Go ahead.

Portland State seems to be more of a continental philosophy school that includes some basic exposure to the analytic side (similar to the program I graduated from).  You're going to be exposed mainly to the ancients (Plato and Aristotle) and mostly 18th and 19th century European thinkers such as Nietzsche (who I see you've already read), Kierkegaard, Kant, Hegel, Sartre, Heidegger, etc. in subjects such as existentialism, phenomenology, and idealism.  To be totally honest, continental philosophy is a dying art.  It really just depends on what your long term plans are, but if you plan to get a job teaching philosophy, you're going to have a very hard time getting work with a continental background even if you study with the best of the best.

Buffalo on the other hand looks like a more common analytic school.  You're going to get exposure to the foundations of philosophy with the ancients of course (albeit with a 20th century slant), as well as Russell (who I see you've also read), Wittgenstein, Godel, Frege, Austin, and Searle in topics such as logic, language, philosophies of science and mathematics, and mind.  This is probably the route you want to take if you're interested in working in the field after you graduate.

But like I said, I'm partial to the existentialism and phenomenology of the continental tradition, but it's been impractical to say the least.  I'm doing linguistics now in an upstart grad program, so although it landed me a free Master's degree along with teaching experience, it hasn't exactly turned out the way I envisioned it. 

Either way, good luck. 

Having attended neither of the universities mentioned, it is difficult for me to comment on them. Still, just by examining their websites, I agree with jmm. But if you are asking me which universities you think are best at philosophy, then to put points at their crudest, the British are better than the Americans, at least in terms of prestige. Whereas the Americans surely have the best scientific institutions such as CalTech, MIT, Harvey Mudd, etc, the earning of a B.Phil, which is a misnomer since it is a Master's degree, is immensely prestigious, especially at Oxford, which, again, to put points at their crudest, has a better philosophy faculty than rival Cambridge. Although that is not to say, obviously, that the Americans have not turned out some brilliant philosophers (Searle, Nozick, Dennett, Quine etc.)

If you are new to philosophy and are looking for a place to start, then I reccomend the most obvious starting point. And in philosophy, everything starts with Descartes.

Really, it depends what you are interested in, although most Enlightenment-era thinkers have written on multiple different philosophical controversies. If, for you example, you find particular interest in how humans gain knowledge and whether it is possible to do so, you must start with Descartes, then Hume on induction, Kant on transcendentalism and Berkeley on idealism. If you are interested in the nature of reality and that which you percieve, start with Spinoza on bare-order property, then Hume on bundle theory. Philosophy of mind as an area of strong research is a relatively new discipline. Start with Descartes again, even though, lacking access to modern data and tools, virtually everything he said on this matter was wrong. For modern introductions to the problems of the mind, start with Putnam on functionalism, Searle on the Chinese room, then Dennett on heterogenity, and Nozick on reality and simulation. 

Also, if you are finding it difficult to get the books by these authors or are finding it takes too long, use SEP. SEP is a good introductory resource. Never use wikipedia.

And also... are the differences between the two, continental and analytic, mainly based off just the different writers and topics I will learn about?