not see where I mentioned they go through the upscaler chip? What your TV gets is 1080P. It's upscaled in that chip. The GPU itself cannot handle running the games at that resolution, so they run it at a lower one then upscale.


For the average console gamer, meh the difference is negligible.

__________________

lockdownx1x

Whatever floats your boat.

__________________