GPU comparison - PC, 360, PS3 - time to stop the console over PC hype

[QUOTE="evildead6789"]

Yes it was done three years ago.... actually it was done 4 years ago with the 8800GTX giving 3x the gpu power and 3x the memory then what the console offered

The main downfall of both consoles are the lack of resources. Which affects everything that they do. Just with using higher resolutions on a Pc version can make the console version look dull and blurry even with nearly the same graphical settings.

No you wouldnt need to buy a whole new system sigh.... Any single core cpu like a Pentium 4 or Athlon 64was enough to play any game all the way into 2007. In late 2005/early 2006, I had a Geforce 7600 which had graphics better then the 360 with multiplatform games and ran at a higher resolution to begin with and it wasnt a $400 card. Even in games like Oblivion Prey or any of CoD's during that timeframe my 7600 out did the the consoles graphically.

04dcarraher

Yeah the 8800 gtx came out in november 2006 but who could afford that, you could buy 3 x360 for the price of a 8800 gtx and then you only had avga card lol.And the price didn't really drop in 2007. And most pc-users don't have high end cards in their pc and the coming of the 8800 gtx didn't really push the prices down of the cards like 7800 gtx and x1900 xt to compete with the x360 graphics

The main downfall of consoles and it's with every console like that is because the continuing evolution in technology the hardware gets outdated after some years, soyou can hardly speak of a downfall lol.

I wouldn't need to buy a new system sigh lol. i did buy a 7600 gt first in a desperaty cry to save my aging system .The 7600 gt is way better than your7600 gs and i had a p4 3 ghz. A game like oblivionran yes but not like on the x360.

Well after trying some games with the new 7600 gt(like oblivion, rainbow six vegas, king kong, condemned) and after seeing the quality of the x360 I wasn't really going to wait to be further demoralized. Off course the 7600 gt could play fear better, halflife 2 episode1hitman blood moneyran at medium settings but seeing the differencei knew where it was going to end.Me buying a whole new pc for a lot more than 270$ if I wanted the same quality of the x360.

So end 2006 i bought an x360. After i boughtitI could play gears of war,rainbox six, king, condemned, oblivion in top notch graphics, Later in 2007 call of duty 4,mass effect, bioshockI know there are some exclusives that you can't really comparebecause those gamesdidn't came out for pc but still the difference in quality was enormousand all this for a 270$. You can bash the x360 all you want today but back then it was a much better option if you didn't want to threw your moneyaway buying a way overpriced pc.

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

to be honest, my 4850 isnt even cutting anymore. I look at a killzone 3 gameplay and go DAYUM. I severly want a 6950. but life expenses superseed time wasting ones.

Jesus_on_fire

Well, I think that at the time that xbox 360 and PS3 were launched, they had competitive advantage over regular PCs. Additionally, with consoles you do not have to worry about compatibility and drivers in order to take advantage of all the features of the game. In my case, I never liked to know that I could not get the most of the game because of the PC hardware. For example: I recently bought the ASUS G73 (ATI 5870, 8Gb, etc), and it was frustrating that even with that machine I couldn't run smoothly Metro 2033 and Crysis (however, most game tried run perfectly well at 1920x1080). There is a feeling that games are not well optimized to any computers, so there is a loss of potential by not being specially develop by specific hardware.

There are not much developer willing to invest time and money to develop AAA games to take near 100% advantage of todays PC hardware. For many reasons, the most important to me is: how many people do you thing have an i7-870 CPU with Geforce 480 at home?

In my opinion, most developer develop games based on taking advantage of current gaming console (xbox 360 and PS3) and add some features when port to PC.

Even though, I feel todays game looks better on PC due to Dx11 features, I still like most to play in console due to the whole experience given by connect the console to an 46" HDTV and a 7.1 receiver seated on a good sofa. Additionally, you do not have drivers or compatibility problem, freezing problem, etc... You just insert the game in your xbox 360 or PS3 and ready to play. You do not need to test the game before playing by selecting Quality of shadows, resolution, AA 2x 4x 6x 8x 16x, and all the setting you can select.

I wish to know if there still potential not achieve in the PS3, I am still waiting for a game that I could say "wow, incredible, I can't believe what I am seeing"....

Here is a 7600gt that is running oblivion at higher settings than consoles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDljy8nv-uI

Here is Left for Dead running at higher setting than consoles on a 7600gt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8x5cprccY4

Here is Resident Evil 5 on a 7600gt running close to console settings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH7__qMhRF4

A 7600gt running Assassin's Creed at higher settings than consoles with 4xAA and 16xAF but slightly lower resolution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4lKLRgEa14&feature=related

.

.

.

That card is weaker than the one on consoles so just imagine something like a 7800gt/gtx.

Heck my old 6800gt 2004 PC can run some older games from this gen at higher settings than consoles.

I run crysis on 1280 x 1024 Very high settings on my i3 530/hd 5770 with 2 X AA and i'm getting framerate drops with the final boss. Don't tell me you're running it on higher settings with an 8800 gt . It's simply not possible. The fact that you can run dead space now with AA just doesn't matter . It's almost a three year old game.

Besides you're driving my point that I initially made to somewhere else. My pointthat an Xbox 360 in 2006 and 2007 was a more affordable option to play the latest games.Off coursepc hardware could best it but you had to paya lot more. You said you had a 650$ pc that could best the x360. It was probably so that the 8800 gt end 2007 made the pc- option somewhat cheaper but a year is a long time incomputergame land.

And still 650$ at that time was somewhat pushing the enveloppe.You still didn't mention what cpu, ram,youactually got for that price.If you had to buy everything from scratch i doubt you could buy a pc that could actually run everything. I mean assasins creed had a minimum system requirement of a dual core 2.66 ghz.An xbox 360 was still a lot less expensive andthe quality of games was just top notch. the following years 2008,2009,2010 pc-hardware became cheaper and better (as it always does) and the x360 (or ps3 for that matter) becomes a less interesting option.

Fact remains the x360 was in 2006-2007 a very good option to play the lastest games becausethe console was very cheap in comparison of that of pc. especially if you had an old pc to browse the internet and do other pc-stuff besides game.

evildead6789

I also play dead space on pc max settings and 2xAA with an 8800gt at 1440x900 and i see no frame drops what soever

Also in 2007 i build a quad core Q6600 ( which by all means its still good cpu ), 2gb of ram a 500W antec PSU and an 8800gt for 800euros and i live in Cyprus where pc parts prices are way to high so no in 2007 you didnt need a $1500 pc and considering the think you can do with a pc my 800euros pc is a much better value than the 400euros x360

Let alone cheaper games

Here is a 7600gt that is running oblivion at higher settings than consoles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDljy8nv-uI

Here is Left for Dead running at higher setting than consoles on a 7600gt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8x5cprccY4

Here is Resident Evil 5 on a 7600gt running close to console settings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH7__qMhRF4

A 7600gt running Assassin's Creed at higher settings than consoles with 4xAA and 16xAF but slightly lower resolution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4lKLRgEa14&feature=related

.

.

.

That card is weaker than the one on consoles so just imagine something like a 7800gt/gtx.

Heck my old 6800gt 2004 PC can run some older games from this gen at higher settings than consoles.

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

Here is a 7600gt that is running oblivion at higher settings than consoles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDljy8nv-uI

Here is Left for Dead running at higher setting than consoles on a 7600gt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8x5cprccY4

Here is Resident Evil 5 on a 7600gt running close to console settings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH7__qMhRF4

A 7600gt running Assassin's Creed at higher settings than consoles with 4xAA and 16xAF but slightly lower resolution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4lKLRgEa14&feature=related

.

.

.

That card is weaker than the one on consoles so just imagine something like a 7800gt/gtx.

Heck my old 6800gt 2004 PC can run some older games from this gen at higher settings than consoles.

04dcarraher

Both of you have done a great job posting the truth about the PC's capabilities in SW. *tips hat in respect*

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

Here is a 7600gt that is running oblivion at higher settings than consoles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDljy8nv-uI

Here is Left for Dead running at higher setting than consoles on a 7600gt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8x5cprccY4

Here is Resident Evil 5 on a 7600gt running close to console settings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH7__qMhRF4

A 7600gt running Assassin's Creed at higher settings than consoles with 4xAA and 16xAF but slightly lower resolution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4lKLRgEa14&feature=related

.

.

.

That card is weaker than the one on consoles so just imagine something like a 7800gt/gtx.

Heck my old 6800gt 2004 PC can run some older games from this gen at higher settings than consoles.

topsemag55

Both of you have done a great job posting the truth about the PC's capabilities in SW. *tips hat in respect*

At this all ran on a 7600 gt alone, no ram , no cpu, no harddisk, no motherboard, no power supply unit. Or ran it on a single core?

The 7600 gt much cheaper and with much bettr perfomance, on that 1024 x 768 resolution. Don't forget the framerate drops.

yeah the 220$ (at the time of assasins creed ) xbox360looked that better or worse can't really tell but i didn't drop in framerate though.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

Pc hardware is so under ultilized with 98% of multiplatform games out. 04dcarraher

Both of you have done a great job posting the truth about the PC's capabilities in SW. *tips hat in respect*

At this all ran on a 7600 gt alone, no ram , no cpu, no harddisk, no motherboard, no power supply unit. Or ran it on a single core?

The 7600 gt much cheaper and with much bettr perfomance, on that 1024 x 768 resolution. Don't forget the framerate drops.

yeah the 220$ (at the time of assasins creed ) xbox360looked that better or worse can't really tell but i didn't drop in framerate though.

lol , you haven't debunked anything. My point here was that a 7600 gt couldn't save a single core system and that it was a lot more reasonable to buy an x360 end 2006 to get a good quality in games instead of paying a lot more to get the same hardware (several time the price). Here are the prices of cpu's end 2006

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cheap-thrills,1335.html

Maybe if you had a single core system that was based on s775 you could have saved the money of motherboard and ram and do a reasonable upgrade but then you had a very recent system. lga 775 only came out july 2006.

But if you had a single core system that was based on s478 (which lasted for a long time) you had to upgrade everything (well maybe not your hdd, case psu and optical drive) and then you came on a price that was way higher than the cost of buying an x360.

And don't tell me you can do other stuff with a pc. That old single core could still do everything you do with a pc besides gaming , i can even do it now 4 years later. Again hakkai you're missing the point . I said that a 7600 gt couldn't save my single core system and you post videos that are made on dual core systems. And again those video's are not to be trusted , they can say what they want. Post benchmarks from review sites.

And what about people who had a 3 year old pc then that actually couldn't work on pc's , their pc was still good to do all the pc stuff and they wanted to play. Mid 2006 if they go buy a model in a shop that could produce the same quality of an x360 paid 1500$. while the x360 was in stores for1/4 or 1/5 the price.You could discuss about these prices , the world is a big place and there are differences everywhere but the fact was that the x360 was available with hardware for an extremely low price in comparison if you would have bought it inpc -hardware. You can post all the crap you want. The facts are the facts.

Stop being childish

lol , you haven't debunked anything. My point here was that a 7600 gt couldn't save a single core system and that it was a lot more reasonable to buy an x360 end 2006 to get a good quality in games instead of paying a lot more to get the same hardware (several time the price). Here are the prices of cpu's end 2006

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cheap-thrills,1335.html

Maybe if you had a single core system that was based on s775 you could have saved the money of motherboard and ram and do a reasonable upgrade. But if you had a single core system that was based on s478 (which lasted for a long time) you had to upgrade everything (well maybe not your hdd, case psu and optical drive) and then you came on a price that was way higher than the cost of buying an x360.

And what about people who had a 3 year old pc then that actually couldn't work on pc's , their pc was still good to do all the pc stuff and they wanted to play. Mid 2006 if they go buy a brand model in a shop that could produce the same quality of an x360 paid 1500$. while the x360 was in stores for1/4 or 1/5 the price.You could discuss about these prices , the world is a big place and there are differences everywhere but the fact was that the x360 was available with hardware for an extremely low price in comparison if you would have bought it inpc -hardware.

And don't tell me you can do other stuff with a pc. That old single core could still do everything you do with a pc besides gaming , i can even do it now 4 years later. Again hakkai you're missing the point . I said that a 7600 gt couldn't save my single core system and you post videos that are made on dual core systems. And again those video's are not to be trusted , they can say what they want. Post benchmarks from review sites.

Stop being childish

evildead6789

greece is maybeoverly expensive, here in belgium games didn't cost more than 65€.

Besides never heard of gamestop, gamemania or other gameshops, where you buyand sell second hand games. I bought bioshock second handed in 2007 for 40€and sold it back for25€.You could even rentgames then. And pc games cost money too if you don't download them. If i was making my point I didn't considered piracy.

greece is maybeoverly expensive, here in belgium games didn't cost more than 65€.

Besides never heard of gamestop, gamemania or other gameshops, where you buyand sell second hand games. I bought bioshock second handed in 2007 for 40€and sold it back for25€.You could even rentgames then. And pc games cost money too if you don't download them. If i was making my point I didn't considered piracy.

evildead6789

PS

Dead Space 2

Cheapest on Gamespider:

http://www.thegamecollection.net/dead-space-2-ps3-p-4139.html

35 GBP PS3

PC

http://www.thegamecollection.net/dead-space-2-pc-p-4140.html

20 GBP

Not bad eh?

Yes. Although with consoles you can fine tune the games to run better than they would with the same hardware in a PC in some cases (pre caching shaders for instance.)

lol , you haven't debunked anything. My point here was that a 7600 gt couldn't save a single core system and that it was a lot more reasonable to buy an x360 end 2006 to get a good quality in games instead of paying a lot more to get the same hardware (several time the price). Here are the prices of cpu's end 2006

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cheap-thrills,1335.html

Maybe if you had a single core system that was based on s775 you could have saved the money of motherboard and ram and do a reasonable upgrade but then you had a very recent system. lga 775 only came out july 2006.

But if you had a single core system that was based on s478 (which lasted for a long time) you had to upgrade everything (well maybe not your hdd, case psu and optical drive) and then you came on a price that was way higher than the cost of buying an x360.

And don't tell me you can do other stuff with a pc. That old single core could still do everything you do with a pc besides gaming , i can even do it now 4 years later. Again hakkai you're missing the point . I said that a 7600 gt couldn't save my single core system and you post videos that are made on dual core systems. And again those video's are not to be trusted , they can say what they want. Post benchmarks from review sites.

And what about people who had a 3 year old pc then that actually couldn't work on pc's , their pc was still good to do all the pc stuff and they wanted to play. Mid 2006 if they go buy a model in a shop that could produce the same quality of an x360 paid 1500$. while the x360 was in stores for1/4 or 1/5 the price.You could discuss about these prices , the world is a big place and there are differences everywhere but the fact was that the x360 was available with hardware for an extremely low price in comparison if you would have bought it inpc -hardware. You can post all the crap you want. The facts are the facts.

Stop being childish

evildead6789

You can keep making bad excuses, buying a prebuilt PC is a bad idea.

Most games up to 2007 were fine with single core setups.

Also dual core processors were out in 2005 way before the 360 was even released.

You also like to use the price of the cheap 4 gig model of the Xbox 360.......

Even the old Pentium 4 HT CPUs from 2003 and up can perform well enough in some games from today.

.

Benchmarks are not always a good measurement of gameplay frame rate.

Benchmarks tend to stress the system more than actual gameplay would.

Like Crysis for example which quickly spans across the island in a high bird's eye view.

That doesn't happen in normal gameplay so there is not as much stress on the system.

Benchmarks also can be outdated since driver updates can increase framerate.

.

You also seem to forget that console games experience frame rate drops too.

Dead Rising 2 had atrocious drops in framerate at around 14 fps sometimes.

.

Pricing on whether you play on one console or a PC will depend on your location and games of choice.

Console gaming can be cheaper but PC gaming can also be cheaper.

.

I already noted in my previous post of the 7600gt that it was weaker than console hardware but could play certain games at console quality or higher.

It was an example to show that a stronger card like the 7800gtx could keep up under the same conditions.

But console games are sometimes modified in ways that are not done on the PC version.

Cutting things out like lower draw distance, low LOD etc. etc.

.

I noticed people also try to use PC requirements for evidence in their claims of needing to upgrade a computer.

PC requirements can be wildly inaccurate.

A lot of the console multiplats will say that you need 2-3 gigs of RAM when the game only uses 400-700mbs.

My Windows 7 ultimate OS can use anywhere between 280mbs to 480mbs of my RAM depending on the current config.

Yes Hakkia, heres an example, Fallout New Vegas while in game maxed out. Even though the requirements ask for 2gb you can get away with only 1gb with WindowsXP.

Here are the minimum requirements

Windows 7/Vista/XP

2GHz Dual Core processor

2GB RAM

10GB hard drive space

Nvidia GeForce 6 or ATI 1300XT with 128mb