Yep, but there are vast improvements in NG2 such as many more simultaneous enemies which don't disappear when dead (increases the number of polygons), blood and more detailed artwork in the backgrounds. IMO this more than makes up for the difference in resolution.

Whether the PS3 could handle NG2 at 720p with 2xAA is an open question.

imo uncharted, gt5p and mgs4 looks better than all 360 titles.

Just to deal with the technical point of view for a minute :

To those who say "GPU wise, XBox360 has an (little) edge, but CPU-wise the PS3 has the (magical) Cell", may i just say the following :  i can play Crysis on high / very high settings with an Nvidia 8800 GTS 512 with both an Athlon 3500 and a C2D E6750. Difference on FPS between these 2 CPU ? 1-2 FPS !

So could we stop with this Cell thing, please ?

Those who who claim that the Cell can be a "GPU-bis" have really no clue what the are talking about ...

On the graphical pipeline, there are 3 main pipeline :

- Pixel Shaders : main power consummers. The Cell is 1000 miles to have the "power" to be really userfull on the subject. Let's say that Xenon and RSX are on par on the subject (RSX has the raw power edge but Xenon is more "versatile") .

- vertex shaders : on modern GPU there are far less vertex shaders parallel units than from first category. This is far less hungry on resources, so the Cell can successfully be an assistant on those. The fact is RSX has workload problems the Xenon has not ! The assistance the Cell can provide on those (as shown in game like HS and in a few time KZ2) is simply used to provide pixel efffects that can be made on Xenon alone ...

- filters (AA, AF and so on): i have less clues about them but all elements point to equivallence between these 2 GPU.

I'd say both the 360 and PS3 could handle it with the right dev and engine.

Maybe, but Team Ninja is no slouch. However, I don't know if the NG2 engine was built from the ground for the 360, so you could be right.

Uncharted looks better than NG2, and it was only using 15% of the CELL's graphicle potential.

1. There is no install

2. It runs at 30fps

With this said if there was to say a 500mb-1gb install the game would run at 60fps(or if naughty dog tried harder by using more of the CELL than they did with uncharted).

@nj5 - I think you have to take into account the style of game. A game like Ninja Gaiden Sigma/2 can and should run at a 60 frame per second clip. I don't think you will see an FPS or hybrid game like Uncharted run higher than 30 frames.

If you want to compare exclusives you should probably stay within the same genre. It is unfair to say that NG2 is superior to Uncharted due to its increased framerate. They are completely different game types.

Edit: Please note at no point did NJ5 say that NG2 was superior to Uncharted.

 Isnt MGS4, GT5, and UNCHARTED enough to prove that, NO 360 GAME matches these 3 at a technicle perspective.

The 360's GPU has a small edge in performance over the PS3's, as I understand it, but this doesn't usually show through in games, nor does the different memory architecture, as 360 apps tend to either split the 360's memory down the middle, making the architecture effectively the same as the PS3, or they use more memory for the CPU/app, and less for graphics.

The only real potential (note that this rarely means "realized", except for occasional exclusive titles) difference between the two platforms is this: The SPUs can act as "GPU helpers", and very powerful ones at that. In addition, there's a CPU side of graphics that the... uninformed.. tend to discount. Namely, animation performance -- blending animations is a colossal amount of work for a processor to do, and this is exactly the kind of thing the Cell excels at. It doesn't matter how many polygons you can push to the screen, if your animation blending was too slow to handle a large blend stack, or you only have a few animated characters onscreen at once. The PS3 blows the socks off the 360 in this dept -- but you'll never see cross-platform games perform differently due to this fact (except *maybe* team sports titles, eventually...), because the game needs to be designed fundamentally different to take advantage of it. As an example, you design your game to have 10 characters onscreeen at once... or 50. One way shows the power of the Cell, and causes you to lose a heckuva lot of money on your 360 port, and the other way makes both versions less impressive, but allows you to design the game to focus on the less impressive design.

You'll only ever see the difference in the exclusives, and even then not a signifigant number of them. Platform focus is why 1st/2nd party exclusives (like Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, MGS4, etc.) look so good compared to cross-platform games. As a general rule, the PS3's platform exclusives will tend to outdo the 360s, because it is, indeed, more capable -- it has much more disc space, and your game design can focus on things that the 360 cannot handle.

Games like Heavenly Sword used very early versions of PS3 middleware, I would wager, but you can still see a bazillion characters onscreen, animating in the very first scene of the game. The 360 would have to make due with billboarded characters, or by instancing rendered meshes, post-skinning (a la Dynasty Warriors -- the characters would number greatly, but they'd all be in the same animation state, or small subset of states). On the PS3, every guy can be animating in his own way, thanks to the Cell.

In my opinion, most users aren't going to notice such a thing, unless the game design somehow really takes this advantage in stride. Not many games do, or probably ever will. If they do, they'll be pretty impressive, though.

I didn't say it's superior. Please, at least read all the past posts before replying... Increased framerate is a very valid point since it's something which will preclude increases in detail, due to hogging double the CPU and GPU assuming the same resolution.