painkiller still beats killzone2 lol

http://i44.tinypic.com/28ujzfl.jpg

painkiller woodgrain texture^

http://image.gamespotcdn.com/gamespot/images/2008/232/928377_20080820_screen002.jpg

killzone2 woodgrain texture^

painkiller's woodgrain texture looks better.

im not a troll, but it's common fact consoles cant compare to pcs because they dont have the memory.

sdretgretretret

[QUOTE="WutTimeIsIt"][QUOTE="FamiBox"]

Sony's bull iterates me.

The PS3 is not the second coming... it's more or less the same as the 360.

FamiBox

But it's not 10 times better than the 360 like Sony wanted us to believe (it's not even better at all in many people's opinion.)

Quote: Ken Kutaragi

"Microsoft shoots for the moon. Sony shoots for the sun."

Yessssss... in terms or distance, the PS3 sure is millions of miles better than the 360 huh:roll:

[QUOTE="WutTimeIsIt"]no, the true difference is what you actually SEE on screen with your eyes, which is a greater draw distance for all ps3 multiplatforms, Even the PORTS, what does that tell you when a port of a 360 game looks better on the ps3? it tells me the 360 hardware couldnt handle itAnnoyedDragon

All I did was explain what that person essentially said, everything you have just said is irrelevant in relation to that.

If you don't think unified shaders are a better direction than the PS3's old style dedicated shaders; then you may want to ask yourself why every GPU produced in over two years have been unified shader based.

[QUOTE="WutTimeIsIt"][QUOTE="DarkGamer007"] So does the Playstation 3. :|DarkGamer007

The Xbox 360 uses a triple-core IBM processor, with each core able to simultaneously process two threads. So it can operate up to six threads at once. While the Playstation 3 has eight cores, only six of the two are available to developers to use as one is reserved to the operating system and the eight SPE is disabled. /thread. How many times must I prove you wrong?

[QUOTE="WutTimeIsIt"] more and more lies from 360 fanyboys, lies are a true form of trolling.AnnoyedDragon

The PS3 GPU is based on the old seperate shader design that was abandoned back in the Geforce 7 series, 360s GPU uses unified shaders; which results in increased performance utilization by allowing all shaders to be used at any one time.

So although their figures were most likely made up, the differences are true.

here's a suggestion to Sony..starting collecting fees from PSN users like MS..use the money to improve the PSN and also DLC..what 3601 have is a must for us to have..tht's my opinion thoughGarudo

[QUOTE="WutTimeIsIt"][QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

I said both consoles are outdated by today's hardware standards because they are both using over 2 year old hardware.

You decided to make sure I knew 360 was the oldest of the two; and yet I'm the fanboy?

Here's the thing, determining console hardware specification takes place long before they are announced. It is likely both PS3 and 360 set their hardware in stone around the same time; it is just 360 released early, which it is now paying for with hardware failures from lack of extensive testing.

My point was arguing which is more next gen than thou was pointless because they are both obsolete hardware from around the same time, you sir are the fanboy for trying to argue PS3 is any different.

DarkGamer007

[QUOTE="sdretgretretret"]

[QUOTE="WutTimeIsIt"]and 360 is a last-gen system...it was cool in 05.sdretgretretret

lol the mods ban me yet let posters like this? pure fanboys talk bs?

xbox360 gpu=direct9c

ps3 gpu=directx9c but uses open gl es api since direct is microsoft api.

ps3's gpu is last gen tech compared to 360s.

ps3's gpu runs at about 60/70% efficientcy, xbox360 cpu runs at about 90-95%.

Sony's bull iterates me.

The PS3 is not the second coming... it's more or less the same as the 360.

FamiBox