The PC Gaming platform vs. next gen consoles

AniThyng · Post by **AniThyng** » 2005-05-19 11:31pm

Now that the 3 next gen consoles have been revealed, how will the PC's of the next couple of years be keeping up? WHat sort of specs will be needed to maintain parity or superiority hardware wise, and at what cost?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2005-05-19 11:39pm

You can max a PC higher then the new console specs. Afterall, these consoles are just computers in their own right, and they aren't going for the highest end. Though such PCs would be just slightly expensive (try the price of a new car).

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-05-19 11:57pm

The new consoles will outstrip all but the most expensive gaming rigs for about a year. Then for a couple years they'll match higher-midrange class systems, then midrange (6600 GT-equivalent of right now), then for the last years of their life, they'll barely keep up... and then new consoles will come along.

PC hardware just has a shorter and more continuous upgrade cycle. Consoles have a longer cycle, but improve in much greater leaps. Over time, it probably averages out to pretty even.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-05-20 12:06am

The last round of consoles were basically outmatched by the PC on the day they came out, but this round will be different, I think. There is a lot of new technology that can be implemented immediately on a console, but will take longer to bring to PC because of the need for compatibility with existing standards and APIs. I'm talking about shader-oriented graphics cards, more specialized CPUs, and the XBOX 360's 10 MB of "smart RAM" that can deliver 4X FSAA for free at 720p resolution.

If I had to guess, I'd say it will be like when the original Playstation came out. They will blow the PC away at first, and it will take about a year to catch up.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2005-05-20 11:08am

I'm thinking it might take longer than a year for PCs to catch up. First, we have to remember that these consoles are using completely different architectures than PCs - they're built for gaming, not for general computing. The 6 hardware threads in the 360 or the 7 core Cell in the PS3 simply don't have counterparts in the PC world. The consoles are dealing with bus latencies and the bandwidth issues come with multiple bus systems. The graphics chip architectures are very different, and can't be readily applied to PCs. The memory schemes are also completely different animals. The compilers for these systems only have to worry about an instruction set that should be fairly well optimized for gaming, and not a more generalize set where sub-optimial instruction choices can be made.

I'm thinking that it take DX10 and serious manufacturing advances in PC processors for PCs to catch up.

Of course, I could just under the influence of 360/PS3 marketing hype at the moment... And the thought of playing Oblivion on my 42" HDTV...

Cal Wright · Post by **Cal Wright** » 2005-05-20 12:15pm

For a very serious gamer, with a very small budget, it basically blows it out of the water. Take this computer for instance. It was already 'fast', but it wasn't able to run newer games. So I made a goal to get it into the Doom 3 specs. I spent roughly $200 easy and it still wasn't close enough to give me a smooth experience. It would have taken another few hundred bills to make it come out right, and that's just for one game of one time. While you can constantly produce PC games that up the ante, it's very hard for most people to keep thier hardware up to spec.

AniThyng · Post by **AniThyng** » 2005-05-20 12:46pm

Sigh...there goes my Athlon XP 2000 and GeForce4Ti.

Does this mean the days when games ported to PC looked better then thier console ports are over? [e.g. KOTOR, HALO, GTA, NFS, to name a few examples i've seen for myself]

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2005-05-20 12:56pm

AniThyng wrote:Sigh...there goes my Athlon XP 2000 and GeForce4Ti.

Does this mean the days when games ported to PC looked better then thier console ports are over? [e.g. KOTOR, HALO, GTA, NFS, to name a few examples i've seen for myself]

Only if you own a (and these are somewhat pricey) high-definition television. Otherwise, your console games will still be stuck at the equivalent of 640x480 resolution.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2005-05-20 02:07pm

<nitpick>You´re stuck with a 720x576 resolution.</nitpick>

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2005-05-20 02:17pm

What? 720p is 1280x720, not 720x576 (which isn't even a TV resolution I've ever heard of).

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2005-05-20 03:31pm

Arrow Mk84 wrote:What? 720p is 1280x720, not 720x576 (which isn't even a TV resolution I've ever heard of).

PAL is 720x576, though TV broadcasts typically are 704x576.

NTSC is 720x480, though TV broadcasts typically are 704x480.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2005-05-20 04:17pm

Ok, I'm use to the NTSC numbers, not the PAL. Thanks for the info.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2005-05-20 06:34pm

Alyeska wrote:You can max a PC higher then the new console specs. Afterall, these consoles are just computers in their own right, and they aren't going for the highest end. Though such PCs would be just slightly expensive (try the price of a new car).

Oh, come on.

The most expensive CPU you're going to get is going to be at most $1000... and that's assuming you go with the high-priced Intel chips.
The most expensive GPU you're going to get is going to be at most $1000... nVidia recently released a 512mb 6800 Ultra, but that's more for penis size than anything else. You could easily cut this cost in half.
The best and most RAM should cost less than $1000.

Those are the big three cost factors. Everything else could easily add up to less than $500 if you wanted it to without negatively impacting game performance.

Where the hell are you getting new cars for less than $4000?

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-05-20 07:02pm

Only if you own a (and these are somewhat pricey) high-definition television.

True, but then one can take a pro-PC argument... people are likely to have a TV anyway, and increasingly more so will it be an HD-equipped TV. In fact, these consoles are likely to be a major driving force in the transition to HD... I expect HDTV prices to halve in a year.

With higher resolution (and much larger sizes) in TV screens, I'm betting you'll see PC gaming shift from monitor to TV, making PC's and consoles alike in one more way (this time, the PC becoming more console-like).

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2005-05-20 07:20pm

If rumors hold true, the new display technologies that are in the works will get you a 40" screen for $400. By the time tuners, DSPs/decoders and inputs accounted for, you could probably get a nice, big HDTV for a $1000.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2005-05-20 08:06pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
Alyeska wrote:You can max a PC higher then the new console specs. Afterall, these consoles are just computers in their own right, and they aren't going for the highest end. Though such PCs would be just slightly expensive (try the price of a new car).
Oh, come on.

The most expensive CPU you're going to get is going to be at most $1000... and that's assuming you go with the high-priced Intel chips.
The most expensive GPU you're going to get is going to be at most $1000... nVidia recently released a 512mb 6800 Ultra, but that's more for penis size than anything else. You could easily cut this cost in half.
The best and most RAM should cost less than $1000.

Those are the big three cost factors. Everything else could easily add up to less than $500 if you wanted it to without negatively impacting game performance.

Where the hell are you getting new cars for less than $4000?

I can build a computer that costs $20,000 easy.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-05-21 01:53am

I can build a computer that costs $20,000 easy.

Gold-plated case.... check.

Diamond-studded DVD+/-RW drive... check.

Case illumination provided by Chandrasekhar effect... check...

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2005-05-21 04:53am

Alyeska wrote:I can build a computer that costs $20,000 easy.

Yeah? Let's see it.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-05-21 06:12am

"Dude, PC's are, like, a hundred times more expensive than consoles."
"Nuh-uh! They're only ten times more expensive!"
"A hundred times!"
"Ten times!"
"Hundred times!"

Etc. etc.... seems like a silly argument, to me...

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2005-05-21 06:45am

Uraniun235 wrote:
Alyeska wrote:I can build a computer that costs $20,000 easy.
Yeah? Let's see it.

2 PCIe SATA2 RAID controllers and 12 400gb disks per controller.

Thats over ~$12k there just on the harddisks.

Quad high end server processors, about $1k each, and another $1k for the motherboard to run it.

Then slap in some high end graphics cards + SLI, probably a grant or 2 there.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-05-21 12:33pm

SPOOFE wrote:
I can build a computer that costs $20,000 easy.
Gold-plated case.... check.

Diamond-studded DVD+/-RW drive... check.

Case illumination provided by Chandrasekhar effect... check...

Don't forget the Tiffany and DeBeers work on the monitor, mouse, and keyboard.

This argument is retarded. The question is not whether or not it's possible to build a computer as expensive as a new car (of course it is). The issue is what it would cost to build a computer that matches the performance of the next-generation consoles. Just to do that, you don't need even the standard 80GB hard drives (you need maybe 20, assuming that you spend more to buy the hard-drive). Even though you need a really good graphics card or two, and some excellent processors, you're still not looking at more than a few thousand dollars to equal the performance of the consoles.

That pretty much means that the consoles are not already obsolete, like the last generation was, but it means that the PC can compete, at least in theory, with their power.

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2005-05-21 12:47pm

One of these maxed out. $16K... of course, it's not optimized for gaming, but it does reach close to $20K

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-05-21 02:33pm

salm wrote:<nitpick>You´re stuck with a 720x576 resolution.</nitpick>

Only if you live in Europe

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-05-21 02:37pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
Alyeska wrote:I can build a computer that costs $20,000 easy.
Yeah? Let's see it.

apple.com/store

Take a dual 2.7 GHz PowerMac G5.

Give it these specs:
• Dual 2.7GHz PowerPC G5
• 8GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 8x1GB
• 2x400GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
• NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL w/256MB GDDR3 SDRAM
• Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)
• Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)
• Bluetooth Module + AirPort Extreme Card
• 56k V.92 internal modem
• 16x SuperDrive double-layer (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
• PCI-X Gigabit Ethernet Card
• Fibre Channel PCI-X Card (w/SFP-SFP cable)
• Bluetooth Module + Apple Wireless Keyboard & Mouse - U.S. English
• Mac OS X - U.S. English
• Mac OS X Server (Unlimited-Client)
• None
• AppleCare Protection Plan for Power Mac (w/ or w/o Display)

Estimated Ship:
7-10 business days
Free Shipping
Subtotal $14,447.00

(although that includes the monitors, remove those and it drops to $8,449)

Of course most of this is just extra junk

I want to buy myself a 20k 8-core Opteron or something. I remember seeing 32-processor servers for like $100,000 on Ebay or something

Some more:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 57189&rd=1

AniThyng · Post by **AniThyng** » 2005-05-21 03:19pm

oooooooookay

Trying to steer it back on topic, what CPU/graphics card/RAM combo exists or are in the works that would match the consoles when they come out?