What? And like the Wee wasn't an awful name 
Wii Wii? No, Wii U.
Wii U just shutup about it!
No U
No, We.
Wii We?
That ain't no dream, that's reality. Fixed hardware platform of XBox and PS3 allows to use low-level code for GPU, which beats the crap out of technologies used in PCs 'cause there is no need for middleware like DirectX and graphics drivers, the same goes for the CPU. In a performance-critical part of code can programmers tell the HW exactly what to do and not rely on the middleware to do the job for them. The difference is actually so noticeable that there have been calls for removing DX/OpenGL and replacing it with some lower-lever more HW-specific implementations.
Anyone who says that in current day and age consoles out perform PC's, are freaking retards.
But they do outperform netbooks.
oh wait, with Ion 2/new gen Atom netbooks, even that's just partially true. Not even talking about those bussiness netbooks with i3/i5/i7 ULV CPUs.
Show me a x86 CPU that can get 200 GFLOPS in single precision. Show me a netbook that can run GTA 4 or BF3 at the level of detail comparable XBox 360 or PS3 and then we can talk. It's not all about the raw performance, you can't actually devise a test that would accurately measure overall raw performance. It's about how effectively you use that performance and that's something PC's have been loosing at pretty badly...
So I have a theory after seeing the past few Nintendo devices.
In the engineers room, they have 2 giant spin-wheels. One of them is divided into "console/portable" and the other one is "gimmick" which has items like "More Screens, More Dimensions, Spec Bump, Larger Size, Smaller Size, Invent-a-gimmick".
Every year, the engineers at Nintendo spin both of the wheels, and implement whatever the wheel falls on. This year it was Console and "more screens".
I'm waiting for the 4-Screened 3DS (Affectionately Called the 3DS2DD), or the Dual Screened Wii U (The Wii U2.. Sponsored by Bono?).. or the 3D, Dual Screen, Wii U.
Also, I heard Nintendo will release an improvement in their matchmaking. Instead of friend codes, you will be able to mail slips of paper with a QR code printed on them for users to take a picture with their 3DS and sync to their Wii U to add you as a friend.
In the engineers room, they have 2 giant spin-wheels. One of them is divided into "console/portable" and the other one is "gimmick" which has items like "More Screens, More Dimensions, Spec Bump, Larger Size, Smaller Size, Invent-a-gimmick".
Every year, the engineers at Nintendo spin both of the wheels, and implement whatever the wheel falls on. This year it was Console and "more screens".
I'm waiting for the 4-Screened 3DS (Affectionately Called the 3DS2DD), or the Dual Screened Wii U (The Wii U2.. Sponsored by Bono?).. or the 3D, Dual Screen, Wii U.
Also, I heard Nintendo will release an improvement in their matchmaking. Instead of friend codes, you will be able to mail slips of paper with a QR code printed on them for users to take a picture with their 3DS and sync to their Wii U to add you as a friend.
The main problem is that games are made for consoles. The PC version is made by adding high res textures and some AA and get shipped.
btw who on earth buys a netbook for gaming? anyways...
http://youtu.be/Xhj2NdO8KLc
http://www.netbookhelden.de/wp ... s/acer_aspire_one_521.jpg
If you really take the potential of a pc to the max it would look like that (well it´s there is not really a max for pc but...)
http://youtu.be/KzjsTt_DzCw
This is the difference between consoles and pc (btw I hate black ops because they totaly ruined the graphic engine for pc)
http://www.pcgames.de/screensh ... 2010/11/CoDvergleich1.jpg
That's not exactly true. If developers want their game to run on both consoles and PCs, they have to target consoles first because of hardware limitations. Consoles do not have Shader model 4.0, tessellation, etc. But where PCs are forced to use generic code, consoles can take advantage of very effective HW optimizations. For example GTA 4 wasn't "slow" on PC and "normal" on consoles, it was "normal" on PCs and well optimized on consoles. Unfortunately, with current state of things PCs don't allow for anything like that.
Kinda good job for a netbook, but still a 4 years older PS3 performs miles better.
Not really a fair comparison, effects introduced with DX11 are beyond hardware capabilities of GPUs in consoles. More up to date technology is PCs' advantage, they just can't use it as efficiently. That's the reason I don't like when people are saying how badly consoles suck 'cause PCs actually suck much more and compensate for it with a new DX specs every year and next GPU/CPU gen every six months...
Hey, but a custom Sager notebook with 120 Hz full HD LCD, i7 990x, 12 GB DDR3-1600 and dual GTX 485M's performs miles better than PS3.
Said notebook also has a 3.2 minute battery life.
When running Mac OS X - yes, but under Windows 7 it runs over 4 hours when not gaming.
Thats ironic considering my Macbook Pro only barely gets 3 hours in Windows, yet I can easily see 7 hours out of the same laptop in OS X.
Shadowww. Your trolling is getting worse and worse. Next thing I know you'll be preaching Windows ME as being the best OS ever.
better than the 0.0 minutes of a console...
Tremendous comparisons guys.
MacOS X is loaded with tweaks and quirks for the HW Apple puts in it, so it's only logical that it outperforms Windows. I actually wouldn't be surprised if Apple broke the SMC driver for Windows on purpose... no flaming guys, just saying
Now why would console need to run on battery when it needs to be plugged in a TV?
MacOS X is loaded with tweaks and quirks for the HW Apple puts in it, so it's only logical that it outperforms Windows. I actually wouldn't be surprised if Apple broke the SMC driver for Windows on purpose... no flaming guys, just saying
Now why would console need to run on battery when it needs to be plugged in a TV?
why would a netbook need to run high spec games
If you like to compare a new console that is build only to play games then compare it with a new gamer-pc (which can do a looooooooooooooooot more then just play games way better than any console)
Actually, the 2 main differences from OSX to Windows (in terms of Power Management are):
Windows doesn't have the support that Apple needs for live swapping between the Intel and AMD GPU.. so the AMD one is the only one used in Windows (Slurping power like a cum slut drinking the man gravy). Apple has it built into the OS to detect and switch seamlessly to the appropriate GPU depending on the load.
Windows doesn't seem to throttle the CPU as aggressively as OSX does either I find.
There'd be something pretty weird going on if pcs hadn't overtaken a games console which is about 5 years old and even at the time of release cost no more than a top spec video card (even if they were being sold at a loss) in terms of actual graphics.
It's a non debate really. The same thing happens every time.
It's a non debate really. The same thing happens every time.
WHy the hell are you having a windows vs. os x argument in the E3 thread?
Because Shadowwwwwww feels the need to troll everything in every thread.
(Have you seen the thread where Dadge reduced him to agreeing to drinking cups of man-juice for money?)
(Have you seen the thread where Dadge reduced him to agreeing to drinking cups of man-juice for money?)
:doh:
E3 2011
(101 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG