PlugComputers 0 Report post Posted November 14, 2006 So PS3 is going to be coming out really soon, some people are starting to get their hands on them. When Nvidia was asked what they were going to do about the graphics power of the PS3 they responded by saying "we'll have something new by then" and holding true to their word, within the last few weeks GeForce 8800GTS and GTX graphics cards have been flowing into the market. These new cards are producing higher quality graphics than those that the PS3 will be capable of, according to Nvidia. At a pretty steep price these cards arent cheap, but if you're looking for perfection gaming from your PC I recommend checking them out. I dont even believe Alienware and Dell has started putting these new cards in their systems yet, but guess what? Plug Computers can do it for you. We sent out a system 2 days ago with a 8800GTX card in it that ran over 15,000 on 3DMark06 Benchmarking without any overclocking and a fairly low end processor. Amazing cards. I'd say check it out for sure.I bet Sony is glad to hear of this timing for their new system... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yacoby 0 Report post Posted November 14, 2006 8800 Looks like an amazing card, but it seems to eat power 400 - 450w, and cost a huge amount, way to much for me at least. Consoles will always be outdated, as the thing about computers is you can always update them. However, there is no game on the market that won't run fine on nvidia's 7x generation of cards, to be fair unless you can't bear to see Oblivion run at under 50fps, there is no need for a 8800. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PlugComputers 0 Report post Posted November 15, 2006 Haha very true. But of course, I would love to see oblivion at highest settings running at about 70 fps. That would be pretty. Imagine two 8800GTX's in SLI. haha nescessary? Prolly not, and hope you have a 1000watt powersupply!There will be a greater need for these cards in the future obviously, I just can't wait to see what they starting doing with DirectX 10. Games should be even better looking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TripleH13 0 Report post Posted November 15, 2006 Technology is always getting better so what can you expect. But Sony shoudl have at least got the ps3 out before the upgraded cards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FLaKes 0 Report post Posted November 15, 2006 Yeah, I think Sony has taken forever to release their next generation console. They took so much that their technology isnt better than the available options on the pc now. A couple of months ago I was surprised about the consoles's specifications, although the processor is still too much for pcs right now, I bet it wont take more than a year from now for the computers to reach that power, but I guess the ps3 will be cheaper by then. Though if you already had a decent pc you can just upgrade the video card and always have a computer thats better than a console.Im wondering if you will able to use the ps3 to run linux, or maybe even windows. That would run really fast. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cerebral Stasis 0 Report post Posted November 15, 2006 Well, just a couple days ago, Intel released their new quad-core processors. Unless the PS3 has that already, it's already been beaten, or at least will be soon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fffanatics 0 Report post Posted November 15, 2006 The difference is that no one releases games for the PC that have state of the art graphics because very few people have these new amazing graphics cards. That has always been the case for consoles and computers which is why enthusiasts have both. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blendergalactica 0 Report post Posted November 15, 2006 I don't think the PS3 is going to achieve much. Plus the PS3 is based on Cell Processors (sounds like a cool idea, but in praxis it is apparently a pain in the butt to program for)With a lot more games and an HD-DVD drive (which I think is the format that is going to win out over Blu-Ray even though I have a Both a Blu-ray and Hd-DVD burners), the Xbox 360 is the system to beat. Don't forget to factor in a lower price tag and the intergrated Xbox Live service. If I decide to get a new console, it will be an Xbox 360, but next on my shopping list is another Mac.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sharn 0 Report post Posted November 15, 2006 The thing is, your PS3 will never have to run Winblows on it. And Vista will take up half that cards power just running. >.< And the PS3 will do what it needs. It just doesn't need to be top-of-the-line. It will still probably blow you off your seat with what it has.And everyone thought blu-rays would cost a lot... They're going to cost exactly the same as Xbox360 games. And 50Gb? That's larger than my computer hard drive. Yeah, laugh. That's still a ton load of storage. Imagine how huge a Final Fantasy map could fit on there. =D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
garbage 0 Report post Posted November 15, 2006 Im sticking to my XBOX 360 I dont care about ho great the PS3 might be someday.. its garbage.. and 360 suits my needs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cerebral Stasis 0 Report post Posted November 16, 2006 It's not about the consoles, it's about the games.The PS3 could be able to calculate the purpose of life faster than I can feel pain, but if it didn't have [fun] games that took advantage of that, what good would it all be?Personally, I like sci-fi games (i.e. Halo 3, a la 360) and some classical/fun/aerobic games (a la Wii), so PS3 probably won't fit into my little regime. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PlugComputers 0 Report post Posted November 23, 2006 Agreed. The games play a huge role in what I'm willing to play. Yes I have and Xbox 360, pretty much just for Halo and Project Gotham. Its fun playing some games with the guys in the basement on the big screen. You can't really do that on a computer, but a computer gamer has their advantages too. With a computer you can upgrade muchh easier and cheaper. Give a console a few years and its obsolete, there goes $600 down the drain. Spending money to upgrade your PC is a much better investment since the things you put into it just roll over to the next time you upgrade. Say you put another Gig of memory into your desktop, cool, so now in 6 months or so you can throw another gig in there, no big deal.Just seems a lot more practical to stick with the PC gaming market, get alot more bang for your buck in the long run... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kawasu 0 Report post Posted November 26, 2006 why is everybody so one sided in the console industry... its either ps3 is crap or 360 is crap. neither of them suck at all, they're brilliant machines. both are heaps powerful and although PCs are still a step ahead who has the money to build say a $1700 machine which has the same power as something a $600 machine has. if u spent your $600 on a PC, it wouldn't be nearly as good as a next gen console.they're very fast and all games will have superb graphics, unlike a pc which has to cater for people worth lower or mid-range pc specs to which graphics look very poor or games just lag too much to even play.when it comes down to it, it's all about personal preference. i wouldn't mind any next gen console, they're all great and if i had cash spare to buy one i'd knock myself out. 360 is great, i love it. but personally, i'd go with a ps3. this is only because more of the games i want are on it. from what i've seen more fps are on 360 whilst the majority of rpgs are on ps3. but hey, 360 still has ffXI doesn't it? oh the choices... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Knuckles 0 Report post Posted December 2, 2006 how much memory it's needed to emulate this console? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elhadi 0 Report post Posted March 12, 2008 Thaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanks PS3 is the best Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
