Graphics between Consoles vs PC (56K no bother)

Is this topic interesting and would you like to see more?

  • Total voters
    78
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

lgestle

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Messages
1,663
Just in case this gets locked, I wanted to avoid investing any additional time... Mods feel free to lock if you want.

Short story Is I own both and I don't want to get into pros/cons but I wanted to try and kill allot of the fud coming from both sides. Just exploring if there's any interest.

I have a KVM with xbox 360 VGA out so the best method I can think of is to take pictures of the same game (I own several AAA titles on both that include bioshock, oblvion, COD4, orange box) and try to get similar moments via a Rebel XTi on a Tripod.

For this experiment I took pictures by hand on 2 different monitors (both 22 inch TNs) just to see if there was anything there or if the gap was huge. So the colors, contrast may differ but I can try improving that by utilitizing the same monitor and tripod

There is no question you can increase the resolution on a PC, and add AA, but I think the argument has always been made is a midrange PC => XBox 360, and what are console people missing out in terms of graphics.

During gameplay, and switching between the two, I thought I was going to have a hard time deciphering which was which.

I think if I continued it I would use the same monitor via KVM and try to adjust the colors better so they are matching. In any case here you go. If theres interest I can invest further time this weekend and use the same monitor via KVM and adjust the contrast/colors between the two as much as I can.

I labeled system A and B, as I didn't want to give one monitor having a deeper color an unfair advangtage. BTW, if anyone thinks there clever by going by the xbox buttons on screen, I'm actually using a Xbox 360 controller for both and it will provide feedback based on those buttons. What I also found interesting as soon as you selected use Xbox 360 controller within the menu on the PC, many of your graphic settings dissapeared and you were left with resolution and High/Medium/Low generic setting;) On the pc I favor Keyboard and Mouse but wanted to keep the input the same incase I took video.

The PC:
Q6600 Stock, 8800 GT 512MB, Windos XP SP2, 2GB PC6400, IP35-E
Resolution: 1280*1024 NO AA and NO AF. Settings were left at default High. (I chose this resolution to level the playing field between resolution that was common between the Xbox 360, PC, and my monitor.)

The Console:
Xbox 360 Elite
Resolution: 1280*1024

System A: Bioshock
systemA1.JPG

systemA2.JPG

systemA3.JPG

systemA4.JPG


System B: Bioshock
systemB1.JPG

systemB2.JPG

systemB3.JPG
 
Yeah, the fork one.

Sorry, but this topic has just been beaten to death and realistically it's usually a no-contest as the PC has more horsepower. You aren't even fully utilizing your computer. As for the the mid-range argument, compare a mid-range PC with a mid-range console. Compare a new PC with a new console.
 
System A looks worse, bad lighting. Even the bezel on the monitor is brighter and shows a reflection. The colors are washed out and the sharpness is worse (see health bar on upper left, which should be sharp, regardless of console vs. PC).

I think the samples or the testing methodology are off. A lot.
 
Ur_Mom said:
System A looks worse, bad lighting. Even the bezel on the monitor is brighter and shows a reflection. The colors are washed out and the sharpness is worse (see health bar on upper left, which should be sharp, regardless of console vs. PC).

I think the samples or the testing methodology are off. A lot.
Click to expand...

Yep, see notes above. Pictures above were taken by hand, on 2 different sides of the room (with different lighting), and on 2 different monitors. If there was interest I would test via the same monitor, camera on tripod, and try to match colors limiting the varience. Obviously screenshots are not possible unless I wanted to go through svideo, in which case the resolution would suffer on both.
I wanted to avoid going through all that set-up unless there was interest.
 
You are negating one of the advantages of the pc, which is resolution. Might as well test the two together and leave out AA and such also....Test all with their inherent advantages.
 
The problem with cranking the resolution is I can't capture frame rates on both devices. So sure I can set the PC resolution to 1680*1050 with 4AA and 16 AF but is it playable? Suprisingly the PC would hiccup in certain locations just at 1280*1024, mostly when you had running water (example when part of the plane crashes into the tube), which I did not see on the xbox.

I do agree that the xbox is not really running 1280*1024, just upscaled, but as I'm using a LCD monitor I didn't want the monitor scaling issues affecting the results. I did have a 20 inch CRT, but was unsure if the "rolling" would come out in the pictures vs a LCD, more so if I decided to take video so you can see the game play.

I guess my goal was on several different threads indicated the "smoothness" and "graphics" were substandard comparing the two. No doubt the PC has greater potential depending on upgrades, so I wanted to keep the variances down by running all the games I have cross platform at 1280*1024 in which I knew the pc could handle and it would be the native res of the LCD on both platforms. I also have a 7600GT and HD3850 available and thought maybe I should compare them based on price alone. However the Q6600 was 165$, and outside of my 4 other Q6600 machines the next in line was a Opteron 165. Either case it seamed like to much work at that point without throwing it out there to others.

Prior to running the experiment I was a little hesitent about trying it as I thought playing them side by side would show an obvious difference (example bringing your rig to a buddies house and playing the same game but one person spent 2x as much). I was concerned if there was a huge delta would I continue in my same gaming habits on cross systems? I was actually quite surprised but maybe it goes back to comparing the same game ran at 800*600, 1024*768, 1280*1024, 1600*1200 and trying to tell the difference. Personally I can tell the difference up to 1600*1200 but just comparing the two I would say the difference was very subtle, maybe the gap between 1280*1024 and 1600*1200 versus what I was expecting was 1024*768 and 1600*1200.

I actually started COD4 on both systems and noticed the Xbox must be performing some AA, as the PC was sharper in certain areas but also had more jaggies. Even with the xbox running at the lesser resolution you would think it would be more or balance out, but this was not the case. I didn't post these as with the brighter scenes the variances in monitors and lighting was way to much.

I haven't tried Orange Box or Oblivion yet side by side.

Edit:
To the poster below, the Dell is aweful for colors I agree. I have 2 of them but only for 2d windows related work;) Hopefully keeping the monitor the same will improve the comparison. I'm just concerned if there will still be a variance based on color profiles on the PC.
I also own a LED DLP, and I agree the Dell is an unfair disadvantage in this quick test.
 
look at the frame with the pistol and focus on the billboard in the center. The x360 is showing the lights while the pc is dark......is that related to the player position or something else?

FWIW...I played Bioshock on my 71"DLP/x360 and it sure wasn't washed out like that dell
 
PC gamers refuse to believe that consoles closed the gap at all. The only advantage to PC gaming is mouse & KB support. 360 and PS3's graphics are fine with me, it's all about the gameplay once graphics are at today's standards on consoles. (just my opinion)
 
Console graphics are good, but PC has the edge with higher resolutions including true 1080p instead of being upscaled from a low resolution, AA, AF, and in some games higher frame rates with these features enabled than their console counter-parts. It's not PC fanaticism, it's just fact. Why does this thread exist?
 
Well, PS3 & X360 are marvelous but PC has an advantage over them because you cannot upgrade your PS3 & X360, Whereas we see a new hardware upgrade every now and then. Maybe there isn't much difference between them now ... but soon current gen consoles' graphics will be like ps2 compared to PC in the coming years. You see it took sony 5 years to introduce ps2 after ps1 and 6 years for ps3 after ps2.
 
starchazer said:
Well, PS3 & X360 are marvelous but PC has an advantage over them because you cannot upgrade your PS3 & X360, Whereas we see a new hardware upgrade every now and then. Maybe there isn't much difference between them now ... but soon current gen consoles' graphics will be like ps2 compared to PC in the coming years. You see it took sony 5 years to introduce ps2 after ps1 and 6 years for ps3 after ps2.
Click to expand...

Gotta admit it's taking much, much longer this go around compared to last generation of consoles...
 
Console gaming is just cheaper and I don't have to stress whether or not my system will be able to hang with a game coming out 8 months from now.... or 3 years from now. I've been in this debate many times before, anyone coming in here proclaiming that the PC is cheaper, I'll run you through the numbers again if you like.
 
I never knew this was in question?! All fans on either side know this is common knowledge. This thread is going to be locked in no time. Besides, you cannot take pics from a tv/monitor from a free hand camera and not expect your variables to have bias. You must screen capture the same shots....
 
Master Blaster said:
I never knew this was in question?! All fans on either side know this is common knowledge. This thread is going to be locked in no time. Besides, you cannot take pics from a tv/monitor from a free hand camera and not expect your variables to have bias. You must screen capture the same shots....
Click to expand...

QFT. You can't take "pictures" of the screen and expect to have a high quality screenshot to compare the variables.
 
Looks like the "Forks" have it and I agree with th flaws of using the camera, was trying to perform the best I could with supplies on hand.
PM sent to the mods (technoob) to lock the thread.
 
If you have an Xbox360/PS3, play it on Xbox360/PS3.

If you have a computer that can run Bioshock, play it on computer.

If you have a good computer and current gen consoles and too much time in your hands, get both version of the Bioshock and do a better comparison than the OP did.
 
I think to do it right you need a VGA grabber as we determined external pictures cannot be used (even If I tried to limit the variances between the two). The next round I was going to use a tripod and same monitor, but still an overwhelming consensus from voting and posts were that it would not provide the whole story and the topic was dead. Just glad I didn't waste any more time.
 
This thread won't end well.

A better comparison would be to view the game in motion, for both systems. Picking out tiny details in still screen shots is not a good representation of how a game actually looks on any given system.
 
for this to work you need a component or dvi/hdmi capture card. Otherwise taking pictures of a LCD is pointless.
 
Historically, the consoles have had the edge for no more than 6 months. In this generation, the consoles were behind the PC on release, in terms of visuals. In terms of processing power, they still had the "6 month edge".
 
exe163 said:
If you have an Xbox360/PS3, play it on Xbox360/PS3.

If you have a computer that can run Bioshock, play it on computer.

If you have a good computer and current gen consoles and too much time in your hands, get both version of the Bioshock and do a better comparison than the OP did.
Click to expand...

I played it on my 360, even though I have a great PC. I wanted the Achievements more!
 
I say stick a fork in it but I can tell you, if I hook up my nephews 360 to my 24" monitor and load up Bioshock and then play it on the computer in DX10 @ 1920x1200 the difference in visual quality is astounding.

The vastly greater visuals and keyboard/mouse support will keep me PC gaming
 
The 360 was comparable the day it came out. Shortly after, the 8800 series completely blew it out of the water. Now the 360's video card is four generations out of date.

The 4850 is today's popular midrange card, and the 360 is shit in comparison. Even going with a low end system using a budget gaming card like the 3850 or the 9600GT there's still no comparison.

You're about 3 years too late. There is no comparison now.
 
This thread is gay.

Of course PC graphics look better did we really need a thread to confirm this? For anyone that thinks that statement is faulse , stop lying to yourself.
 
Exactly pc hardware will always be superior to any console no matter what hardware inside.
 
Hahaha! Blurry pictures of the screens themselves to compare image quality huh?

Kinda like the feeling you get with beer goggles at a bar.. having a harder time telling the bomb shells from the broads.
 
To add another detail to this threads topic....

Consoles are MORE for gaming in the living room with friends that come over and mooch chips and coke from ya (I mean beer) and sometimes want to borrow money (bastards).

PC's are for a personal experience, hence the acronyms full name...PERSONAL computer. Ive had friends over and wanted to show them some game I was playing on the PC. They'd have to sit in a desk chair (at my desk, heh) and watch me play using the mouse and keyboard......Aside from showing them the exact "thing" I wanted to show them, they have ZERO interest in sitting in that chair to watch ME and me alone play a game.

So, if you socialize a lot, consoles are more suited to you. But, for that PERSONAL gaming experience, its the PC all the way.
 
SAW said:
To add another detail to this threads topic....

Consoles are MORE for gaming in the living room with friends that come over and mooch chips and coke from ya (I mean beer) and sometimes want to borrow money (bastards).

PC's are for a personal experience, hence the acronyms full name...PERSONAL computer. Ive had friends over and wanted to show them some game I was playing on the PC. They'd have to sit in a desk chair (at my desk, heh) and watch me play using the mouse and keyboard......Aside from showing them the exact "thing" I wanted to show them, they have ZERO interest in sitting in that chair to watch ME and me alone play a game.

So, if you socialize a lot, consoles are more suited to you. But, for that PERSONAL gaming experience, its the PC all the way.
Click to expand...

I can buy that.

We do own a Wii btw and love it just for that social "everybody in front of the 52" for a little gaming. My nephew brings his 360 over when my boys are here and it is a freakin free for all.
But when I want to game. It is PC. btw.........I buy ALL of my PC games.........and so should you. ( i only included that statement to rebut the idiot todd hollenshead statement that the primary motivation for pc gaming is the unwritten rule that pc gamers feel they are entitled to games for free simply because they own a pc..................hush hush......wink wink..............id iots........................I say again..................go make a cell phone game and leave us alone.)
The primary motivation is the increased visuals, mouse/keyboard and yes, that "personal" experience. Also mods, extra's......etc. etc.
 
starchazer said:
Well, PS3 & X360 are marvelous but PC has an advantage over them because you cannot upgrade your PS3 & X360, Whereas we see a new hardware upgrade every now and then. Maybe there isn't much difference between them now ... but soon current gen consoles' graphics will be like ps2 compared to PC in the coming years. You see it took sony 5 years to introduce ps2 after ps1 and 6 years for ps3 after ps2.
Click to expand...

That's true, but on the PC end you can end up paying $600 for one piece of hardware, whereas you can buy an entire X360 system for half that cost. To me most of the PC hardware out there isn't even worth it.

Also, games aren't how they were in the past where they progressed so rapidly. IMO developers really haven't even maxed out the capabilities of say the 8800 GTS. So, it'll be awhile till we see a new line of games and video cards that really blows the consoles out of the water. Plus, many game companies are starting to focus their efforts largely towards the consoles because of better sells potential.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top