Squilliam, can you give me some sources you used for your article?

Just PM them to me

The Cell as a CPU considered in its own right is more powerful than the Xbox360s Xenon, there can be no denying that simple fact. The point of this thread is to prove the Xbox360s architecture as taken as a whole – CPU + GPU + Memory and architecture along with its programming environment and tools is simply superior to the PS3 and its architecture.

The Xbox360 provides varying levels of extra AA, resolution and superior frame-rates over the equivalent PS3 versions. This shows at a base level, that often when the PS3 and Xbox360 games are created, there is at least a little extra performance left over for the Xbox360 to create a slightly better game experience by this metric.

To appreciate the key differences between the architectures we should look at the games which we have the most data on, GTAIV and Race-Driver: GRID.

The Xbox360 renders 28million pixels per second compared to 19.5 million on the PS3 when comparing them with GTAIV. This is a game that runs sophisticated AI code in an open world environment with the PS3 and the Xbox360 versions being coded by separate teams to extract the best performance possible from both architectures. In this game the Xbox360 code runs faster than the PS3 version while maintaining a higher AA level and resolution. This shows in my opinion that the Xbox360 architecture benefits from the greater available ram and superior GPU more than the PS3 benefits from its HDD install and Cell CPU.

Race Driver: Grid is another case where the Xbox360 is able to produce both better visuals without screen tearing and a higher AA level while delivering a superior frame rate. This game did not have the high budget of the GTAIV example, and it certainly does not have the budget of Gran Turismo 5. It does show that when given a set budget for a game, developers giving their best efforts can produce a better result on the Xbox360.

This isn’t about theoretical performance, this is a direct comparison between the architectures and the only fair way to compare the differences between the Xbox360 and the PS3 is to remove all other variables bar the ones being measured. Exclusive games cannot be used to determine the worth of an architecture because there is no control and such comparisons just boil down to subjective opinions. I excluded Blu-Ray vs DVD-ROMs because the optical medium does not effect how well games run. From the ease of programming to the more accessible CPU the Xbox360 is truely the superior architecture for creating games.

 Good God. I can smell the fanboy shit spewing out your ass by the truckload. Anybody who has a life, will not give a shit what kind of CPU and GPU, and KPU and DPU are in a fucking 360 or a PS3. If my PS3 was run my several mini hamsters all performing mathematical calculations inside my PS3 instead of a CELL processor, I'd still buy it. If my 360 had 3 monkeys with sock puppets as a GPU, I'd fail to give a shit. No one cares what's inside.

If a developer truly wants a game to make full use of the PS3's hardware, they will. If another developer wants to make full use of the 360's architecture they will. And if they both did push the hardware to the point where both the PS3 and 360 overheat till I could put it in a bowl of water and stick my cock in for medicinal purposes after a hard days work spunking into the brains of 360 and PS3 fanboys alike, I guarantee...

You'd see absolutely no difference, whatsofuckingever.