8600GT>>>>>>>Xbox 360 and PS3.

I keep hearing how consoles are so much more efficient than the PC.Now let's see it then shall we how the 8600GT plays multiplat games in the same graphical fidelity as the xbox 360 and ps3.

So we see in COD4 that the 8600GT gets 36fps maxed out in 12x10.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p so it's safe to assume that the 8600GT would get around 80fps maxed out in COD4 in 600p.That leaves plenty of headroom to put in AA and thus ultimately excedding console quality while maintaining 60fps.

Now let's see UT3.The 8600GT get's 39fps maxed out in 1600x1200.It is safe to say that the 8600GT would get 80+ fps in 720p.How does the ps3 run this game again?

Now lets see bioshock.We see here that the 8600GT runs bioshock maxed out in 720p at 40fps once again beating the xbox 360's 30fps.

You console fanboys can argue all you want as to how the PC is more expensive and requires regular upgrades but the fact is that the PC is as much an efficient gaming machine as your console is as proved by the 8600GT here.Only those people need regular upgrades who must play in crazy resolutions.

The 8600GT is now available for $80 and it thrashes your consoles graphics.This card also doesnt need much power so you may not have to replace your generic PSU to run this card.So basically if you have any dual core CPU than for roughly $120(you may need more RAM) you can make your PC on par with your consoles.

But people will continue to think that their consoles give them a close experience to what a $1000 PC gives but i guess ignorance is bliss.

How about the RAM?EuroMafia

And BTW you can play crysis in XP with only 1GB system RAM.

[QUOTE="EuroMafia"]How about the RAM?Thinker_145

And BTW you can play crysis in XP with only 1GB system RAM.

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

Thinker_145

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

What is the 8600GT's equivelant in 2005? 7600GT..wouldn't it be a more fair comparison to use that card rather than change hardware completely..The consoles didn't get a hardware upgrade did it or was it something I missed.

[QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

Pro_wrestler

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

Pro_wrestler

[QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

Pro_wrestler

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

1280x1024=1310720

1024x600=614400

[QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

Pro_wrestler

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

1280x1024 = 1 310 720 pixels

[QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"][QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

EuroMafia

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

Fair enough..but 2005 tech versus 2007 tech:)

[QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

[QUOTE="EuroMafia"]How about the RAM?EuroMafia

And BTW you can play crysis in XP with only 1GB system RAM.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182806/p-6.html

[QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"][QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

EntwineX

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

1280x1024 = 1 310 720 pixels

I know now thanks!

Congratulations!!!!!

You are the 1 millionth person to make a PC is more powerful than consoles thread!!!!

LOL console fanboys are ignoring this arent they.:lol:

Bu bu teh consoles are so much more efficient and still loss to the paltry 8600GT.:cry:

I have seen console fanboys say that the 8600GT sucks and is worthless.Ah the irony now your consoles suck as well then i guess.

[QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

anshul89

Nah the statement in your sig is much more stupid:P

BTW, those benchmarks seem gimmed, they're using quad-cores, faster RAM and high-end motherboards from the looks of it.

But the 360 was relaesed in 2005.Compare it to something realistic like a 7600-7800gt and then we'll talk. ;)stvee101

The 7 series is now old.The 8600GT has a stunning price performance.For somebody buying a ps3 or 360 right now it doesnt matter that it is old tech.The ps3 is a current market product and so is the 8600 and both offer a similar price performance and thus can be compared.

LOL console fanboys are ignoring this arent they.:lol:

Bu bu teh consoles are so much more efficient and still loss to the paltry 8600GT.:cry:

I have seen console fanboys say that the 8600GT sucks and is worthless.Ah the irony now your consoles suck as well then i guess.

Thinker_145

Well it is 6 AM in the morning

[QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

Pro_wrestler

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

I think he means double the number of pixels?

1280 x 1024 = 1,310,720 pixels

1024 x 600 = 614,400 pixels

-

The GeForce 8600gt runs the game with roughly 2.13 times as many pixels on the screen. Doubling the resolution would increase the number of pixels four fold, which is not quite the case here.

-

What does this have to do with anything though? "The GeForce 8600gt sucks" has never, ever been the cornerstone of the argument against the PC. In fact, most of the "hate" against that card came from within the PC community itself.

[QUOTE="anshul89"][QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

Pro_wrestler

Nah the statement in your sig is much more stupid:P

BTW, those benchmarks seem gimmed, they're using quad-cores, faster RAM and high-end motherboards from the looks of it.

But the 360 was relaesed in 2005.Compare it to something realistic like a 7600-7800gt and then we'll talk. ;)stvee101

the 8600GT is crappy card,don't make it sound comparable with 8800gt, and u're just a fakeboy. i remember you doing pro ps3 threads and bashing pc gaming, now suddenly u're a elite hermit :roll: .-wii60-

And yes i used to be a cow but then decided to go with PC gaming and cant be more happier.

the 8600GT is crappy card,don't make it sound comparable with 8800gt, and u're just a fakeboy. i remember you doing pro ps3 threads and bashing pc gaming, now suddenly u're a elite hermit :roll: .-wii60-

And maybe you didnt see but i did make a thread about becoming a hermit.

Well it's a dual core and yes pretty fast RAM but that's the way all benches are done.A faster CPU really wont help much if the graphics card is poor.Thinker_145

Benchmarks are done that way so that no other component is bottlenecking the performance of the graphics card. But let's not ignore that he's making a viable point - it's possible the GPU is not the bottleneck to solid performance - it could be RAM, CPU, or even Hard Drive performance that is an issue with a particular game.

-

The foundation of this arguement is a little silly as well - PC gaming isn't about playing mainstream games with slightly better framerates - when you represent it that way, it just becomes a pissing contest. That's such a waste - PC gaming for me has been about playing different kinds of games than are on consoles, not worrying about whether or not I'm running Bioshock 10fps faster than a 360 owner.

And yet consoles continue to sell - care to explain why that is?

We're well aware that PCs are more powerful - we just didn't base our buying decision off of that.

Forget the year the tech came out! I'm about to slap this pc gamer down let's see how that rig play on my 52 in hdtv it will fall apart that card is good on a small screen that's it. now walk away ! granddogg

So an Xbox 360 running at a lower resolution over HDMI looks fine, but a PC running at a *higher resolution* over HDMI doesn't? They both connect to the same HDTV, they both can use the same controller, what's the difference?

I don't agree with the TC going this route, not because the PC isn't more powerful than consoles (this is undeniable) but because if the PC just played console games with slightly improved graphics, it would not be a unique and special platform. There's so much more to PC gaming than just "zomg look at my resolution"... so much more.

SW gives a bit skewed image on PC gaming tbh, as most people here have 8800s and so on and then they say they can't max out Crysis, people start thinking that's what you need the least if you wanna game on PC at all, but it's not really true. The best is gonna cost you, but honestly it's for enthusiasts only, average PC gamer won't need 2x8800Ultra to play games, and if you're content with console like graphics, a mid-range card will suffice, tho 8600GT isn't really even mid-range anymore...EntwineX

It's misrepresented because the majority of PC gamers who come to SW are still honestly consolites at heart. What I mean is, the "hermit" you see in SW is someone who is talking about graphics and physics, instead of creativity, unique games, and what makes the PC unique as a platform.

That's partially because a lot of SW is completely unaware of the big indie games on the PC. I said it months before Crysis came out, and I'll say it again - it's not that important of a game to the PC, and its existance will be used against PCs time and time again, for really no good reason.

[QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"][QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

subrosian

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

I think he means double the number of pixels?

1280 x 1024 = 1,310,720 pixels

1024 x 600 = 614,400 pixels

-

The GeForce 8600gt runs the game with roughly 2.13 times as many pixels on the screen. Doubling the resolution would increase the number of pixels four fold, which is not quite the case here.

-

What does this have to do with anything though? "The GeForce 8600gt sucks" has never, ever been the cornerstone of the argument against the PC. In fact, most of the "hate" against that card came from within the PC community itself.

Lol yeah, wasn't thinking in megapixels..

Oh and 3850 > 8600GT/GTS price/perf

Forget the year the tech came out! I'm about to slap this pc gamer down let's see how that rig play on my 52 in hdtv it will fall apart that card is good on a small screen that's it. now walk away ! granddogg

[QUOTE="granddogg"]Forget the year the tech came out! I'm about to slap this pc gamer down let's see how that rig play on my 52 in hdtv it will fall apart that card is good on a small screen that's it. now walk away ! Thinker_145

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"][QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

.Now 12x10 is MORE than double the resolution of 600p

Pro_wrestler

:|

Now I'm no math major but 1024x600 x 2 = 2048x1200 yet 1280x1024 = double the resolution?

I think he means double the number of pixels?

1280 x 1024 = 1,310,720 pixels

1024 x 600 = 614,400 pixels

-

The GeForce 8600gt runs the game with roughly 2.13 times as many pixels on the screen. Doubling the resolution would increase the number of pixels four fold, which is not quite the case here.

-

What does this have to do with anything though? "The GeForce 8600gt sucks" has never, ever been the cornerstone of the argument against the PC. In fact, most of the "hate" against that card came from within the PC community itself.

Lol yeah, wasn't thinking in megapixels..

Oh and 3850 > 8600GT/GTS price/perf

You're comparing a $160 ~ $180 graphics card to one that was selling for $100 five ~ six months ago... they're not in the same price bracket, and the newer mid-range card will generally always be a better performer than the old one.

Yawn at Topic thinks who cares man the PC has loads of FPS games that are way better than COD 4 so dont worry about it mannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

I mean hell the poor console guys who may or may not have owned a decent PC thourought there lives are only just discovering what FPS games can really be sadly the on the Rails nature and god damn push and go here design of that game grates on me, im to use to Far Cry, Stalker, Crysis, Bio Shock, where you can take your time and approach situations how you want to.

[QUOTE="granddogg"]Forget the year the tech came out! I'm about to slap this pc gamer down let's see how that rig play on my 52 in hdtv it will fall apart that card is good on a small screen that's it. now walk away ! subrosian

So an Xbox 360 running at a lower resolution over HDMI looks fine, but a PC running at a *higher resolution* over HDMI doesn't? They both connect to the same HDTV, they both can use the same controller, what's the difference?

I don't agree with the TC going this route, not because the PC isn't more powerful than consoles (this is undeniable) but because if the PC just played console games with slightly improved graphics, it would not be a unique and special platform. There's so much more to PC gaming than just "zomg look at my resolution"... so much more.

SW gives a bit skewed image on PC gaming tbh, as most people here have 8800s and so on and then they say they can't max out Crysis, people start thinking that's what you need the least if you wanna game on PC at all, but it's not really true. The best is gonna cost you, but honestly it's for enthusiasts only, average PC gamer won't need 2x8800Ultra to play games, and if you're content with console like graphics, a mid-range card will suffice, tho 8600GT isn't really even mid-range anymore...EntwineX

It's misrepresented because the majority of PC gamers who come to SW are still honestly consolites at heart. What I mean is, the "hermit" you see in SW is someone who is talking about graphics and physics, instead of creativity, unique games, and what makes the PC unique as a platform.

That's partially because a lot of SW is completely unaware of the big indie games on the PC. I said it months before Crysis came out, and I'll say it again - it's not that important of a game to the PC, and its existance will be used against PCs time and time again, for really no good reason.

Maybe you didnt play the game in high settings or maybe dont care about technology and graphics.But forget that crysis has unparalleded gameplay as well.The only really negative thing about this game is the performance.

HD 2600XT >>>>>>>>>>>> 8600GT

:D :P JK

No offense or anything but to we need another 'PC gaming more powerful than consoles HURRAH' threads?

I mean seriously, its nice and all, but this is becomming all to frequent.

[QUOTE="granddogg"]Forget the year the tech came out! I'm about to slap this pc gamer down let's see how that rig play on my 52 in hdtv it will fall apart that card is good on a small screen that's it. now walk away ! subrosian

So an Xbox 360 running at a lower resolution over HDMI looks fine, but a PC running at a *higher resolution* over HDMI doesn't? They both connect to the same HDTV, they both can use the same controller, what's the difference?

I don't agree with the TC going this route, not because the PC isn't more powerful than consoles (this is undeniable) but because if the PC just played console games with slightly improved graphics, it would not be a unique and special platform. There's so much more to PC gaming than just "zomg look at my resolution"... so much more.

It's just one of the many reasons of the superiority of the PC.

[QUOTE="Thinker_145"][QUOTE="granddogg"]Forget the year the tech came out! I'm about to slap this pc gamer down let's see how that rig play on my 52 in hdtv it will fall apart that card is good on a small screen that's it. now walk away ! anshul89

I keep hearing how consoles are so much more efficient than the PC.Now let's see it then shall we how the 8600GT plays multiplat games in the same graphical fidelity as the xbox 360 and ps3.

Thinker_145

wow, you can play games with just a graphics card?

LOL console fanboys are ignoring this arent they.:lol:

Bu bu teh consoles are so much more efficient and still loss to the paltry 8600GT.:cry:

I have seen console fanboys say that the 8600GT sucks and is worthless.Ah the irony now your consoles suck as well then i guess.

Thinker_145

Why are you comparing things that have a 2 year difference. Maybe you should compare a video card that was released at the same time as X-box 360.

[QUOTE="anshul89"][QUOTE="Thinker_145"][QUOTE="granddogg"]Forget the year the tech came out! I'm about to slap this pc gamer down let's see how that rig play on my 52 in hdtv it will fall apart that card is good on a small screen that's it. now walk away ! Thinker_145

No offense or anything but to we need another 'PC gaming more powerful than consoles HURRAH' threads?

I mean seriously, its nice and all, but this is becomming all to frequent.

skrat_01

Everybody thinks that consoles are efficient due to unified hardware.Ya sure they maybe a little bit but really not much.

[QUOTE="Thinker_145"]

LOL console fanboys are ignoring this arent they.:lol:

Bu bu teh consoles are so much more efficient and still loss to the paltry 8600GT.:cry:

I have seen console fanboys say that the 8600GT sucks and is worthless.Ah the irony now your consoles suck as well then i guess.

Supafly1

Why are you comparing things that have a 2 year difference. Maybe you should compare a video card that was released at the same time as X-box 360.

The xbox 360 is a "current" product in the market.The 8600 is also a current product in the market.A 2 year old GPU isnt.Maybe 2 years ago the 360 was more efficient than consoles but we are talking about today.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

No offense or anything but to we need another 'PC gaming more powerful than consoles HURRAH' threads?

I mean seriously, its nice and all, but this is becomming all to frequent.

Thinker_145

Everybody thinks that consoles are efficient due to unified hardware.Ya sure they maybe a little bit but really not much.

Because you are spot on.

Problem is the thread is presented as a PC>Console thread - which kind of obscures the facts .

But yes you are right.

edit*

The 360 has somthing along the lines of an X1950pro in it btw.