[QUOTE="Mikee3"] 360 is not inferior to ps3.
The ps3's cell processor has 7 cores at 2.8 ghz each. however develpors are using only 2 of the cores, with the third handling system processes (XMB etc.)
The 360 has 3 cores at 2.8 ghz each and developers are again using 2 of them with the third running system processes (dashboard etc.)
The 360's GPU is superior to the PS3's in almost every way. The PS3's GPU is based on the Nvidia G71 chipset, which is dated at this point (used in Geforce 7800 series). The 360's GPU is basedd on the much more recent and more powerful ati r600, which was released a couple of years after the g71.
Game wise the 360 can handle more detailed graphics while the ps3 can handle more amount of ai on screen and such. However at this point the developers are producing games for both systems at equal power. and the only way this will change is for console exclusive games.
diablobasher
Youve got it all wrong. Well, technicly right but you're looking at it wrong.
The PS3 has 8 cores, one if which is perma locked, and one is reserved for system processes. 6 are available for use for games, the fact Devs are only using 2 is testement to how hard the console is to code for. Doesnt change the fact there are still 4 cores floating that people arent using, so the potential is there.
Also bear in mind that the 360 uses its GDDR3 as its ram AND graphics memory at the same time. Whereas the Ps3 has seperate graphics memory but only 256 RAM (although its XDRAM or whatever its called, its stupidly fast)
So both systems have advantages and disadvantages, but from a technical standpoint the PS3 is undeniably more powerful, to try and argue otherwise is simple ignorance.
The potential to use all cores is there but it's not got enough ram to maximise usuage on all cores. In a few years they'll probably just spread the processes of the console across more cores rather than pushing one or two their limits.
Log in to comment