By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Digital Foundry (Eurogamer) - GT5P vs Forza 3 Tech analysis.

Reasonable on 03 November 2009
selnor said:
Reasonable said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Rainbird said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Of course Eurogamer would pick GT5P. The GT series is the chosen game of Europe, period.


except that eurogamer gave Halo3 a 10/10

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/halo-3-review

and believe me, it is far from what others european site have given to this good (but far from perfect) game ...

Thats cool bro, but the GT series is still the main console brand of Europe. America barely cares about it anymore and Japan doesn't pay much attention to it. It doesn't matter that they gave Halo 3 10/10. It is the definitive exclusive console shooter.

So you still think that Digital Foundry (not Eurogamer) choose GT5:P over Forza 3 because of the site they post their content on is Eurogamer?

Not because of the site. It is because Europe loves GT. I cannot blame them really. Every official game turns out to be the total package.

OK, so let's stop the shit about europe in general and let's give a rest to Halo3.

let's focus on eurogamer biais will you ?

GT3 : 10/10
GT4 : 8/10
GT5pro : 8/10

FM1 : 9/10
FM2 : 9/10
FM3 : 9/10

How do they prefer GT over FM ?
With a 92/100 on metacritic, their review looks pretty fair !!!

at your service

I wouldn't waste your breath.  I'm giving up on this thread.  The basic premise of the DF article is:

"GT5:P has overall the better rendering engine because, among other things, it can render the same track, details, etc. with more cars, better lighting, etc. at 1080p at 2xAA vs Forza 3 rendering at 720p at 2xAA."

Despite this clear, technical focus on rendering people are going "Europe loves GT", "Damange modelling", etc. etc. all of which are essentially irrelevant to the article as they pertain to other aspects of the game than graphical rendering.

 

People are quick to use this article as a be all end all. But seem to forget the 3 different sites that all favoured FM3's graphics over the so called newer and improved GT5 graphics a TGS09. But because they bring out the 2d trees etc, people say it's not about the scenery. But when in a thread where GT5 wins, you disregard us pointing out the poor scenery of GT5. If GT5 rendered the sort of complex scenery FM3 was and 360hrtz physics instead of GT5P 120 hrtz then it would not be in 1080p or have that much AA. It's a trade off. It's what you prefer.

I agree in principle, but I find DF gives the best detailed analysis of pure graphics around, and I haven't seen another analysis as detailed as theirs.  Pls post any links you have, but most other analysis I've seen are of the 'I prefer' variety vs simple analysis.  For me, no matter how much extra detail Forza 3 puts in, I'd rather have more cars than more grass, although I do like the 'feel' of Forza 3 more when driving.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
Skeeuk on 03 November 2009

well both handle well, with gt5p handling more real and more punishing.

forza 3 is also real but far more accesable.

best way to look at it, if 10 good devs made a sim racer each based on realism, all 10 will be realistic, now which one of them you prefer depends on what kind of driving feel they offer. some may like 1 some may like the other.

so there will always be opinins on which drives better.

but tbh the scale on which gt5 is sounding, makes it very difficult to pick any other sim over it.



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

Skeeuk on 03 November 2009
Reasonable said:
selnor said:
Reasonable said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Rainbird said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Of course Eurogamer would pick GT5P. The GT series is the chosen game of Europe, period.


except that eurogamer gave Halo3 a 10/10

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/halo-3-review

and believe me, it is far from what others european site have given to this good (but far from perfect) game ...

Thats cool bro, but the GT series is still the main console brand of Europe. America barely cares about it anymore and Japan doesn't pay much attention to it. It doesn't matter that they gave Halo 3 10/10. It is the definitive exclusive console shooter.

So you still think that Digital Foundry (not Eurogamer) choose GT5:P over Forza 3 because of the site they post their content on is Eurogamer?

Not because of the site. It is because Europe loves GT. I cannot blame them really. Every official game turns out to be the total package.

OK, so let's stop the shit about europe in general and let's give a rest to Halo3.

let's focus on eurogamer biais will you ?

GT3 : 10/10
GT4 : 8/10
GT5pro : 8/10

FM1 : 9/10
FM2 : 9/10
FM3 : 9/10

How do they prefer GT over FM ?
With a 92/100 on metacritic, their review looks pretty fair !!!

at your service

I wouldn't waste your breath.  I'm giving up on this thread.  The basic premise of the DF article is:

"GT5:P has overall the better rendering engine because, among other things, it can render the same track, details, etc. with more cars, better lighting, etc. at 1080p at 2xAA vs Forza 3 rendering at 720p at 2xAA."

Despite this clear, technical focus on rendering people are going "Europe loves GT", "Damange modelling", etc. etc. all of which are essentially irrelevant to the article as they pertain to other aspects of the game than graphical rendering.

 

People are quick to use this article as a be all end all. But seem to forget the 3 different sites that all favoured FM3's graphics over the so called newer and improved GT5 graphics a TGS09. But because they bring out the 2d trees etc, people say it's not about the scenery. But when in a thread where GT5 wins, you disregard us pointing out the poor scenery of GT5. If GT5 rendered the sort of complex scenery FM3 was and 360hrtz physics instead of GT5P 120 hrtz then it would not be in 1080p or have that much AA. It's a trade off. It's what you prefer.

I agree in principle, but I find DF gives the best detailed analysis of pure graphics around, and I haven't seen another analysis as detailed as theirs.  Pls post any links you have, but most other analysis I've seen are of the 'I prefer' variety vs simple analysis.  For me, no matter how much extra detail Forza 3 puts in, I'd rather have more cars than more grass, although I do like the 'feel' of Forza 3 more when driving.

 

good way to put it. either have more cars or more grass



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

libellule on 03 November 2009
selnor said:
Reasonable said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Rainbird said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Of course Eurogamer would pick GT5P. The GT series is the chosen game of Europe, period.


except that eurogamer gave Halo3 a 10/10

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/halo-3-review

and believe me, it is far from what others european site have given to this good (but far from perfect) game ...

Thats cool bro, but the GT series is still the main console brand of Europe. America barely cares about it anymore and Japan doesn't pay much attention to it. It doesn't matter that they gave Halo 3 10/10. It is the definitive exclusive console shooter.

So you still think that Digital Foundry (not Eurogamer) choose GT5:P over Forza 3 because of the site they post their content on is Eurogamer?

Not because of the site. It is because Europe loves GT. I cannot blame them really. Every official game turns out to be the total package.

OK, so let's stop the shit about europe in general and let's give a rest to Halo3.

let's focus on eurogamer biais will you ?

GT3 : 10/10
GT4 : 8/10
GT5pro : 8/10

FM1 : 9/10
FM2 : 9/10
FM3 : 9/10

How do they prefer GT over FM ?
With a 92/100 on metacritic, their review looks pretty fair !!!

at your service

I wouldn't waste your breath.  I'm giving up on this thread.  The basic premise of the DF article is:

"GT5:P has overall the better rendering engine because, among other things, it can render the same track, details, etc. with more cars, better lighting, etc. at 1080p at 2xAA vs Forza 3 rendering at 720p at 2xAA."

Despite this clear, technical focus on rendering people are going "Europe loves GT", "Damange modelling", etc. etc. all of which are essentially irrelevant to the article as they pertain to other aspects of the game than graphical rendering.

 

People are quick to use this article as a be all end all. But seem to forget the 3 different sites that all favoured FM3's graphics over the so called newer and improved GT5 graphics a TGS09. But because they bring out the 2d trees etc, people say it's not about the scenery. But when in a thread where GT5 wins, you disregard us pointing out the poor scenery of GT5. If GT5 rendered the sort of complex scenery FM3 was and 360hrtz physics instead of GT5P 120 hrtz then it would not be in 1080p or have that much AA. It's a trade off. It's what you prefer.

link ?

I really doubt 3 sites have stated FM3 > GT5 graphically

perhaps for GT5p but I higly doubt for GT5 ...



Time to Work !

selnor on 04 November 2009
libellule said:
selnor said:
Reasonable said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Rainbird said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Of course Eurogamer would pick GT5P. The GT series is the chosen game of Europe, period.


except that eurogamer gave Halo3 a 10/10

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/halo-3-review

and believe me, it is far from what others european site have given to this good (but far from perfect) game ...

Thats cool bro, but the GT series is still the main console brand of Europe. America barely cares about it anymore and Japan doesn't pay much attention to it. It doesn't matter that they gave Halo 3 10/10. It is the definitive exclusive console shooter.

So you still think that Digital Foundry (not Eurogamer) choose GT5:P over Forza 3 because of the site they post their content on is Eurogamer?

Not because of the site. It is because Europe loves GT. I cannot blame them really. Every official game turns out to be the total package.

OK, so let's stop the shit about europe in general and let's give a rest to Halo3.

let's focus on eurogamer biais will you ?

GT3 : 10/10
GT4 : 8/10
GT5pro : 8/10

FM1 : 9/10
FM2 : 9/10
FM3 : 9/10

How do they prefer GT over FM ?
With a 92/100 on metacritic, their review looks pretty fair !!!

at your service

I wouldn't waste your breath.  I'm giving up on this thread.  The basic premise of the DF article is:

"GT5:P has overall the better rendering engine because, among other things, it can render the same track, details, etc. with more cars, better lighting, etc. at 1080p at 2xAA vs Forza 3 rendering at 720p at 2xAA."

Despite this clear, technical focus on rendering people are going "Europe loves GT", "Damange modelling", etc. etc. all of which are essentially irrelevant to the article as they pertain to other aspects of the game than graphical rendering.

 

People are quick to use this article as a be all end all. But seem to forget the 3 different sites that all favoured FM3's graphics over the so called newer and improved GT5 graphics a TGS09. But because they bring out the 2d trees etc, people say it's not about the scenery. But when in a thread where GT5 wins, you disregard us pointing out the poor scenery of GT5. If GT5 rendered the sort of complex scenery FM3 was and 360hrtz physics instead of GT5P 120 hrtz then it would not be in 1080p or have that much AA. It's a trade off. It's what you prefer.

link ?

I really doubt 3 sites have stated FM3 > GT5 graphically

perhaps for GT5p but I higly doubt for GT5 ...

"Visuals:
Winner: Forza Motorsport 3
While both games look great on the track, Forza's demo featured a polish that Gran Turismo 5's lacked. The rocky hillsides and lush greenery easily showed up the bland, almost clinical-looking cityscape of Gran Turismo. Driving slow in Gran Turismo is like inviting disappointment. I guess they were hoping you'd always be moving fast enough to not notice the perfectly flat tree and pole textures. Plants and trees on the side of the road look like paper cutouts, and the tree trunks are laughably bad.  As far as the vehicle visuals go, neither game disappoints. Both supply unhealthy doses of car porn. The tighter racing action of Forza 3 made it easier to appreciate the models of the cars I raced against, but both pull off amazing feats as far as visuals go. Forza's framerate was liquid smooth, making it a bit easier on the eyes than GT5."

 http://www.destructoid.com/tgs-09-forza-motorsport-3-vs-gran-turismo-5-149770.phtml

Examples:



Any game that takes THIS much downgrading to sit at 60fps and suedo 1080p has the priorities in the wrong place. There is to much detail missing from GT5 and GT5p. As has been said, you notie it when you look. And then it is so obvious you never see the game the same again. It's not just distant scenery that is not there in GT5p or GT5. It's the close details that are washed out and not included also.



Around the Network
Jansky8 on 04 November 2009

I am not able to count polygones and stuff, but the thing is the colors and the light in GT, and through out the series, just perfectly replicate the way I see racing cars. Graphics dont make a game (obviously) and we'll see once GT5 comes out which one is the better overall racer.



Reasonable on 04 November 2009
selnor said:
libellule said:
selnor said:
Reasonable said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Rainbird said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Of course Eurogamer would pick GT5P. The GT series is the chosen game of Europe, period.


except that eurogamer gave Halo3 a 10/10

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/halo-3-review

and believe me, it is far from what others european site have given to this good (but far from perfect) game ...

Thats cool bro, but the GT series is still the main console brand of Europe. America barely cares about it anymore and Japan doesn't pay much attention to it. It doesn't matter that they gave Halo 3 10/10. It is the definitive exclusive console shooter.

So you still think that Digital Foundry (not Eurogamer) choose GT5:P over Forza 3 because of the site they post their content on is Eurogamer?

Not because of the site. It is because Europe loves GT. I cannot blame them really. Every official game turns out to be the total package.

OK, so let's stop the shit about europe in general and let's give a rest to Halo3.

let's focus on eurogamer biais will you ?

GT3 : 10/10
GT4 : 8/10
GT5pro : 8/10

FM1 : 9/10
FM2 : 9/10
FM3 : 9/10

How do they prefer GT over FM ?
With a 92/100 on metacritic, their review looks pretty fair !!!

at your service

I wouldn't waste your breath.  I'm giving up on this thread.  The basic premise of the DF article is:

"GT5:P has overall the better rendering engine because, among other things, it can render the same track, details, etc. with more cars, better lighting, etc. at 1080p at 2xAA vs Forza 3 rendering at 720p at 2xAA."

Despite this clear, technical focus on rendering people are going "Europe loves GT", "Damange modelling", etc. etc. all of which are essentially irrelevant to the article as they pertain to other aspects of the game than graphical rendering.

 

People are quick to use this article as a be all end all. But seem to forget the 3 different sites that all favoured FM3's graphics over the so called newer and improved GT5 graphics a TGS09. But because they bring out the 2d trees etc, people say it's not about the scenery. But when in a thread where GT5 wins, you disregard us pointing out the poor scenery of GT5. If GT5 rendered the sort of complex scenery FM3 was and 360hrtz physics instead of GT5P 120 hrtz then it would not be in 1080p or have that much AA. It's a trade off. It's what you prefer.

link ?

I really doubt 3 sites have stated FM3 > GT5 graphically

perhaps for GT5p but I higly doubt for GT5 ...

"Visuals:
Winner: Forza Motorsport 3
While both games look great on the track, Forza's demo featured a polish that Gran Turismo 5's lacked. The rocky hillsides and lush greenery easily showed up the bland, almost clinical-looking cityscape of Gran Turismo. Driving slow in Gran Turismo is like inviting disappointment. I guess they were hoping you'd always be moving fast enough to not notice the perfectly flat tree and pole textures. Plants and trees on the side of the road look like paper cutouts, and the tree trunks are laughably bad.  As far as the vehicle visuals go, neither game disappoints. Both supply unhealthy doses of car porn. The tighter racing action of Forza 3 made it easier to appreciate the models of the cars I raced against, but both pull off amazing feats as far as visuals go. Forza's framerate was liquid smooth, making it a bit easier on the eyes than GT5."

 http://www.destructoid.com/tgs-09-forza-motorsport-3-vs-gran-turismo-5-149770.phtml

Examples:



Any game that takes THIS much downgrading to sit at 60fps and suedo 1080p has the priorities in the wrong place. There is to much detail missing from GT5 and GT5p. As has been said, you notie it when you look. And then it is so obvious you never see the game the same again. It's not just distant scenery that is not there in GT5p or GT5. It's the close details that are washed out and not included also.

See, that's what I'm talking about.  That's subjective and actually wrong.  He says:

"Forza's framerate was liquid smooth, making it a bit easier on the eyes than GT5"  they have the same fps - he felt Forza 3 was smoother but technically it isn't.  They are both smooth.  Pretty much all of that reads subjective to me, I don't see any hard tech analysis as with DF, with frame by frame fps, dropped frames, etc. analysis of rendering.

 I agree that of course some will prefer 3D to 2D tree for personal preference, but I believe it's Forza 3 making the wrong sacrifices, losing cars and resolution and lighting accuracy for scenry that only looks different if you drive slowly or put the camera in the sky to look down.

If you play GT5:P in 1080 at 2xAA and Forza 3 at 720 at 2xAA GT5:P simply looks better where it matters for this kind of game IMHO, resolution, frame rate, AA and car models and lighting.  Driving at speed, at full capable resolution, GT5:P looks better as the cars are sharper, the lighting more natural and realistic and the number of cars higher.

Anyway, I'm going to leave this now.  As I said the DF analysis is the only true tech analysis of rendering I've seen, considering transparencies, lighting, resolution, etc.  Everything else I've read, including links like the one you post, are based on subjective views from people's eyes only.   When a supposed comparison thinks two games with equal fps have different fps I pretty much discount it as the observer is clearly not drawing accurate conclusions.  Both are amazing rendering engines, Forza 3 is definately the better game, although to be fair from that perspective it's a full game whereas, depending on your view, GT5:P is anything from a partial game to a demo to a tech demo, but based on everything I've read, for a driving game, GT5:P has the better rendering engine overall - again, technically, not subjectively.

Note: Don't know why this has switched to italic but can't seem to turn it off, even cutting and pasting text out and back in - glitch I guess, pls ignore it.  Also, I know you love Forza 3 so I'm not going to get into a massive back and forth on this, I'm happy to go with agreeing to disagree.




Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Rath on 04 November 2009

I honestly don't get all of the worry. They're both gorgeous, why don't people spend more time judging them as games rather than as CGI?



1337 Gamer on 04 November 2009

Very interesting to read and i will definaty admit that Forzas Car models underwhelmed me a bit. However i think the tracks look better than GT5P. And physics and gameplay wise Forza 3 wins. Overall both games are freakin amazing and i wish that people would stop bitching about which game is better. Theyre both super similiar with visuals going to gt5 and gameplay going to forza.



I mostly play RTS and Moba style games now adays as well as ALOT of benchmarking. I do play other games however such as the witcher 3 and Crysis 3, and recently Ashes of the Singularity. I love gaming on the cutting edge and refuse to accept any compromises. Proud member of the Glorious PC Gaming Master Race. Long Live SHIO!!!! 

selnor on 04 November 2009
Reasonable said:
selnor said:
libellule said:
selnor said:
Reasonable said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Rainbird said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
libellule said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Of course Eurogamer would pick GT5P. The GT series is the chosen game of Europe, period.


except that eurogamer gave Halo3 a 10/10

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/halo-3-review

and believe me, it is far from what others european site have given to this good (but far from perfect) game ...

Thats cool bro, but the GT series is still the main console brand of Europe. America barely cares about it anymore and Japan doesn't pay much attention to it. It doesn't matter that they gave Halo 3 10/10. It is the definitive exclusive console shooter.

So you still think that Digital Foundry (not Eurogamer) choose GT5:P over Forza 3 because of the site they post their content on is Eurogamer?

Not because of the site. It is because Europe loves GT. I cannot blame them really. Every official game turns out to be the total package.

OK, so let's stop the shit about europe in general and let's give a rest to Halo3.

let's focus on eurogamer biais will you ?

GT3 : 10/10
GT4 : 8/10
GT5pro : 8/10

FM1 : 9/10
FM2 : 9/10
FM3 : 9/10

How do they prefer GT over FM ?
With a 92/100 on metacritic, their review looks pretty fair !!!

at your service

I wouldn't waste your breath.  I'm giving up on this thread.  The basic premise of the DF article is:

"GT5:P has overall the better rendering engine because, among other things, it can render the same track, details, etc. with more cars, better lighting, etc. at 1080p at 2xAA vs Forza 3 rendering at 720p at 2xAA."

Despite this clear, technical focus on rendering people are going "Europe loves GT", "Damange modelling", etc. etc. all of which are essentially irrelevant to the article as they pertain to other aspects of the game than graphical rendering.

 

People are quick to use this article as a be all end all. But seem to forget the 3 different sites that all favoured FM3's graphics over the so called newer and improved GT5 graphics a TGS09. But because they bring out the 2d trees etc, people say it's not about the scenery. But when in a thread where GT5 wins, you disregard us pointing out the poor scenery of GT5. If GT5 rendered the sort of complex scenery FM3 was and 360hrtz physics instead of GT5P 120 hrtz then it would not be in 1080p or have that much AA. It's a trade off. It's what you prefer.

link ?

I really doubt 3 sites have stated FM3 > GT5 graphically

perhaps for GT5p but I higly doubt for GT5 ...

"Visuals:
Winner: Forza Motorsport 3
While both games look great on the track, Forza's demo featured a polish that Gran Turismo 5's lacked. The rocky hillsides and lush greenery easily showed up the bland, almost clinical-looking cityscape of Gran Turismo. Driving slow in Gran Turismo is like inviting disappointment. I guess they were hoping you'd always be moving fast enough to not notice the perfectly flat tree and pole textures. Plants and trees on the side of the road look like paper cutouts, and the tree trunks are laughably bad.  As far as the vehicle visuals go, neither game disappoints. Both supply unhealthy doses of car porn. The tighter racing action of Forza 3 made it easier to appreciate the models of the cars I raced against, but both pull off amazing feats as far as visuals go. Forza's framerate was liquid smooth, making it a bit easier on the eyes than GT5."

 http://www.destructoid.com/tgs-09-forza-motorsport-3-vs-gran-turismo-5-149770.phtml

Examples:



Any game that takes THIS much downgrading to sit at 60fps and suedo 1080p has the priorities in the wrong place. There is to much detail missing from GT5 and GT5p. As has been said, you notie it when you look. And then it is so obvious you never see the game the same again. It's not just distant scenery that is not there in GT5p or GT5. It's the close details that are washed out and not included also.

See, that's what I'm talking about.  That's subjective and actually wrong.  He says:

"Forza's framerate was liquid smooth, making it a bit easier on the eyes than GT5"  they have the same fps - he felt Forza 3 was smoother but technically it isn't.  They are both smooth.  Pretty much all of that reads subjective to me, I don't see any hard tech analysis as with DF, with frame by frame fps, dropped frames, etc. analysis of rendering.

 I agree that of course some will prefer 3D to 2D tree for personal preference, but I believe it's Forza 3 making the wrong sacrifices, losing cars and resolution and lighting accuracy for scenry that only looks different if you drive slowly or put the camera in the sky to look down.

If you play GT5:P in 1080 at 2xAA and Forza 3 at 720 at 2xAA GT5:P simply looks better where it matters for this kind of game IMHO, resolution, frame rate, AA and car models and lighting.  Driving at speed, at full capable resolution, GT5:P looks better as the cars are sharper, the lighting more natural and realistic and the number of cars higher.

Anyway, I'm going to leave this now.  As I said the DF analysis is the only true tech analysis of rendering I've seen, considering transparencies, lighting, resolution, etc.  Everything else I've read, including links like the one you post, are based on subjective views from people's eyes only.   When a supposed comparison thinks two games with equal fps have different fps I pretty much discount it as the observer is clearly not drawing accurate conclusions.  Both are amazing rendering engines, Forza 3 is definately the better game, although to be fair from that perspective it's a full game whereas, depending on your view, GT5:P is anything from a partial game to a demo to a tech demo, but based on everything I've read, for a driving game, GT5:P has the better rendering engine overall - again, technically, not subjectively.

Note: Don't know why this has switched to italic but can't seem to turn it off, even cutting and pasting text out and back in - glitch I guess, pls ignore it.  Also, I know you love Forza 3 so I'm not going to get into a massive back and forth on this, I'm happy to go with agreeing to disagree.

 

GT5P is not 1980x1080it's 1280x1080. There is a massive difference. It looks great moving at speeds. But crash or take a hairpin and the game can look ugly as described by TGS09 goers. It's not just 2d trees, but seriously low textures on barriers, buildings, tree trunks etc. Here look at these shots. The amount of detail difference is astonishing. If GT5 had this level of texture detail and 3d models it wouldn't run at 1280 x 1080.

 

FM3:

GT5:

FM3:

GT5:

FM3:

GT5:

FM3:

GT5:

 

Now look at these shots. Take the first 1. No horizon on GT5. Better road textures at a higher res on FM3. More detailed trees.

2nd comparison: Again no horizon on GT5. More detail on the fence in FM3, trees are not 2d blobs of colour in FM3 again in this pic. Again road textures including tyres mark are of a higher res in FM3.

3rd comparison: A BIG difference. building on the right in GT5 is a flat 2d texture. In FM3 it's 3d modelled with much higher textures. The trees on the right are close up, giving you a prime example of the detail that FM3 carries. The GT5 trees are 3 different colours with each 2d row being a different colour ( or shade ). Horizong draw distance still visible in FM3. GT5 draw distance doesn't include horizon.

4th comparison: Again horizon missing in GT5. Ferris wheel is missing detail ( spokes missing in GT5 ). Alot more crowd in FM3 ( yes they are 3d ). the building to the left of the car on the bank again much more detailed and higher res than GT5. Also look to the right of the car. GT5 is missing a whole load of track detail. It's missing 2 long barriers and a high fence. Again the road itself packs much more detail. Also the ferris wheel in GT5 is not animated. In FM3 it is fully animated.

Basically, FM3 has higher res textures, better 3d models and much more trackside detail. Also animating world scenery. Also running physics at 360 hertz. While GT5p manages a slightly higher overall res ( Fm3 1280 x 720, GT5P 1280x 1080 ) it has less than half the physics read speed and less texture res and 3d modelling.