GTAIV - PS3 vs 360


Recommended Posts

The RRoD fact could come from anyone :rolleyes:

How many RRoD were caused by the GPU?

Again, as I've said before (and look, I have a PS3 sig!), get the 360 version if the DLC is important to you, or you don't like the DS3/Sixaxis controller. Also, if you don't mind paying a little more for the DLC (that **** won't be free, I assure you) and the online.

Other than that, they're the same game, except that the "achievements" won't really be implimented well for PS3 until home is released.

I wish people would just do a bit of research on each console before posting a load of bull****. It's not hard to find out which console is better for gaming, theres tons are articles comparing the two.

Yeah but most people can't afford a ?1500 PC =P

The RRoD fact could come from anyone :rolleyes:

Anyone who is Anti-MS yes! :rolleyes: RLOD has been talked, talked and talked to death, People are getting sick of it now.

Did you even read his post? He was just trolling. His opinions doesn't mean crap on this forum. Unless he can come up with some evidence to backup everything he said instead of his Pro-PS3 opinions, we don't want to hear it thank you!

I wonder how many Xbox 360 consoles go back to Microsoft after people playing GTAIV on end will burn out their precious GPU's and suffer the RRoD.

The Cell chip is much better at handling things like physics, audio & video streaming etc, which is great for complex games like GTAIV. I also reckon the graphics will look better on the PS3 in comparison to the Xbox 360.

Some how I get the feeling Rockstar improved the PS3 visuals because Microsoft got the DLC.

Rockstar and Sony still have a very strong relationship.

I could just as easily say the PS3 version of GTA IV will use blur filtering instead of true AA like the Xbox 360 version. It doesn't mean anything until I have actual unbiased comparisons.

have got the 360 version for obvious reasons. Live, friends, DLC and because the 360 controller is great, i have a PS3 and 360 and Wii was thinking of getting a PS3 version but no point. You get achievements with the 360 and my GS could do with some pumping up aswell.

Got COD4 for PS3 and 360, i think it feels a lot better to play on the 360 than the PS3 because of the controller so GTA4 for 360 it is for me.

In a nutshell, if you own both, get it for whatever controller you like the most.

I am getting it for 360 mainly because of that (& achievements & DLC).

I am also getting it for 360, so that I can be 100% sure there will be no form of motion sensing whatsoever incorporated in the game.

I own both and I'm getting it for the 360 for the sole fact of achievements and my friends all are on XBL.

In theory the PS3 should have superior graphics, but I doubt rockstar would take the time to do that much to the PS3's version. Because if you think about it, the ps3 uses blu-ray disks and they hold 25gigs for a single layer compared to a standard DVD holding about 5 for a single layer. I love both consoles and hate flame wars, but the ps3 does have a more powerful GPU and more storage capacity on its disk so things don't have to be compressed as much. I guess we have to wait and see what Rockstar did about the situation.

heres my opinion,

for a start im a PC owner and it sucked having to wait for the GTA's to come to PC cus for some reason the playstation failboaters some how managed to convince rockstar to do it for ps first then release it to PC 6 months later, so im unhappy in having to wait for it.

its GTA ppl anyone who stands around looking at plants and checking out the sky at twilight really should be getting a different game cus for me when im whizzing around the citys at break neck speeds with coppers on my tail, or trying to gun down the hordes of enemies last thing im gonna be thinking is ooo that little sign that ill prolly never see again has a few jaggies on it. This version sucks. lol

:( prolly have buy a new pc to play it to :( if it comes to that ill just go on holiday instead i think

thats just my opinion

I am getting it for 360 (just cuz of controller issue with PS3), I love both systems but "I HATE THE DAMN PS3 CONTOLLER".

I mean real would it kill them to redesign the damn thing, I don?t even need the gyro thing. It's been what like 10 year and they still have the same controller design. Seems like it was made for little kids? hands.

Also isn't this game really bad for comparing consoles, I mean really have you guys even seen the game.

I am getting it for 360 (just cuz of controller issue with PS3), I love both systems but "I HATE THE DAMN PS3 CONTOLLER".

I mean real would it kill them to redesign the damn thing, I don?t even need the gyro thing. It's been what like 10 year and they still have the same controller design. Seems like it was made for little kids? hands.

Also isn't this game really bad for comparing consoles, I mean really have you guys even seen the game.

They kept it the same for "fan service&qu:/; :/

I bet that boomerang controller for all the flak it got, was actually really comfy.

I don't have any issues with the DS though, I guess im just really used to it.

One game it is better than the 360 controller though hands down is with Pro Evo/Fifa - I HATE using analog sticks for football games, it's nowhere near as accurate as I want it to be.

You can't use the d-pad on the 360 for footy games due to where it is, and because it's awful anyway.

I own both and I'm getting it for the 360 for the sole fact of achievements and my friends all are on XBL.

In theory the PS3 should have superior graphics, but I doubt rockstar would take the time to do that much to the PS3's version. Because if you think about it, the ps3 uses blu-ray disks and they hold 25gigs for a single layer compared to a standard DVD holding about 5 for a single layer. I love both consoles and hate flame wars, but the ps3 does have a more powerful GPU and more storage capacity on its disk so things don't have to be compressed as much. I guess we have to wait and see what Rockstar did about the situation.

fail.jpg

In theory the PS3 should have superior graphics, but I doubt rockstar would take the time to do that much to the PS3's version. Because if you think about it, the ps3 uses blu-ray disks and they hold 25gigs for a single layer compared to a standard DVD holding about 5 for a single layer. I love both consoles and hate flame wars, but the ps3 does have a more powerful GPU and more storage capacity on its disk so things don't have to be compressed as much. I guess we have to wait and see what Rockstar did about the situation.

Ummm, no. By all accounts the 360 GPU is the superior one. It's the PS3 CPU that holds the horsepower advantage.

I own both and I'm getting it for the 360 for the sole fact of achievements and my friends all are on XBL.

In theory the PS3 should have superior graphics, but I doubt rockstar would take the time to do that much to the PS3's version. Because if you think about it, the ps3 uses blu-ray disks and they hold 25gigs for a single layer compared to a standard DVD holding about 5 for a single layer. I love both consoles and hate flame wars, but the ps3 does have a more powerful GPU and more storage capacity on its disk so things don't have to be compressed as much. I guess we have to wait and see what Rockstar did about the situation.

Just because you own both and are getting the 360 version doesn't make anything what you said right.

PS3 has an inferior GPU than 360, its been stated time and time again. Blu-Ray offers nothing to current games yet since regular DVD9 (8GB) media has been fine so far so your theory doesn't hold true. Infact 360 games use better compression than PS3 Blu-Ray games. A quick search from you will fine that the Blu-Ray drive in PS3 is slow as hell and it order for games to be actually playable, they need to do a mandatory install. Also hackers that ripped the Blu-ray games found that developers were putting the game files 3 or 4 times over repeatedly to help with the slow drive. I am not dissing the Blu-Ray opticial media as a whole, just the one Sony put inside PS3 is just far too slow that what it should of been.

Just because you own both and are getting the 360 version doesn't make anything what you said right.

PS3 has an inferior GPU than 360, its been stated time and time again. Blu-Ray offers nothing to current games yet since regular DVD9 (8GB) media has been fine so far so your theory doesn't hold true. Infact 360 games use better compression than PS3 Blu-Ray games. A quick search from you will fine that the Blu-Ray drive in PS3 is slow as hell and it order for games to be actually playable, they need to do a mandatory install. Also hackers that ripped the Blu-ray games found that developers were putting the game files 3 or 4 times over repeatedly to help with the slow drive. I am not dissing the Blu-Ray opticial media as a whole, just the one Sony put inside PS3 is just far too slow that what it should of been.

what you say is quite true, however you've missed the good points the PS3 has over the 360. The PS3's CPU is far more adept at multitasking, which a game like GTA should use well. If a game does not use the space of a BD you might as well put multiple copies of the game on the disc to improve speeds, how is that bad? Also the mandatory installs may be a pain, however coming from being a dedicated PC gamer its not unfamiliar territory, just go make a drink or take a dump while it installs. lastly, the PS3 won't have space issues even with installs due to it being able to take larger hard drives than the 360 (and being cheaper to upgrade too). and theres little chance of the PS3 dieing on you mid game :p

Why can't users just accept that the games are near identical, there will be minor differences due to the porting process. I'll be getting the SE on PS3, as will many of my friends. DLC is a moot point at the moment as it won't be released for a long time. In terms of connectivity and connection quality, PSN is as good as live, it may not have stuff like achievements yet, but I've got better ways of improving my e-penis.

Whatever happens, come tuesday I'll be sitting in front of my tv playing gta4, as will many others, even if the graphics are slightly different, true gamers don't judge a game by its graphics but on the game quality, like storylines, replayability etc.

gonna make this short.

Just buy the damn game and play, stfu about which console is better, they are both good.

Yeah, exactly what he said.

This whole fanboy thing is wearing thin, and to be perfectly honest everything is down to user prefrence, if you have big hands you like the 360 controller, if you have smaller hand then the ps3 controller, but if you are like me and like a controller to sit in your hands then you will like the ps3 one, but if you like to grip the pad then its 360.

Who really cares what is better? if you are a gamer you will have both and buy games on both of them and have lots of fun!

I'm getting gta on my ps3 simply because it feels at home on the playstation, i had it for ps1 and ps2 and psp, just wouldnt feel right on a 360.

more storage capacity on its disk so things don't have to be compressed as much. I guess we have to wait and see what Rockstar did about the situation.

Have we forgotten that GTAIV used less than 7 gigs of data on the DVD which leaves 1 gig of space for them to have added more content.

Edited by Oxuyoska

whenever I read about how the 360 has the better gpu, I think "So What" Please, don't even mention it. Get a life.

It's insignificantly better. No one will ever take advantage of what it can do on paper. Same for both. I've gone through tons of video cards, and if you compare same generation competing cards, in the end, they perform about the same. Especially with how sloppily coding can get. The real difference is when you compare something that's a generation ahead.

My 360 sounds like a rocket taking off, and I can barely hear games these days, my PS3 is silent.

Im going PS3.

chp_rocket.jpg

:p

Really it's a shame though, this is one of the only things I genuinely hate about the 360. I haven't had any RROD yet and while I complain about paying for Live, and infact I have gone to Silver, it's nowhere near as bad as the noise for me. I can grit my teeth and accept seeing that ?4/5 leave a month over turning on and hearing my 360 breath:laugh::

I've said before though I'm a silent nut, I went and paid more to build my PC just to make it silent. Guess it's also because every console and my PC is in my room, so if anything is staying on 24/7, it needs to be quiet so I can sleep! Even under load on my PC, my 360 is still louder.

Right now im playing my 360 with headphones hooked into my TV - Yes you can turn the volume up, but when im playing at 12am+ it's not really viable to have a TV on full volume!

Bit of a pain as it dictates where I can sit in my room due to my headphones cable, which is actually quite long, but still not as good as wireless.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      rolfus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      78
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!