Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11
    ZeonMX is offline Senior Member Regular
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Crysis, the game that will shame all console game's graphic...

  2. #12
    98abaile's Avatar
    98abaile is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    An Englishman in a shithole somewhere in Wales.
    Posts
    7,892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shautieh View Post
    true, but let's say that we play on the same high def screen, be it with the PC or the console then
    in fact i'm more interested in the raw power of the 2 rather than on their display, but it is true that sharpness in the rendered image is important for the player's eyes

    nice video btw
    Depends on the parts used in the PC, but potentially the PC is more powerful. Don't forget, all console games are developed on PC, and most consoles are built based on existing PC hardware.

    EDIT:
    Just ran a spell check and it flagged shautieh's name and gave the suggestion "Shiite", which I mistook for shite. XD

  3. #13
    shautieh's Avatar
    shautieh is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Skipea
    Posts
    5,340

    Default

    but given that the consoles are designed for games while the PCs have a bigger part of their overall performance used for non game activities (while playing game...), are the consoles still not at an advantage ?
    i browsed some forum yesterday and someone said the best looking game of 2006 was gears of war => a console game (even if it doesn't mean it wouldn't have look better on PCs, it is a good argument against PC games )

    and you shouldn't trust spell checks lol

  4. #14
    MadDogMike is offline Senior Member Always Around
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,517

    Default

    It's true that Gears of War looks better than most PC games that exist at the moment, but that's only because it's the first game to use the Unreal 3 engine. Once an Unreal 3 engine game has come out on PC, you'll see what PCs are capable of doing with that engine.

    Here's the best way to show that PCs are more powerful though: just mention the GeForce 8800 GTX. It has double the performance of the previous best video card (the Radeon X1900XTX), which itself was more powerful than both the Xbox 360 and the PS3's graphical capabilities. Combine two of them together in SLI mode, and you have the Ultimate Godly Beast of Console Devastation.

    Also, it's not the "bigger" part of system resources that gets devoted to non-gaming activities. It's usually around 1% to 2% of CPU resources (unless you're actively doing something like virus scanning), and less than 500MB of RAM (and most PCs have 1-2GB, compared to the ~512MB that the new consoles have).



    Last but not least, show your friend Crysis.

    http://media.pc.ign.com/media/694/694190/imgs_1.html <-- Crysis images
    http://media.pc.ign.com/media/694/694190/vids_1.html <-- Crysis videos
    Last edited by MadDogMike; 01-17-2007 at 02:22 AM.

  5. #15
    Jyuu's Avatar
    Jyuu is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MadDogMike View Post
    It's true that Gears of War looks better than most PC games that exist at the moment, but that's only because it's the first game to use the Unreal 3 engine. Once an Unreal 3 engine game has come out on PC, you'll see what PCs are capable of doing with that engine.

    Here's the best way to show that PCs are more powerful though: just mention the GeForce 8800 GTX. It has double the performance of the previous best video card (the Radeon X1900XTX), which itself was more powerful than both the Xbox 360 and the PS3's graphical capabilities. Combine two of them together in SLI mode, and you have the Ultimate Godly Beast of Console Devastation.

    Also, it's not the "bigger" part of system resources that gets devoted to non-gaming activities. It's usually around 1% to 2% of CPU resources (unless you're actively doing something like virus scanning), and less than 500MB of RAM (and most PCs have 1-2GB, compared to the ~512MB that the new consoles have).



    Last but not least, show your friend Crysis.

    http://media.pc.ign.com/media/694/694190/imgs_1.html <-- Crysis images
    http://media.pc.ign.com/media/694/694190/vids_1.html <-- Crysis videos
    Argh, you know nothing!
    Gears of War was been awarded best graphics for technological and artistic excellence. It looks great and runs great.

    And the 8800GTX has double the power of the X1950XTX, not the X1900XTX. The Xenos IS as powerful as the X1900XTX because of its unified shaders. And remember that SLI'd 8800GTX only shows performance increases at 1920x1200 and above. If we stick to apples to apples it does nothing at 720p, the output resolution of the consoles.

    Even if consoles have only 512MB of RAM, it's entirely dedicated to the game. AND it's DDR3 SDRAM/XDR RAM.

  6. #16
    Jakko's Avatar
    Jakko is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, US
    Posts
    4,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jyuu View Post
    Argh, you know nothing!
    Gears of War was been awarded best graphics for technological and artistic excellence. It looks great and runs great.

    And the 8800GTX has double the power of the X1950XTX, not the X1900XTX. The Xenos IS as powerful as the X1900XTX because of its unified shaders. And remember that SLI'd 8800GTX only shows performance increases at 1920x1200 and above. If we stick to apples to apples it does nothing at 720p, the output resolution of the consoles.

    Even if consoles have only 512MB of RAM, it's entirely dedicated to the game. AND it's DDR3 SDRAM/XDR RAM.
    So, there is no point in getting an two 8800's, unless we have a monitor that supports 1900x1200 and above?

  7. #17
    Jyuu's Avatar
    Jyuu is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jakko View Post
    So, there is no point in getting an two 8800's, unless we have a monitor that supports 1900x1200 and above?
    Actually right now, there is no point of getting two 8800s even if you have a 30" LCD like me, cause one of them is enough to run any game at at least 2xAA at 2560x1600 and maximum settings.
    I have two because of... 3DMARK06 e-penis enlargement.

    Edit:
    Take into account the masive bottleneck induced by today's processors. Even my QX6700 @ 3.0GHz bottlenecks my two 8800GTX as shown by those who got a higher score than me. Just by overclocking their QX6700 to 4.16GHz, they got higher framerates.
    Last edited by Jyuu; 01-17-2007 at 06:52 AM.

  8. #18
    shautieh's Avatar
    shautieh is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Skipea
    Posts
    5,340

    Default

    thanks all for the infos,
    don't hesitate to add more

    Quote Originally Posted by Jyuu View Post
    Actually right now, there is no point of getting two 8800s even if you have a 30" LCD like me, cause one of them is enough to run any game at at least 2xAA at 2560x1600 and maximum settings.
    I have two because of... 3DMARK06 e-penis enlargement.
    now that you have enlarged your e-penis, it would be kind of you if you let go one of the 2 8800s ^^

  9. #19
    MadDogMike is offline Senior Member Always Around
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jyuu View Post
    Argh, you know nothing!
    Gears of War was been awarded best graphics for technological and artistic excellence. It looks great and runs great.

    And the 8800GTX has double the power of the X1950XTX, not the X1900XTX. The Xenos IS as powerful as the X1900XTX because of its unified shaders. And remember that SLI'd 8800GTX only shows performance increases at 1920x1200 and above. If we stick to apples to apples it does nothing at 720p, the output resolution of the consoles.

    Even if consoles have only 512MB of RAM, it's entirely dedicated to the game. AND it's DDR3 SDRAM/XDR RAM.
    Nice try at nitpicking everything in my post. Allow me to explain most of the things you mentioned though.

    - I believe that Gears of War is the best looking game out right now, but I'm sure that there are other games with graphical capabilities that are incredible in other ways. I was looking at IGN the other day, and it mentioned Medieval: Total War as having the best graphical engine on PC. I haven't played a lot of PC games lately, and because of that I was being careful.

    Also, I can quote you saying that Gears of War graphics are "weaksauce stuff" when trying to proclaim PC superiority in another thread around here.



    - Okay, I forgot that they also released the X1950XTX, but I have a magazine in my house which ran performance tests on a number of video cards, including the X1950XTX, and the 8800 GTX performed on average 1.63 times as good as that card . If it was the X1900XTX it would be closer to double the performance, but as far as I'm aware, it doesn't double the performance of the X1950XTX.

    - The SLI comment was in reference to the insane quality that PCs can run the games at (while consoles are limited to 720p), not how fast they can render. I'm fully aware of the pros and cons of SLI.

    Since when were we limited to discussing quality at 720p? You went off talking about how your LCD monitors can display resolutions above 720p before.

    - If you take a closer look at the RAM comment, I've mentioned how even though up to 500MB of RAM is used by the operating system and other background processes, they still have much more RAM left over than they would normally need. I was pointing out how the amount of RAM in the typical PC outweighs the amount used for non-gaming activities by more than enough that it barely makes a difference. The only reason I mentioned the amount used in our current consoles is to show that the so called "bigger part" (yeah right...) of system resources that are hogged by the OS still leaves us with PLENTY of unused RAM (more than the consoles have to start off with).

    Sure, the consoles are using DDR3, but that's another point entirely from the one I was making. The OS taking up system resources used to be a big problem once upon a time, but not really anymore, which is the point I was trying to make (Vista may be another thing entirely though... a friend of mine needed to buy another 1GB of RAM to get F.E.A.R. to run smoothly on Vista).



    So anyway, if you weren't looking so hard for things to pick at, I doubt there would have been a problem here. I notice you seem to do that to my posts every now and then, and I can't figure out why.
    Last edited by MadDogMike; 01-17-2007 at 04:28 PM.

  10. #20
    Henchy432 is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Harlem
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    This might be off topic. But, does anyone know how long it takes to get their 360 back for microsoft. Mine just died and I sending to them.

 

 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
vBulletin Skin by: ForumThemes.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79