XBOX 360 graphics

J.B

J.B

Soldato
Joined
16 Aug 2006
Posts
5,924
What is the best game for demonstrating how good PCs are graphically?

Most people will probably say Crysis I imagine.

And to PanchoVille:
What is your rig ATM? A new graphics card might be the boost you need without having to upgrade. I thought I might have to upgrade my dual core AM2 but it's still plodding along!
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jul 2009
Posts
5,010
Location
Manchester
The PS3 and Xbox are very good value for money IMO.
I enjoy my PC as a hobby, I enjoy tinkering as much as I enjoy gaming to be honest and at the end of the day I have assembled it, chosed the components and personalised it.
PCs are a hobby and like any hobby it is hard to justify rationally.
"Why did you need those 3 ATI 5870s in Crossfire?"
 
Associate
OP
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
602
Most people will probably say Crysis I imagine.

And to PanchoVille:
What is your rig ATM? A new graphics card might be the boost you need without having to upgrade. I thought I might have to upgrade my dual core AM2 but it's still plodding along!


Thanks J.B. - but my last gaming pc died on my having an nvidia 7800 or something (can't remember). For the last couple of years I've been using business machines that don't have a graphics slot, so I'll have to start from scratch which perhaps is a blessing !?

The last game I was playing was COD and it was good. Since then, the only reason to upgrade was for Crysis, but I still get a lot of mileage from Unreal Tournament 99 on the multiplay servers and couldn't justify upgrading just for crysis. The story has changed since MW2 I think as it looks great to play on the pc.
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Jul 2009
Posts
16,234
Location
Newcastle/Aberdeen
I'm at the point where the only reason I choose PC over consoles is because the mouse-keyboard combo is far superior in FPS games than a console controller.

Well... you say that, but i grew up with the gamepad. I've never been able to use the K+M combo as effectively. Apart from slight joystick movements... but there's bound to be a solution sooner or later.
 
Associate
Joined
30 Sep 2005
Posts
144
I think it looks really really good personally - even more impressive seeing as the engine still has some roots in the original quake 3 engine.
What does it share exactly?

Don't know where you got that from - the Xbox GPU has 48 stream processors which places it roughly in line in terms of performance with the ATi X1900. It's difficult to compare like for like though as the architectures are quite different.
ATI said that Xenos was about on par with the X1800 XT, at least running the Toy Shop demo. It has 48 ALUs like the X1900, but these have to handle pixel and vertex workloads, and it's clocked lower than the X1900 XT/XTX (500 MHz vs. 625/650 MHz)

Considering that, Xenos' performance in MW2 is pretty impressive: look at how the X1950 XTX struggles, and the 7900 GTX gets absolutely thrashed, in the PC benchmarks:

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...nchmarks-of-the-latest-Call-of-Duty/Practice/

The fact you need a 3870/9600 GT to approximate its performance on the PC, shows how beneficial it can be to work with a closed platform.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Jan 2009
Posts
4,819
Location
North East
pc is superior to any console, look at the settings gta iv use on console:

Resolution 1280x720
Textures medium
Rendering low
view distance 21
Detail 10
Vehicles 33
shadows 0

although gta does not use AA/AF, games like call of duty etc as mentioned can run up to 16x AA and whatever resolution monitor supports.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Posts
17,790
Location
Finchley, London
Never mind crysis,:p I'm currently playing tomb raider underworld and find the graphics very impressive. Couldn't run it on my previous computer, it was like a slide show. Now, running in 1920x1080, 16 x AF, 8 x AA, and everything on high. These are just low res screenshots I took which don't really do justice. Can't imagine the xbox running with this detail.


 
Soldato
Joined
9 May 2005
Posts
7,401
Location
Berkshire
I've found that if you set a PC game to the highest settings and sit right infront of it then it will look lovely, but take the same game and set it to medium settings (I suppose by this I mean medium textures and AA), put it on a 32" TV, sit ~2 meters back from it and it looks as good as on high did up close.
 
Associate
Joined
23 Apr 2009
Posts
600
Location
Glasgow
Yeah, I've played demo versions of Tomb Raider:Underworld on the pc and ps3, and the pc version is, as you would expect, far more superior. Anti-aliasing, higher res, deph of view, shadows, character models, the list goes on.
 
Associate
Joined
28 Jan 2009
Posts
400
Location
Gloucestershire
The problem is that the 360 and PS3 are very new compared to PCs.

PS3 has all those cell processors that aren't being fully utilised. If they were to get those working, it would be good.

In terms of processing power, a PC will always kick a consoles ass, but it *looks* better on a console because you're something like 5 times farther away from the screen. If you play a game on console that was on PC first (like Oblivion) you will see a huge difference.

Grass effects are cut off, reflections are only half as defined, and you only notice any of the good lighting effects if you're running at 1080p. It kind of looked like Bloom, to me... Anyone else agree with me?

Oblivion @ 1680x1050, HDR, AA x4, AF x8... Its just so much nicer on a PC.

Same thing happens in Fallout 3. The engine is fixed up a bit for this one, so the graphics are better on the console version, but they still fail compared to a decent PC.

Look back to old games. I was recently playing Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic for the first time. On starting, the game was locked to 4:3 resolutions, so i was at 1280x1024. Black strips down the side. I used a hack to get it working at my native res, with the UI to fit as well. After doing this, i used the nvidia control panel to increase AA and AF, and turned on post processing in game... It started looking *much* nicer than it was even designed to run before.

Try doing that on a console. It just doesn't happen.
 
Associate
Joined
27 Feb 2009
Posts
1,575
Location
UK
Really come on people saying your pc kills console is unfair you have spent far more money to get it to do all the high resolutions.

use same budget and then compare 360 elite £200 vs pc £200 the console wins.

Console parts might be based on pc parts but they are not the same so you cant say 360 has like a ati 1900 because no it doesn't its custom build and works in different way.
 
Associate
Joined
23 Apr 2009
Posts
600
Location
Glasgow
But then, you can't compare a console to a pc just as simply as "oh, consoles are much cheaper and a gaming pc isn't worth the extra money." You can do far more things with a pc than you can do with a console, so that argument doesn't really stack up! The way I think of it is that if you take your average home pc, however much it may cost and add £200(the price of an xbox 360) on top of that then you can get a fairly decent gaming set up.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Apr 2009
Posts
11,973
Location
Cheshire
Really come on people saying your pc kills console is unfair you have spent far more money to get it to do all the high resolutions.

use same budget and then compare 360 elite £200 vs pc £200 the console wins.

Console parts might be based on pc parts but they are not the same so you cant say 360 has like a ati 1900 because no it doesn't its custom build and works in different way.

It is unfair, but the comparisons will be made because the game came out on consoles and PC, its human nature to wonder which is better.

From the comparisons I have read so far, the better looking and performing platform is PC.

I agree the price difference is substantial, but you are paying a premium for a better system. For around £450 you can get a machine that eats MW2 and pretty much any modern game. On top of that it can be used for pretty much any PC game made in the last 10+ years and do all the stuff you need a PC to do.

Is this cost justified, well I guess you have to be the judge of that, but in my opinion it is.
 
Back
Top Bottom