By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
disolitude on 25 March 2012
Edit Thread
Sal.Paradise said:
usrevenge said:
Sal.Paradise said:
It surely can't be running at the same quality as the PC demo, or the Nextbox would be more expensive than a PS3 was at launch.

Still, nice to see that the next gen of consoles might be able handle something approaching PC quality tech.


are you clueless?
at launch consoles usually are the latest and greatest tech wise, there will be little distinction between the 2. and then even so when next gen does come out games will be made for console and ported to PC ( kinda like now but more frequent) so it again won't look much differnt

Haha.

Oh, you're serious, let me laugh even more. 

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

While his post is pretty funny Xbox 1 and 2 were mid to high tier spec wise when they came out in terms of GPU. The Xenos used in the 360 was a hybrid of X1800/1850 and later to be introduced X1900/1950. Its not coincidence that 360 is easily keping up with PS3 graphically despite having a much weaker CPU and being a year older.

As far as this topic and subsequent posts are concerned,  people don't know what they are talking about (or are just ignorant) if they think that next Xbox has to have a GTX 680 like GPU to stay relevant for more than 4-5 years.

Comparing a console to a PC graphic card in general is like comparing apples and oranges. Considering that a console GPU is highly optimized to do 1 thing, and that games for consoles are written specifically to work with its hardware., it just doesn't need the most powerful hardware to run it's games effectively.

But people can go ahead and argue like kids over spilled milk if they feel like... I mean, Microsoft has totally announced which GPU the next console is shipping with and specs have been set in stone.