• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

7800GTX 512 in SLI > XBox 360?

I would imagine such a setup would be a LOT faster. The XBox360 seems to be in the ballpark of a 7800GT/GTX or X1800XL/XT, based on cross-platform games like CoD2.
 
Your comparing Apples to Oranges.

EDIT: And the Xbox 360 has 48 shaders as it has a unified architechture.
 
While I agree its an apples and oranges issue, as far as sheer raw processing power goes, I would say a single 7800GTX 256MB has more going on than the Xbox 360.

You have to remember that even the best of consoles, (which is the 360 right now) only moves about 1/4 of the data a home computer does while 3D gaming.
Back in the original Xbox days it was closer to one tenth.
The resolutions and color depth are much lower. You dont notice this because nobody has made a TV that comes close to the average CRT monitor. HDTV is only high-definition by comparison to regular TV.
 
Originally posted by: shortylickens
You have to remember that even the best of consoles, (which is the 360 right now) only moves about 1/4 of the data a home computer does while 3D gaming.
Click to expand...
Why do you say that?
 
I dont think it will matter because game developers will write games that work on all platforms so games are written with PS2 and gamecube sales in mind with added sparkles for x-box 360 and pc games.
 
Originally posted by: Wingznut
Originally posted by: shortylickens
You have to remember that even the best of consoles, (which is the 360 right now) only moves about 1/4 of the data a home computer does while 3D gaming.
Click to expand...
Why do you say that?
Click to expand...

You have to remember that even the best of consoles, (which is the 360 right now) only moves about 1/4 of the data a home computer does while 3D gaming.
Back in the original Xbox days it was closer to one tenth.
The resolutions and color depth are much lower. You dont notice this because nobody has made a TV that comes close to the average CRT monitor. HDTV is only high-definition by comparison to regular TV.
Click to expand...
 
The XBox360 seems to be in the ballpark of a 7800GT/GTX or X1800XL/XT, based on cross-platform games like CoD2.
Click to expand...

If you compare top tier titles PGR3 makes everything on the PC look fairly laughable. CoD2 had to be coded to run on very low end setups- PCs. Using CoD2 to compare visuals then we should use a NES emulator for the PC to show its limitations.
 
i think SLI would outrun the xbox360...because (i think) PCs are definitely more capable of handling more graphics intensive stuff. xbox 360 is limited in some point or time.

hmm, but what about G71/G80 in SLI? that would be awesome.
 
2 7800gtx 512mb in sli will smoke a 360 any day of the week. and yes you can run whatever resolution you desire as long as your monitor is up to snuff.
not to mention the fact that a year from now you can upgrade the pc, but you are stuck with the performance of the 360 for its lifespan.
or you could just buy both. lol
 
People assumed the same thing way back when the PS2 came out and it was far far from true thanks to the geForce and Voodoo 5. The only console in history to have graphics processing(NOT cpu) compairible to a high end PC was the dreamcast thanks to basicly having a bumped up Kyro 1 and decent Vram. The dreamcast was compairible because at the time of its release(early 1999 a few months before the geForce 256) the best of the best were TNT2 and voodoo 3. The PS2 was only faster than the dreamcast in poly count and by the time of its release in march 2000 it wast even compairible to high end PCs.

The Xbox 360 is much closer than the PS2 was but I still would not put it near a G70, but I guess we cannot be sure until someone can hack one to run 1600x1200 VGA.
 
A few points.

1. Xbox 360 games run at a significantly lower resolution. One benefit for consoles to that is that low res textures look fine on consoles but look like crap on PC monitors. If you've played both the Xbox 360 (on an HD TV) and PC version of Quake 4, you'll actually notice that the textures for the Xbox 360 version are lower rez than for PC.


2. Xbox 360 has a total of 512 mb of memory and there is no virtual memory to fall back on. Data is read directly from disc. That greatly limits what game designers can do with games. As old and outdated as the graphics from World of Warcraft look, it almost certainly wouldn't be possible to run on the Xbox 360 simply because there are just so many meshes and textures.
 
Really Apples & Oranges..

The 360 IMHO is currently more powerful than the current PC Gaming Setup, graphically.

Don't just count polygons..

The PC has so much overhead in the backend that a lot of wasted processing power.

The consoles have lower overhead, since there's no windoze GUI and the developers can use much more available system resources just for games.

I look at many PC games and 360 games, while the current crop of 360 games aren't that much exciting, there are some impressive graphics that I've yet to see on the PC yet.

Yes, PGR3 makes all PC racers look like SNES Mariokart. Even PC racers like GTR just look like crayon colored cars than PGR3's graphics.

Now, I still play my HL2, CSS, FEAR, and WOW but you gotta admit developers prefer consoles because they can wield more power out of consoles than PCs with the most expensive hardware.

 
Originally posted by: vision33r
Really Apples & Oranges..

The 360 IMHO is currently more powerful than the current PC Gaming Setup, graphically.

Don't just count polygons..

The PC has so much overhead in the backend that a lot of wasted processing power.

The consoles have lower overhead, since there's no windoze GUI and the developers can use much more available system resources just for games.

I look at many PC games and 360 games, while the current crop of 360 games aren't that much exciting, there are some impressive graphics that I've yet to see on the PC yet.

Yes, PGR3 makes all PC racers look like SNES Mariokart. Even PC racers like GTR just look like crayon colored cars than PGR3's graphics.

Now, I still play my HL2, CSS, FEAR, and WOW but you gotta admit developers prefer consoles because they can wield more power out of consoles than PCs with the most expensive hardware.
Click to expand...



wrong in every way, have you even palyed games on a 7800 sli setup? i highly doubt it. the 360 looks good on low resolution tvs, but a HIGH end pc will blow its doors off.
 
Originally posted by: cronic
Originally posted by: vision33r
Really Apples & Oranges..

The 360 IMHO is currently more powerful than the current PC Gaming Setup, graphically.

Don't just count polygons..

The PC has so much overhead in the backend that a lot of wasted processing power.

The consoles have lower overhead, since there's no windoze GUI and the developers can use much more available system resources just for games.

I look at many PC games and 360 games, while the current crop of 360 games aren't that much exciting, there are some impressive graphics that I've yet to see on the PC yet.

Yes, PGR3 makes all PC racers look like SNES Mariokart. Even PC racers like GTR just look like crayon colored cars than PGR3's graphics.

Now, I still play my HL2, CSS, FEAR, and WOW but you gotta admit developers prefer consoles because they can wield more power out of consoles than PCs with the most expensive hardware.
Click to expand...



wrong in every way, have you even palyed games on a 7800 sli setup? i highly doubt it. the 360 looks good on low resolution tvs, but a HIGH end pc will blow its doors off.
Click to expand...

Dude, I have 6800GT right now and sold my 7800GTX, SLI or not PC graphics just does not push the envelope of the hardware one bit. It is not about hardware, it is the game code is just not pushing the hardware enough.

Show me one PC game that can blow the doors off of PGR3.

Get off that high horse that PC graphics are better, I still have yet to see one PC game that blows Ninja Gaiden Xbox away or Resident Evil 4.

 
need for speed most wanted looks great with everything turned up to the max at 1600 x 1200. what do you think that 360 will look like in 12 months compared to high end graphics cards at that time? i guess you think consoles will still look better. right.
uber pc kicks consoles a__ any day of the week.
 
not even to mention the g71 that will be here in a couple of months and will totally dominate the 360

have you looked at half life 2 lost coast in 32 bit or better yet 64 bit on a sli setup?. 360 doesn't even compare.
 
Originally posted by: cronic
Originally posted by: vision33r
Really Apples & Oranges..

The 360 IMHO is currently more powerful than the current PC Gaming Setup, graphically.

Don't just count polygons..

The PC has so much overhead in the backend that a lot of wasted processing power.

The consoles have lower overhead, since there's no windoze GUI and the developers can use much more available system resources just for games.

I look at many PC games and 360 games, while the current crop of 360 games aren't that much exciting, there are some impressive graphics that I've yet to see on the PC yet.

Yes, PGR3 makes all PC racers look like SNES Mariokart. Even PC racers like GTR just look like crayon colored cars than PGR3's graphics.

Now, I still play my HL2, CSS, FEAR, and WOW but you gotta admit developers prefer consoles because they can wield more power out of consoles than PCs with the most expensive hardware.
Click to expand...



wrong in every way, have you even palyed games on a 7800 sli setup? i highly doubt it. the 360 looks good on low resolution tvs, but a HIGH end pc will blow its doors off.
Click to expand...

I somewhat agree with both of you. SLI 7800GTX's will wipe the floor with an XBOX360. But since the XBOX360 has so little overhead, it can afford to be less than SLI 7800's by "muscle" comparison alone.

i highly doubt it. the 360 looks good on low resolution tvs, but a HIGH end pc will blow its doors off.
Click to expand...

You ask him if he's played on SLI 7800s... but have you played XBOX360 on an HDTV? Your comment about "low resolution TVs" leads me to think otherwise. The X360's kiosks don't count... not until they stop using the same damned demos.

 
yeah i played it on my sony kd-34xbr960n HDTV. i asn't impressed at all, and i do think that qualifys as a high end hdtv. I guess we must agree to disagree. i'll keep playing my pc and spend =ing the money i made from selling my 360 on ebay. lol
 
Originally posted by: cronic
not even to mention the g71 that will be here in a couple of months and will totally dominate the 360

have you looked at half life 2 lost coast in 32 bit or better yet 64 bit on a sli setup?. 360 doesn't even compare.
Click to expand...

Hey I played the Lost coast, I think Valve's "artistic" spin on the graphics is impressive at 1st but it looks weak compared to PGR3's motion blur and dynamic live lighting effects, it really is something to see and experience. I'm not trying to debate endless about another PC vs Console debate but when you play it, it really beats everything on the PC so far I've seen and played.

BTW, NFS Most Wanted plays smoother on the 360, quicker load time and smoother gameplay over all. There is something about arcade games and consoles that just doesn't feel right on PC setups.

I don't think the PC's problems can be cured easily with more "muscle" such as the x1900 and G71, even DX10 won't cut it.

The reason is the console developers are given direct access to the 360/PS3's full capability while PC developers can't wield all the newest video cards capabilities until DX10 comes out and they still have to struggle with the PC's overhead issues.
 
BTW, NFS Most Wanted plays smoother on the 360, quicker load time and smoother gameplay over all.

wrong again. My pc with raided raptors and 2 gig of memory is like butter compared to the 360 on nfsmw. But there in lies the problem. It is impossible for people to make a blanket statement as that as there are so many different ways to setup and configure a pc it makes game play hard to compare with different peoples setups. I am not saying that the 360 isn't a great consloe because it is the best out there. I am saying that for me gaming on my pc killed my 360 experience.
 
I understand what you guys are trying to say. How COD was made in mind that it will be ran on systems that will not have 7800GTs or even 6800GTs for that matter. So they created it with those types of people in mind where as the XBox 360's hardware is all the same hardware, and when they created the game, they didn't have to factor in slower systems. I can see where that would make it greater than a computer's graphics. Thanks for the info.
 
Originally posted by: Nocturnal
I understand what you guys are trying to say. How COD was made in mind that it will be ran on systems that will not have 7800GTs or even 6800GTs for that matter. So they created it with those types of people in mind where as the XBox 360's hardware is all the same hardware, and when they created the game, they didn't have to factor in slower systems. I can see where that would make it greater than a computer's graphics. Thanks for the info.
Click to expand...


That why you have different settings on a pc for different hardware setups. It is not greater than a pc with all the settings maxed out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top