Which has the better graphics, ps3 or xbox 360?

Question

Which has the better graphics, ps3 or xbox 360?

Answer 1

[The PS3 has always been acclaimed and hyped to be the more powerful...and in sheer technical terms, it is.  The Cell Processor is a very complicated beast and when used properly, it could do amazing things...but what does this mean in gaming?]  

Firstly, Sure, Processor spec is important but what Microsoft had done, was release a very powerful general purpose processor, more relevant to what developers are use to developing for on modern day dual/tri-core PC's.  The only thing the 360 has over modern day CPU's, is that it of it's three cores are capable of 2 threads, each thread can handle a task, so it's sort of like simulating a standard 6 core processor with no threading ability.  What do I mean by "General Purpose?" well, for short, let's just say that the PS3's processor is aimed for everything non-gaming.  The PS3 processor would be super awesome for high level cryptography, maybe and super awesome for video editing, but it relies to heavily on math and not enough toward general purpose processing.  There is one advantage to this, however...the PS3 could ideally pull off some wicked physics processing for games and particle effects.

Secondly, the GPU (graphics processor) is extremely important and everyone seems to overlook the GPU in the 360.  The GPU in the 360 is a major key to its success.   The RSX GPU in the PS3 is no doubt powerful but the 360's GPU was cleverly designed.  It can simulate 48 Pixel Pipelines, using a unified shader setup but to understand that means studying up on vector and pixel shading.  

Thirdly, the 360's EDRAM.  THe 360 has embedded (on die) memory for the GPU.  While, the system itself has 512MB of unified memory, there is 10MB of additional memory on the GPU, this is insanely fast memory nearly quadrupling the bandwidth of DDR2 memory on most modern day machines, this EDRAM was put there for HDTV purposes, meaning, it's the reason why Anti-Aliasing and Anisotropic filtering looks best on the 360 and why PS3 owners are complaining of jaggy looking graphics.  To get a similar look on the PS3 means a heavy cost on system memory.

Fourthly, the PS3's system memory is segmented.  256MB of system memory and 256MB of video memory.  Neither one alone is a large amount and so it is an extra task for developers to mess with, it's better to have a large pool of memory to pull from when you're dealing with the limited amounts of gaming consoles e.g. 512MB is not much.

Fifthly, here is a huge one.  SDK's (Software Development Kits).  The 360/Microsoft has one of the best SDK's out there and it's called "XNA".  It is the single most easy to use method for developers to get the most out of the 360.  That same SDK is used for PC development too, I believe and so, this makes the developers feel at home.  

Sixthly (is there such a thing lol), the console operating system.  Sony's OS started out as a behemoth, taking up 64mb of the available 256MB system memory and 32MB of the video memory to run.  The 360's OS was only ever 32MB to start with and you had more features than the PS3's.  Slowly but surely, each firmware update on the PS3 has seemed to reduce this a little and will get better.

[Do you see the big picture? Sony is trying to be too unique in designing such complex hardware designs (Just like the PS2).  I knew that after the PS2, Sony was going to do this all over again...I was right.  Just when developers finally understood the PS2 and how to work with it, the PS3 was out and ready to go (yes, it did take that long to work around the PS2's complexity).  In an interview with John Carmack on the game RAGE on the PS3/360, he had made mention (about PS3), "We do not feel the PS3 delivers the power promised" and " this is not how we develop games but Sony is saying 'this is how we should''.

http://kotaku.com/5031985/rage-and-ids-l...

Microsoft, on the other hand says "well, we know software, we know operating systems, we know networking, we've master graphics API's, and working with developers, we know about drivers, we know what developers like, etc. let's build a system this generation that is a breeze to develop for".  Microsoft understood that the only way to grab the competition by the balls, was to develop a piece of hardware that is simple for third party development and woudl insure, that the 360 was the chosen system to develop for.  This is why PS3 ports look a little downgraded.  Developers are choosing the easier system to take advantage of (through, a combination of unique choice of, both, hardware design and SKD's), and then porting them to PS3.]

Answer 2

ps3

Answer 3

360 has a batter processor and faster frame rate.  Plus it has better games :)

for more info, go here

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Free_...

Answer 4

ok... 360 runs at 720p out of the box while ps3 runs at 1080i.  1080i is slightly better than 720p but to notice the difference you must be 6 inches infront of the tv, 12 underneath or 30 feet away so they are pretty much the same... with an hdmi cord they can both run at 1080p which is the best availible at this time... some idiot will try to tell you that because blu-ray disc have more memory that ps3 has better graphics, do not listen to them they are wrong... having more space allows you to put more into the game length wise... so if your trying to decide get the one with the better games that you like...  

Answer 5

ps3:1080p full high definition

360:1080i or 720 i dont remember not full high definition but high definition anyway

the ps3 has better graphics

Answer 6

all the answers you got are complete c**p.dave, ps3 has a better processor but yes 360 des have a faster fram rate sometimes.

now for the answer, they look the same if they are 3rd part (non exclusives). but the exclusives on the ps3 looks better than any xbox 360 game