Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Computer Graphics compared to xbox360

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 12, 2012 2:53:15 AM

I want to know why graphics cards cost so much money?? And why is it that you have to own a pricey gpu to play games like Battlefield 3? But a Xbox360 with 5-6 year old tech (graphics card) can play it high resolution with no problems? I mean it seems like there is a new GPU every month but the tech in it just makes it suitable to play modern games, should computers be years ahead of xbox360? And it seems if xbox360 can play games like that it would drive the cost of a basic model to round $800?, which happens to be around the price of a newer gpu. You could buy 2 xbox360s for that price and have the same playablity? I just dont see the advantages to owing a computer gaming rig or super low cost consoles that play in high resoultion without liquid cooling, 5 huge fans or stuff like that. For the cost of a xbox360 your getting a machine that would cost yo $2500+ to build as a computer gaming rig? I just think with a market like computers have you would see farther reaches in gpu design and playablity then you would out of a $199 gaming system. I just built my rig in march and I paid $300 something for a Xfx 6870 HD 2Gb which is the price of a xbox360 itself but for some reason even wit top of the line parts computers have a hard time playing games in higher resoultions? it gets me, make me wonder how they build xbox360 and keep the price super low? let me know what you think maybe there is somethng im missing?
September 12, 2012 2:59:01 AM

Not sure if trolling or serious. BF3 at 1080p on my GTX 670 vs BF3 at 1080p on a Xbox 360 is a completely different experience. Plus computers can do far and away more than an Xbox 360.
Score
0

Best solution

September 12, 2012 3:02:05 AM

Most games on consoles don't actully play at 1080. BF3 is actually playing at 1280 x 704 on console and getting a fit to your screen. Consoles also tend to knock down and cap FPS to make games playable.
Share
Related resources
September 12, 2012 3:03:42 AM

Please tell me you are not serious. If you are in doubt, look at PC gameplay with medium settings, and then compare it to a 360.
Score
0
a c 171 U Graphics card
September 12, 2012 3:08:09 AM

To my knowledge the 360 doesn't play BF3 at 1080P. It could barely handle GTA4 at 720. (they had to lower detail settings to get it to have enough power for even that.) As Anthonyorr mentioned if you are playing it at 1080 its being upscaled to that res. And as Zalhera mentioned the detail settings between the PC and 360 aren't even close. You should be able to drop the details down a ton and be able to play it on lower cards.

Finally, you can't compare the two directly. The 360 uses PowerPC cores in its CPU which I don't think are even x86 cores. The OS's are also very different. You are talking about two different beasts here.
Score
0
September 12, 2012 3:08:27 AM

Consoles can't even support native 1080p resolution. There's no comparison. I'm an honest owner of an xbox 360. I have no problem in admitting I'm too poor to afford a proper gaming rig. (I'm gonna end up having to use the money I've been saving up for one to help my parents pay THEIR damn car bill.) But anywho, back on the topic at hand, a gaming PC beats the Xbox 360 in graphics hands down. Here's a good youtube video explaining the key differences...it's also from a fairly credible source.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocVyrtcTpHw&playnext=1&l...
Score
0
September 12, 2012 3:09:40 AM

while xbox is good as far as consoles go. They are not as interchangeable as a gaming rig. what you see is what you get. It really doesnt leave much for the imagination. Your gaming rig, and to quote my compadre here, gaming rigs are far and away from the preformance of a console. consoles are the industries answer for people who cannot afford a gaming rig. your comparing ferari to volvo. if YOU could woudnt you?
Score
0
September 12, 2012 3:23:19 AM

4745454b said:
To my knowledge the 360 doesn't play BF3 at 1080P. It could barely handle GTA4 at 720. (they had to lower detail settings to get it to have enough power for even that.) As Anthonyorr mentioned if you are playing it at 1080 its being upscaled to that res. And as Zalhera mentioned the detail settings between the PC and 360 aren't even close. You should be able to drop the details down a ton and be able to play it on lower cards.

Finally, you can't compare the two directly. The 360 uses PowerPC cores in its CPU which I don't think are even x86 cores. The OS's are also very different. You are talking about two different beasts here.



battlefield 3 can be palyed at 1080p witha HD content Download to the hardrive only if you hav a HD larger then 4g can you downloadit to seeing it is a 2.2g file even if you have enough room on a 4g it still will not let you dl the HD cotent upgrade.
Score
0
a c 171 U Graphics card
September 12, 2012 3:26:58 AM

Does it render it at 1080 or upscale it to 1080. Big difference.
Score
0
September 12, 2012 3:28:10 AM

Doesn't matter in regards to the "HD" content download. It's not true, native 1080p resolution. Everything is upscaled from 720p or whatever standard res the xbox uses.
Score
0
September 12, 2012 3:34:36 AM

I believ you guys when it comes to better graphics from a computer, but shouldnt omputers be on a whole another level seeing the tech is updatd monthly? I mean I can see the graphics upgrad on a xbobx360 just by using a HDMI cord instead of the good ole yellow red and white cord provided. But when the next gen xbox comes out its going to utilize blu-ra even tho mcrosoft really doesnt care for a sony product so the whole advantage to havinf a rig might just go under water. it is just hard to drop $2000 on a crossfire setup for my 3930k rig w/ Xfx Amd Radeon HD 6870 2Gb and Asrok x79 extreme 9 mobo. when you can buy a console that is some what comparable for 1/8 of the price. its like a buggati veyron with 1001rwhp and nissan GT-R with 800Rwhp your only getting a 20% push in horsepower for $800,000 more, to me it just isnt worth the money for a 15 to 20% advantage. BTW a nissan GT-r will kill a buggati veyron in a 1/4 mile and cost Almost a million less.
Score
0
September 12, 2012 3:54:05 AM

Well Xbox 360 has most games running at 720p @30FPS. There is a pretty big difference in graphic quality comparing Xbox 360 to PC but in terms of cost efficiency the Xbox 360 wins hand's down. The reason console games look so good with the hardware they have is optimization. Devolopers can just optimize the game on the Xbox 360 much more easily then working with Thousands of different PC hardware configurations. Hope this helps a bit!
Score
0
September 12, 2012 3:57:21 AM

Why the hell would you use x79 with only gaming in mind, anyway? You should have went with something like a 3570k then pump whatever you have left on a 680 or a 7970 and have enough left to buy yourself a nice cooler.

And if you are so concerned about pricing, it isn't totally out of this world to build a budget gaming PC that will outperform any console in this generation for only $500, give or take a few.

And technology isn't updated monthly. New cards come out, sure, but they aren't new technology.
Score
0
September 12, 2012 4:12:14 AM

games are optimized for the 360 because they're all the same hardware and pc is very different per computer.
console contains 7+ year old technology. in 7 years LED screens and smartphones became mainstream (example of tech difference)
360 upscales to 1080, doesnt create 1080.
PC has more dynamic shadowing, lights, anti aliasing and higher fps. the fine details are different.

also gt-r stock is 550hp
Score
0
September 12, 2012 4:34:58 AM

evan1715 said:

also gt-r stock is 550hp


I wouldn't care if it was modded with only 350hp; I'd love to just have a car...much less a car such as that :lol: 
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
September 12, 2012 4:45:54 AM

Are you serious OP. Here are the main differences between consoles and PC:

- Consoles run at 1024x768 (DVD res) or 720p and are upscaled to 1080p. They don't have the balls to run natively no tricks at 1080p.

- Textures are vastly reduced compared to PC. Look close, they are blurred on a console.

- There is no draw distance

- There is no FOV adjusment

- There is overuse of bloom to smear the graphics and hide the lack of AA, and the lack of any filtering

- Forget fancy shadows, SSAO, advanced lighting, Direct X 11.

- Levels in all games now are reduced in scope and size due to lack of memory on consoles

On top of all that a $1000 PC will smash any console and be useful for at least 2yrs without upgrades.

Consoles are trash, rubbish, junk. You don't know what you are missing.

EDIT: $300 for a 6870 in March, you were ripped. You also bought an ageing mid range card. Next time choose parts that will last.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
September 12, 2012 5:16:53 AM

DuBZzz00 said:
I believ you guys when it comes to better graphics from a computer, but shouldnt omputers be on a whole another level seeing the tech is updatd monthly? I mean I can see the graphics upgrad on a xbobx360 just by using a HDMI cord instead of the good ole yellow red and white cord provided. But when the next gen xbox comes out its going to utilize blu-ra even tho mcrosoft really doesnt care for a sony product so the whole advantage to havinf a rig might just go under water. it is just hard to drop $2000 on a crossfire setup for my 3930k rig w/ Xfx Amd Radeon HD 6870 2Gb and Asrok x79 extreme 9 mobo. when you can buy a console that is some what comparable for 1/8 of the price. its like a buggati veyron with 1001rwhp and nissan GT-R with 800Rwhp your only getting a 20% push in horsepower for $800,000 more, to me it just isnt worth the money for a 15 to 20% advantage. BTW a nissan GT-r will kill a buggati veyron in a 1/4 mile and cost Almost a million less.


Btw the veyron is quicker in 1/4 mile drag. Although there are plenty of other stock cars around the price of a GT-R that will beat it.

I hate using car analogy's to refer to refer to pc's and it seems your misunderstanding of the automotive world has infected your understanding of the computing world....

Im fairly certain you don't own a Nissan GT-R or a Bugatti Veyron so what gives you the right to say which is better?

The same goes for computing, you havent seen the potential of a decent set up yet so you are in no position to complain...
Score
0
September 12, 2012 5:39:54 AM

paddys09 said:

Im fairly certain you don't own a Nissan GT-R or a Bugatti Veyron so what gives you the right to say which is better?


The 1st Amendment.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
September 12, 2012 5:43:17 AM

Man this thread is making me laugh.

To put it simply: PC's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*infinity + 1 >>> Console.

Seriously guys, think about it. PHONES have nearly the same quality as an xbox 360 now.

PHONES!

Ok, i made my point. I hope.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
September 12, 2012 6:09:33 AM

DeusAres said:
The 1st Amendment.


:lol:  LOL sorry ill rephrase that for anyone thought I was referring to human rights:

Im fairly certain you don't own a Nissan GT-R or a Bugatti Veyron so what makes you think that you know which is better?
Score
0
a c 171 U Graphics card
September 12, 2012 7:24:04 AM

I wouldn't say that consoles are rubbish junk. They are cheap, and do allow you to play great games. They also double as dvd players and can surf the web now. I don't own a console and don't like them, but they do have a purpose which they do rather well.
Score
0
September 12, 2012 7:36:18 AM

DuBZzz00 said:
I want to know why graphics cards cost so much money?? And why is it that you have to own a pricey gpu to play games like Battlefield 3? But a Xbox360 with 5-6 year old tech (graphics card) can play it high resolution with no problems? I mean it seems like there is a new GPU every month but the tech in it just makes it suitable to play modern games, should computers be years ahead of xbox360? And it seems if xbox360 can play games like that it would drive the cost of a basic model to round $800?, which happens to be around the price of a newer gpu. You could buy 2 xbox360s for that price and have the same playablity? I just dont see the advantages to owing a computer gaming rig or super low cost consoles that play in high resoultion without liquid cooling, 5 huge fans or stuff like that. For the cost of a xbox360 your getting a machine that would cost yo $2500+ to build as a computer gaming rig? I just think with a market like computers have you would see farther reaches in gpu design and playablity then you would out of a $199 gaming system. I just built my rig in march and I paid $300 something for a Xfx 6870 HD 2Gb which is the price of a xbox360 itself but for some reason even wit top of the line parts computers have a hard time playing games in higher resoultions? it gets me, make me wonder how they build xbox360 and keep the price super low? let me know what you think maybe there is somethng im missing?




THAT'S ALL
Score
0
September 12, 2012 7:48:28 AM

when I run games on my rig with consoles graphics (720P + medium to low settings) I get 120++ fps while consoles target is to get only 30 fps which really isn't bearable at least for me. when I play a game on my pc and then play the same game on a console I feel like I moved to the stone age
Score
0
September 12, 2012 8:07:05 AM

My pc can play games, music, movies, internet, and without being stuck to one platform, all for £750, I could make one to do that for £500 but I rather have more power. When the new XBOX is here it'll be £400 and they brake easily :lol: 
Score
0
September 12, 2012 6:06:45 PM

paddys09 said:
:lol:  LOL sorry ill rephrase that for anyone thought I was referring to human rights:

Im fairly certain you don't own a Nissan GT-R or a Bugatti Veyron so what makes you think that you know which is better?

:D 
Score
0
October 3, 2012 3:51:28 AM

paddys09 said:
Btw the veyron is quicker in 1/4 mile drag. Although there are plenty of other stock cars around the price of a GT-R that will beat it.

I hate using car analogy's to refer to refer to pc's and it seems your misunderstanding of the automotive world has infected your understanding of the computing world....

Im fairly certain you don't own a Nissan GT-R or a Bugatti Veyron so what gives you the right to say which is better?

The same goes for computing, you havent seen the potential of a decent set up yet so you are in no position to complain...



A GT-R will smoke a veyron and as for car background I have worked for all the top 3 (ford.chryslerand Gm) and Roush Racing since I was 17 y/o know Just a lil bit about fast cars.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 3:58:05 AM

DuBZzz00 said:
I believ you guys when it comes to better graphics from a computer, but shouldnt omputers be on a whole another level seeing the tech is updatd monthly? I mean I can see the graphics upgrad on a xbobx360 just by using a HDMI cord instead of the good ole yellow red and white cord provided. But when the next gen xbox comes out its going to utilize blu-ra even tho mcrosoft really doesnt care for a sony product so the whole advantage to havinf a rig might just go under water. it is just hard to drop $2000 on a crossfire setup for my 3930k rig w/ Xfx Amd Radeon HD 6870 2Gb and Asrok x79 extreme 9 mobo. when you can buy a console that is some what comparable for 1/8 of the price.


[:russk1:7]

We don't even know if the next Xbox is going to render games at 1080p. My guess is no - it will render games at 720p and then upscale just like current consoles do. Why do I say that? Because 99% of people won't know what's really going on and will believe whatever the sticker on the box tells them, and because Microsoft won't be able to get their console's price under $400 if they want to render games at 1080p.

A high end PC plays games at 60fps+ at 1080p+ with maxed out settings like AA/AF/DX11 features/etc. A console plays games at 30fps at 720p with medium-low settings. They're no more comparable than my Camry is to those supercars. Stop trolling, please.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 4:20:51 AM

DuBZzz00 said:
A GT-R will smoke a veyron and as for car background I have worked for all the top 3 (ford.chryslerand Gm) and Roush Racing since I was 17 y/o know Just a lil bit about fast cars.


You know nothing about the motor industry or computing...

http://www.fastestlaps.com/cars/bugatti_veyron_164_supe...

http://www.fastestlaps.com/cars/nissan_gt-r_mk_iii.html

1/4 mile times are very unpredictable as they rely on more than just the car, the environment and driver also have important roles to play...

The site I linked you to has taken averages from a number of different tracks, provided by reliable sources to give the most accurate result possible, and there is over a second in it, which is a lifetime at these speeds!

Watching a few youtube videos doesn't mean you can start creating this fantasy world around yourself...

Worked for Ford, Chrysler, GM, and Roush eh.... Get fired often?

Either your trollin or I'm seriously concerned about your well-being :??: 
Score
0
a c 109 U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 4:54:42 AM

In a nutshell:
XBOX=Bike
PC=Supercar
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:07:57 AM

BigMack70 said:
[:russk1:7]

We don't even know if the next Xbox is going to render games at 1080p. My guess is no - it will render games at 720p and then upscale just like current consoles do. Why do I say that? Because 99% of people won't know what's really going on and will believe whatever the sticker on the box tells them, and because Microsoft won't be able to get their console's price under $400 if they want to render games at 1080p.

A high end PC plays games at 60fps+ at 1080p+ with maxed out settings like AA/AF/DX11 features/etc. A console plays games at 30fps at 720p with medium-low settings. They're no more comparable than my Camry is to those supercars. Stop trolling, please.


Yeap you told the truth bro..Ive played skyrim on xbox then got it a few months later when i first bought my gtx 460 fpb..BIG difference man and after seeing that i sold the xbox not to long after. Dont get me wrong its a decent system but graphically it sucks compared to good pc hardware
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:52:56 AM

I remember reading an article that showed that most games on xbox/ps3s don't even natively render most games at 720p, they are just upscaled. Even at 720p that is less than half the quality of the picture of 1080p which obviously makes a big difference. Battlefield 3 is also renderded in dx11 which when everything is running on full it looks like a wet dream, the console version looks like a bad nightmare.
Score
0
a c 171 U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 7:08:12 AM

I'm pretty sure the 360 renders in 720. There was a big deal about GTA4 when it came out. In order for 720 to be met they had to drop the details down. The PS3 instead of doing 720 with lower details they dropped down to 680(?) and left the details higher.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 7:10:21 AM

4745454b said:
I'm pretty sure the 360 renders in 720. There was a big deal about GTA4 when it came out. In order for 720 to be met they had to drop the details down. The PS3 instead of doing 720 with lower details they dropped down to 680(?) and left the details higher.


Dang, My opinion both looks horrible and crysis 3 is going to push the console limits even harder
Score
0
a c 171 U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 8:49:20 AM

Thankfully they are getting a big upgrade so it won't be all bad. A big 3C/6T CPU with a 6670/7750 should do quite well.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 4:13:44 PM

4745454b said:
Thankfully they are getting a big upgrade so it won't be all bad. A big 3C/6T CPU with a 6670/7750 should do quite well.



Thats true but if they dont support native 1080p basically it still wont look as clean due to it being upscaled like the systems we got now and even then i dont see them really pushing the graphics that far in the 720..Consoles is way to behind and they going to shoot them selfs by going cheap
Score
0
a c 171 U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:01:55 PM

IF. I bet it won't be a problem this time. As least for MS/Sony. Nintendo is another story...
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:04:06 PM

If those GPU rumors are true, it's gonna be more 720p upscaled garbage, by the way.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:42:56 PM

BigMack70 said:
If those GPU rumors are true, it's gonna be more 720p upscaled garbage, by the way.



Yeap and i might pass on consoles. Ever since ive been gaming on pc lately in the past 5 months ive never thought about going backwards
Score
0
October 7, 2012 1:04:10 AM

paddys09 said:
You know nothing about the motor industry or computing...

http://www.fastestlaps.com/cars/bugatti_veyron_164_supe...

http://www.fastestlaps.com/cars/nissan_gt-r_mk_iii.html

1/4 mile times are very unpredictable as they rely on more than just the car, the environment and driver also have important roles to play...

The site I linked you to has taken averages from a number of different tracks, provided by reliable sources to give the most accurate result possible, and there is over a second in it, which is a lifetime at these speeds!

Watching a few youtube videos doesn't mean you can start creating this fantasy world around yourself...

Worked for Ford, Chrysler, GM, and Roush eh.... Get fired often?

Either your trollin or I'm seriously concerned about your well-being :??: 



Its called contracting, good ole american way if you dont want to do it OUTSOURCE to someone who a.k.a me. And you people are killing me with the GT-R vs. Buggati BS! a 1993 F1 mclaren will run a better 1/4 mile then the buggati the bugatti is a top end car or a 1 mile car the quarter times suck for the HP/ weight ratio. So you can say Im trollin , Im lying or bullshiting Fact is I will bet anything anytime on that race the GT-R wins the quarter mile. The torque to weight ratio of the GT-R is far greater then the bugatti's, the veyron is VERY heavy seeing it has 2 V8 engine and something like 4 turbos and 10 radiators in it!! This isnt youtube facts this is real life LoL Buggati veyron will win top end but it takes it about 4 1/2 miles to even get going its fastest, Plus the gear ratio on the GT-R is designed for low end high power band torque with almost 1/3 less weight to HP ratio Do the math SON So quit trying to act like you know everything about everythng and u may know more about computers but thats why i started this thread was to benefit from others knowledge not try to debate there answer and say there wrong even the I ask the question.
Score
0
October 7, 2012 3:48:41 AM

DuBZzz00 said:
Its called contracting, good ole american way if you dont want to do it OUTSOURCE to someone who a.k.a me. And you people are killing me with the GT-R vs. Buggati BS! a 1993 F1 mclaren will run a better 1/4 mile then the buggati the bugatti is a top end car or a 1 mile car the quarter times suck for the HP/ weight ratio. So you can say Im trollin , Im lying or bullshiting Fact is I will bet anything anytime on that race the GT-R wins the quarter mile. The torque to weight ratio of the GT-R is far greater then the bugatti's, the veyron is VERY heavy seeing it has 2 V8 engine and something like 4 turbos and 10 radiators in it!! This isnt youtube facts this is real life LoL Buggati veyron will win top end but it takes it about 4 1/2 miles to even get going its fastest, Plus the gear ratio on the GT-R is designed for low end high power band torque with almost 1/3 less weight to HP ratio Do the math SON So quit trying to act like you know everything about everythng and u may know more about computers but thats why i started this thread was to benefit from others knowledge not try to debate there answer and say there wrong even the I ask the question.


That's all well and nice, except your bragging isn't getting the question solved. :) 
Score
0
October 7, 2012 3:55:59 AM

...................................All the while someone could be helping me on my new thread, man Im the one supposed to be trolling .cry
Score
0
October 7, 2012 4:44:37 AM

This topic has been closed by Amdfangirl
Score
0
October 7, 2012 4:44:50 AM

Best answer selected by amdfangirl.
Score
0
!