PC's at 2006+

Jul 23, 2004
76
0
0
#1
How will PC's fair against the next gen consoles.
Do you think they will lose their status are the most powerful gaming machine, seeing as the PS3, Xbox2 and N5 are hyped to be very powerful, and should well exceed the PC at their launch.

Well i think that PCs wouldnt be able to beat the power of the gaming machines because of how rapidly they are increasing in power.
 

Evolution

Superior Member
May 2, 2004
952
0
0
www.konamijpn.com
#2
i say that pc's would stay near the SUPER CONSOLES because you can upgrade and do other things to a pc where as with a console once its been made theres nothing you can do to improve its power ect
 
Jul 23, 2004
76
0
0
#3
yea but then again look how quick the consoles are gaining in power compared to pc', by the time its 2010 consoles will be the greater compared to pc... i have a feeling that will happen because when it was the old days consoles used to be crap compared to pc's ... now look at the ps3 thats going to come out ... its going to match upto most pc's in the world.
 

Evolution

Superior Member
May 2, 2004
952
0
0
www.konamijpn.com
#4
you are forgetting that a pc was not invented for gaming purposes. PCs wouldnt have to be brilliant games machines as so to speak because most people dont buy a pc to play games. PCs will always sell more because they are used for business purposes ect and consoles are a means of entertainment.
 

Evolution

Superior Member
May 2, 2004
952
0
0
www.konamijpn.com
#6
All in due time i guess consoles will be the ultimate machine in terms of graphics, power and memory ect, but where would it lead, would you really enjoy a game where its like watching a movie
 
Jul 23, 2004
76
0
0
#7
well consoles are getting that special features like internet access, DVD's etc. but the thing is PC's increase slowly but surely....consoles increase fast but thats in a long wait.
 

cOwpander

Apprentice
Jul 1, 2004
162
0
0
39
#8
One thing is that you forget is that PC stands for Personal Computer. Even though consoles are getting to be just as good as PC graphics, you can always upgrade with the newest Technology that is out there. On the other hand with consoles you would have to wait till the next generation to come out before they implement what is already capable for a PC months or if not years before. Of course compared to a PC, consoles are AS-IS and there is nothing you can do about it to make it better. That being said, this is one of the reasons why PC can be very expensive if you want it to be. It's obvious that consoles have com a long way. Before if you wanted jaw dropping graphics you would have to go to the arcade, but now you can just stay home and get even better graphics, hence the fall of the Arcades.

I have to go my shift is done at work, talk amongst your selves, be back later.
 
Jul 23, 2004
76
0
0
#9
sure you cant upgarde consoles but look at how much strength and power they are getting ... for e.g in the ps2 i think it had around 300MHZ but in the ps3 it is said to have over 4.5GHZ thats like over 4GHz, and that only 4GHZ (only the increase) is powerful that what most people's PC's are today.
 

cOwpander

Apprentice
Jul 1, 2004
162
0
0
39
#10
Nightmare said:
sure you cant upgarde consoles but look at how much strength and power they are getting ... for e.g in the ps2 i think it had around 300MHZ but in the ps3 it is said to have over 4.5GHZ thats like over 4GHz, and that only 4GHZ (only the increase) is powerful that what most people's PC's are today.
Yes that is a huge leap and it looks like Consoles have caught on. But even as I type this AMD and Intel are working to make Faster CPUs. Using the new 90-nanometer fabrication process that creates circuits nearly 50 percent smaller than the ones inside today's P4s. As circuits get smaller, chips can run at higher clock speeds and execute more instructions per second. This seems to be the trend at this point and am not surprised if we see speeds at 7 ghz within the next year or two. Basically PC well always be ahead of consoles because of the ever changing Technology being brought out. I'm sure Sony knows this and until sony and M$ start making consoles ever other year, they well always be a step behind. Just think about it, a next generation console is made every 4-5 years. Given that time, how much do you think a PC can advance within that time given. Lets just say that the PS3 well be released out into the market on December 2005. By the Second year of it's release or less the PC would have advances so much in that time in terms of graphics and CPU speeds. Making what ever that console has in its innards outdated just within 2 years.

Keep in mind though that not everyone can afford the newest stuff available on out on the market for a PC. I for one upgrade my PC every 2 - 3 years. It's a very expensive hobby to always get the latest Video card or the latest CPU and so fourth. It's really not a matter of what's better or not cause I still enjoy my PS2 even though when I look at HL2, and Doom III, am like man I wish the PS2 can have graphics like that. One thing is for sure that the PS3 graphics well look a hell of allot better than PC games out in today's market, but who knows. Everything well come to light at next years E3 and I can't wait.
 
B

Blake

Guest
#11
It's not a matter if PC's can keep up, it's a matter if "graphics cards" can keep up. And if you have seen the latest line of them, then it's apparent they can.
 

hew

Newbie
Jul 25, 2004
4
0
0
#13
nightmare, you must be retarded. first of all, the computer i have had for almost a year now, has a more powerful cpu, more ram, a better gpu and more vram on my video card, and more functionality than a ps3 will have. there is technology out there today, that would be more powerful than a ps4. because pcs evolve faster than consoles. there is a higher demand, and consoles are meant to stay cheap so the technology doesnt get around to them until it is older. take the xbox for example. that machine is practicaly all computer parts. there is a hard drive, which is made by either seagate or western digital, 2 of the biggest pc drive manufacturers, and it runs off the same 40 pin IDE connection that pcs use. you could take out that hard drive and put it in your computer, format it with a new file system and it would be like any other hard drive, only slower. it uses a 4-pin molex power cable, same as pcs. the optical drive is the same thing. the motherboard is the only thing that isnt like a pc motherboard. the cpu is not un-socketable, meaning its more of a soldered-in chip. there are no vga or pci slots, and ram is built in different. other than that, it is basically a pc. the hard drive is what would have been new 8 or 9 years ago. in some models, there is a 7 gb 5400 rpm WD caviar drive, which is so old its funny. and an xbox is one of the highest selling consoles made right now. its all yesterdays technology. it will always be yesterdays technology because there is no need for a 15,000 rpm scsi raid drive layout in a console that has 1024 mb of vram with a 2 ghz gpu. also, pc video and console video are totally different. a generic tv has a max. resolution of 640x480 pixels. a mid range pc monitor can display many times more than that, and at 80 frames per second, compared to gaming consoles which max at around 40, but usually stay around 35. until they make tv monitors with a higher resolution than pc monitors (which will never happen), then there is no contest in video. and a 4 ghz cpu is nothing special. pc motherboard manufacturers have been making dual-cpu boards for years now, and are even making quad boards for servers. these boards allow up to 4 64-bit opteron cpus, with up to 4 gb of ram for each cpu, meaning up to 16 gb of ram on one board. tell me now that consoles are "catching up". you should do some research before you make a stupid remark like that. its obvious that consoles will never out perform pcs. consoles cant evolve as fast because of the slowly evolving tv technology. at this pace, consoles will never be greater than pcs, and i only see them as getting further behind.
 

Seb

Veteran
Dec 8, 2003
4,464
2
0
33
London
www.gamerguides.com
#14
:shock: This is stupid! To be honest most people in this thread don't know what they are talking about.

nightmare, you must be retarded. first of all, the computer I have had for almost a year now, has a more powerful cpu, more ram, a better gpu and more vram on my video card, and more functionality than a ps3 will have.
Do you know the specifications of PS3? Because I certainly don't! And neither does anyone at this point. It's all just speculation! What we do know however is that PS3 is going to use 65 NM (Nanometre) technology in CELL, which is far superior to any technology currently used in PC's today. In fact Sony are investigating 45NM technology which from memory I recall has 1/1000'th of a human hair transistor gaps. That's 4 times more transistors than the best PC's. Unfortunately we won't be seeing that technology until 2007.

When consoles first come out they beat PC's hands down in the graphics department. PC's then spend the next year or so trying to catch up and eventually, yes they do over take consoles, but that happens well into the consoles lifespan by which time the next console is under development which will then repeat the cycle. This sums up the current situation now:

-> PS2 in maturity stage moving towards decline.
-> PC's ahead in graphical performance
-> PS3 Just around the corner.
 
Jul 19, 2004
493
0
0
#16
Evolution said:
Is it true that a PS3 will be 8x more powerful than a PC. I heard that ages ago but i never knew whether to believe it or not.
Here see it for yourself :wink:

Cell, a radical new processor designed by IBM, Sony, and Toshiba, could enter production in 2004.

Collaborating engineers from IBM, Sony, and Toshiba have wrapped up the design for the inner workings of a mysterious new chip called "Cell." The new multimedia processor, touted as a "supercomputer on a chip," is well on its way to completion, IBM says. The chip could end up inside the PlayStation 3, and elements of its design will be seen in future server chips from IBM.

Cell has nearly "taped out"--an industry term meaning that the chip's pen-and-paper design and layout have been completed. Soon the design will be handed over to engineers in manufacturing, who will craft samples. Meanwhile, engineers have been testing various subelements of the processor, both separately and together, before the manufacturing unit connects them inside actual Cell chips. At this rate, commercial production of Cell could begin as soon as the end of 2004.

While details remain vague, Cell will differ from existing microprocessors in that it will have multiple personalities. The chip will not only perform the heavy computational tasks required for graphics, but it also will contain circuitry to handle high-bandwidth communication and run multiple devices, sources say. This multifaceted approach is possible because a single chip will contain multiple processing cores (hence the name "Cell"). Communications features expected to be in the chips will also allow devices to form powerful, peer-to-peer-like networks, some analysts believe.

While the processor's design is still under wraps, the companies say Cell's capabilities will allow it to deliver 1 trillion calculations per second (teraflop) or more of floating-point calculations. It will have the ability to do north of 1 trillion mathematical calculations per second, roughly 100 times more than a single Pentium 4 chip running at 2.5GHz.

Cell will likely use between four and 16 general-purpose processor cores per chip. A game console might use a chip with 16 cores, while a less complicated device like a set-top box would have a processor with fewer, said Peter Glaskowsky, editor in chief of influential industry newsletter Microprocessor Report. Some of these cores might perform computational functions, while others could control audio or graphics. But not everyone thinks this approach is groundbreaking, given that some processors already use inter-chip multiprocessing. "I just don't see that Cell is revolutionary, except in its marketing impact," Glaskowsky said.

While Cell's hardware design might be difficult, it's creating software for the chip that will be the trickiest part of establishing it in the market. "It's going to take an enormous amount of software development," said Richard Doherty, analyst with Envisioneering. "We believe the chip architecture is going to be on time and ahead of the software wizardry that is going to really make it get up and dance."

Furthermore, creating an operating system and set of applications that can take advantage of the Cell's multiprocessing and peer-to-peer computing capabilities will be the key to determining if Cell will be successful, he said.

Knowing this, the three chip partners have so far set a goal of crafting Cell as a system, creating an operating system and application software alongside the Cell hardware. Cell's designers are engineering the chip to work with a wide range of operating systems, including Linux.

But the chip triumvirate is also developing a purpose-built Cell operating system and applications, which Cell's developers will use to test the chip's various features, such as its multimedia-processing capabilities. They are also likely to form the basis of a Cell software development kit and also the Cell OS and applications for end devices, such as game systems, sources said.

While much of the work on Cell is complete, there's still a lot left to do. Together, the hardware and software teams will continue testing the chip's inner workings. The last stage of development work, which still lies ahead, includes completing circuit layout and then eventually testing actual sample chips.

IBM is expected to begin manufacturing Cell as soon as 2004 or possibly early 2005. But Jim Kahle, director of broadband processor technology and a research Fellow at IBM, confirmed only that the Cell project is on track to meet its 2005 release schedule, which was set forth at its initial announcement. The rest of the chip's schedule is a secret, at least for now, he said.

Coutesy of Gamespot.com :wink:

You satisfied now? :wink:
 
B

Blake

Guest
#24
Care to quit bringing up old topics mgs if your not going to add anything worth anyones time. This is seriously getting old and me, PBM, Siren and Rebon have had a discussion about your actions already. Your walking on think ice buddy.
 
May 23, 2005
1
0
0
#25
Consoles will never be better than pc's for the simple reason that whatever consoles do, nomatter, how revolutionary, pc's can just copy it. If the overhyped cell processor is 100 times faster than a p4 it should be able to render almost real looking games in real time. Why cant it, because theyre full of shit. If it is significantly faster than anything else then other companies will just put them in pc's, end of story. Also consoles have to be affordable, and nothing will have more power than the current 500 dollar videocard. You cant afford to throw a 500 dollar vid card into a 400 dollar system. Hell pc's today can match next gen performance and by the time next gen consoles come out pc's will already have gone farther. Also, has anyone ever heard of moore's law, cell wont be that much better than anything else.
 

The John

Superior Member
May 23, 2005
665
0
0
www.playstation.com
#26
I love consoles but consoles never...ill repeat never will be graphical better then consoles. This because when a console is introduced it takes another year to ship them to anywere in the world. A pC grows in a Year and gets much more Software support and much more new hardware.
 
Mar 21, 2005
120
0
0
#28
Well considering Unreal 2007 is coming to PC next year with all the same graphical enhancements it will do just fine. The cards will be higher clocked than the console gpu's and they will have more memory for higher resolution textures.
 

straightballin

Superior Member
Feb 18, 2005
622
0
0
#30
Well considering Unreal 2007 is coming to PC next year with all the same graphical enhancements it will do just fine. The cards will be higher clocked than the console gpu's and they will have more memory for higher resolution textures.
I hope thats true and I hope it would be a launch title for ps3 if it does come to ps3.(I thought I heard it was coming to the PS3)