consoles get 600p while pc's get 1900x1200+

[QUOTE="UserFrenly_Noob"]how do you noobs live with thisdk_2007

Main purpose of high resolution is to read text. It doesnt matter much for games and movies.

Ever wondered about the resolution of a movie in cinema? All agree that cinema graphics are the most engrossing.

There still using movie tapes that's why!

[QUOTE="WhySoCry"][QUOTE="Mad_Rhetoric"]

the resolution also takes it toll on framerate

Polaris_choice

yeah, for consoles. On games for PC (with the exception of crysis) most games run smoothly up to 2560x1600. Where a 8800GTX can run oblivion maxed 2560x1600 better then the X360 or PS3 @ 1280x720.

Um most graphically impressive games on pc wont dream of running 2560x1600 resoulution at a reasonable framerate . Look at Bioshock, Crysis and other big name titles .

Bioshock runs pretty well... while crysis is in another categorie.

[QUOTE="dk_2007"]

[QUOTE="UserFrenly_Noob"]how do you noobs live with thisBebi_vegeta

Main purpose of high resolution is to read text. It doesnt matter much for games and movies.

Ever wondered about the resolution of a movie in cinema? All agree that cinema graphics are the most engrossing.

There still using movie tapes that's why!

right.

Digital cinemas are being planned though.

I've been exclusively playing PC for the past 6 years and now I'm going back to console. I'd normally defend a moron like you but I'm not going to bother being biased anymore. Consoles are so much better for gaming, period. The only thing I see PC winning in is MMORPG's, FPS and RTS. Anything else is just plain funner and better on a console. Give it up.mrxdemix

Your point is not valid, since it's a matter of opinion... Unless you can tell me why it's better?

1080p 52" Flatscreen LCD + Surround Sound + comfortable couch + Place enough room for split-screen co-op on one screen for live > Pc monitors with DEAD PIXELS!!!!Adrian_Cloud

What? I play on a 42" 1080p monitor, I also have a HTPC hooked up to my theater room with a 100" projector screen. What's your point?

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"]1080p 52" Flatscreen LCD + Surround Sound + comfortable couch + Place enough room for split-screen co-op on one screen for live > Pc monitors with DEAD PIXELS!!!!WhySoCry

What? I play on a 42" 1080p monitor, I also have a HTPC hooked up to my theater room with a 100" projector screen. What's your point?

:| DAYUMN, my point is that i hate dead pixels. And if your using a projetor thats the same thing consoles use, defeating the TC's point that Monitors+pc games> console games+ t.vs.

I've got to see your monitor, what brand?

[QUOTE="WhySoCry"]

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"]1080p 52" Flatscreen LCD + Surround Sound + comfortable couch + Place enough room for split-screen co-op on one screen for live > Pc monitors with DEAD PIXELS!!!!Adrian_Cloud

What? I play on a 42" 1080p monitor, I also have a HTPC hooked up to my theater room with a 100" projector screen. What's your point?

:| DAYUMN, my point is that i hate dead pixels. And if your using a projetor thats the same thing consoles use, defeating the TC's point that Monitors+pc games> console games+ t.vs.

I've got to see your monitor, what brand?

My monitor? Westinghouse. Its the current one I use for my monitor. I have a 52" sharp in my family room also.

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"][QUOTE="WhySoCry"]

[QUOTE="Adrian_Cloud"]1080p 52" Flatscreen LCD + Surround Sound + comfortable couch + Place enough room for split-screen co-op on one screen for live > Pc monitors with DEAD PIXELS!!!!WhySoCry

What? I play on a 42" 1080p monitor, I also have a HTPC hooked up to my theater room with a 100" projector screen. What's your point?

:| DAYUMN, my point is that i hate dead pixels. And if your using a projetor thats the same thing consoles use, defeating the TC's point that Monitors+pc games> console games+ t.vs.

I've got to see your monitor, what brand?

My monitor? Westinghouse. Its the current one I use for my monitor. I have a 52" sharp in my family room also.

I'm impressed.

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

Vorserider2

And you fail because i can plug my pc to the tv.

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

Vorserider2

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

[QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

cobrax75

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

Yes it can. When you are closer up, you notice the details, but the image becomes grainy.

When you are further away, it looks better. Keep in mind you are sitting awfully close to the monitor, whereas a TV you are sitting further away. It looks better as you sit farther away.

Okay, you can plug it in to your TV. But is your TV 1900x1200? Didn't think so. Plus, an independent monitor for PC outclasses a TV for PC games.

Stop.

[QUOTE="cobrax75"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

Vorserider2

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

Yes it can. When you are closer up, you notice the details, but the image becomes grainy.

When you are further away, it looks better. Keep in mind you are sitting awfully close to the monitor, whereas a TV you are sitting further away. It looks better as you sit farther away.

Okay, you can plug it in to your TV. But is your TV 1900x1200? Didn't think so. Plus, an independent monitor for PC outclasses a TV for PC games.

Stop.

the image is grainy on a TV...because the resolution is a lot lower....the image isnt grainy at 1900 by 1200 where the resolution is a lot higher.

My 360 is doing 1024x768 right now. So, I don't know what this 600p you're talking about is.rhaigun

[QUOTE="Guitartod"]i never knew that resolution made a better game.........HuusAsking

actually it could, with the processor, it does iwth movies, u can get ahd dvd player in a laptop i remember with a gma 900 (can only do 720p really) and the processor handles the h dvd movies, even tho it uses alot of the battery and cpu is used soley for that so anything else runs slower then stopped. but i don't know why you would want that laptop..but a 400 dollar one could. heck they can with wow, atm my old 400 rig is running wow maxed at 1800x1680 i think with a 6800 ultra in it.

[QUOTE="cobrax75"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

Vorserider2

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

Yes it can. When you are closer up, you notice the details, but the image becomes grainy.

When you are further away, it looks better. Keep in mind you are sitting awfully close to the monitor, whereas a TV you are sitting further away. It looks better as you sit farther away.

Okay, you can plug it in to your TV. But is your TV 1900x1200? Didn't think so. Plus, an independent monitor for PC outclasses a TV for PC games.

Stop.

It only looks grainy when you hook it up to a TV because of pixel pitch. For PC monitors, a smaller monitor = more sharp.

[QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

Bebi_vegeta

And you fail because i can plug my pc to the tv.

Console fanboys dont know that, they think there is some magical force stopping you from plugging you computer into the VGA input on the back of your LCD TV, or of course connecting you PC to a TV through HDMI....

how do you noobs live with thisUserFrenly_Noob

I like my 1080p plasma better than my monitor...

And I like my consoles better than my PC.

[QUOTE="cobrax75"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

Vorserider2

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

Yes it can. When you are closer up, you notice the details, but the image becomes grainy.

When you are further away, it looks better. Keep in mind you are sitting awfully close to the monitor, whereas a TV you are sitting further away. It looks better as you sit farther away.

Okay, you can plug it in to your TV. But is your TV 1900x1200? Didn't think so. Plus, an independent monitor for PC outclasses a TV for PC games.

Stop.

Where does it say PC gamers need to sit up close to a monitor?? and even if for some reason you are forced to sit close you can play far better looking games because PC hardware is far more powerful than console hardware, play CoD4 max on PC sitting up close to a monitor and compare it to the console version upscaled to 720p and sitting far away and the PC version will clearly look better. There is no argument on this matter, PC is in EVERY way graphically superior to consoles.

[QUOTE="UserFrenly_Noob"]how do you noobs live with thisSeanBond

I like my 1080p plasma better than my monitor...

And I like my consoles better than my PC.

There is a simple solution to this problem, plug your PC into the TV....

[QUOTE="Vorserider2"][QUOTE="cobrax75"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

michael098

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

Yes it can. When you are closer up, you notice the details, but the image becomes grainy.

When you are further away, it looks better. Keep in mind you are sitting awfully close to the monitor, whereas a TV you are sitting further away. It looks better as you sit farther away.

Okay, you can plug it in to your TV. But is your TV 1900x1200? Didn't think so. Plus, an independent monitor for PC outclasses a TV for PC games.

Stop.

Where does it say PC gamers need to sit up close to a monitor?? and even if for some reason you are forced to sit close you can play far better looking games because PC hardware is far more powerful than console hardware, play CoD4 max on PC sitting up close to a monitor and compare it to the console version upscaled to 720p and sitting far away and the PC version will clearly look better. There is no argument on this matter, PC is in EVERY way graphically superior to consoles.

You mean, when you have a high-end PC. Because if you don't, then you're not running games better than the 360/PS3. I think the real question is, why are hermits so intimidated by console gamers that they continuously feel the need to flaunt graphical prowess/resolution? If console gamers were that worried about it, they'd all be playing Crysis on a $10,000 Alienware PC (or at least something with pretty potent hardware).

The only reason consoles can't really do 1900x1200 or similar crazy resolutions like that is simple: lack of memory.

Give a console 512MB or 1GB of video RAM (in addition to whatever system RAM it may have) and it'll be able to do 1920x1080, no problem.

Some 360 and PS3 games do 1920x1080 already as it is, Virtua Tennis 3 on PS3/360, for example.

[QUOTE="michael098"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"][QUOTE="cobrax75"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

SeanBond

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

Yes it can. When you are closer up, you notice the details, but the image becomes grainy.

When you are further away, it looks better. Keep in mind you are sitting awfully close to the monitor, whereas a TV you are sitting further away. It looks better as you sit farther away.

Okay, you can plug it in to your TV. But is your TV 1900x1200? Didn't think so. Plus, an independent monitor for PC outclasses a TV for PC games.

Stop.

Where does it say PC gamers need to sit up close to a monitor?? and even if for some reason you are forced to sit close you can play far better looking games because PC hardware is far more powerful than console hardware, play CoD4 max on PC sitting up close to a monitor and compare it to the console version upscaled to 720p and sitting far away and the PC version will clearly look better. There is no argument on this matter, PC is in EVERY way graphically superior to consoles.

You mean, when you have a high-end PC. Because if you don't, then you're not running games better than the 360/PS3. I think the real question is, why are hermits so intimidated by console gamers that they continuously feel the need to flaunt graphical prowess/resolution? If console gamers were that worried about it, they'd all be playing Crysis on a $10,000 Alienware PC (or at least something with pretty potent hardware).

Consoles are last generation PC hardware... so please stop it already, crysis is ahead of it's time.

The only reason consoles can't really do 1900x1200 or similar crazy resolutions like that is simple: lack of memory.

Give a console 512MB or 1GB of video RAM (in addition to whatever system RAM it may have) and it'll be able to do 1920x1080, no problem.

Some 360 and PS3 games do 1920x1080 already as it is, Virtua Tennis 3 on PS3/360, for example.

UnnDunn

Once they do native resolution get back to me.

[QUOTE="michael098"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"][QUOTE="cobrax75"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

SeanBond

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

Yes it can. When you are closer up, you notice the details, but the image becomes grainy.

When you are further away, it looks better. Keep in mind you are sitting awfully close to the monitor, whereas a TV you are sitting further away. It looks better as you sit farther away.

Okay, you can plug it in to your TV. But is your TV 1900x1200? Didn't think so. Plus, an independent monitor for PC outclasses a TV for PC games.

Stop.

Where does it say PC gamers need to sit up close to a monitor?? and even if for some reason you are forced to sit close you can play far better looking games because PC hardware is far more powerful than console hardware, play CoD4 max on PC sitting up close to a monitor and compare it to the console version upscaled to 720p and sitting far away and the PC version will clearly look better. There is no argument on this matter, PC is in EVERY way graphically superior to consoles.

You mean, when you have a high-end PC. Because if you don't, then you're not running games better than the 360/PS3. I think the real question is, why are hermits so intimidated by console gamers that they continuously feel the need to flaunt graphical prowess/resolution? If console gamers were that worried about it, they'd all be playing Crysis on a $10,000 Alienware PC (or at least something with pretty potent hardware).

Well i wouldn't be talking about some crap old PC would I? Just like you wouldn't be talking about the PS1, most people that are interested in PC gaming can build a good gaming PC for little over $1000, you don't need to spend any-were near $10,000.

[QUOTE="SeanBond"]

[QUOTE="UserFrenly_Noob"]how do you noobs live with thismichael098

I like my 1080p plasma better than my monitor...

And I like my consoles better than my PC.

There is a simple solution to this problem, plug your PC into the TV....

[QUOTE="michael098"][QUOTE="SeanBond"]

[QUOTE="UserFrenly_Noob"]how do you noobs live with thiskillab2oo5

I like my 1080p plasma better than my monitor...

And I like my consoles better than my PC.

There is a simple solution to this problem, plug your PC into the TV....

omg noob ever heard of font DPI scaling???

[QUOTE="michael098"][QUOTE="SeanBond"]

[QUOTE="UserFrenly_Noob"]how do you noobs live with thiskillab2oo5

I like my 1080p plasma better than my monitor...

And I like my consoles better than my PC.

There is a simple solution to this problem, plug your PC into the TV....

Looks like you have no PC "skills" to change the font text?

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

The only reason consoles can't really do 1900x1200 or similar crazy resolutions like that is simple: lack of memory.

Give a console 512MB or 1GB of video RAM (in addition to whatever system RAM it may have) and it'll be able to do 1920x1080, no problem.

Some 360 and PS3 games do 1920x1080 already as it is, Virtua Tennis 3 on PS3/360, for example.

Bebi_vegeta

Once they do native resolution get back to me.

[QUOTE="michael098"][QUOTE="SeanBond"]

[QUOTE="UserFrenly_Noob"]how do you noobs live with thiskillab2oo5

I like my 1080p plasma better than my monitor...

And I like my consoles better than my PC.

There is a simple solution to this problem, plug your PC into the TV....

I have, alot.....and no....

[QUOTE="killab2oo5"][QUOTE="michael098"][QUOTE="SeanBond"]

[QUOTE="UserFrenly_Noob"]how do you noobs live with thisWARxSnake

I like my 1080p plasma better than my monitor...

And I like my consoles better than my PC.

There is a simple solution to this problem, plug your PC into the TV....

omg noob ever heard of font DPI scaling???

[QUOTE="cobrax75"][QUOTE="Vorserider2"]

Your thread fails, because you overlook tons of details:

1.COD4 was an exception. While it may run at 600p, it gets upscaled up to 1080p. It's not true 1080p Native, but it still look amazing.

2.A computer monitor may display 1900x1200, but you are sitting about 1 foot from the monitor. While I'm sitting 15-18 feet from my 1920x1080p Sony SXRD XBR2 TV, you can't tell the difference. In fact, in most cases, it looks better.

FAIL.

Vorserider2

#2 is not true at all...its physiclly impossible for it to look better when the monitor physicly displays more pixels....

Yes it can. When you are closer up, you notice the details, but the image becomes grainy.

When you are further away, it looks better. Keep in mind you are sitting awfully close to the monitor, whereas a TV you are sitting further away. It looks better as you sit farther away.

Okay, you can plug it in to your TV. But is your TV 1900x1200? Didn't think so. Plus, an independent monitor for PC outclasses a TV for PC games.

Stop.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

The only reason consoles can't really do 1900x1200 or similar crazy resolutions like that is simple: lack of memory.

Give a console 512MB or 1GB of video RAM (in addition to whatever system RAM it may have) and it'll be able to do 1920x1080, no problem.

Some 360 and PS3 games do 1920x1080 already as it is, Virtua Tennis 3 on PS3/360, for example.

UnnDunn

Once they do native resolution get back to me.

Oh yes... true.

But how many games?

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

The only reason consoles can't really do 1900x1200 or similar crazy resolutions like that is simple: lack of memory.

Give a console 512MB or 1GB of video RAM (in addition to whatever system RAM it may have) and it'll be able to do 1920x1080, no problem.

Some 360 and PS3 games do 1920x1080 already as it is, Virtua Tennis 3 on PS3/360, for example.

UnnDunn

Once they do native resolution get back to me.

yeah and i'm trying to figure out when consoles will be able to display 2560 X 1600, which a single 8800GTX can do already.

I also can't wait for february for the release of Nvidia's next heavywieght top of the line card.

yeah and i'm trying to figure out when consoles will be able to display 2560 X 1600, which a single 8800GTX can do already.

I also can't wait for february for the release of Nvidia's next heavywieght top of the line card.

WARxSnake

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"][QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="UnnDunn"]

The only reason consoles can't really do 1900x1200 or similar crazy resolutions like that is simple: lack of memory.

Give a console 512MB or 1GB of video RAM (in addition to whatever system RAM it may have) and it'll be able to do 1920x1080, no problem.

Some 360 and PS3 games do 1920x1080 already as it is, Virtua Tennis 3 on PS3/360, for example.

Bebi_vegeta

Once they do native resolution get back to me.

Oh yes... true.

But how many games?

Good point. We all know that a game running in 1920x1080 is automatically more fun to play.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="UnnDunn"][QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Once they do native resolution get back to me.

SeanBond

Oh yes... true.

But how many games?

Good point. We all know that a game running in 1920x1080 is automatically more fun to play.

Well yes it is a good point since this is the whole argument of the thread.... did you read the title?

Well yes it is a good point since this is the whole argument of the thread.... did you read the title?

Bebi_vegeta

Just because it's the whole argument of the thread doesn't make it any less silly...Or do you not understand that?

[QUOTE="WARxSnake"]

yeah and i'm trying to figure out when consoles will be able to display 2560 X 1600, which a single 8800GTX can do already.

I also can't wait for february for the release of Nvidia's next heavywieght top of the line card.

UnnDunn

But monitors can;)

[QUOTE="UnnDunn"][QUOTE="WARxSnake"]

yeah and i'm trying to figure out when consoles will be able to display 2560 X 1600, which a single 8800GTX can do already.

I also can't wait for february for the release of Nvidia's next heavywieght top of the line card.

michael098

But monitors can;)

yep

http://www.behardware.com/articles/609-4/the-dell-3007wfp-30-inch.html

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Well yes it is a good point since this is the whole argument of the thread.... did you read the title?

SeanBond

Just because it's the whole argument of the thread doesn't make it any less silly...Or do you not understand that?

Silly? Where the heck were we talking about "fun"... we're talking about resolution of games. Let's compare apples with apples... not oranges with apples.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Well yes it is a good point since this is the whole argument of the thread.... did you read the title?

SeanBond

Just because it's the whole argument of the thread doesn't make it any less silly...Or do you not understand that?

Well it got your attention.

Cuz I don't care about those numbersBubbyJello

then why are you here