webreg
Apprentice
John Carmack "normal benchmarking" is more than good enough because his "rigorous benchmarking" would be something that maybe ten people on this world could even understand. Your further post delves into exactly that kind of theorycraft that has only very limited value since it has nothing to to with the consoles themselves which can still change some specs around (although unlikely). In any case such differences are not relevant in the market and the day to day programming in the industry. The games will simply be programmed and optimized to the lowest common denominator. The weaker box will be the target spec for all next gen games.Okay so you have said "it's nice to see it verified by an expert" - Nothing has been verified by anyone. He clearly states (see the link in op) that "I haven't done really rigorous benchmarking". So no tests have been done from which he can base his comments.
The PS3 would have been theoretically (and practically) stronger than the 360 but almost every multi-plattform game ran worse and looked weaker on it. This had obviously to do with the unique architecture of the PS3 and the incredible bad documentation (in japanese) which made it a hassle to optimize the games for the platform but even without those peripheral problems the games would still never have looked better on the PS3 because it would have been a wasted effort anyway. And we are not even speaking about the political entanglements between companies here which are sometimes an even larger factor.