Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

PC vs XBOX or PS3

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 17, 2009 12:29:20 PM

Hi,



I was wondering why PS3 and XBOX360's have way way better graphics performance than normal PC's? While onle Nvidia and ATI make the GPU for both . Why cant they make some GPU like that for a PC? Is it because a PC cant handle the performance of a XBOX or PS3?


Why?

More about : xbox ps3

a b U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 12:41:13 PM

That's not true pc has much more power then consoles. My pc destroys my previous xbox360 that i had. Consoles may seem more efficient with less hardware but amazing visual is due to the games being greatly optimized for console as well as the consoles only task is playing games while pcs have various other tasks.
a c 177 U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 12:46:56 PM

Oh.
This is going to get ugly;)
Related resources
a c 271 U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 12:50:58 PM

Looks like someone's been munching the stupid pills.
June 17, 2009 12:52:21 PM

Someone hasn't read up on the hype that is 1080p and what is up scaling...lo freaking l....
a b U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 12:53:02 PM

Please correct me if i am mistaken.
=]
June 17, 2009 12:56:18 PM

PS3 rules since I own stock in Sony...j/k,,,, about the stock that is.
June 17, 2009 12:58:48 PM

invisik said:
Please correct me if i am mistaken.
=]

Somewhat...but "amazing visuals" is a bit off...the sharper image and aa etc that we have at our disposal with pc's is an amazing visual boost and overhead compared to the 360 and ps3 and not to mention things like DX10 yadda yaddda...iv loaded games up side by side on different inputs via my 22" LG comparing my ps3 to my pc....BIG difference...same would go for a 360...its just no comparison for some of us...whilst others see no difference and or just deal with it..

a b U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 1:03:50 PM

Of course i agree 100% pc has much visual power then console but im just saying console with the gpus they have produce very good visuals.
Crysis blows any console game. =D
June 17, 2009 1:06:49 PM

There ok...i mean they only have to run games at a res of 1280x720 or lower so its not that much strain on the gpu and im sure the tlc on coding helps...so price vs visual there good for beginners and the annoying age children between 10-18...

I love my PS3 when im not stuck playing with people whose vocabulary consists of only 4 words and one of them being ***....oh how many parents shouldn't leave there children alone with a game console...
a c 130 U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 1:34:50 PM

hash said:
Hi,



I was wondering why PS3 and XBOX360's have way way better graphics performance than normal PC's? While onle Nvidia and ATI make the GPU for both . Why cant they make some GPU like that for a PC? Is it because a PC cant handle the performance of a XBOX or PS3?


Why?



The key phrase i'm picking up here is normal PC's. that to me indicates a unit bought off the shelf and made for all the family. These machines are invariably made with cost in mind and while companies seem to throw a quad in as standard (Wow a quad core say's the uneducated buyer) and (look at all that Ram) etc. These machines just don't have the hardware to play half decent games at any resolution above 1024x768.
That's why a Console would look better than these units, basically because they are. Pitch a Console up against a Gamers of enthusiasts machine and it will soon look very ordinary.

Mactronix
June 17, 2009 2:10:59 PM

mactronix said:
The key phrase i'm picking up here is normal PC's. that to me indicates a unit bought off the shelf and made for all the family. These machines are invariably made with cost in mind and while companies seem to throw a quad in as standard (Wow a quad core say's the uneducated buyer) and (look at all that Ram) etc. These machines just don't have the hardware to play half decent games at any resolution above 1024x768.
That's why a Console would look better than these units, basically because they are. Pitch a Console up against a Gamers of enthusiasts machine and it will soon look very ordinary.

Mactronix

Yeahp....its like comparing an IGP to a dedicated GPU...WAIT...we are comparing IGP's and HTPC cards to a dedicated gaming GPU....

of course any 100$(give or take a buck) pc graphics card @ 720p can push WAY more visuals than the ps3 or 360...try running the 360 off vga and compare em...fps wise and visuals etc...
a c 271 U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 2:16:57 PM

Maybe the title of this thread should have been 'Dickhead vs PC users', just a thought.
June 17, 2009 2:20:24 PM

I wouldn't say that as much as some pre pubescent little halo f** trying to find a reason to justify that steaming crap when compared to a gaming pc...
a b U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 2:24:56 PM

One thing that's pissing me off is that crysis 2 is going to be for console and ported for pc? so assuming the graphics are = to crysis 1 or less then?
a c 271 U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 2:26:38 PM

Hmmm, I still haven't finished Halo 2 myself [:mousemonkey] , 200 FPS keeps making my eyes water. [:mousemonkey:4]
a c 271 U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 2:28:43 PM

invisik said:
One thing that's pissing me off is that crysis 2 is going to be for console and ported for pc? so assuming the graphics are = to crysis 1 or less then?

Oooh, way less than, think Warhead with bits missing but at least it stands more chance of being coded correctly.
June 17, 2009 4:19:52 PM

Il start googling 2 girls 1 cup/finger before i succumb to learning who she is and what the hell she does.....
June 17, 2009 4:45:53 PM

rewindlabs said:
Il start googling 2 girls 1 cup/finger before i succumb to learning who she is and what the hell she does.....


I spent 5 minutes, and it was worth it. I love youtube. And I love that they don't block youtube at work. Speaking of which, they're going around and doing layoffs right now which I wasn't aware of until I walked out of my office 10 minutes ago. Perhaps I should stop browsing youtube for a while.

But back on topic...

Yes, your 1000$ PC wins, but ... can you build a PC for 300$ that wins?

This is one of my favorites. Suggestion:

a b U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 4:57:02 PM

Xbox360 games ran on 720p, but now most 360 games are available in "1080p"

Is this the same thing as a PC running at 1920x1080?
a b U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 5:01:50 PM

drunknmunkys said:

Yes, your 1000$ PC wins, but ... can you build a PC for 300$ that wins?

http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/5156/pumpkinsuicidegr3.jpg


You might be hard pressed to do that, but keep in mind a computer does more than gaming. I'd have to assume everyone needs a PC anyway, and everyone would probably spend roughly 500 on it anyway. If you shop smart you can easily get a PC that does all of your "work" (internet + pron + movies + music anyway.. lol) as well as plays games better than a console on your TV (obvioauly teh screen, whatever it is, is extra) for a good bit less than what most people pay for thier console + internet box. At the least it woudl be realyl close.

Though at this level of "gamers" people would probably prefer the simplicity of the console. I simply don't see the selling point being the price.

EDIT: I just saw yuo have a picure there.. it doesnt show up here at work. Therefor you were probalby making an awesome joke that zoomed right over my head :D 
a b U Graphics card
June 17, 2009 5:04:37 PM

Bluescreendeath said:
Xbox360 games ran on 720p, but now most 360 games are available in "1080p"

Is this the same thing as a PC running at 1920x1080?

I was under the impession that the xbox doesnt actually render at 1080p and upscales the 720p. Though I could be wrong.

But anyway, yes, 1080p is the same as 1920*1080.
June 17, 2009 5:10:35 PM

daedalus685 said:
You might be hard pressed to do that, but keep in mind a computer does more than gaming. I'd have to assume everyone needs a PC anyway, and everyone would probably spend roughly 500 on it anyway. If you shop smart you can easily get a PC that does all of your "work" (internet + pron + movies + music anyway.. lol) as well as plays games better than a console on your TV (obvioauly teh screen, whatever it is, is extra) for a good bit less than what most people pay for thier console + internet box. At the least it woudl be realyl close.

Though at this level of "gamers" people would probably prefer the simplicity of the console. I simply don't see the selling point being the price.

EDIT: I just saw yuo have a picure there.. it doesnt show up here at work. Therefor you were probalby making an awesome joke that zoomed right over my head :D 


It's a picture of pumpkin shooting itself in the head.

:) 
June 18, 2009 12:16:59 AM

Let me give you an idea how far wrong you are.
A $60 vga like the ATI 4670 is about 2x times faster from what ps3 and 360 have
A $100 vga like nvidia 9800gt or Ati 4770 are about 3x-3,5x times faster
Not to mention Vga's in the $200 and upwards price point
PS3 and 360 have only 256mb of ram a gaming pc has usually 2-4gb
You can make a game as optimized as you can can for a console, you can squeeze every bit of power out of consoles but an average $600-800 gaming pc let alone a $2000pc that alot of console users seem to think is the lowest price a gaming pc cost has so much power on its disposal that even bad ports ( aka GTA4 ) look and run far better on that pc
a b U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 12:25:15 AM

^Well said!
a c 358 U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 12:40:04 AM

hash said:
Hi,



I was wondering why PS3 and XBOX360's have way way better graphics performance than normal PC's? While onle Nvidia and ATI make the GPU for both . Why cant they make some GPU like that for a PC? Is it because a PC cant handle the performance of a XBOX or PS3?


Why?


Basically it boils down to the ever expanding tech frontier on the PC side as opposed to the static hardware in a PS3 and Xbox 360.

If you bought an Xbox360 (or PS3) back in 2007 and buy another in 2009, you will basically be buying the same hardware. There's been a few tweaks here and there to hammer out bugs, but the hardware is the same (CPU & GPU), the hard drive will be whatever is available and is a non-issue.

On the PC side, there have been advances in on the CPU side. Phenom did not exist back in 2007, the Intel i7 series did not exists either (and all other in between CPUs as well). There are different clock speeds for each CPU too. XBox360 and PS3 does not give you the option to upgrade the CPU.

On the GPU part of the equation, back in 2007 we had the Radeon HD 2xxx series and the Geforce 88xxx series. Do you know the current GPU offerings are?

As technology advances on the PC end of the gaming industry, game developers want to take advantage of that extra power. So what do they do? They increase the load they put both CPU and GPU to get "improved" graphics. Sometimes they go overboard, like Crysis. Crytek jacked up the graphics load on the card for "Ultra High Settings" that even current generation of GPUs cannot handle those settings. GTA IV is another example which is a console port to the PC; it is a very, very bad port so much so that Rockstar basically recommended a Quad Core to play the game. Quad Core!!!!

Meanwhile on the console side, nothing has been augmented and also everything is standardized. All Xbox360s use the exact same ATI card and the exact same CPU. As they develop more games they will be able to optimize the game engine to be more efficient with the static hardware.

On the PC side you got ATI and nVidia; BOOM you got performance and optimization differences right there. Another BOOM, they don't just make one model each, they have several models and also a few generations as well. PC game developers need to create a game the will pawn all other games, but BOOM there are a shitload of PC owners who do not have current high-end video cards so that have two options:

[1] Develop a graphics engine that is friendly older general of cards. Or...
[2] Boom Fcuk those older generation cards, hell fcuk those with current generation cards (Crysis).

On the CPU side of things you got Intel and AMD, BOOM performance and optimization differences right there. Another Boom you got 1 core, 2 cores, 3 cores and 4 cores. Need I go on?

If you don't want to upgrade a PC, but you want to play current games and don't mind a one trick pony, then buy a console.
a b U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 12:51:06 AM

not to mention, i like playing my old consoles and not have to deal with the nintendo (oh man is that thing hard to get working now)

i play nes,snes,n64,genesis,ps1,gameboy(original-advance) on my computer
and this is on top of the games and school work and movies
also, how easy is it to......pirate.....a game on the console
a c 271 U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 12:58:43 AM

mindless728 said:
how easy is it to......pirate.....a game on the console

Very, if the console is chipped and you know where to download the ISO's from. [:mousemonkey]
June 18, 2009 1:50:03 AM

Mousemonkey said:
Very, if the console is chipped and you know where to download the ISO's from. [:mousemonkey]

Damn right....iv had modded PSX's Xbox's PS2's....i of course own all of those and sometimes tend to go back and play my NES's and N64's...i love all of my consoles....the old original xbox is actually still pretty useful as an emulator for anything below N64 like PSX/NES/SNES/Atari's/Gameboys etc...

I would have to say the easiest console to "mod" and get free games on is the DS...i mean you buy a card shaped like any other game for 30$ and that comes with a 1gb or 2gb japanese quality memstick....and DS games rarely get to 100mbs and usually stay between 30-50....i know i could have at least 20 games on my NDS lite with a 1gb card at one time...

All you have to do is put the rom onto the root of the memory stick and pop it into the ds and bam....great little console...the psp isn't much harder to mod and it does top the DS when it comes to emulating with its faster processor and graphics chipset...albeit the DS actually has games that i want to play released for it....honestly PSP has a ton of horrible games and nothing much on the horizon :( 

a c 130 U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 7:15:54 AM

Its every bit as easy to pirate a game for a console as it is for a PC. The misnomer that PC sales suffer more from pirating is one of my pet hates. I personally know way more people who have chiped Consoles than people who would let pirated,potentially virus carrying media anywhere near their PC.

Mactronix
June 18, 2009 7:22:38 AM

hash said:
Hi,



I was wondering why PS3 and XBOX360's have way way better graphics performance than normal PC's? While onle Nvidia and ATI make the GPU for both . Why cant they make some GPU like that for a PC? Is it because a PC cant handle the performance of a XBOX or PS3?


Why?


Here are some of the reasons why PC gaming is far better than consoles:

Consoles play games with 20-30fps and PC with 60+ fps.
Consoles have 1280×720 and even sometimes sub hd resolutions but PC have 1920x1200 and 2560x1600.
Also PC have better graphics(lighting, textures, shaders etc).
Consoles don’t have Anti-aliasing and Anisotropic filtering.
With the consoles you cannot mod the game.
Console gamers struggling with the controller in fps games.
With Consoles in multiplayer you had to always mute everybody to avoid whiny kiddy voices talking (very annoying).
There are tons of exclusives on PC gaming like starcraft 2, diablo 3, stalker, Crysis, the Witcher, Empire Total War etc too many too count.
If you like RTS and MMORPGS then PC is your only choice.
a b U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 12:29:16 PM

yeah, the pirated games for consoles are easy if you have a chipped console, no one i knew had one, but without it one its what, damn nigh impossible
a c 271 U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 12:40:17 PM

mindless728 said:
yeah, the pirated games for consoles are easy if you have a chipped console, no one i knew had one, but without it one its what, damn nigh impossible

I know of many folk who haven't got a clue where to get pirated PC games from and when they have been given one they have no idea how to get it to work.
June 18, 2009 1:16:04 PM

I'm really sorry for guys who think I was trolling. I seriously had no intent of doing that and I've never owned or ever used a PS or a XBOX in my life,but quite amazed about its graphics performance . Its just lately been seriously crazy about PC hardware and I just want to find an answer of what i couldn't quite find on google.


Anyway very informative.
Thanks .
a c 271 U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 1:36:31 PM

hash said:
I'm really sorry for guys who think I was trolling. I seriously had no intent of doing that and I've never owned or ever used a PS or a XBOX in my life,but quite amazed about its graphics performance . Its just lately been seriously crazy about PC hardware and I just want to find an answer of what i couldn't quite find on google.


Anyway very informative.
Thanks .

Kudos for returning.
June 18, 2009 2:32:58 PM

Mousemonkey said:
I know of many folk who haven't got a clue where to get pirated PC games from and when they have been given one they have no idea how to get it to work.

These are the morons commenting on the demonoid/TPB torrents....i hate listening to them...heck there posting in the games general section as well...

I had to sit through ebonics mixed in with pc hardware and a guy was wondering why an e8400 and 9400gt 1gb couldn't play saints row 2....either way pc games tend to have alot of steps...which can stump anyone who can't use google and simple thought....

Console is usually plug and play...or solder and play....
a c 271 U Graphics card
June 18, 2009 2:40:06 PM

Some of us were around and communicating before the days of the interweb, so what's a torrent?, oh that, hmm, nice, okaay.
June 18, 2009 9:13:33 PM



Yup, when I think of torrent, I think about the 1926 silent American film directed by an uncredited Monta Bell based on a novel by Vicente Blasco Ibáñez. It was released on February 26 1926 and stars Ricardo Cortez and Greta Garbo.

People who use it to refer to BitTorrent need to read up on their history before reusing a term already ingrained in American culture.
June 18, 2009 10:14:41 PM

hash said:
Hi,



I was wondering why PS3 and XBOX360's have way way better graphics performance than normal PC's? While onle Nvidia and ATI make the GPU for both . Why cant they make some GPU like that for a PC? Is it because a PC cant handle the performance of a XBOX or PS3?


Why?



I'm not sure what you mean by "normal PC" even a low budget $600 build is much more capable than the 360 and the PS3. Not only in graphics but the PC can do a lot more in general.


drunknmunkys said:

Yes, your 1000$ PC wins, but ... can you build a PC for 300$ that wins?


That however is a unfair comparison. That's like comparing a Ferrari to a Honda Civic of course the Ferrari costs a lot more and rightfully so. Your basically asking if we can make a Ferrari for $23,000 (about the price of the civic). If you want high performance it comes with a price.

Also the PC does more than the consoles and can be used for many more tasks. Its not like we are comparing two gaming platforms when in reality the PC much more than that. Also when it comes to prices the PC is much cheaper than it use to be and much more affordable while the consoles are doing the exact opposite and are becoming much more expensive with each generation the next generation of consoles may even reach the prices of a decent PC that is likely to outperform the console.

Even the prices of games seemed to have been averagely increased for consoles. The average new title costs what $60 now for the console? While the exact same title released at the same time will be about $50 for PC. That same title also looks better on the PC and is often moddable which gives the PC version a huge upper hand. The console gamers aren't going to be able to enjoy great mods for games like HL2 or Fallout 3.

Consoles use to have the ease of use advantage but now they too require game patches and such. This also basically forces the console gamers to have a internet connection in their homes too whether or not they wish to play multiplayer games. It may also just be a matter of time before viruses and spyware also hit the consoles. With such high popularity and the ability to surf the web (for the ps3 anyways but the next-gen consoles will likely all do it) and with no anti virus software protecting them its bound to cause major headaches for console gamers in the future. Even worse is the anti-virus software might be 3rd party and require a subscription as well as a initial retail fee. If its not 3rd party expect the console and games to go up in price averagely to make up for it. Things are going to get mighty costly for console gamers.
June 18, 2009 10:51:07 PM

all of u forgot to mention one point.

lets say u bu a 360 and play games on it for many blissful years........
then a new xbox comes out and ur cconsole becomes useless as new games start coming on the newer console


on the other hand if u have a computer u can just upgrade it nstead of having to repace all of ur hardware.


June 19, 2009 3:58:48 AM

syavash said:

on the other hand if u have a computer u can just upgrade it nstead of having to repace all of ur hardware.


Yeah, you just replace everything except the case.
June 19, 2009 5:14:51 AM

turboflame said:
Yeah, you just replace everything except the case.

Not exactly, Q6600's are two years old now and will be fine for PC gaming for years to come.
AMD platforms are built for expandability, who knows how long AM2/AM2+/AM3 combos will be on the top for.
Well, way longer than the xbox 360 will live for.
June 19, 2009 5:47:53 AM

Onlive> ALL THE PCs and PS3s and Xbox360s what evers.

Sad thing is onlive isnt out yet, but when it comes out it owns all >D
June 19, 2009 5:50:58 AM

PS3's have one thing going for them though, Their processor. Its incredibly efficient and Intel has only had plans to start creating processors like the PS3's in 2018. I wish PC gamers would cut the consoles some slack, I have a Quad Core 3Ghz 6900? processor And a HD4870 1Gb with 4Gb of ram ,vista 64-bit.

Visually, you can only notice that PC graphics are better if you REALLY look for it. Also, On PS3's and X box's the games are simply made better, maybe not as graphically impressive but they run a whole lot better. A LOT BETTER, i can still get lag on Crysis (ffs stupid peice o-" And i hear that PS3 could actually run Crysis at a frame rate of 30 at a medium graphics setting, but they couldn't get it to multithread very efficiently and it was hard to do so yeah, thats why You don't see Crysis on the PS3.
June 19, 2009 3:56:02 PM

k0unit said:
Not exactly, Q6600's are two years old now and will be fine for PC gaming for years to come.
AMD platforms are built for expandability, who knows how long AM2/AM2+/AM3 combos will be on the top for.
Well, way longer than the xbox 360 will live for.


Microsoft and Sony are claiming that their consoles will have a 10 year lifespan.

holysoks said:
PS3's have one thing going for them though, Their processor. Its incredibly efficient


With very specific tasks, yes. It is still a nightmare to code for.
!