PS3 graphics VS newest PC graphics.

Why are gaming consoles so much more powerful graphically than PC? I looked at the wikipedia page and for both the PS3 and Xbox 360 and their graphics cards are considered precursors of cards that went into PC by NVidea and ATI. I know I'm missing something huge here; can someone explain this to me?

 

it's because developers of console games know exactly what hardware specifications are in the consoles and can push the parts to the limits.

pc gaming is more of a hit and miss kind of thing. you can't code perfectly for every piece of hardware people have running, but instead code to have the best graphics for the most amount of people.

 

It's a combination of a lot of things.

Mainly, the processors, like the PS3's:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...ops-high-performance-computing-benchmark.html

The processor's are so fast that they don't need a bigger, faster GPU. The games are also optimized much better. But make no mistake about it, if you have a high-end GPU & CPU on PC, you will outpreform either console very easily, you will simply pay much more money.

So consoles are a great way to get a solid gpu, a great cpu, and bluray(ps3) in some cases for relatively cheap. Sure you could get an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, an 8600 GT(HDMI), disable as much processes as you can with msconfig, along with a bluray drive, but thats exceeding the console pricing, and the amount/quality of exclusive games on the Consoles is superior to the amount/quality of exclusive PC games.

 

First of they are not more powerful graphically. My laptop card is about 3x more graphically powerful than your 360/ps3. The thing you have to understand about consoles is :

1. they don't play above 720p (1280x720,768), while pcs can 1920x1200. The console resolutions are no where near what a pc can produce.

2. Games for the console are built around its specs and optimized for that machine.


xbox360 hasn't had better graphics than a PC since 2005. Remember the xbox360 uses a graphics card equivalent to X1900, ps3 7800gt.

 

If you look power wise to the latest computer vs PS3,I think the computer will win.But not many ppl own them.So the developers develop somewhere in the middle IMHO.

 

Are you kidding? Console graphics cannot hold a candle to PC graphics at all. Did you hear all the complaints that Halo 3 and many games didn't even run at 720P and how many games have stutter or low framerate problems. Most game that actually runs at 1080i/p usually have to get by with a reduce colour pallet.

Take one of the most recent games as an example. Mass Effect looks so much better on the PC it's not even funny, I can run it at 1920x1200 (vs the console's 1280x720) at very decent detail even on my 8800GTS.

As you say, Console GPU is usually based on dated PC GPUs and the only reason the console video runs even as good as they do is that they stripped of all non-essential (for games) feature and the drivers are optimise for graphics.

 

when xbox 360 was released, it had better graphics than most pcs, but VERY soon after that, pc hardware catched up.
The best graphics will always be on the pc platform, given you got cash to burn.
but for most people who don't build their own computers or throw away grands for an alienware, console gaming is the logical answer.

 

a high-end PC would look better than a PS3 game. due to higher resolutions and bigger textures, you can compare some port by your self, Maybe DMC4. it looks much better on the PC and even Runs better on a high end PC

 

1080i is just an upscaled image, doesn´t require any specific power. I run all my 360 games at 1080i. But an PS3 or an 360 is inferior to an high end PC, they don´t have any better graphics. Most games are multiplats anyway and that multiplat always looks better on the PC, due to:

1. Higher Resolution
2. Antialiasing
3. Anisotropic Filtering
4. Many graphical options (usually)

As someone else said 1280x720p is a very low resolution to play at and thus doesn´t require as much as running a game at 1440x900, 1680x1050, 1920x1200.

The only games the PS3 or 360 run at 1080p is some measly sports games, that is true 1920x1080 native resolution. Consoles are actually just pathetic, I call these the poor man´s PC, I have one, though mainly for my kids. Personally I play on PC that is way more powerful than any of these measly consoles that does indeed have framerate issues and stuttering, just look at GTA 4 that either console can´t keep any steady framerate at all

 

GTA4 is actually running 30 FPS on X360 when there is NOTHING going on, just you looking at the sea or something, and dips to 20 when there are stuff happening no matter how little they were

 

Try playing GTA IV. Once the motion blur sets in on A high speed chase you can defiantly notice a framerate drop. I've even crashed the 360 before. It just quit during a rather heated chase.

 

Ya Consoles suck but if your out of money go for it that's just my $2 IMO
Piss out.

 

Interesting. Thanks for the info. I was always under the impression that consoles were more powerful graphically. Cool to know I was wrong; one more reason to buy a gateway with a 8800gts. I just always thought graphics were worse on PC because looking through screenshots of EA NHL games, they always looked better on consoles than PC.

Goes to show how much I know about it. I haven't ever even seen a PS3 or Xbox 360, let alone played it. I'm still running my PS1 from '98

 

Yeah NHL looks bad on the PC, but that is only due to EA lazy sorry ass doesn´t put more work into upgrading the graphics engine for it. But apart from that take a look at every other game that is on 360 and run those on a high end laptop then decide for yourself which one looks the best and runs the best

 

That's a fallacy. A HDMI cable doesn't magically produce images to 1080i. It's also not just an upscale of an image. Have you ever seen the difference in a 1680x1050 screen to a 1280x800? There's a lot more room to be found in the higher res. And it does require a specific power since there's more output of pixles.

The reason people are saying that the 360 doesn't have games running in 1080i and only gets to 720i or w/e, is because there's so much on the screen that the 360's hardware can't maintain the 1080i res. and to do so, would require a decrease of color and pretty effects etc.

 

My 360 runs GTA4 just fine, your exaggerating

 

There is way more variety on the consoles, I run FPS's and RTS games on PC, but everything else is much more enjoyable on a console. I could buy a 8800GT, but why? For what? Crysis? How boring... UT3, been there & done that, is there really anything else left if you've played the orange box, cod4, & coh(or your favourite rts)?

 

PC graphics are better mainly because consoles have way less shader memories, that's what i heard from a Ubisoft official. and at this rate, i would say xbox 720 and ps4 should be out by 2010, 360 and ps3 are starting to struggle with the newer games already

 

Actually, having worked on multiple Xbox 360 titles, I can tell you for a fact that console games are just upscaled. The back buffer (the place the game actually renders the game) is 1280X720 (720p), and the console upscales it to 1080i/p. It is straight upscaling. Pure and simple.

Games and software don't automagically start rendering to a lower frame resolution in real time, they just drop framerate. I'll say it again: the vast, overwhelming majority of console games are rendered to a 1280X720 back buffer and either downscaled (if you are going to a SD TV) or upscaled (if going to an HD TV above 720p). This is fact.

Also, 720p and 1080i use nearly the same bandwidth (if at equal frequency). Just so you know.

 

You had to ask that question didn't you. Now everyone is gonna reply and this thread will never end.

I'll start off... There are plenty of awesome games on the PC. You named 4 like that's all there is to play. Let me name some more. Battlefield 2, F.E.A.R. (and all of the expansions), Bioshock, FarCry 2 which is coming out, Alan Wake, Half Life 2, Rome: Total War, the upcoming Empire: Total War, Mass Effect.

You have to remember that people don't buy gaming compturs solely for games that are already out. They buy them for games that will come out as well.

People like gaming on a PC b/c you can use a mouse and keyboard. Not to mention if you are building/buying a PC, sometimes it pays off to spend $500 extra bucks on more mem/graphics so you can play games on it. Actually, it is logical to conclude gaming on a PC is cheaper than gaming on a XBox360 or a PS3. With consoles you need cables, controllers, $60 games, an expensive TV. All totaled it can cost you over $700 to be able to play games on a console while only about $500 for a PC. Laptop gaming is a different story of course.

 

When I buy the latest game, I always buy it on the 360 rather than PC, even though I have a more than capable laptop and Desktop, although I do download game demo's to play on my laptop when I'm away from home, and if I really really like a title, I may end up buying it for my laptop as well as the 360.

OK, the 360 upscales most things from 720 to 1080, but everyone I know with a 360 is playing these upscaled games on a 40 or 42 inch screen, and they look great (Gears, Grid etc).

Yet we still have people saying that the PC is much better for gaming because of the fact that their £400 graphics card can run the latest game @ 32768 x 16384, even though they're running this on a 19'' Monitor. I'm pretty sure they do not have anywhere near as good an experience as playing on a console on a decent sized screen. I know, because I've tried it and regularly compare both. OK, you could connect your PC to your 40/42'' screen, and play in the higher res, and yes, the graphics would look better - You'd just have to pause it frequently, and stare at it to convince yourself - does anyone honestly believe that, as a gaming experince the difference is worth so much extra money, or are they just trying to justify the fact that yet again they've spent a large part of their expendable income just to retain their title of "Another classic victim of the marketing machine" ?

I regularly watch SD DVD movies (720 x 576) on my 42'' screen, and with my eyes about 10' away from the screen they look good, and that's why my Xbox 360's 1280 x 720 upscaled games do too.

I think there's too much belief that a higher resolution (at any cost) means a better gaming experience. Years ago, when we were talking 320 x 256 v 640 x 320, I would have certainly agreed, but when we reach a situation where people dismiss video games rendered in a higher resolution than they watch TV, or movies at, as having poor graphics, it gets a bit silly. Of course I appreciate good graphics, but beyond a certain threshold, I believe the difference in gaming experience is negligible.

 

Dude...you just contradicted yourself..your calling people stupid for getting a high-end pc when they could get a cheaper 360, yet you say "even though i have a more than capable desktop/laptop". You should read what you write...

 

First of all, read my post on page 2. Second, the minute you start insulting the other party's decision (a very large party, I might add), is the minute you're wrong.

 

If you think PC gamers are victims of a marketing machine, enjoy your delusion. Consoles and console games probably have more money spent every day on advertising than the entire PC gaming industry spends in a year. Console games are all about image. PCs are better performers, they are more flexible, and they have more varied types of games. For instance, if you like strategy games, a console is about as useful as a doorstop. Or if you like mods. And you don't need a high end comp to beat a console anymore. A mid-range card can best a console these days. In a year or so, I'd bet a low end card will put a console to shame. In a few more years, IGPs will probably be better.

 

I haven't called anyone stupid. Maybe you should have written what I wrote.

My Laptop was bought by the company I work for, and although it is more than capable, my desktop does not have the most expensive cutting edge components.

For the record, I, like most, regularly fall victim to the marketing machine in many retail sectors. I'm not ashamed of it, nor am I criticising anyone for doing it. However, it seems that some took my comment as a personal attack, and as an accusation that they have fallen victim, and as a personal criticism.

 

It would be great to own all.. End of story.

Back to Topic, as some said before, PC graphics can theoretically and practically surpass consoles, it just depends on the component of the PC. Remember, the gpu that your 360 or PS3 is just an equivalent of a 7900GTX or lesser. We're coming to the 9800GTX series and that's like 4x faster than anything you have on the consoles. It's just up to the producers and programmers to optimize the code for them. Or even publish.... MGS4 will run better on a quad core/9800GTX SLI if they really want to do it.

 

The difference is usually worth the money because of what else people use there PC for. build a $1000 that can play all of the latest games and do everything else a PC can do and it's well worth the money. Buy a $4000 PC that is worth $2000 just for gaming and I will laugh at you while I play the same games at the same settings.

thats a good point. thats why playing a FPS/RTS on a PC is superior. It's not the graphics power, it's the gameplay. Plug in a joystick for your flight sim. Plug in a steering Wheel and enjoy racing. While the consoles do have both joysticks and racing wheels, they still miss you on the keyboard/mouse combo.

 

I agree, and as a matter of fact haven't done any gaming on my pc since GTA IV came out. That's because IMO there aren't any games that are as good or entertain me as much for pc. People are just upset that they have to buy a console to get it, so they feel the need to exaggerate the negatives and ignore the fact that the game of the year may never come to pc.

 

I appreciate the fact that most PC gamers prefer mouse/keyboard over a controller. But not everyone in the gaming world does, nor does everyone like mods, or strategy games.

 

They are going to bring it to PC, it's just going to be awhile. As for framerate drops, I've experienced them firsthand and they aren't that bad, though annoying since consoles shouldn't have them IMO.

 

I do, and that's why I choose my 360

 

Actually GTA IV does not run satisfying enough. I mean I spent a lot of money on that game and they can´t even make it run at least 30 fps in a fire fight nor in a heavy car chase, instead it is below 30. A console game should run at least at 30 fps. Though I am just a damaged PC user who have used PC´s for many many years

So I am asking you who thought the console experience is much better than the PC. Do you think it is a great experience to have a game that has frame rate problems. To me that is not any ideal gaming experience and with no video options too to draw down some settings to make it run faster.

I too have a 42 inch plasma, but to me I am not amazed at playing Gears on it, no I am more amazed playing it on my laptop at 1920x1200 and yes high resolution graphics do make a difference graphically and a 17" screen does look big when you sit in front of it.

Also PC has more diversity in games, I play lots of different games that isn´t even available on the consoles. Consoles is mostly same old same old, a new fps there another one there. FPS games is a real hassle to play on any console due to sub standard controls.

I don´t think every PC gamer thinks Crysis is awesome, graphically hell yeah it is the best looking out there, but I got bored quickly of the gameplay. On the other hand Far Cry 2 I look forward to.

The best FPS out there currently STALKER isn´t even available on any console and STALKER Clear Skies looks plain amazing with the DX10 effects. Just some off topic ranting

 

Ah, many of use runs HTPC on our HDTV. If you think stuff looks good with a 360. try running multi-platform games with a PC at 1920x1080 on a large 1080p display.

 

I think what really helps to sway my choice of the 360 is slouching back on the couch with a beer next to me, controller in hand playing on the large screen, in a family environment, with the minmum of fuss, and no wires etc. Switch on and play. The last thing I want to do when I get home after a hard day is sit bolt upright at a desk with a screen a few inches from my head, tucked away alone in a room for my entertainment, but that's my personal opinion, and I appreciate the fact that everyone's different.

Of course I can connect my Desktop or Laptop to my screen, but it's just the simplicity and convenience of the more than adequate console that does it.

 

Get a wireless gamepad and play in ur living room. it's just as simple. once you are in game there is nothing to worry about.

 

AFAIK there has been no official announcement of GTAIV for pc, but I'd be interested in the link.

Originally posted by Magnus:
Also PC has more diversity in games, I play lots of different games that isn´t even available on the consoles. Consoles is mostly same old same old, a new fps there another one there. FPS games is a real hassle to play on any console due to sub standard controls.

Really? What genre is available on pc that isn't on the consoles? How many games were released in the past year for pc? for consoles?

 

I'm sure you are, and I'm sure it's good, but just remember what your laptop cost compared to the 360.

 

To the keyboard+mouse thingi, I wonder why microsoft din want a pc Halo 3.. Maybe they are afraid of the keyboard+mouse combo player would own those 360 player that it'll kill the sales of 360 Halo3 so much

Above are personal opinions. Pls don't sue me, microsoft.

 

Yep, A good set of wireless keyboard and mouse in a "breakfast in bed" tray is all I need to play PC games on my HDTV sitting on my couch.

 

But I do this just fine on my 360, and don't have to put my laptop on the floor near the TV, or carry my Desktop PC downstairs !

As I mentioned, my preference is obviously due to convenience and home/equipment layout just as much, if not more than technical ability.

 

No indie games on consoles. None.

but both platforms suffer from sick movie-based game which really shouldn't be even allowed to develope any more, so bad.

 

We can pretty much count on Rockstar releasing GTA IV on PC later on. They did it with San Andreas, I don't know about before that. They would be missing out on a lot of sales if they didn't.

Considering that the PC is home to countless Indie developers, many more PC games were released this year for PC. As for Big name titles, I have no Idea. Only a few games are console exclusive, and most are released for PC anyway. When is the last time you saw a successful MMO on a console? Nearly all have been flops.

ahh yes. That is why, if I had the money, I would have a Home Theater PC set up in my living room permanently.

 

the vast majority of console exclusive games come from japan, their gaming market is dominated by consoles, PC gaming is almost none existent.
Most N American/European titles are all multi platform now, save a few titles like the new starwars thing.

 

wrong... It is possible to create indie games for consoles. Most of them suck anyway. GTAIV owns gaming right now, and I'm sorry that it upsets you. It's good to hear there are still the loonies out there that agree with censorship of video games

 

Really?? Guess wat the PC gamers and Wii players are playing right now...

 

Console gaming FTW!!!

So much better, no matter what people really say, there is no way of denying it and you know it yourself, so stop lying to yourself

 

I don't know what they're playing... Crysis and Wiifit??

 

course it's possible to make them, but are there many?

I'm not saying censorship should happenLOL, just sad to see little kids wasting their money on crappy budget-made stupid games like ironman, and those publishers getting profit for doing nothing.

 

I admit that console gaming is
easy, no patches or crashes.
fun with a few friends and beers.
quite easy on your wallet!
but you can't put up a nonsense comment like that.

 

Well as people said indie games. But for me turnbased advanced wargames, do consoles have any of those, nope not at all? I am myself into indie development, not in the coding area but in the graphics area. RTS games there are a few to none on consoles because they does not work with a joypad.

These are the main type of games I play and yes FPS games too of course.