| MikeB said: @ LTKN As for 1080p, the fact is that neither system has a huge frame buffer, so that 1080p in an expansive game may not even happen, or else would happen in both systems, since they have about the same RAM. The Cell perhaps could render things better, but the screen resolution would be about the same on both. On the 360 things have to fit the EDRAM, going beyond this seriously affects performance (coninuosly pushing data from main shared RAM to the EDRAM) . The system approach is very different on the PS3 and 360. The EDRAM approach is powerful, but mostly in lower resolution. |
Sorry, but the PS3 is not free of resolution issues, which is what you seem to be implying. The PS3 has to cut into its 512MB for its frame buffer, while the 360 doesn't. It can be made up by the Cell optimizing the texture memory, but it still means the PS3 has about the same screen resolution restrictions as the 360.
That does not mean the PS3 can't eventually beat the 360 in terms of onscreen graphics, just that the screen resolution on such games will still work better by being 720p or lower, because that would still leave more room for the texture memory.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs








