-
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.
How long does a video card "last" at 1920x1200 ?
- Thread starter asintu
- Start date
Syntax Error
Senior member
Depends on what you mean by "great" video card. 8800GT? It should do nicely in 1920 x 1200 for games, though I'm no fortune teller and I can't predict what games are going to come out that are going to raise the bar like Crysis did.
Extelleron
Diamond Member
We're still waiting for a single card that can play Crysis well at 1920x1200, so for now, not long. It's not a good time to be a high-resolution gamer, with games like Crysis out and no new high-performance graphics cards released for over a year.
Should last you about a year although you probably won't get any AA with newer titles.
There's a link to games planned for 2008 in the PC games forum and tons of games are being built on UE3.0, which runs great and looks great unlike CryPig's CryingGame engine which only looks great. Even if UT3 was a commercial bust it looks like Epic's UE3.0 has won the licensing war this time around.
There's a link to games planned for 2008 in the PC games forum and tons of games are being built on UE3.0, which runs great and looks great unlike CryPig's CryingGame engine which only looks great. Even if UT3 was a commercial bust it looks like Epic's UE3.0 has won the licensing war this time around.
No video card will last 3 years in a PC when you're trying to play the latest-and-greatest games at that resolution...hell I'd doubt 6 months!
The reason why Xbox360/PS3 both can do it, as they're a closed system, developers always know what they're working with so they can optimize the game to run smoothly... can't do that on the millions of combinations of PC hardware..
And then there's the question of cost... are you willing to spend $600-700 (or more!) every 6 months to keep up with the latest video card? If you're like most people..no you won't..
I don't like console games for the most part. Plus, I don't play games all that often, and I use the computer all the time for things other than games, like checking these forums. It is easier for me to just say, "Hey, I'd like to play a game of C&C." and just open it up and run it without going into my living room and looking through my games and set the TV up to play something. I generally think of the Console as something I like to play when I have company, but since I have had kids that isn't much of an option anymore.
Another issue is that they target lifespan of a console is about 5 years. The 360, for example, came out in late fall 2005. I dont' think they have the next one slated til 09 or 10 or possibly even later.
Another issue with consoles is that is has been harder for the end user to get them to play at HD resolutions because you had to hook them up to an HD set. More people had computer monitors capable of 1280x720 (or 1280x1024) - and I mean tons more people - than had access to a next gen console AND and an HDTV to get that type of resolution.
In my searching for a new flat panel (24") i've discovered lots of these things have multipe inputs so you can have a console plugged in next to your computer and hook it up to the same monitor. The $500 monitor i'm getting is much cheaper than the $2000 HDTV i'm hoping to get with my tax return. Plus, in most houses there's more than one person and you have to get access to the TV for your console or have it set up elsewhere.
In my personal view, the thing i don't like about consoles is the controller(s). Give me a keyboard and a mouse anyday over those gamepads 🙂
Another issue with consoles is that is has been harder for the end user to get them to play at HD resolutions because you had to hook them up to an HD set. More people had computer monitors capable of 1280x720 (or 1280x1024) - and I mean tons more people - than had access to a next gen console AND and an HDTV to get that type of resolution.
In my searching for a new flat panel (24") i've discovered lots of these things have multipe inputs so you can have a console plugged in next to your computer and hook it up to the same monitor. The $500 monitor i'm getting is much cheaper than the $2000 HDTV i'm hoping to get with my tax return. Plus, in most houses there's more than one person and you have to get access to the TV for your console or have it set up elsewhere.
In my personal view, the thing i don't like about consoles is the controller(s). Give me a keyboard and a mouse anyday over those gamepads 🙂
Extelleron
Diamond Member
There are very few PS3/360 games that are rendered at 1080p. Halo 3 isn't even rendered at 720p; it's slightly below it. If you want to compare console vs PC resolution, you need to be playing PC games @ 1280x720. Then a high-end card will likely last you 3 years.
good point...i guess the comparison is more fair at 720p. If a high end video card "last" about 3 years at 720p resolution then I guess it is cheaper than a console if you factor in the cost of games.
One other thing...would it be better then to buy a bigger (like 32'') 720p LCD HDTV than a similarly priced 27'' LCD monitor? Cause the 720p resolution would be much lower than the native resolution for the LCD monitor.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
