17 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  ] Newer
1.
 
No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 10:59
1.
No subject Sep 15, 2005, 10:59
Sep 15, 2005, 10:59
 
$600 bucks? Is that all?

2.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 11:07
2.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 11:07
Sep 15, 2005, 11:07
 
See, when the price of a graphics card is starting to become DOUBLE the price of a console that features pretty much the exact same graphics capability (isn't the X1800 basically the derivative of the RSX core in the 360?), it's not really that hard to figure out anymore WHY so many people are buying consoles over PCs, is it?

Creston


Avatar 15604
3.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 11:34
3.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 11:34
Sep 15, 2005, 11:34
 
I agree with you Creston. Unlike like consoles, video cards do not have a 5-year life span. Obviously, you can keep your video card in your system for 3-5 years if you want but after the second year or so, you'll definitely start to see it having difficulties keeping up with newer games.

With consoles (specifically Sony's PS2 and PS3), the graphics will be very good at the start of the console's life and only get better as time progresses. The two sides (consoles and PCs) have a completely opposite view of on pushing the graphic enevelope.

Consoles: push the limits of the hardware until necessity forces the creation of new console hardware.

PCs: Both video card makers and developers always playing catch up with each other, never seeming to be on the same page with at the same time.

There was a time when I thought I'd never pick just one platform and stick with it. But with the PS3 supporting mouse and keyboard, playing games as well as DVDs and music, and quite possibly becoming an all-in-one entertainment unit, there might not be a reason to upgrade my PC any further...

4.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 12:33
4.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 12:33
Sep 15, 2005, 12:33
 
I think video cards have a better life span than we give them credit for. I've got a Radeon 9700 Pro that I probably paid a hefty amount for about three years ago. It's holding up just fine. And my PC has consistently looked better than any of my consoles since I got it. So maybe not five years, but probably four.

That card can be had for like $80 on eBay these days. I just cobbled together a PC which seems to be handling modern games just fine for about $300, tossing some old parts I already had laying around. That's probably kept me from getting a 360 at launch.

5.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 13:01
5.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 13:01
Sep 15, 2005, 13:01
 
Yeah, my Ti4200 lasted a good 3 years I think. I don't remember exactly when they were released. Now I just recently upgraded to the 6800. This card would probably last at least as long, but I will probably upgrade my CPU/mobo before that and would have to get a new vid card since I'd be switching to PCI-E. I know that'll be an expensive upgrade, although I should be able to afford it by that time.

This space is available for rent
6.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 13:16
6.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 13:16
Sep 15, 2005, 13:16
 
Bought a 9800 AIW Pro in fall of 2003. It is still seeing duty in my wife's computer - playing all the current games at 1280 x 1024 and doing a pretty good job of it.

I would still be using the card except I upgraded my monitor and need a more powerful card to power it.

You cannot make anything fool-proof. The fools are too inventive

GW: Tr Gandhi (Ra/Ele lvl 20), Shiva Sung (Mo/Me lvl 20), Rana Pratap Singh (Wa/Ne lvl 8)
You cannot make anything fool-proof. The fools are too inventive

GW: Tr Gandhi (Ra), Shiva Sung (Mo), Mangal Pandey (Ne), Rana Pratap Singh (Wa), Boddhi Satwa (Ri), Bhagat Singh (De), Bahadur Shastri (Pa)
Avatar 11944
7.
 
I'm thinking the same thing
Sep 15, 2005, 14:05
7.
I'm thinking the same thing Sep 15, 2005, 14:05
Sep 15, 2005, 14:05
 
See, when the price of a graphics card is starting to become DOUBLE the price of a console that features pretty much the exact same graphics capability (isn't the X1800 basically the derivative of the RSX core in the 360?), it's not really that hard to figure out anymore WHY so many people are buying consoles over PCs, is it?

Creston

It's a very good point I agree, and add the fact that a console is really an all in one package that works with hardware you already have (stereo, TV, network?) and it looks even better.

But 2 things keep me with computers. (but I pre'ordrd the 360)
1. The games: So much more variety available on the computer and it's usually where all the cutting edge games go. Consoles seem to just refine what works and churn out titles. There are plenty of good console games but when new ideas come around, like the sims, Battlefield 1942, Half-Life they make them on the computer and if successful the consoles pick them up.
2. Online Games. Consoles are trying to catch up here and this next gen may get them a major share of the online market but atm playing games online from a console is in it's infancy, computers on the otherhand offer free mods and a huge online community's for most popular games.

BF2 Fanboy and Valve Hater.
8.
 
Re: I'm thinking the same thing
Sep 15, 2005, 14:12
8.
Re: I'm thinking the same thing Sep 15, 2005, 14:12
Sep 15, 2005, 14:12
 
I bet two Radeon X800 series gfx cards run in CrossFire will come out to be cheaper than buying one X1800 card soon.

Avatar 571
9.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 15:04
9.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 15:04
Sep 15, 2005, 15:04
 
In addition to (generally) being the most expensive item in the computer. Add in how few games actually have the ability to use the full features of these cards, how they are obsolete within a year, how so few (none?) developers actually improve performance from release to release, how consoles are expanding their content and variety while the PC market is stagnating somewhat, that we are seeing less and less innovation from the GPU companies, more often taking the "It's the same, but bigger!" approach, etc.

Maybe I am just gettin gold, but it seems like ATI/Nvidia are obsessed with pricing the gaming market out of existence...

Still amazed that they brought SLI back,
Ray Can we go, oh, forward and not backward? KTHXBYE

-----
http://users.ign.com/collection/RayMarden
http://www.dvdaficionado.com/dvds.html?cat=1&id=ray_marden
http://www.livejournal.com/users/raymarden/
I love you, mom.
Everything is awesome!!!
http://www.kindafunny.com/
I love you, mom.
Avatar 2647
10.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 15:13
10.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 15:13
Sep 15, 2005, 15:13
 
What amazes me about consoles is that developers are able to make 2 or more sequels for a game on the same exact hardware platform. There's only so much $%#! you can fit into a 10 pound bag. A sequel for a PC game almost always has changes to take advantage of faster processors, video cards, and any new features associated with them. Plus, the standard memory requirements are always going up.


This comment was edited on Sep 15, 15:18.
11.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 17:03
11.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 17:03
Sep 15, 2005, 17:03
 
I think video cards have a better life span than we give them credit for. I've got a Radeon 9700 Pro that I probably paid a hefty amount for about three years ago. It's holding up just fine.

Video cards sometimes last as long as you still want to use them. What I meant about the card's lifespan was that newer games tend to shorten the card's lifespan. Also, the price drops that occur because newer cards are released. Thus you have a $400 card that has become a $100 card for your wife in a short period of time.

And there's no way the older generation of cards are handling the new games just fine. Doom 3, F.E.A.R., and a few others can really choke your system with the features turned on.

I just wish devs and cards makers would get on the same page. Instead, we have ATI and nVidia racing back and forth against each other while devs are struggling to implement some new feature in their game to take advantage of ATI/nVidia's card.

12.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 17:12
nin
12.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 17:12
Sep 15, 2005, 17:12
nin
 
Video cards sometimes last as long as you still want to use them. What I meant about the card's lifespan was that newer games tend to shorten the card's lifespan

It also depends on what a user terms acceptable. To someone who's not that computer savvy, running something like Doom3 @ 640x480 w/ default settings may be "acceptable". Meanwhile a game junkie would turn up the res and AA, have a bad frame rate, and scream "I need a new video card!"...



--------------------------------------------------------------
GW: Nilaar Madalla, lvl 20 R/Mo / Xylos Gath, lvl 10 W/Mo

Don't look at me that way. It was An Honest Mistake. http://www.thebravery.com/
13.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 17:27
13.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 17:27
Sep 15, 2005, 17:27
 
I would still be using the card except I upgraded my monitor and need a more powerful card to power it.

tft monitor, huh?

I ran D3 at 640x480 because it was the nicest compromise on my 17" monitor which couldn't cope at native.

-----------------------------
Northern Ireland 1 England 0
14.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 15, 2005, 19:29
14.
Re: No subject Sep 15, 2005, 19:29
Sep 15, 2005, 19:29
 
PC graphics cards are far more then the dumbed down versions in consoles. Hence you pay more.
When is the last time you saw a console display on a real monitor? It was the Dreamcast- the only one that had vga output. Consoles only need to do maybe 720p res to get so called "high defination video". Real high def is 1920p


15.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 16, 2005, 09:30
15.
Re: No subject Sep 16, 2005, 09:30
Sep 16, 2005, 09:30
 
Real high def is 1920p

I'm assuming you mean 1080p (which is 1920x1080), which btw the Xbox 360 supports fully, and that's the direct equivalent of the card we're talking about here.

So I'm afraid your argument is quite invalid.

Creston


Avatar 15604
16.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 16, 2005, 10:09
mag
16.
Re: No subject Sep 16, 2005, 10:09
Sep 16, 2005, 10:09
mag
 
I'm curious to see how much of a performance hit the new generation of consoles will take when bumping up the resolution to 720p or 1080p. Considering developers will generally push a console to the limit anyway, so that there'll always be a couple of parts where you'll see some slowdown even at typical TV-res...

17.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 16, 2005, 11:19
17.
Re: No subject Sep 16, 2005, 11:19
Sep 16, 2005, 11:19
 
1080p will probably see slowdown, that's a crapload of pixels the machine has to push.

I think the 360 will probably handle 1080i pretty well. I believe Sony isn't even bothering with 1080x support, though.

Creston


Avatar 15604
17 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  ] Newer