PC graphics > consoles: the next gen war is over

[CptStern]

Back when Sony announced the specifications of the PlayStation 3, everyone asked if it meant the end of PC gaming. After all Cell looked very strong and NVIDIA's RSX GPU had tremendous power. We asked NVIDIA how long it would take until we saw a GPU faster than the RSX. Their answer: by the time the PS3 ships. So congratulations to NVIDIA for making the PS3 obsolete before it ever shipped, as G80 is truly a beast.


let the flames begin :E

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2870&p=29

[Anthraxxx]

haha. PS3's graphics weren't going to be much better than Xbox 360's anyway. Anyone who believes otherwise is just eating out of Sony's hand. IMO, the only good thing that PS3 has going for it is the Final Fantasy and MGS series, and that another year or two down the line after PS3 ships. A launch PS3 is not worth the price.

[DeusExMachina]

OH MAN, BAD ASS NVIDIA TAKING DOWN THE CONSOLES. OH SHIT.

No, I don't care.

[Iced_Eagle]

Cool, but expected....

[ailevation]

Nvidia: SO! EVERYBODY BUY THE NEW NVIDIA CARDS! THEY OFFER BETTER GRAFFIX! LAWLZ!

[CyberPitz]

Eh, I will probably still get a PS3 and Wii. not because I am a console junky, but because I like playstation, and the wii's ability to be innovative is awesome.

[smwScott]

I would hardly say this makes consoles obsolete. First of all the cost issue is still heavily in favor of consoles. Secondly it won't take long at all before developers really start to push the PS3 .... by the time they even get close with the latest and greatest video card it's already out of date. Video cards never reach their potential, consoles almost always do. You can say all you want about technical specs, but the consoles will have more great looking games in their first two years than PCs, and much more people will be able to enjoy them.

PC gaming is far more expensive and less efficient. The only reason it has to exist is for games that are tailor designed for that platform. For this I mean largely multiplayer based games or things like Civ, Sims, or RTS games which are generally "office" style games.

I love my PC, but I'd much rather keep it relegated to other stuff while I play games on my television. Unfortunately many genres still aren't done right on consoles and many great developers only make games for PC, so I'll continue upgrading for the foreseeable future.

One thing I will say is that it seems redundant to own both a good PC and a 360. It seems that most of the good 360 games are also available on PC with only a few exceptions, and the ones that aren't will probably be ported sometime in the future. Hell, you can even control them with a 360 pad.

[<RJMC>]

so another ps3 bashing thread pc loving thread?

and who didnt thought this wouldnt happen?

[Gargantou]

The thing to keep in mind is that a console can do alot more with alot less than a PC, I think this applies to the GPU as well..:)

[destrukt]

so another ps3 bashing thread pc loving thread?

and who didnt thought this wouldnt happen?
I was thinking it was more along the lines of "LOL PC SUPERIOR LOLSILLY CONzOL KIDSE WE'''RE LEET."

[99.vikram]

All I know is, when a PC game is ported to console, it's usually a downgrade, and vice versa for console to PC ports -_-

[Raxxman]

Okay just one point.

It's 'a lot', not 'alot', pet peeve :)

And I think this is to be expected, PS3 graphics-wise IS old tech, it's comparable to the 360 and that's been out a year now. I'm also not convinced over Sonys claimes of the PS3s power after the PS2, which was noticibly less powerful than the box and the cube.

This isn't PS3 bashing per say, I'm not trying to put the console down for the sake of it. I just feel Sony are totally off the ball at the moment, and I can't read any press release they publish without just thinking 'Bull*Ahem*'.

[TheAntipop]

So... what, games like Crysis are going to be more powerful than any other game? Yeah, alright, too bad it's going to be entertaining for like... a month. It's a shame devs are putting so much time into making these techy flashy games when really... well, they just look like fail on the side that matters.

[jondy]

So... what, games like Crysis are going to be more powerful than any other game? Yeah, alright, too bad it's going to be entertaining for like... a month. It's a shame devs are putting so much time into making these techy flashy games when really... well, they just look like fail on the side that matters.

You're missing the point. No one's putting graphics above gameplay here, it's just an interesting discussion point.

All I know is, when a PC game is ported to console, it's usually a downgrade, and vice versa for console to PC ports -_-

They would be.. the Xbox was released in 2001 :P

[Shift]

Even though the 'next gen war' only involves the next gen consoles, not the PC. There is no point slagging the consoles off, because in the long run, the consoles will do better than the PCs. They will sell more and a lot more people play consoles than PCs worldwide, not to mention the amount of people commuting from the PCs to the consoles. Like someone said above, PCs upgrading is getting outragously expensive, and you can blabber on about how the PC specs will always own console specs and how the PC graphics will always be better than the console graphics, but unless you want to spend A LOT of money on upgrades for your PC, then you will not be getting these 'high' specs, personally I rather spend that amount of money on something other than upgrades for my PC. You do not get this with consoles, you just pay for the console first, and all games run at their maximum potential, everybody is happy, A HELL of a lot more satisfied customers which ultimately leads to more copies being sold and in the long run, the consoles beat the PC in many areas. This could never be achieved with the previous consoles, as PC upgrades were no where near as expensive as they are now so more people stayed with the PCs, and the games and graphics was of no comparison, that is now definately not the case.

[TheAntipop]

You're missing the point. No one's putting graphics above gameplay here, it's just an interesting discussion point.



Yeah, I guess so, graphics just never really struck that big a chord for me. It's nice to have cool graphics, but as of recent I'm seeing alot of games that have had most of their time put forward through graphics, then seeing that the gameplay just looks dull and un-original and the like. I dunno.

[Raxxman]

Even though the 'next gen war' only involves the next gen consoles, not the PC. There is no point slagging the consoles off, because in the long run, the consoles will do better than the PCs. They will sell more and a lot more people play consoles than PCs worldwide, not to mention the amount of people commuting from the PCs to the consoles. Like someone said above, PCs upgrading is getting outragously expensive, and you can blabber on about how the PC specs will always own console specs and how the PC graphics will always be better than the console graphics, but unless you want to spend A LOT of money on upgrades for your PC, then you will not be getting these 'high' specs, personally I rather spend that amount of money on something other than upgrades for my PC. You do not get this with consoles, you just pay for the console first, and all games run at their maximum potential, everybody is happy, A HELL of a lot more satisfied customers which ultimately leads to more copies being sold and in the long run, the consoles beat the PC in many areas. This could never be achieved with the previous consoles, as PC upgrades were no where near as expensive as they are now so more people stayed with the PCs, and the games and graphics was of no comparison, that is now definately not the case.

I don't think its about who's more satisfed. I'm certainly more satisfed playing Guild Wars or Eve Online in the long term than Dead Rising or Saints Row. Cost is always an issue, but consoles are getting more and more expensive and PCs are getting cheaper and cheaper. For the Price of a PS3 you can buy a PC than can play current games at good levels, it may not be futureproof, but thats because of the nature of the PC market.

You can go insanse and buy a hyper expensive top of the line tricked out mega PC that will be outdated before you can get it out of the box. However if you buy a PS3, 1080p tv (to get the best out of it) 4 controllers (assuming you have friends :P ) and a few games, I doubt the cost difference is going to be huge. I mean sure you don't need a 1080p tv to play the PS3, but you also don't need to run PC games on max detail either.

Swings n Roundabouts.

[AiM]

I don't think its about who's more satisfed. I'm certainly more satisfed playing Guild Wars or Eve Online in the long term than Dead Rising or Saints Row. Cost is always an issue, but consoles are getting more and more expensive and PCs are getting cheaper and cheaper. For the Price of a PS3 you can buy a PC than can play current games at good levels, it may not be futureproof, but thats because of the nature of the PC market.

You can go insanse and buy a hyper expensive top of the line tricked out mega PC that will be outdated before you can get it out of the box. However if you buy a PS3, 1080p tv (to get the best out of it) 4 controllers (assuming you have friends :P ) and a few games, I doubt the cost difference is going to be huge. I mean sure you don't need a 1080p tv to play the PS3, but you also don't need to run PC games on max detail either.

Swings n Roundabouts.

Yeah, for $500 you could buy a PC that does 'ok' and get's outdated within a year or two tops. With the PS3, it will likely last you ~5-6 (just a guess here) years and the graphical prowess will be leaps and bounds better than what you see with a $500 PC. The PlayStation traditionally has one of the longest lifespans of any console, hell even now there are still strong games being released for the PS2 even when the PS3 release is drawing very near (God of War 2 being the biggest one).

[Steven]

I could of guessed that PC graphics would be better when it comes out.

[Warbie]

Of course, we all know comparing pcs and consoles spec for spec is stupid. Regardless, technical power is one thing, having decent games that use it is another.

[AJ Rimmer]

Surprise surprise; Everytime a new console comes out someone says it's the end of days for PCs, and they're always wrong.

[VictimOfScience]

Yeah, we saw this coming from day one. I don't care, I just want a 360 and a PS3 and a Wii and a new GPU. When this will all happen is quite a different story....

[CptStern]

lol @ how defensive some of you get over this issue .. from missing the point entirely to making statements that have nothing to do with the issue at hand:

- why would "next gen" only be console exclusive? is crysis "current" gen? did "next gen" come into use when new iterations of consoles came out or has it also been used to describe game engines (UT2007), or directx 10, or new leaps in graphics technology?
- lol @ the sentiment of "well crysis is gonna suck anyway" ..what does that have to do with anything?
- what do console ports have to do with the g80's graphics horsepower?
- why would anyone believe that the G80 makes consoles obsolete?
- why are people taking this as an attack on PS3? all the article is saying is that the new g80 has more horsepower than the PS3's graphic solution
- what does price have to do with the g80's horsepower? all the quote is saying is that it's more powerful ..price plays no part in it
- of course this was going to happen ..pc graphics are ever evolving ..consoles have a finite lifespan and dont evolve until next gen
- and lastly why are some of you unabashed fanboys? platform loyalty is based on whatever you have/own/like ..to bash what you dont have is silly and says more about the person than the product they're bashing

bottom line: this thread is about how the g80 is a step forward from what is currently available today ..whether it's ps3, xbox360, wii, current pcs, psp or the DS ..the video card is more powerful than any of those platforms. That's it, nothing more

[VictimOfScience]

lol @ how defensive some of you get over this issue .. from missing the point entirely to making statements that have nothing to do with the issue at hand:

- why would "next gen" only be console exclusive? is crysis "current" gen? did "next gen" get coined when new iterations of consoles came out or has it also been used to describe game engines (UT2007), or directx 10, or new leaps in graphics technology?
- lol @ the sentiment of "well crysis is gonna suck anyway" ..what does that have to do with anything?
- what do console ports have to do with the g80's graphics horsepower?
- why would anyone believe that the G80 makes consoles obsolete?
- why are people taking this as an attack on PS3? all the article is saying is that the new g80 has more horsepower than the PS3's graphic solution
- what does price have to do with the g80's horsepower? all the quote is saying is that it's more powerful ..price plays no part in it
- of course this was going to happen ..pc graphics are ever evolving ..consoles have a finite lifespan and dont evolve until next gen
- and lastly why are some of you unabashed fanboys? platform loyalty is based on whatever you have/own/like ..to bash what you dont have is silly

bottom line: this thread is about how the g80 is a step forward from what is currently available today ..whether it's ps3, xbox360, wii, current pcs, psp or the DS ..the video card is more powerful than any of those platforms. That's it, nothing more

Yes, you are quite right. Its a monster card alright. Now to see what ATI comes up with. Next year is going to be a great year for gamers on any platform. I personally will be upgrading my whole setup and probably to one of those nifty new macs with 4 cores or maybe the ones they'll be introducing right soon with 8 cores. The GPU will be an integral part of that decision making process so its good to see serious performance results like these!

[Cole]

lol @ how defensive some of you get over this issue .. from missing the point entirely to making statements that have nothing to do with the issue at hand:

- why would "next gen" only be console exclusive? is crysis "current" gen? did "next gen" come into use when new iterations of consoles came out or has it also been used to describe game engines (UT2007), or directx 10, or new leaps in graphics technology?
- lol @ the sentiment of "well crysis is gonna suck anyway" ..what does that have to do with anything?
- what do console ports have to do with the g80's graphics horsepower?
- why would anyone believe that the G80 makes consoles obsolete?
- why are people taking this as an attack on PS3? all the article is saying is that the new g80 has more horsepower than the PS3's graphic solution
- what does price have to do with the g80's horsepower? all the quote is saying is that it's more powerful ..price plays no part in it
- of course this was going to happen ..pc graphics are ever evolving ..consoles have a finite lifespan and dont evolve until next gen
- and lastly why are some of you unabashed fanboys? platform loyalty is based on whatever you have/own/like ..to bash what you dont have is silly and says more about the person than the product they're bashing

bottom line: this thread is about how the g80 is a step forward from what is currently available today ..whether it's ps3, xbox360, wii, current pcs, psp or the DS ..the video card is more powerful than any of those platforms. That's it, nothing more
Agreed although I am a bit mad about how Graphic Cards are evoloving. The cards are simply getting more power hungry and bigger. Obviously there are other improvements. But I would like to say Graphic Cards perhaps staying the same size...or getting smaller? Becoming less power hungry and such.

[CptStern]

well a single g80 out performs dual sli 7950's ..they're also quieter and draw less power than current video cards


VoS: the quad core xeons? that will be uber expensive ..top of the line macs now have 2 dual core xeons and they're in the $3000 price point (which is really good considering I paid that much for a g4 a number of years ago)

[Direwolf]

I'm not going to be dissatisfied with the graphics we've got on the 360 and PS3 any time soon, so a step beyond that is off in la-la land for the moment.

[VictimOfScience]

VoS: the quad core xeons? that will be uber expensive ..top of the line macs now have 2 dual core xeons and they're in the $3000 price point (which is really good considering I paid that much for a g4 a number of years ago)
Well, the good thing is that Apple usually keeps their pricepoints the same from generation to generation so there's no going up (but there's no going down either). My brother got me hooked on this idea since he just got one, but for a few hundred dollars cheaper thanks to a work discount the lucky bugger. I think that is the way I will go because it has all of the benefits of OSX and the ability to play Windows games with ultra-uber performance (e.g. he was playing HL2 at like 2500x1600 with every single graphic option maxed out and was getting a super sexy smooth framerate). I am very jealous. I can only imagine what a card like this would do on top of the other performance pieces included therein....

[CptStern]

ya but bootcamp doesnt work well with every game ..there's still some issues with some games and I think there's a few that dont work at all ..I think the issue is driver related

[VictimOfScience]

ya but bootcamp doesnt work well with every game ..there's still some issues with some games and I think there's a few that dont work at all ..I think the issue is driver related
Well its still in beta though right? So presumably these issues will be ironed out upon release. I hope that's the case at least. Still its running HL2 and Far Cry and GTA:VC/SA well, so that would keep me busy for a while. :D

[CptStern]

ya most AAA games work as far as I know

it will be awhile before I return to macs ..just too easy to build/upgrade a pc ..funny cuz I was a mac fanboy for almost 10 years

[VictimOfScience]

Hahaha! How things change!

I am hoping that with 8 cores and like 4 gigs of RAM, I won't need to upgrade anything for quite some time if I get that machine. That way, the only real limit is the GPU and this one sounds damn fine for the time being but let's face it, they only last so long. :(

[Raziaar]

Oh man... PS3 will make PC's so obsolete! We'll be posting on these forums, filing our taxes over the internets, and all that technical stuff on this shiney little doohickey that takes up no space at all!

[-Psy-]

Whoever honestly thought that the PS3 would make the PC obsolete is a moron and deserves to be shot for their lack of knowledge about both consoles and pcs.

[VictimOfScience]

Whoever honestly thought that the PS3 would make the PC obsolete is a moron and deserves to be shot for their lack of knowledge about both consoles and pcs.
Dude, no one deserves to be shot over this. Educated maybe, but not shot.

[-Psy-]

Just exaggerating is all. :P

[VictimOfScience]

Just exaggerating is all. :P
Yeah, I figured, but it struck me as extreme this morning for whatever reason. (Not enough sleep due to FF12? Probably...)

Seriously though, I sincerely hope no one thought this generation would be the one that somehow makes PCs obsolete. I foresee something like that happening in the relatively near future, but by then PCs and consoles will be virtually the same anyway. Convergence is what is coming....

[CptStern]

Hahaha! How things change!

I am hoping that with 8 cores and like 4 gigs of RAM, I won't need to upgrade anything for quite some time if I get that machine. That way, the only real limit is the GPU and this one sounds damn fine for the time being but let's face it, they only last so long. :(

dont get me wrong, I still love apple (have an ipod and getting a nano soon) but since my pc is both my gaming rig and my work from home rig it has to be pc ..mac apps tend to be a little scarce (at least the free versions are ) ..but i'll probably get a mac mini as a media pc ...or just build a media pc

[DEATHMASTER]

You can't make pcs obsolete, more expensive to be better than consoles, but not obsolete.