EDIT : SCRATCH THIS
Went for a GTX 680 to be done with it.
Thanks for all the tips and advice
Printable View
EDIT : SCRATCH THIS
Went for a GTX 680 to be done with it.
Thanks for all the tips and advice
First things we need to know.
What resolution and AA and AF settings are you using ? How much are you willing to spend ?
Might be worth having a quick look here and seeing how your 4870X2 stacks up
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...mark,3074.html
1920x1080
And I want to spend as little as possible...
tbh I do not expect many options, quite frankly I left the PC hardware scene for this reason..
4 years down the line, and this 4870x2 is hard to beat for under £200..
This fact alone, is enough to make me proud to own an xbox..
But unfortunatly, I have 2xSSD in my PC - which makes load times between areas in skyrim heavenly... but at what cost?
Well I am no longer prepared to spend on PC hardware, however, I am temped for a new GPU as SKYRIM makes my 4870x2 sound like somebody is hoovering my hair.. I have gotten my 360 controller reciever today for my PC and it works a treat..
Uhh, what most of us do is sell our older components when we upgrade.
4870X2 used to be a $600 USD card. Being "proud to own an Xbox" doesn't make sense, do you realize the hardware inside? Play your games on low-medium detail with 2xAA/AF or less at 720p (can be done on a $400 computer including OS cost) if you want something similar...
Cheap option pair of GTX460 1gb cards maybe? If not then a GTX560 ti448 or GTX570 3rd party card would give your ears a break :).
[QUOTE=BeepBeep2;5092131]do you realize the hardware inside? QUOTE]
Yeah I do.
Play RAGE on the xbox and see what can be done on such garbage hardware.
It is all down to coding, but hell why should they bother when they can make us pay an extra £200 for +20 FPS..
Its actually that attitude that causes the problem. Most games are console ports which is somewhat similar to using an emulator. FPS on any console designed game on the PC will take a massive hit. Console ports are optimised for crappy detail and low res, running them higher res at proper detail levels means youre basically upscaling.
There are very few designed for pc games now, but the ones that do exist look awesome and simply would not run on a console (skyrim being the most recent example). Go take a look at BF3 for how designing the game around a console audience can nerf the graphics. No HD textures = fail. Foliage, groundmaps, clothing - it all looks garbage close up.
Anyway, lets not derail the thread. If you want to talk about hardware fine, if you want to bash pc gaming and say how good your xbox is then go to XBL chat. :lol:
I was a HARDCORE PC gamer and builder for many years, I do not say things without a strong experience base in both platforms.
it is all a rip off, whatever the reason, we are being shafted..
My attitude does not CAUSE anything.. my attitude is as a result.
GTX-560ti is very sweet for the money
+ 1Quote:
Originally Posted by Splave
It's hard to argue the difference in cost to stay in "high quality" settings for any length of time on pc vs. the cost of a console that stays at one quality. It's basically the cost of buying 2 or 3 consoles every year or two vs. one console for what now, 6,7,8 years? I would have thought this ridiculousness ($), would have all but killed the enthusiast (at least graphics) pc market by now. I'm glad it hasn't!Quote:
Originally Posted by ArCElM
As for that 4870x2, I'm still using one too. It's been able to get me through everything I've wanted to play with good framerates and surprising quality levels. It makes me want to strangle people who say, "you don't need that much graphics power unless you're running multi monitor" or "it's onlr for bragging, benchmarks, etc". It may be more than you need at launch but, give it a year, you'll find something you can't play soon enough! There are some games already, that push the gtx 680 real close the 30fps threshold at 1920 x 1200, according to reviews. That's at highest quality but, who the hell doesn't want the highest quality settings. I start games with highest quality and gradually work down 'til playable. If, I have to go to far, I know what I'm missing and that won't do. I used to upgrade often, staying "in the new". Now, I just try to build it as fast as I can then, keep the system for a few. The 4870x2 has served me well.
My new build coming up, will be a 690 or a 7990. Hang on until waterblocks are available for this round of dual gpus and I'll give you a good deal on my 4870x2:D
All I'm saying is that if you want to play the games you can on an Xbox, with it looking like the Xbox, you need about $275 in hardware (cheap AMD Llano) and an OS. You could even try Linux + Wine/PlayOnLinux and get it down to $300 total...and have a fully functional HTPC too (mini-itx and can install XBMC)...Quote:
Originally Posted by ArCElM
No need to buy high end components to play at 720p, in which case a 360's textures are upscaled from what should be 480p anyway.
Whatever.
1 680? - what was I thinking... :D
Funny old posts.
Once I start something it seems I have to go all the way..
Funny thing is, after all this to play SKYRIM I have never even played it on PC, I get great FPS but bad stuttering.
BF3 and many other games suffer zero stuttering and flawless performance.
Never did get to the bottom of SKYRIM stuttering after all this effort.
This is what i gotQuote:
Originally Posted by sepol
+1
Bad coding and designed for a console. Problem identified.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArCElM
You mean problem identified.Quote:
Originally Posted by EniGmA1987