Xbox 360 & PS3 vs PC graphics

Brumboy

Brumboy

Brumboy

Associate
Joined
11 Jan 2011
Posts
2,403
I was wondering what ATI & Nvidia PC graphics card would be equivalent to the PS3 & Xbox 360?

I've read that even though some graphics cards (the top end) have almost 10x the power of the PS3 they cannot produce 10x the graphics because of Directx holding the PC back, is this true?
 
Last edited:
If you ask me, the reason a pc game might not look as good even on more powerfull hardware is because with so much headroom these days with pc hardware developers are lazy and just dont streamline the code the same way you have to on a console to get the best.
 
Consoles have VASTLY inferior graphics to PC graphics cards.

Even a 4870 would trounce a PS3/Xbox360.

As for what would be the same? Hmm not sure. Even a x1950pro might be superior.
 
The PS3 is roughly equivalent to a GeForce 7800, and the Xbox to a Radeon X1950. That's 6 year old technology :mad:
 
Swear we get about ten of these threads a week, they serve no purpose. You cannot do a direct comparison of specs between a console and a PC.
 
robj20 said:
If you ask me, the reason a pc game might not look as good even on more powerfull hardware is because with so much headroom these days with pc hardware developers are lazy and just dont streamline the code the same way you have to on a console to get the best.
Click to expand...

Not lazyness, more to do with economics. Console games not only make more money, but I imagine consoles are easier to optimise for given there is one fixed set of hardware to work with.
However as can be seen with Battlefield 3, a developer using PC as the lead hardware can create a game vastly superior to what is possible on current consoles.
 
If its anything like our devs here it is laziness and the fact the 80%+ performance is plenty, old code gets left in even though its not used, errors happen minor ones though.
 
reflux said:
The PS3 is roughly equivalent to a GeForce 7800, and the Xbox to a Radeon X1950. That's 6 year old technology :mad:
Click to expand...

Really!? I have an X1950pro in my second machine and it can just about run M2:Total War in medium-low graphics...
Perhaps that's more down to the rest of the machine though... it's only a P4 2.4 and 2gb mem.
 
reflux said:
That's 6 year old technology :mad:
Click to expand...

In a Console that wa being designed and developed six years ago? That's shocking that.

Pointless thread is pointless. It's dev lazyness/cost as people say. There's no business sense spending weeks squeezing out performance that only the tiny minority of your audience will get any benefit from.
 
Last edited:
Priobably a conbination of laziness and not being able to program for one standard. I suppose DirectX could be a factor, I think it was someone from ATI that suggested this....

Also, are consoles not also very reliant on the power of their CPU?
 
From what I can remember the ps3 is running on some subset of the 7000 nvidia series and the 360 is using a 6+year old Ati card, not sure what the comparable model number would be. As people have said though, most of the games that make their way to the PC are just ports with clumsy controls added to them. It's now becoming more common to get a console game on the PC that won't let you change the key configs. Transformers was a classic example of that, Ghostbusters would just use the same analog thumb stick movement but mapped it to a mouse, no smooth aiming possible, same with dead space but not so much on DeadSpace. Probably the reason I played all three for a few hours and then dumped em until I found bargain bin copies for the consoles.
 
Last edited:
I overheard a ps3 fanboy in pc world the other day talking about a 5870.. apprantly a ps3 graphic card is equivilent to two 5870 ... :) Hope that helps you... *cough* Bull *cough* lol Diehard ps3/360 fanboys... gotta love em ;)
 
robj20 said:
If you ask me, the reason a pc game might not look as good even on more powerfull hardware is because with so much headroom these days with pc hardware developers are lazy and just dont streamline the code the same way you have to on a console to get the best.
Click to expand...

what angers me are the pc games that come out.. and near enough rely on the fans to sort out the bugs. *Im looking at you GSC GRR* Call of pripyat for e.g was FULL of bugs, graphic glitchs and boring gameplay untill the makers of complete came along and released a MOD that made the game how it should have been. Its lazy and money grabbing.
 
reflux said:
More importantly, they are holding back the industry and we are overdue for new hardware.
Click to expand...

Keep telling yourself that. It's down to the the developers to decide if it's worth the effort for them to utilise the power available to them for the PC, and how much optimisation to do. There's no technical limitation stopping them using whats available because of consoles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom