Currently Online 
MikeB said:
Most XBox 360 vocals seem to care, often comparing micro differences of some multi-platform games which sometimes aren't enough PS3 optimised. It may be hard to understand for some, but the PS3 has technical advantages over the PC (and vice versa), such as the Cell is able to outperform the best consumer PC quad core CPUs out there with proper optimisation. Blu-Ray disc capacity allows for more varierty of assets (mainly textures and audio). Blu-Ray is yet to become standard for PC gaming (and publishers don't want to spread their games onto too many DVDs). All PS3s out there have a Cell and Blu-Ray and that allows for much deeper optimisations in course of time. Ironically the most popular PC games are actually some of the least technically demanding titles on the PC. Top PC GPUs are able to render higher framerates in higher resolutions, but to truly appreciate going from 720p to for example 1080p you'll need a big HDTV.monitor and if good upscaling is applied the difference is even smaller (like on Toshiba Cell powered HDTV). The irony is that most PC gamers I know own monitors much smaller than my HDTV! With regard to framerates a locked 30 FPS experience is perfectly smooth for most types of games (due to human perception delay) especially in combination with motion blur for faster paced scenes. For a game like Super Stardust HD the onscreen action can get so fast 60 FPS is of benefit, hence it will render 120 pictures per second in stereoscopic 3D (60 pictures per eye). |
I'm going to have to call BS here.
The Cell was overwhelming tech in 2006, but things move at a fast clip, and it isn't so amazing by today's standards.
(If it was really so amazing, they'd just use Cells for PCs instead of bothering developing all new "weaker" ones)
One of the big misconceptions is that because of the SPUs, people often think of the PS3 as having an 8-core CPU. Unfortunately, the SPUs are limited in many regards; they have no local cache, and need a vectorized instruction set.
There are other issues too, like RAM. The PS3 sports 256MB of main RAM and 256MB of VRAM. This is miniscule by modern standards, and high end gaming PCs can offer many, many times as much.
Then there's the PS3's GPU, RSX, which is basically a 7800 GTX circa 2005, and is in fact inferior to even the 360's GPU. It's so weak in fact that most devs looking to push the system try to minimise it's role as much as possible and use the SPUs to emulate it's role instead, which yields better results, but is still quite inefficient as it eats up SPU power that could be spent on other things if the GPU was able to hold it's own. This puts the PS3 at a disadvantage when competing with a PC which can handle its graphical needs via the GPU and leave the CPU free to handle other elements.
While it is true that the fixed nature of its architecture makes it easier for devs to optimise a game for the PS3 than for PC, the disparity is large enough that it can't be bridged by any amount of optimisation, only narrowed.
