I wonder if anyone has really done an accurate comparison of hardware power? I remember many claiming that the PS3 and 360 were pretty much neck and neck in the graphics dept. They pretty much said each had small advantages here and there but there was not the huge lead that the Sony hype machine claimed to be.
Yeah, and apparently the Xbox had the PS2 beat hands down in that department, but looking at Burnout 3 on either platform the evidence isn't so clear-cut. The problem is that Sony's architecture has been pretty complicated to get to grips with, so I think you won't see the best of the PS3 for some time yet.
I suppose there may be a few 1080P games in the future but I wouldn't expect many.
Doesn't Ridge Racer 7 support 1080p already? I'm pretty sure GTHD does, anyway. I'd expect the number to increase a lot as time goes on.
Actually I just read an article (not biased for either it seems ) that does say the GPU in the 360 is actually better than the PS3. It does say that the Cell has a bit of an advantage in CPU power though, while both are fairly powerful, but not as powerful as a high end PC CPU.
"Now the 360’s GPU is one impressive piece of work and I’ll say from the get go it’s much more advanced than the PS3’s GPU so I’m not sure where to begin, but I’ll start with what Microsoft said about it. Microsoft said Xenos was clocked at 500MHZ and that it had 48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader pipelines (48 unified shader units or pipelines) along with a polygon performance of 500 Million triangles a second."
... What I found interesting was Microsoft said the 360’s GPU could perform 48 billion shader operations per second back in 2005. However Bob Feldstein, VP of engineering for ATI, made it very clear that the 360’s GPU can perform 2 of those shaders per cycle so the 360’s GPU is actually capable of 96 billion shader operations per second.
...The 360’s GPU is revolutionary in the sense that it’s the first GPU to use a Unified Shader architecture. According to developers this is as big a change as when the vertex shader was first introduced and even then the inclusion of the vertex shader was merely an add-on not a major change like this. The 360’s GPU also has a daughter die right there on the chip containing 10MB of EDRAM. This EDRAM has a framebuffer bandwidth of 256GB/s which is more than 5 times what the RSX (PS3) or any GPU for the pc has for its framebuffer (even higher than G80’s framebuffer).
... The 360 GPU has 48 unified pipelines capable of accepting either pixel or vertex shader operations whereas with the older dedicated pixel and vertex pipeline architecture that RSX uses when you are in a vertex heavy situation most of the 24 pixel pipes go idle instead of helping out with vertex work.
... 1080p is not a smart resolution to target in any form this generation, but if 360 developers wanted to get serious about 1080p, thanks to Xenos, could actually outperform the ps3 in 1080p. (The less efficient GPU always shows its weaknesses against the competition in higher resolutions so the best way for the rsx to be competitive is to stick to 720P) In vertex shader limited situations the 360’s gpu will literally be 6 times faster than RSX.
i thought that uk and jap dvds were same region ? region 2 i think. But I tryed a dvd for the first time there and it says "video in the PAL broadcast standard is not supported" I wonder if when i get my HD cable it would play as it wont be in pal or ntsc but HD ? Anyway i can play dvds on my 360 But it is a bit noisy so maybe have to use my pc or ps2.
Or get the HD-DVD add-on for the 360. It is pretty cheap and the PQ is amazing in high def.