Ps3 is faster than any pc...

I remember when the PS3 specs were first officially released, caused quite a bit of discussion. My brother has a PS3 and depending on the game, sometimes the graphics are very good, but this sort of fanboy bitching really frustrates me.

Concentrating on the PS3 it has what, 8 processing cores? It must be a nightmare trying to utilise all of them, I doubt many of the PS3 games actually take advantage of all this power, the cost of producing a game to run on all these processing cores must be very high. Software has always lagged behind hardware, and it will continue to be the case.

One could spark a different thread of conversation (pun not intended) about the benefits of a console running a specified lightweight operating system compared to a standard pc which has a big, lumbering, cumbersome general purpose operating system, but then again a PC isn't designed to be a pure gaming system, in contrast consoles have broadened their usage. Before console were just for playing games, then they could play dvd's, then they could go online, now they can be used to watch/record TV shows. Seems a bit strange to me, Consoles are turning into PC's.....
 
DTurbo_Tom said:
On a side note, I watched my mate playing FEAR 2 on his PS3 and was ****ing HORRIFIED at it, the resolution on his 50" TV looked like 640 or something upscaled and the lack of high res textures and anything remotely innovative distraught me, but what got me the most, the JAGGIES, holy jesus, the screen was just a pixelated mess, and how anyone could think that was a fun experience must still be in PS1 times. In this modern age, if your going to release a console, at least give it some ****ing anti aliasing as playing these "games" in so called "HD" just makes them look like an 8bit side scroller.
Click to expand...

thats exactly what i thought of unchartered 2 when i played it on my mates brand new £600 42" LG tv using a gold coated HDMI cable:eek:

oh and the gameplay was crap to:D
 
Haven't read through all of this thread, and its probably a little off topic.

But what is *roughly* the pc equivalent (spec wise) to that of the ps3, when it comes to performance/graphics in games?

Might be a silly question but I for one don't have a clue.
 
borgia said:
Haven't read through all of this thread, and its probably a little off topic.

But what is *roughly* the pc equivalent (spec wise) to that of the ps3, when it comes to performance/graphics in games?

Might be a silly question but I for one don't have a clue.
Click to expand...

the ps3 uses a 7800GTX chip...
 
borgia said:
Haven't read through all of this thread, and its probably a little off topic.

But what is *roughly* the pc equivalent (spec wise) to that of the ps3, when it comes to performance/graphics in games?

Might be a silly question but I for one don't have a clue.
Click to expand...

Not as high as you might think, I reckon an E5300 with an 8800GT would manage just fine. Bear in mind equivalent performance you are only looking at 1280x720 resolution in most cases and low/medium settings for most stuff, with no AA and minimal AF.
 
Kenai said:
Not as high as you might think, I reckon an E5300 with an 8800GT would manage just fine. Bear in mind equivalent performance you are only looking at 1280x720 resolution in most cases and low/medium settings for most stuff, with no AA and minimal AF.
Click to expand...

awesome, thats cool to hear. didn't realise that most games have low/medium settings!
 
ps 3 - uncharted 2 not bad and its a good game (£50ish for a new game:()

xbox 360 Errrm cant think of a really good game that's not on the pc and i cant say halo because i hate FPS with a joy pad so ill go for Fifa 10 i love it and it makes me hate EA (£50ish for a new game:()

Pc - well football manager 2010
;) just cant beat it and it keeps me of my 360 (its been tryed on a console and didnt work!) plus every FPS
(£35 for a new game)
 
DTurbo_Tom said:
Let me just say my 2p.

Dont blame anyone for not wanting to read this much.

When I was around 2, I used to get up at 5am to play bubble bobble on my NES, I was addicted, and ever since then, I played every console that came out, as lets face it. That was the way to play back then. (I'm talking late 80's to mid 90's)

Then I touched my first PC in 1996, and shortly had a blast at games like Doom and Duke 3D, man they were awesome, but it wasn't till the original AvP 1 on PC in 99 that I completely turned to PC, man what a game that was, and it basically did what consoles do now in terms of gameplay, maybe more. It was p2p, no mod support, relied on Mplayer as a platform realistically to play and apart from the M+KB support and the text chat, that was it. I continued this with AvP2 in 2001, and then eventually dropped out of PC gaming and gaming altogether due to life and other things going on. In around 2007, my brother returned home from university with his Xbox360, and I played this new game "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare".

Firstly, I was dazzled, I'd missed 6-7 years of gaming and was thrilled at this new gen of tech!. I played it non stop all night till I completed it. Then a week or two later, I decided to fire up AvP2 again on my PC and give it whirl, what a blast I had and it was then I realised, how cool would Cod4 be to play on the PC, and instantly began to research the latest hardware and order myself a rig.

It was then I realised how much I'd missed gaming, but in paticular PC gaming. I purchased L4D on the promise from an old AvP2 gamer I knew, and instantly became hooked, all the things that reminded me of what made PC gaming great were there. In a long story short, I was back into a competative gaming scene, and in the summer of 09, I and my clan became the only european team to win a cash prized tournament in L4D, (The Games Master Night Cup), (coincidently the only cash prized tournament in europe for L4D).

During this time all the realisations of consoles as an inappropriate platform for gaming came forward. Pay to play, 10 year old kids screaming and fighting, low quality resolution with little to no AA,simple control system and little to no serious gamers.

I currently play many games in the competative scene and that's something that any console has nothing of, and dont try to fob me off with some idiots playing cod on Xboxlive as clan or something, because thats just pathetic. True competative gaming requires the PC and imo, always will. Simple things such as a command console, mod support, dedicated servers, accurate control system are essential to compet play and are all what is to be considered standard on a PC.

It is a little worrying at the complete lack of attention the PC is getting, even games are now designed around using a controller therefore making the gameplay terrible, games like UT are totally dead now, as its fast paced high accuracy requirement cant be fulfilled by a controller.

In short, consoles only worth in my eyes, is to get the lads round with a few beers and play some FIFA, and the odd must play title, (such as MGS). I congratulate Nintendo and making a console that centres that gameplay and offers something totally unique compared to a PC. If your an average joe and like to play occasionally, get the console, its perfect for you. If your a serious gamer and want to play as an ethusiast, theres only one path.. the PC.


On a side note, I watched my mate playing FEAR 2 on his PS3 and was ****ing HORRIFIED at it, the resolution on his 50" TV looked like 640 or something upscaled and the lack of high res textures and anything remotely innovative distraught me, but what got me the most, the JAGGIES, holy jesus, the screen was just a pixelated mess, and how anyone could think that was a fun experience must still be in PS1 times. In this modern age, if your going to release a console, at least give it some ****ing anti aliasing as playing these "games" in so called "HD" just makes them look like an 8bit side scroller.
Click to expand...

this is the best post by miles and i totaly agree
 
^^

That post was awesome. Just made me realise how much I love pc gaming. And how much I cringe when having a conversation with any of my mates who own a 360 or ps3. They go on and on about their awesome graphics on their 'HIGH DEF' screens. And its just like, you don't have a clue what your talking about. Or how much your missing out on.
 
stifler said:
thats exactly what i thought of unchartered 2 when i played it on my mates brand new £600 42" LG tv using a gold coated HDMI cable:eek:
Click to expand...

Think that looks bad? Take a look at GTA IV. It'll make your eyes bleed. If most PC gamers had even seen the PS3 version, they'd realise that it isn't actually a bad port at all.
 
DiscoDave said:
Concentrating on the PS3 it has what, 8 processing cores?
Click to expand...

Not quite: 1 main core, then 8 similar co-processors - 2 of which aren't used in games, all of which need to be specifically catered for as they are limited in functionality compared to the main core, so yeah....must require a lot of effort to optimize them. Cell's architecture means it only excels in certain tasks unlike more general purpose cpus from Intel/AMD.
 
Unbelievable. I've never heard such ignorance before. The PS3 is more powerful than a PC? And nobody cares about multi-platform games like Assassin's Creed 2? Even if that statement was valid it would only be because they don't take full advantage of the platform, not because the PC is irrelevant. I'd rip the **** out of this guy if he said that to me in person and yet he's being broadcast across the internet? Outrageous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom