i'm just curious, console amers always argue that PC's from 2005 and 2006 can't run the latest games we have now, but ive heard of PC gamers saying they have tech way from 2005 that can handle most games on med/high settings. is this true ? if so could you list the specs ?
It depends on the game. The most demanding games would be rough on a system from that time period, though if you consider the monitors used from that time, it might not be so bad, because 1280x1024, 1024x768 resolutions were popular then and a lot easier on a GPU than todays 1080p monitors. If you played your PC games at 720p and upscaled them, you'd have similar looks to what consoles have.
Don't forget that PC games today, the most cutting edge at least, are much better looking and have better AI than their console counterparts.
a 3.6 pentium d (will struggle)or 2.6 dualcore and a 1950 xtx/7950gt is pretty much exactly the same performance wise as a console.
cpu wise the consoles have either a tri core ibm @3.2 ghz or the cell chip which was 1 core with 8 threads @3.2ghz, the real name is an spe (Synergistic Processing Unit) of which 7 are active and 1 is for redundancy...
gfx wise the consoles have heavily modified 7900. that is capable of dx10 like features b4 dx10 was implemented in win 7.
but if you have a reasonably fast dual core and a 1950 or 7950 you can run any game at the same or above the settings of a console.
so yeah there is hardware from 2006 that will match a console... the differing factor was the price at the time. if you wanted console performance you would be paying 700+ while the consoles soled for 399 and 299. both of which sold at a loss until 2 years ago. i could go on but really you may as well read all of this on wiki...