Xbox360 vs PS3 vs PC

[JH_man]

Anyone got hard facts on performance of these consoles vs todays PCs?
Thinking about gfx and CPU performance.

How would they, lets say stand up to a Q6600 and a Geforce 8800 Ultra?..

Yes I know the systems are very different and the PC for ALOT of more overhead in the OS that slows it down, but would like to see some numbers to be able to compare them.

JH_man

[DTU_XaVier]

Look at Crysis... No Console could pull that off at the moment.. maybe the DX9 part, but power up the DX10, and there'd be no competition...

Best Regards :toast:

[DTU_XaVier]

Doesnt the 360 use dx10 ? Or something like it. Im pretty sure the 360 could run crysis easy.

Id say PC's and comsoles are on par. but then you cant really do anything else on a console cept game, where as a pc you can do anything

It has unified shaders, yes, but IIRC, it can't do "true" DX10-processing, end's up being some kind of DX9.1 or something :)
And I don't believe that a console could run Crysis at the detail-levels we've seen so far... But I suppose it'll all be decided in a little over a month, when Assassin's Creed and GoW hit the PC and consoles...

Best Regards :toast:

[AllAgainstPaul]

It's pretty much no contest. A PC, as long as it is up to date, will almost always beat any console system.

[JargonGR]

What it can't beat however I think is the following list :

(Note that my PC setup is not mediocre)

- Huge comfortable sofa with many pillows vs Leather good office chair
- 30" Monitor (HP with 92 color gamut) vs 52" HDTV
- Creative gigaworks 7.1 vs High end Home Cinema sound system ($10,000) PC uses X-fi Prelude

And since I own both a PS3, Xbox and a Wii (bad graphics) I have to say that this generation of consoles is impressive at least.

Have you seen Heavenly Sword at 1080p? And ofc Gears of War at the same res looks magnificent. Now whenever someone comes home and asks me to see a comparison the fall in love with the consoles.

My opinion? For their money the consoles are impressive but honestly the 2560x1600 resolution my monitor provides is on another league. Too bad that even 2x Overclocked 8800GTXs are having problems to drive it with the newest titles when at full detail and 4x or higher AA.

What makes the consoles look so great is the fact that they are mostly hooked up to big TVs and played from a distance. However if you know where to look you can see that a cutting edge PC game in full detail is really the winner. Textures are richer, frame rate can be faster, AA better and a lot more. I can only imagine how greater the difference would be if programmers optimised PC games the same as the hot console exclusives.

[JargonGR]

Anyone who spends $10,000 on speakers for a TV needs to start giving money to charity... thats just stupid lol. I have a 60" HDTV but other then that speakers that came with it are good enough for me there surroundsound


If you think that anyone who spends 10,000 on speakers is mad then what do you think about those home setups:

http://blog.audiovideointeriors.com/407diy.1.jpg
http://blog.audiovideointeriors.com/307new.1.jpg
http://blog.audiovideointeriors.com/407roof.3.jpg
http://blog.audiovideointeriors.com/207complete.1.jpg
http://blog.audiovideointeriors.com/207mac.1.jpg

Did you know that there are speakers that cost 165,000 (EUROS) per pair?

[trance565]

if consoles had 2 gigs of ram, they could probably blast through crysis as if it were nothing.

[Drag]

don't forget just cause, it looks way better on the xbox360.

it has better detail and runs at a constant 60fps at a tv screen witch is a much better quality then a monitor anyway.

[Bigchrome]

if consoles had 2 gigs of ram, they could probably blast through crysis as if it were nothing.

You eh.....do know you're wrong right?:ROTF:
Drag, you'd also better be taking the piss:yepp:

I personally think they both have their merits....Consoles are good for kicking back with friends but PC can't be beat in terms of power and graphics.

[trance565]

You eh.....do know you're wrong right?:ROTF:
Drag, you'd also better be taking the piss:yepp:

I personally think they both have their merits....Consoles are good for kicking back with friends but PC can't be beat in terms of power and graphics.

really? so a cell cpu + 2 gigs of ddr3 + custom gpu !> c2d +2gigs ddr2 + new gpu?

[AllAgainstPaul]

really? so a cell cpu + 2 gigs of ddr3 + custom gpu !> c2d +2gigs ddr2 + new gpu?

By the time a console debuts with hardware with those specs like the ones you listed we will have computers with much more powerful specs.

The main reason consoles can perform at the quality that they do is only determined by their hardware limitations and how well it was coded. Whereas a PC game has to deal with a several background programs running all the time. Even if you went and terminated all other programs the OS would still use a percentage of CPU and Memory. With consoles you have a minor OS and thats it. <- (Oversimplification)

If you had a PC and a console with the same specs and ran a game, the PC would dominate the PC. The devs who worked on the console could optimize the game for the drivers the console use. The devs who worked on the PC version would have to consider all the different variations of different hardware and drivers.

The reason PC usually win is the fact that once a console comes out, all variations are limited by the original. A game that comes out at the end of a console's life will have the same limitations as games that come out at the beginning.

PC's aren't that stagnant. They change constantly, and with that so do the limitations that are placed on it.

[FallenCow]

There's no comparison between consoles and a top end PC. I own all three of the current "next-gen" consoles, but quad core w/ an 8800 ultra would blow those consoles out of the water in terms of sheer processing capability.
The 360 and PS3 are more comparable to midrange systems now. Where consoles have an advantage is that they don't have to drive any resolution higher than 1920x1080 and most games don't even do that, they render at 720p and then use a scaler, because the frame rate hit would make a lot of games choppy. Also, having games written specifically for a group of components goes a long way in making up for the lack of grunt.

[trance565]

By the time a console debuts with hardware with those specs like the ones you listed we will have computers with much more powerful specs.



the only specs i listed that the ps3 is missing is 2gb of ram, i doubt it would be hard to have integrated more ram into the damn thing.

and i know a pc is always changing. but right now, i bet if they put alot more memory into the 360/ps3 they would get a massive performance boost.

[[XC] hipno650]

considering both consoles have 512mb for both video and the main console to share. that explains it enough right there. loading times on consoles make me sick. i own a desent pc a 360 and PS3 and i would take my PC any day for gaming. the 360 gpu offers the performance of a 1900xt on a good day and the ps3 is just a cut in half 7800gtx. last time i checked those are last gen.and cpu wise. Cell is a poor gaming cpu and the Tri core of the 360 is not near the level of a 3ghz C2D. the only reason why games look ok is becasue the are so highly optimized. but the 360 and PS3 can't do any better for the next 5 years. where as PC will destroy them currently think of the power in 5 years.

[afireinside]

Anyone who spends $10,000 on speakers for a TV needs to start giving money to charity... thats just stupid lol. I have a 60" HDTV but other then that speakers that came with it are good enough for me there surroundsound

What do you need a 60" HDTV for? Isn't a 27" SDTV good enough? You should start giving money to charity...

[Bigchrome]

really? so a cell cpu + 2 gigs of ddr3 + custom gpu !> c2d +2gigs ddr2 + new gpu?

I don't get what you are saying here at all? I'm saying PC is better, but I don't know of any console with cell and 2gigs ddr3 but the cell frankly sucks balls and so does the "custom" worse than a 7800 pos.

[Drag]

really? so a cell cpu + 2 gigs of ddr3 + custom gpu !> c2d +2gigs ddr2 + new gpu?

don't bs because all the games that are currently out are like 3.0ghz p4 and 512mb ram so xbox360 made at its first year better games then pc. besids evry tv has a better quality then any monitor so there is no match compared to consoles

[FallenCow]

don't bs because all the games that are currently out are like 3.0ghz p4 and 512mb ram so xbox360 made at its first year better games then pc. besids evry tv has a better quality then any monitor so there is no match compared to consoles

That last line doesn't even make sense. :shrug:

[DeltZ]

Board games FTW





sorry...

[purecain]

don't bs because all the games that are currently out are like 3.0ghz p4 and 512mb ram so xbox360 made at its first year better games then pc. besids evry tv has a better quality then any monitor so there is no match compared to consoles

consoles are rubbish compared to a high end gaming pc..... FACT:yepp:
my monitor and most of everyone who is a member here will have a moniter with a rez of 1280-1024, to 1680-1050 and still those with 30inch+ will have a rez even higher. then you have tv's, which are made with cheaper lower quality panels . i have a 40inch HD TV and its no where near the quality of my monitor.most hd tv's are 1024-768 and do HD in 720i
even the 60inch tv's have a rubbish rez compared to a monitor.
the gfx on this gen consoles have never been better than what can be produced on a pc.
gears of war has added a level which was left out of the 360 version because the console couldnt render it smoothly, not even at 30fps :rofl: . my pc will render that same level at a minimum higher than that.
lets see how world in conflict does on the 360.
fear perseus mandate is about what the ps3 and xbox 360 can do while crysis is our new standard..... end of incoherant rant.....

[JargonGR]

I have to say that I was expecting the consoles to do better than they do (I own all three current ones). I made a simple test I downloaded (and rented too) Dirt for both my PS3 and XBOX360 to play them and compare to my PC.

The result was day and night, DIRT @ 2560x1600 on my 30" monitor is like day and night compared to either the PS3 and XBOX360 version and my consoles are hooked on a 1080p 52" HDTV.

Seriously after that test I started paying attention to textures and small details in other games too and there is no contest. PC is the ultimate in graphics quality by a long shot. Ofc my 2x 8800GTXs cost more than my consoles (incl watercooling) but that was not the point. The only problem right now is that even 2 x 8800GTXs are not enough to game at 2560x1600 full details and AA and soon I will have to ditch another 1200 Euros to get the next gen cards.

For their cost though console are impressive.

[coyotetu]

hipno650;2485447']considering both consoles have 512mb for both video and the main console to share. that explains it enough right there. loading times on consoles make me sick. i own a desent pc a 360 and PS3 and i would take my PC any day for gaming. the 360 gpu offers the performance of a 1900xt on a good day and the ps3 is just a cut in half 7800gtx. last time i checked those are last gen.and cpu wise. Cell is a poor gaming cpu and the Tri core of the 360 is not near the level of a 3ghz C2D. the only reason why games look ok is becasue the are so highly optimized. but the 360 and PS3 can't do any better for the next 5 years. where as PC will destroy them currently think of the power in 5 years.You honestly think that graphics on consoles are at their highest level possible? If you were speaking merely of the hardware limitations, I'd tend to agree, but that simply isn't the only factor. True that in almost every case, games attempt to use 100% of available resources, but games released near the beginning of a console life cycle are always less efficient in using those resources and less optimized for the platform.

Console power relative to PC power is always a generation behind or more, simply because of the time it takes to develop, integrate and code for the platform. PC hardware is constantly updated and have an interchangeable standard in place at all times, this simply isn't feasible for console manufacturers. They have to provide the same level of service to each consumer of their current product at the risk of alienating a large percentage of their install base.

Then comes the obvious fact that 95% of the time ONE current generation graphic card costs as much as an entire console. Consoles themselves are a model of engineering and cost efficiency, simply put, you can't build a PC in the same price bracket with retail prices and expect equivalent graphic capabilities. Beyond all else, that's the only comparison that need be made, keep the $3,000+ PC systems out of it.

[d44ve]

I would have to say that the PC would win in the field of graphics and FPS (in general)

[GAR]

PC, console is for the average joe gamer, or someone who likes sports games, PC gamers are more advanced.....IMO

[Elusid]

I would have to say that the PC would win in the field of graphics and FPS (in general)

Well yeah... what kind of a competition is this? lol. Well it really depends on your hardware but if you have a decent computer it will almost always look better and run better.

[coyotetu]

PC, console is for the average joe gamer, or someone who likes sports games, PC gamers are more advanced.....IMOCongratulations, you just made a sweeping generalisation.

[Scubar]

For the Price a Console is excellent value for money and will beat down any pc that costs the same to build. If you compare a console to a highend PC then obviously theres no contest because the PC will win everytime, The graphics of the current consoles isnt all that great, the only game with graphics that can match a PC is the HD Gran Turismo.

[Kingcarcas]

Congratulations, you just made a sweeping generalisation.
QFT, consoles are better value and you have piece of mind. Not to say i haven't liked getting into PC gaming.

[DilTech]

Consoles have their place, and PC gaming has it's place.

I own a Xbox360, PS3, and a gaming PC. All of them get their playtime, plain and simple. Yes, I prefer my PC for gaming hands down, but PC's would never work for a fighting game(don't question this, I can break it down for ya if you'd like), and I'm big on fighting games. :D

[naokaji]

with a console you get a predefined piece of hw which allows for better sw optimization.. thats how they manage to compete graphically atleast with cheaper pcs... texture quality is usually worse (when its not then its because the pc game got them dumbed down for the console). the controls.. well, you could in theory have proper pc controls on the consoles too.. so i'm gona leave that one out....
also, since the introduction of hdd's in consoles its possible to patch games.. so, quality of games doesnt need to meet the standards anymore...

consoles are cheaper... but if you factor in all necessary accessoires and the higher game prices.. you would be suprised how small the difference gets.

pc all the way for me... i have a pc anyway... but no tv... so why would i go and dump money on a console + full hd tv + pay higher game prices if my pc can do it aswell?

[Kingcarcas]

True, but i'm poor so i wait for the games to drop to $20 anyway, or buy them used from ebay.

[Soulburner]

Consoles have their place, and PC gaming has it's place.

I own a Xbox360, PS3, and a gaming PC. All of them get their playtime, plain and simple. Yes, I prefer my PC for gaming hands down, but PC's would never work for a fighting game(don't question this, I can break it down for ya if you'd like), and I'm big on fighting games. :D
For multiplayer, sure. Get all your friends on the couches and have a good time.

But for single player? Get a PS2/Xbox controller and hook it up to the PC - same thing.

[DilTech]

For multiplayer, sure. Get all your friends on the couches and have a good time.

But for single player? Get a PS2/Xbox controller and hook it up to the PC - same thing.

Fighters would never work on pc's for a big reason...

Unlike every other genre, fighters demand a perfect framerate that never even drops by single digits. The slightest frame lag, even by 1, would cause moves to not work as intended in a serious fighter like Virtua Fighter 5 or Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection. There's moves in both titles that only have a 1-2 frame window to perform, so obviously that single little frame gets dropped and your entire battle-plan just failed.

This is just too difficult to handle with a PC due to the huge variations of system set ups, while on a closed system(consoles) it's easy to make sure the frame-rate never dips. ;)

Fighting games are what keeps consoles in my possession.

[Soulburner]

Well of course, but did you know that physics in FPS games are also calculate based off a certain fraction of the framerate? Change the framerate, change the rate of physics calculations, such as people not running Vsync on Quake 3 engine games because ultra high framerates affect how they move and jump.

Anyway a bit off-topic, but I see your point. Given a PC with a fixed framerate of 30 or 60 (VSync) it wouldn't be a problem, but developers can't be sure of that.

[The0men]

I'm certainly no pro, but even my core 2 duo and GTX eats the 360 for breakfast as far as im concerned, having played both on the same 28" high def TV. In fact my computer loads faster, and runs the games especially like oblivion at a much smoother framerate.

But then you have alot of other things to consider, like its easy to add expansions on a PC and get custom mods for your favourite games to extend theyre life and make them more enjoyable.

Then you have many more features that are worth the price. Everything is more customisable. You can burn and rip your CD's/ DVD's etc. You can get fixed exe's so you dont need disks to play, which saves looking for them all the time (I mean if you legally own a copy of the game btw)

Ahh theres a thousand reasons why I would prefer to spend more on a PC than own any console, which are outdated technology by the time they come out anyway, where at least you can upgrade parts at a time on your PC, and most things are backwards compatible. The only thing holding back PC's is the operating system. Putting that aside PC's are far better.

[coyotetu]

I'm certainly no pro, but even my core 2 duo and GTX eats the 360 for breakfast as far as im concerned, having played both on the same 28" high def TV. In fact my computer loads faster, and runs the games especially like oblivion at a much smoother framerate.

But then you have alot of other things to consider, like its easy to add expansions on a PC and get custom mods for your favourite games to extend theyre life and make them more enjoyable.

Then you have many more features that are worth the price. Everything is more customisable. You can burn and rip your CD's/ DVD's etc. You can get fixed exe's so you dont need disks to play, which saves looking for them all the time (I mean if you legally own a copy of the game btw)

Ahh theres a thousand reasons why I would prefer to spend more on a PC than own any console, which are outdated technology by the time they come out anyway, where at least you can upgrade parts at a time on your PC, and most things are backwards compatible. The only thing holding back PC's is the operating system. Putting that aside PC's are far better.This thread is about performance, it's a given that PC's can be better in processing capabilities when you spend more, but in regards to price the PC is outright trounced by console's price:performance ratio, you can refer to my earlier post for a more elaborate explanation.

Nobody's talking about any capabilities other than processing capabilities.

[Origin_Unknown]

i've recently bought a PS3 but for some reason i keep going back to my pc.

for example;

Oblivion: the mod-a-bility on the pc is astronomical. I've got so many mod's installed to inhance my game my hard drive is crying. iirc my install is 11gb right now.

COD4; is superior on a pc with dx10. there is just some things that bug me about the game on the ps3. for example; in the first mission where your the sas and you fly onto that ship. when the first lightning bolt strikes and you see the flash - look at the floor of the helicopter. the shadow of the chap infront is so blocky i thought i was playing on a spectrum for a second.

[Rickster_64]

There ya go! who needs expensive tv's and consoles. Buy some Axis and Allies, Blokkus, etc. and actually see your friends in person! and Warcraft? Yeah right, go get the dice and your DM handbook! My friends all have moderdate level PC's and I have a 360 as well but honestly we have the most fun playing board games or Magic: the Gathering. Been playing it for almost 15 years and its still fun and far more of a mental stimulant than any FPS on my PC. With the current massive slump in PC gaming, I can hardly justify the cost of a $500 video card, when I could buy a 360 and 2-3 games for just the price of the card upgrade. The rest of PC's pricing this past year has been fantastic but Nvidia and ATI are going the wrong way. Yes, the 8800GT just got released, but short of that who wants to lay down big $$$ to stay current to play Crysis? I can't justify the expense when once I buy the console I know it will play all the games on it at X fps and at X resolution on my hdtv. Thats what makes PC gaming a tough sell for me anymore (besides so few outstanding games available.) What happened to Microsoft's "games for windows" big push?