digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

PlayStation 3 vs Xbox360 Head to Head Comparison

ps3.ign.com — So the next-generation of console gaming is going to be damn impressive. We've seen PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 in action and we are enormously impressed. We've seen games, we've seen specs and we've shared our thoughts. But which titan will win the day? Looks like the PS3.

Who dugg this? Made popular May 17, 2005

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

41 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • b04155, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Imagine3 - dunno if this counters / answers your comment... but doesn't the ps3 have 6 usb 2 connections...
  • eric_n_dfw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They could switch to wireless USB if they wanted to - it's still a year off.
  • Mike.Dunn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Either way, its going to be a bad ass gaming experience.
  • Bostonsox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I love console battles. Everytime they come around they are great.
  • gmg76, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Im a Xbox fan-boy but PS3 dual screen mode is true innovation.. Unless Im missing something.
    How many times did you wish you could play halo ect. with one Xbox and multiple screens.
  • Imagine3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have to say, although PS3 has more raw processing power, I think they made a fatal mistake. If you notice they included Bluetooth. The problem with this is in the next 6 months Wireless USB will be rolling out and will kill Bluetooth. Bluetooth is a great concept but the actual functionability of it is awful. There are so many problems with it, I think it will lead to the eventual win of Microsoft.
  • eric_n_dfw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Also, I wonder if it's the newer Bluetooth 2.x standard. Which is supposed to be much faster/better.
  • wormdrink, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Okay, but I am still wanting to know. Who "won" the last battle?
  • MaskedMagi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Now, I'll be the first to admit that I know pretty much fek all about technical specifications. Now, I was dissapointed with the 360 after seeing the graphics, and then watching the killzone video... so much so, that I actually wanted a ps3!! This is most probably due to the fact that I'm one of those people that are extremely influenced by hype and cool adverts with good music flashing lights, shiny buttons e.t.c.... However, I've been doing a couple of hours research, after which my faith in the 360 is restored, and there is now now doubt that I'm going to be getting an xbox 360....

    1.) First things first. Killzone. We've all seen it, we were all amazed, it made us WANT a PS3. However, prior to contrary belief, it seems VERY likely that Killzone WAS NOT in game graphics. Now, I'm not going to go into that now, as ittl take a while, but CHECK OUT this article, where the reliability of SOny and the killzone demo is seriously questioned.... IGN.com - reliable

    http://ps3.ign.com/articles/616/616591p1.html

    2.) PS3 is more powerful. Thats another thing thats got us all excited, me included. But then I stumbled across a site, with people that work in the computer industry and actually know what there saying. totally neutral, not fanboys. When it boils down to it the ps3 isnt as powerfull as sony make it out. They gave us a lot of numbers.. numbers i dont even understand, but once you look closely its a whole different story. Now, like I said before, I dont know ***** about chips processor power e.t.c. but there are guys that do.. like this post i found

    Hmm, Sony up to the same old BS as usual. As to my knowledge, the xbox 360 has a four fold advantage over the PS3 in regard to raw processing power. The Sony unit (CELL) has a tested output of somewhere in the area of 200-250Gflop. Now architectural differences aside (We'll get to that later), the tri-coreIBM PowerPC processor in the 360 can perform well over a Tflop (emphasis on "well over"). Some claim it to run closer in the range of about 1.2Tflop (Unconfirmed). I saw the whole presentation for the PS3, and I felt that deja vu all over again. Sony claims that it's graphics core adds on an additional 1.8Tflop of processing power for a total of 2Tflop. ??? ... ??? ... ??? . WOW! And I thought with the release of the PSP that Sony was finally ready to step up to the big boys' table... I was wrong. The absurdity of their claims can't even be measured, as a graphics core has nothing to do with the systems CPU. To put it simply, SCEI is lying, again. And simply is trying to their way out of another technology spoof (and miserably failing). Cell is no where close to the power of microsoft's processing solution, and just as last time when they claimed that their "emotional engine" was on top, it ended up about 1/10 as fast as the marketed number. This isn't to say that the PS3 is inferior to the XBOX 360, only that we have seen this before and obviously microsoft came out on top. As far as developing goes and coding, this system looks even more rediculous than the emotion CPU. Many argue that the PS2 was more powerful than the xbox when people learned how to use it, but to be honest no one (except maybe bungie) ever dug that deep into the XBOX's power. My guess from the lineup of 3rd parties this time around (a vast majority of Sony's staples hoping on the XBOX360 bandwagon) that sony has finally run out of marketing tactics to appease the consumers, and with development costs skyrocketing, I think developers will put more consideration into what system they decide to base their games. But this is really just fuzz right now. Most consumers are terribly educated and will usually just listen to whatever the cool crowd says. Last gen, Sony had overwhelming support from pop culture, which made playstation into the cliche that took out nintendo. I think already with microsoft's MTV marketing campaign and sleek design (not to mention billions of dollars) that they will push sony out of the market. But this all remains to be seen. One thing is for damn sure. CELL is no where near as powerful as the 360CPU. It's almost unethical to compare them.

    Now i only really got the gist of the above post, but im sure some of u guys will understand it better than me. for more info on stuff like the above post the link to the topic is

    http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=28&threadid=1591054&enterthread=y


    3.) did i mention XBOX LIVE? I wathched the whole 360 1hr 21 min convention, and live looked UN ***** BELEIVABLE. Sony have got ***** on M$ regarding online gaming.. ps2 online, I think well all agree was nothing compared to XBOX LIVE. Sony have not yet mentioned anything, but they most probably do have plans for a live service. At the moment, I'm not ruling out ps3 live, I'm just saying that Microsoft will almost 100% probably produce a far better online experience, as they been doing it longer, and have perfected it.

    Overall I think 360 is more a more flexible machine, not only a fantastic console, but a great device for connectivity, multimedia, personalisation, and of course FUN Very

    Now, no doubt you lot are gonna post back saying ure a gay fanboy who doesnt know wat the fuk hes saying. Im guilty of the latter but not the former. Basically, Im trying to give links to posts that guys that do understand this technical stuff more than me, so they can put it into terms that even dumbasses like me will understsnd.

    Cheers
    Magi

  • SilverSurfR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Microsoft has always known the PS3 will be a more powerful machine in terms of raw power. It's usually what happens when you are the first to release a new console. The purpose of the Xbox was to put their name out there and show they have what it takes to make a great console, not only did they achieve that, they built a robust online gaming service. I haven't tried Sony's Online, but I've heard it's not as good as Live. So what about blu-ray? I haven't seen a blu-ray drive on the market, or media. How is this going to effect the cost of the PS3? I'm guessing Sony is going to take quite a loss to get this drive in their systems and out the door. Dual screen output? How many of you have 2 TV's close to one another? Or one decent enough to move around an play games on.(I do agree it is an innovation). Live is going to have a free version, and it will be free for everyone on weekends too. It's going to be hard to tell, but I think MS might just come out on top this time around.
  • cadis12, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Are the mod-chips in development too?
  • pantstuff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The PS3 is obviously more powerfull, but i wouldn't be supprised to see at least a 500$ price tag.
  • pixelbend, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1One question: Why in gods name does a console need a Gigabit Ethernet connection?
  • PoorYorick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As to who has won the last round of console wars, I think it's safe to say PS2 did. There are three main markets for video game sales: Asia, North America, and Europe. In terms of installed base--the number of consoles out there being used--PS2 has bigger numbers in all three markets. However, Xbox started from a full stop at a distant third while PS2 was building on the strength of the PlayStation. Xbox has since soundly defeated GameCube, first in Europe and then in North America. In the last year, it has outsold the PS2 in North America. Considering Microsoft's early release for Xbox 360 and Sony's recent hardware delays (HDD), Xbox 360 has the edge in this round...at least for North America and Europe. The real wildcard is Nintendo...I think it's a matter of time before they transform themselves into an EA-type third-party publisher.
  • avaugha4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0whoa- live is going to be free?
    i wont have time to play the ps3 now...

    screw that!
    hahaha
  • avaugha4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0first- published stas are BS
    neither console came anywhere close to their published stats.
    second- am i wrong or didint the ps2 have better on paper stats then the xbox?

    now, i love my xbox, but the PS3 is looking just as good to me as the xbox 360 right now. anyone know if the ps3 will have system link type functionality?

    also- HD resolution is optional as an output on the xbox360, but all games are required to run at them. does ps3 at 1080 standard on the ps3 mean i need an HDtv?

    im actually going to start saving... and buy both of them as soon as they come out.... and an HDtv.... oh mann soooo much money...
  • Lumiras, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0After watching videos of both consoles, I cannot even imagine that the Xbox 360 would even be considered a next-gen console. On the other hand, after seeing videos of games like Killing Day and the FFVII tech demo, the PS3 is the future
  • Freak4Dell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Based on hardware, the XBox beat out the PS2. Based on games, the PS2 beat out the XBox. The thing about XBox, though, is that although the quantity of games is low, the games they do have are very good games. PS2 has a lot of games, but a lot of them suck.

    I think based on hardware, the PS3 is better than the XBox 360. However, the PS3 is now almost as big as an original XBox, and the controller looks like a piece of crap. Microsoft improved on the features that they lacked in the first XBox, and they didn't worry so much about the power. Who really needs all that power anyway? I think both systems will be amazing, but I think I would rather have the XBox 360, just because the PS2 was highly overrated, and I'm assuming that the PS3 will also be overrated. Also, if the PS3 does use blue-ray, I think that's going to be hard for Sony to promote. The market for blue-ray is just not big enough, so the disks would probably be extremely expensive. I do hate the name of the XBox 360, though. I think the XBox 2 would have been way better.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't really care that much about the hardware, show me the games.
  • The_Sheriff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I also read that the code base for xbox 360 games will be direct x based, meaning porting games from console to PC will be almost seemless.
  • brucebeh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"whoa- live is going to be free?
    i wont have time to play the ps3 now..."

    buddy.. its free, but no online/multiplayer play.

    and the ps2 started off with a $500 price as well.. so.
  • jedi55555, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I am alway weary of these "tech demos" with new systems, they hardly ever measure up to what the systems games will look like(were we not promised Toy Story looking games 8 years ago?). The one thing I liked about the Xbox 360 was that not all of the games they were showing off were tech demos, it was gameplay but it seemed like all of the PS3 stuff were tech demos. I mean it is great that the system can push that type of power but come on show me some actual gameplay.
  • Saxonx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sheriff if you figure out how to do that, email me first Saxonx@gmail.com cause I would ***** my pants if you can do that.
  • The_Sheriff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I am really intrigued with the xbox 360's media center capability built in. I think this will be a good console war, nintendo needs to get its head out of its ass if it wants to survive.

    Honestly though the PS3's controller looks like total bs. Boomerang, what the hell? Obviously the ps3 has more raw power, but its not like the xbox 360 graphics look like *****. I disagree that the games microsoft showed had "current gen graphics" Although I really don't like the ghost recon series, I thought the graphics in the GR3 demo were very nice. I did notice however, 3 ethernet jacks on the back of the ps3... Be interesting to see how that is implemented. I think a huge factor in this whole thing will be price, and for me moding exploits.
  • Saxonx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0First of all, you cant compare games at a consoles first release, they are usually not actual gameplay, graphically games at the initial release to not show the potential of later games. Although ps3 has 2.0 teraflop ability no one will use that to its full extent at least not in the first two years, also look at the controllers, Sony should have stuck with their orignal design, they are horrible, not only will it be hard for developers to make games on the PS3 it will be harder to release games in time. Microsoft has the upperhand, the powerpc chips were a good choice on both parts,although the cell processor I think is overated, but this will be an interesting battle. As for now, the sheer design aspect in my eyes the xbox wins, also adding connectivity to Ipods and PSP shows they have a dedication toward making the best console, and not worring about their compitition in computer fronts or gaming fronts. Since Xbox360 is rumored to be $300 its going to be interest how much money sony will lose tryign to match that, Ill be first in line when the Xbox360 comes out just because they have all the franchises I love, Quake, Halo, Elder Scrolls, Splinter Cell and even the fact Japanese developers are moving to the xbox is amazing, PS3 must be horrible to develope on, how do you like my essay?
  • damark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i like the comparison on gamespot.com because i dont really know what all those numbers mean on IGN.
  • Plecky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Although a good gaming PC would cost more I know, but I read at IGN.com that the specs for the PS3 would currently run it $1,000 a system and Sony would have to take a pretty big loss and really rely on their game sales to sell it for XboX 360 or Nintendo Revolution prices, even a year from now I don't the technology's going to be down to a price where Sony won't feel the same kind of hit XboX did when it had to drop its prices to $150 to compete with the PS2.
  • xboxsucs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0xbox caught fire before haha and i bet with a hd xbox360 vs a ps3 standerd tv ps3 would still win
  • Plecky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like both systems have done a switch. XboX use to have the specs under the hood but was considored "bulky, big, and ugly" and now the PS3 is larger dimension wise (And in my opinion) not as good looking. While hte XboX doesn't posess the same specs, it looks better (controller, system, etc.) also in my opinion and is smaller dimensions. So really we should focus on the games for each, otherwise the XboX fanboys should go the big and bulky better spec. system of PS3 and the PS2 fanboys should go to the sleek and small XboX 360. On that note, gamewise there's no way I could ever give up on the Halo series and since there's no chance of Halo going to PS3 I guess that's case closed for me. Unless I pick up both systems but I hihgly doubt it, especially if the price tag on the PS3 is >$300 which I think there's no argument that it probably will be... Although I may change my mind if GTA games only came out for PS3 but if the pattern continues the GTA series will continue making its wait to XboX, just may take a few months to get there. Although XboX will get FFXI, I don't know if it should fear FFXII now that they've established a pretty good RPG base with Morrowind, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Fable (even though not as great as was expected, still good none the less), just as some notables in XboX's RPG corner. So we may not get the most sucessful RPG series of all time, we've still got some pretty dang good ones and I think the KOTOR series is exclusive to XboX like all of Bioware's games. Also, I keep reading that Blu-Ray technology in PS3 is suppose to be pretty dang costly, so how will they incorporate that and still have a system under $500? I know its still a year away, but considoring Blu-ray hasn't really made a splash yet, it still may be new and expensive technology even a year from now... Just saying, the first DVD player I ever owned was 600 bucks, and made by Sony oddly enough ;), so unless this new technology is going to be cheaper at launch I don't know if the prices for it will drop so drastically in under a year... Otherwise, both systems look awesome but Pricetag and Games mean the most to me. I mean if price was no matter, then wouldn't I just get a monster-PC considoring PC can usually have better specs then any console? So PS3 better not be a fortune, otherwise why not just get a Gaming PC?
  • thefluxorator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Look who is going to trust Microsoft, i mean Ur just saying that Sony is untrustworthy, Cos there better, all ms supporters hate Sony, cos ms helped them become Wat they are today, ms is just as untrustworthy and Sony, I mean "Windows: The most Reliable Operating System On This Planet" that was quoted from the release of Windows Xp, we all no that, that is BS and a whole load of BS at that too
  • ITOAO, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I am less excited about the XBOX360. I thought it was supposed to come with wireless connectivity out of the box. I just read that you will have to buy the wireless adapter separately. What the hell is that about. Just like MS to try and jip you out of more money.
  • Plecky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Brucebeh - I don't remember it costing nor do I know anyone who bought a PS2 for $500... so...?
  • SupaDawgX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It should be an interesting run. I am a 100% certified MS fanboy. *****, i even worked for the xbox street team for a summer a couple years back. I watched Sony's press showing last night with eager anticipation and an open mind.... And i was impressed... Stunning visuals and aesthetically pleasing...

    Than Microsoft started their E3 event... My expectations were low. Boy was I WRONG. After watching what Square-Enix did with a live-rendering demo on the 360 i was awestruck... And Square in support of the Microsoft console? Capcom support? Full EA backing? and PSP/iPod support? Damn.

    Let the heated battle begin. MS has dropped the gloves this time around.
  • brainspout, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0by: damark (1) on 06:17 PM 5/17/05 |
    i like the comparison on gamespot.com because i dont really know what all those numbers mean on IGN.

    ===================

    Couldn't agree more, GameSpots comparison is far more user friendly than IGN.
  • xboxsucs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0microsoft will never take out sony not only better games but better hardware and now graphics u all think graphics make the game well they dont and now ps3 will have both and later in the development i will look at both and see once again ps3 wins but this time also in graphics
  • Plecky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Damark, can you post that comparison you speak of? Thanks!
  • Itaintrite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Well, let's think. Who sold more consoles?
  • stosh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I didn't really see any xbox 360 games that made me say....WOW! heh. All of the xbox 360 games microsoft showed off looked more like current gen games rather than next gen.

    The ps3 demos and games just looked more impressive...With the next gen of consoles I imagined they'd show off something like a glass dipping into water and then realistically spilling the water back out. And they did it...The ps3 movies and demos really looked like what I expected from the next generation.
  • wormdrink, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I got no f@#$ing clue. Show me some numbers. (an actual source, not a made up number)
  • GamerSDG, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0360 has more hype, PS3 might have the hardware but 360 has the most to offer i will buy all 3 sytems, maybe Nintendo might shock us all and be on top with but me i think PS3 and REV look more like DVD players 360 looks strange i think it to early to say who will win the nex war
  • jmccorm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0My pants are wet.

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.