By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - $350 PC that runs Fallout 3 better than PS3 & 360.

NJ5 on 29 March 2009
Barozi said:
You should mention, that this is not possible in Europe (and probably many other countries).


The same combo costs in Germany approx. 450€ ($600)

That price includes tax, unlike USA prices where tax is added later. So 450 € would actually be around $500.

 

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Around the Network
gebx on 29 March 2009
Soleron said:
gebx said:
...

 

What if I wanted to play a game that came out next year? Would I have to spend another $200 updating this PC?

But the PS3 isn't getting any faster; games that come out next year on the PS3 will also run on this PC.

The graphics of PC gaming are being held back by the current generation of consoles. Even Crysis is now playable on midrange hardware, and with CryEngine being ported to consoles, that won't change soon.

 

 

New tools are released for the consoles to improve performance, so while the PS3 won't get any faster, developers will be able to use it more efficient. Now this isn't always the case for PC games, where instead developers just increase the requirements. Why would a PC developer spend time and money to squeeze out a couple more fps when they can just change the suggested requirements to a newer better graphic card?



Proud Member of GAIBoWS (Gamers Against Irrational Bans of Weezy & Squilliam)

                   

Soleron on 29 March 2009
gebx said:
Soleron said:
...

But the PS3 isn't getting any faster; games that come out next year on the PS3 will also run on this PC.

The graphics of PC gaming are being held back by the current generation of consoles. Even Crysis is now playable on midrange hardware, and with CryEngine being ported to consoles, that won't change soon.

 


New tools are released for the consoles to improve performance, so while the PS3 won't get any faster, developers will be able to use it more efficient. Now this isn't always the case for PC games, where instead developers just increase the requirements. Why would a PC developer spend time and money to squeeze out a couple more fps when they can just change the suggested requirements to a newer better graphic card?

Link to one that has evidence of a measurable improvement in performance.

And there is such software for PCs: graphics driver updates.

 



Majin-Tenshinhan on 29 March 2009
darthdevidem01 said:
gebx said:
Seraphic_Sixaxis said:
Well... putting it that way it sounds like i just did some blasphemy.....

 

It be like saying you never heard of Halo, Half Life, CounterStrike, Final Fantasy, and Diablo..

or it would be like saying you never heard of chocolate ice cream, Canada, Paris, Disney, Coca Cola, etc...

 

I'm actually quite shocked someone on this site doesn't know what Starcraft is..

 

Bolded many people havn't heard of.....trust me

Add in GTA there

______

oh and even I didn't know what STARCRAFT was before coming to this site....its really no big deal.

Warcraft>>>Starcraft BTW

 

 

 

Half-life and Diablo maybe, but not having heard of CS? That's insane right there. Might want to remove Final Fantasy though, because if you aren't much of a gamer chances are you don't know what it is. And yeah, not having heard of Starcraft is a big deal. It's like, have you ever touched a PC? For real?



darthdevidem01 on 29 March 2009

@majin

calm down

ofcourse I've touched a PC

KOTOR, Sims, SIm City, Tycoon games, Age Of Empire.....I lived on them in my pre teen years

Now I have a crappy PC so I don't care about PC announcements

& yeah many people havn't heard of counter Strike

Final fantasy is known by a lot of normal people too actually



All hail the KING, Andrespetmonkey

Around the Network
gebx on 29 March 2009
Soleron said:
gebx said:
Soleron said:
...

But the PS3 isn't getting any faster; games that come out next year on the PS3 will also run on this PC.

The graphics of PC gaming are being held back by the current generation of consoles. Even Crysis is now playable on midrange hardware, and with CryEngine being ported to consoles, that won't change soon.

 


New tools are released for the consoles to improve performance, so while the PS3 won't get any faster, developers will be able to use it more efficient. Now this isn't always the case for PC games, where instead developers just increase the requirements. Why would a PC developer spend time and money to squeeze out a couple more fps when they can just change the suggested requirements to a newer better graphic card?

Link to one that has evidence of a measurable improvement in performance.

And there is such software for PCs: graphics driver updates.

 

 

Here's a good example - Call of Duty series

Minimum requirements

Call of Duty 4

  • CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 2.4 GHz or AMD(R) Athlon(TM)
  • 64 2800+ processor or any 1.8Ghz Dual Core Processor or better supported
  • RAM: 512MB RAM (768MB for Windows Vista)
  • Harddrive: 8GB of free hard drive space
  • Video card (generic): NVIDIA(R) Geforce(TM) 6600 or better or ATI(R) Radeon(R) 9800Pro or better

    •  

    Call of Duty World at War

    Processor: Pentium 4 @ 3 GHz/AMD 64 3200+
    Memory: 512 MB (1 GB for Vista)
    Hard Drive: 8 GB Free
    Video Memory: 256 MB (nVidia GeForce 6600/ATI Radeon X1600)

     

    And I also expect Modern Warfare 2 to have higher requirements then CoD 4

     



    Proud Member of GAIBoWS (Gamers Against Irrational Bans of Weezy & Squilliam)

                       

    Barozi on 29 March 2009
    Deneidez said:
    Barozi said:
    You should mention, that this is not possible in Europe (and probably many other countries).


    The same combo costs in Germany approx. 450€ ($600)

    Same for Finland. Finland prices say hi! *oops* (Well, its still over 500€ in some places.)

    That's a bundle with 2 games.....You can get a PS3 for 330€ here. Xbox 360 Arcade costs 170€



    gebx on 29 March 2009
    darthdevidem01 said:
    @majin

    calm down

    ofcourse I've touched a PC

    KOTOR, Sims, SIm City, Tycoon games, Age Of Empire.....I lived on them in my pre teen years

    Now I have a crappy PC so I don't care about PC announcements

    & yeah many people havn't heard of counter Strike

    Final fantasy is known by a lot of normal people too actually

     

    haha, can i quote you?

    "I've touched a PC" - darthdevidem01

     



    Proud Member of GAIBoWS (Gamers Against Irrational Bans of Weezy & Squilliam)

                       

    Soleron on 29 March 2009
    gebx said:
    ...

     

    Here's a good example - Call of Duty series

    Minimum requirements

    Call of Duty 4

  • CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 2.4 GHz or AMD(R) Athlon(TM)
  • 64 2800+ processor or any 1.8Ghz Dual Core Processor or better supported
  • RAM: 512MB RAM (768MB for Windows Vista)
  • Harddrive: 8GB of free hard drive space
  • Video card (generic): NVIDIA(R) Geforce(TM) 6600 or better or ATI(R) Radeon(R) 9800Pro or better

    •  

    Call of Duty World at War

    Processor: Pentium 4 @ 3 GHz/AMD 64 3200+
    Memory: 512 MB (1 GB for Vista)
    Hard Drive: 8 GB Free
    Video Memory: 256 MB (nVidia GeForce 6600/ATI Radeon X1600)

     

    And I also expect Modern Warfare 2 to have higher requirements then CoD 4

     

    Those minimum requirements (and even the recommended ones) are still well below the system described. The E5200 is three or four times as fast as that P4, and the 4830 is maybe ten times as fast. You're not really sat=ying that mere software efficiency improvements will make up a 4x gap within the PS3's lifetime?

     



    cura on 29 March 2009

    but I don't like Fallout 3...

    Also, the 4800 series graphics card needs 450 watt psu (http://ati.amd.com/products/radeonhd4800/requirements.html ), and that graphics card is very loud. If you were going to spend $350 just to play fallout 3 why not just buy a cheap 360 and fallout 3 second hand, it would turn out to be much cheaper.