Lesser gap in graphics between PC and Consoles this gen compared to last?

Get used to it because it's only going to look smaller and smaller. In terms of hardware the gap is still huge, but the things that are increasing in quality in games are small details rather than gigantic things like before

The technological gap is the same, it's just that few devs make big budgeted action games exclusively for PC these days. Look at ArmA III, it;s bassicaly generation ahead of anything modern consoles can run.

The gap is there, it;s just mostly limited to strategy games and simulators, games that are rare and not popular on consoles.

One more thing..FEAR was this gen bassicaly. It's funny, because thanks to it, it was the first generation I can remember when consoles didn't squash PC graphics like a bug on release day. FEAR was comparable to what 360 had to offer on launch.

Get used to it because it's only going to look smaller and smaller. In terms of hardware the gap is still huge, but the things that are increasing in quality in games are small details rather than gigantic things like before

bobbetybob

Yes devs want money, publishers want money, they hire PR guys to try and convince you they care but bottom line is they don't. Its always been about money or gaining status in the industry which inevitably means they can charge more money from publishers.JohnF111

[QUOTE="bobbetybob"]

Get used to it because it's only going to look smaller and smaller. In terms of hardware the gap is still huge, but the things that are increasing in quality in games are small details rather than gigantic things like before

deadlyabdus123

[QUOTE="deadlyabdus123"][QUOTE="bobbetybob"]

Get used to it because it's only going to look smaller and smaller. In terms of hardware the gap is still huge, but the things that are increasing in quality in games are small details rather than gigantic things like before

bobbetybob

The 360 came out in 2006, the PS3 in 2007. Thats around 5 years ago, a long time in hardware terms.

Here is the thing though.. I'll use Oblivion as a reference, being I have personal experiance with the game when it was released.

When Obivion was released on the 360 and PC, (March of 2006) it was a very good looking game at the time. The PC version was capable of looking somewhat better then the 360 version, but only if you had the very latest GPU, and at least 2gig of ram or more. Anything less, and the 360 version would look and perform better. I know this as fact, because I upgraded my PC at the time, and bought a 6800 just to run Oblivion, and the game underpreformed the Xbox version on my set-up.

At the time, the top end GPU was the Nvidia 7800, it was released in Febuary of 2006, and was a high priced, high end GPU when Oblivion came out. $200-$250 for a top end card. If you had that card, and the ram and CPU, you had the "superior" version of Oblivion.

Fast forward to today....

Oblivion is far, far from the best looking game on the 360. Many games look better, and play smoother. Dedicated hardware is a big advantage consoles have, it allows them to produce more with less raw power. Think of it like a lightweight Indycar with 600hp being able to outrun a heavy NASCAR stock car, even though the stock car can produce close to 900hp.

If you are a PC gamer, if you had upgraded in 2006 to the latest hardware, and were playing ther best version of Oblivion, today you have to have upgraded at least once since then to be playing current PC games at the high end setting you hear about all the time on the SW forums. A PC running 2gigs of ram with a 7800gt is not going to play games like Crysis, The Witcher 2, or even Dragon Age 2 with any kind of ease. The graphics, framerates, effects, and fidelity are all going to be lacking. You probably would have had to upgrade the CPU as well, as most people were not running multicore CPU's in early 2006. I know this for a fact, as I am still running the same setup I had back then, and there are few if any recent PC games my PC can even run, much less run at a level comparable to the consoles.

PC hardware has moved a generation ahead, because its necessary. PC's, even PC's built with gaming in mind, are not dedicated gaming platforms. They don't use assets the same way, and require more power to run the same thing. It's the nature of the way things work in real real world computing applications.

A high end current gen PC is capable of running the same games consoles play at higher resolutions, and higher framerates. But the difference is not nearly as great as the disparity in raw processing power required to acheive it.

The gap is huge, bigger than ever before imo.

Sure the games are much more console oriented but the resolution is doubled, so is the fps and we get AA/AF + a bunch of customization through cfgs and brute forcing.

I'm taking a break from Shogun II ,which I can play nearly maxed on decent FPS. The gap is HUGE.

The small gap is in software, not hardware.

The performance is there for titles that would blow consoles away, which isn't unreasonable; given consoles have 2005 hardware and it is 2011 now. But this generation has seen a startling, and quite frankly unsustainable, increase in game development costs.

So 3rd party developers don't really make high end exclusives any more, on any platform (yes, console as well). So while the performance is there to show a significant gap between PC and console, the funding isn't.

So most of the time these days, the gap between console and PC is in performance, rather than in asset and effect quality. Which leads a fair few console gamers into believing PC is less capable than PC gamers claim. As if console optimized games are going to demonstrate PC capability; outside of higher resolutions and such.

NOPE

gap is way bigger this gen due to Crysis alone

gap was much smaller last gen, Doom 3/ Half life 2/Farcry were all on Xbox

I'm taking a break from Shogun II ,which I can play nearly maxed on decent FPS. The gap is HUGE.

GeneralShowzer

Shogun 2 in DX11 maxed out looks very nice

very well optimized aswell

At the time, the top end GPU was the Nvidia 7800, it was released in Febuary of 2006, and was a high priced, high end GPU when Oblivion came out. $200-$250 for a top end card.evilross

[QUOTE="evilross"]At the time, the top end GPU was the Nvidia 7800, it was released in Febuary of 2006, and was a high priced, high end GPU when Oblivion came out. $200-$250 for a top end card.LongZhiZi

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"][QUOTE="evilross"]At the time, the top end GPU was the Nvidia 7800, it was released in Febuary of 2006, and was a high priced, high end GPU when Oblivion came out. $200-$250 for a top end card.osan0

This is true. The 7800 card was first released in June 2005, a few months before the 360. The 7800GS was in Feb. 2006. Oblivion released in March of 2006.

I know, I was there, and I did a hardware upgrade during that period. If you were not running a 7800 series card, the 360 version of Oblivion looked and preformed better then the PC version. If you did have a good CPU, plenty of RAM and a 7800 the PC version was a bit crisper, with better AA. Not much of a difference at all, as the 360 was very high end in 2005/early 2006 when it was released.

The 8800 first came out in November of 2006, around the same time as the PS3. There was no PC hardware that was substantially superior to the 360 until the end of 2006, and even then when running the 8800 series card, the preformace was similar due to the unoptimised nature of the way PC hardware runs.

And besides the point, if your running either of those cards now, your not even close to running high end PC games the way they are glorified to look and preform with current hardware.

Nope just look at the PC version of BF compared to the console version. It blows it out the water.

[QUOTE="osan0"][QUOTE="LongZhiZi"] Nonsense. The 8800 series came out just before the 360 launch, which kicked the crap out of the 360 in terms of power.evilross

This is true. The 7800 card was first released in June 2005, a few months before the 360. The 7800GS was in Feb. 2006. Oblivion released in March of 2006.

I know, I was there, and I did a hardware upgrade during that period. If you were not running a 7800 series card, the 360 version of Oblivion looked and preformed better then the PC version. If you did have a good CPU, plenty of RAM and a 7800 the PC version was a bit crisper, with better AA. Not much of a difference at all, as the 360 was very high end in 2005/early 2006 when it was released.

The 8800 first came out in November of 2006, around the same time as the PS3. There was no PC hardware that was substantially superior to the 360 until the end of 2006, and even then when running the 8800 series card, the preformace was similar due to the unoptimised nature of the way PC hardware runs.

And besides the point, if your running either of those cards now, your not even close to running high end PC games the way they are glorified to look and preform with current hardware.

I guess. Honestly I don't care enough to really say.

Its about the same I think....And Fear and BF2 were last gen were they not, both came out before the 360. But today the consoles are starting to show their age as they have last far longer than we are used to.

The 360 came out in 2006, the PS3 in 2007. Thats around 5 years ago, a long time in hardware terms.

Here is the thing though.. I'll use Oblivion as a reference, being I have personal experiance with the game when it was released.

When Obivion was released on the 360 and PC, (March of 2006) it was a very good looking game at the time. The PC version was capable of looking somewhat better then the 360 version, but only if you had the very latest GPU, and at least 2gig of ram or more. Anything less, and the 360 version would look and perform better. I know this as fact, because I upgraded my PC at the time, and bought a 6800 just to run Oblivion, and the game underpreformed the Xbox version on my set-up.

evilross

i'm just curious at what resolution you were running oblvion on the pc with your 6800 because the 360 version was running at 1024x600 only

[QUOTE="evilross"]

The 360 came out in 2006, the PS3 in 2007. Thats around 5 years ago, a long time in hardware terms.

Here is the thing though.. I'll use Oblivion as a reference, being I have personal experiance with the game when it was released.

When Obivion was released on the 360 and PC, (March of 2006) it was a very good looking game at the time. The PC version was capable of looking somewhat better then the 360 version, but only if you had the very latest GPU, and at least 2gig of ram or more. Anything less, and the 360 version would look and perform better. I know this as fact, because I upgraded my PC at the time, and bought a 6800 just to run Oblivion, and the game underpreformed the Xbox version on my set-up.

cyanblues

i'm just curious at what resolution you were running oblvion on the pc with your 6800 because the 360 version was running at 1024x600 only

Didn't reprint the charts, but they look about right. The set up was an AMD 3700+ with 1.5 gig ram and a 6800gt.

At 1024 x 768 the game ran ok in dungeons, but was unplayable outside. And anymore then one active enemy showed up on screen it the game pretty much slowed to a crawl.

To make it playable I was running it at 800x600.

The 360 version played much better, and looked slightly better then my PC version did in March of 2006.

The only point was that at the very start of this console gen, you had to have a very top of the line PC to get equal preformance. The 7800 came out at the same time as the 360. A year later the 8800 was availble, and for the first time you could out-preform the 360/PS3, provided you had the CPU and RAM as well.

And now for current games, the 7800 and 8800 won't cut it. PC hardware moves much faster then console hardware, but sys reqs for the games do as well. The same PC setup I used for Oblivion won't even run Dragon Age 2.

You can't really compare console hardware cycles and PC hardware cycles. They are just two diffent beasts, even if your running the same software.

[QUOTE="evilross"]

[QUOTE="osan0"] i think your getting the 360 mixed up with the PS3. the 360 was released in nov 2005. the 8800GTX was released in nov 06osan0

This is true. The 7800 card was first released in June 2005, a few months before the 360. The 7800GS was in Feb. 2006. Oblivion released in March of 2006.

I know, I was there, and I did a hardware upgrade during that period. If you were not running a 7800 series card, the 360 version of Oblivion looked and preformed better then the PC version. If you did have a good CPU, plenty of RAM and a 7800 the PC version was a bit crisper, with better AA. Not much of a difference at all, as the 360 was very high end in 2005/early 2006 when it was released.

The 8800 first came out in November of 2006, around the same time as the PS3. There was no PC hardware that was substantially superior to the 360 until the end of 2006, and even then when running the 8800 series card, the preformace was similar due to the unoptimised nature of the way PC hardware runs.

And besides the point, if your running either of those cards now, your not even close to running high end PC games the way they are glorified to look and preform with current hardware.

The 8800 series debuted in November of 2006. The same time as the PS3

On the 8800 GTX:

"The GeForce 8800 GTX was by far the fastest GPU when first released, and 13 months after its initial debut it still remained one of the fastest. The GTX has 128 stream processors clocked at 1.35GHz, a core clock of 575MHz, and 768 MB of 384-bit GDDR3 memory at 1.8GHz, giving it a memory bandwidth of 86.4 GB/s. The card performs faster than a single Radeon HD 2900 XT, and faster than 2 Radeon X1950 XTXs in Crossfire or 2 GeForce 7900 GTXs in SLI. The 8800 GTX also supports HDCP, but one major flaw is its older NVIDIA PureVideo processor that uses more CPU resources. Originally retailing for around US$600, prices came down to under US$400 before it was discontinued. The 8800 GTX is also very power hungry, using up to 185 watts of power and requiring two PCI-E power connectors to operate. The 8800 GTX also has 2 SLI connector ports, allowing it to support NVIDIA 3-way SLI for users who run demanding games at extreme resolutions such as 2560x1600."

The card was a beast. It also demanded a beastly rig and power supply to run. It also cost as much at a first generation PS3.

By mid 2009 you could find versions of it a lot cheaper, around $150.

Crysis says hi.

Just like with the "console grpahics wars" where you want to have exclusives vs exclusives.

Well judge PC by PC exclusives, not PC/360/PS3 multiplats.

The 360 came out in 2006, the PS3 in 2007. Thats around 5 years ago, a long time in hardware terms.

Here is the thing though.. I'll use Oblivion as a reference, being I have personal experiance with the game when it was released.

When Obivion was released on the 360 and PC, (March of 2006) it was a very good looking game at the time. The PC version was capable of looking somewhat better then the 360 version, but only if you had the very latest GPU, and at least 2gig of ram or more. Anything less, and the 360 version would look and perform better. I know this as fact, because I upgraded my PC at the time, and bought a 6800 just to run Oblivion, and the game underpreformed the Xbox version on my set-up.

At the time, the top end GPU was the Nvidia 7800, it was released in Febuary of 2006, and was a high priced, high end GPU when Oblivion came out. $200-$250 for a top end card. If you had that card, and the ram and CPU, you had the "superior" version of Oblivion.

Fast forward to today....

Oblivion is far, far from the best looking game on the 360. Many games look better, and play smoother. Dedicated hardware is a big advantage consoles have, it allows them to produce more with less raw power. Think of it like a lightweight Indycar with 600hp being able to outrun a heavy NASCAR stock car, even though the stock car can produce close to 900hp.

If you are a PC gamer, if you had upgraded in 2006 to the latest hardware, and were playing ther best version of Oblivion, today you have to have upgraded at least once since then to be playing current PC games at the high end setting you hear about all the time on the SW forums. A PC running 2gigs of ram with a 7800gt is not going to play games like Crysis, The Witcher 2, or even Dragon Age 2 with any kind of ease. The graphics, framerates, effects, and fidelity are all going to be lacking. You probably would have had to upgrade the CPU as well, as most people were not running multicore CPU's in early 2006. I know this for a fact, as I am still running the same setup I had back then, and there are few if any recent PC games my PC can even run, much less run at a level comparable to the consoles.

PC hardware has moved a generation ahead, because its necessary. PC's, even PC's built with gaming in mind, are not dedicated gaming platforms. They don't use assets the same way, and require more power to run the same thing. It's the nature of the way things work in real real world computing applications.

A high end current gen PC is capable of running the same games consoles play at higher resolutions, and higher framerates. But the difference is not nearly as great as the disparity in raw processing power required to acheive it.

evilross

Nope feels the same like every generation.

Farcry, Half-life2, Crysis, Stalker, Arma 2, upcoming BF3 and Rage.

Irony next gen PC will games pushing it's limit with Bohemias next 2 titles

Arma 3

Carrier Command: Gaea Mission

Then from other devs were getting things like

STALKER 2 which claims PC is the lead

Metro Last Light and other games

We are hitting the point of diminishing returns. The hardware gap may be great but the software gap will only get smaller.

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"][QUOTE="evilross"]At the time, the top end GPU was the Nvidia 7800, it was released in Febuary of 2006, and was a high priced, high end GPU when Oblivion came out. $200-$250 for a top end card.osan0

It is a lot smaller.

Last generation, Half-Life 2 practically created a huge gap between PC and console. Now, the only difference between PC and console these days is that PC enjoys games with 1080p 60fps, with a few exceptions where PC versions utilize GPU physics, modes that greatly increase enemy count, or double texture size

We are hitting the point of diminishing returns. The hardware gap may be great but the software gap will only get smaller.

Giant_Panda

Because of $$$$ and developers.

Not because of PC hardware limitations.

The gap is huge. Many people don't accept it, because they base their comparisons off compressed Youtube videos. But when you see the real thing running at 1080p, the difference is mind blowing. To illustrate this, let's say I watch a PS2 game with my eyes nearly shut... It will look pretty much like the PS3 game.

Moreover, there are game genres which are considered major on PC, and that console gamers completely ignore. Thus they have no idea what the gap is concerning strategy games. RTS games on console are pathetic compared with the PC, and not because of KB/M. The ancient CPUs in consoles just can't simulate more than a fraction of what PC CPUs are able to simulate in games like Shogun II.

Just look at the 360 versions of Supreme Commander... So limited it's not the same game any more.