What is the difference between 1GB and 512MB for GPUs?

Is it just for higher resolutions or for overall performance. I'll be running at 1280x1024 and planning on getting a Nvidia card.

Is it just for higher resolutions or for overall performance. I'll be running at 1280x1024 and planning on getting a Nvidia card.

brandojones

1GB is for resolutions 1920x1200 and higher. 512MB will do for your resolution.

Hell, 256 would do at something that low.

ok, thanks.

Hell, 256 would do at something that low.

Sporknife

[QUOTE="Sporknife"]

Hell, 256 would do at something that low.

codezer0

Hell, 256 would do at something that low.

Sporknife

If he's running a moniter at that, i'd assume he'd be getting a low end card, which can't use that much vram.

If he's running a moniter at that, i'd assume he'd be getting a low end card, which can't use that much vram.

Sporknife

[QUOTE="brandojones"]

Is it just for higher resolutions or for overall performance. I'll be running at 1280x1024 and planning on getting a Nvidia card.

kaitanuvax

1GB is for resolutions 1920x1200 and higher. 512MB will do for your resolution.

Do u know PS3 render 1080p with 256MB? Almost of memory spent for texture, polygon, effect.Macolele

[QUOTE="Sporknife"]

Hell, 256 would do at something that low.

imprezawrx500

8800GT can use 1GB and run GTAIV better than the 4870.

1GB is also not necessarily for highest resolutions either. On GTAIV you need 1GB for high textures at 1024x768 or 1280x960,1280x1024.

High textures these days are needing 1GB cards, I think that trend will continue upwards it always does.

Hell, 256 would do at something that low.

Sporknife

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="Sporknife"]

Hell, 256 would do at something that low.

teddyrob

8800GT can use 1GB and run GTAIV better than the 4870.

1GB is also not necessarily for highest resolutions either. On GTAIV you need 1GB for high textures at 1024x768 or 1280x960,1280x1024.

High textures these days are needing 1GB cards, I think that trend will continue upwards it always does.

on my 9800GTX+ 512MB i run GTAIV with everything maxed out @ 1600x1200 and i get about 35-40 FPS . so a 512MB card is fine for 1600x1200 and anything below that, and 1GB is for res higher than 1600x1200, the only exception is crysis. don`t count GTA as an exception. it runs great for some ppl and it dosen`t for others with the same rig, and this happens only because of the terrible engine. so if ur max res is 1600x1200, then a 512MB card will do fine

[QUOTE="Macolele"]Do u know PS3 render 1080p with 256MB? Almost of memory spent for texture, polygon, effect.codezer0

This is not a valid point in my opinion, for the simple fact that the console versions of most cross-platform games don't look (graphically) as good as the PC versions. The PC versions of GTA IV, NBA 2k9, Gears of War, Devil May Cry, etc... look far better than the X360 and PS3 versions. PC gaming is and always has been more expensive than console gaming, because you're getting a more advanced and refined product in the vast majority of cases. If you want cheap gaming with generally good graphics, buy a console. If you don't mind spending more and want the best visuals (and gameplay in my opinion, especially for FPS and RTS games), build a gaming PC. For less than $600 you can build a gaming PC that will wipe the floor with the current consoles.

[QUOTE="codezer0"][QUOTE="Macolele"]Do u know PS3 render 1080p with 256MB? Almost of memory spent for texture, polygon, effect.hartsickdiscipl

This is not a valid point in my opinion, for the simple fact that the console versions of most cross-platform games don't look (graphically) as good as the PC versions. The PC versions of GTA IV, NBA 2k9, Gears of War, Devil May Cry, etc... look far better than the X360 and PS3 versions. PC gaming is and always has been more expensive than console gaming, because you're getting a more advanced and refined product in the vast majority of cases. If you want cheap gaming with generally good graphics, buy a console. If you don't mind spending more and want the best visuals (and gameplay in my opinion, especially for FPS and RTS games), build a gaming PC. For less than $600 you can build a gaming PC that will wipe the floor with the current consoles.

This is not a valid point in my opinion, for the simple fact that the console versions of most cross-platform games don't look (graphically) as good as the PC versions. The PC versions of GTA IV, NBA 2k9, Gears of War, Devil May Cry, etc... look far better than the X360 and PS3 versions. PC gaming is and always has been more expensive than console gaming, because you're getting a more advanced and refined product in the vast majority of cases. If you want cheap gaming with generally good graphics, buy a console. If you don't mind spending more and want the best visuals (and gameplay in my opinion, especially for FPS and RTS games), build a gaming PC. For less than $600 you can build a gaming PC that will wipe the floor with the current consoles. hartsickdiscipl

For less than $600 you can build a gaming PC that will wipe the floor with the current consoles. hartsickdiscipl

Ok how can this not run a current game or future game on high quality. It only costs $720 including shipping. That is not "A LOT" more than $600 for a totally new computer.

AMD Phenom II X3 720

GTS 250 1GB

4gb ram

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827129023

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811146041

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136218

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131362

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130468

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817256037

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103649

Er, i have a 350$ canadian pc that can run left4dead on high and get 30-40fps, so no, you don't need a really expensive computer. Hell, in the us you could build it for 250.

GTS 250 1GB = 9800GTX Rebrand = Weaker then 260GTX By LOT Tough i agree on ur choice fo ra Phenom II X3 720 can be quit ea good DEal I did not speak about Video card here before seen the post and what i see is about if memory really play a role. well they do for 1920x1200 gaming but the user on gTA IV did not show 1920x1200 but 1280x1024 : Which is somewhat old REsolution

1280x1024 exist since 1995 As Standard native resolution for 90% OF CRT monitor
I know that cause all the monitor we ad from that age to even newest what did display the max display ? and support : 1280x1024 and i ad : 4 Different CRC monitor all from 1995-2003 : currently playing on 1920x1200 the Differance was so much noticable i like my 1920x1200 compare to my old 1280x1024 But It Still Look Good. on 1280x1024 that i can tell but it look much better on 1920x1200 thing look much bigger without lose Quality in game

Oh And here a Current new Benchmark by the way not with December 15th 2008 Driver : but 2009 28th february (DRIVER)
when you look a benchmark they are several thing to notice : DRIVER :hardware used and resolution test
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3520&p=8

If you see this picture you clearly see memory is not evverything cause if it was 9800GX2 Quad sli would be on top then 285GTX which is not

it is also vartiate from a game to another here another picture Left 4 DEAD instead of Fallout 3 Gameplay


And Sportknife what ur PC build ? I could know basicaly what you can get for both cause i builded my pc in 2008 September first Week
And In october 22-24th Around On Both ncix.com / newegg.ca a Canada REcession as Shown up i noted it on my blog of course with some chaotic comment
But I still have no idea why a such recession happen i seen my CPU E8600 from 290$CAD AFTer 10$ Instant REbate Become : 385$ The 22th & 24th OCTOBER EVERY FREaking Website in canada ! it as not lowered since and we are in 2009 : 10th march 2009
and i checked all : pricebot canada : directcanada : Ncix.com / newegg.ca / tigerdirect.ca (Alway being higher price then else where)
Sprintcomputer for ottawa & PCCYBEr.CA : Lot of hardware went suddently super high .. 4870x2 from 599$CAD (REtail) Everywhere to minium 650$ AFTEr mir to 720$ Retail


So I know more then you about what you can build or not if i can know the processor / motehrboard / ram / video card / and the setting you set for FPS
As Average

Medussaes you'r righ ton a point but Also Guy... Guy... you must also count of the Frequancy of the GDDR And The BIt Interfaces the number of Steam processor and LOT OF thing you cannot know a card by just is MEmory type : Why ? cause 295GTX USE GDDR3 2x870meg : And 4870x2 : GDDR5 2x1GB

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/02/23/sapphire-ati-radeon-hd-4870-1gb-toxic/3
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3520&p=8

Look Carefully at 1920x1200 not 1680x1050 * And Compare the Frame rate Per second OF 295GTX VS 4870x2
I don't think i have to repost the picture to try to have my point of view with you guy right ? so i post you benchmark and give you detail of where to click

i try to Arguement that 4870x2 in some game is better then 295GTX but in some game 295GTX is better by 4870x2 but you don't see a huge 20fps differance but rather a Close Quarter Fight at 5-7fps Differance

Also For Weaker Card here something Weird hever heard of HD 4750 ? R740 ? It will be Better then 4830 while user only 128bits memoery interfaces but GDDR5 Instead of GDDR3 and more GLOPS http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-4750-rv740-review-preview-test/7

I don't know lot About Video card how they work but i know how benchmark work and that work with me as long i try to understand the basic of what i should know i'm far from being a Great specialist in video card Of how they WOrk and is conception but I do know quite Lot Still and I learn from it
By Look Such stuff as HD4670 Being Killed by 4750 and that 4750 Outperfmring HD4830 and There for Becoming Closer to HD4850

I've got an x2 5000+ running at 2.8, a 9600gt which i jacked the clocks up a whole bunch, some generic mobo, and 3 gigs of ram. I got the processor, ram and mobo as well as the case + psu and the hdd in a barebones deal on tiger, saved something like 70$.

here are my settings : ( not gonna post the actual images cause of table breaking )

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/1559/84723044.png

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/9970/55936223.png

Actually, now you could probably get more for that money because of price reductions on the 4670

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]This is not a valid point in my opinion, for the simple fact that the console versions of most cross-platform games don't look (graphically) as good as the PC versions. The PC versions of GTA IV, NBA 2k9, Gears of War, Devil May Cry, etc... look far better than the X360 and PS3 versions. PC gaming is and always has been more expensive than console gaming, because you're getting a more advanced and refined product in the vast majority of cases. If you want cheap gaming with generally good graphics, buy a console. If you don't mind spending more and want the best visuals (and gameplay in my opinion, especially for FPS and RTS games), build a gaming PC. For less than $600 you can build a gaming PC that will wipe the floor with the current consoles. codezer0

For less than $600 you can build a gaming PC that will wipe the floor with the current consoles. hartsickdiscipl

1. I'm not sure about you, but maybe you need your eyes checked or you forgot to put on your glasses...Gears of War is a lot better looking on the PC, even on just medium settings (running on 1680x1050 - 720p) then it is on any 1080i HDTV that I've played the 360 version on. The jaggied edges stand out like a sore thumb on the 360 version - whereas the edges are much more smooth and rounded looking (not to mention images appear sharper and more crisp) on my computer.

2. I can build a computer for around $580 (less if you take into account for rebates) that could easily out perform any 360 or PS3 game - if the games were optimized for my computer. What you have to understand is that there are so many configurations for PCs, that truely optimizing any game to be completely compatible for all PCs would be impossible. Which is why it is so much easier for game developers on consoles to eventually, truely optimize games for those systems. There are set specifications they have to stay within and they can work their magic to push games to the system's limits.

Whereas on a PC, game developers pick a middle ground (aside from Crysis and a couple other high demanding PC games) and do their best to optimize for that middle ground. Their best (generally not that great of a job for console to PC ports) usually allows about 75% (my personal guess) of current gaming PC owners to play the game at lower or maxed settings (and anything in between).

With my old computer parts that I have from my last computer (PSU, 2 7600GT cards, old HDD), I could probably put just another $300 into parts and still have a PC that mops the floor with a good 1/4 - 1/3 of current 360 and PS3 games. I could almost max out Oblivion with those two cards in SLI...I had to turn down the grass draw distance and put shadows around medium and a couple other texture settings to medium and I ran that game just fine. Heck, I ran that game on medium settings with my old 7800GS AGP card I had before.

Maxing out Oblivion on PC, the game was so much better looking then what the 360 was capable of doing. If I were to venture a guess, Oblivion on 360 is about the equivalent of running all medium settings on a PC at a 720p resolution....now I'm just babbling, so I'll stop here.

Lol I see You are From Quebec too But I can speak very Well english ;) but this is a forum only English we better speak in english shall we ?

well : i don't know for if i would change to 295GTX Probably if i ad a X58 + COre i7 920 at 4.0GHZ and then i could return my 4870x2 at full price and for around same money id get a 295GTX YES I would as it get more fps in most of the game

ough as it really a Close Quarter fight i don't bother they like 5-7 FPS Difference even with huge AA On i mean it not a big deal if you see review
if you put a 4870x2 + Fallout 3 or a 295GTX + Fallout 3 : At 1920x1200 at AA mostly the most maxed it can be with AF and Everyting max.
it give about the same spec . not like 15-20fps differance : which then of corse could want me to lust to have that card instead :P

But Anyway ATI IS releasing a 295GTX Killer : 4890 & 4890x2 : then it will wait to GTX 300 & HD5870
You see ATI & NVIDIA ARE both Great I never Seen ATI & Nvidia that close Quarter fight in Majority of game since 7900GTX VS ATI 1950XT

because as soon you went on 3870 / 3870x2 it was far inferior or of 8800GT/GTS/GTX / SLI of those for enthusiast
so people could go like : TWo 8800GT and have much more power then two 3870 : and have go toward nvidia motherboard that do sli instead of Crossfire

motherboard as Before X58 : you ad to buy either Nforce Based Chipset or ATI Crossfire Based Chipset which is create a Dilemma in people user
They don't want to buy Two motherboard of quality : but one motherboard of Quality :D

cause if you ad like if i go Crossfire 3870 ? but it show on benchmark it much weaker then SLI 8800GT for around same cost of video card what happen !?
You just bough ATI what happen is the most logic conclusion : you get angry and want to sell ur pc on ebay for 95% Of it cost to get more power ;)

most of gamer want the performances regardless of the brand : i would go back to nvidia if i was proved in over 10 Benchmark that it Better the ati By 30-50% such as example if 4870x2 was giviong : 35fps and : 295GTX : 72fps then id say omg ?! but you know it not the case ..

See Fallout 3 At 1,920 x 1,200 8xAA 16xAF, Maximum Detail : you clearly see if you see 4870x2 & 295GTX there Barely 2fps Difference in minimum & average : so i say it a Close Fight : so i'm happy with my 4870x2 but if i could sell my 4870x2 for 95% of it price then buy a 4890x2 at around same price
i bough my 4870x2 then id do buy the 4890x2 as it rumour to release around : May / June

so Then id get even more power 100% sure : but i can't wait to see is pre-benchmark i just lust to see that knowledge i'm passionate of hardware ;)

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]This is not a valid point in my opinion, for the simple fact that the console versions of most cross-platform games don't look (graphically) as good as the PC versions. The PC versions of GTA IV, NBA 2k9, Gears of War, Devil May Cry, etc... look far better than the X360 and PS3 versions. PC gaming is and always has been more expensive than console gaming, because you're getting a more advanced and refined product in the vast majority of cases. If you want cheap gaming with generally good graphics, buy a console. If you don't mind spending more and want the best visuals (and gameplay in my opinion, especially for FPS and RTS games), build a gaming PC. For less than $600 you can build a gaming PC that will wipe the floor with the current consoles. codezer0

For less than $600 you can build a gaming PC that will wipe the floor with the current consoles. hartsickdiscipl

If anyone here should be banned for ignorance of well-known facts based on what you just typed, it should be you. I've built 3 pc's that were more than capable of completely outperforming any current-gen console for under $600. Take a look at the machine in my sig. This thing runs Crysis on all high settings at 1680x1050 at 35-40 fps in DX10, and can be put together for that amount. Hell, my video card is over a year old and it's WAY more powerful than the GPU's in the X360 and PS3.

I also submit that you should have your eyes checked when it comes to the Gears of War visuals. You must be in some type of serious denial.. The PC version looks far sharper.. and that's not even close to the best-looking game out on the PC.

again hartdiscip you must compare to CANADA OR USA ? build I Do not want to call you ignorant but : the price in canada Went Extmreley higher after october 3rd Week FOr Processor / Motherbard / Ram / Video card / If you stack up a OS it self 100$ : A Psu 50-70$ : a CPU 70$+ CAD + A video card 100$ = 8800GS + a hard drive 50-60$ + a CAse + RAM you get to 500$ and it will outperform any console of course

but.. AGAIN ? how much you paid ? higher then 299$ FOR A XBox 360 But in usa it another Story.. Because money value are different I don't want to insult you or anything : Iv just read what you guy talk about

But you are right that gear of war on pc is better then on 360 when you compare image and AA but Again it very similary as GEAR OF WAR II Is Looking Better then GEar of war 1 On PC But we don't talk of the same gear of war now we are talking of the GEAR OF WAR II VS GEAR OF WAR : wish Gear of war II WAs for PC but Does of the chain of bug and stuff on GEAR OF WAR On PC Or something i belive it did Discourage Epic to make it PC version Specialy within the USA recession

Because PC allow much higher standard then console they allow higher AA : more graphic : mods : Ect : PC Are Better on that aspect
While Console as there Good Side : they don't LAG they All Stable : But what create Lag on them is the connetion to other user. over online = SAD
While game on console optimize to never lag does of graphic engine they lack of graphic : When Xbox 3 / or PS4 Exist it may sound different

We Went Really off-topic With those ARgument About Console & PC Build According you guy Speaking OF USA and not Canada.

Ok how can this not run a current game or future game on high quality. It only costs $720 including shipping. That is not "A LOT" more than $600 for a totally new computer.

AMD Phenom II X3 720

GTS 250 1GB

4gb ram

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827129023

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811146041

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136218

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131362

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130468

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817256037

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103649

brandojones

1. I'm not sure about you, but maybe you need your eyes checked or you forgot to put on your glasses...Gears of War is a lot better looking on the PC, even on just medium settings (running on 1680x1050 - 720p) then it is on any 1080i HDTV that I've played the 360 version on. The jaggied edges stand out like a sore thumb on the 360 version - whereas the edges are much more smooth and rounded looking (not to mention images appear sharper and more crisp) on my computer.

neatfeatguy

2. I can build a computer for around $580 (less if you take into account for rebates) that could easily out perform any 360 or PS3 game - if the games were optimized for my computer. What you have to understand is that there are so many configurations for PCs, that truely optimizing any game to be completely compatible for all PCs would be impossible. Which is why it is so much easier for game developers on consoles to eventually, truely optimize games for those systems. There are set specifications they have to stay within and they can work their magic to push games to the system's limits.

neatfeatguy

Whereas on a PC, game developers pick a middle ground (aside from Crysis and a couple other high demanding PC games) and do their best to optimize for that middle ground. Their best (generally not that great of a job for console to PC ports) usually allows about 75% (my personal guess) of current gaming PC owners to play the game at lower or maxed settings (and anything in between).

With my old computer parts that I have from my last computer (PSU, 2 7600GT cards, old HDD), I could probably put just another $300 into parts and still have a PC that mops the floor with a good 1/4 - 1/3 of current 360 and PS3 games. I could almost max out Oblivion with those two cards in SLI...I had to turn down the grass draw distance and put shadows around medium and a couple other texture settings to medium and I ran that game just fine. Heck, I ran that game on medium settings with my old 7800GS AGP card I had before.

neatfeatguy

Maxing out Oblivion on PC, the game was so much better looking then what the 360 was capable of doing. If I were to venture a guess, Oblivion on 360 is about the equivalent of running all medium settings on a PC at a 720p resolution....now I'm just babbling, so I'll stop here.

neatfeatguy

My my Codezero you are sure the only guy to speak as me in this forum ;) but you sure have nice point of view but you exgare on 5K God-BOx if you make ur own you can get a god-box for 3000$ If you play at 2560x1600 or : 1500$ US If you play at 1920x1200 ;)

but you know Oblviion On pc + QUARLS mod 3 : THE thing you add with mod like Beautifullpeople 2.0 and Pretty Face Ect.. you are so getting Better Graphic OVER OLD XBOX 360 Specialy at 1920x1200 that i'm shocked by the changing i did on the gameplay i was having so much more fun on the PC version

But Again :( With my 7600GT I ad Lag sometime lag on 1280x1024 in 2007 .. TO put HDR I was unable to put AA with hdr at sametime :(

still i haven't play much Oblivion with the new pc. in my sig
Beside I know i have no lag. and i max it out at 1920x1200 i could even max it out at 2560x1600 if i ad the monitor but life isn't that easy to get a 2560x1600
:D specilay that other game will go like at 35fps and that ul have to maybe Disable AA Even with my rig i have.. for some game

Game like how ever Fallout 3 + 8x aa + MAX DETAIL At 2560x1600 with my current rig but Far Cry 2 : Argh..
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/02/23/sapphire-ati-radeon-hd-4870-1gb-toxic/3 (fallout 3) 71fps around if you play at 2560x1600
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/02/23/sapphire-ati-radeon-hd-4870-1gb-toxic/4 (Far Cry 2) Around 40fps :(
which show how hungry is 2560x1600 :D

it give quite a culprit and it make you think Twice Before spend 1200$CAD on gAteway 30 inch 2560x1600 :-/

You still don't understand, do you? If you're computer couldn't at least play GoW on medium settings (pretty much any computer running with an 8600GT or better GPU can do this), then no, you won't see much difference (if any) between the PC and 360 version. Anyways, I don't really see why anyone would want to own a copy for the 360 and the PC (aside from maybe the extra content on the PC version)...seems silly to me. You need to play the 360 version on a good HDTV and then find a PC (or build one or buy one, since you don't seem to have a good one to begin with - this assumption is based how you readily bash PC gaming and how you think you need a super expensive PC to play games) that runs GoW on medium settings or higher with a resolution of at least 1280x1024 and you should easily be able to notice a difference in quality.

[QUOTE="neatfeatguy"]

2. I can build a computer for around $580 (less if you take into account for rebates) that could easily out perform any 360 or PS3 game - if the games were optimized for my computer. What you have to understand is that there are so many configurations for PCs, that truely optimizing any game to be completely compatible for all PCs would be impossible. Which is why it is so much easier for game developers on consoles to eventually, truely optimize games for those systems. There are set specifications they have to stay within and they can work their magic to push games to the system's limits.

codezer0

Only thing my build didn't include was a monitor, keyboard and mouse. You can spend about $10-15 and get a keyboard/mouse and if you shop around, you can pick up a cheap monitor for $50-100. Until you actualy quite your mouth and look around before you start to bash everyone, you might actually find good deals out there and figure out that a good gaming PC can be built for $500-600 with brand new products.

[QUOTE="neatfeatguy"]

Whereas on a PC, game developers pick a middle ground (aside from Crysis and a couple other high demanding PC games) and do their best to optimize for that middle ground. Their best (generally not that great of a job for console to PC ports) usually allows about 75% (my personal guess) of current gaming PC owners to play the game at lower or maxed settings (and anything in between).

With my old computer parts that I have from my last computer (PSU, 2 7600GT cards, old HDD), I could probably put just another $300 into parts and still have a PC that mops the floor with a good 1/4 - 1/3 of current 360 and PS3 games. I could almost max out Oblivion with those two cards in SLI...I had to turn down the grass draw distance and put shadows around medium and a couple other texture settings to medium and I ran that game just fine. Heck, I ran that game on medium settings with my old 7800GS AGP card I had before.

codezer0

Some more recently released games that I own that I can run with my (I maybe spent a grand on my computer about 1.5 years ago) PC on high settings (or nearly all high settings)with my 22" monitor @ 1680x1050:

FarCry2, Crysis, Gears of War, Mass Effect, FEAR 2 demo (the game doesn't interest me, so I haven't picked up a copy yet), Assassin's Creed, Fallout 3 and Rainbow 6: Vegas 2

That does it for my newer games...I'm not much on spending lots of money on just released games. I tend to pick up games after they drop in price a bit...which is why I don't own a coyp of Call of Duty 4 yet.

Maybe, but I'd rather have avian flu than touch Oblivion or Morrowind for that matter. Those games were just awful. Crysis? UT3 still looks better to me, and plays faster. Hell, even now FC2 looks better on this machine than Crysis ever did. Overlord on PC only really benefitted from a somewhat faster framerate and higher resolution... but the controls were so borked that you needed to plug in the 360 gamepad in order to play it right anyway. And finally, the 360 and ps3 can both run stuff like Gears of War 2, Left 4 Dead, and KIllzone 2 at 1080p (1920x1080 res to you) and still remain playable 99.8% of the time. And these things are technically almost 3 years old now. You try playing a brand new PC game on a 3-year-old computer and see if you can get a fluid and playable framerate at 1920x1080 on anything but low and see how badly you'll want to curse the thing out.codezer0

Mass Effect was well ported to PC, other companies need to learn how to do this. Any console game that's ported to PC and you can't effectivly utilize the keyboard/mouse, then the game is going to be crappy on PC - period. Also, you need to do your research on what games on the 360 actually support true 1080. Gears of War 1 & 2 do not, Left 4 Dead (from what I can tell) does not support true 1080....I couldn't find any info for Killzone 2. Also, there are only maybea few PS3 games that support a true 1080 - along with a handful of games for the 360. Games that upscale from 720 to 1080, are not true 1080. There is a difference in upscaling and true 1080.

So, calm down, take a deep breath and come to terms that the 360 and PS3 are not really that great of a thing (except maybe the Blu-ray on the PS3, that's a nice perk). They're big improvements over the past generation of consoles, but PCs are always and will forever be ahead of the curve when compared to consoles.

If you like consoles, then stick with them. If you'd rather game on PCs, then do that. Just don't run out here bashing people because you failed to do your own homework. You can build decent PCs for gaming at a low cost and don't need to spend $3-5k. My computer put me back about $1050 and from how games were 1.5 years ago and to what they're progressing into, I don't see why my computer couldn't handle new games for the next couple of years and allowing me to play at medium-high settings....maybe I'll be lucky and it'll last me longer.

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2008/10/23/far-cry-2/4
http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2008/10/far-cry-2/bultra.jpg

Game on 360 / Ps3 are native 720P Or 1080i : but upscale well to 1080P Without a huge Quality Lose in the Quality that waht they mean behind the box
Such as Killzone II : IS Native 720P But Run at 1080P no problems so no quality Lose but if killzone II was on pc : It would Look better

as it would probabely allow higher AA Setting for user that as PC with at last 8800GT / 4830 / 4850 / 4870 / 260GTX / 280GTX
tough i won't think the frame rate will giv eyou a 60fps 24/24 7/7 like on console : if you played Killzone II AT A PC version at 1920x1200
It sad that it wasn't made as PC Version it sure sad.