Thread: Which console has better graphics?

Many people say that graphics of ps3 are better than xbox 360 but i found that both the consoles had almost similar graphics for games like NFS. The noticeable difference is that Xbox 360 has better lighting while the PS3 has sharper textures. So, we cant say that one is better than other in terms of graphics.
What are your thoughts?

The fact is PS3 is loads powerful, and when NFS pro street was out it wasn't even trying to juice out its capabilities. Play a game like Assasin's creed or any newer games on PS3 and you would know what I say.

Yes you can see the actual capabilities of ps3 with some other games. Ps3 has far better hardware than an xbox 360 which can be seen in the graphics quality of ps3.

Yes the ps3 has hands downs the best graphics. The only issue is that most of the games that are being created don't fully utilize the systems capabilities.

In my opinion, Xbox 360 has slightly better graphics, with the processor dedicating 490 MB
to graphics alone, while PS3 only dedicates 256 MB between it's cores which means that in order to fully utilize the graphics possibilites, a game would have to utilize all of the PS3's core's, but none of the games for PS3 actually use all those cores because that would simply be far too hard to program for.

The original XBox definitely has the best graphics! Duh! Remember that just because there is a bunch of cool effects, and the screen looks a lot better, doesn't mean that the graphics are cooler. And who gave you permission to say which game system has the best graphics???SCARED YA!!!SCARED YOU OUT OF YOUR SOCKS!!!

So, how are you today?

PS3 has better graphics. Playstations always have had superior graphics.

But don't worry, Xbox has great liive (even if I don't favor xbox) and, if Nintendo ever tosses the Wii, it'll once more have the best gameplay (worst graphics). XD

PS3 has the potential for better graphics than the 360 but it's a very difficult system to program for and most developers aren't willing to take the time and effort with the console lacking in the sales area. Then there's the high price of developing such titles and having it exclusive to PS3 is a bit of a death sentence at the moment, thus they have to have a 360 version too. PS3 also managed to bottleneck itself with the RAM situation. I'd love to see the full potential of the console though. Games like Uncharted look amazing and Killzone 2 looks insane already.

Originally Posted by Comeaudodragon

In my opinion, Xbox 360 has slightly better graphics, with the processor dedicating 490 MB
to graphics alone, while PS3 only dedicates 256 MB between it's cores which means that in order to fully utilize the graphics possibilites, a game would have to utilize all of the PS3's core's, but none of the games for PS3 actually use all those cores because that would simply be far too hard to program for.

wut?

Despite the steady hiss of internet pundits that suggests otherwise, Ubisoft's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter development team doesn't believe that it's harder to code games for the PlayStation 3 compared to the Xbox 360.

sourceGRAW developer: PS3 not harder to code for than 360 - Joystiq

Sony’s Scott Steinberg has commented that developers are now waking up to the idea of creating their games on the PS3 primarily first, then porting them down to the Xbox 360 as the game will look better this way. He also indicated that the Xbox 360 has failed to go beyond its core audience of FPS fans, just like the original Xbox.

fromplay.tm

and if your talkin bout grafix xbox360 uses Custom ATI Processor, at 500 MHz
and PS3 uses a Custom NVidia Processor called RSX “Reality Synthesizer”, at 550 MHz so your #s are slightly off. please stop this missinformation.

plus the PS3 uses the Cell Processor with 7 SPEs, at 3.2 GHz, xbox Custom IBM PowerPC CPU with 3 symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz, they dif. is with the ps3 its spread out to 7 SPEs so if the dev. would use those the right way all those games would be better on PS3