The thing the person who wrote this article forgot about most is explosions. That's what killzone 2's biggest forte is. It's an explosive game in every sense. Look at the explosions in Killzone 2 and look at the explosions in Gears of War 2. (Although I've never seen any explosions in Gears of War 2 because I've never played it, I'm sure it has some) Killzone 2's explosions look incredible. An idiot would know that the explosion on the bridge found in Killzone 2's demo takes a ridiculous amount of processing power. They still managed to make the demo look incredible.

@jetrii

Thanks for the numbers, they always help putting things in perspective. I will try to document myself on the subject when I have some free time because I'm curious about GPU/CPU trends.

From a layman's point of view anyway, CPU rendering don't seem so underwhelming by what you said. Having Mflops in the same range of a year old GPU, or the progress in numbers between earlier cells and the newest ones look impressive to me, if projected forward again to a 2-3 years time span (if next gen consoles have to have their specs fixed by say 2011).

Again, my impression from 10 miles height is that CPUs are moving into GPUs territory faster than GPGPUs can really claim their GP moniker (sp? sorry but english is not my language).

Anyway, thanks for an interesting thread in the sea of mediocre sale analysis :)

@Jettrii ,so how does MS own the IP to the 360 GPU i was of the understanding its a custom AMD/ATI GPU just as sony's is a nvidia custom gpu plus PS3's real expense is not so much the cell as pricing is coming down as the die size shrinks ,but there decision to put blu ray in the machine .

Crysis was more immersive in my oppinion but I ahvent beat KZ2 yet to give final oppinion just the demo Crysis demo was better too.

Actually, Gears of War 2 has some pretty impressive explosions. However, it's a different type of game and explosions really don't fit in as well as in Killzone 2 where there's an explosion everytime someone sneezes. Were the game designed to have a lot of explosions like in Killzone 2, I have no doubt that they could scale to look even better. However, I agree that they probably wouldn't look as good, but they certainly would rival it.

I'm glad you enjoyed it. However, keep in mind that the PowerXCell 8i has more SPEs than the one in the Playstation 3, has significant architecture improvements, and cost a heck lot more than the entire Playstation 3. While IBM was able to double the overall power of the Cell CPU, in the same timeframe, GPU performance increased by around 2.5X.

Microsoft went to AMD and said "We want you to design us a GPU. We don't want to license it, we just want you to design it. We will own the IP and if we want, we can improve the GPU ourselves and make them ourselves. Here is some cash, make it." AMD agreed and Microsoft got its GPU.

Sony went to Nvidia and said "We want a GPU." Nvidia said "Sure, we will license you our GPU. We are the only ones that you may purchase the GPU from and if we don't feel like lowering the price, too bad." Sony was desperate because the Cell processor wasn't 1/8th as powerful as they expected so they accepted the deal.

Granted, I am sure Sony was smart enough to have Nvidia agree to lower the price every once in a while, but that is essentially how it went down.

Unbias ha.

no such thing, to say you are screams BS.

Both games look amazing now lets stop comparing and start playing

Care to link me to a bias thing I've said aside from praising GPUs over CPUs?

Wow very nice! It was both friendly and easy to read. We need more people like you! I prefer Killzone 2 more just because I don't have an Xbox 360. *By the way this is my first post!*

"biased"