| BenVTrigger said: Good luck building a PC with the same graphics card and CPU as the 360 and have it run Far Cry 3 or a Halo 4 equivalent. There will be PC gamers who will always call console tech "weak" or "outdated" and while that might be true for PC, console architecture is quite a bit different. You can get more out of less. |
True to some extent but console gamers never compare apples-to-apples. If you took a 6 year old GPU or a GPU with performance roughly equivalent to Xbox 360's "X1800XT" or PS3's "7950GT" and lowered everything to DX9, all settings to LOW and resolution all the way to Xbox 360/PS3 level you can run Far Cry 3 at the same crappy performance level of Xbox 360 / PS3, i.e., 22-30 fps.
Far Cry 3 on a 610M on the PC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=843Uio0fG6c
GT610 is barely faster than the GPUs in Xbox 360 and PS3.
http://alienbabeltech.com/abt/viewtopic.php?p=41174
GT610/610M only has 48 CUDA cores vs. 1536 of GTX680 and it runs Far Cry 3 with the same level of crappy graphics as a Gen7 console would. If you want the same performance and graphics as Xbox 360/PS3, you can get that on a $50 GPU. When most people play PC games, the LCD monitor is positioned very closely to their field of vision. If you came up to your living room TV and looked at the graphics of Uncharted 3 or Halo 4 one foot away from the monitor, the image is pixelated and blurry. Because console gamers often game 6-10 feet away from their living room TV, the lower resolution, terrible textures are more forgiving than if you were to play at the same settings on a 24-30 inch PC monitor.
