Lens of Truth: DiRT 3 Head-2-Head - News
by VGChartz Staff , posted on 30 May 2011 / 8,597 Views
DiRT 3 recently hit store shelves to rave critical reviews. Our own Craig Snow gave it a 9.1, claiming, "This is, without a shadow of a doubt, Codemasters’ most packed racer ever." So you know you should get it if you're a racing game fan. The question still remains for those owning both Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3: which version do you buy.
As usual, Lens of Truth is up to the task of providing us with all the information we need to make an informed decision. First up are some shots from their recent screenshot Head-2-Head. As usual, the PlayStation 3 is on the left, Xbox 360 is on the right.
As you can see in the first picture, the PS3 version is showing significant screen tearing. Being Lens of Truth, one screenshot isn't enough, however. Here's the breakdown of the framerates and screen tearing between the two consoles.
Xbox 360:
- Clip 1 info:
- Length of clip: 6981 frames
- Average FPS of clip: 30.10
- Percent of torn frames: 0.00
- Clip 2 info:
- Length of clip: 929 frames
- Average FPS of clip: 29.87
- Percent of torn frames: 0.00
- Clip 3 info:
- Length of clip: 5342 frames
- Average FPS of clip: 30.00
- Percent of torn frames: 0.00
- Global percent of torn frames: 0.00
- Global average FPS: 30.05
PlayStation 3
- Clip 1 info:
- Length of clip: 6981 frames
- Average FPS of clip: 30.03
- Percent of torn frames: 10.03
- Clip 2 info:
- Length of clip: 929 frames
- Average FPS of clip: 29.87
- Percent of torn frames: 0.00
- Clip 3 info:
- Length of clip: 5342 frames
- Average FPS of clip: 29.58
- Percent of torn frames: 11.01
- Global percent of torn frames: 16.61
- Global average FPS: 29.84
So there you have it. Are those screen tears enough to convince you to grab the Xbox 360 version of DiRT 3 ?
More Articles
The problem lies with Devs that are inexperianced on the PS3. They go for the easy route and develop for the 360 and then port it over to the PS3. Its when devs spend the proper time on the PS3 version that you start seeing better results. L.A. Noir started off as a PS3 exclusive on an engine designed for the PS3 and Brink developers worked hard on the PS3 version. They even had beta tests on the PS3 which was the first and only muliplat title private EU beta testers got to test. Its got nothing to do with which one is more powerful. How the game runs and looks on the system is all down to the devs.
The Xbox version looks a lot better than the PS3 version. It has more colour and texture compared to the PS3 version. Plus the PS3 version is very bright. Thats not saying much though because altogether the game doesn't look great. What happened to that great looking trailer they teased a few months back. This looks nothing like that
@wandamaximoff - you hit the nail on the head good sir!
But let me give you some hard figures of just exactly how much sony has lost with the ps3
4.3 billion - yes you read that correctly - 4.3 BILLION!!
ALL the promises of the cell processor have evaporated faster than a drop of rain in the Sahara Desert
Even when comparing exclusives, most people really don't see a noticable difference (similar to xbox 1 and ps2)
Moral of the story is .....go cheap and innnovative like ninty and win!!
lazy developers, another example :D
its 2011 and we are still comparing PS3 and 360...
HOW ANGRY must sony be? i mean SURELY there console should be making the 360 looks like a super nintendo by now?
i mean.... they spent BILLIONS on the hardwear.....
still no difference? and in some places the 360 is ACTUALLY better
360 version starts with a C4 WRC. In the PS3 version, it's a Mini WRC. 360 wins hands down... :P. Almost identical.
I love how after all this time the 360 is still keeping up with, and surpassing, the PS3 when it comes to graphical comparisons. No doubt the PS3 is this generation's powerhouse graphically, but when it really matters, the 360...a year behind and written off by tech geeks everywhere, still owns. 5 years after the release of Sony's PS3, Microsoft is right there with them. Simply awesome. Gotta love the underdog.
All I can see on that clip that the guy playing the ps3 version is faster, so I'll get that version. I can't see any tearing, that video runs at 5-10fps on my laptop...
guilty its because no game company gives a crap about PC gaming, this is why ( like i've said for over a year now) PC gaming is dead. and or dieing. the few companies that make PC only games keep the gfx low to accommodate older machines (games like wow and rift)
the few games that are graphically stunning on PC are made by either Large companies that can afford a PC version to be made specifically for PC... or companies that just won't let go.
BF3 will be amazing looking on PC. the maybe 2 million people that get it for pc will be gravy when 5+ million people buy it on xbox 360 alone which will already be profitable.
its funny how pc gamers compare the graphics to the PC version. Home console are stuck with a maxed out graphics card while PC's are upgradeable. So there really isn't a point in comparing the two. If anything im wondering why PC is Leaps and bounds ahead of the 360 or PS3. It probably is only 2 or 3 percent better graphics wise.
@ kain it's most probable because of the fact almost all dev teams dev for the Xbox and port :(
It's amazing how few multipatform games on PS3 perform better than their Xbox 360 versions. Even though the PS3 is only slightly more powerful than the Xbox 360 you'd think it would be enough to ensure all multiplatforms games are superior on the PS3. But it is usually the other way around.
They both look perfectly playable to me. Now compare the PC version on even a modest graphic card like the 5770 or GTX460 @ 1080p :)
Is this article meant to inspire the gamers to analyze screen tearing and select their versions..pity that!!
Essay Pro