If you said that a $500 PC tower performed same as PS2 in 2001...

[QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] No TV runs at higher than 30fps...
Both Xbox360 and PS3 are locked at 30fps...youve again owned yourself...
cobrax25

What? HD TVs are pretty much just PC moniters bloated in cost, quality and size.

So then there are TVs that can do it....

Why can't you people give me real answers?

PC gaming is great but it is far tto complicated for most peoplecakeorrdeath

[QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] No TV runs at higher than 30fps...
Both Xbox360 and PS3 are locked at 30fps...youve again owned yourself...
-Spock-

What? HD TVs are pretty much just PC moniters bloated in cost, quality and size.

So then there are TVs that can do it....

Why can't you people give me real answers?

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="magus-21"] Yes it will. Again, you are REALLY underestimating PC horsepower.-Spock-

Of course. And I will continue to do so until I get solid proof that a mid-spec PC game can run a blockbuster console game to the maximum of its potential. I don't argue that high-spec PCs can do it, but definitely not mid-spec PCs on the market.

Forza 2 on the 360 runs at 60FPS, has AA and can most definitely not be run on a PC in the same way without a lot of framerate compromise... I think everything you've been saying is BS plain and simple...

[QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] No TV runs at higher than 30fps...
Both Xbox360 and PS3 are locked at 30fps...youve again owned yourself...
cobrax25

What? HD TVs are pretty much just PC moniters bloated in cost, quality and size.

So then there are TVs that can do it....

Why can't you people give me real answers?

I don't know if anyones told you, but 360 and ps3 don't broadcast to the tv...you hook them up to it. Thats broadcast standards you're posting there. Thats like saying an avi format only supports 15 frames a second so thats as fast as a computer monitor refreshes.

[QUOTE="cakeorrdeath"]PC gaming is great but it is far tto complicated for most peopledarklord888

I don't know if anyones told you, but 360 and ps3 don't broadcast to the tv...you hook them up to it. Thats broadcast standards you're posting there. Thats like saying an avi format only supports 15 frames a second so thats as fast as a computer monitor refreshes.cobrax25

No, TVs are specificlly designed to max out at 30 FPS, to get optimal performance.

[QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] No TV runs at higher than 30fps...
Both Xbox360 and PS3 are locked at 30fps...youve again owned yourself...
-Spock-

What? HD TVs are pretty much just PC moniters bloated in cost, quality and size.

So then there are TVs that can do it....

Why can't you people give me real answers?

[QUOTE="darklord888"][QUOTE="cakeorrdeath"]PC gaming is great but it is far tto complicated for most peoplenytrospawn

[QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] No TV runs at higher than 30fps...
Both Xbox360 and PS3 are locked at 30fps...youve again owned yourself...
cobrax25

What? HD TVs are pretty much just PC moniters bloated in cost, quality and size.

So then there are TVs that can do it....

Why can't you people give me real answers?

[QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] No TV runs at higher than 30fps...
Both Xbox360 and PS3 are locked at 30fps...youve again owned yourself...
magus-21

What? HD TVs are pretty much just PC moniters bloated in cost, quality and size.

So then there are TVs that can do it....

Why can't you people give me real answers?

[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] No TV runs at higher than 30fps...
Both Xbox360 and PS3 are locked at 30fps...youve again owned yourself...
cobrax25

What? HD TVs are pretty much just PC moniters bloated in cost, quality and size.

So then there are TVs that can do it....

Why can't you people give me real answers?

[QUOTE="Hammerofjustice"]xbox 360 runs COD2 @ a steady 60fps 720p 4xAA.

/thread
True_Gamer_

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"][QUOTE="Hammerofjustice"]xbox 360 runs COD2 @ a steady 60fps 720p 4xAA.

/thread
acekall

All 360 games have AA...you can have aa and still see jaggies. Thats why theres different levels of aa.

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"][QUOTE="Hammerofjustice"]xbox 360 runs COD2 @ a steady 60fps 720p 4xAA.

/thread
acekall

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-039-BG w00t w00t w000000000000t someone link plz :)

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-039-BG w00t w00t w000000000000t someone link plz :)

Mrkebab

^^ Yup ordering one 2morrow if they are not sold out :D

I agree to some extent in that PC with medium settings will give you about what you get on consoles(provided you are using a fairly new setrup) when it comes to textures and shaders because thats what PC cards excel at but I disagree in a way because if developers code well you can get better results when it comes to poly counts and stable framerates on consoles which is why you get a game like Gears which was coded specifically for the xbox 360 that looks better than most PC games if not all PC games at the m,oment. If a game shares a platform with the pc it will always look better than the console counterparts but console exvlusive when coded right can look better than even games on high end rigs.Citan_Uzuki

[QUOTE="acekall"][QUOTE="True_Gamer_"][QUOTE="Hammerofjustice"]xbox 360 runs COD2 @ a steady 60fps 720p 4xAA.

/thread
True_Gamer_

60Hz=60 cycles per second, which means that if a tv refreshes its screen 60 times a second, that it CAN display 60 frames per second. A screen refresh and a "frame" are the exact same thing.

are you, like, 13 years old by any chance?

I wonder how long it will take for me to have to upgrade my PC again for it to be considered high end. 2 years? Versus 5-10 years a console will give you...Truth-slayer

[QUOTE="Truth-slayer"]I wonder how long it will take for me to have to upgrade my PC again for it to be considered high end. 2 years? Versus 5-10 years a console will give you...Ontain

I wonder how long it will take for me to have to upgrade my PC again for it to be considered high end. 2 years? Versus 5-10 years a console will give you...Truth-slayer

cobrax25.. stop making us PC gamers look ignorant. :lol:  HDTV's can run 60fps, but many console games are locked to 30 to prevent tearing.

A medium PC theorically can play a xbox360 or ps3 game on the same or better settings, the problem is being lucky enough to get a setup where there arent some weird bugs or bad drivers or unbalanced parts (say... a dude with a e6400 and a 7600gt) or whatever that would cut down on the maximum performance.

Although i am a hermit i must say one thing. Console games can run at 60FPS, a lot of the X360 titles are yes, locked at 30FPS, but there are X360 games which run at 60FPS, their is no arguing with that fact, the 1080P may run Television Broadcasts at 30FPS, because they are usually what, set to broadcast at 25FPS to 30FPS. As for the CoD2 comment, yeah the X360 version runs it at 1280x720 at 60FPS, but have you ever compared the 2 versions side by side? If you have, you will know that the X360 version looks horrible in comparison, albeit may not have been the most fair comparison, since i was running the game at 1680x1050, 4XAA and all that stuff, and my TV was running it at X360 levels (Sharp Aquos RX6M 37")Tribeskhas

Thats exactly what im talking about...

Never before in gaming history the consoles have been painfully outperformed by a competitevly priced PC tower...never.

[QUOTE="Spartan070"][QUOTE="Truth-slayer"]I wonder how long it will take for me to have to upgrade my PC again for it to be considered high end. 2 years? Versus 5-10 years a console will give you...cakeorrdeath

I prefer consoles cause they have the games that are better suited in my tastes. PC runs amok with Shooters and RTSes.... that's all the majority of games... frankly... I've yet to see the quality of games on the consoles on PC. I'm refering to diversity and also the fact that it's got exclusives I care more for. yoshi_64

[QUOTE="Hammerofjustice"]
Try running LAIR @ 1080p on that PC, or even Gears of war. it will lag alot.
True_Gamer_

Umm... unless the PC market has changed radically, 1080p IS a rather high resolution. Renderingwise, 1080p is slightly more system intensive than 1600x1200, having to render 8% more pixels per frame. While that's not the highest resolution ever, and many games do run at that resolution, I wouldn't call it medium. 1024x768 or 1280x1024 would be medium resoultions.

1080p >1600 x 1200

 720p > 1024 x 768 

[QUOTE="yoshi_64"]I prefer consoles cause they have the games that are better suited in my tastes. PC runs amok with Shooters and RTSes.... that's all the majority of games... frankly... I've yet to see the quality of games on the consoles on PC. I'm refering to diversity and also the fact that it's got exclusives I care more for. baddog121390

You're forgetting the main expensive of PC gaming is the frequent necessary upgrades to stay current with modern games. A gaming PC needs to be upgraded about every 1.5 years. The next gen consoles will last for 6-7 years depending on how long you want to keep it. So a PC over a 5-7 year period will probably cost you $3000 at least.CaptainCrazy

[QUOTE="baddog121390"][QUOTE="yoshi_64"]I prefer consoles cause they have the games that are better suited in my tastes. PC runs amok with Shooters and RTSes.... that's all the majority of games... frankly... I've yet to see the quality of games on the consoles on PC. I'm refering to diversity and also the fact that it's got exclusives I care more for. yoshi_64

Who won racing GOTY? And the occasional RPG game? Gothic 3? Neverwinter Nights 2? This year we have Hellgate: London (ex-Blizzard devs), Dragon Age (Bioware), and The Witcher. We get simulation games such as Silent Hunter, Spore, and Flight Simulator. Then there's all the adventure games. PC also gets tonnes of 2d fighters (Halo Zero anyone?). These games are just as ever good as Mario, Zelda, Meta Gear etc. - they just aren't in the mainstream.baddog121390

Simulation games do nothing for me, and frankly I don't care about them at all. So yeah I admit PC has that, but I don't care for that genre at all frankly. I don't play games for simulation, I play to lose myself. 2D fighters on the Keyboard are lame, and the only way to truely enjoy any fighting genre on the PC is through a gamepad, which frankly adds more to the costs. (Though I can of course use my 360 controller for the PC, but it's D-pad is nothing to the PS controller. Which again, with something like a simulation game, it requires another add-on to fully enjoy, because a digital keyboard does not work for it. IME (In my experience)

[QUOTE="Truth-slayer"]I wonder how long it will take for me to have to upgrade my PC again for it to be considered high end. 2 years? Versus 5-10 years a console will give you...magus-21

You're forgetting the main expensive of PC gaming is the frequent necessary upgrades to stay current with modern games. A gaming PC needs to be upgraded about every 1.5 years. The next gen consoles will last for 6-7 years depending on how long you want to keep it. So a PC over a 5-7 year period will probably cost you $3000 at least.CaptainCrazy

Console > PC and here is why

Perfect Example : Stalker.  Horrid Bug ridden piece of trash thats not even playable due to crashs and bugs ( and yes that includes turning of the dynamic lighting ) I can't even continue in the game cause it crash's if I go in to a certain area for more than 4 mins, but everywhere else the game is fine :roll:  I never have to experience this kinda crap with my console period.  ( by the way fun game, if it was bug free )

And its not like stalker is the only game to have these kinda bugs.  PC games = buggy and lame and it takes about 2 months before they even become playable after about 1-2 patchs, and in some cases (BF2 :lol: ) it take take like a year !  THe lack of quality in PC gaming is horrendous, and in the case of a game like stalker its pathetic that people with 8800gts and X's can't run this game at full settings with dynamic lighting due to the bugs.  

O and I love how hermits ALL THE TIME try to say Crysis is graphically better than anything on consoles ( and it is at full settings in DX10 ) but yet they always argue that they run everything on lowest settings to medium settings to try and nullify the price issue of PC's.   :roll:  Either admit that PC's look better when you spend about $1500.00 on a system or admit that consoles look better when you play stuff at low to medium settings on a pc.

/thread

The PS2 wasn't all that powerful and would not have been able to handle games like Morrowind or Medal of Honor: Allied Assault. Even a Duron 800 Mhz, 256 MB SDRAM and a Ge Force 2 would outperform it. The difference is developers didn't make games for low level PC hardware for long or optimise games for it like they did with the PS2. It will be the same this generation. Even high end PCs bought today won't run graphic intensive games as they are meant to be run two years from now, while the PS3 will run any game made for it how it's meant to run for the next 5 years or more.

Nah, I doubt It can run at 'Medium' specs and look as good as GeOW. Tri-core CPU clocked at 3.2Ghz and a 512MB GPU clocked at 700MHZ(8800GTS) all for gaming! And then you have PC's which multitask, dedicted resources to other things. Logically you would have to run specs at a higher level than consoles to maintain equal performance, not saying that a PC wont out perform consoles though. ..and rendered in 1080p is different than displaying 1080p regardless if PC gamers have been playing in 2000x1500 resolution before the Hi-Def standard.Pro_wrestler

Yeah, the only problem is that single core Pentium 4 outperforms your tri-core 3.2GHz CPU.

No, you can not compare 8800 GTS with Xenon or whatever it's called because Xenon is one realm, 8800 GTS is the other. In other words, Xenon is a pure pile of crap compared with 8800 GTS.

Yeah, rendering a game in 1080p is definitely different, probably because there's no console game made for that resolution (yet).

Let's just put it in this way. No console outperforms mainstream or high end PC configuration in terms of hardware. Not in this world, realm, time... never. Single-core Athlon64/Pentium4 outperforms IBM tri-core powerpc/eight-core cell... anytime, anywhere. Dual-core Athlon64/Core2 eats named console CPUs for breakfast and leaves some for dinner. Quad-core... well, that would be just sad.

Note: PlayStation 3 is not a supercomputer. Supercomputer is a farm of many, many, many computer clusters which are used to perform many, many, many complicated tasks...