November 28th, 2012
Posted in 
“Spark The American Revolution!”…
| System Breakdown | Xbox 360 Stats | PlayStation 3 Stats | Wii U Stats |
| Resolutions: | Up to 1080p | Up to 720p | Up to 1080p |
| # of Discs: | Single | Single | Single |
| HD Install: | Optional | 4.5 GB | None |
| Metacritic: |  |
 |
|
Welcome back for another exciting Heads Up! Come join us as we “Slip” our way through Assassins Creed III on the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii U to give you the “Heads Up” on which version out performs the other. Just remember, a Heads Up doesn’t have a winner or a loser – they’re designed to give our members a “Heads Up” on which version performs better on games that might have slipped through the cracks. In short, our members are the judge and jury on which version is the best. Heads Up winners and losers can be found on our Head2Head Index page. Check out the analysis below and enjoy.
Below are the videos and the frame analysis stats.
PlayStation 3 vs. Xbox 360 Analysis Video Above.
Wii U Analysis Video Above.
| PlayStation 3 Frame Analysis | Xbox 360 3 Frame Analysis | Wii U Frame Analysis |
| Clip 1 info: Length of clip: 770 frames Average FPS of clip: 26.58 Percent of torn frames: 0.0 |
Clip 1 info: Length of clip: 770 frames Average FPS of clip: 28.63 Percent of torn frames: 0.0 |
Clip 1 info: Length of clip: 1898 frames Average FPS of clip: 28.08 Percent of torn frames: 0.0 |
| Clip 2 info: Length of clip: 2015 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.07 Percent of torn frames: 0.10 |
Clip 2 info: Length of clip: 2015 frames Average FPS of clip: 32.22 Percent of torn frames: 0.0 |
Clip 2 info: Length of clip: 1989 frames Average FPS of clip: 27.36 Percent of torn frames: 0.0 |
| Clip 3 info: Length of clip: 4572 frames Average FPS of clip: 33.12 Percent of torn frames: 0.08 |
Clip 3 info: Length of clip: 4572 frames Average FPS of clip: 36.34 Percent of torn frames: 0.0 |
Clip 3 info: Length of clip: 4582 frames Average FPS of clip: 29.42 Percent of torn frames: 0.0 |
| Global percent of torn frames: 0.06 Global average FPS: 31.33 |
Global percent of torn frames: 0.0 Global average FPS: 34.41 |
Global percent of torn frames: 0.0 Global average FPS: 28.64 |
Conclusion: As you can see the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions were most definitely the lead SKU, but never the less the Wii U’s advanced architecture still held its own in the performance department. One thing to mention here is while most people on the Internet, including the media, continue bashing the Wii U’s CPU performance and graphics thus far fail to realize one major fact.
*Update* Hey folks, we wanted to let you know that we noticed some capture card interference in our analysis video which caused some phantom screen tearing. This can been seen in the first clip of the Xbox 360 vs. PS3 analysis video. However, we manually inspected each suspected screen tear on all platforms before publishing this article, and updated the stats accordingly. Long story short, the stats listed above were correct from the get go.
Although, the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 are seven year old consoles, history and experience shows that a console is at its strongest around its demise. Games like Halo 4, Uncharted 3 and Assassins Creed III, could have never been conceived of at launch. With that being said, the Wii U actually handling these games this early in its life is rather impressive, considering developers have had over seven years to optimize there code on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 CPU intensive architecture. Enough said, Lens of Truth love facts and if your interested in some facts about the Wii U and its advanced architecture you should read this article Zeldainformer.com.
Loading ...
Tags: *To ensure color accuracy from the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii U output, the PlayStation 3 has RGB Full Range set to "Full" and Super White "On", and the Xbox 360 has Reference Level set to "Expanded" and HDMI Color Space set to "RGB". Our capture card we have captured segments from the AVS HD 709 . Blu-ray, HD DVD, & MP4 Calibration suite.
As you will see, each system matches each other at the SOURCE LEVEL. No contrast or gamma settings are manipulated before or after capturing our images/videos. We strongly believe that these types of corrections are done on a individuals preference and should not be adjusted by us. Finally, washed out looking images that are due to contrast or gamma differences will not have any influence on our final verdicts. Please Read through our F.A.Q page if you have any questions or concerns.*
why do you state that the Xbox 360 has 0% torn frames in the conclusion table, but in the screen grab of the video it clearly has 0.7%???? .4% more than the PS3????
……and I think the media “bashing” of the Wii U’s CPU strength is simply in relation to what it will be up against when Sony & MS release their own next gen console. I expected more from Nintendo. I can see history repeating itself……
Remember, this is Nintendo’s “next Gen” offering. Competing with “current”.
But I do know what you mean. Not a bad effort at all this early in the game.
I have to disagree with you there Samchez,I doubt we will get a repeat with what happend with the wii when the 360 and ps3 came out’Although i do agree it will be underpowered compared to sony and microsoft’s next consoles,But think about it’this little console has alot of power in fact’and for meany people including myself im verry excited to see nintendo makeing mario/zelda/smash bro/metroid prime and meany other eclusives in HD,ok some of the games i mentioned have not been confirmed yet,It’s only a matter of time,But what im trying to say is Samchez is that it’s not all about power”Yes it is nice to have some grunt under the hood’And im sure the wii u has plenty of it,Anyway”Enough to make nintendo’s games look stunning and make people go WOW!im not gonna see this game on a sony or microsoft console’i gotta get me one of these!;]Also im not sure if this is true but i hear sony and microsoft are going a similar way with haveing not much bigger CPU’S Than what they have now’And just slapping in a beast of a GPU,Not sure if its true’but you know how words fly round,Ether way im sure the next Box and Station are not going to be to far ahead this time round.
yeah I guess. Here’s hoping they close the gap. Nintendo have always valued gamplay FIRST, and graphics SECOND anyway. The possibilities with that little screen are quite exciting, regardless of a missing shadow here, and texture missing there.
“Nintendo have always valued gamplay FIRST, and graphics SECOND anyway.”
That’s not really true at all. NES, SNES, and N64 were the most powerful consoles out at the time of their release. Something may have came out afterwards that was more powerful, but they were the best of the best when they were released. Gamecube was released the same time the Xbox was, and it was almost just as powerful.
In my opinion. Once Nintendo realized they weren’t going to be the graphics king and still be cheap, they decided to have a different gameplay style instead.
It’s not that Nintendo cares about gameplay because they’ve made a lot of shovelware games that people bought at full MSRP. Pokemon Dash(I feel sorry for the kids who got suckered into paying full price for that,) Wii Sports(even if it came with the system,) Wii Music, Wii Fit. Just about anything that’s Wii whatever. These were some of the laziest releases ever, all of them featuring the same Mii graphics and most of them were first party.
For the most part, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo care about making good games. Nintendo has slacked off quite a bit as they have their name brands to sell the product. The New Super Mario games might sell well and score high, but anyone who has played them is aware they’re nowhere near the quality of the older Mario titles and a lot of platformers released this gen. If this doesn’t coincide with your opinion, sure it might sound fanboyish, but the Little Big Planet titles have surpassed the new 2D Mario titles by far.
I’ll eventually get a Wii U and play New Super Mario Bros U. But I’m setting the bar pretty low. That way I’m not disappointed with it like I was just about every other Mario game this last gen.
I may have mentioned LBP above, but platformer fans, get Prinny and Prinny 2. These are the two best platformers you can get this past gen.
xbox and ps3 are mixed in resuls, ps3 has framerate advantage in this clips.
PS3 wins yet again. There is nothing the xbots can say that can get them out of this one.
they’ll find a way. Trust me.
Yeah, but we all know the ps3 is the superior version by far.
Head2Head Far Cry 3?
The video and the analysis table below it do not add up. Someone done goofed.
You are right, the 360 stats are supposed to be the ps3 stats.
UMMMMMM. Check the very first comment on this page.
After viewing the vids here i think you might be right.
Definitely a ps3 advantage on the LOT clip(cutscenes mainly ho hum).
Apart from a little walky forward scene.
DF have a better set of videos if you want to see the gaming fps difference when it gets busy.
It’s close but the rooftop levels definitely have an advantage on the 360.
Seems to be a very mixed set of results over certain sections on 360 and ps3.
A tie is fair.
lmao at the four “thumbs down” on my factual comment. I know Xbots are blind and delusional but thats just hilarious!!!!!! bahahahha.
Another underperforming WiiU game. Whats that all of them now and for a system that costs more money and has no HDD?!
Yep it’s a slight performance win for the 360, 10fps advantage on the rooftop levels at times for the 360 over the ps3(we’ve all seen the vids).
Ps3 does a half decent job at staying alongside the superior 360 version, but the wii-u……Ouch!
No it is not. THe ps3 performs better by 5 fps in the frontier and naval scenes. xbox does better on the city. THats it. The ps3 version wins .
City areas the most important areas for sure and judging by past pc assassin games, the most stressful areas of the game.
DigitalF: We start off with another look at the bustling reception area of the theatre, where we can this time interact with the crowds by pushing through. In terms of frame-rate the 360 comes out on top in these instances.
DF:Nevertheless, frame-rate appears anchored to the 30FPS line during traversal around woodland areas on 360, which results in perceptibly smoother motion than the 35FPS values we experience on PS3(juddering problems).
DF:Outside of differences in texture filtering and shadow draw distance, which favour Microsoft’s console by a small margin, there’s very little else that set these two versions apart in terms of image quality(still the 360 has the edge).
DF:For PS3, anything involving naval warfare or scenes around the Animus proves more digestible, giving us up to a five frame lead on average over the 360.
As i said, Seems to be a very mixed set of results over certain sections on 360 and ps3.
A tie is fair despite the 360 handling the more stressful areas better
Just accept a minor loss once in a while Android. Never known such a child.
That makes no sense, Android. If the 360 was better at handling the “more stressful” environments, then it should have no problem at handling the “less stressful” environments better as well right? Ah the spin you guys can come up with.
I hear what you’re saying CernaML, but those rooftop levels have always caused slight issues on previous assassin games on my pc(which is a decent rig).
The fact the 360 runs those sections better is a good thing imo.
The framerate does seem all over the place regarding various sections on 360 and ps3 though. Maybe we should blame the bonkers engine used
It’s a tie.
360 wins
The analysis table is screwed up. The PS3 didn’t tear at all in the videos and had a higher framerate the entire time.
Somone is trying to make the xBox 360 look better than it actually is.
That’s pretty much the entire mission statement of this site buddy. This time it’s blatant.
PS3 winning the poll pretty much show how immature Sony fanbase is!Factually 360 > PS3 > WiiU.
Sorry, its actually ps3>360>wii u
Android, the ps3 performs better during frontier and naval scenes as df said. So its a tie there.But the fact that the ps3 has exclusive dlc and only 1 disc makes it the superior version.
there should be a mistake in the stats.
Ps3 has better performance than 360 in those clips. i think staff has inverted the columns in table
You have inverted the data, from the video comparison global average FPS 31.33 is on 360 and 34.41 is on PS3
Taking everything (including the fact of extra dlc and one disc for the ps3-version) i would say it’s a very slight ps3 win. The performance and look of the game on ps3 and 360 are just about as identical as you can get (seriously, except for button-prompts, no-one would be able to tell which is which). Sooo…. yeah, i think extra content takes the edge, but 60 minutes of dlc should hardly be the diciding factor. If i had bought all the games on 360 i would probably just continue along that road.. and not be bothered. That being the said the Wii U seems to be a pretty miserable piece of kit. Hope it gets some good games soon, because i think it is an interesting platform, and i would probably buy it if it got a great system seller game
Now let’s see Far cry 3 analysis! DF gave it more or less a tie, except for some very slight shadowing issues … think i will be playing it on pc though.
I think this is wrong. The Wii U has a resolution of 1080p and yet LoT compares its performances with the ones of the other two consoles at 720p. At least do an orange to orange comparison. How does the Wii U performs at 720p? 60 fps with no tearing? Worse than at 1080p? Are developers taking care of the extra power at lower resolution? These comparisons are invalid for the Wii U. And mind me, I am a PS3 boy. But what is fair, is fair.
So when I seen Tear % does that mean Screen Tearing and How does their Application know when the screen has teared so it can count the number of screen tears?
XBOX 360 version for me…because the XBOX 360 is so awesome…and the PS3 is awesome too,…so they are both awesome..