MikeB said: @ scottie http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?id=2002828

That's a great post!

MikeB said: @ scottie http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?id=2002828

I was about to post the same data, but from another source.  LOL!  Anyway, you are quite correct. BD drive in the PS3 is 1MBps faster than the DVD drive in the X360 when it's using DL-DVDs.

halil23 said: MikeB said: @ scottie http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?id=2002828 lol owned! MikeB to the rescue, as always On a serious note, now I understand why PS3 is one of the best blu ray player out there.

The price ?

The pitfall has more to do with seek times. The BD in the PS3 is CLV which means there's extra latency due to the fact that the RPM's are constantly modulated.

I don't see the averages taking into account;

1. The Xbox 360 doesn't use the innermost 1GB tracks.
2. Data would be optimised to be delivered faster when needed.

and another

3. If BD was so quick in comparison, why are so many installs MANDATORY. So the proof is in the results.

Also when combined with the fact that developers create the disk image with read speed in mind so that regularly used assetts are in the ares that can be read the quickest.  This is one of the reasons Halo 3 runs better from disk than the HDD.  Your post showed bluray in only a positive light and quickly neglected to mention how DVD was a lot better for the majority of time.  If for example data at  the extreme edges of the disk is filled with video files for example where speed is not an issue then the actual game data average read speed increases again.

Averages is a very poor method of calculating a drives performance and is just an excuse to try and paint Bluray into a good light as a gaming media (which 2x isn't).

Gosh, graphs like that exist?? I went to all the effort of doing basic arithmetic for nothin'.

1. The ENTIRE disc is read, where it has to read the security portion or the game data.

2. Are you trying to say that the data wouldn't be "optimised to be delivered faster when needed" on a Blu-ray disc?

3. That's not the correct question. Why are there so many games WITHOUT mandatory installs?  That should be the question for you.  "The proof is in the results."

Halo 3 ALREADY uses the HDD is the first place.  That's why the process in slower when you install completely on the HDD.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/932/932273p1.html

"Basically, Halo 3 uses a special partition of the Xbox 360 hard drive as scratch memory to quickly load maps. Because it's pulling data from one device (the DVD drive) and copying it to another (the HDD) the software can do both at once. But when the game is installed solely to the hard drive, it can't easily perform both operations simultaneously and thus the process is slowed down significantly. If you want to geek out about things like read/write heads and data copy ratios, then head over to the Bungie.net post and read more."

This is also another answer to the "mandatory install" from SOME developers.  It could be that they are using HDDs, when available, to increase install times.

Think about it.  All these so called "loading time tests" from reviewers are on a X360 with a HDD.  I haven't seen ONE load time test on a X360 without one.