Crysis 2 PS3 vs. Xbox 360: Performance & FPS Analysis

by Jeanine Celestin, posted on 24 March 2011 / 49,847 Views

Gaming website Lens of Truth prides itself on exposing a game's quality for what it is with raw facts. They have recently decided take on Crytek's challenge of finding the differences of Crysis 2 which has been the source of some controversy between the PS3 and Xbox 360. I will be focusing on the end results of their research so far.

Before you get too excited, this is NOT a final verdict on either console yet, and only features the single-player campaign. For more details and screen shots go to their website.

Some vocabulary for you just in case you’re not familiar:

Frames, FPS: Frames per second

Frame Tearing, tearing : A visual artifact in video where information from two or more different frames is shown in a display device in a single screen draw.

Now that we’ve got that out of the way, let's go to the facts that we have.

Performance

PS3: The PlayStation 3 is triple buffered and has absolutely no screen tearing. The PlayStation 3's frame rate dips in "hectic" areas more often than Xbox 360 version.

Xbox 360: The Xbox 360 has some tearing but appears to handle the frame rate more effectively in chaotic scenes.

Average Tearing and FPS

PS3 Frame Analysis average:

Global percent of torn frames: 0.0

Global average FPS: 26.54

Xbox 360 Frame Analysis average:

Global percent of torn frames: 1.93

Global average FPS: 29.11

The frame rates are perhaps surprisingly similar.

Conclusion: The question they were trying to answer was "Can it run Crysis 2" and Lens of Truth decided the answer was "Yes" to both.

Also, I've included some of Lens of Truth's comparison images below.

Crysis 2 Comparison Screen

Crysis 2 Comparison Screen

Crysis 2 Comparison Screen

Crysis 2 Comparison Screen

They will be breaking down the graphics, loading, multiplayer and much more over the next few days, and we will let you know when more interesting results pop up.

And here's their video of their Single Player Analysis.

In my opinion the experience on both seems similar so far, but it’s too early to tell. What do you think?


More Articles

68 Comments

dark_gh0st_b0y (on 27 March 2011)

jesus christ, it's the same thing


JBravo (on 26 March 2011)

OMG you guy are so fucking stuoid!!!!!!!!! Really you are actualy arguing over what consol is better looking graphicly????? I watched the video and I really don´t notice any difference!!!! Just buy a gun and shoot your selves in the face!!!! Really I would rather prefer to vote on who can suicide better in 1080p!!! Get a fucking life, seriously!!!!!!!!!!


froster (on 19 February 2013)

Who can find any differences at this high compressed youtube video? That is dispensable.


ND3G (on 27 March 2011)

Normally I can spot the differences but I will be damned if i can find anything. Kudos to the developers for getting the PS3 version upto the level of the 360 version. ;)


Dr.Grass (on 27 March 2011)

@jbravo That's what we do on this website. Why did you read the article if you don't like splitting hairs on the PS3 vs 360 debate?


EmpireNO (on 27 March 2011)

@Michael-5 "360 tends to have an easier time running games in 1080p (How many PS3 exclusives are in 1080p? MGS4 and GT5?), so I wouldn't be surprised if the 360 version looks a little better." Seriously?! X360 upscales. Native resolution is mostly the same on PS3 and X360. http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241 Alan Wake has a native res of 960x544. Halo 3 (also Reach og ODST) 1152x640, Fable 2 1120x720, Crysis 2 1152×720, Alone in the Dark 1040x600, COD 2 MW 1024x600.


Killiana1a (on 26 March 2011)

Me bolting?! To set the record straight, I have never run away after I made a stupid statement or wrong prediction. Furthermore, I have the balls and am man enough to make a stupid statement or wrong prediction, listen to the reaction, defend it if need be, and/or apologize if need be. As for my opinion here, I stand by it completely. I celebrate that Microsoft, a company based in the US, can perform equally if not better than a foreign conglomerate called Sony. The average Japanese consumer may love Apple but no one else is putting out equivalent products and I would bet my whole savings that if Sony was putting out the PlayPad or PlayPod, Japanese consumers would buy it in droves more than an American product such as the iPad or iPod. Wrong or right, the numbers speak for themselves. Westerners, US citizens in particular, have no problem buying Nintendo and Sony products by the millions, while Microsoft video game consoles struggle to reach the million mark.


Michael-5 (on 26 March 2011)

To be honest, I find the only way you can make a proper comparison between the two is by playing it on a tv, not a laptop screen. Your watching this video at best in 720p, resolution is already distorted. 360 tends to have an easier time running games in 1080p (How many PS3 exclusives are in 1080p? MGS4 and GT5?), so I wouldn't be surprised if the 360 version looks a little better. In the end, who cares. It's the game that matters most right? I honeslty don't see much of a difference between Alan Wake/Heavy Rain Quality to Crysis 2 / Killzone 3 quality. I mean it's there, but really? Stop whining.


piggychan (on 25 March 2011)

BTW if you want to do a comparison thread why not add Digital Foundry's comparison too instead of just lens of truth? http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-crysis2-face-off


piggychan (on 25 March 2011)

got this on the 360 today and I was quite stunned at the graphics.. sure there is some hiccups here and there but overall very impressed considering this is crytek's first game on consoles


DonFerrari (on 25 March 2011)

just to remember they promised fully developed with ps3, xobx in mind... no ports... even though they need to learn some better programing from ND, GG, SM and PD


Genera1MLD (on 25 March 2011)

screw both the 360 and ps3 id get it for the PC, if my pc can average 30 fps then its better on the pc than on the consoles, so what you get a few achievements/trophies on the consoles i can do that with much better console games designed purely for the consoles than with a PC game designed to take advantage of the latest hardware, how can it take advantage of 5 year old technology worse still the games been toned down for the consoles to be able to run it the first game wouldnt even be playable on the console's as the technology is just too advanced on the PC to do a PC port that why the game engine has been toned down for the consoles, just ask any PC gamer and theyll tell you exactly the same as what im telling you. (recomended spec for crysis 2 on PC requires either an nvidia 8800GTX or ati X3870XTX with 512mb graphics memory with at least a dual core cpu running @ 2.4ghz and at least 2gb DDR ram, the consoles only have 512mb total ram for both system and video memory "360 also has dedicated 10mb video ram" but just pale's in comparison with PC requirements).


Bristow9091 (on 25 March 2011)

I bought it on PS3 and to be honest it's not too bad, I mean, you can tell the framerate is lower than 30, it really does show, but it looks pretty nice (Not as good as they make it out to be). I've spent most of my time online though, it's fun!


gustave154 (on 25 March 2011)

well we PS3 owners got the bad port... again


tingyu (on 25 March 2011)

Its just the same game on 2 platforms, if u like Crysis and cant afford a super ex NVIDIA card on ur PC, get it on either console.


Superman4 (on 25 March 2011)

I really can't brlieve some here are so blind. This is a PC based dev company. Based on that the 360 version should destroy the PS3 verision. The devs would be much more up to date with the 360 than the PS3 considering this is the first iteration for consoles. The fact is they are pretty equal with the 360 doing a little better in a couple areas and the PS3 doing a little better in others. The gam eitself however doesn't look better than PS3 exclusives so it obviously has room for improvment. It does look hands down better than anything for the 360 to date. So a win for the 360 camp and another mediocre multi plat for the PS3. Big deal. The game itself doesnt appeal to me and I found rather boring compared to what is on the PS3 currently so overall Crysis isn't in my current game rotation.


Superman4 (on 25 March 2011)

I really can't brlieve some here are so blind. This is a PC based dev company. Based on that the 360 version should destroy the PS3 verision. The devs would be much more up to date with the 360 than the PS3 considering this is the first iteration for consoles. The fact is they are pretty equal with the 360 doing a little better in a couple areas and the PS3 doing a little better in others. The gam eitself however doesn't look better than PS3 exclusives so it obviously has room for improvment. It does look hands down better than anything for the 360 to date. So a win for the 360 camp and another mediocre multi plat for the PS3. Big deal. The game itself doesnt appeal to me and I found rather boring compared to what is on the PS3 currently so overall Crysis isn't in my current game rotation.


uso (on 25 March 2011)

@Killiana1a From Digital Foundry's, if you can read the PS3 handles these "chaotic scenes" much better than the Xbox360. Read the whole article and you will see


John_Doe (on 25 March 2011)

360: 2-3 frames higher 1152*720 low tearing PS3: no tearing anisotropic 1024x720 a little higher draw distance


Drexor (on 25 March 2011)

lol, i remember the time i was into playing counter strike...everything below stable 60fps was unacceptable...


Barozi (on 25 March 2011)

wow 29FPS is already kinda low, but 26FPS average is pretty bad. That is a HUGE difference.


D-Joe (on 25 March 2011)

see thats power of Crysis make all gonna Crazyis


Cueil (on 25 March 2011)

most of these games come down to a difference in how each system handles lighting...and shadow...


AussieGecko (on 25 March 2011)

people will start to depend on countries other then us, aus alliances with china/india is growing, same as europe


GuiltySpartan77 (on 25 March 2011)

As long as Japan, Australia, Europe, remain the United States Allies then our economy will not sink and the dollar won't go away. Even as China grows in terms of economic power they will never be on the same level of the United States. Anyway Crysis 2 is a great game and i don' t care much about the graphical difference between the two if any. Both versions look great and play great.


klumminati (on 25 March 2011)

osamanobama 1 hour ago "@killiana1 you do no microsoft makes their products in China, including xbox and Sony is owned/head guy is an american" STFU. That is complete bullshit. The japanese don't hire non japanese as head of their companies. Go ahead and say Reggie for Nintendo....go ahead. I love how you red necks say you love the USA, bash the President, buy Hondas and shop at Walmart. And then the jackass at the bottom of the page predicting the dollars' demise. O.K. believe that. Sure. How about facts? The dollar aint what it once was but watch the dollar rise once these dumb ass wars are over according to Gen. Petreaus. What exactly are you trying to jusify?


Ping_ii (on 25 March 2011)

lol you guys should just ignore killiana seriously. thats the dude who said GT5 would not sell 1m week 1 and 4m LTD, after that super fail prediction he bolted off VGC and didn't show up in a while.


spaceguy (on 25 March 2011)

Or should I say EMEAA


spaceguy (on 25 March 2011)

PS3 IS NOT PERFORMING MUCH BETTER. IT HAS BEEN A VIRTUAL TIE. EUROPE AND JAPAN BEEN IT'S BREAD AND BUTTER. IT IS GETTING SMASHED IN THE UNITED STATES AND JAPAN IS THE ONLY PLACE THAT HAS GAVE THEM THE LEAD. WITH ALL THAT HAS HAPPENED I DOUBT THEY WILL BE BUYING AS MANY PS3 IN THIS TIME OF TRAGEDY. NOT ONLY THAT, I THINK WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT FOR SHIPMENTS TO CONFIRM WHAT IT'S DOING IN EUROPE, NOT THAT IT IS OFF BUT IT HAS BEEN. SO I WANT TO SEE ONE MORE SHIPMENT THAT CONCLUDES VGCHARTZ IS ON THE RIGHT TRACK.


osamanobama (on 25 March 2011)

@killiana1 you do no microsoft makes their products in China, including xbox and Sony is owned/head guy is an american


spaceguy (on 25 March 2011)

@APKenna. You have no clue what you are talking about and just should not talk politics.


APKenna (on 25 March 2011)

@Killiana1a, foolish child!! The 360 does not appeal to the Japanese, period!! Sony is a great company that has done alot for both Markets...as we speak the PS3 is performing much better than the 360!! As for your comment: "Japan is shit", hear my words..with in 12 months our precious country will collapse even further, to an unimaginable extent that the Asians, specially China & Japan will OWN the USofA(they already own us if you think about it), by that time it will be obvious that the US dollar is no longer the worlds Reserved Currency and instead the Yen or Euros would take that place. Anyways, if I was you I would not make such childish/stupid comments.


UnknownFact (on 25 March 2011)

@Killiana1a also, besides what whatever said, you seem to be ignoring the whole deal. If PS3 is not outperforming X360 in everything, as it should, it wouldn't be because hardware "is not as great as it seemed to be". It's because some (third party) developers simplify the PS3 game developpment process by skipping a few things and making it analog to other HD consoles, in this case the X360 (obviously since it's the only one left). This doesn't happen with some PS3 exclusives where they take the full advantages of PS3 exquisite architecture; and the older the PS3 gets, the more experienced the developpers become in programming games for it.


BluGamer23 (on 25 March 2011)

Like with most review you should not trust it.. Quiet a few games got high score in the past .. But they are worth sh|t.. Ign is no better .. large site full of advertisement.. you can bet they get paid out by certain companies to give their games higher score.. Especially from companies with deep pockets!


UnknownFact (on 25 March 2011)

Sorry but anything below 30 fps is not for me.


whatever (on 25 March 2011)

@Killiana, you should learn to read, especially since Digital Foundry said the exact opposite of your statement that the 360 handles the "chaotic scenes" better. "... as we can see in these extensive tests, performance can be very, very variable and the small variations in frame-rate we see previously give way to some much bigger differences, depending on the level of action on-screen. The unavoidable conclusion we came to is that when frame-rate does crash in those affected areas, it's actually Crysis 2 on PS3 that holds up better. " The graphics are equivalent on both, get over it.


whatever (on 25 March 2011)

The frame rate differences don't seem to matter, and I don't really notice the screen tearing much either. Basically, it's a draw.


Killiana1a (on 25 March 2011)

I had to delete my first post as it was in poor taste. My point is, both products will be equal if the player is standing around out of combat just marveling at the world. Who has the best graphics is when the most enemies, explosions and general "shit" is going on around the player. From this review and Digital Foundry's, the Xbox 360 handles these "chaotic scenes" much better than the PS3. So much for the "vaunted" cell technology. Goes to show you Microsoft knows how to build their hardware just as well as their software. As for my "inner fanboy child"...Well, excuse me for being patriotic and cheering when a US company, Microsoft, does better than a foreign company called Sony. This goes much deeper than "console wars" and into a territory the average Japanese video game consumer knows all too well. We don't call the Japanese xenophobic or jingoistic for buying Microsoft video game products in such pitiful numbers compared to Nintendo and Sony. Henceforth, I am going to behave the same way they do. Japan is shit, the West is the best. How about them apples?


Baalzamon (on 25 March 2011)

@Killiana1a: Runs better via frames per second...but you suffer tearing, you need to face that they are virtually the same product, and whatever differences that do exist don't justify an 8.5 on ps3 and 9.5 on 360 for graphics.


tripleb2k (on 24 March 2011)

Crysis 2 is a sexy game. Case closed.


dynamo (on 24 March 2011)

@Killiana1a You have it backwards. 360 runs smoother during scenes, not in the instance of chaotic game play according to DF. Anyways, by using ones eyes rather than listening the your inner fanboy child you'd see there is literally almost no difference between them, ps3 is better in some areas while 360 in others. (most of which aren't discernible during regular gameplay) Trying to say one is actually better than the other at this point is asinine. Why IGN would go out of their way to say there was such a big difference is ridiculous. Also both versions are less than true 720p. I'd say if anything this shows that both versions aren't perfect and each needed a bit of work in there own ways.


dirkd2323 (on 24 March 2011)

you wont see much difference, the developers came out and said they wanted both version to be the same. So looks like the achieved this, but I tell you what , it says on the cover best graphics of any console game, or something like that, total bull shit, the game looks good but EVERY PS3 exclusive looks way better from Killzone 3, even Killzone 2, U2, MGS4 , GOW3 , Heavy Rain, GT5, all the PS3 games smack C2, Its clear to me if the game was only PS3 ans PC, PS3 version would be much better. I looked at the lens of truth steal shots, there was not a hugh difference, but the PS3 version did look better on every shot.


Superman4 (on 24 March 2011)

They both look similar. The game sucks though so who cares what they look like.


chocoloco (on 24 March 2011)

I see no difference. So it only shows other developers need to live up to Crysis. Especially for the few 360 exclusives. I only say that because the recent ps3 exclusives live up to to the full potential of the system, but the few real 360 exclusives prove they are not woking hard enough. I want to see both games orkimg their systems power at full potential.


Xelestial (on 24 March 2011)

@pslee- That's the point...If you've been following this Crysis 2 stuff, people have been saying one version is better than the other. Now that the game is out they're attempting to prove whether is a difference or not.


pslee (on 24 March 2011)

i dont see a fucking difference. this comparison is useless.


Nybbas (on 24 March 2011)

I have always gone with the mentality that if you have to put them side by side to tell a difference then there isn't a freaking issue.


usrevenge (on 24 March 2011)

makes sense to me, even though the PS3 is more powerful almost all multi platform games perform better, and sometimes look better on the xbox 360.


yo_john117 (on 24 March 2011)

They are both basically the same visually.


baggy (on 24 March 2011)

Look pretty much the same. IGN bias reviewer


dsage01 (on 24 March 2011)

IGN is definitely crazy! PS3 version looks much better. Most multipat games look better on PS3 anyways.


Monges79 (on 24 March 2011)

They both look good.


think-man (on 24 March 2011)

The videos quiet good, the ps3 doesnt tear once were as the xbox is tearing the whole time.


Ping_ii (on 24 March 2011)

LOL @ IGN.


Baalzamon (on 24 March 2011)

So IGN was full of shit with their 8.5 for ps3 graphics versus 9.5 for 360 graphics...I figured as much.


CaptainHavok (on 24 March 2011)

@Nsanity And VGChartz is the laughing stock of several sites. There's hate for everybody everywhere. That doesn't take away their legitimacy.


raygun (on 24 March 2011)

Hmm, no mention on how THE AI SUCKS!?! I can't believe how they released this game which such lame AI, soldiers will: run right past you, run through barriers, continually bump into objects, bump into each other, die in funny limbo dance poses, die floating in the air, shoot through buildings, all kinds of crap. And in 3d mode, when looking through some windows the view becomes 2d, the laser site is 2d, the screen has weird mirrored sections at each side of the screen and around your weapons, and parts of 3d objects don't line up correctly. I think the Killzone3 engine is much better, especially with AI, although it had texture loading/unloading in 3d mode in the Jungle map. Too bad we can't load the same maps into it and compare.


Nsanity (on 24 March 2011)

walkerj they also said 360 has the edge in terms of visuals and general performance, but PS3 more than holds its own, bettering the Microsoft platform in some areas.


Nsanity (on 24 March 2011)

CaptainHavok Lens of truth are bunch of noobs and laughing stock of B3D so please dont compare them.


CaptainHavok (on 24 March 2011)

Digital Foundry and Lens of Truth should be considered on equal footing, they both use high-end machines for analysis and provide unbiased information.


Xelestial (on 24 March 2011)

@walkerj- By what you're saying then, Len of Truth's findings are in agreement.


walkerj (on 24 March 2011)

360 version has no AF. textures suffer hugely. Ps3 versions looks clearer due to AF. It also performs better under stress but with a small reduction in resolution. 360 version has a higher resolution so looks a little more crisp, but textures look muddier especially at an angle. Essentially identical


walkerj (on 24 March 2011)

Digital Foundry Says the PS3 is the one that holds up better under stress. 360 holds up better in cut scenes. Only one source is reliable, DF.


dynamo (on 24 March 2011)

@jim6860 "The increased performance and resolution indicates that the Xbox 360 is the preferred platform for Crysis 2, but in the heat of actual gameplay, this difference appears to evaporate. Put simply, on certain stages, frame-rate varies rather drastically to the point where the game can feel almost unplayable. " "The unavoidable conclusion we came to is that when frame-rate does crash in those affected areas, it's actually Crysis 2 on PS3 that holds up better. "


Silver-Tiger (on 24 March 2011)

From what I've can tell, both versions look nearly identical and play identical.


Jim6860 (on 24 March 2011)

@dynamo I don't know where you read in the Digital Foundry comparison, but if they said that, then they are contradicting their own words. Excerpt: "On balance, 360 has the edge in terms of visuals and general performance, but PS3 more than holds its own, bettering the Microsoft platform in some areas. " They confuse what their stance is. Here IGN all but damns the PS3 version for graphics. PS3 comment from IGN: "Crysis 2 looks great on PS3, but a worse framerate, lower resolution, and missing effects compared to the 360 release hurt it. PS3 owners expect more." Now the 360: "Crysis 2 on Xbox 360 has taken the crown for best graphics in a console game. It's well animated and the effects are great, but light is always the star of the show."


dynamo (on 24 March 2011)

"PS3: The PlayStation 3 is triple buffered and has absolutely no screen tearing. The PlayStation 3's frame rate dips in "hectic" areas more often than Xbox 360 version. Xbox 360: The Xbox 360 has some tearing but appears to handle the frame rate more effectively in chaotic scenes." Digital Foundry says the opposite in terms on consistency in hectic areas, ps3 was the more consistent but both suffered.


osamanobama (on 27 March 2011)

@jbravo im pretty sure most people are saying they look the same because they do