Somewhere along the line, the claim went from shared memory is a better architecture solution than dedicated CPU/GPU memory to simply the PS3 only has 256MB of RAM.

I'm guessing the assumption for the Google impaired would be it either has only system memory, or GPU memory, which would work about as well as an Xbox using all 512MB of its memory for pushing pixels and effects, with zero overhead for both the game engine and 360 OS (which is actually very spartan at a combined 32MB memory usage total).

I own the PC and 360 version, have played all three and really can't say there is a significant visual difference between the console versions without splitting hairs.

The only difference comes when playing on a PC with the CPU/GPU processing ability to run all effects on optimal at 1920x1200 resolution. Even at 1680x1050, the game looks noticeably sharper than either version.

But, both console versions still play smoothly, even if they aren't running at over 100fps at 1920x1200.

Regardless, it is still notable that 2K saw it fit to slightly reduce the resolution to get the game to run at a smoother frame rate and/or higher effects, much like GTAIV.

          XD....yes, your right, many people do see the difference.  I just like throwing a wrench in things sometimes to either spin people up or calm them down.  I have noticed sharp qualities and great textures on my HD 15 inch laptop monitors settings, and it has HDMI/1080p, with the ability to modify resolution settings, unlike console.  But my point is, when I was originally deciding on 720p resolution or 1080i, for my 65 inch TV (Older HDTV, doesnt have 1080p), some of my buddies almost came to blows trying to convince me on which settings to use.  Never really noticed a difference, all that much between the settings, even up to 1080p.  I think a lot of it has to do with what type of TV you own.  My TV is about 6 years old, huge, and has better HD picture quality than a lot of the newer HDTV's I see at BestBuy.  This isnt a "My TV is better" type of argument, it's just fun.  So when these, (pixle) threads come up, it just fun to sit back, read, and watch the mayham ensue.

You forgot to post that Far Cry 2 runs in a higher native resolution on the PS3 than on the 360. This was reported by Quaz51.

http://talkplaystation.com/far-cry-2-runs-at-a-higher-native-resolution-on-ps3/

You guys should stop your "technical discussions" regarding the specs and advantages of one console over the other. There is plenty of information published by sites on the web that have people that actually can understand these specs. We no longer need to discuss the power of each system in theoretical terms, just look at the quality of exclusives on each system and you will see the differences.

This is going to ruin the experience.

Buy the 360 version.

My initial reaction to the OP was "Who cares?" but reading all the posts after it I guess people DO care... (still don't know why though)

Oh, will the Xealots ever learn...

From IGN...

"For the most part, BioShock on the PS3 is exactly the same as the PC and 360 versions of the game."

...and...

"This can also be said about some of the visuals within the game, which have received a number of enhancements, but also suffer from older, less impressive texture work. 2K Games went out of their way to make sure that the larger capacity of the Blu-ray was used to implement higher resolution textures across the title, as well as improve some of the in-game cutscenes. For the most part, you'll see these appear as a slightly sharper Rapture across the board, and you'll be able to pick up some features that look better than on the 360, such as pools of water or neon signage. However, there does appear to be a strange mix of the older textures scattered in the title as well, so you'll find quite a lot of texture pop in that will occur as you move through levels.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/920/920389p2.html

From Eurogamer...

"I could, of course, talk about the technical differences between PS3 and 360...except there really aren't any. Or at least none that my human eyes can detect. I'm sure that a future comparison article will tear the frames apart to lay bare exactly how the PS3 code stands up to the 360, but for the vast majority of players it'll be a moot point. It plays at a steady 30 frames-per-second, with no screen tearing that I could see."

...and...

"...and the PS3 rises to the occasion every bit as successfully as the 360. Perhaps even more so, since this version is free from the annoying - though eventually patched - cache bug that made the 360 version stutter in the later levels."

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=260897

From Gamervision...

"The graphics are improved over the original, but not universally. Some textures look better and particle and water effects are occasionally superior, but there are still slow downs and abundant texture pops. Physics glitches will also rear their head from time to time, and it’s apparent that, while 2K took time to make sure PlayStation 3 fans for their moneys worth with BioShock, they didn’t attempt to make this the “definitive” version of the game. It’s been a year since it was released on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 and most of the glitches still remain. Taking this time to polish the title and releasing a complete, perfected version of the game was possible, but this isn’t that game."

http://www.gamervision.com/gamer/coop/reviews/article/bioshock_playstation_3

From Cheat Code Central...

"Graphically, BioShock on PS3 is improved. A lot of care went into the game’s already beautiful, Art Deco-inspired levels, making them even more striking. However, upon first glance, the overall look is identical to what was offered in the original releases; that’s a good thing. What are readily noticeable are the incredibly shiny surfaces; the textures in the PS3 version are quite astonishing. Also, the cinematic cuts are very sharp. Moreover, players familiar with the game will notice that the humorous “twitch glitch” among the corpses of fallen Splicers, so prevalent on the 360 and PC, has been largely done away with this time around. All in all, the game is more stable on the PS3, thanks to the extra year of development. The 360 version especially, was plagued by framerate cascading; every turn you made caused the screen to ripple ever so slightly. This cascading problem has been essentially eliminated, and the game is significantly better for it. Unfortunately, not all the framerate issues were resolved though. When you get into encounters with multiple grenade-toting Nitro Splicers, the ensuing explosions still cause unruly shuddering and freezing."

http://www.cheatcc.com/ps3/rev/bioshockreview.html

From Gaming Trend...

"Thanks to a recent patch which shored up a few graphic oddities, Bioshock on the PS3 is almost visually identical to that of its Xbox 360 counterpart. It is true, all good things flow to the city of Rapture. The only way you’ll be able to tell the difference between the two console versions is if you set up two consoles on two TVs and viewed them side-by-side."

...and...

"One of the bugs I ran into on the Xbox 360 version was a caching issue that caused a bit of a framerate hitch on long play times. The PlayStation 3 version of Bioshock doesn’t seem to suffer from the same fate – I never saw the framerate dip in any way. Granted, I’m not one of those people who can see the difference between 60 and 55 frames per second, but odds are you aren’t either."

http://www.gamingtrend.com/Reviews/review/review.php?ReviewID=1109

The important thing here is that Bioshock PS3 looks great, and it rivals the 360 version graphically if not better. You can get all technical all you want, but what's pleasing to the eye is what's important. This is really nothing to troll over.

 and whats about this

http://www.product-reviews.net/2008/10/24/far-cry-2-on-sony-ps3-apparently-its-lacking/

i found this link inside ur link.

Although the resolution differences is fairly minimal, being that developers have been working on the PS3 for over 3 years now, I hope we stop hearing the (moronic) argument that the PS3 will soon start to show how much more powerful it is compared to the XBox 360.

Yawn... another Squilliam 'have a go' thread... why not explain why Halo 3, a huge big budget exclusive built from the ground up for 360 couldn't manage 720p instead?