My XBox 360 vs PS3 comparison (mostly technical)

[sieanr]

If you are referring to the simple fact that the XDR memory is separated from the RSX by the Cell, then please provide your explanation of why this compares badly to the fact that the 360's CPU faces the same ordeal, only worse, and with all 512 MB of its RAM.

The 360s memory controller is built into the GPU. Essentialy the CPU goes straight to this memory controller then to the memory. In no way does the CPU go through the GPU.

RSX has to go through two memory controllers and hop two busses to get to the XDRAM, hence more latnecy than the Xenos - unless the Sony has somehow made controllers without latency. There is also the 128bit bus to the Cell, which puts limits on how much data can be moved between the two.

And you have also done absolutely nothing to answer the allegation that all this is a sideshow to the true strength of the PS3's memory architecture, namely that the Cell and RSX each have 256 MB of memory that they can access without having to go through the other -- which is certainly not true of the 360.

The EDRAM makes up for most of the bandwidth the CPU would steal (as I've said above)

The pooled design is far more flexible, allowing a dev to devide the RAM in any way they see fit. But overall the systems are close to even with regards to memory bandwidth. Really, its just simple and easier on developers.

Keep in mind that the current PS3 design was rushed, whereas the 360 has had this design worked on for years.