Call of Duty Black Ops PS3 vs 360

The visual difference is huge between the two versions, and PS3 gamers deserve better. I can understand that the 360 was the primary development platform, but this is really sad. PS3 version is blurry, missing effects, has down graded effects, and in general looks worse then the 360 version in every way.

Category:

Gaming

Tags:

• Call
• of
• Duty
• Black
• Ops
• PS3
• vs
• 360
• playstation
• xbox
• gunstar1981

[gunstar1981]

@TakeBusFace I see your jelly over all the shit I own. Fuck yeah I own 3 PS3's, 2 360's and a ton of other shit. 5 HDTV's...everything. Don't be hating, get off your lazy ass and get a job and then you can afford shit you fucking bum. Must suck being a poor fag like you, such a fucking loser : ) Maybe you could earn some coin sucking dick, huge faggots like you are good at shit like that. Suck that cock fag, take it all in, like the good little faggot you are.

[TakeBusFace]

@gunstar1981 LOOK @ THIS CUNT TALKING ABOUT CONSOLES. FUCK OFFFF U FUCKING NERD

[gunstar1981]

@mattjoe98 Please tell me you were fucking high when you wrote this trash. I stated in the video that PS3 owners deserve better and I have 2 PS3's in the house, and that the PS3 is more than capable to run Black Ops as good as the 360. I complain about the PORT OF THE FUCKING GAME, FROM 360 TO PS3. No one was talking shit about either console, the ONLY person that brought anything up about PS3 vs 360 is YOU. Again, it was the PORT thats the problem, not the PS3, you must not have watched the vid

[NewLynxChannel]

@gunstar1981 Continued...

Now, what has three cores is Xenon (the CPU), not Xenos (the GPU). When you compare Xenon (three cores, six threads, 1 MB of cache) to Cell (one core, two threads, six SIMD units and 512 KB of cache), the former excells on integer performance, while the latter excells in floating-point operations. You can't just say one is better than the other, that will depend on the software's needs. Cell runs physics simulations much faster, but Xenon handles AI better, for example.

[NewLynxChannel]

@gunstar1981 First, you're confusing the GPUs and the CPUs. GPUs are RSX and Xenos. CPUs are Cell and Xenon.

When you compare RSX and Xenos, Xenos is faster. And indeed the PS3 can offload post-processing tasks to Cell's SPEs (only six are available, not seven), but that requires specific programming, which means it can only be done on exclusives. Multiplatform engines can't address the SPEs that way, resulting in RSX rendering alone and the Xbox 360 version having slightly better graphics.

[gunstar1981]

@NewLynxChannel ...the 360 GPU. Simply said, the Cell's 7 (8th is locked) SPE's simply out perform the 3 core's in the 360 CPU. Yes, the 360's gpu cores can run 2 threads per core but the performance will never be as good as having 6 real cores, where the Cell has 7 SPE's to work with. It again all come down to developers being poor at coding. And if you don't think I know what I am talking about, I have 16 years PC repair and 2 years CGI development with Maya.

[gunstar1981]

@NewLynxChannel Kinda. The 360 GPU has better shader support and 10mb RAM on the actual die of the GPU giving 360 games basically free AA without a performance hit. So where the 360 GPU is technically "better" its really not, as the PS3 GPU can task out GPU instructions to SPE's of the Cell GPU. It takes more work but the PS3 can produce games that look much better then 360, but the developer has to be good. And that takes us to the CPU side of thing, where the Cell is much more powerful then...

[NewLynxChannel]

@NickelodeonRewind2 Multiplatform games look better on the Xbox 360 because it has a slightly more capable GPU, not because of the processor.

[gunstar1981]

@NefariousVirtuoso88 Fair enough. But with enough exposure and videos like this, maybe companies will show the PS3 gaming community with some respect and put some effort in.

[NefariousVirtuoso88]

@gunstar1981

... because everbody knows the PS3 version is an utter disgrace. This is on par with making a video about the RROD.