• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Xbox 360 vs. PS3, aka "these dicks haven't still been measured enough, must continue still"

blly155

Member
Aug 3, 2014
9,763
1,378
520
i still have a 360 in the cupboard. only keeping it so i can go back to Red Dead Redemption.

if i ever get a newer xbox i'll get rid of it but don't think i will be buying an xbox any time soon :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Jun 9, 2012
3,864
1,589
760
I just miss crazy Ken Kutaragi saying whatever crazy bullshit popped into his head at the time.

I remember him talking about how you could “age” your DVD movies on PS3. You’d be able to copy them to the HDD, and Cell would upconvert them to HD offline. The longer you aged them the better they’d look.

There was also a quote along the lines of “who told you PlayStation 3 was a game console? You didn’t hear that from us. It’s not a game console, it’s a home entertainment SUPERCOMPUTER.”
 

Negotiator

Member
Jun 28, 2011
3,942
562
680
I remember him talking about how you could “age” your DVD movies on PS3. You’d be able to copy them to the HDD, and Cell would upconvert them to HD offline. The longer you aged them the better they’d look.
Crazy Ken endorsed piracy? LOL!
 

zcaa0g

Member
Sep 3, 2018
259
345
250
For me, same story as ps4 and xbox one. A handful of very good titles on playstation that are one and done, but several hundreds of good titles on xbox that i play more of.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: Bolivar687

Graciaus

Member
Nov 17, 2014
695
326
355
The 360 was a much better system. It just stopped having good exclusives while the Ps3 kept going toward the end of its life. It was cheaper, had better features and halo dominated ever other game. Rrod was unfortunete but ps3 had issues too. Timed exclusives are lame but they had them along with solid exclusive ips.
 

01011001

Member
Dec 4, 2018
157
156
230
the 360 was so much better, better controller, better hardware, better OS features (custom music that automatically mutes in-game music, OS wide party chat/party feature, manual full installs to speed up loading etc.) and almost every multiplatform game runs better on it...

the PS3 has a handful of good exclusives but that's literally the only reason to own one... it was my secondary system because doing anything on it aside from playing offline mp or singleplayer was just absolutely awful
 
Jun 9, 2012
3,864
1,589
760
Early Xbox 360 was a golden age of gaming for me. Sooooo many cool, exclusive new games I couldn’t even keep up with them. Just to name a few:
- Kameo
- Chrome Hounds
- Full Auto
- Elder Scrolls: Oblivion
- Condemned
- Perfect Dark 0
- Blue Dragon
- Lost Odyssey
- Tales of Vesperia
- Fight Night Round 2
- Star Ocean 4
- Mass Effect

Not all of them were great, but they were certainly all interesting and felt very fresh. 360’s launch window just totally put PS3’s to shame.

That seems like such a different time. Big publishers were still taking risks and trying new things. It was before the influx of all the big AAA franchises with their highly polished (but boring) gameplay, microtransactions, preorder bonuses, etc.
 

Rubberwald

Neo Member
Feb 18, 2019
43
24
110
Didn't get to play games all that much during the last gen, but I had both systems and 360 was definitely turned on a hell of a lot more often. PS3 was my first Blu player and I played Uncharted games/Last of Us on it, but that's about it. Good thing I managed to sell it for a pretty good price.
 

R600

Member
Jun 17, 2019
342
212
195
360 was better at :

Multiplats
Early exclusives (seriously, so many amazing games in first 3yrs)
OS
Online
Controller

PS3 was better :

Exclusives (especially later in gen)
Multimedia
Blu Ray + HDD just seemed as more thought out sys for 10 yrs

In the end, old MS Xbox team did bulk of good job (system design, early exclusives, games at center) while new team (Don Mattrick and team) brought kinect and muddied message that resulted in terrible system - Xbox One and accountant type of look at the gaming that lost all the good will 360 brought them. Such a terrible terrible team back in 2013...no idea how to run gaming dept.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Member
Mar 19, 2013
24,294
3,468
800
37
Brazil
PS3 was hard to use and more powerful than 360.

While the game library were more pro 360 at beginning (maybe due 1 year headstart) PS3 did catch in the middle and ended the clearly winner with more diversity and quantity of game offered to games.

360 mid to end of gen was an abomination showing the complete lack of interest of MS with the console.... similar situation is happening with Xbox One that didn’t see a game in years unless you count Crackdown 3 failure.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Member
Mar 19, 2013
24,294
3,468
800
37
Brazil
PS3 was a technical abomination.

It will never be emulated and it's exclusive games will be forever lost in the cell processor hell.
A lot games are already emulated in playable state... there is a lot of work yet but with new processors brute force will make things easier.
 

StarlightLotice

Gold Member
Dec 25, 2018
1,060
740
505
Manchester, England
I loved the 360's online and community news feed they provided when Blades was the OS (love the Blade layout ).

After NXE it felt like they started to not care and focused purely on Halo/Gears/Forza combo which diesn't interest me.

Xbox 1 looks to implement Skype and Windows 10 Apps which bothers me as I had a Windows Phone years ago and it...wasn't great and locked my pictures behind Onedrive which made me very angry and has made me hate Windows 10 now.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Panajev2001a
Mar 8, 2018
631
630
345
I just miss crazy Ken Kutaragi saying whatever crazy bullshit popped into his head at the time.

I remember him talking about how you could “age” your DVD movies on PS3. You’d be able to copy them to the HDD, and Cell would upconvert them to HD offline. The longer you aged them the better they’d look.

There was also a quote along the lines of “who told you PlayStation 3 was a game console? You didn’t hear that from us. It’s not a game console, it’s a home entertainment SUPERCOMPUTER.”
How did they get away with this ?
 
Jun 9, 2012
3,864
1,589
760
How did they get away with this ?
They didn’t. Sony was trying to have PS3 categorized as a computer rather than a game console so they’d have to pay a lower VAT tax in EU. It didn’t work. EDIT - or maybe not, see post 24

As far as the term “supercomputer”, It doesn’t really have a precise definition. But they did deservedly get a lot of shit for calling PS3 that.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Godzilla Emu

Negotiator

Member
Jun 28, 2011
3,942
562
680
I mean, it's like partially true, chain a ton of them together and you get a decent and cost-effective number cruncher: https://phys.org/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html

In itself, a supercomputer it is not, granted.
Cell as a chip is a (die) shrunk/condensed supercomputer from the 90s:


What Kutaragi wanted to do with Cell is what MS is trying to do with Azure Cloud right now:



Remember how Phil recently said that he wants Xbox Live gamers to connect to his own personal XBOX console via p2p xCloud and be able to play games?

Kutaragi was a visionary way ahead of his time, there's no question about that.

Too bad ARM SoCs (with energy-efficient, fixed-function video ASICs) and GPGPUs compromised his vision, and thus rendered Cell obsolete.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Panajev2001a

Negotiator

Member
Jun 28, 2011
3,942
562
680
They didn’t. Sony was trying to have PS3 categorized as a computer rather than a game console so they’d have to pay a lower VAT tax in EU. It didn’t work.
This is an urban myth most likely, since computer parts in EU have always had the full fat VAT tax.

Other stuff (like food/medicine) have a reduced rate.
 
Last edited:
Jun 9, 2012
3,864
1,589
760
This an urban myth most likely, since computer parts in EU have always had the full fat VAT tax.

Other stuff (like food/medicine) have a reduced rate.
Hmm yeah that may be wrong, I couldn’t find any articles about it. This was the explanation that had been going around the internet at the time.

I mean, it's like partially true, chain a ton of them together and you get a decent and cost-effective number cruncher: https://phys.org/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html

In itself, a supercomputer it is not, granted.
I mean, a bunch of any kind of computers networked together, with some mechanism for managing a workload among them, could be considered a supercomputer.

They also had this vision for Cell that they’d network with each other and distribute the workload among them. So if you had multiple Cell devices on your home network (remember they intended to use Cell in all their consumer electronics), they could essentially dispatch jobs to SPEs on other Cells.
 
Last edited:
Jun 9, 2012
3,864
1,589
760
BTW I wish I could find the Nicholas Blackford article about Cell CPU.

It was one of the earliest hype pieces that detailed how Cell worked, and it was absolutely astounding the amount of exaggeration and outright bullshit it contained. Like, talk of how x86 compatibility isn’t an issue because it’d be able to emulate x86 at greater than native speed.

That was one of the articles that helped hype PS3 to ridiculous levels.
 

CJY

Member
Jan 8, 2016
1,052
747
430
So... just popping in here to see if we've found out who has the biggest dick yet?

No? OK, carry on.
 

hunthunt

Member
Mar 22, 2019
110
135
220
Even as a Sony fan I have to say that the 360, technical issues aside, was a fantastic and well thought system with a period of 3 years were itlooked easily the best choose. Sony turned it around tough and the PlayStation3 ended being the best systemall around with better first party support and features.
 

Aintitcool

Member
Sep 3, 2017
950
615
550
Vienna, Austria
PS3 was like xbox one x at launch. Hardrive, hdmi, 3d, bluray.

All necessary console requirements that gen sony had since launch.

The mistake was not investment in tools for cell and devs to ease developers.

Also supposedly ps3 dev kits were expensive and exotic while Microsoft used modified mac desktop powerpc‘s.

Meaning devs were on 360 dev kits almost all multi platform titles.
 
Mar 8, 2018
631
630
345
PS3 was like xbox one x at launch. Hardrive, hdmi, 3d, bluray.

All necessary console requirements that gen sony had since launch.

The mistake was not investment in tools for cell and devs to ease developers.

Also supposedly ps3 dev kits were expensive and exotic while Microsoft used modified mac desktop powerpc‘s.

Meaning devs were on 360 dev kits almost all multi platform titles.
Unlike PS3, games actually looked better on Xbox One X. Xbox 360 had double RAM and a better GPU, anything that looked better on PS3 was because it was designed for PS3 and was very difficult to port.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godzilla Emu

A.Romero

Member
Feb 23, 2009
2,100
781
970
Mexico
www.lavejota.com
I got the PS3 day one. Didn't disappoint most likely due to not having money to buy games.

I enjoyed way more towards the end of the gen when there were games to buy and had some money.

It gave me a pretty competent blu-ray player and games like MGS4 and Uncharted.
 

pawel86ck

Member
Jan 27, 2018
573
511
310
Cell gave compute capabilities (think of CUDA) to a non-compute GeForce 7-based GPU.

Some people argue that the combination of Cell + RSX was equivalent to a GeForce 8 GPGPU.

Judging by games like Uncharted 2/3, TLOU1, GoW Ascension, Heavy Rain, Beyond Two Souls, I'd say that's a fair assessment.

There's no way they could port this to XBOX 360:


If someone is going to argue against Christophe Balestra, then he should read his resume first:


100% SPU utilization (around 150 Gflops for 6 SPUs). Uncharted 3 utilized the entire BD-ROM capacity (46GB) due to having 2D + 3D cutscenes.

Xenos did not support compute shaders, despite having unified shaders. It was something between DX9 and DX10.
8800 seriers card? The thing is, I bought PS3 and Quad 3GHz + 8800Ultra the same month and untill I bought GTX 680 many years later all multiplatform games run much better on my PC (60fps instead of 30fps, and 1680x1050 resolution instead of subhd or 720p, not to mention higher details settings). Crysis 1 on my PC run only at 30fps and direct 9 very high details tweak (game looked almost as good as dx10 details but run better) but looked like PS4 game. I will never believe CELL + RSX could match my 8800Ultra, but maybe some cheaper 8800gts variant.

PS3 GPU was much slower compared to X360 GPU, and untill developers started using CELL to offload PS3 GPU the majority of multiplatform games run at higher resolution and better performance even compared to X360 (for example GTA4). However when developers started using CELL+RSX combination then PS3 had no problems matching X360 results (for example GTA5). You suggest CELL+RSX combination could not only close the 30% performance gap but even outperform X360. Maybe that's indeed true, but looking at PS3 exclusive games I really cant see nothing that couldnt be done on X360. I still have my all PS3 games (the best looking games like heavenly sword, uncharted 1-3, god of war 3 + ascension, killzone 2-3, motorstorm, TLOU included) and IMHO x360 Gears Of War 3 easily matched the best exclusive games PS3 had to offer (the same forza 4 vs gran turismo 6)

In 2006 GPU technology was advancing very fast unlike these days (after every 12 months we had another GPU generation) and you would think PS3 GPU should crush x360 that launched year earlier (like XBOX OG crushed PS2) but in reality x360 was still holding strong. What MS and ATI engineers have done was really impressive although they have rushed their console a little because x360 hardware clearly wasnt tested they way ut should (ROD). If only Nv would use their 8xxx series technology in PS3 things would look different, 8800gts + Cell would offer insane results, RSX (7600/7800 mix) was a big bottleneck in PS3.
 

Negotiator

Member
Jun 28, 2011
3,942
562
680
8800 seriers card? The thing is, I bought PS3 and Quad 3GHz + 8800Ultra the same month and untill I bought GTX 680 many years later all multiplatform games run much better on my PC (60fps instead of 30fps, and 1680x1050 resolution instead of subhd or 720p, not to mention higher details settings). Crysis 1 on my PC run only at 30fps and direct 9 very high details tweak (game looked almost as good as dx10 details but run better) but looked like PS4 game. I will never believe CELL + RSX could match my 8800Ultra, but maybe some cheaper 8800gts variant.

PS3 GPU was much slower compared to X360 GPU, and untill developers started using CELL to offload PS3 GPU the majority of multiplatform games run at higher resolution and better performance even compared to X360 (for example GTA4). However when developers started using CELL+RSX combination then PS3 had no problems matching X360 results (for example GTA5). You suggest CELL+RSX combination could not only close the 30% performance gap but even outperform X360. Maybe that's indeed true, but looking at PS3 exclusive games I really cant see nothing that couldnt be done on X360. I still have my all PS3 games (the best looking games like heavenly sword, uncharted 1-3, god of war 3 + ascension, killzone 2-3, motorstorm, TLOU included) and IMHO x360 Gears Of War 3 easily matched the best exclusive games PS3 had to offer (the same forza 4 vs gran turismo 6)

In 2006 GPU technology was advancing very fast unlike these days (after every 12 months we had another GPU generation) and you would think PS3 GPU should crush x360 that launched year earlier (like XBOX OG crushed PS2) but in reality x360 was still holding strong. What MS and ATI engineers have done was really impressive although they have rushed their console a little because x360 hardware clearly wasnt tested they way ut should (ROD). If only Nv would use their 8xxx series technology in PS3 things would look different, 8800gts + Cell would offer insane results, RSX (7600/7800 mix) was a big bottleneck in PS3.
You're missing the point.

If games like Uncharted 2/3 or TLOU1 were ever ported to PC, GeForce 7 wouldn't suffice. You would need a GeForce 8 minimum to offload SPU code to a CUDA-enabled GPGPU or a very SIMD-heavy x86 CPU (which did not exist at the time, so CUDA it is).

Can we agree on this?
 

Dee Dah Dave

Member
Nov 24, 2013
5,605
800
485
England, UK
PS3 is just a waste of everyone’s time - Gabe Newell

There were a few games on it which were a bit better looking than the best 360 games, but not by much. Also they were typically the restricted cinematic heavily scripted type stuff. It’s not hard to push graphics when you are essentially watching a bunch of cutscenes.

Also lol at the controller and online service. Garbage console and the worst I ever owned probably.
 

Riven326

Member
Mar 25, 2019
806
745
310
United States
Oh, I can end this once and for all. You'll all just have to recognize my greatness. Anyway. Here we go...

Xbox 360 kills PS3. Far superior in everyway except the blu ray player. Had better graphics, was a whole lot cheaper, was easier to use, better controller, better for online gaming, and so on. There was the RROD, which is really the only true blemish on an otherwise spectacular generation for the Xbox brand.

Well I'm glad that's settled.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Godzilla Emu

Negotiator

Member
Jun 28, 2011
3,942
562
680
Gotta love it when XBOX fans dismiss Sony exclusives with the pretense of being too "cinematic & scripted" (spoiler alert for non-tech folks: everything is scripted in programming) and yet, games like Halo, Gears, Quantum Break, Ryse follow the exact same AAA route (nothing wrong with that, just pointing out the hypocrisy :)).
 

Negotiator

Member
Jun 28, 2011
3,942
562
680
Gabe Newell embodies everything that's wrong with the PCMR-centric mindset (brute-forcing problems, disdain for new programming models). I'd argue the same about Durante, despite his mod contributions.

I know for a fact that programmers who loved and thrived on exotic architectures (whether it's Amiga or PS2 EE VUs or PS3 Cell SPUs) were also able to write amazing code on current-gen consoles.

Is that a coincidence, or is it perhaps a different type of mindset/school of thought (dating back to the Demoscene era)?
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: SonGoku

pawel86ck

Member
Jan 27, 2018
573
511
310
You're missing the point.

If games like Uncharted 2/3 or TLOU1 were ever ported to PC, GeForce 7 wouldn't suffice. You would need a GeForce 8 minimum to offload SPU code to a CUDA-enabled GPGPU or a very SIMD-heavy x86 CPU (which did not exist at the time, so CUDA it is).

Can we agree on this?
Geforce 7 wouldn't suffice for sure, so we can agree on that. Even GTA5 (and that was multiplatform game) wouldn't run on 8800 GTX / Ultra
 
  • Like
Reactions: Negotiator

Negotiator

Member
Jun 28, 2011
3,942
562
680
Geforce 7 wouldn't suffice for sure, so we can agree on that. Even GTA5 (and that was multiplatform game) wouldn't run on 8800 GTX / Ultra
Hmmm, interesting. Worse framerate than a PS3?

I guess the high vs low-level API also makes things even worse... AAA games on PS3 used libGCM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pawel86ck