Actually you can run windows , you have to run it through Linux but it runs and ive seen youtube videos faster then you'd think. We will see when teh full version of Gt5 comes not alot of PC games will be able to match it in terms of graphics and at 60fps fully. You Also have to remember the resolution Ps3 can run all games no lag at 1920×1080. your 4200+ many people might say its faster then the Cell Engine but I wont, code specially for either and the cell will be able to beat that 4200+. Do you know what I just thought about, Take a look at Gran Turismo 5 ok it runs at 60fps all the time 30fps in replay mode, at 1920x1080, 16 Very High Polygon count cars on track at a time, I think the Ps3's GPU must be a little bit more then what I thought it was because I doubt a 7800GTX would do so well in this type of game what do you think?
Maybe you haven't heard, but the PS3 doesn't run many games at 1080p. My PC right now is faster than my PS3. I would rather play games on the PC as they will look better. The PS3 really can't compare...
You can't build a complete PC to match the graphical potential of the PS3 for the same price, but you can build one that matches it in most games for about the same, and for not much more, one that kicks the PS3's ass. Consoles aren't as powerful as you think.
clued up in PR are we? no game has yet to be made for the PS3 and 360 that can run at FULL 1080p. some are jsut about 720p, and even COD4 is just 600p.
http://www.ps3center.net/story-1578-Crysis-Heading-To-PS3-But-Not-Xbox-360.html the day is coming for PS3 sad for 360
I hope it does come to the PS3. I mean, the PS3 does need help. Most, if not all of my friends own a 360 and not a PS3, so maybe Crysis will inspire some people to buy the PS3, as it did the same to many PC users who spend thousands on upgrading their PC to play it. From the article: I hope they're not talking graphically, because as we have said, there is no way in hell the PS3 is more powerful than the PC. Overall, my stand is that consoles aren't the best for gaming, if you want the real experience, go with the PC.
Essentially, to have all bases covered, you need a PC and a 360, and probably a Wii too. The Wii is for the games that are Wii only (obviously), and the 360 is for the games that come out on both PC and console. The reason being that because of the ridiculously poor quality of the ports of games from console to PC, a £1000+ PC can't actually play some games to look as good as the 360 version. Ultimately though, PCs are where gaming is at.
since everybody seems to have a lot of this to say about this i am gonna change it to pc vs console in general and not just my pc
PC vs console is one of those old forum annoyances really, since a lot of people disagree on what's what. Fortunately in the PC hardware section most of us are PC nerds, so you'll probably hear most of us repeat the same argument. Ultimately though, it doesn't take a genius to realise that something built for more money than the PS3 is ultimately going to perform better than it.
personally i wouldn't have a problem with this although i am still not convinced that this is true, because the ps3 in my opinion is the superior system, there is no way that it could run crysis at max though
lol ya, but i think that is good for people to hear both sides of the arfument so that they can make a valid decision of there own
The PS3 isn't going to be producing graphics equal in quality to the very high setting for Vista. Based on the hardware inside it, I reckon it could run the game, but on a low detail setting.
although i dont think high i think that low settings is a bit of an understatment i would say medium but again i question the validity of these comments about a ps3 port. just wondering does ps3/360 have anykind of random access memory
really how does it run any game with that, i now that there are no backround programs but a lot of games take up 700 on xp
exactly my point even games that have worse graphics then ps3 games like css can take 300mb so how does it only use 256
i dont know if all PC's are capable of out running a PS3...for example try running folding@home on ur PC and watch the progress compared to wen ran on a PS3...the PS3 beats my Core2Duo E6600 at 3.2 ghz, with 2 gig ram clkd at 4-4-4-12 havnt read anything wen it comes to quadcores
that is due to there cell proccessor but we are talking about actuall gameabillity and also try running to programs at once with a ps3 i doubt you could do that with 256 mb ram
Master, you must have a crap graphics card. The Folding at home team said that anyone running a X1800 XT will fold more than a PS3. Most of the Folding done my the PS3 is due to its GPU not CPU. In fact compared to an E6750 the cell CPU is not as efficient in real world applications. It only has one core after all... As for you guys all blabbering about the PS3 being much better than the 360, consider this. While the PS3s CPU is more powerful than the 360's, the 360 GPU is more powerful than the PS3's. What do you think Crysis stresses more? The GPU or the CPU?
