Nvidia v ATI

[Alex74]

...I truly believe even the ps2 pumped out better graphics than some PC games. I was shocked when I saw how poor the character detail was on Mass Effect..

In before the firestorm

Just wanted to confirm the implication here: Mass effect details are so poor that they are relevant in a paragraph comparing the PC to the PS2?

I'm not one to jump into flamewars, but that is a tad confusing...


More important response:

Anyway one could easily argue that the reason for the homogeneity of graphics across platforms is simple: Console limitations are holding back a multiplatform development framework which takes advantage of the strengths of each platform.

Seeing what Crytek are doing with Cryengine 3 is fantastic, with seperate development for all of the platforms. This means that consoles arent overworked and can provide an excellent gameplay experience. Meanwhile, PC gamers can take advantage of their £1300 rigs to deliver the same (if not better ) performance while offering superior graphical quality overall.

 

[coolsouthern]

In before the firestorm

Just wanted to confirm the implication here: Mass effect details are so poor that they are relevant in a paragraph comparing the PC to the PS2?

I'm not one to jump into flamewars, but that is a tad confusing...


More important response:

Anyway one could easily argue that the reason for the homogeneity of graphics across platforms is simple: Console limitations are holding back a multiplatform development framework which takes advantage of the strengths of each platform.

Seeing what Crytek are doing with Cryengine 3 is fantastic, with seperate development for all of the platforms. This means that consoles arent overworked and can provide an excellent gameplay experience. Meanwhile, PC gamers can take advantage of their £1300 rigs to deliver the same (if not better ) performance while offering superior graphical quality overall.

I fully agree with this and whilst writing my novel it is a point I wish I had made. Still, the reasons do not take away the fact that the situation is such. Should more developers adopt the approach of Crytek then this would not be an issue. However, due to the financial implications I don't see this becoming standard practice.

As for the ps2 comment, I am purely referring to some of the alien race characters. I can't remember names but I remember thinking there was something wrong with the game when I 1st saw it!

 

[Kribby2006]

Good luck playing a proper FPS game on a PS3...

+1

Totally agree.

Most PS3 games only run at 720p anyway, there ok I guess, but much prefer my PC running at 1920x1200 with AA/AF.

Also as someone has said, analogue sticks are nowhere near as good as keyboard/mouse

 

[Kribby2006]

you would think its about time the console market came out with its own brands of keyboard and mouse for its consoles not everyone wants to use a pad all the time and for some games its just rubbish, to be honest i had a 360 but sold it coz it sucked so much trying to play fps on it with the pad. tho the pad was good for fifa. I think the consol companys are missing a trick here as i would have one hooked up to my monitor as well as my pc if they let me use my own usb mouse and keyboard or sold decent ones themselves.

Good point, mouse and keyboard would make me play my PS3 more for FPS games

 

[coolsouthern]

Good point, mouse and keyboard would make me play my PS3 more for FPS games

I thought you could use USB keyboards and mice with a ps3?

Or is it just that there are no options to use these in games?

 

[Kribby2006]

I thought you could use USB keyboards and mice with a ps3?

Or is it just that there are no options to use these in games?

You'd think there was one, but as far as I know there isnt, not one that can be used for games anyway.

Maybe there is? Hmm...

 

[remy87]

don't think that "6 month the card will be outdated" applies any more
8800 is like 3-4 years now? and still a respectable card not to mention the
constant rebranding.
lets say you get 5850 that would probably last you 2-3 years if you are not
too fussed about maxing everything yet it will still probably be better than a console graphic wise.

I have ps3 and 360 already drooling thinking of heavy rain and Alan Wake or GT5
Action/Adenventure gaming you won't see those games on a PC I'm afraid
Uncharted series, MGS saga etc etc

FPS/MMORPG, community within those games and mods hands down for PC.

Majority have a console, so PC games ends up having to deal with bad ports most of the time.

 

[Alex74]

I fully agree with this and whilst writing my novel it is a point I wish I had made. Still, the reasons do not take away the fact that the situation is such. Should more developers adopt the approach of Crytek then this would not be an issue. However, due to the financial implications I don't see this becoming standard practice...

Yes, it's true i picked a very specific example, one which doesnt reflect an enormous proportion of developers. A shame really, because I agree that there seems no immediate incentives for developers to use such a framework, other than one catering to the enthusiast crowd (which still seems to be a very small percentage)

But then I think most PC enthusiasts are well aware of these facts and pay more simply for the benefits they get when these games such as Crysis do come out (some of us actually look forward to troubleshooting an uncountable set of errors before we actually get to play the game ). Is it the most cost-effective solution? Well..no. You yourself demonstrated this in your post. Not unless the computer is going to be used for far more than just playing the next Call of Duty game to grace our tired shelves.

We all know that computers are capable of so much more, and I imagine many people on this forum use them as such. For the typical 15 year old with a gaming messiah complex, however, I would agree that getting them a console will be no worse than any gaming PC..

Except maybe for this:
Many people have, even just in this thread, praised the control interface on the PC for FPS games. Strategy games also, in particular, benefit from an intuitive, heavily customisable interface which just isnt found on a console.

Not sure if there's a real point i'm trying to make in this post, maybe just contributing to the discussion and seeing what points you agree/disagree with

EDIT: Goodness me this post is a mess, must be tired

 

[chaotic_uk]

4870 will be out of date ? , i thought they had been replaced with the 5870 ? . last time i checked the ps3 cost over £250 ?

 

[Auraomega]

Personally, give me a PC any day. A PC can do so much more, and in my opinion gives much MUCH better controls for games, because honestly, I hate playing shooting games on a pad, I hate RTS on a pad, and I hate RPGs on a pad.

And, you say that a console costs less, however for me it wouldn't be true as I'd need to fork out for a TV, games, controls, memory cards (do any consoles actually use these anymore)/hard drives, etc. When you consider a PC, if you build a good one and upgrade each part it works out at roughly the same price, plus there are so many free games available for PC, granted nothing Crysis level, but still some pretty fun games out there.

Also, how on Earth is the title related to the OP?

 

[Geckovich]

I'm gonna get slated here but I fully agree with the ps3 vs high end gaming pc point being made here.

As far as I can see, my pc (in sig below) is equal to my ps3. I've yet to be amazed by any graphics on my rig. To me, they are the same as the ps3 graphics. I have tried a few games, ok I've never run Crysis, but I still can't see much difference. Bioshock looked awesome on my ps3 so when I had the chance to try it on pc I was excited. When I got round to it I was extremely dissapointed to find that I could not see any difference in graphical quality!

I made the point ages ago on another thread that I truly believe even the ps2 pumped out better graphics than some PC games. I was shocked when I saw how poor the character detail was on Mass Effect ( actually not the human character but certainly on some of the alien races) and will continue to say God of War 1+2 on the ps2 were both better. Final Fantasy 12 on ps2 was better.

I have a 5870 ffs and if I want to play something like Batman in the same way my mate can on his ps3 I need to buy another card potentially adding another £100 just to the costs of the GPU's in my rig. STUPID

Like I say I expect to get attacked but this is my opinion. I am not trying to insult anyone. I am new to PC gaming and have myself enjoyed putting together a nice spec.

I do, however, stick by what I am saying. My rig below could cost £1200+ to people with a good knowledge of PC's and with the ability to build their own systems. To those that don't, a pricey future with someone like Smell or litlle green martian-ware awaits. I have seen the latter advertising something similiar yet still slightly inferior to my rig for about £2600- madness.

Even with a level of competance - High end gaming PC ( or my rig for comparison) :

£1200+
No major differece in graphical detail (debatable, but I certainly don't see much)
Constant problems with drivers or file errors or some sort of rubbish
Above problem resorts in people spending as much time trying to get the game to work as actually enjoying it.

Ok you can use keyboards and mice. I actually prefer gamepads but I understand I am in the minority here

OR

PS3: £250 or whatever they are now

Games more expensive
From what I can tell the DLC situation for consoles is ridiculous. Don't they have to pay for some things PC gamers get for free??

But... games WORK. 1st time out of the box. With no driver issues. Or file errors. Or any of the other rubbish that infuriates me regulaly. They just work.Simple.

You don't have to constantly update any hardware. Newer games constantly improve on both visuals and gameplay and NONE of this requires hundreds of extra £'s to enjoy the benefits.

Just realised I have written a small novel. Sorry But before you slate me read the whole thing, then maybe again and understand that I am not slating enthusiasts, nor PC gamers in general. I feel that my points are valid and would welcome an adult discussion should someone disagree as oppose to childish name calling etc

Sorry again

What monitor do you have? If you're running at a low res there probably wouldn't be a vast difference, though running anything less than 1920x1200 with a 5870 is almost criminal.

Play tf2 (or any cross platform game) on a 1920x1080 monitor, then play it on a PS3 on a 1080 screen. The Source engine isn't even particularly demanding yet it looks like a dogs dinner on the console. Low res textures and jaggies everywhere. The only games I've personally played on both PC and PS3 are Fallout 3, Portal, Tf2, GTA4, Fallout 3 and COD:WaW. But I've found what I said about tf2 to be true for all of them.

I'm not having a go here (though I disagree with nearly every point you make ), I'm just very curious as to how you're seeing the graphics of a PS3 as being the same as those pumped out by a 5870. Even if the games were identical graphically the PC always has the advantage of AA/AF/resolution. It's not just the graphics either, the difference in framerate is very apparent too.

This graphical issue along with "Constant problems with drivers or file errors" just smacks of there being something wrong, which is a damn shame as your PC should breeze through any game, and look great while doing so.

On the subject of PS2 graphics looking nicer than mass effect you leave me godsmacked. I don't even see how they can be compared. I'm just hoping you're looking back through rose tinted specs, as I'd assume that if you put the two side by side you'd see what I mean,

With regards to your mentioning of prices, all I'm going to say is that to game at the level of a console (ie 1024x600/1280x720 res stretched to fit 1920x1080) you could spend 1/4 of the cost of your rig. But that isn't the point. Nobody wants the bare minimum, people want faster, newer, shinier etc. A PC (much like a car) just lets you indulge that in a way that a console doesn't.

Also, and this is where I'd be skinned alive if this were the console forum, but why do people always seem to use the PS3 in the PC vs console graphical debate? The 360 looks far nicer. Everything on the PS3 looks like it's been smeared in mud - see gamespot's PS3 vs 360 graphics feature to see what I mean.


So there we have it, a novel to rival your own

In all seriousness though I mean none of the above in a vindictive way, I just hope it was the type of adult discussion you were after.

 

[TAC4U]

Do you know anything

Look at GTA IV graphics comparison of PC/Xbox 360/PS3:
http://uk.gamespot.com/features/6202552/p-4.html

and look at Crysis:
http://snagwiremedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/crysis-pc-screenshot-big.jpg

I'm sorry but please don't bring up Crysis. It was a mediocre game at best and a technical disaster. I still can't max it out on my rig, which is embarrassing... for the developers. Far Cry 2 had much better graphics, imo - and that game ran incredibly well on PC and on consoles.

Anyway, DiRT2 is the definitive game to show off graphics and what the PC can do. It really is quite a sight in all its DX11 glory. Is it worth the money buying a rig capable of running it well? Not really, but gaming is a passion for me. I could have grabbed a PS3, X360 and Wii for the price I paid for my graphics card but I didn't want to. Consoles have their place and I'm perfectly happy to see them do well - I'm not elitist about it - but I strongly disagree that they provide an equal or better gaming experience. Better value? Probably. More social? Sure. Require minimal setup and maintenance? Absolutely. But PCs are dramatically more versatile and have considerably better graphical fidelity.

 

[cotton_flex]

My 4870 from launch time is still going strong at 1900x1200. So not everyone upgrades every 6 months.

Sure in such a enthusiast forum, you will get people who do that...the benchmark chasers, the epeens etc. But for pc gaming, upgrading every 6 months is not a must.

I've been doing ~ 720p gaming long before ps3, 360. PS3 games are a blurry mess, poor frame rates etc. Some games I found the 360 to fair better. But the ultimate killer for me with consoles are the pads. I just can't get use to them like a keyboard and mouse. Sure fifa, some racing and platform games are fine with pads but RTS/FPS etc, there just isn't enough buttons.

But for those games where pad is fine, I have my 360 pad for the PC where I can sit back and enjoy true hi res gaming with decent framerates and no blur to hide blemishes/low res textures.

 

[Ludomudo]

So having used ATI for a number of years I have suddenly bought a bad card from what the forum says - 9500GT / 1GB. One of the best games/simms I have ever played was FS2004 but you know what really ****** me off? ... This attitude that ATI xxxx makes a better card. Why? The PS3 can deliver more for less, so where are you coming from? So im running a 9500GT @ 650MHz - probably a fraction of most of the card's on here, but *if* your are a gamer, then you will use the PS3 ! Purchase the best card and you know what? - 6 months time there will be a better card! Too much attitude on this forum tbf.

WTF???!

 

[Parsley]

Budget - I would like an Asus board with DDR3 RAM and an i5/i7 CPU.
What's the best to go for? i7 seems very $$ ??

You have a minor rant about people buying expensive cards that will be out of date soon and willy waving with them.

Then you go for i5/i7 over a socket 775 quad core system that's perfectly capable of running games at a fraction of the price.

Does anyone else not see the daftness in this?

 

[abjectblitz]

Every 6 months, what rubbish. I upgrade every 3 even 4 years without issue, always have. Now with consoles being the primary development platform I recon eve the top card today will do you 5 years at a push if you can accept 30 fps like on a console....

 

[coolsouthern]

Yes, it's true i picked a very specific example, one which doesnt reflect an enormous proportion of developers. A shame really, because I agree that there seems no immediate incentives for developers to use such a framework, other than one catering to the enthusiast crowd (which still seems to be a very small percentage)

But then I think most PC enthusiasts are well aware of these facts and pay more simply for the benefits they get when these games such as Crysis do come out (some of us actually look forward to troubleshooting an uncountable set of errors before we actually get to play the game ). Is it the most cost-effective solution? Well..no. You yourself demonstrated this in your post. Not unless the computer is going to be used for far more than just playing the next Call of Duty game to grace our tired shelves.

We all know that computers are capable of so much more, and I imagine many people on this forum use them as such. For the typical 15 year old with a gaming messiah complex, however, I would agree that getting them a console will be no worse than any gaming PC..

Except maybe for this:
Many people have, even just in this thread, praised the control interface on the PC for FPS games. Strategy games also, in particular, benefit from an intuitive, heavily customisable interface which just isnt found on a console.

Not sure if there's a real point i'm trying to make in this post, maybe just contributing to the discussion and seeing what points you agree/disagree with

Yep, I also agree here. I like to play games like Football Manager 2010 and Civ IV and as of yet the ps3 can only offer watered down versions of these kind of games (not that Civ Rev wasn't fun).

I enjoy my high spec rig and reap the benefits when it comes to burning discs, using software like SPSS (number crunching) and everyday use thanks to a powerful processor and a quick SSD. However when it comes to games I still see my arguements as just.

I can appreciate that custumisation wise the PC dwarfs consoles but I wonder, realistically, how many people take advantage of this in terms of getting their hands dirty. As far as I'm aware user modded content also makes it's way to consoles for some games?

As for you (and others) enjoying troubleshooting for want of a better word... Patience of a saint comes to mind. I also assume you're as much fun to be with as an accountant

What monitor do you have? If you're running at a low res there probably wouldn't be a vast difference, though running anything less than 1920x1200 with a 5870 is almost criminal.

Play tf2 (or any cross platform game) on a 1920x1080 monitor, then play it on a PS3 on a 1080 screen. The Source engine isn't even particularly demanding yet it looks like a dogs dinner on the console. Low res textures and jaggies everywhere. The only games I've personally played on both PC and PS3 are Fallout 3, Portal, Tf2, GTA4, Fallout 3 and COD:WaW. But I've found what I said about tf2 to be true for all of them.



This graphical issue along with "Constant problems with drivers or file errors" just smacks of there being something wrong, which is a damn shame as your PC should breeze through any game, and look great while doing so.

On the subject of PS2 graphics looking nicer than mass effect you leave me godsmacked. I don't even see how they can be compared. I'm just hoping you're looking back through rose tinted specs, as I'd assume that if you put the two side by side you'd see what I mean,

With regards to your mentioning of prices, all I'm going to say is that to game at the level of a console (ie 1024x600/1280x720 res stretched to fit 1920x1080) you could spend 1/4 of the cost of your rig. But that isn't the point. Nobody wants the bare minimum, people want faster, newer, shinier etc. A PC (much like a car) just lets you indulge that in a way that a console doesn't.

Also, and this is where I'd be skinned alive if this were the console forum, but why do people always seem to use the PS3 in the PC vs console graphical debate? The 360 looks far nicer. Everything on the PS3 looks like it's been smeared in mud - see gamespot's PS3 vs 360 graphics feature to see what I mean.


So there we have it, a novel to rival your own

In all seriousness though I mean none of the above in a vindictive way, I just hope it was the type of adult discussion you were after.

Glad to see there are people that can disagree with everything said and engage in a discussion

My monitor is 1920x1200. To be fair my Mass Effect vs ps2 comment is abvout certain characters and is not meant to reflect the game as a whole. Sadly for your sanity, I am sticking by the comment

For me your point on being able to build a rig that plays at console level for a minimum cost is up for debate. Here I am comparing my rig to the console so I'm less likely to agree here. Also "smacks of something wrong" could be a valid point. Although from the amount of problem threads spread through out the forum I'd say that it's not a problem I alone deal with.

I'm with you all the way when it comes to the tinkering and obtaining of new shiny

I'm not going to contribute to the 360 vs ps3 debate. ANother whole can of worms. I use the ps3 as an example as I have one!

 

[Alex74]

...
As for you (and others) enjoying troubleshooting for want of a better word... Patience of a saint comes to mind. I also assume you're as much fun to be with as an accountant ...

...I can appreciate that custumisation wise the PC dwarfs consoles but I wonder, realistically, how many people take advantage of this in terms of getting their hands dirty. As far as I'm aware user modded content also makes it's way to consoles for some games?..

...To be fair my Mass Effect vs ps2 comment is abvout certain characters and is not meant to reflect the game as a whole. Sadly for your sanity, I am sticking by the comment

Accountancy, just the field i'm trying desperately hard to avoid right now..
In my defence, though, most of the troubleshooting I do is for other people. The biggest troubleshooting I've done for myself recently was having to do a DirectX web update on Windows 7 so that I could play Hitman: Blood Money. I knew what to do though and life was easy, as becomes the case as one encounters these problems more and more.
In fairness though, as you point out, a lot of people do have such problems with games on ther computers that they end up having to post on forums for want of any kind of solution at all. All I think I was trying to say overall earlier was that many of us are willing to take the pain for the ultimate result

It seems that, as consoles become more like PCs, modding communities are finding it easier and easier to modify games, which is great! This is nowhere near the same level at the moment, however. Not having looked into modding console games, I couldnt really comment on the difficulty thereof at the moment.

I think the problem with the Mass Effect statement is that it was a game developed in the same mindset as we were talking about earlier. Develop one game for all the platforms, rather than developing certain elements seperately in order to cater to the strengths of each. It worked well in terms of performance on all platforms because Unreal Engine 3 is extremely well made and Epic Games should be proud of how well they've done.
However, we're still using pretty much the same textures and models that 360 users are. In other words, we are limited by what the console was capable of.
So yes, this means that one or two of the aliens are probably going to look a little freaky. I wouldnt call that a reflection of PC gaming, more a reflection of, as said, the development process as a whole.

 

[EdGey]

9500GT is a bad card.

Consoles are horrible.

 

[Th3D0n]

I can't justify the $$ you guys spend on graphics cards but, only for it to become out of date in 6 months. I always loved ATI and this is my first Nvidia card. I will see how it goes, but im not about to spend £150+ on a card when I could buy a PS3 for not much extra, so what card would you guys buy on a budget of say £60?

i spent £140 an year and an half ago on my 4850 and its still going strong ! if you spend £150+ it will last a lot longer then 6months