Xbox 360 & PS3 vs PC graphics

Runs absolute **** on both the ps3 and 360, it's barley playable it feels jumpy at all times and the framerate drops A LOT when it's busy ( eg. c4 explosion in the club in the ballad of gay tony and it drops to about 10 fps and it's already around a crappy 30-40 fps when it's calm.)

That's funny because I've played it through twice absolutely fine so it's clearly not "barely playable" is it :)
 
That's funny because I've played it through twice absolutely fine so it's clearly not "barely playable" is it :)

Lower standards...

You try it tho, get in a filled club in TBOGT and throw 2 or 3 C4 charges in there, run to the hallway, and explode, on the PS3 it literally freezes for 2 seconds. This doesn't happen on pc ( provided you have a quad core and a decent GFX card).

Yeah, you can play it it through and finish the game, the experience is far worse though that it's supposed to be.


I guess I was exaggerating, but it doesn't run fine to my standards... The experience is worse, stuttery framerate overall, freezes on explosions where lots of people are sent flying, lower res (which for me makes a difference, I sit a couple of inches of a 32'' tv I use as a monitor, 1280x720 is really blurry unless I move to the other side of my room, while at 1920 it's decent, far lower traffic ( just put the traffic on 100 on pc, and stop for a sec on a road, there'll be a massive jam with loads and loads of cars, unlike on the console equiv.), etc...

Yes, it runs rubbish if you have a pc with a slow cpu, but the framerate when playing on a decent pc is pretty much always above 50 ( well according to the fps counter)...

The only gripe imo is the lack of multisampling...
 
Last edited:
Im finding even my £45 9800GT is far surpassing my Xbox in every game i have played on PC so far, and looks a ton better. So much so lucky if ive been on the Xbox for 3 hours this week, and wasnt on it at all since i got it :L
 
1280x720 blurry? Should've gone to specsavers.

I use my PC at 1280x768 on a 37" Screen for everything (including gaming) and it looks crystal clear. And if you think a game that runs around 40-30fps is "crappy" you are living on another planet. For the record Gta4 also runs fine on the 'box. Oh crap, I just fed the troll.
 
Last edited:
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.

This is true technically, but windows is crap and games need to be backwards compatible etc...

Other words, the graphics cards for PCs are not utilized properly due to many factors, including what I just mentioned. Whereas the consoles inards remain the same thus developers squeeze the last ounce of power out of every component.
 
I don't really understand the details (as this post is about to make clear). I don't understand how my 5 year old xbox can play a game like Black ops at a smooth framerate and good graphics detail yet my 3 1/2 year old just about barely play it on medium at the same resolution and stuggles to stay above a playable framrate

The 360 has a triple core cpu running at 3.2ghz. If you're running a dual core cpu in your pc, then there is part of your problem.

Plus, Black Ops appears to be a pretty bad port on the pc, going by various opinions on here & around the web.

Blame the developers for the below par performance.
 
Runs absolute **** on both the ps3 and 360, it's barley playable it feels jumpy at all times and the framerate drops A LOT when it's busy ( eg. c4 explosion in the club in the ballad of gay tony and it drops to about 10 fps and it's already around a crappy 30-40 fps when it's calm.)

Just move your analog stick while driving or look to the side, it's quite clearly VERY jumpy, how can you now notice it, the 360 felt a tad better but was still jumpy and the ps3 is a catastrophe...

What a load of nonsense. Framerate issues are there, yes, but it certainly doesn't make the game unplayable, and it only dips very low on odd occasions. Even so, with the amount that's going on in the game at a time, and the sort of detail there is, it's understandable.

If you're accustomed to the PC version then yes, you're going to find the console version is inferior, but then that's nearly always going to be the case.

Fortunately performance issues are far less abound in Red Dead Redemption, but then I guess you'd have no comparison to make there. ;)
 
To be fair consoles like the xbox and ps3 are designed to last 6-7 years. They aren't as sharp graphically for many games, but then I feel some pc games look horrid as well....
but damn f1 2010 was looking good at 2560 maxxed out at 70-105 fps yesterday (played with my 360pad :))
 
1280x720 blurry? Should've gone to specsavers.

I use my PC at 1280x768 on a 37" Screen for everything (including gaming) and it looks crystal clear. And if you think a game that runs around 40-30fps is "crappy" you are living on another planet. For the record Gta4 also runs fine on the 'box. Oh crap, I just fed the troll.

I'll bite.

1280 on a 37" screen is not "crystal clear" maybe by your standards but by enthusiast standards its not even murky
 
It's incredible what they can get out of consoles these days considering the age of the hardware...equally, I would therefore say it's quite disappointing that PCs aren't so much further ahead.
 
Imagine if developers were allowed to use lowlevel code on the lateset and greatest. It would annihilate consoles.

They get so much out of the hardware because of how far they get "under the hood."
 
It's incredible what they can get out of consoles these days considering the age of the hardware...equally, I would therefore say it's quite disappointing that PCs aren't so much further ahead.

Agree on the console comment but not on the PC comment, its not really the hardwares fault that devs are not taking advantage of it

DirectX is the PCs problem
 
Imagine if developers were allowed to use lowlevel code on the lateset and greatest. It would annihilate consoles.

They get so much out of the hardware because of how far they get "under the hood."

I'd imagine that development times would be a bit longer though, never mind the increased costs to go with it as well.
 
I'd imagine that development times would be a bit longer though, never mind the increased costs to go with it as well.

Precisely, investors aren't going to hang around 4-5 years for a superb game and very little profit when you can churn out ok games yearly for massive profit. It's become big business and the smell of money will all ways lead the way and if they will take the easy route to fast cash, they will.
 
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 ;)

Can you show me where this fan boy lives so I can open an invitation to slap him with a wet fish repeated times until he learns that idiocy kills kittens.
 
wanna tag team him? like how dumb can you be! :eek:

Some people will spout the most moronic of BS when it comes to justifying their choice, wether its car, console, whatever it may be if they own it they feel the need to justify and defend it, I see it on here all the time but probably not to the point where its just a blatent lie

Most of the time, like with my mates and the fact that if they have a 1080p TV then the 360/ps3 is clearly running in 1080p :rolleyes: They simply havent got a clue what they are talking about but refuse to believe you when you educate them and in same cases even go as far as to accuse you of lying! :eek:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom