False. The reason games are filling up Blu Rays is to allow textures to be left in an uncompressed format. Much of any graphics card’s resources is spent uncompressing textures to draw on wireframes. It takes a chunk out of the processor, but more than that it monopolizes the VRAM. Uncompressed textures are incredibly large. The 360 can only display so many high res textures on the screen at once due to the VRAM capacity and DVD size. You can see the difference with games like FFXIII. Since FFXIII correctly uses Blu Ray capacity to relieve graphics card stress you will notice that the PS3 version has more and higher quality textures than the 360 version. What it comes down to? The PS3′s video card may not be as fast as the 360′s, but even cell aside it runs more efficiently than the 360′s video card because far fewer resources are wasted. The cell processor is just the icing on the cake. According to Folding@Home it’s 50 times more powerful than the average home PC. Strings of PS3s have been used as mini computers. It’s an amazing architecture. If the PS3 had a $400 graphics card inside it? Even the fastest desktop would be left in the dust.

Reasons why digital distribution aren’t going to work? What internet service can support downloading 50 GBs worth of content? So we can either go backwards in technology, which won’t happen it never does, or we can all get T3 lines and spend 2 entire days downloading a game before we can play it. Cable can only go so fast. We can’t argue with physics, it will always win. So until fiberoptic cable gets run to most homes in the world, digital distribution will be for much lower sized downloads. Reality sucks. It still exists.

it doesn’t matter if the Xbox’s GPU is better, the Cell is better then both the PS3′s and the Xbox’s GPU combined. And when developers take full advantage of the Cell the games are clearly better. You don’t compare multiplat games to prove the consoles power, you look at exclusives, and the proof is in the pudding. The PS3 has the edge and that’s that.