The bigger the above bar the better.

The shorter the bar the better.

More data:

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=74197

With regard to gaming 12x 360 DVD drive vs 2x PS3 Blu-Ray drive:

A 360 dual layer DVD can hold 6.8 GB of game data, a single layer Blu-Ray can hold 25 GB of data, dual layer Blu-Ray disc can hold 50 GBs of data, it's claimed the PS3 is capable of supporting 1 TB Blu-Ray discs in the future (not that I think we will see PS3 games that big, but having technical headroom is great).

http://www.t3.com/news/pioneer%27s-1tb-blu-ray-discs-could-work-in-ps3?=37463

"For really old Blu-Ray drives (like 3 years ago). The PS3 uses a fairly compact triple wavelength OPU.

From my own personal experience testing a Sony BD-RE drive (actually uses a Panasonic drive mechanism) and a Hitachi-LG drive of similar specs, for similar sized data sets the BD drive typically has almost the same if not significantly faster random seek times. That's generally because data sets between 4-8GB span the entire disc for for DVD-ROM while only covering a third of a BD-ROM, so on average a BD-ROM is going to have seek times in the range 50-100ms with a worst case scenario of around 200-230ms. The DVD-ROM drive will average between 110-150ms with a worst case scenario of around 170-230ms.

Of course once you start getting into larger data sets that that Blu-Ray can handle the average and worst case scenarios (which is an entire disc sweep which takes around 350-400ms) will eclipse the worst case conditions on a DVD-ROM. That being said, even with 23+GB of data with a 100 randomly generate seek sectors I still get around 100ms on average. Besides, if you find the need to randomly jump around to random sectors greater than 4GB in span, then your title has bigger issues than the capabilities of the drive."

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=42157&highlight=speed&page=2

"2x Blu-ray Drive (72Mbps(9MB/s))
Single Layer (2http://www.neogaf.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=10460097
NeoGAF - Reply to Topicx CLV) - Constant Linear Velocity (Same speed across entire disk)
Double Layer - Couldn't find any data but no games have been released on a double layer yet.

Entire Blu-ray Disk is read at 9MB/s.

12x DVD-Rom Drive SL (9.25MB/S-15.85MB/s(AVG ~8x(10.57MB/s) DL (4.36MB/s-10.57MB/s(AVG ~6x(7.93MB/s)
SL(DVD-5) 12x Max (5-12x Full CAV) - Constant Angular Velocity (Speed Varies from edge to edge)
DL(DVD-9) 8x Max (3.3-8x Full CAV) - Constant Angular Velocity (Speed Varies from edge to edge)

SL DVD is 1.57MB/s > SL Blu-ray
DL DVD is 1.07MB/s < SL Blu-ray

Majority of 360 games are on DVD-9."

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=42157

Some additional notes:

- 360 single layer DVD games are small enough to easily fit on any PS3's harddrive, which loads much faster. (this refers to identical 360 to PS3 ports, sporting identical assets)

- In combination with a default harddrive this provides the PS3 with a lot better streaming options (data caching) than it would have been without.

- Many 360 games ported to the PS3 are optimised for variable CD/DVD speeds which have been the standard for over a decade. To easily get around this, the part of the disc where a 360 Dual layer DVD is being read faster, the easy workaround (overkill in terms of what's needed) is to install this data onto the much faster harddrive. But starting from scratch it's much more easier to optimise for the far more easily predictable sustained reading speeds of Blu-Ray disc.

- Due to a much higher density of data per track of Blu-Ray disc, PS3 Blu-Ray discs have to spin much slower to read data quickly as compared to the 360. This results into less noise production and potentially fewer wearing issues over time.

- Blu-Ray discs are scratch resistant, you won't have to deal with scratched discs like many are experiencing with using the 360 DVD drive over time.

Just what Sony needs, people reading this and buying the loss-leading PS3 without intending to buy profitable games.

Isn't it time they release an excellent standalone Blu-Ray player?

nice article!
but "- 360 single layer DVD games are small enough to easily fit on any PS3's harddrive, which loads much faster."?
I don't quite understand that entry...360 games on PS3?

@ NJ5

With regard to things like Java performance, the PS3 will have an advantage for a long time to come due to the Cell processor present in this device, even if the virtual machine uses just 1 of the 8 available processors on the PS3 Cell chip.

I think rival players should mainly try to compete in terms of form factor and pricing instead of performance. I think the more educated consumer will pick a PS3 at this point anyhow, especially if there are people part of the family interested in playing games or want to use other PS3 multimedia strong points.

I meant if a 360 game with all its assets is small enough to fit on a single layer 360 DVD (about 3.4 GBs), a PS3 port with identical assets can easily fit on any PS3's harddrive, where these assets can potentially be loaded much quicker (if the loading routines support this, which of course does not have to be the case if it's a direct port, but then it will still perform near identically, as well as like installing 360 games on a 360 harddrive).

oh i see! that makes sense now, thanks

A single PPE shouldn't be very expensive, perhaps they could even get some wasted Cell CPUs with more than one damaged SPU from the PS3's production line.

But as your pictures show, the disadvantages of standalone players vs the PS3 go much farther than just the Java part. Is there any upcoming standalone player which is competitive with the PS3 in terms of features/performance?

An additional note with regard to spreading games onto several DVDs.

For the usual game spreading data onto several discs will not exactly equal the amount of data on a bigger capacity disc.

What I mean if you have a game cramming 25 GB of data on a single layer Blu-Ray disc and trying to span this data onto dual layer DVDs in equal quality, this will normally not result into 25/6.8 = 3.67 (of course meaning 4) DVDs. This is due to even for linear games developers are usually re-using graphics and audio data from earlier sections in later sections as well. To prevent constant disc swapping developers will then duplicate re-used data for each disc. So this could mean spanning the content could actually require 5 or even 6 discs depending on the game.

With regard to disc swapping, it is sometimes believed by some gamers that by spanning data onto several discs this will not impact game design. In addition to what is mentioned above, developers will try to keep disc swaps and production costs (box size, disc production) to a minimum. An extremely linear game (like Blue Dragon) will usually lead to far fewer sacrifices, but by having a far more open world like GTA IV or other games where you will have to re-visit previously visited areas this poses far more a problem. Game designers in such cases will then usually make any kind of technical sacrifice to keep the game on no more than 1 disc.

@ NJ5

I guess PC Blu-Ray players in terms of boot-up speeds have or will have an advantage in the future. But that's not much of a competition as an elegant living room solution for most consumers.

So the PS3 drive spinning slow is a good thing?

Crazy.