Nope, I usually just refer to it as the gpu, but I figured I'd spell it out in case that acronym wasn't familiar. I'm a 360/PS3 programmer by trade, focusing on graphics and optimization. It's fairly rare that I post, but I just got off a long crunch and have been browsing the forums more than normal to unwind Incidentally most of that crunch was spent trying to get the PS3 to match the 360's frame rate. It falls short, but it hits 30fps so we're ok.
The Gran Turismo image posted above is a good shot, but its a testament to the talent of the dev crew, not just the hardware. Vertex/pixel shaders are written in HLSL and can be compiled to run on either PS3/360 although you can tweak them to suit the console. I guess my point here is that if you take that same vehicle 3d model and those same shaders that make it look all pretty, and compile/run them on the 360, it will look the same and run at a higher framerate than on the PS3. This is because the PS3's gpu isn't as good as the 360's.
I reread my other post on a different thread, hopefully it didn't come off too negative. Just to be clear, 'isn't as good' is all relative. The PS3's gpu is far better than the typical 6 series geforce found in peoples pc's. It's just that in this round, Microsoft chose better on the video side (cpu side is debatable). Likewise just to be clear, I don't favor Microsoft or Sony as far as companies go, having either be a landslide winner would be bad for us all. Fortunately it's expected that they will have similar market share in this generation which should lead to awesome competition Anisotropic filtering wouldn't help much in that shot of the car, its big benefit is when the camera is looking at geometry at shallow angles. Anti aliasing helps, except that the PS3 can't do anti aliasing with a floating point render buffer (360 can), which limits things somewhat.
Still though, assuming basic bilinear filtering and no antialising, the 360 will still run it faster.
