How can most of you say that Next consoles have more power then current PC's?

  • 183 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for telefanatic
telefanatic

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 telefanatic
Member since 2007 • 3008 Posts

Thats just not plausible ? You guys think the next PS4 or Xbox will have some crazy specs ? Most PC gamers spend around $800- $1200 on a really nice rig, this is just not possible for the next consoles to have atleast a 660 GTX or a good AMD card, both 660 gtx or ATI 7950 go around for $300 on newegg, and thats what most of us have in our rigs, so you think these manufacturers will throw all these awesome parts in there and build these consoles with a starting price tag of $400 or $500 ??? I'm not even taking into consideration the ram,hdd,motherboards,cpus, and all the other little things that go into building a console, what about the next controllers ? They will probably be following the Wii U route with tablets, and thats just gonna up the price even more! So with that discuss.

Avatar image for Jonwh18
Jonwh18

9350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Jonwh18
Member since 2009 • 9350 Posts

#1 I don't think next en consoles will be better then current gen PC's

#2 there are some major problems with your agruement though. More $$$ does not = better hardware. The Mac line is a great example of this. PC's are indeed better, but it certainly isn't because of their price tag anlone.

Avatar image for Videodogg
Videodogg

12611

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 Videodogg
Member since 2002 • 12611 Posts

I have a GTX680, I5 cpu and 12 gig DDR3 ram. I dont think any next gen console will even come close to those specs.

But we all know it is not just about specs. Most pc games dont even come close to using the hardware i spent so much money on. Console games are optimized better and get better results using less specs available, so i would expect many next gen games to look on par with anything my PC is capable. Just Saying.

Avatar image for ultimate-k
ultimate-k

2348

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 ultimate-k
Member since 2010 • 2348 Posts

You have to remember that gaming companies, buy the hardware from compainies such as AMD in bulk, so therfore they alot cheaper for them.

Avatar image for Jonwh18
Jonwh18

9350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Jonwh18
Member since 2009 • 9350 Posts

I have a GTX680, I5 cpu and 12 gig DDR3 ram. I dont think any next gen console will even come close to those specs.

But we all know it is not just about specs. Most pc games dont even come close to using the hardware i spent so much money on. Console games are optimized better and get better results using less specs available, so i would expect many next gen games to look on par with anything my PC is capable. Just Saying.

Videodogg

not really. WE really only see really optimized game later in the gen when devs are trying to squeeze ever last bit out of consoles. At the beginning of a generation there isn't a whole lot of optimization going on.

Avatar image for deactivated-59b71619573a1
deactivated-59b71619573a1

38222

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 deactivated-59b71619573a1
Member since 2007 • 38222 Posts

Don't think they are saying they will have more power, just better looking games. Never seen anyone say it will be more powerful than a current PC hardware wise, unless they say it just to get a rise out of people.

Avatar image for Bebi_vegeta
Bebi_vegeta

13558

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Bebi_vegeta
Member since 2003 • 13558 Posts

#1 I don't think next en consoles will be better then current gen PC's

#2 there are some major problems with your agruement though. More $$$ does not = better hardware. The Mac line is a great example of this. PC's are indeed better, but it certainly isn't because of their price tag anlone.

Jonwh18

PC have a bigger price tag... because you can do everything with it.

Avatar image for telefanatic
telefanatic

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 telefanatic
Member since 2007 • 3008 Posts

[QUOTE="Videodogg"]

I have a GTX680, I5 cpu and 12 gig DDR3 ram. I dont think any next gen console will even come close to those specs.

But we all know it is not just about specs. Most pc games dont even come close to using the hardware i spent so much money on. Console games are optimized better and get better results using less specs available, so i would expect many next gen games to look on par with anything my PC is capable. Just Saying.

Jonwh18

not really. WE really only see really optimized game later in the gen when devs are trying to squeeze ever last bit out of consoles. At the beginning of a generation there isn't a whole lot of optimization going on.

That is true Ghost Recon Advanced Warrior tottaly blew me away graphicaly on 360 and Gears of War, there was also Resident Evil 4 on Gamecube which looked fantastic for its time. Then we got Crysis and everything looked like $hit afte that., thats not what i meant really, i just a ton of threads where people state that the next consoles will be a lot more powerful then most gaming rigs that we have. Thats a lie,

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
KillzoneSnake

2761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 37

User Lists: 0

#9 KillzoneSnake
Member since 2012 • 2761 Posts

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

Avatar image for free_milk
free_milk

3903

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#10 free_milk
Member since 2011 • 3903 Posts

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

KillzoneSnake
Consolite arrogance....
Avatar image for ClassicRockFTW
ClassicRockFTW

1106

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 ClassicRockFTW
Member since 2012 • 1106 Posts

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

KillzoneSnake

nope

aINYb1.gif

Avatar image for whiskeystrike
whiskeystrike

12213

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 whiskeystrike
Member since 2011 • 12213 Posts

I think anyone who really cares that much about console graphics compared to PC either has plans to build a PC or is trolling. I doubt your average PS3/360 gamer cares about the graphical capabilties of a PC and if next gen consoles are going to top it.

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#13 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

KillzoneSnake

PS3 came out in 2006 and the 8800GTX that is older still play games with better graphics and performance than ps3.

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
KillzoneSnake

2761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 37

User Lists: 0

#14 KillzoneSnake
Member since 2012 • 2761 Posts

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

ClassicRockFTW

nope

yep. and that is why what ever PC you have right now will not have graphics as good as PS4 :cool:

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
KillzoneSnake

2761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 37

User Lists: 0

#15 KillzoneSnake
Member since 2012 • 2761 Posts

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

MK-Professor

PS3 came out in 2006 and the 8800GTX that is older still play games with better graphics and performance than ps3.

an 8800 GTX came out at the same time as the PS3 :roll:

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#16 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

KillzoneSnake

PS3 came out in 2006 and the 8800GTX that is older still play games with better graphics and performance than ps3.

an 8800 GTX came out at the same time as the PS3 :roll:

not realy

8800 GTX - release date November 06 2006(that complete destroys the ps3 even in today games, and that is only one GPU NOT two)

ps3 - release date japan and N.America November 11 2006 and Europe March 23 2007

why wait 5 months to get an inferior hardware?

Avatar image for SamiRDuran
SamiRDuran

2758

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#17 SamiRDuran
Member since 2005 • 2758 Posts

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

MK-Professor

PS3 came out in 2006 and the 8800GTX that is older still play games with better graphics and performance than ps3.

+1

Avatar image for AmazonTreeBoa
AmazonTreeBoa

16745

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 AmazonTreeBoa
Member since 2011 • 16745 Posts

#1 I don't think next en consoles will be better then current gen PC's

#2 there are some major problems with your agruement though. More $$$ does not = better hardware. The Mac line is a great example of this. PC's are indeed better, but it certainly isn't because of their price tag anlone.

Jonwh18
He is talking the price of the parts, you are talking a prebuild system made by the manufacturer and way over priced. BIG difference there.
Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
KillzoneSnake

2761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 37

User Lists: 0

#19 KillzoneSnake
Member since 2012 • 2761 Posts

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

PS3 came out in 2006 and the 8800GTX that is older still play games with better graphics and performance than ps3.

MK-Professor

an 8800 GTX came out at the same time as the PS3 :roll:

not realy

8800 GTX - release date November 06 2006(that complete destroys the ps3 even in today games, and that is only one GPU NOT two)

ps3 - release date japan and N.America November 11 2006 and Europe March 23 2007

why wait 5 months to get an inferior hardware?

they both came out NOVEMBER 2006. So yes they came out as the same time.

lol funny guy :lol:

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#20 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

an 8800 GTX came out at the same time as the PS3 :roll:

KillzoneSnake

not realy

8800 GTX - release date November 06 2006(that complete destroys the ps3 even in today games, and that is only one GPU NOT two)

ps3 - release date japan and N.America November 11 2006 and Europe March 23 2007

why wait 5 months to get an inferior hardware?

they both came out NOVEMBER 2006. So yes they came out as the same time.

lol funny guy :lol:

nope

I live in europe, so it came in March 23 2007 and the 8800 GTX November 06 2006.

Avatar image for clyde46
clyde46

49061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#21 clyde46
Member since 2005 • 49061 Posts

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

an 8800 GTX came out at the same time as the PS3 :roll:

KillzoneSnake

not realy

8800 GTX - release date November 06 2006(that complete destroys the ps3 even in today games, and that is only one GPU NOT two)

ps3 - release date japan and N.America November 11 2006 and Europe March 23 2007

why wait 5 months to get an inferior hardware?

they both came out NOVEMBER 2006. So yes they came out as the same time.

lol funny guy :lol:

The PS3 came out here in 2007, thus it was 5-6 months late.
Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
KillzoneSnake

2761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 37

User Lists: 0

#22 KillzoneSnake
Member since 2012 • 2761 Posts

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

not realy

8800 GTX - release date November 06 2006(that complete destroys the ps3 even in today games, and that is only one GPU NOT two)

ps3 - release date japan and N.America November 11 2006 and Europe March 23 2007

why wait 5 months to get an inferior hardware?

MK-Professor

they both came out NOVEMBER 2006. So yes they came out as the same time.

lol funny guy :lol:

nope

I live in europe, so it came in March 23 2007 and the 8800 GTX November 06 2006.

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

Avatar image for clyde46
clyde46

49061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#23 clyde46
Member since 2005 • 49061 Posts

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

they both came out NOVEMBER 2006. So yes they came out as the same time.

lol funny guy :lol:

KillzoneSnake

nope

I live in europe, so it came in March 23 2007 and the 8800 GTX November 06 2006.

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

Regardless, the PS3 was trumped as it walked out the door.
Avatar image for rockydog1111
rockydog1111

2079

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#24 rockydog1111
Member since 2006 • 2079 Posts

They won't be better, but did you ever think the 360 and PS3 would be pushing their hardware to where it is now? Not to the level of PC gaming, but good enough for most people.

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
KillzoneSnake

2761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 37

User Lists: 0

#25 KillzoneSnake
Member since 2012 • 2761 Posts

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

nope

I live in europe, so it came in March 23 2007 and the 8800 GTX November 06 2006.

clyde46

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

Regardless, the PS3 was trumped as it walked out the door.

and then come out the best looking exclusives.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vxNO3w8c8g

poor 8800gtx today, so useless. ps3 still has another year of great looking exclusives ;)

Avatar image for clyde46
clyde46

49061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#26 clyde46
Member since 2005 • 49061 Posts

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

KillzoneSnake

Regardless, the PS3 was trumped as it walked out the door.

and then come out the best looking exclusives.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vxNO3w8c8g

poor 8800gtx today, so useless. ps3 still has another year of great looking exclusives ;)

The 8800GTX can still play games today at high settings. The 8800 series is 6 generations old and it still can beat the PS3 in terms of graphics and physics.
Avatar image for Gue1
Gue1

12171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#27 Gue1
Member since 2004 • 12171 Posts

They won't be better, but did you ever think the 360 and PS3 would be pushing their hardware to where it is now? Not to the level of PC gaming, but good enough for most people.

rockydog1111

not just good enough but a significant jump from prior consoles. I will never support a console that pull off a Wii. If the PS4 graphics look the same as what we have now with the PS3 and X360 then I will not buy that garbage.

Avatar image for Jonwh18
Jonwh18

9350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 Jonwh18
Member since 2009 • 9350 Posts

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

nope

I live in europe, so it came in March 23 2007 and the 8800 GTX November 06 2006.

clyde46

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

Regardless, the PS3 was trumped as it walked out the door.

serious question, so for $637.50 ( a launch PS3 plus sales tax) you could get a PC in 2006 that out performs a PS3, along with basic methods of input for that PC (M + KB) and can still play today's AAA games like Assassin's creed 3 at a higher frame rate & resolution then a PS3?

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#29 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

KillzoneSnake

Regardless, the PS3 was trumped as it walked out the door.

and then come out the best looking exclusives.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vxNO3w8c8g

poor 8800gtx today, so useless. ps3 still has another year of great looking exclusives ;)

poor ps3 that even a prehistoric ATI x1950 pro (that is 2 times SLOWER than the newer 8800GTX) play games like crysis 2 with slightly better graphics and performance than ps3 lol.giflol.giflol.gif video

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#30 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

they both came out NOVEMBER 2006. So yes they came out as the same time.

lol funny guy :lol:

KillzoneSnake

nope

I live in europe, so it came in March 23 2007 and the 8800 GTX November 06 2006.

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

and it is still older, why wait to get an inferior hardware?

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

"How can most of you say that Next console have more power then current PC's?"

That's easy, no one is.

----

Your arguments are trash, btw. A 1800XT/7800gtx cost around 500$ when the 360 was released, yet the 360's GPU was comparable to both.

"both 660 gtx or ATI 7950 go around for $300 on newegg, and thats what most of us have in our rigs"

No, 'most' of us have lesser GPU's, I think the 8800gt is one of the most common GPU's according to the Steam HW-Survey. And I have a 5850.

"I'm not even taking into consideration the ram,hdd,motherboards"

Which have nothing to do with "power"

----

The biggest issue with "power" of the next consoles isn't the cost of parts, it's the heat they put off and the desire of MS/Sony. "How much crap can we shove into a tiny box, and what is most cost effective for us?" Though there's a consideration of cost, it's not "if we spend more, we die (well, maybe for Sony it is)", it's "who can spend the least and win"

PS3 destroys near all PC's you could build in 2005. But... being a console you dont even need to be as strong as a PC to beat it. Consoles have optimizing PC gaming will never have. Also very strong dev support helps (naughty dog, santa monica, guerrilla games :cool:)

KillzoneSnake


As far as consumers were concerned PS3 didn't even exist in 2005, 360 did.

Avatar image for GotNugz
GotNugz

681

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 GotNugz
Member since 2010 • 681 Posts
Remind me again what pc was faster than 360 or PS3 in late 2004 early 2005? Oh that's right there wasn't one. Remind me again what pc games trounced PS2 games in 2000? Oh right not much. Remind me again why theN64 destroyed anything on pc at launch in the 90's. people need to get a grip and look at history consoles have always been powerful at launch. Just as you say a gtx 680 is $500 well guess what an ati 1800XT was $550 in 2005 and Xenos was more than comparable. You do realize they sell consoles at a loss and that with their contracts with hardware companies they get stuff much cheaper than you ever will. So to get to the point it's very plausible if not probable that next gen consoles will have stuff that's high end.
Avatar image for Farsendor1
Farsendor1

462

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 Farsendor1
Member since 2012 • 462 Posts

hey Gots ps3 came out in 2006 not 2005

Avatar image for clyde46
clyde46

49061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#34 clyde46
Member since 2005 • 49061 Posts

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

Jonwh18

Regardless, the PS3 was trumped as it walked out the door.

serious question, so for $637.50 ( a launch PS3 plus sales tax) you could get a PC in 2006 that out performs a PS3, along with basic methods of input for that PC (M + KB) and can still play today's AAA games like Assassin's creed 3 at a higher frame rate & resolution then a PS3?

In the UK, the PS3 was about $800.
Avatar image for GarGx1
GarGx1

10934

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#35 GarGx1
Member since 2011 • 10934 Posts

The main reason that the next consoles will not be up to spec with a good PC and absolutely no chance against a top line PC is the time this generation has dwindled on for, and continues to do so. The hardware gap is enormous, gaming rigs are at least 10x more powerful than this generations consoles and will increase again next year and the year after that.

Assuming that the next consoles are getting released in 2014, it pretty much means they'll have this years mid range tech (if we're lucky) to be affordable, last years tech is looking more likely though as they will want to be profitable straight off the bat (especially taking into account Sony's finacial woahs). This will still be a 'quantum leap' in terms of console capability and I'm sure that the devs will do amazing things with them but they will not be anywhere close to the power of a top range PC running an intel i9 8 core cpu @ 6 Ghz? with 32GB Ram 2xNvidia GTX 880's in SLI (I'm obviously projecting the specs into 2014)

Avatar image for AM-Gamer
AM-Gamer

8116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 AM-Gamer
Member since 2012 • 8116 Posts

Thats just not plausible ? You guys think the next PS4 or Xbox will have some crazy specs ? Most PC gamers spend around $800- $1200 on a really nice rig, this is just not possible for the next consoles to have atleast a 660 GTX or a good AMD card, both 660 gtx or ATI 7950 go around for $300 on newegg, and thats what most of us have in our rigs, so you think these manufacturers will throw all these awesome parts in there and build these consoles with a starting price tag of $400 or $500 ??? I'm not even taking into consideration the ram,hdd,motherboards,cpus, and all the other little things that go into building a console, what about the next controllers ? They will probably be following the Wii U route with tablets, and thats just gonna up the price even more! So with that discuss.

telefanatic

LMAO system warriors crack me up!!! You think Sony and MS just go to newegg and slap a console together like some hermit does when he builds his pc? They spend billions on Research and developement and they get massive bulk discounts and then usually sell the hardware for a loss. A console that cost $600 to produce for an example would cost a pc gamre nearly double that to build themselves as they are buying each product with at least a 10% mark up. Not to mention a console is designed to work for the soul purpose of playing games while a pc is multiple parts slapped together. You are an idiot and a prime example of why some hermits are just a complete joke.

Avatar image for Bebi_vegeta
Bebi_vegeta

13558

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 Bebi_vegeta
Member since 2003 • 13558 Posts

Remind me again what pc was faster than 360 or PS3 in late 2004 early 2005? Oh that's right there wasn't one. Remind me again what pc games trounced PS2 games in 2000? Oh right not much. Remind me again why theN64 destroyed anything on pc at launch in the 90's. people need to get a grip and look at history consoles have always been powerful at launch. Just as you say a gtx 680 is $500 well guess what an ati 1800XT was $550 in 2005 and Xenos was more than comparable. You do realize they sell consoles at a loss and that with their contracts with hardware companies they get stuff much cheaper than you ever will. So to get to the point it's very plausible if not probable that next gen consoles will have stuff that's high end.GotNugz

There was plenty of PC back then more powerfull then PS3 or X360... Let's not even go there, SLI/Crossfire.

Yeah may get high end stuff, but there will always be something better on PC... it's time realise, there's no limit for PC.

Avatar image for Jonwh18
Jonwh18

9350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 Jonwh18
Member since 2009 • 9350 Posts

[QUOTE="Jonwh18"]

[QUOTE="clyde46"] Regardless, the PS3 was trumped as it walked out the door.clyde46

serious question, so for $637.50 ( a launch PS3 plus sales tax) you could get a PC in 2006 that out performs a PS3, along with basic methods of input for that PC (M + KB) and can still play today's AAA games like Assassin's creed 3 at a higher frame rate & resolution then a PS3?

In the UK, the PS3 was about $800.

if it was the UK wouldn't it be in euros? Either way I live in the US. Use US PC parts from 2006 if it amkes you feel better.

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#39 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="Jonwh18"] serious question, so for $637.50 ( a launch PS3 plus sales tax) you could get a PC in 2006 that out performs a PS3, along with basic methods of input for that PC (M + KB) and can still play today's AAA games like Assassin's creed 3 at a higher frame rate & resolution then a PS3?

Jonwh18

In the UK, the PS3 was about $800.

if it was the UK wouldn't it be in euros? Either way I live in the US. Use US PC parts from 2006 if it amkes you feel better.

UK use pounds,
anyway to answer your question:

back in 2006


gaming PC (qx6700, 8800GTX, 4GB ram, etc) for $1800
ps3 for $600 & low-end pc for $400 (Let's face it, everyone need a pc) = $1000

ps3 games cost on avenger 15$ more than pc games so,
an average gamer buy 12 games per year that means, 15x12 = $180 per year more expensive, 180x6 = $1080 in 6 years.

conclusion:
the above gaming PC will cost you $1800
and the ps3 with cost you $600+$400+$1080 = $2080

as you can see it came out cheaper and you play games with better graphics and performance than consoles.

Avatar image for Jonwh18
Jonwh18

9350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 Jonwh18
Member since 2009 • 9350 Posts

[QUOTE="Jonwh18"]

[QUOTE="clyde46"] In the UK, the PS3 was about $800.MK-Professor

if it was the UK wouldn't it be in euros? Either way I live in the US. Use US PC parts from 2006 if it amkes you feel better.

UK use pounds,
anyway to answer your question:

back in 2006


gaming PC (qx6700, 8800GTX, 4GB ram, etc) for $1800
ps3 for $600 & low-end pc for $400 (Let's face it, everyone need a pc) = $1000

ps3 games cost on avenger 15$ more than pc games so,
an average gamer buy 12 games per year that means, 15x12 = $180 per year more expensive, 180x6 = $1080 in 6 years.

conclusion:
the above gaming PC will cost you $1800
and the ps3 with cost you $600+$400+$1080 = $2080

as you can see it came out cheaper and you play games with better graphics and performance than consoles.

you can't just make random assumptions and throw in games and other stuff to infate the cost of one system or the other. We're looking at what you would get in the box of a launch PS3 fat. The gaming system and a method of input.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
lundy86_4

61509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#41 lundy86_4
Member since 2003 • 61509 Posts

There isn't going to be a major change in architecture this time around, so the consoles aren't going to get as close the the PC in terms of power. Especially now that multi-GPU setups are more viable.

Avatar image for Riadon2
Riadon2

1598

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 Riadon2
Member since 2011 • 1598 Posts

Only trolls say that.

I suppose that accounts for most posters, though.

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#43 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="Jonwh18"] if it was the UK wouldn't it be in euros? Either way I live in the US. Use US PC parts from 2006 if it amkes you feel better.

Jonwh18

UK use pounds,
anyway to answer your question:

back in 2006


gaming PC (qx6700, 8800GTX, 4GB ram, etc) for $1800
ps3 for $600 & low-end pc for $400 (Let's face it, everyone need a pc) = $1000

ps3 games cost on avenger 15$ more than pc games so,
an average gamer buy 12 games per year that means, 15x12 = $180 per year more expensive, 180x6 = $1080 in 6 years.

conclusion:
the above gaming PC will cost you $1800
and the ps3 with cost you $600+$400+$1080 = $2080

as you can see it came out cheaper and you play games with better graphics and performance than consoles.

you can't just make random assumptions and throw in games and other stuff to infate the cost of one system or the other. We're looking at what you would get in the box of a launch PS3 fat. The gaming system and a method of input.

These are not random assumptions but facts, of course the upfront cost of the system above is greater because play games with better graphics and performance and also can do a million things more. But in the long run it came cheaper.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
lundy86_4

61509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#44 lundy86_4
Member since 2003 • 61509 Posts

These are not random assumptions but facts, of course the upfront cost of the system above is greater because play games with better graphics and performance and also can do a million things more. But in the long run it came cheaper.

MK-Professor

Nope, they are random assumptions. Where are you getting the amount of games an average gamer will buy? Let alone the fact that sales do happen for console titles, and I personally, get $20 off every big release I pre-order from Best Buy. I got AC3 for $50 after taxes.

Avatar image for SwarmKing
SwarmKing

106

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 SwarmKing
Member since 2012 • 106 Posts

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="KillzoneSnake"]

thats too bad for you. still PS3 came out 2006 :) 2009 if you live in thailand LOL

KillzoneSnake

Regardless, the PS3 was trumped as it walked out the door.

and then come out the best looking exclusives.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vxNO3w8c8g

poor 8800gtx today, so useless. ps3 still has another year of great looking exclusives ;)

Buddy, if you want to troll you should do so subtly. The ";)" makes it too obvious but maybe my trollradar is advanced from my years on this place.
Avatar image for Riadon2
Riadon2

1598

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 Riadon2
Member since 2011 • 1598 Posts

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

These are not random assumptions but facts, of course the upfront cost of the system above is greater because play games with better graphics and performance and also can do a million things more. But in the long run it came cheaper.

lundy86_4

Nope, they are random assumptions. Where are you getting the amount of games an average gamer will buy? Let alone the fact that sales do happen for console titles, and I personally, get $20 off every big release I pre-order from Best Buy. I got AC3 for $50 after taxes.

Everyone I know who knows about Steam sales buys at least 12 games per sale, and many inbetween.

If you are bragging about getting AC3 for $50, I am led that PC and console gamers have different definitions of a "sale". When you get AC3 for 30 dollars or less, we'll talk.

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#47 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

These are not random assumptions but facts, of course the upfront cost of the system above is greater because play games with better graphics and performance and also can do a million things more. But in the long run it came cheaper.

lundy86_4

Nope, they are random assumptions. Where are you getting the amount of games an average gamer will buy? Let alone the fact that sales do happen for console titles, and I personally, get $20 off every big release I pre-order from Best Buy. I got AC3 for $50 after taxes.

in fact when i say "ps3 games cost on avenger 15$ more than pc games so" i was a bit generous i usually get pc games on one third of the console price.

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23832

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#48 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23832 Posts
There are multiple factors why the next consoles will not be powerhouses compared to modern high end pc's. The economy is the main factor and how much the masses are willing to spend. The fact that MS and Sony lost major amounts of money for years because of design and putting together an expensive generation from part choices to reliability factors, while Nintendo pretty much made money from the start until the decline of Wii sales in 2010. MS & Sony want to break even or start making profit from the get go, which means that they can not design an expensive console and take losses. Next are the issues that arise from using high end cpu's and gpu's. The power requirements and the need will increase the console to be more expensive, along with the need for more/bigger/better cooling solutions.
Avatar image for percuvius2
percuvius2

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 percuvius2
Member since 2004 • 1982 Posts

I don't expect next gen consoles to out perform my CPU or RAM, but I do expect better GPU performance than my 7870 by the time the neXtBOX launches.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
lundy86_4

61509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#50 lundy86_4
Member since 2003 • 61509 Posts

in fact when i say "ps3 games cost on avenger 15$ more than pc games so" i was a bit generous i usually get pc games on one third of the console price.

MK-Professor

What does this teach you? Unless you have a large enough sampling, you are talking out of your ass. You don't know the average cost of games. If you have a study with a reasonable conclusion, then show it to us.

Furthermore, do you have a study naming the average amount of games an individual will buy?

Your entire post was based off of assumptions.

----

You aren't debating with a child here, so put up, or shut up.