| NightAntilli said: If we look at the performance of Call of Duty 4 on both systems, and also look at the performance of World at War on both systems, the X360 has less framedrops and framerate issues than the PS3. And now you are gonna tell me that the X360 is being maxed out and the PS3 is not? -______________- And oh, before anyone starts saying I have no proof for those framerate stuff... http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/call-of-duty-4-engine-analysis http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/call-of-duty-world-at-war-engine-analysis |
Eurogamer (UK) is a biased source (the worst one available within the mainstream gaming press, like I said so even long before they started their 360 vs PS3 propaganda articles). I know World of War performs solidly on my PS3. With regard to COD4 devs have claimed the PS3 version has a slight edge over the 360 version, but I think those games although development was geared at the XBox 360 first and foremost are practically identical.
Even if the XBox 360 version would have had a slight edge, it does not mean it maxed out the PS3 hardware. As we know even some early PS3 exclusives did not use the SPUs at all (extremely fast processors, the bulk of the Cell's performance). With regard to the 360 we know early launch games already tapped the bulk of the Xenon's CPU resources from all 3 cores.
So, the maturity and optimisation of a games engine can determine the amount of yet untapped resources. And of course the PS3 has a lot more resources available (like 8 processor Cell, 50 GB Blu-Ray discs, default harddrive, etc), so requires far more effort to "max out".
