Dkcode
Senior member
- May 1, 2005
- 995
- 0
- 0
The thing the 360 has got going for itself is not only the decent shader power, although this is nothing compared to the Geforce 8 series. The majority of titles has software-hardware optimization. Something which is seriously lacking in PC gaming at these times.
VGA cable and run it on a 19inch CRT or 19-22inch TFT and it should look fine.
i use my 360 on my 2005FPW and while for racing games i have to use the 1:1 pixel scaling because otherwise PGR3 and TDU look garbage and jaggy when filled to the screen. other games such as GoW, R6, SC: DA all look amazing when aspect filled on my 2005.
but anyway its a console, i know its next gen and a nice bit of kit, but in reality its not that powerful in comparison to what you get on a PC today. consoles are desgined the look consistently good for a couple of years. on the pc everything looks fan bleeding tastic untill 6 months later when another system hog game brings todays latest and greatest to its knees and you start the whole upgrade process again
i use my 360 on my 2005FPW and while for racing games i have to use the 1:1 pixel scaling because otherwise PGR3 and TDU look garbage and jaggy when filled to the screen. other games such as GoW, R6, SC: DA all look amazing when aspect filled on my 2005.
but anyway its a console, i know its next gen and a nice bit of kit, but in reality its not that powerful in comparison to what you get on a PC today. consoles are desgined the look consistently good for a couple of years. on the pc everything looks fan bleeding tastic untill 6 months later when another system hog game brings todays latest and greatest to its knees and you start the whole upgrade process again
well that eDRAM isnt even big enough to sample a 720p image for AA, i dont think its even big enough to get 4xAA on a 480p image.
how they counter this though is by employing a tile based rendering approach, but using rather large tiles, but not so big that they wont fit into the eDRAM for "free" AA.
i think the number was 3 or 4 tiles, so that they could fit in the eDRAM but at the same time minimize the amount of the image or geometry that would appear in the eDRAM more than once if they had used smaller tiles. no point in doing things twice...its a waste
so they its a balancing game really the more AA they use the smaller the tiles have to be to fit, but then they have to ask, is the 360 quick enough to munch through these tiles? if not then they'll have to reduce the AA, make the tiles bigger.
i think thats the jist, you might wanna go to beyond3d.com because they have a very very good detailed explanation of how the Xenos GPU works and how they use it to produce the graphics.
Weren't you poking around in AVS a bit ago? As far as your issues go, its either the TV, cables, or xbox. You said on AVS you tried replacing the xbox with a known working set, did you also use a new set of cables? Can you try using a different input on the TV? Otherwise, try to return the TV.
Originally posted by: ZimZum
Originally posted by: 40sTheme
Originally posted by: ArchAngel777
I'll let you have your opinion, but it is generally conceded by both PC gamers and XBox 360 alike that the best looking game right now is Gears of War. Since only the 360 has it, I guess the 360 takes the cake.
I own both and this is what I think. I think the PC *now* has more power than the Xbox 360. However, I think the Xbox 360 will continue to put better looking games out because PC developers are still developing for the lower common denominator. Therefore, while a top end PC is faster, it essentially goes to waste (somewhat). Thought being able to enable 16XQAF probably has its advantages...
But in the end it doesn't matter... Own both!
PC gamers concede that GoW has the best graphics? No. Respectfully, absolutely not. I'm pretty sure any PC gamer would say 'GoW should come out for the PC so I can actually turn on some good looking enhancements.' Also, PC developers develop for everyone. The PC is easy to develop for and is constantly on a basis of establishment as far as graphics go, but consoles are always a new and big change and the developing styles must be totally overhauled and are very limited by the exact architecture of the console. I must give consolation to the console graphics because; frankly, it's hard to make the games on them.
Wow, pretty much everything in this post is wrong.
Yeah, especially the part about how the games are developed. Pretty much any gamer knows that console games get better graphics as they age, because the developers learn new tricks to make games look better on the same hardware. I am not a programmer, but I have been told, (and it seems pretty obvious to even my limited programming knowledge), that making software for hardware in which you have the exact specifications, is much easier, especially in the efficiency department.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 11,679
- 0
- 81
It is much easier. Especially because you have have to code for ONE Video setting PERIOD.
Not only that, GoW is the best looking game to date. But I honestly don't see how that means the console "wins". What that means to me, is that the PC is still awaiting games. Anyone who thinks the console has more power than the PC is in denial- better games right now...yeah probably.
-Kevin
The 360 has the better graphics for the same price. If you compare a $400 pc to a $400 xbox 360, the 360 will come out on top.
However once you go above the $1000 mark pc then the PC will have the edge.
I have both an Xbox 360 and a E6600 with a 8800GTX and my PC blows the Xbox 360 out of the water, however the PC was $1500 while I have $400 invested in my Xbox 360 running both through my Dell FP 2001 monitor.
However once you go above the $1000 mark pc then the PC will have the edge.
I have both an Xbox 360 and a E6600 with a 8800GTX and my PC blows the Xbox 360 out of the water, however the PC was $1500 while I have $400 invested in my Xbox 360 running both through my Dell FP 2001 monitor.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 11,679
- 0
- 81
Well if you want to count it that way, you will need to buy a TV to use the Xbox or at least a monitor the same as the computer.
Also factor in that a PC does more than just game for the money you get.
-Kevin
i just recently bought the mitsubishi hd1000 and mainly got it for movies. my friend brought over his xbox and we played games (gears of war and splinter cell double agent). i was totally blown away by the image quality. we also watched 720p movies and i was amazed by how sharp everything looked. i would highly recommend this projector. you get a lot of bang for your buck!
check it out here:
HD1000U
check it out here:
HD1000U
Aikouka
Lifer
- Nov 27, 2001
- 30,383
- 912
- 126
The only bad thing I really ever notice about XBOX graphics is the aliasing. But I don't run a $400 computer or even a $1700 computer (adding in the cost of my TV)... heck, my computer cost more than twice that, so I should expect some decent power out of it. But for what it's worth, I got a gaming machine that has some decent purdiness.
Reread what he said. hes talking about he doesnt upgrade his drivers and whatnot so he just plays it on his 360.
ever since I got the 360 and the Wii, my PC has been relegated to an internet kiosk, browsing the net, downloading stuff and checking emails. All my gaming is on the consoles. I cant imagine what it would be like once the PS3 also starts getting good games and then my time will truly be divided among the 3!!!!
Only reason I still need the PC is for its media center capabilities.
Only reason I still need the PC is for its media center capabilities.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 11,679
- 0
- 81
He wasn't saying that. He was saying that games on the computer, compared to similar generation games on the console will always look better on the computer (ie: Computer is more powerful- sometimes that power isn't tapped). Which is true given the level of customization allowed on PC. When Gears gets ported to computer I will guarantee you that it will look better on PC then it did on 360.
-Kevin
I know that wasn't directed at me, because I agree with you. The last major console system I bought was an XBox, and I fried the motherboard on it while soldering up a USB port. (Long story)
Luckily, out of the ashes, I got 4 XBox controller ports which I wired up for USB on my computer. So I still get the same emulator games I used to play(SNES,Sega, etc), sans the actual XBox ones. (Is there a stable Xbox emulator, yet?)
And the Xbox controllers are great for games like Flatout 2, Toca 3, GTA games.
So far, the only console that has really impressed me more than the versatility of my PC is the Wii. The big question on my mind is how many accessories they will develop for the remote, and how good the software is at using those accessories. For example, there were some Nintendo DS games released that really made poor use of the features of the system (Wi-Fi, touch, dual screen), FFIII really sticks out as a highly anticipated game that really sucked as far as utilizing the second screen. Besides that, I believe there is enormous amount of potential there.
Graphical immersion can definitely be improved, (I wonder what the resolution is of the "panels" in Farenheit 451
) but it gets to a point where it takes too much hardware for minimal gains. While I still enjoy sitting on my butt and playing games, I also enjoy standing up and being ridiculed of my hilarious batter stance.
mooncancook
Platinum Member
- May 28, 2003
- 2,874
- 50
- 91
I don't quite understand why console guys always try to argue or convince others or themselves that their console is more powerful or its gfx is better than PCs. All consoles get is that they get to enjoy some games first before the PC gamers get a better looking port (though sometimes it might be a worse crappy port). One main difference between a PC and a console is that a PC can replace a console while a console cannot replace a PC, that's why the demand for computing power is always greater for PCs, and PCs are always ahead. After all, a console is a toy.
oh and btw, social gathering with Wii > X360 > PS3 (unless it's all men gathering). gfx does not always win.
oh and btw, social gathering with Wii > X360 > PS3 (unless it's all men gathering). gfx does not always win.
It's easier to optimize your engine for the exact hardware you know will be there. You can do things like writing shaders that might run like crap on another GPU, but that you know will be pipelined really efficiently on the 360. You can fill every last bit of video memory and don't have to worry about someone running the game without enough VRAM. And you don't have to worry about CPU and GPU scaling.
But, you have to put in a lot of time and effort customizing your code to run on that exact hardware if you want it to run well. That part is tougher than with PC development, especially early in the life of a new console. And when the next consoles come out in 4-5 years, the hardware is so different that all the tricks you learned to optimize for the old one are no longer relevant. Compare to a PC, where the hardware is built and optimized around the APIs.
Some consoles are also just naturally difficult to optimize for -- the PS2's "Emotion" GPU was apparently very hard to use well early on (it took years to develop really robust and reusable game engines and tools), and the PS3's Cell processor is also very very difficult to really take full advantage of (in part because most programmers are not used to writing code for multithreaded streaming processors).
I'm not even gonna get into the "console games look better/worse" argument.
All you can really say is that a very high-end PC has considerably more raw GPU horsepower (albeit at much higher cost), and the gap will only get bigger.Not sure why everyone is getting their panties in a twist over this. I am a die-hard PC gamer and I have no problem admitting the truth, that the Xbox 360 takes the crown for the best looking video game thus far. Sure the PC has the power to render it if it were ported over properly, but the point is, the PC doesn't have Gears of War.
Seriously, this is almost ridiculous to read some the responses in this thread, people are getting emtional and throwing out insults when they probably don't even have both systems, let alone have them both hooked up to the same TV-Monitor.
Seriously, this is almost ridiculous to read some the responses in this thread, people are getting emtional and throwing out insults when they probably don't even have both systems, let alone have them both hooked up to the same TV-Monitor.
mooncancook
Platinum Member
- May 28, 2003
- 2,874
- 50
- 91
IMO PC offers similar gaming experience as 360 and PS3 when hook to a TV as a htpc, while offering more entertainment functionalities and potentials, but none like Wii. so...
PC + Wii = FTW
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 Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter