Can a 2005 PC compete with current gen consoles?

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]

[QUOTE="RyuRanVII"]

I wonder how many console gamers are still using a 2005 x360 and a 2006 PS3.

Shielder7

I'm on my third PS3

Well done on refuting what he said... Oh wait.

PS3's do have a failure rate, and people can be unlucky. It's not like he aid "Everybody is now on their 3rd PS3." That would be a ridiculous statement.

A 600$ 2005 PC could not even run 2005 best looking games

A 3000$+ 7800GTX SLI would run some 2008 games well but runs nothing latest at allloosingENDS

I wouldn't go that far. FEAR was crowned graphics king by both IGN and Gamespot back in 2005. The game runs okay at 640x480 in my old Athlon XP 1700+ and GF4-Ti 4200.

My Athlon XP 1700+ came out in 2001. I bought my GF4 Ti-4200 in 2002. How much would those be in late 2005?

Most people agree you need a PC anyways, so why not build one that plays games for the same price you'd pay for a crappy one at a store?? There's a ton of money that can be saved in doing so SW__Troll

[QUOTE="edidili"]No a 2005 PC doesn't play modern PC games but then again it's a 7 freaking years old piece of hardware. Only because consoles are stuck in the past doesn't mean PC should too. PC doesn't have to play by the same rules, it does cheat :P In the end a PC is costly but that's because it's a freaking computer. It does gaming and much more and a bit more after that.loosingENDS

Indeed, PCs are usless after a few years and must move forward indeed

Xbox 360 on the other hand runs Withcer 2 fine, so i would not call that "stuck in the past" either

[QUOTE="SW__Troll"]Most people agree you need a PC anyways, so why not build one that plays games for the same price you'd pay for a crappy one at a store?? There's a ton of money that can be saved in doing so Shielder7

[QUOTE="Shielder7"][QUOTE="BPoole96"]

I'm on my third PS3

lundy86_4

Well done on refuting what he said... Oh wait.

PS3's do have a failure rate, and people can be unlucky. It's not like he aid "Everybody is now on their 3rd PS3." That would be a ridiculous statement.

[QUOTE="SW__Troll"]Most people agree you need a PC anyways, so why not build one that plays games for the same price you'd pay for a crappy one at a store?? There's a ton of money that can be saved in doing so Shielder7

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="edidili"]No a 2005 PC doesn't play modern PC games but then again it's a 7 freaking years old piece of hardware. Only because consoles are stuck in the past doesn't mean PC should too. PC doesn't have to play by the same rules, it does cheat :P In the end a PC is costly but that's because it's a freaking computer. It does gaming and much more and a bit more after that.edidili

Indeed, PCs are usless after a few years and must move forward indeed

Xbox 360 on the other hand runs Withcer 2 fine, so i would not call that "stuck in the past" either

Well, my toy playes Witcher 2 looking stunning and has Dark Souls too unlike PC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oMt-jCYgb0
http://gamingeverything.com/14433/15-minutes-of-the-witcher-2-enhanced-edition-xbox-360-footage/

If a well known console gamer came on here and said he built 3 gaming PCs in the last 5 years and they all fried so PC gaming is unreliable and a waste of money would you believe him and except he did nothing wrong?Shielder7

Benefit of the doubt. Unless I can prove it wrong, I wouldn't assume they were lying. Unless it was a completely unreasonable reply like the one I gave regarding everyone being on their third PS3.

BTW, offering an equal scenario based on a different system does nothing to refute what he said.

[QUOTE="edidili"][QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Indeed, PCs are usless after a few years and must move forward indeed

Xbox 360 on the other hand runs Withcer 2 fine, so i would not call that "stuck in the past" either

loosingENDS

Well, my toy playes Witcher 2 looking stunning and has Dark Souls too unlike PC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oMt-jCYgb0
http://gamingeverything.com/14433/15-minutes-of-the-witcher-2-enhanced-edition-xbox-360-footage/

Whatever. you're not going to drag me into the same discussion you had for the entire past week. We get it, you're fine with your 360.

[QUOTE="Shielder7"][QUOTE="SW__Troll"]Most people agree you need a PC anyways, so why not build one that plays games for the same price you'd pay for a crappy one at a store?? There's a ton of money that can be saved in doing so edidili

2004 cpu yes

[QUOTE="edidili"][QUOTE="Shielder7"] because they're not the same price a good gaming PC cost quite a bit more than say one prebuilt at walmart. especially once you factor in all the software that comes with them.Shielder7

You already get a windows 7 when you buy a new PC and what does office have to do with gaming. If you really need office then you're going to get it, gaming or not. My point was that a lot of people buy new computers anyway. Throw 100 more bucks for a video card and you have a gaming machine too.

my athlon 64 3200+ 2.0 ghz socket 939 winchester still handle any game out there.

2006 core 2 duo, 2GB ram, 8800GTX.

Better than consoles.

[QUOTE="Shielder7"]

[QUOTE="edidili"] Actually all you have to do is get a better video card. I know a lot of people who buy a new computer with i5, 4GB ram but a crappy intel integrated card. For only like 100 bucks more they could had a pretty good gaming machine.edidili

You already get a windows 7 when you buy a new PC and what does office have to do with gaming. If you really need office then you're going to get it, gaming or not. My point was that a lot of people buy new computers anyway. Throw 100 more bucks for a video card and you have a gaming machine too.

That would be a clear no.Stevo_the_gamer

cpu's yes....gpu's no

[QUOTE="edidili"]

[QUOTE="Shielder7"] You see thats where things start to add up. Like padding the bill once you start adding things like 100$ for a better graphics card, Windows 7, Microsoft Office you're already over 300$ than what you intended on paying and your not even buying top of the line, on top of which next year you'll have to upgrade. you know how many times I had to upgrade my PS 3 or spend a 100$ extra dollars to put in a better video card? None.

Shielder7

You already get a windows 7 when you buy a new PC and what does office have to do with gaming. If you really need office then you're going to get it, gaming or not. My point was that a lot of people buy new computers anyway. Throw 100 more bucks for a video card and you have a gaming machine too.

You're paying 1000$ for a new computer and 100 more to turn it in a gaming machine is not worth it?

[QUOTE="Shielder7"][QUOTE="edidili"]

You already get a windows 7 when you buy a new PC and what does office have to do with gaming. If you really need office then you're going to get it, gaming or not. My point was that a lot of people buy new computers anyway. Throw 100 more bucks for a video card and you have a gaming machine too.

edidili

You're paying 1000$ for a new computer and 100 more to turn it in a gaming machine is not worth it?

i only paid 200$ for my pc

[QUOTE="SW__Troll"]Most people agree you need a PC anyways, so why not build one that plays games for the same price you'd pay for a crappy one at a store?? There's a ton of money that can be saved in doing so Shielder7

A good gaming PC will run around the price of $600 + about $100-$150 for a monitor.

This PC will be of similar performance to laptops of upwards of $2000 if you purchase one at a store.

In the desktop market you'd have to spend roughly $1100 to get anything comparable at a store.

And what software that comes with them? Norton? That may be the worst program I've ever seen.

The only thing you really need is Windows 7, and if you want virus protection there is free software out there.

The software you get on a store-bought PC bogs down the computer. It's a very noticeable hit to performance in comparison to the performance you get with a custom-built computer without pre-loaded software on it.

i only paid 200$ for my pc

heeeeeeeeeweeee

but can it play solitaire?

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]

I'm on my third PS3

BPoole96

3rd? Already? How can that be? Did quality control drop across the board this gen? My original PS2 is still very much alive.

I think so. My NES and Genesis still work fine. My original 60GB got the YLOD 14 months after purchase, so I sent it back to Sony. For $150, they sent me back a different refurbished model and didn't have the game that was originally in it. After hours talking to their customer service they finally agreed to send my another copy.

The refurb lasted 9 months and that is even with me vaccuuming dust out of it every few weeks. I fixed that one myself with a heat gun and thermal compound but it kept breaking over and over so finally I said fvck it and bought a Slim model. Luckily I have no had any problems with that at all

I wonder if that's due to the "Capacitor Plague" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor_plague

Consoles weren't alone in it. I had two PC motherboards and a laptop die between 2003 and 2005. Make it 4 total if you count the motherboard of my previous (2005) PC which died in 2009. It definitely had bulging capacitors.

I'm kinda leaning towards buying a PS3 slim as well. Hopefully, it'll be trouble-free.

[QUOTE="edidili"]No a 2005 PC doesn't play modern PC games but then again it's a 7 freaking years old piece of hardware. Only because consoles are stuck in the past doesn't mean PC should too. PC doesn't have to play by the same rules, it does cheat :P In the end a PC is costly but that's because it's a freaking computer. It does gaming and much more and a bit more after that.loosingENDS

Indeed, PCs are usless after a few years and must move forward indeed

Xbox 360 on the other hand runs Withcer 2 fine, so i would not call that "stuck in the past" either

U are so full of Troll Fail and you always respond to easy targets and ignore the legit counters to your pathetically weak counter-posts. Witcher 2 on the 360 is nowhere NEAR the experience of the PC version with DX11 truly running at 1900by1080 AND above. Yes, your basic and overused point is correct; a closed end console is a good system for the duration of it's existence IF you are not into having bleeding edge gaming experiences. That is a fact and not opinion. Consoles are never pushing the bleeding edge of gaming from a technical perspective when compared to PC's given a generation of technology advances.

API changes and numerous other factors like OS advancements make older PC hardware outdate; even if they are more powerful than consoles. However your pricing is just ignorant and flame bait when you say "SLI is 1200 dollars" and a "500 dollar CPU" "2k minimum for a gaming PC I don't need one but can check a website." Again, low IQ FTL. Games at REAL HD (720p isn't even HD by todays standards) will bottleneck GPU's so a $200 i7 is just fine for gaming. Two 560 Nvidia cards can eat anything thrown at it and they are not 1200 dollars. Things like a great Case, PSU, fans, etc can carry over a few generations; even MOBOs can. So you really only upgrade a CPU/GPU/RAM every once in awhile. XBL is 350 dollars for 7 years, that is a GPU upgrade right there alone.

PC gaming CAN be cheaper than console gaming but I don't even want to get into that because I personally pay MORE for PC gaming than console gaming and that is with STEAM game deals etc because I CHOOSE to stay on the bleeding edge. It's worth it to play the best games like Skyrim, Witcher2, Crysis/Crysis2/BF3 "The way they are meant to be played." Most people that play both versions and had a choice to choose the best platform WILL choose PCs IF money is not an issue. But being that you make it perfectly clear that you are LoosingENDS in life, it doesn't surprise me that you have to settle for a console ONLY experience. Nothing wrong with that, but constantly failing in your responses and trying to VALIDATE why a console only gimped version playing experience is BEST...is WRONG. U so MAD bro. Honestlly, the Jelly inside your belly is sad that I FeelsBadMan. I hope you get your Ends together one day Bro. Biggest fail ever.

No. 90% of modern PC games wouldn't even run on a 2005 PC. But a good 2006 PC, however, should already run games better than the consoles.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

A 600$ 2005 PC could not even run 2005 best looking games

A 3000$+ 7800GTX SLI would run some 2008 games well but runs nothing latest at all

loosingENDS

You should stop talking about price... since you've never had a gaming PC to start off with, you wouldn't know the price.

I know that all top crads cost in the 600$+ range and SLI is 1200$ just for the GPUs

Add a top CPU at another 500$ at least and you are already at 1700$, if you dont go for the top of the top parts

2000$ is the absolute minimum imo, i can see the prices, i dont have to buy a PC to see the cost, i can browse a website

People don't pick top of the lines CPU... it's really useless. 3000$ for CPU,Mobo,Ram,PSU,HDD and Case... wow.

Sure you can see price... you just chose the most expensive computer at alienware and base your argument on that... it's easy.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

You can upgrade a 2005 PC with a 2011 GPU ?

Wouldnt the CPU bottleneck it to nothingess ?

What about RAM ?

jockie_chan

Did you not read what I wrote? I upgrade when needed...

I think his point is, you'll always have a bottleneck in your system if you keep upgrading a single part at a time, and might as well just get a new pc altogether.

Really? So you have no idea either right? Stop buying Dell computer, seriously.

LoosingEnds U best stop ignoring my posts putting you into place. Awaiting dat dere reply. You can fool others into getting mad at ur troll bait but you seem to speficially never respond to my posts bro U scared? Come at me bro

1) you don't need microsoft office at all for a dedicated gaming machine princeofshapeir

The return on investment for a PC is substantial compared to a console. The PC is a full media device while consoles are dedicated gaming machines; they should be cheaper as they're not customizable, are prone to failure, and offer little outside of gaming.princeofshapeir

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

A 600$ 2005 PC could not even run 2005 best looking games

A 3000$+ 7800GTX SLI would run some 2008 games well but runs nothing latest at all

loosingENDS

You should stop talking about price... since you've never had a gaming PC to start off with, you wouldn't know the price.

I know that all top crads cost in the 600$+ range and SLI is 1200$ just for the GPUs

Add a top CPU at another 500$ at least and you are already at 1700$, if you dont go for the top of the top parts

2000$ is the absolute minimum imo, i can see the prices, i dont have to buy a PC to see the cost, i can browse a website

lolwtf, you must be insane to think high-end GPUs and CPUs cost that much. here's a PC i'm getting ready to build:

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/4Vgi

this will absolutely max out all current games at 1080p. if you really want to cut costs you could drop the SSD, switch to a cheaper mid-tower case, and replace the 7950 with a 6950; you'd still be able to max out current games at 30+ FPS at 1080p.

this rig costs $1617... nowhere near the "$2000 minimum" bullsh!t figure you made up.

What's the relevance of this topic?

a 600 dollar PC in 2006 would be on par or better than consoles

a 2005 one... hmm, MAYBE, many games would run better on a high end 2005 PC, but some games wouldnt, a lot of games just are not optimized for old hardware and flat out not supporting them, DX10 games also cant be run on 2004/5 PC's (Thanks MS for your useless DX10)

LoosingEnds U best stop ignoring my posts putting you into place. Awaiting dat dere reply. You can fool others into getting mad at ur troll bait but you seem to speficially never respond to my posts bro U scared? Come at me bro

Dave_NBF

Wow, I didn't realize anyone wanted loosingEND's attention so much.

That's... kind of sad.

WAIT WHAT? are people seriously saying a PC from 2006 cant run the latest games or be better than a console? are you serious?

a PC with a 8800/E8400/4GB ram destroys both consoles and can run any game better than the consoles can

My toaster can compete with current gen consoles.

WAIT WHAT? are people seriously saying a PC from 2006 cant run the latest games or be better than a console? are you serious?

a PC with a 8800/E8400/4GB ram destroys both consoles and can run any game better than the consoles can

HaloinventedFPS

I'll take an objective view on this. I have a 512mb PCI-E 8600GT (and a 256mb PCI-E ATI X800XL) lying unused right now. Later this week, I'll be able to pair it with an Intel Celeron E3400 dualcore and 4gb DDR3 RAM. I'll do some tests on it. That CPU will approximate the first-generation dualcores of 2005 and 2006. My video cards are pretty weak although the 8600GT will be worth a try.

Edit: I'm finally upgrading the old server from an Athlon XP 1700+

[QUOTE="HaloinventedFPS"]

WAIT WHAT? are people seriously saying a PC from 2006 cant run the latest games or be better than a console? are you serious?

a PC with a 8800/E8400/4GB ram destroys both consoles and can run any game better than the consoles can

jun_aka_pekto

I'll take an objective view on this. I have a 512mb PCI-E 8600GT (and a 256mb PCI-E ATI X800XL) lying unused right now. Later this week, I'll be able to pair it with an Intel Celeron E3400 dualcore and 4gb DDR3 RAM. I'll do some tests on it. That CPU will approximate the first-generation dualcores of 2005 and 2006. My video cards are pretty weak although the 8600GT will be worth a try.

Edit: I'm finally upgrading the old server from an Athlon XP 1700+

Can a 2005 pc compete with current consoles yes it depends on optiminzation, in 2005 you had dual core cpus which even today are able to play modern games. The average gaming system in 2005 had 1-2gb of memory, and inlate spring of 2005 The Geforce 7800GTX came out. It had 2x the memory and 2x the memory bandwidth of the 360 or PS3. And from 2005-2008 a 7800GTX out performed with betterdetail thenboth consoles. and even in 2009 with Resident Evil 5 a 7800GTX played the game at higher resolution with better framerate. The PS3's gpu is based on the Geforce 7800 chipset but it has only half the memory and bandwidth of a normal 7800GTX. In 2006 Pc's surpassed current console graphical ability by multiple times, with the 8800GTX which was released the same month as the PS3. By 2007 you could build a Pc that was 3-4x stronger then the 360 or PS3 for $700. And is still today able to outclass them.

Below is a cpu performance chart from Gamepro showing how far behind consoles are cpu wise.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]1) you don't need microsoft office at all for a dedicated gaming machine Teufelhuhn

The return on investment for a PC is substantial compared to a console. The PC is a full media device while consoles are dedicated gaming machines; they should be cheaper as they're not customizable, are prone to failure, and offer little outside of gaming.princeofshapeir

I apologize, I used dedicated gaming machine loosely for PC gaming rigs. By this I mean a PC that won't really be used for office work or intensive photo editing, where gaming is the primary use. And that second quote is pretty self-explanatory.

Was the 8800 gt released when the consoles came out? If so, that paired with the e8400 or q6600 and 4gb ddr2 ram would be able to output graphics slightly better than its console counterparts for $600. I remember having that set up with a 9600gt (slightly worse than the 8800gt) and I was able to play games like mass effect and crysis with better graphics than my xbox.

rikimaru93