By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Badassbab on 07 January 2012
Edit Thread
Andrespetmonkey said:
Zlejedi said:
Lucas-Rio said:
Sony should not do the same mistakes.

The PS3 was more powerful than the Xbox, but coming one year later and with third parties that made lazy ports, it did not show the difference. Sony has to release their console at the same time than Microsoft.


It wasn't

PS3 has edge in CPU but X360 has better RAM and GPU which is why most multiplatforms look bit better on xbox.

Oh god, are we still having this debate? The only edge 360 possibly has is having all it's RAM shared. But PS3 more than makes up for it by having having faster RAM speeds and a significantly better processor. The reason why most multiplatforms used to look better on 360 is because the process of porting a 360 game to PS3 is difficult due to PS3s architecture. In recent years most games look identical on both platforms, and PS3 has had about as many multiplatforms that look slightly better as 360 does in the last 2 years. 

He's right though. 360 has a better GPU. And it has a smaller OS footprint which is a definite plus when you only have 512mb of RAM (+ 10MB EDRAM in 360's case). The faster PS3 ram speed you mention only applies to the main ram not the vram. The best looking PS3 games are the ones which use the CELL in conjuction with the RSX for graphics and use the CELL to quickly stream textures from the blu ray disc. Hence UC/GOW/KZ look amazing.