It's just proven with this video that Project 8 loads faster, why do you have to be an Xbox fanboy to believe it??? I think you just need to be not visualy impared to believe it. I hate it when people accuse other people of being fanboys whithout a vaild reason. Can you maybe post links to where it says that PS3's load times are faster in general? If you can't then it's only fair and logical to call you a sony fanboy. Actualy DVD's read faster than Blu-Ray and that is a fact. I realy hate people coming on here and posting without thinking and generaly making crazy statements. I now assume that you are 14 years old and only want attention.
The video makes perfect sense that the PS3 takes a few seconds longer cause 2x Blu-Ray isn't as fast as 12x DVD which the X360 does indeed have. 2x Blu-ray isn't much slower though. 4x Blu-Ray would blaze past 12x DVD in speed. Games can be optimized to run faster though on the systems.
i found motorstorm takes ages to load, especially when trying to select a car it takes a long time for the image to show up on screen befor you can select the next one also its painfull waiting for RFOM to load at the end of the day it doesnt matter because with time developers learn how to make games load faster, like oblivion on ps3 doubleing the data so the blue ray can load it quicker, if they didnt do that it would have loaded slower then the 360 version
That's the bad part about this video, it's one game. Next someone is going to do the same thing with a PS3 game loading faster than the 360 and we'll have this argument all over again.
"Can't we all get along?" is too cliche...
"STFU" is too crude...
"Who cares?" is very appropriate. I have both systems but I'm not going to play them both at the same time. The was like 5 seconds different. If I had bought the game for both systems (which I wouldn't) and played them indepedently I probably wouldn't have noticed that. That video was at the start-up, not even ingame.
I'm certain that the next argument is which console is a deeper black, PS3 or 360. Doesn't effect gaming...
Blu-Ray takes longer to read the disc and you can install games on the PS3 and you will have faster load times.
Xbox 360 has a faster reading capability and the better compression allows more information to be moved at once. You cannot install games onto the Xbox 360 to make the load times faster.
They are unfair comparisons because of the way you can separately setup each of them and they use a different type of disk drives and both reads the information differently.
because were talkin from a hardwear stand point and it seems like the ps3 is slower and to say its not fair is wrong because theres a reason ps3 didnt have a core ps3 is because blu-ray wouldnt make up for its speed, its obvious why sony didnt use a removeable HDD because of blu-ray.
The ps3 does have a hardware disadvantage in slower maximum read speed (although it does have faster minimum read speed), but it also has an advantage in harddrive caching.
Besides hardware, there is also a software aspect to which one loads faster, so that needs to also be taken into account. Since THPS8 for the ps3 is basically a port of the 360, it has an immediate disadvantage. Unfortunately, many upcoming games for the ps3 are also mere ports, but ones like Oblivion that are much more adapted to the ps3 hardware do show comparable loading times to their respective 360 versions.
but the only reason the ps3 version of oblivion is better because the devs had much more time to develop it on the ps3 then they did with the xbox360s.great game none the less
They also have patches for X360 and you don't see X360 version becomes better after patching. Patch is released after PS3 version... patch = dev. time too isn't it?
Is due to hard disk caching more than anything... That's why Microsoft REALLY needs to drop the 360 Core SKU, drop the price on the 360 Premium, drop the price on the 20GB hard drives, and allow developers to REQUIRE the hard drive for their games..
I thought that was so goofy that ALL of the original Xbox'es had hard drives STOCK... But the 360 comes out with a model that doesn't have a hard drive, and devs are supposed to code their games as if the 360 DOESN'T have a hard drive...
Besides, $99.99 for a 20GB hard drive? Can you say GREED...
how fast the data is read off the disc. It also has to do with how fast the data is distributed into system ram/HDD and how fast the CPU can process all that data to set everything up.
so dj... i'm confused, typically you support the ps3 almost blindly, but with that statement you kinda say that the xbox 360 may beable to move data around its motherboard faster because it loads tony hawk faster... i'm not saying it does, i'm just a little confused by what you are arguing.
Ok, on average the 360 and PS3 have equal data transfer rates from their disc drives. For the 360 it varies between 16Mb/s and 4Mb/s(dual-layer DVD's read at half speed on their second layer). PS3 reads at a constant rate of around 9Mb/s. (approx numbers;correct me about the blu-ray speed if I'm wrong).
With that piece of hardware out of the way, next is system bandwidth, memory pool bandwidth, memory frequency, CPU, FSB, etc.
The final part is dealing with the software itself, processing the code, etc. If the code isn't built properly, expect very long load times. Tony Hawk Project 8 on the PS3 is crap; Call of Duty wasn't bad, but still had issues. You can almost always predict long vs. short load times based on how optimized/skillfully built the code is. Every function takes a certain amount of time to process, and if those functions aren't ordered properly (especially on In-Order Processors like Cell and Xenon) then all the other functions have to wait in line, even with multiple cores.
Play Jak 3, and you'll see for yourself that optimizing code helps combat load times and boosts in-game performance.
"because were talkin from a hardwear stand point and it seems like the ps3 is slower and to say its not fair is wrong because theres a reason ps3 didnt have a core ps3 is because blu-ray wouldnt make up for its speed, its obvious why sony didnt use a removeable HDD because of blu-ray."
How is it not fair? Your comparing different types of disk drives and different CPU architecture that are only similar by the end result. The point of having a removable HDD isn't to not have one its to beable to upgrade to a better one. Although Microsoft was kinda late to this.
We're to compare and argue about load times now? Like any of us has anything that important to do.
I grew up with a Commodore 64 tape deck which sometime would load unless you left the room. If you came back early and it wasn't finished it would sometimes crash and you had to start again. Load"*",8,1
As a consequence of my upbringing I have a sense of perspective about whats important and whats just garbage and because of that I've never complained about loading times in my life since I first got a floppy disk drive for that amazing computer.
PS The seek times swaping cars in Motorstorm are a little annoying but its a small price to pay for the fun that can be had driving said car.
PS3 will have it's first game with no load screens Ninja Gaiden Sigma. Xbox 360 won't have any games with no load times because the games are compressed to hell and the hdd is not standard.
ps3 loads fastest. ok there are games in which it take long, for example motorstrom, but the traces are gigantic in motorstrom. till a game like motorstorm does not exist on the xbox360 you cant draw conclusions.
I'd put my faith in the 360's loading times. Blu-Ray loads at 9mb/s and 360 loads at 16mb/s. When I played Motorstorm it was slow as hell for a next gen game, all 360 games I own load within seconds.
guys, you're taking about 2 different disk media, processor structures, disk formats and speed, devs know how, age of console, if it's full HD or not, any extra content that needs to be loaded, singal or multi format games/ ports. the drive on the ps3s slower BUT blu-rays bigger and holds more content, you can't judge loading times because you're not conparing two of the same types of media or drives.
Like initial load times are even really a significant factor in your gaming experience, considering there are more important things to worry about like graphics, gameplay, and in game system performance. As long as it doesnt take like 3 or more minutes, im cool, and this is coming from a 360 enthusiast. Funny though, Sony's systems always did take a little longer to load games
On the XBox 360 loads super fast considering they dont even NewfZ is a moronic dumbass he wouldnt know how fast the DVD on the XBox 360 for crap or the PS3 considering that some of the games on the XBox 360 are so slow and some of the games for PS3 are fast but of course the PS2 DVD's are much even faster than XBox 360 DVD's.
Does any XBoxer here have Fight Night? I'm curious to know how your loading times are.
I have the PS3 version, and as much as I absolutely adore the game itself, the loading times are nothing short of torture. I don't think I've ever played a slower-loading game.
I could swear I've felt rigor mortis creeping into my muscles, as I gaze numbly at the screen, drool running down my chin, while waiting endlessly for a fight to load up.
It's rather amusing that even though Sony boasts about the Blu-Ray drive and all that processing power; the Xbox 360 still comes out first? It's like the comparisons too- Xbox looks good as or better than the PS3!
blah blah blah, the proff is on the vid, if you dont like it, then phone up Sony and ask them to change the Blue Ray player to DVD :P lol only joking, but seriously Sony choose to use it, its not MS fault you cant admit the PS3 is slower at loading it.
You will even deny a video that shows you (FACT) and you spin it by trying to change the subject with Oblivion. You guys are pathetic what do you need Sony to show the comparison before you will believe it and even then I think you would call Sony a liar. LOL What next you going to argue the sky isn’t blue?
Slow loading times influence the way graphics are drawn on the screen. The slower the speed the longer it takes to load images. And yes it does effect gameplay, if your system can’t draw the screen fast enough you have framerate hiccups and that makes games frustrating to play.
Truth like this is the reason Sony d!cks attack your bubbles, they just cant face reality anymore and they live in a fantasy world where they believe everything Sony says even the lies. Don’t worry The Mart 11million of us have seen the light and have opened up our windows to let the spring air in and that sweet fresh air smells like the 360, where gaming comes first and movies come second.
how many of those American made products that you're buying have components made in China, Japan, <insert random 3rd/2nd/developed world country here>.
All PS3 owners are stupid because they wasted their money with a system that is not proven and has failed in so many areas. PS3 owners should have waited to see what is gonna come up. Instead they settled with a crap system that doesnt have good games...won't have a good online experience... no force feedback... BLU-RAY is pretty useless right now.... Can't play all PS2 games... and IS FAT... cost 600 fat bucks of your mommy's wallet.... Exclusives are going to the 360... developers have a difficult time figuring out the PS3.... No HDMI cable included and its $600... no achievments or anything to prove how well you kill a game.....
and a cherry on the top: Final Fantasy and MGS4 is comming to the 360..fact or fiction.... it is possible..especially with an install base of 10+ million
anyways. I'm A 360 fan all the way. so you guys can eat what I just said.
On AVERAGE the 360 and PS3 have EQUAL data transfer rates from their respective disc drives. For the 360 it varies between 16Mb/s and 4Mb/s depending on which part of the disc is being read (dual-layer DVD's read at half speed on their second layer). PS3 reads at a constant rate of around 8 or 9Mb/s. (approx numbers;correct me about the blu-ray speed if I'm wrong).
With that piece of hardware out of the way, next is system bandwidth, memory pool bandwidth, memory frequency, CPU, FSB, etc.
The final part is dealing with the software itself, processing the code, etc. If the code isn't built properly, expect very long load times. You could have the best damn processor in the world, but if the code isn't built right, you're f*cked. Tony Hawk Project 8 on the PS3 is crap; Call of Duty wasn't bad, but still had prominent issues. Even Oblivion on the 360 has long load times. You can usually predict long vs. short load times based on how optimized/skillfully built the code is. Every function takes a certain amount of time to process, and if those functions aren't ordered properly (especially on In-Order Processors like Cell and Xenon) then all the other functions have to wait in line, even with multiple cores.
Play Jak 3 and you'll see for yourself that optimizing code helps combat load times and boosts in-game performance. Honestly, I see no reason to compare load times between consoles other than to say "Mine is Better Than Your's!". Instead, compare it to other games on that platform. Load times + Game Performance are dependent on so many factors (including software) that it's hard to pinpoint what's more responsible for that performance. The hardware? The software? Whether you put it on felt vs. carpet? Who gives a sh*t.
----------------------------- ----- Dealing with OldSchoolGamer: "Assuming the Blu-ray is constantly reading as fast as possible.."
Ok. First off, you already showed how incredibly misinformed you are with that statement, so I'm not going to bother discrediting the rest of your post. That statement only applies to DVD, which has a variable data rate; Blu-ray on the other hand reads at a constant speed. It never drops, nor rises above that speed.
How much more do you PS3 fans need before you just say... 'o.k. you win' I mean it's not even a game but really what has the PS3 delivered that it said it would? Thats right Blu-Ray... a format that is only around as another hurdle for movie piraters, I mean really no one needs Blu-ray or HD-DVD for that matter. The 360 may not be the beast of power that the PS3 is but it has games that work, an online sytem that you don't have to vitualy walk through (I have a feeling that will get old fast, but time will tell on that one), it has games, and one more thing... what was it... ummm oh ya the price! I know you guys are mad that you spent all that money and now you trying to justify it but there comes a point where you say ok lets just put this away in the closet with my PSP to gather dust!
Which means faster load times all other things being equal.
Blu-ray 1x: 4.5MBps 12x DVD: 8.2 - 16.5MBps
Blu-ray 2x: 8MBps 12x DVD: 8.2 - 16.5MBps
Assuming the Blu-ray is constantly reading as fast as possible this means the PS3 (which is a 2x Blu-ray player) will read 8 Mbps perfect world scenario, while the 12x DVD in the 360 would worst case scenario drop to 8.2 on certain parts of a double density disk. Utilizing better code or the HDD may speed up a load screen, but as for getting data from a disk source the blu-ray is a little slower.
The Playstation 3 load times are faster and if you disagree you are obviously a Xbox fanboy,just look at oblivion!
Good stuff "ASSASSYN 36o" keep it up!
i found motorstorm takes ages to load, especially when trying to select a car it takes a long time for the image to show up on screen befor you can select the next one
also its painfull waiting for RFOM to load
at the end of the day it doesnt matter because with time developers learn how to make games load faster, like oblivion on ps3 doubleing the data so the blue ray can load it quicker, if they didnt do that it would have loaded slower then the 360 version
Yea... I also saw a home video like this one of Gears running on a PS3 !
This is uncredible crap. lol sorry buddy
Blu-Ray takes longer to read the disc and you can install games on the PS3 and you will have faster load times.
Xbox 360 has a faster reading capability and the better compression allows more information to be moved at once. You cannot install games onto the Xbox 360 to make the load times faster.
They are unfair comparisons because of the way you can separately setup each of them and they use a different type of disk drives and both reads the information differently.
The ps3 does have a hardware disadvantage in slower maximum read speed (although it does have faster minimum read speed), but it also has an advantage in harddrive caching.
Besides hardware, there is also a software aspect to which one loads faster, so that needs to also be taken into account. Since THPS8 for the ps3 is basically a port of the 360, it has an immediate disadvantage. Unfortunately, many upcoming games for the ps3 are also mere ports, but ones like Oblivion that are much more adapted to the ps3 hardware do show comparable loading times to their respective 360 versions.