Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In 3~4yrs time ( Maybe less ) a X1950XTX wont be powerful enough to run 4th or 5th generation 360 games with the same quality as 360.
When Xbox arrived we had GeForce 3 and Radeon 8500, two boards that were obviously outclassed by NV2A. Well Radeon 8500 maybe was its equal.
That is not the case with X1800/G70. Not only do both X1800 and G80 have huge local RAM sizes and 256-bit RAM data buses, but they also have equal or better internal capabilities than 360. They are theoretically somewhat less flexible, but the performance is ahead on the PC.
If i am wrong correct me but from what i can see there arent soft shadows. Its just 1280x1024 - 4x FSAA (Not adaptive enabled) and 16X AF.
min:30 - max:64
Sorry but for me is not impressive at all. We are talking for a previous gen title without soft shadows and hdr who plays between 37/75 at hardware who cost me 1600 euros. Its ok but definitely not impressive.
And even less impressive is the fact that when we look at titles with next gen material , things become worst. Look at your link for GRAW benchmark. 1280x1024 With HDR but zero AA and the game runs with 21-47 frames.
I mean it seems to me that 7900gtx and 1900xtx are not as capable as xbox360 to handle next gen gaming IRL but only in papers.
In 3~4yrs time ( Maybe less ) a X1950XTX wont be powerful enough to run 4th or 5th generation 360 games with the same quality as 360.
Compared to a next gen console pushing the same game at a lower resolution, no texture filtering, inferior anti-aliasing, no softshadown, but added HDR, all at a likely lower framerate. I wouldn't say that bad.
Yeah, but I expect Gears of War and FM2 to show off the system quite nicelyonly games specificately written for a single console will (maybe) really push a system.. but not now, in 2 or 3 years
There's nothing in Crysis you can't do on a next gen console at proper frame rate from what we have seen so far.
Maybe they're having some problem with memory occupation..
Ninja Theory
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninja Of Chaos
How could they look as good/better then crysis, if the PS3 has no DX10 shaders whatosever?
Nao-
CELL is, in many ways, way more flexible than a DX10 geometry (vertex shader + geometry shader) pipeline.
Devs will exploit it in ways that even the original CELL designers had never imagined, it's only a matter of time, no doubts about it .
Quote:
I believe that Crysis was running at E3 on DX9 GPUs (although in SLI/Crossfire configuration). nAo, do you think that PS3 will eventually reach Crysis' graphical level?
Nao-
Yes, I do.
Again he doesnt say anywhere that they enable soft shadows with AA. I choose also the highest graphics quality for the demo and this is the reason that i dont have soft shadows."We select the highest graphics quality settings in each game, "
We dont really know how is going to look The FINAL console version of FEAR. Everything you say is hypothetical based on "work in progress" footage .pjbliverpool said:Compared to a next gen console pushing the same game at a lower resolution, no texture filtering, inferior anti-aliasing, no softshadown, but added HDR, all at a likely lower framerate. I wouldn't say that bad.
Most people dont pay a bunch of money just to be able to play previous gen games with better framerate at maxed settingsThe cost of your entire PC isn'r really an issue since it has more functions, and your paying a premium on the hardware to pay less on the games.
Ok I was wrong with the max framerate but i dont buy the 47 fps average. The game suffers from horrible tearing (at least the demo dip very often under 25 frames) It doesnt have AA vs 4XAA of the 360 version , and it has bland hdr , worst graphics and lower polycount compared with its console counterpart.Again, your confusing average framerate with maxmimum framerate. Everyone knows GRAW is a horrible system hog for its graphics but a 47fps average at 1280x1024 with HDR and 16xAF isn't too bad.
Dont forget IRL. A High end PC with an 1900xtx carry all the proper specs to run a , dx9 level, NG-game. But this can happen only with a reasonable level of optimisation. I just dont see this happen at the moment. When we pass to NG gaming ( real time DoF, motion blur, hdr+AA etc) all i see for the time being is inferior pc games.What evidence do you have showing the X360 performing superior feats? All I see is lower resolution, generally lower image quality and framerates which are optimistically equal.
...and by the time Crysis ships 7900GT/X level cards will be mainstream (if they aren't already).
Can you provide a benchmark in any game showing NV2a outperforming a Ti4600 at the same settings today?
Certainly there are features of Xenos than the 1900 can't replicate in the same way but in terms of producing the same level of visuals I don't see why it would be any less capable.
There's nothing in Crysis you can't do on a next gen console at proper frame rate from what we have seen so far.
Maybe they're having some problem with memory occupation..