Playstation 3 vs. Xbox 360 - One Year Later

HCW writes:

"It has been exactly 1 year to the day since we published our PS3 vs. XBOX 360 article, written for us by a friend of mine who is a lead programmer for a game company working on all three consoles (and PC).

His consensus was a controversial one at the time; that the XBOX 360 pretty much owned in every category; price, performance, graphics, and game selection.

However, a lot can change in a year. Both consoles saw price drops, and firmware updates have the potential to improve both gaming and non-gaming features. Developers have had time to 'learn' the intricacies of the PS3, and several new exclusive titles have been released for both.

One year later, I am going to don my flamesuit, and take a look at each console. Let's see if the PS3 has made strides! It's certainly selling better lately."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Zhuk4040d ago

Zhuk's Summary:

The Xbox 360 still is the superior console with the PS3 failing to make any significant ground in closing its inferiority. Games still look and play better on Xbox 360 thanks to its superior graphics, performance, controller, achievements, online features. Xbox Live is still the best online gaming service with PSN still suffering from crippling problems. The PS3 still suffers from poor design issues thanks to its awful CELL processor and its inferior tacked-on RSX GPU which makes the system poor for game development, driving up costs and development times. Sony is now begging third party devs to not abandon the PS3 and nearly every third party exclusive is now being developed on the Xbox 360, with FFXIII and MGS4 soon to follow because there is no way they can turn a profit on a console that doesn't sell games.

Meus Renaissance4040d ago (Edited 4040d ago )

Considering your recent comments, But I don't think anyone cares about your opinions?

If you're happy with your console of your choice, then you go girl! But to attack another platform with as much nonsense and BS like you do, it sounds like you're the desperate one, plagued with insecurities.

Truth be told, if you want to criticise the console, then post some well structured comments that have valid points in a neutral fashion, this way, you'll appeal to a greater audience. But you're just making yourself look bad with every post you make. And I think you know it.

mesh14040d ago

yup zhuk that true tis a shame some ppl cant realise what is so clear to see 360 is amazing

Zhuk4040d ago

I receive lots of fan mail actually from Xbox 360 enthusiasts and fandroids alike.

And while I may be reviled amongst fandroids for speaking my mind, at least I don't post false/badly researched news pieces which hurt the credibility and respectability of this site as a way of attacking a console I don't prefer or try and hide my bias by acting fair and balanced when I really am far from it.

Meus Renaissance4040d ago (Edited 4040d ago )

FF13 developer: "Ofcourse" it will be a PS3 exclusive.

MGS4 creators: It's PS3 exclusive (for the 10th time now)

In response Zhuk says: 360 rocks my world, MGS4 and F13 will be on the 360 anyway, trust me, not the ones making the games. I am respected and appreciated, I post facts and do not attack other consoles without cause. I am fair and balanced. PS3 sucks.

I'm sorry, but if you see yourself as fair and balanced then lol. I actually laughed at reading that. If you think you're fair and balanced, I dread to see when you're actually being bias. I like you Zhuk, you make me laugh.

Neo-Delta4040d ago

If that comment was posted five months ago I would have agreed. Its total B$ now, lol! PS3 is closing fast, all those comments you made are not the case anymore, ports are starting to look the same and soon enough they will get better. An article was posted here eariler where the hardware sales are nearly the exact same trends the 360's were in their first year.

I'm not even gonna comment on your CELL blab, youknow yourself that its complete and utter B$.

PS3PCFTW4040d ago

zhuk ive only been here for a couple of days, but ALL YOUR COMMENTS ARE IGNORANT, ARROGANT, AND SHOW LACK OF INTELLIGENCE. plus you cant really make a valid point, which also proves your stupidity.

id be embarrassed if i were you, luckily youre on the internet and noone can see you or kick you in the face...Lucky for you...but im sure youre REAL life amounts to nothing anyway . its just u and your beloved console.

Im sorry, thats just my opinion of u, im sure other members here whove known you much longer have a much more colorful description of you.


I can't see what he is posting, have to "show" so I can reply, but don't bother reading... Anyway, just hit ignore people. The guy really thing everybody care to what he have to say... The guy don't need more attention... Medical attention maybe, but not your attention anyway...

Genuine4039d ago

I agree with both you and this article. If someone buys a game console to game and likes a decent movie occasionaly, then the 360 is what they need to buy. If someone is a videophile and occasionaly plays games, then the ps3 is a decent choice.

MANTIIS4039d ago (Edited 4039d ago )

"As of now, there is only one multiplatform game being developed on the PS3 later to be ported to 360, and that’s Haze."

Oh, really? When is this Haze 360 coming out? Take this article and shove it, and post one from a journalist who knows his facts. I can be objective.

As for Zhuk, the guy's an idiot and is secretly depressed that he has an inferior 360-so he make up lies and propaganda about PS3 to make himself feel better. Hey Zhuk, if you weren't so poor, maybe you could have a PS3 too, and wouldn't be playing on that cheap, defective white box. What's the matter? Can't afford 399.00? Biyatch!

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 4039d ago
Meus Renaissance4040d ago

The PlayStation 3, from a hardware point of view, is the better value considering the price difference and what it offers you in return. The Xbox 360 currently has a better software lineup, with highly rated AAA games this year. The PS3, when it too comes to its 2nd year year, will most likely be the same with the highly anticipated franchises being released in 2008.

Personally, I favour the PS3 but I'm not arrogant enough to tell you or anyone else its the better console. It all comes down to your preference. Initially, the deciding factor was mainly price but this will be less relevant as time goes on as there is little distinction between the two in regards to that. What will be the main deciding factor now is the games that will be released/are on the console and then make a choice.

Either way, you'll be very happy with your purchase.

lowlight4040d ago

Pretty good synopsis of that huge article :)

RadientFlux4040d ago

I agree it all comes down to what sort of games you like play everything else is secondary.

Good example during the last console I ended up playing xbox more than my ps2, due too the more western developer support. The price and how well the ps2/xbox were never a concern of mine (and still arn't).

Lord Cheese4040d ago

Ditto - the only game i played towards the end of my ps2's life was pro evolution soccer 5. I couldnt stop playing ninja gaiden and halo 2 on my old xbox, and thats what made me prefer the console.

Right now i prefer my 360 because i have so many games i love on it - doesnt mean the ps3 isnt a very decent piece of kit (and R&C is superb fun, despite being ridiculously easy)

Lord Cheese4040d ago

If i was forced into a corner and had to advise someone (i have both so i'm not really biased) i'd definately go along with the article.

Gameswise, right now you have to go for the 360. Multiplatform games arrive earlier, are (generally, but certainly not always) more stable graphically, and are better on-line (xbox live is well worth paying for compared to psn right now), and the exclusives are still far in excess of what the ps3 has to offer (despite some good recent releases on the ps3 - R&C, Uncharted etc)

From a media standpoint, i'd pick the ps3 hands down. The menus are far faster (especially if you're streaming any content - that damn 100 item limit on the 360 before it refreshes the list drives me nuts) and the fact you can upgrade your hdd really easily means you can future proof it no trouble at all. Divx support will be here sooner than for the 360 (something to do with it being less "locked-down") and the blu-ray quality is great - even the 360 elite only has a 1.2 hdmi port (sorry if thats the wrong version) which doesnt support dolby tru-hd.

Next year i'm sure the story will have changed, but its nice to see an article discuss the pros and cons in a fairly sensible fashion instead of fanboy nonsense that drives most sensible gamers out of their minds!

xsteinbachx4040d ago

Meus i love reading your comments compared to some people you actually use intelligence while posting. keep it up.

if your bubbles weren't locked i'd throw some your way.

LJWooly4040d ago

Meus, i don't mean to be an arse-kisser, but i really appreciate it when someone who owns a ps3, and preferes it to other consoles, makes a fair, unbiased and most of all, an intellegent (although not pretentious or condescending) comment. It reflects on the ps3's entire user base, and the gaming community as a whole.
I just wish people like theMart would follow suit. N4G would be a better place.

PS3PCFTW4040d ago (Edited 4040d ago )


fvck what you think.

PCFTW assh0l3!!!

nah im just playing, all systems are great.

kudos to you for the intelligent assesment of the article.


witchking4039d ago

I like your reasoning. I don't have a PS3 (yet). I love my 360, and I think a lot of my hesitancy around the PS3 is due to the fact that I play a lot online. Halo, COD4, RSV... I have a large friends (and family) list, and the 360 is where we gather to play.

I will eventually pick up a PS3, but I suspect that the 360 will remain my console of choice for online. Which means the PS3 needs to deliver some seriously AAA single player games in 2008.

aftrdark214039d ago (Edited 4039d ago )

agree more. People need to stop posting fanboy nonsense and be happy with their console of choice. Recently my ignore button has gotten a lot of use from ranting flamebait spewing idiots. Nice to see a non biased comment.

[email protected]
I forgot Here's a bubble for you!

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 4039d ago
BIoodmask4040d ago (Edited 4040d ago )

"Xenos simply has more power - higher fillrate, higher pixel processing power, higher vertex processing power, and better memory architecture. If you look at multiplatform games and contrast the graphics on the two consoles, XBOX 360 almost always leads. Whether they use a higher resolution or higher quality antialiasing, games often look better and/or play smoother on the 360. We looked at a handful of multiplatform games a while back, and this was always the case."

This is the reason why multiplatform games look better the majority of the time on the 360. Anyone into PC gaming will tell you the same thing if you compare the Xenos and the RSX to their PC counterparts, Xenos is significantly more powerful. Personally I don't care, it is just kind of funny to see the denial on this website.

I'm just tired of all the lame excuses of "developers being lazy" etc.etc......Believe it or not developers do actually want to make great games.

Meus Renaissance4040d ago

The fact that the differences between the two versions of multiplatform games decreasing with every release is suggestive of the opinion, that is constantly shared by developers who aren't called Gabe Newell, is that there is little difference between the two except for the architecture and thus the research into developing onto that. In short, COD4 and Assassin's Creed prove this. Multiplatform games are starting to become on par and will eventually become so.

These facts and changes in the climate of comparisons are often ignored with claims "Xbox 360 will always have the best looking/performing games". It's as frutiless and ignorant as "FF13 and MGS4 will be on the 360" or "360 is the new PS2".

In essence, it leads one to wonder, WTF?!

Lord Cheese4040d ago

Its very interesting to read that the xbox has the better gpu - i certainly didnt realise that. I had assumed that the recent occurances of framerate issues (for instance in games by EA sports) was more to do with the developers familiarity with the hardware and development kits.

Doesnt take away however, from the fact that as the article says, the ps3 will improve, just like the ps2 did. I mean, try comparing the graphics from Tekken Tag Tournament or SSX to those of God of war II or FFXII!!! Its like a completely different console!

I get the feeling next year will be very different. M$ might have released too many big games too soon this year, because they thought the ps3 would have caught up faster than it has - as such, at least in exclusive software terms, i wouldnt be suprised if the gap reduced significantly.

BIoodmask4040d ago (Edited 4040d ago )

what the hec does two games looking "similar" have to do with a GPU's overall power??

Absolutely nothing.

I realize that you don't look at the facts. Go to Ciruit City and compare an Nvidia 7800 GTX 256 MB, to a higher end ATI card using Unified Shaders with 512 MB of video ram. There is no comparison.

Any PC gamer will tell you the same.

And I'm sick of all the BS, but "over time" the games will exploit the power". That can be said about any "hardware" all the way back to the NES days. That is the natural evolution of game programming.

50% of hardwares potential this year = 20% next year...No kidding.. The whole argument is weak.

coolfool4040d ago

but i have read many articles in the past (mainly last year when specs were first discussed) that says that a lot of the gpu computation can be done on the spu's. There was a time when sony were thinking about not having a gpu at all and that is for this reason. In the end it was deemed that a gpu was necessary to take some of the load from the SPU's but as the gpu in this case was being used essentially as a kind of support feature (although in essence it is the other way around) to the SPU's then the latest and greatest GPU wasn't warranted.

popup4040d ago (Edited 4040d ago )

It is a shame then that these 'significantly more powerful' capabilities as you put them, seem to be less demonstrable with every leap the PS3 seems to have been making during its debut year - there is no point having all that power if it cannot be seen.

Recent releases such as COD4 and AC have been hailed by reviewers as 'setting new graphical benchmarks' for the 360 and yet the PS3 versions do not have the graphical gap of difference you would expect if this vast comparison in power exists.

In fact, more than a few reviewers have commented on Uncharted having some of the best visuals seen this generation. Given that this is NaughtyDog's first outing on the PS3, I would say things may be closer than you think at present.

Also, if I could actually buy a Wii at the moment, I would be playing Galaxy. A superior game on an inferior platform is still a superior game.

mighty_douche4040d ago

unfortunatly for you, it takes more than a GPU to process a game, its a balance between the cpu and gpu. take crysis for example, when the developers where asked what to upgrade first, their cpu or gpu, their reply was the cpu.

if i had a pentium 3 and put it with a 8800GTX, then took a qual-core and a 8800GTS guess which would perform better?

mesh14040d ago

sll thsi talk about the cell using tis spe for graphical processing the xennon wud own it also if they cell used its SPE at what cost ? u think if they used the cell for grapics that it wont hinder processing power HAHAHAHA guys plz get real there is no way a ps3 game will look beter thana 360 game in 10years time mass effect/assasins creed prove all u thearoies wrong thse games have expanisve world that on my 360 screen look jawdropping mass efect is evne alarege game than assasins creed in terms of scale and has amazing grapics guys we are not kids if they mad maxx effect a 10hr story line and and took out al lthe custimazation npc walkingaround eveyr weere /all the plannets u can vist /and made a game on uncharted dont u think mass effect wud even rival crysis in the grapics department?

mighty_douche4040d ago


that collection of words right there proves you have absolutely no idea about what your talking about. let alone the quality of your spelling. both stupid and illiterate, a dangerous combination.

PS3PCFTW4040d ago

@3.0 :so then why is halo3 only 640p?

i hate it when people try to make a valid point, when clearly they have no idea what theyre talking about.

stop being such a fanboy and go play the console of your choice.

MANTIIS4039d ago (Edited 4039d ago )

The 360's Xenos GPU is the video card equivalent of an ATI X1800XT 256MB, albeit, slightly overclocked. The RSX, on the other hand, is closest to an Nvidia 7800GTX 256MB (with undoubtedly extra properties, since nobody knows exactly what it can really do yet). There are only four video cards between the two in terms of benchmarked capability-the X1900GT, X1950GT,8600GT, and X1900GT Rev2. The difference between these cards should make this argument a moot point, as it certainly doesn't make 360 more powerful or have nicer graphics. On paper, the PS3 is the more powerful machine (theorectically by about 50MHZ, but this is not why). One could argue that the difference in graphics comes from the 360's 3 primary cores are doing a better job at handling instruction than the 8 SPE cores for the PS3 (of which six are dedicated to games). Remember, the GPU can only display the complexity of what it is told by the CPU. If you have an underwhelming CPU, but your GPU can map the the entire landscape of the Grand Canyon in vivid detail-consider it potential wasted. Developers have figured out how to use hardly four (I'm being generous) of the PS3's SPEs. As developers learn how to unlock PS3's true potential (it will be a 1st party gamemaker, first)- then we will see a stunning difference in the superiority of PS3 over 360 graphics. Just wait for FFXIII and GT 5. In that inevitable future, when games made for PS3 are technically impossible to make on the 360, everything you(Bloodmask) are saying will be in the past.You said, "Anyone into PC gaming will tell you the same thing if you compare the Xenos and the RSX to their PC counterparts, Xenos is significantly more powerful." Well, I'm into PC gaming, and you are wrong, it is not. The one's to blame for this misconception are lazy and inadequate developers. These dummies will not learn how to maximize the hardware until a more experienced developer(Square/Enix, Konami,Insomniac, hell-even Midway(TNA)has more skill than EA) handfeeds them the code.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 4039d ago
X_GAMER_X4040d ago

we all knew that..XBOX 360 GPU is better then PS3's GPU.
PS3 CPU is better then 360's CPU.
So its net to net.
Both rivers will ends up in a lake of good games.

v1c1ous4040d ago

we also get stuck with a cesspool of crap games on both :p

Kleptic4040d ago

available ram is the main problem for the PS3 though...the OS footprint is 20 megs more than that of the 360 (of which also has a hidden 10 megs to allocate towards AA)...

the Xenos and RSX debate has gone on and on all year long...both have small advantages in some areas over the other...the 360 overall ends up being slightly superior GPU wise not because of the GPU itself...but more because of the available ram I mentioned...the RSX actually has superior available memory bandwidth by having access to the main CPU's XDR server class slab...but it still falls back on the overall available memory...

that wasn't the only mistake in that article though...Haze is not the only PS3 game being developed first...haze isn't even coming to the 360 at all, I guess he didnt' get the memo...DMC 4, UT3, and burnout Paradise are all being/have been developed on the PS3 first...and several games have been developed separetely from the ground up for the ps3 along side the 360...the Darkness and CoD 4 being two that are noteworthy...

which brings up another contradiction to the GPU argument...if the PS3 has an inferior GPU, why is it that only ports look worse?...if the game is made simultaneously and not a port of 360 code...why do they ship day and date and look identical (or arguably better in some cases) to the 360 versions?

otherZinc4040d ago

OWNS the PS3 and with the games that are out the 360 will increase its lead over the PS3 to a point where the PS3 has no chance of catching it.

Neo-Delta4040d ago (Edited 4040d ago )

OMG the PS2 was at 22mil in the same ammount of time the 360 took to get to 10mil. The Wii has more sales then the 360 in less then that too! The original xbox managed to scrape 30mil. What did the PS2 get? 120mil- 3 times that! Sony has much better brand recognition, consumers and devs were just waiting until a resonable price tag accompanied the console, your just starting to see the difference now. Can't wait to see your guys face in 2008.

Kleptic4040d ago (Edited 4040d ago )

zinc you are a are arguing about second place right now in a marathon to 100 million sold...with 16 million sold in two years it is quite obvious the 360 isn't going to do much better than its older brother...MS will pull the plug anyway, and bring out the 720...the PS3 didn't have the first year anyone expected either...but it is definitely picking up, and also has way more legs than any other console...

the PS3 will be around a lot longer than either other console...and its very unlikely that it won't break 100 million just like each playstation console sold so far...

god_o_war4039d ago

the only games you can get on 360 and not on ps3 that are good are:
halo3, gears, mass effect,bioshock and ummm ummm ummm .... IN 2 YEARS THATS ALL


Fototherapist4039d ago

It's all about price. The cheaper systems will almost always win out over their more expensive brethren. Ask any family or gamer and they will tell you they'll wait until the price comes down.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4039d ago