dirt and snow look great but grass and trees are ps2-like

True..... Its been a struggle working with the cell ever since their launch and if they were to remake the ps3 i guarentee theyd use a much simpler multicore processor with a heafty-ass GPU

Cell is not a complete failure tho... Naughty Dog raves about it, and proves it with Uncharted 2

And keep in mind that while these numbers don't meant a whole lot in practical use.....

The cell processor still can perform almost twice as many floating point operations per a second compared to an Core i7 cpu.

i have the game and It looks good for the most part. And lets not forget the fact that this game runs at 1080p at a constant 60fps. Something that is virtually unheard of on consoles. I think the only other game was WipEout HD. They could have gone the MW2 route and made this game 600p, but no body wants that right?

You claim to know a lot about computers, then state that the xbox uses dx10. Seriously dude, its not even worth discussion when everything about your post demonstrates how little you know about computing.

Just today one of the developers from Crytek stated that the PC is a full generation ahead of consoles. I think hes a bit more qualified then you.

Actually your wrong, the entire physics engine was reworked for GT5. The entire point of the GT5 Time Trail demo was to show off a near-complete physics engine upgrade. And its perfectly realistic. Cars handle 100% as they should unlike Forza's trashy handling. Forza is the one lagging. It is a decent racing sim, but Gran Turismo is the trust driving simulator of them all.  Why? You have a man dedicated to get every vehicle to perform exactly how they should no matter what.

As for other visuals other than the car, why the hell should we care? I don't give a damn about how the grass looks while driving, just how the car looks and where all the other cars are. As long as everything from light poles to fencing are placed properly like at all the real tracks its all good.

Plus, you have to realize that the PS3 and 360 are both about spent on graphical power. 512mbs ram is the biggest hindrance of them all, but the CPUs and GPUs are pretty much maxed too. As Yamamoto said, GT5 was held back by the PS3. If it was on PC, he wouldn't have had an issue, but the PS3 ran out of power to give him which explains any screen tearing and crap. I figure all games for the next few years that push the polygons and triangles like GT5, Halo, Forza, Crysis 2, Killzone 3, etc will all suffer from massive screen tearing and framerate issues because any graphical improvements will hit the ram limit wall pretty easily causing texture load issues that cause framerate and screen tearing.

Yep, perfectly realistic.

yawwwnnn... failure of the gen...on average the game looks worst than forza motorsport 3 and plays like every gt so far

I think your eyes and hands don't work properly.

everything like what? so you know a lot? you are just running away. xbox 360 uses a simplified dx10 iirc. so Crytek think the next gen consoles can only do what PC does today? Then i will definitely skip this generation. there hasn't been enough breakthroughs just yet. This gen's best graphics can be quite close to real life already.

You think background process use up enough resources to put gaming rigs on par with consoles.

You don't understand what a graphics API is, nor how they work.

You think the 360 uses a "simplified" version of dx10 (again, not understanding what an API is)

You think consoles are comparable to PCs in terms of lighting models, when there have been numerous PC titles that simply can't run on consoles with the same lighting model - for example Mirrors Edge had AO on PC, but not consoles.