Was the PS3 weaker than the 360?

Was the PS3 weaker than the 360?

Attached: mafia 2.png (1280x1440, 3.3M)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=0MFmqmkq63c
youtube.com/watch?v=P2dvhoBbqw8
youtube.com/watch?v=y_XREfxf4ds
youtube.com/watch?v=dKYT6NzsUZQ
slideshare.net/Slide_N/deferred-lighting-and-post-processing-on-playstation3
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

no

C E L L
E
L
L

more like incel

Ps3 was harder to optimize for.

More like shemale

Yes it was. Trying to play shit like red dead redemption was a fucking nightmare because of how bad the performance is

no but it was hard to develop for so third party games didnt really invest the time/effort

Attached: 1639424866797.png (610x625, 336.39K)

Its GPU was weaker, the 360 basically got free MSAA 2x thanks to its EDRAM, and having 256MB RAM+256MB VRAM instead of 512MB shared RAM greatly limited it.
The PS3's SPUs were powerful, but there's no real good/simple application for them for most games, so they were very underutilized. It got to the point were Sony made a FXAA like post processing AA that ran on a SPU core as games pretty much always had at least one completely unused.

It had a weaker GPU, the CPU was a 3.0GHz PowerPC core which is what most games used as opposed to 360's triple-core Xenon, the Cell had 6 SPU cores but most devs didn't utilize them cause they couldn't be arsed