Last message on previous page: I'm not bashing the PS3. I like consoles and I own an Xbox360. What I was trying to say was that they have their niche and for what they do, they do well. I like to sit down, turn it on and play. Nothing wrong with that. I use my PC for some games too, but I use it for more of a multimedia function.
Hey everyone, just to show that guy that the PS3 is not a life changing piece of hardware I have found a video of somebody booting into windows xp using a PS3, Linux and QEMU... and yes while it is a virtual load and not native, even a celeron would do it faster.
A scientific research came to a conclusion saying a person who says a PS3 is far better than a PC has the following disorders.
1. The subject likes to eat cow dung for breakfast.
2. The subject likes to fling monkey poo.
3. The subject's brain only activates 0.000000000001ns per day.
4. The subject does not know the difference between night and day
or day and night.
5. The subject has the mind of a artificial turf
6. While everyone always put a hot dog into a bun. The
subject likes to put his bun to the hotdog.
7. The subject thinks PS3 is the best console, but
in reality it stands for
Piece of Sh*t 3.
Back when Sony announced the specifications of the PlayStation 3, everyone asked if it meant the end of PC gaming. After all Cell looked very strong and NVIDIA's RSX GPU had tremendous power. We asked NVIDIA how long it would take until we saw a GPU faster than the RSX. Their answer: by the time the PS3 ships. So congratulations to NVIDIA for making the PS3 obsolete before it ever shipped, as G80 is truly a beast.
No, I did not say the ps3 is better than pc overall, but for the price of one gtx, you could buy a ps3 is all I am saying. I am not taking either side, as you need a very expensive tv to get the best out of ps3, while any large monitor will do for the pc. Once again, I am simply saying that for whoever is going to compare them side by side has to keep this in mind
Ahh sorry mate, that was not about you.
It should have said...
A scientific research came to a conclusion saying the person who created this topic says a PS3 is far better than a PC has the following disorders.
3rd, playing 40-50 inches from my (to get) 22 inches widescreen 1680*1050 LCD screen is just as good as playing console 72-84 inches away from a 32 inches 1368*768 highdef TV set. Both gets you about twice the distance from the screen as the one of these monitor/TV across distances, but resolution is better on PC. I'd say PC wins, otherwise I can connect my video card on that same highdef TV set and get what you already have. That of course is if you prefer bigger over better resolution. Forget about 1080i, as image is interlaced (do a google search for it and you'll see) and quality will never be as good as 1080P that doesn't even exist on the market yet, apart from maybe a few expensive exceptions.
Quote :
4th, I'll take you anytime with your gamepad on my PC.
Regarding HDTV's and Resolution, playing at 1080i (not a typo, " i " ) I have to say, I couldn't see the difference between 1080i and 1080p at all. I was totally blown away. In the old days going interlaced wasn't even CLOSE to being an option. Now, that's totally different. Before you comment on it, go and see it. If you try 1080i and can see a difference in the sense that it's not playable... heck, if you can even TELL that's it's in interlaced mode, I'd be very surprised. I cannot tell the difference at all. For that matter, none of my co-workers / friends can tell either. So if you CAN in fact tell the difference, you're one of them "special" ppl that have miracle eyes (a curse imo) where you need 200fps to not see skip and a progressive scan television to not get a headache.
2nd, as far as the joystick, trust me, play against a few ppl on Xbox live and tell me they aren't whupping you sideways. The dual analog sticks are amazing once you get used to them. Keep in mind, this is coming from someone with 15 - 16 years of PC gaming... I've played ALL the best 3D shooters from then till now... doom, Duke nukem 3D, quake, quake 2, quake 3, UT, ... you name it and I"ve probably played it. And I'm telling you, with practice you could definitely get as good as a keyboard / mouse. The obvious thing that's missing is that you don't have as many keys to setup. No argument there. But the control aspect, it's very much on the same level.
OK, I'll give it to you about 1080i. I haven't seen it personally (gotta be honest, and stay open to discussion. This is the only way to improve ). I do know that 1080P is way better on it's specification at least, and report seem to say so, but it might not be so big after all. But I also know that any computer LCD is highdef and will look even better because it has refresh below 8ms that make sure there is no ghost. Can you tell the same of highdef TV set? For some yes, for most not.
About the keypad! I've done both, my brother has just about every console out there (except PS3 and Wii as wii speak). There is no way anybody, with same practice time, will get the same result with a keypad as with a mouse keyboard. No way around that, unless there is aiming help on in the gane you're playing! Even with games like Morrowind, on both PC and XBox (I've played both), PC version come out easier to play... much easier.
Sure, noob will get there ass handed to them by experienced players. But same level, mouse-keyboard will always win over keypad. That brings the question, what are they waiting to release one set for console? Unless it's already out!
I should have made it more clear as what I was trying to say. A PC does what it does and a console does what it does. Enough said. Anything else is just garbage. I buy consoles to play games, I buy PC to do everything else and play some games. I don't see why everybody is trying to compare them.
I just went to buy a new pc an athlon X2 3800 with an asus aex1950 pro 1gb of ddr2 for 700$ cad (including tax) without monitor
If i think, i can get a ps3 for about 600$ cad (including tax) Hum if i found one in the stores.
After a couple of game compare on the same screen ( hd multimedia projector) i alway use my computer as home teater using multimonitor and as workstation too in same time ...
I can say this pc GFX are really close to ps3. i am talking about gfx effect and not artistique point of vue . Some game really look better only because the artist are better ...
Conclusion for me it is really better to buy new pc because i upgrade my workstation my gamig station my home teater in same time and i selled my old computer for 300$ it give me an over all cost of about 400$
I d'ont know why everybody talk about high end pc when mid pc can give really good result for less than 1000$ when you not buy fancy things like a 100$ keyboard 200$ computer case . ANd put money only on effective hardware..
Just a little example we can get a radeon x1950pro (256Mb) for 200$ or a x1950 xtx (512 Mb) for 500$ to get 15 % more power or a x1650 xt (512 mb) for 350$ to get 50% less power than x1950 pro ... but oh yeh we have 512mb of video ram .... all price in cad
Maybe i will buy an Xbox with XNA it is possible to build game and port it to xbox really easely...
And about pure hardware power i think new console are well balenced to give you good gfx for the money but that will not last long ...
It make me remeber when someone tried to convince me about hes PSX was really more powerfull than any computer while i alrady been able to play Psx game on my computer with an emulator ...
I agree, as the ps3 being my favorate console but my bro said that the graphic cards on the PC are already better and that the ps'3 graphic card id outdated. Do u know any thing about it?
thanks in advance
I agree, as the ps3 being my favorate console but my bro said that the graphic cards on the PC are already better and that the ps'3 graphic card id outdated. Do u know any thing about it?
thanks in advance
Your brother is correct; the Geforce 8800GTX is 3x+ as fast as the GPU in the PS3.
Am I wrong, or did everyone forget that you can also run in sli and crossfire modes? Since when can you do that with a console. So my 2 7900gt's in sli kick the sh!t out of xbox 360 and ps3 in terms of graphical performance.
Oh, and since most people have a PC already, spending sub $400 for an sli UPGRADE(say that for your console) is more economical than spending $500 + just for the PS3!(that is, of course, assuming they have an sli or crossfire compatible mobo, or one with 2 pci-e slots available)
Am I wrong, or did everyone forget that you can also run in sli and crossfire modes? Since when can you do that with a console. So my 2 7900gt's in sli kick the sh!t out of xbox 360 and ps3 in terms of graphical performance.
Oh, and since most people have a PC already, spending sub $400 for an sli UPGRADE(say that for your console) is more economical than spending $500 + just for the PS3!(that is, of course, assuming they have an sli or crossfire compatible mobo, or one with 2 pci-e slots available)
Actually SLi isn't exactly worth it. They would be better off using that $400 to upgrade to newer technology. Unless they are playing at incredibly high resolutions might as well sell the old video card and buy a better one. Chances are good that with the sale of your old card it will be sub $300 (unless of course you go for an 8800GTX )
What do you mean, sli isn't worth it? You don't have to get top of the line cards to run sli. Heck, you can get some 7300 cards that will run sli. As far as I'm concerned, I think spending $380 on 2 7900gt's that I'm going to watercool and overclock, is definitely worth it. You save about a $100 with this sli setup than getting a new 8800gts. Plus the performance is about the same(comparing 7900gt sli to 8800gts). Then, 6 months down the road you can sell your 7900gt's on ebay, make a decent dollar and invest it in a dx10 card. At least that's what I plan on doing. For now, and in the next few months, there won't be enough dx10 games for me to invest in a dx10 card. The only reason I would go with dx10 cards now, is to pursue my fascination with overclocking. Which brings me back to the original topic of this thread: the PS3(or any other console, for that matter). When is the last time, or the first time, you've seen some one overclock their hardware on a console? Tell me, please, what's the highest overclock you've gotten on the cell processor? What's that? You can't oc it? I thought not. Until you can personalize a console the way you can a pc, I'm not buyin' it. Except for the Wii, that looks fun! Plus, who can resist a new Mario game?
OMFG, people keep dragging up this crappy thread, it should just be left to die and rot away.
Here's the final nail in the coffin to hasten that, the announcement that Sony will make a multimedia PS3, and in order to do so MSRP will be $1600-2500;
"Given that in the consumer electronics industry manufacturers do not subsidize hardware in hope to compensate their losses by selling many games, it is highly likely that the console, which currently costs $840 to manufacture, will be sold at a premium price. The Japanese web-site noted an executive at SCEI as saying that the price range could be from ¥200 to ¥300 thousand ($1680 to $2520)."
So in order to make it anywhere near a PC it costs as much or more than a gaming PC.
Does anyone actually realize this thread is dated from Feb 20 LAST YEAR???
If anyone uses the money argument, it doesn't matter. The OP asked HIGH END PC. No competition there (we all know that). Yes the PS3 is better value for money concerning just gaming and IF you can get it at the suggested retail price of $650.
This is not directed to anyone in particular, jst giving an opinion. Oh yeah, the ps3 also won't see crysis. (not powerful enough they say).
What do you mean, sli isn't worth it? You don't have to get top of the line cards to run sli. Heck, you can get some 7300 cards that will run sli. As far as I'm concerned, I think spending $380 on 2 7900gt's that I'm going to watercool and overclock, is definitely worth it. You save about a $100 with this sli setup than getting a new 8800gts. Plus the performance is about the same(comparing 7900gt sli to 8800gts). Then, 6 months down the road you can sell your 7900gt's on ebay, make a decent dollar and invest it in a dx10 card. At least that's what I plan on doing. For now, and in the next few months, there won't be enough dx10 games for me to invest in a dx10 card. The only reason I would go with dx10 cards now, is to pursue my fascination with overclocking. Which brings me back to the original topic of this thread: the PS3(or any other console, for that matter). When is the last time, or the first time, you've seen some one overclock their hardware on a console? Tell me, please, what's the highest overclock you've gotten on the cell processor? What's that? You can't oc it? I thought not. Until you can personalize a console the way you can a pc, I'm not buyin' it. Except for the Wii, that looks fun! Plus, who can resist a new Mario game?
I agree with the poster that told you SLI wasnt worth it. And 2 7300 cards in SLI is a pretty dumb idea
As for you choosing 7900GT's in SLI over getting an 8800GTS you are out of your freaking mind. 8800GTS's are going for $399 and after the rebate only $369.00 which is less expensive than 2 7900GT's.
Also you are leaving out the extra cost that would be included for water cooling those 2 7900GT's making it even more impractical than it already is to choose over getting a 1 card solution that is DX10 ready and will also beat the pants off of those 7900GT's once overclocked to 8800GTX levels.
I hope you did realize that once the 8800GTS is overclocked to 8800GTX(as most will get to that speed pretty easily) speed that it has shown to be be equal to the performance of the 8800GTX (at least in dx9 games) and the last time I checked a single 8800GTX outperforms SLI'd 7900GTX's and crossfired X1900XT's. It would simply trounce 2 7900GT's.
Consoles are all about the experience, which is why the wii has been popular.
Lets face it, you can't invite your mates over for a game on the pc.
You can invite them over from pro evo on the ps2 though
Don't play the old stupid arguements about graphics either. Who really cares. Yes graphics are nice, but if thats all your interested in then you need to take a look at your brain. Gaming is about gameplay, if graphics is all you care about, go for a walk outside.
As far as I'm concerned, I think spending $380 on 2 7900gt's that I'm going to watercool and overclock, is definitely worth it.
I agree with the poster that told you SLI wasnt worth it. And 2 7300 cards in SLI is a pretty dumb idea
As for you choosing 7900GT's in SLI over getting an 8800GTS you are out of your freaking mind. 8800GTS's are going for $399 and after the rebate only $369.00 which is less expensive than 2 7900GT's.
Also you are leaving out the extra cost that would be included for water cooling those 2 7900GT's making it even more impractical than it already is to choose over getting a 1 card solution that is DX10 ready and will also beat the pants off of those 7900GT's once overclocked to 8800GTX levels.
It would simply trounce 2 7900GT's.
You wasted your money.
Oh yes, you did! The question should be, who's better at making their product sound more powerful than it really is: Sony with the PS3? Or Nvidia with SLI?
speak). There is no way anybody, with same practice time, will get the same result with a keypad as with a mouse keyboard. No way around that, unless there is aiming help on in the gane you're playing! Even with games like Morrowind, on both PC and XBox (I've played both), PC version come out easier to play... much easier.
)
