Why can the PS3 do this but the 360 can't?

[scottish]

http://www.pcvsconsole.com/compariso...60-vs-ps3-gpu/

[Black_Apalachi]

Installing means that it adds game files to the hard drive which also means that it loads games very quickly. i've played many of the top games on the ps2 and could remember waiting like 2 minutes to load one level. Also on PS3 its as simple as inserting a disk and playing, install only happens once. ...

I understand and accept that. But with all the additional updates on top of that which I found to be very regular, it makes it feel very sluggish and frustrating.

[Neil]

No, even there the ps3 is more powerful. Bigger numbers doesn't mean that an xbox will run better. They're both uniquely laid out and the ps3 has separate RAM for the graphics. Slightly lower numbers mean nothing.

Are you an idiot?

The link below your post once again proves you wrong, it's actually been a known fact the PS3 was less powerful than the 360 since the release and you can't sit and deny that because it's just the truth, Sony rushed the console, put whatever they could in to make it work and still haven't got a better console, admittedly if they had less on screen the PS3 can defiantly push out better graphics but only then, guess you'll have to wait another gen before Sony can actually beat Microsoft, hopefully they'll give up by then so arguments like this go away.

[dbgtz]

PS3 is less powerful? No its a little slower because of the split RAM and because blu-rays read slower (hence installs)
Only game I know which needs more then 1 install is mgs4.

Also you say the PS3 was rushed but the 360 fails more?