Gaming consoles VS PC

[Syntax]

Here's something I've been wondering for a very long time: how is it that gaming consoles like ps2, xbox and gamecube can produce higher quality graphics at higher framerates than most PCs, even though they run on much slower CPUs?(for example, xbox is only 700mhz or something, and that's the fastest one)

Life is but a sexually transmitted disease

 

[spitoon]

Deja Vu??

 

[Vimp]

Your mistaken. They don't run at higher graphic quality. Resolutions for consoles are pitifull in comparison to computers. TVs cant support very good res. Also consoles don't have near the detail level of computer versions of the same games but because of the bad res its not very obvious. Also because consoles support the latest special effects it can seem as if they look better then they really are. Additionally consoles are specificly built for games where as computers are not so an equivelant computer spec may do a little less performance wise compared to a console but not by much.

Needless to say Computers are deffinitly superior to consoles when it comes to graphic quality AND speed. However not always are PCs as up-to-date for special effects as consoles.

 

[spitoon]

I said "deja vu" because a similar thread was posted here not too long ago

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=377927#377927" target="_new">http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=377927#377927</A>

 

[splenda20]

That was my post, but I didn't mean for it to be a PC vs. Console. I was trying to say that there should be a new OS for PCs that are made specifically for games, like that of a consoles OS.

Anyways, some of the things mentioned are not true. Consoles generally run at lower res, but HD TVs are capable of 1900 * 1080 and some games for Xbox support that, so it's not that they look good cause of lower res anymore. Also, some games are programmed better for console than for PC. For instance Splinter Cell has much better lighting and shadow effects on XBox on PC because the PC port was somewhat sloppy and doesn't take as much advantage of PC graphic cards as it does the Xbox (this is not true for the other consoles, PC does look better than PS2 and GC).
Overall, IMO PCs have the potential for better graphics, but games generally look better on XBox.

 

[Britdude]

A PC has more class

 

[shadus]

It has nothing to do with the os. Well yah it does, but very little. The reason console games generally get better performance on the same hardware as a pc is because: ITS A NON MOVING HARDWARE PLATFORM. You don't have to program for ati, nvidia, matrox, generic, bobsvidcard, and ancient tnt2 cards. You don't have to worry, "Is this going to work with x cd-rom?" or will this asm opt work on amd and intel? Thus you get more time to write asm opts and you have less bugs in the long run since there are less possible conflicts in platform.

Do Consoles look better? Yes at release.
Would a new "game" OS fix computers? Not a bit.

Shadus

 

[rain_king_uk]

You're wrong - games take a huge overhead hit on the PC, specifically running on Windows, because they have to run in protected mode and because the platform has alot of [-peep-] running in the background all the time taking up resources. An OS on the PC specifically written for games would make a big difference in performance.

 

[shadus]

Without a non-moving hardware target it isn't going to do as much as you'd think. Shutdown everything unneeded in windows and see what kinda performance you gain, yes you would gain more from a game specific os, but not a tremendous ammount more unless you had a single hardware platform to optimize for. Take a look at y1 ps1 games and take a look at ps1 games out this year... hardware is same, but the games look *ALOT* better because programers have had years to come up with reuseable asm routines for tasks that take to long because they dont have to worry about several hundred thousand possible hardware combinations.

Shadus

 

[rain_king_uk]

I guess that's why a machine with a 700Mhz P3 and 64Mb of RAM (X-box) running in real mode can match a PC with a 2Ghz+ CPU and 256MB+ of RAM running on Windows (protected mode) when running games huh?

 

[cleeve]

Remember that the Xbox is running natively at 640*480.

That helps alot with the speed...

------------------
Radeon 9500 (hardmodded to PRO, o/c to 322/322)
AMD AthlonXP 2400+ (o/c to 2600+ with 143 fsb)
3dMark03: 4055

 

[shadus]

If I run my games at 512x400 (or whatever the freaky low-res is) they scream too (I might weep, but they'd scream as far as speed goes). Not to mention look better than xbox/ps2/gc. Like I said, *MOST* of the effect your are seeing is being able to optimize for a single hardware platform. It has much less to do with software. What I really miss on my pc is the loading times. Those are so nice.

Shadus

 

[rain_king_uk]

If you're talking solely about rendering speed, then yes you are right. However, the actual game logic is a load on the cpu/memory part of the platform and this is the part that suffers from running in protected mode on Windows.

 

[Snorkius]

If you have a TV-out, try running a low quality DIVx or Halo through it on your TV. Looks much better.

My brother programmed for PSX and he says that their OS sucks arse. Huge amounts of bugs and limitations. A gaming OS would be like a DOS with a specific hardware configuration.

<font color=blue>"As you journey through life take a minute every now and then to give a thought
for the other fellow. He could be plotting something."
----Hagar the Horrible</font color=blue>

 

[shadus]

heh god, dos... i have alot of good memories there... trying to eek that extra 3k of base memory out. memmaker, custom config, and optimized defrags oh my! Linux would actually make a good modern gaming os really. You can par the kernel down to just support the hardware in your machine specifically. If you know what you are doing or are running a version like gentoo (or a bsd with ports) you can custom compile all the software on the machine to take advantage of all the hardware opts on your machine also... bout as close to a completely custom os as you can get.

Shadus

 

[Caimbeul]

I agree with most comments here. TV cant support hi-res so game are in lower res and run faster. detail level is lower too. another reason consoles seem faster is the fact that hardware (ie GPU etc is hardwired to the silicon and is specifically built for gaming, there are lower latencies, ottlenecks etc. data doesnt have to go through bus X to reach part blah blah. + developers are getting lazier in general. they will concentrate efforts on a console version and then go "Hmm, I know lets give them the option to change resolution and use a keyboard/mouse control method and not optimize a single bit of code because console version is out and ok and thats al that matters...do people still play games on PC?"

<i>Mmmm Dawn AND Eve at the same time...Drroooooll
-------------------------------------------------
<b>XP2800 Barton, 2x512Mb PC2700, ASUS A7N8X, Hercules 9800Pro 128Mb.

 

[splenda20]

I guess no one here has heard of HDTV??? FYI, XBox supports resolutions up to 1900*1080, Hardly low-res.
Also, all this talk about developing games for diff specs isn't a strong argument as to why consoles look better. Properly coded PC games run in different codepaths so they are optimized for different vid cards. They aren't limited by low-end cards, they just have to turn certain features off for those ones. Otherwise, all games would look the same regardless of the graphic card the user has.

 

[GeneticWeapon]

If you think console games look better then pc games, then you need to leave now and never come back.....seriously....go.

<b>I help because you suck</b>

 

[splenda20]

To quote myself "Overall, IMO PCs have the potential for better graphics, but games generally look better on XBox"

Try reading all posts...
And how could you say that all PC games have better graphics than Console??? Have you seen the Xbox version of Rainbow Six 3 or Splinter Cell or even Tiger Woods, definately better than PC. I used to hold you in pretty high regard GW, but your ignorant comment about console graphics really surprises me. Maybe you should get your facts straight before you comment next time.

 

[GeneticWeapon]

Wow, that bums me out...especially since I have <b>no freakin' idea who you are</b>..... :tongue:


<b>I help because you suck</b>

 

[fragglefart]

agreed.
no console has caught me alight since the dreamcast, (which noone bought, silly buggars.... after playing on my bros PS2 for a coupla years, and my housemates Xbox for 2 years.....) nothing has moved, tech wise, since the SEGA DC days on the console platform.
Anyone who thinks that a pc game is inferior to a console game misses a LOT of major rendering/code features.

Man, i love console games... but for sheer GRAPHICS?!!!
ah [-peep-] i forget.... i only have a DEGREE in 3D studies!!!

............................................
Render times? You'll find me down the pub...

 

[GeneticWeapon]

My dreamcast is hooked up in front of my TV as we speak

<b>I help because you suck</b>

 

[fragglefart]

thats because YOU have taste

............................................
Render times? You'll find me down the pub...

 

[GeneticWeapon]

<b>I help because you suck</b>

 

[shadus]

I have all 4 systems, but nothing compares to playing soulcaliber 1 on the dreamcast with the bigass green arcade sticks that are actually microswitched... I have SC2 on the xbox but it's just not as good

Shadus