PS3 Slim Vs. Xbox 360 Elite Hardware: Pretty Cut and Dry?

[wraggster]

Kotaku made a handy chart comparing the two $300 game consoles from Microsoft and Sony, and it sure looks like the PS3 comes out on top. Unfortunately, none of this stuff actually sells consoles.

PS3 Slim Xbox 360 Elite
Price $299 $299
Color Black Black
Hard Disk Size 120GB 120GB
USB Ports 2 3
WiFi Built-In $99 Add On
Disc Drive Blu-ray/DVD/CD DVD/CD
HDMI Yes, no cable included Yes, no cable included
Bluetooth Yes No
Controllers Included One One
Last Generation Backwards Compatibility No Partial
Online Play Free $50 a year
Dimensions 290 × 65 × 290 mm 310 x 80 x 260 mm
Weight 3.2 kg 3.5 kg


Yes, Blu-ray is a big aspect of what makes the PS3 appealing. But for gamers, is that a huge selling point? As for Wi-Fi, well, that depends on your setup. Most gamers who are serious about playing online probably would rather plug their console right into their router. And Bluetooth? Who gives a $#@! about Bluetooth?

To be fair, there are definite advantages to PS3 that make it appear to be a better value. Really want a Blu-ray player? Home theater setup too far away from your router to plug the console right in? Turned off by an annual charge for online services? The PS3 is right up your alley.

But for many people who are interested in serious gaming consoles, what matters most is software, not hardware. And the Xbox 360 arguably has the best games library and the best online service. And for me at least, that makes up for Bluetooth and Wi-Fi about 50 times over, which is why I would personally recommend the Xbox 360 to a friend over the PS3. But despite that fact, the decision as to what console to buy has never been harder.

Aw, what the hell. Just buy both

http://gizmodo.com/5346969/ps3-slim-...ty-cut-and-dry

[Stone Temple Pilots]

I bought my PS3 initially cause I've been a loyal PlayStation gamer since I first got the PSX in 1997. Also, the free-online play and built in Wi-Fi is what completely sealed the deal. And don't even get me started on the PSone Classics on the PS Store! I LOVE MY PS3. And at $299, who couldn't?

[Eviltaco64]

Just for the hell of it, I made a comparison chart myself:



It's meant to be as unbiased as possible.

[Darksaviour69]

Eviltaco64, just to point out that RRoD has been fixed with the jasper board which has been out for a while now, so only really a factor if your buying 2nd hand.

Also PSone classic < xbox originals? is that not really a personal preference?

also Elite and slim are £199 in the UK ( gold is £40)

also max wireless players on the xbox is 4, but i think you can have 4 wireless + more wired, but i'm not sure

also if they are both 120gb drives how can one be better than the other?

also you could add under downfalls for ps3, less software library than xbox 360, but i would keep that black as its still personal preference

[Eviltaco64]

Eviltaco64, just to point out that RRoD has been fixed with the jasper board which has been out for a while now, so only really a factor if your buying 2nd hand.

It fixed a good number of them, but that doesn't explain why my one friends 360 from around January of this year got the RRoD.

Also PSone classic < xbox originals? is that not really a personal preference?

Apparently, Microsoft is done with Xbox originals and they aren't adding any new games (http://kotaku.com/5294582/microsoft-...xbox-originals). PSOne Classic, however, is still alive and kicking.

To be fair, I also said that Xbox 360 was better with backwards compatibility.

also Elite and slim are £199 in the UK ( gold is £40)

Whoops, my mistake. All the information I gathered about their UK prices was on here. :/

also max wireless players on the xbox is 4, but i think you can have 4 wireless + more wired, but i'm not sure

I think 360 only handles 4 controllers alone (there's only four lights for input on the console, at least). If you want to play a game using more that four controllers, I think you have to system link.

also if they are both 120gb drives how can one be better than the other?

A 2.5" SATA drive for a PS3 is a lot cheaper than a proprietary 360 drive.

You can get a new 320GB drive for your PS3 for $60 vs a 120GB 360 drive for $120.

also you could add under downfalls for ps3, less software library than xbox 360, but i would keep that black as its still personal preference

That is true, but as you said, it's all about personal preference.

[Darksaviour69]

But traditional RRoD has been fixed, but that does not mean the the xbox can't break down just like any device. The general thinking these days is the jasper has fixed the high number of RRoDs. (remember RRoD is can mean a load of different error, really RRoD should be called E74)

good point on the ps1 classics vs Xbox originals

About the drives, yes they are cheaper on the ps3, if bought separately , but for your £199 console you get the same sized HD

[Eviltaco64]

But traditional RRoD has been fixed, but that does not mean the the xbox can't break down just like any device. The general thinking these days is the jasper has fixed the high number of RRoDs. (remember RRoD is can mean a load of different error, really RRoD should be called E74)

good point on the ps1 classics vs Xbox originals

About the drives, yes they are cheaper on the ps3, if bought separately , but for your £199 console you get the same sized HD

That's why I said it may get the RRoD. It's notorious for having issues. Still, most 360's I fix these days are from early 2006 or so.

It's not about the drive size for me, it's just that it's much easier to upgrade to a higher capacity on the PS3 than the 360 which could be useful.

I do believe you can pull off some sort of mod to use a standard SATA hard drive with the 360, but it does require a lot more work. That's really the only reason the PS3 beats it when it comes to hard drives.

[Darksaviour69]

but my point is that the new jasper board is not notorious for having issues (I don't know anyone with a jasper board that has had any problems). The fail rate of the new 360 is most likely the same as the ps3 slim (unless you have evidence to the counter), which makes "possible RRoD" an unbalanced statement.

yes its easier and cheaper to update the ps3 hd, but you chart implies that the ps3 120gb is better than 360's 120gb, while its the same. Most ps3 owners will not install their own bigger HD. I still think to to fair they should be marked the same but a note that it cheaper to update your ps3 HD.

also, yes there is a hack to installing your own HD for the 360, but the 360 won't use anything higher than 120gb e.g if you install a 300gb hd the 360 will only use 120gb, which sucks

[Eviltaco64]

Ok, I made a few small revisions to the controversial comparison chart:

[Stone Temple Pilots]

The PS3's HDD (on the chart) should stay green as the SATA drive can be used in more than the PS3 signifying it's diversity. Where as the 360's is... well, proprietary.