The lowerest price PC thats can run games better than current Gen Consoles

Darkwave · 3 Feb 2008 at 12:58

Richdog said:
Really... Mass Effect lags? That's surprising... and a bit poor if true.

You can take my word for it.

I love my Elite and I love Mass Effect but it does run stupidly slow.

Shamikebab said:
Just because there are some games that don't run smoothly now, it doesn't mean a console has reached its limit. Designers will learn how to use both consoles architectures far more efficiently, leading to better looking and running games.

Even games like PGR4 and Skate get framerate hits at times, this is a continuing issue with the 360. I'd also like to see you quote some statements from a developer saying that the Xbox 360 still has lots of untapped potential left, because I just don't see it, and I personally think it's coming time for them to bring in the graphical shortcuts again.

Richdog · 3 Feb 2008 at 13:04

ergonomics said:
same goes for the PS3, with the game lair. During larger air battles, the fps can drop into the single digits at times.

this could be due to a rushed game perhaps...but its just an example

I think the coding is the problem... you get some games that look beautiful and run like butter... others which look less impressive and yet run like treacle.

snowdog · 3 Feb 2008 at 13:21

Shamikebab said:
Just because there are some games that don't run smoothly now, it doesn't mean a console has reached its limit. Designers will learn how to use both consoles architectures far more efficiently, leading to better looking and running games.

You can say the same for pc, just look @ Halo 2, it ran pretty poorly on my old spec of a pentium D 925 @ 4ghz, 2gb and a 6800GS, only had bout 25fps sometimes averaging about 35.
While it ran on a celeron 800mhz, geforce 2 on the xbox...
The game looks pretty dated too...
They could have easely recoded it much better to run like a rocketship with 150 fps or so, but were to lazy to do so... Same for the requirement of Vista tbh. Cracking/release groups isnetad fixed that for them by allowing it in xp.

a lot of games on xp could have been optimized a lot more for a wide selection of specs. The develloppers just recon it's too much work to test it on lets say a 6600, a 7600, an 7800, an 8600, an 8800 and equiv. ati's and make it run superbly on all those cards and push the capability's of each individual to the max.

You can see they're not by the usage of dual and quad cores, 2 threads are still often not used fully, never mind quad, whereas on the 360 and playstation3, I recon they try to use the cpu's to the max...

Paracelsus · 3 Feb 2008 at 13:41

You could go lower than an 8800GT IMO.

My 1950XT runs games at least as well as a 360. Gears of War easy, and Crysis makes Halo 3 look crap.

Devil May Cry 4 will be a good test though. It looks amazing and is on both 360/PS3. I think it will show up any difference.

Only £27 as opposed to £40-50 though

GTRacer · 3 Feb 2008 at 13:49

Biohazard said:
I agree.

Linking cars into an argument compairing PC's to consoles = fail

Its not a very conclusive analogy.

I'll do a better one.

A console is like an F1 car. Everything about it is designed to give the best performance on the track. A PC, however, is a BMW M5. It's a good all rounder, but it's by no means a dedicated race car.

Minstadave · 3 Feb 2008 at 13:54

Anim said:
Yeah that PC wouldnt run a 360 game at all well... or at all in general. The 360 has a triple custom built processor each hyper-threaded.

Total nonsense, that PC is far more powerful than a 360 in everyway.

The CPU in the 360 is actually quite cut down, in-order execution core.

4p · 3 Feb 2008 at 13:57

Console is a dedicated system

A PC isn't

End of thread

Minstadave · 3 Feb 2008 at 14:00

Thorpy said:
Console is a dedicated system

A PC isn't

End of thread

Dedicated to what? Playing games, email, media playing, instant messaging, video downloading, emulating older consoles?

My 360 can do all of them, as can my PC.

People seem to forget that consoles are built to be cheap, thats why they always have quite restrictive hardware specs (especially RAM).

The Running Man · 3 Feb 2008 at 14:24

yes and when u consider the price drop in ram since the design of both the xbox360 and ps3 if they had known maybe they would have put more in...or if it had been designed like 1 year later.

yantorsen · 3 Feb 2008 at 14:30

Spunj99 said:
Why not buy a hard drive equivalent to the 360 premium, 20gb is it? For about £5, saving £25 already...

And uh, who in the right mind would buy Vista for a gaming machine, scrap that and save a few more quid buying a copy of XP.

Oh, and 8800GT's can be had for around £140. (mine was £141 on release day - Inno3D fyi)

I'd rather spend £400ish on a PC of around that spec that is already a generation ahead of the "next-gen" consoles, lol.

you don't need and 8800GT to beat an Xbox at 720P!!!

a x1950pro should be plenty.

yantorsen · 3 Feb 2008 at 14:32

Shamikebab said:
PES 08 has known framerate problems, the new FIFA is far better and runs very smoothly. How new a GTA trailer are we talking? until really recently there have been framerate issues with all builds of GTA 4 (well they haven't actually shown the PS3 version yet) but thats to be expected from a pre release video.

what happened to xbox's being perfectly optimized so they walk all over pcs?

Darkwave · 3 Feb 2008 at 14:34

yantorsen said:
what happened to xbox's being perfectly optimized so they walk all over pcs?

Aye, I'm wondering what happened to this argument.

Now it seems to be "there's lots of untapped potential in consoles".

badbob · 3 Feb 2008 at 14:37

Gashman said:
except console games are much more optimised for that specific hardware, PC games can never be like that, too much variation in the hardware

Edit: heres a way to describe whats going on, the console is a lotus exige, not very powerful HP wise but agile and good cornering, the PC is more like a 500BHP shelby mustang, fast as hell in a straight line but can't do **** in the corners, so even though consoles have less power its used FAR more efficiently being the moral of the story

Perhaps in times past, when the operating system and games are designed for that console, but now with DX and Microsoft OS it's just ported from either...

If games on the current consoles are so high end, how come there's slow down?

I do remember the old PSX versus PC, you couldn't get games on the PC to run as well as a PSX, or even before that (SNES, Megadrive etc)

yantorsen · 3 Feb 2008 at 14:37

GTRacer said:
I'll do a better one.

A console is like an F1 car. Everything about it is designed to give the best performance on the track. A PC, however, is a BMW M5. It's a good all rounder, but it's by no means a dedicated race car.

that's a crap analgy aswell, because that implies that PC's are less powerfull and slower.

it also implies that PC's are cheaper than Xbox's, so im not sure what your getting at.

sicknote · 3 Feb 2008 at 15:09

I don't honestly see how it's possible to compare a £200 console to a gaming PC. For the money the consoles offer great value and easy playability.

Its £200+ for a decent gaming monitor never mind buying anything else.

I own both but spend 95% of my time on the PC.

yantorsen · 3 Feb 2008 at 15:25

sicknote said:
I don't honestly see how it's possible to compare a £200 console to a gaming PC. For the money the consoles offer great value and easy playability.

Its £200+ for a decent gaming monitor never mind buying anything else.

I own both but spend 95% of my time on the PC.

yes but it's £350+ for a HDTV aswell!

GTRacer · 3 Feb 2008 at 15:45

yantorsen said:
that's a crap analgy aswell, because that implies that PC's are less powerfull and slower.

it also implies that PC's are cheaper than Xbox's, so im not sure what your getting at.

You're confusing function with price. An F1 car can't seat 4 in comfort and have enough space for their luggage. The point I'm getting at is that consoles ARE pretty much dedicated to gaming, it's the reason they're built. PCs, however, are much more multi-faceted than consoles.

Tefal · 3 Feb 2008 at 15:46

Ulfhedjinn said:
Aye, I'm wondering what happened to this argument.

Now it seems to be "there's lots of untapped potential in consoles".

there is in the ps3, but only because of the learning curve for developers.

Still though to get a pc for the price of an xbox that runs games that looks as good, is not going to happen for a long time.

Tefal · 3 Feb 2008 at 15:48

yantorsen said:
yes but it's £350+ for a HDTV aswell!

you don't need hd though, and most people already own a tv.

And tray and get a spec that will run gow or cod4 at the same visual quality as an xbox for £200.

Also find me a pc that will run mgs4

sicknote · 3 Feb 2008 at 15:51

yantorsen said:
yes but it's £350+ for a HDTV aswell!

I am under the impression that most people buying a console actually own a TV. I know where your coming from though.