Whats the better deal? A PS3 and 360 for 600, or a 600 Gaming PC?

A 450 USD could run crysis at max settings at 1680x1050.

I know because the PC I built 3 years ago is worth that much now and can play crysis at those settings.

I vote PC because I like the internet, movies and games.

With consoles you got games but no browsing the internet.

Hakkai007

I get that, if you don't have a PC, you should probably go that route first. I have a PC, it just can't run games. Since I have a PC, and a Mac, for the internet and all that goodness, my ps3 satisfies my gaming needs. I believe this question was whether you should go console combo or gaming PC, without factoring in other PC aspects, since most people would already have a PC for that stuff.

To help out, just from 2009/2010:

1. The Sims 3
2. Dawn of War II: Chaos
3. Napoleon: Total War
4. Europa Universalis III
5. Hearts of Iron 3
6. Dawn of Discovery
7. Empire Total War
8. Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II
9. Stalker: CoP
10. Kings Bounty: Armoured Princess
11. Machinarium
12. Torchlight
13. ARMA II
14. The Path
15. For the Glory
16. Shattered Horizon
17. Champions Online
18. Killing Floor
19. C&C4: Siberian Twilight
20. Dawn of Discovery: Venice
21. Still Life 2

Plus a plethora of others that likely will never ever be reviewed by GS.

lundy86_4

at least 2 out of 21 are decent.....LOL, you put sims 3. for shame. as a pc gamer that offends me that you would even think that is good enough to list.

You guys who are judging this by review scores are doing it wrong.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

To help out, just from 2009/2010:

1. The Sims 3
2. Dawn of War II: Chaos
3. Napoleon: Total War
4. Europa Universalis III
5. Hearts of Iron 3
6. Dawn of Discovery
7. Empire Total War
8. Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II
9. Stalker: CoP
10. Kings Bounty: Armoured Princess
11. Machinarium
12. Torchlight
13. ARMA II
14. The Path
15. For the Glory
16. Shattered Horizon
17. Champions Online
18. Killing Floor
19. C&C4: Siberian Twilight
20. Dawn of Discovery: Venice
21. Still Life 2

Plus a plethora of others that likely will never ever be reviewed by GS.

lespaul1919

at least 2 out of 21 are decent.....LOL, you put sims 3. for shame. as a pc gamer that offends me that you would even think that is good enough to list.

To be fair, I wasn't cherrypicking, as you know, games appeal to many different people. Whether you don't like it or not, doesn't mean other people don't.

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="Hahadouken"]

And you're proud? I speak the truth and it hurts so much you can't finish reading it? Okay let's play this legit. Build me a high-end PC for $600 and include a power supply, a case, keyboard, mouse, wifi adapter, Operating System, DVD drive, hard drive, motherboard, RAM, GPU and CPU. I'll be waiting. Enough of this BS propaganda of posting the lowest price you can find on the internet then only totaling up a CPU/GPU/Mobo like it's all you need to max Crysis.

Hahadouken

I made a PC that can runalmost any game maxed includingCrysisfor a little under $600 with everything you asked for. Obviously you where wrong.

$593.93

• Windows 7
• Case
• 585watt PSU
• AM2+ mobo
• 2 GB DDR2 800
• AMD 2.5ghz Quad Core Black Edition
• ATI 5770 1GB DDR5
• Keyboard + Mouse
• 250GB HDD 7200RPM
• Wireless card
• DVD RW

http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/2009/pc2.png

That isn't "high-end", which is clearly the determining criteria that I specified. My rig is old and I have twice as much RAM as that, and it's faster, for example.

I said a $600 PC is a piece of crap, to me, and that still looks like a piece of crap, to me, so I am not wrong. You can't decide what I subjectively think is a good PC or isn't. To me, I won't even bother upgrading again unless it's top-of-the-line, future proofed for at least a few years, not something that will sorta passably play recent titles on compromised settings.

I agree with Gio, the users posting these generic parts and claiming they are sufficient, while not wrong, they are definitely misleading. No respectable PC gamer, including them, uses the barebones minimum on their rig. How much sense does it make to skimp out on cooling when it's one of the chief elements to keeping your hardware running for a long time?

It's just as misleading as people claiming a 360 Arcade is "all you need" when they know damn well they wouldn't have been satisfied with it. It's pure propaganda, which is senseless unless you work for the company.

This is the same thing as a TV ad claiming their cell phone plan is only $20 a month, and then when they've got your attention you find out that $20 a month gets you 20 daytime minutes per week and free evenings starting at 9 PM. Nobody is happy with that plan, it's just there to entice you into getting something better. Same goes for a "$600 PC".

I am not denying that a $600 PC will outperform consoles, but it won't play the top games at the top settings, whereas with a console I know I am getting the same experience as everyone else.

Anyway I am going to upgrade my rig this summer so I am glad to see some of these parts come down in price.

1. That PC can max Crysis, along with about any other game you toss at it. That is why I said you are wrong.

2. You don't need massive amounts of ram with W7 32Bit not to mention the PC has 1BB DDR5 Vram on the GPU

3. I've never used after market cooling on my Q6600, 8800GT, or ATI5870, and I've overlcocked them all, no problems on stock cooling.

4. And the parts I listed are far from "barebone minimum."

5. This PC is future proof with a Quad Core CPU along with a DX11 GPU.

6. Some people choose to spend more on their machines while others do not. The point is this thread asked for a $600 PC or a 360/PS3. Most people said that a $600 would be crap. But the one I built for under $600 is all that above and it can max out almost any game on the market.

If you pick PC, this year you miss out on:

1. Splinter Cell Conviction: 8.0
2. Resonance of Fate: 8.5
3. Final Fantasy XIII: 8.5
4. Bayonetta: 9.0
5. Yakuza 3: 8.0
6. MLB 10: The Show: 8.0
7. God of War 3: 9.0
8. Heavy Rain: 8.5
9. MAG: 8.0

If you pick PS3/360, this year you miss out on:

1. Warhammer III: Chaos Rising: 8.5
2. Napolean Total War: 8.5
3. STALKER: Call of Pripyat: 8.0
4. Kings Bounty: Armorred Princess 8.0

GioVela2010

all u need is a ps3 n millions of people bought it at $600 n that should tell you alot that the ps3 is the best imho

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="SpideR_CentS"] Oh word? Lets start listing from '09 to now. I'll Start Halo ODST, Heavy Rain, Forza 3, Demon's Souls, Ratchet & Clank, Spinter Cell, MAG, God of War 3, MLB '10 The Show, Yukuza 3, Final Fantasy 13, Mega Man 10 ....

.... OK NOW YOU GO!

GioVela2010

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pc5oLqpenpT78W87pMfgvBA&gid=0

Look at it this way, for starters we all knowPC is rated on higher stantard than consoles so lets look at some numbers:

PC AAAAE = 0
PC AAAE = 12
PC AAE = 77
PC AE = 81

TOTAL AE or above = 170

360/PS3 AAAAE = 1
360/PS3 AAAE = 14
360/PS3 AAE = 25
360/PS3 AE = 27

TOTAL AE or above = 67

Like 40 of those PC Games are expansion packs that require the original game.

PS3 is at a disadvantage being 1 year late to the game.

PS3/360 multiplats that aren't on PC are not included in your list why? This thread is about PS3/360 vs PC, not PS3 vs 360 vs PC.

all u need is a ps3 n millions of people bought it at $600 n that should tell you alot that the ps3 is the best imho

_SWAG_

SpideR_CentS:

It's hard to talk about PC gaming to a console user since you won't understand what we're talking about. For the most part, game reviews are superfluous to us since we have communities, and we talk about games there. It's a lot like this one, except game-specific. You'd think there wouldn't be a lot of traffic, but there is. SC - an ancient game by any standard, still has very strong communities going for it, complete with clubs and tournaments, new user generated content and so on. Pubbing on XboxLive is just not the same thing.

This is why community support is important for PC users. As an analogy, most HD gamers decry the Wii's "terrible" online infrastructure. I feel that way about all the consoles. The online is just so, so limited.

Released games number lots - NVIDIATI's list gives you some idea of how vast PC gaming is, but all those reviews barely scratch the surface. For every game that gets reviewed, maybe ten slip under reviewer radar and only get purchase on communities for sales.

I can name a lot of unreviewed games for you, but what use would that be? Your appreciation for them would be absent to nonexistent, since you haven't played them and can't play them.

I don't think you'll even acknowledge that most of the multiplatforms that get released are better on the PC. What use is it to argue with you? None.

There are bucketloads of games, and lots of them are really fun. If you really want to know, visit the PC forums or ask honestly. If you're looking for system wars, don't bother. I don't have any ammo that'll hit you. They'll just go over your head.

You guys who are judging this by review scores are doing it wrong.

MangaJ

Easily 600$ gaming PC. You can get a GTS 250 for around 100-120$ and that can run Crysis maxed 0xaa on a decent resolution.Chiddaling

according to these benchmarks, not so much.... Doesnt even break 30 fps on 1280x1024

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gts-250,2172-6.html

And thats on an OCed card

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

To help out, just from 2009/2010:

1. The Sims 3
2. Dawn of War II: Chaos
3. Napoleon: Total War
4. Europa Universalis III
5. Hearts of Iron 3
6. Dawn of Discovery
7. Empire Total War
8. Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II
9. Stalker: CoP
10. Kings Bounty: Armoured Princess
11. Machinarium
12. Torchlight
13. ARMA II
14. The Path
15. For the Glory
16. Shattered Horizon
17. Champions Online
18. Killing Floor
19. C&C4: Siberian Twilight
20. Dawn of Discovery: Venice
21. Still Life 2

Plus a plethora of others that likely will never ever be reviewed by GS.

lespaul1919

at least 2 out of 21 are decent.....LOL, you put sims 3. for shame. as a pc gamer that offends me that you would even think that is good enough to list.

I agree with lundy. All of those games are fantastic. Just because you're not the target market doesn't mean that they're crap. For that matter, SC:C doesn't appeal to all audiences either, and I hear that Bayonetta isn't selling as well as it ought. Let's not degenerate this into the usual crap that's SW. WE'RE talking facts here. There are tons and tons more games on PC that won't see the console. That's a fact.

The PC is going to give you access to thousands of more games than the PS3 and 360 couldn't even imagine delivering. The PC will always be the best choice when compared to any console.

[QUOTE="MangaJ"]

You guys who are judging this by review scores are doing it wrong.

NVIDIATI

Not only that, but a game like X3: Terran Conflict which scored a 7 or something is a lot huger, more immersive, more customizable, more varied, more just plain awesome than a straight forward 8 hour long button masher with crap story and 500 million quick time events that gets perfect review scores.

AAA Games or better

360/PS3

1. MGS4: 10
2. Uncharted 2: 9.5
3. FIFA Soccer 10: 9
4. God of War 3: 9
5. Demons Souls: 9
6. Beatles Rock Band: 9
7. InFamous: 9
8. MLB 09: The Show: 9
9. Killzone 2: 9
10. NHL 09: 9
11. Resistance 2: 9
12. LittleBigPlanet: 9
13. Sid Meiers Civilization Revolution: 9
14. Rock Band 9
15. Ninja Gaiden Sigma 9
16. Forza 3 9.5
17. Halo 3: 9.5
18. Ghost Recon AW: 9.2
19. Forza 2 9.2
20. Bayonetta 9
21. Halo 3 ODST 9
22. Gears of War 2 9
23. Perfect Dark Zero

PC:

1. Crysis 9.5
2. World in Conlflict 9.5
3. World of Warcraft Burning Crusaid 9.2 (expansion needs standalone game)
4. Galactic Civilization II: Dark Avatar 9.1 (Expansion needs standalone)
5. The Sims 3 9
6. World of Warcraft: Wrath of Lich King 9 (expansion needs standalone)
7. Crysis Warhead 9
8. Galacgic Civilization II: Twilight of the Arnor 9 (expansion needs standalone)
9. Sins of a Solar Empire 9
10. GTR2 9
11. Company of Heroes 9
12. Galacgic Civilizations II: Dream Lords

lets define "maxing out crysis".

1920x1080/1920x1200
4xAA
very high (every setting)
60 FPS. or at least never going below 30 NO MATTER WHAT. no stuttering whatsoever (which happens to me constantly).

I would wager that that $600 pc cannot do that.

here is crysis warhead on high, not even very high. with more ram and a better CPU than this $600 one.

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"][QUOTE="MangaJ"]

You guys who are judging this by review scores are doing it wrong.

MangaJ

Not only that, but a game like X3: Terran Conflict which scored a 7 or something is a lot huger, more immersive, more customizable, more varied, more just plain awesome than a straight forward 8 hour long button masher with crap story and 500 million quick time events that gets perfect review scores.

The PC is going to give you access to thousands of more games than the PS3 and 360 couldn't even imagine delivering. The PC will always be the best choice when compared to any console.

foxhound_fox

and I would trade every one of them for just the reach beta.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

The PC is going to give you access to thousands of more games than the PS3 and 360 couldn't even imagine delivering. The PC will always be the best choice when compared to any console.

lespaul1919

and I would trade every one of them for just the reach beta.

You're being funny, right?

[QUOTE="MangaJ"]

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"] Yeah according to them AA and A games are not valid :roll:NVIDIATI

Not only that, but a game like X3: Terran Conflict which scored a 7 or something is a lot huger, more immersive, more customizable, more varied, more just plain awesome than a straight forward 8 hour long button masher with crap story and 500 million quick time events that gets perfect review scores.

About Gamespots Reviews and Ratings

"However, relative comparisons do apply, so a game that scores poorly is a poor game by any standards, while a game that scores extremly high is an outstanding game by any standards"

lets define "maxing out crysis".

1920x1080/1920x1200
4xAA
very high (every setting)
60 FPS. or at least never going below 30 NO MATTER WHAT. no stuttering whatsoever (which happens to me constantly).

I would wager that that $600 pc cannot do that.

here is crysis warhead on high, not even very high. with more ram and a better CPU than this $600 one.

lespaul1919

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

The PC is going to give you access to thousands of more games than the PS3 and 360 couldn't even imagine delivering. The PC will always be the best choice when compared to any console.

MangaJ

and I would trade every one of them for just the reach beta.

You're being funny, right?

k, I'll keep halo PC. that's the only one I play every day anyway.

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

lets define "maxing out crysis".

1920x1080/1920x1200
4xAA
very high (every setting)
60 FPS. or at least never going below 30 NO MATTER WHAT. no stuttering whatsoever (which happens to me constantly).

I would wager that that $600 pc cannot do that.

here is crysis warhead on high, not even very high. with more ram and a better CPU than this $600 one.

NVIDIATI

Which has already been proven bogus since the benchmarks I showed using his settings and a perfectly running 5770 averaged 23 FPS.

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="MangaJ"]

Not only that, but a game like X3: Terran Conflict which scored a 7 or something is a lot huger, more immersive, more customizable, more varied, more just plain awesome than a straight forward 8 hour long button masher with crap story and 500 million quick time events that gets perfect review scores.

About Gamespots Reviews and Ratings

"However, relative comparisons do apply, so a game that scores poorly is a poor game by any standards, while a game that scores extremly high is an outstanding game by any standards"

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

lets define "maxing out crysis".

1920x1080/1920x1200
4xAA
very high (every setting)
60 FPS. or at least never going below 30 NO MATTER WHAT. no stuttering whatsoever (which happens to me constantly).

I would wager that that $600 pc cannot do that.

here is crysis warhead on high, not even very high. with more ram and a better CPU than this $600 one.

GioVela2010

Which has already been proven bogus since the benchmarks I showed using his settings and a perfectly running 5770 averaged 23 FPS.

You know what ie fun about some console fanboys here?

Crying about 5770 not been able to max crysis ( the most demanding pc game) at 1920x1080 ( although at a reasonable 1440x900 can max it and probably enable 2 or 4xAA and still be over 30 fps) where in fact it can max 99 out of a 100 new games at 1920x1080 with 60fps games including Batman AA, AssCreed 2, Bad company 2, Mass effect 2 , dragon age etc etc etc etc

Also the biggest irony is that their consoles run 99 out of a 100 games at 720p or even less ( call me ghostbusters ) and at 30fps while with a 5770 is the exact opposite

So no unless you are maniac and rich and want overpriced stuff for a few frames more then yes you will buy that $500-600vga otherwise a reasonable pc gamer who is not rich will get a card like the 5770 that offers 60-70% of the performance of top cards for half the price

So my list shwoing PS3/360 has twice as many AAA games as PC is gonna be ignored?

And 3 times as many standalone AAA games.

lets define "maxing out crysis".

1920x1080/1920x1200
4xAA
very high (every setting)
60 FPS. or at least never going below 30 NO MATTER WHAT. no stuttering whatsoever (which happens to me constantly).

I would wager that that $600 pc cannot do that.

here is crysis warhead on high, not even very high. with more ram and a better CPU than this $600 one.

lespaul1919

Although I agree the "a $600 rig can max Crysis" arguments are wrong, thats really in another league of gaming (visually). I still get away with an 8800gt and it will run bfbc2 fine. I think the issue is taste in games really. The majority of the exclusive PC games include strategy and MMOs. If your not into those genres (which a console fan most likely would have no exposure to, thus not liking/appreciating it), I can see why the PC doesnt look like a great option.

[QUOTE="MangaJ"]

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

and I would trade every one of them for just the reach beta.

lespaul1919

You're being funny, right?

k, I'll keep halo PC. that's the only one I play every day anyway.

Wow. I have a 360 and I don't even think I'm going to get Halo:Reach. The only game I'm looking forward to is Red Dead Redemption.

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

lets define "maxing out crysis".

1920x1080/1920x1200
4xAA
very high (every setting)
60 FPS. or at least never going below 30 NO MATTER WHAT. no stuttering whatsoever (which happens to me constantly).

I would wager that that $600 pc cannot do that.

here is crysis warhead on high, not even very high. with more ram and a better CPU than this $600 one.

NVIDIATI

so anandtech lies huh? why you bringing up consoles? you flat out said "maxing crysis". you aren't maxing it if any settings can go higher...period. and you aren't maxing it if it's chugging. it has to be silky smooth. but honestly, it's still silly dropping $600 for crysis.

PC:

1. Crysis 9.5
2. World in Conlflict 9.5
3. World of Warcraft Burning Crusaid 9.2 (expansion needs standalone game)
4. Galactic Civilization II: Dark Avatar 9.1 (Expansion needs standalone)
5. The Sims 3 9
6. World of Warcraft: Wrath of Lich King 9 (expansion needs standalone)
7. Crysis Warhead 9
8. Galacgic Civilization II: Twilight of the Arnor 9 (expansion needs standalone)
9. Sins of a Solar Empire 9
10. GTR2 9
11. Company of Heroes 9
12. Galacgic Civilizations II: Dream Lords

GioVela2010

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

The PC is going to give you access to thousands of more games than the PS3 and 360 couldn't even imagine delivering. The PC will always be the best choice when compared to any console.

MangaJ

and I would trade every one of them for just the reach beta.

You're being funny, right?

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

lets define "maxing out crysis".

1920x1080/1920x1200
4xAA
very high (every setting)
60 FPS. or at least never going below 30 NO MATTER WHAT. no stuttering whatsoever (which happens to me constantly).

I would wager that that $600 pc cannot do that.

here is crysis warhead on high, not even very high. with more ram and a better CPU than this $600 one.

lespaul1919

so anandtech lies huh? why you bringing up consoles? you flat out said "maxing crysis". you aren't maxing it if any settings can go higher...period. and you aren't maxing it if it's chugging. it has to be silky smooth. but honestly, it's still silly dropping $600 for crysis.

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

[QUOTE="MangaJ"]

You're being funny, right?

MangaJ

k, I'll keep halo PC. that's the only one I play every day anyway.

Wow. I have a 360 and I don't even think I'm going to get Halo:Reach. The only game I'm looking forward to is Red Dead Redemption.

that's fine, I want that game too. but I've been playing halo multiplayer for 8 years......so it's obviously my thing. the only games I even currently own for xbox are halo games and I still have my original xbox just to LAN halo 1. so yeah.......reach is THE upcoming game for me. not that I wont get alan wake, red dead, and some others. reach shall be my multiplayer home base for sure.

[QUOTE="MangaJ"]

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

and I would trade every one of them for just the reach beta.

GeneralShowzer

You're being funny, right?

opinions, everybody has some

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"] So by setting the highest standard for PC makes it valid :? Most console games run from 540 to 720 with little to no AA @ mostly 30, but sometimes 60 FPS. Go talk to Silenthps about his 5770 running @ 90% power and how he runs Crysis maxed @ 34-40FPS. At HD resolutions.

NVIDIATI

so anandtech lies huh? why you bringing up consoles? you flat out said "maxing crysis". you aren't maxing it if any settings can go higher...period. and you aren't maxing it if it's chugging. it has to be silky smooth. but honestly, it's still silly dropping $600 for crysis.

Crysis is unplayable at those resolutions when sitting 2 feet away from a 17" screen.

oh god, it never ends with you guys huh...

GioVela2010

So my list shwoing PS3/360 has twice as many AAA games as PC is gonna be ignored?

And 3 times as many standalone AAA games.

GioVela2010

So my comment about the case NVIDIA showed being good for most components, you're just going to ignore?

Goes both ways bud.

Here ya go:

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

That thing has access for 1 fan, you gonna built a gaming computer with 1 fan...Have fun replacing everything in a year..

And that 1 fan would probably shake the case apart..Talk about poor quality...

lundy86_4

You do realize running most components at stock would be fine in that case. Only things like running a GTX 480 overclocked, and possibly the same with a 5970 would be cause for concern. The ambiet temperature in that case would be more than fine.

You've shown you have little to know knowledge on computer components in your thread trying to show off your computer, when you got confused about a GTX 2** series and asked if it would give better performance than your 5870.

On top of that, you are using both consoles against one. Not really surprising they won.

I have a 4850, it's funny it's only a few FPS behind the 5770 lol. might as well save some money and change that to a 4850. you are only losing a few frames a second.

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]PC:

1. Crysis 9.5
2. World in Conlflict 9.5
3. World of Warcraft Burning Crusaid 9.2 (expansion needs standalone game)
4. Galactic Civilization II: Dark Avatar 9.1 (Expansion needs standalone)
5. The Sims 3 9
6. World of Warcraft: Wrath of Lich King 9 (expansion needs standalone)
7. Crysis Warhead 9
8. Galacgic Civilization II: Twilight of the Arnor 9 (expansion needs standalone)
9. Sins of a Solar Empire 9
10. GTR2 9
11. Company of Heroes 9
12. Galacgic Civilizations II: Dream Lords

foxhound_fox

ok, but then he could add all the ps1, ps2 and xbox games onto his list..... Still may not be completely even. Also, going back 15 years and digging up old games may cause a problem with compatibility issues. Just sayin.

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

so anandtech lies huh? why you bringing up consoles? you flat out said "maxing crysis". you aren't maxing it if any settings can go higher...period. and you aren't maxing it if it's chugging. it has to be silky smooth. but honestly, it's still silly dropping $600 for crysis.

Crysis is unplayable at those resolutions when sitting 2 feet away from a 17" screen.

Also, one other point. I think a more fair comparison would be to start from the beginning of this console gen (Nov 2005), and use those console prices to determine the PC price.

So the

360 - $399

PS3 - $599

is $1000 dollars. Now how would a $1000 PC from 2005 fare now?

I'm probably one of the few PC gamers here who play on both a lowly 19" monitor (1440x900 res) and an even more lowly(?) 32" 720p HDTV (1280x768 res). Crysis plays and looks fine on both with the 5770 as do Flight Simulator X (another hog).

I'm probably one of the few PC gamers here who play on both a lowly 19" monitor (1440x900 res) and an even more lowly(?) 32" 720p HDTV (1280x768 res). Crysis plays and looks fine on both with the 5770.

jun_aka_pekto

If possible you should post a screenie at that rez. Maybe it'll stop TC from flapping his gums.

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

I'm probably one of the few PC gamers here who play on both a lowly 19" monitor (1440x900 res) and an even more lowly(?) 32" 720p HDTV (1280x768 res). Crysis plays and looks fine on both with the 5770.

lundy86_4

If possible you should post a screenie at that rez. Maybe it'll stop TC from flapping his gums.

I'm at my 19"monitor right now. A 1440x900 shot isn't that much higher from 1280x720 anyway. Standby.....

1280x720 windowed. Right Click, View for full size.

Some more coming.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

I'm probably one of the few PC gamers here who play on both a lowly 19" monitor (1440x900 res) and an even more lowly(?) 32" 720p HDTV (1280x768 res). Crysis plays and looks fine on both with the 5770.

jun_aka_pekto

If possible you should post a screenie at that rez. Maybe it'll stop TC from flapping his gums.

I'm at my 19"monitor right now. A 1440x900 shot isn't that much higher from 1280x720 anyway. Standby.....

Not much, but it'll still look great. You know, because apparently playing at that rez on a PC monitor would look awful :roll:

:lol:

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

If possible you should post a screenie at that rez. Maybe it'll stop TC from flapping his gums.

lundy86_4

I'm at my 19"monitor right now. A 1440x900 shot isn't that much higher from 1280x720 anyway. Standby.....

Not much, but it'll still look great. You know, because apparently playing at that rez on a PC monitor would look awful :roll:

:lol: