Xbox 360 or PS3 (for a PC gamer)


Recommended Posts

First off, I'm a PC Gamer. I play a range of games from CS 1.6 to BF2 to Q4 to Dota (warcraft 3 mod). I'm interested in a console because sometimes I'd love to just kick back and relax in front of the TV and play some games. I don't think consoles will ever be better than PC games (not as accurate for one). Do you think buying a console would be worth my while?

Secondly, should I wait it out for a PS3 or buy an xbox 360 now? Will the PS3 be much better? I'm particularly fond of racing games on consoles, which is probably what I'll be playing 90% of the time.

So what you think?? :)

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/456144-xbox-360-or-ps3-for-a-pc-gamer/
Share on other sites

PS3 will almost have identical performance to the 360, although probably far more expensive. Many western developers such as id have started focusing their development on Xbox 360 and from there they port it to PC/PS3... unless Sony will modify the PS3 gamepad they've shown us the 360 controller is far better suited for first person shooters and racing game than any current Sony's offerings. Analog triggers and properly positioned analog joysticks are crucial.

I say if you are fan of western gameplay, as I assume by the titles you mentioned you should go for the Xbox 360, if you are into the japanese games with anime styles and fancy colors go for PS3.

Cross platform games will look identical...

Snakehn has offered some good advice. No one can really recommend the PS3 over the 360 or the 360 over the PS3 because the PS3 is not out yet.

If you wait until November you can compare what each console offers then you can make a more informed choice.

First, since you know that the Xbox 360 is out and where still waiting on the PS3 to show up, it's imposible to tell witch one is better. Right now, it's opinion based on spec sheet and numbers. It's nothig like real life gaming.

So, what I would suggest is to wait until the PS3 is out. Also, check what's available on the Xbox and it will give you some kind of indication of what to expect on the Xbox 360 (same for PS2 and PS3).

You like race game? Check this on HardOCP : Project Gotham Racing 3

Not playing favs, but 360 tends to be very "PC-like" in its games. PS tends to be more "console-like"...

I agree with you - and personally I like the console-like games more, hence my bias toward the PS3...

Best bet is to wait for a while and judge when both are out - it's all about the games anyway isn't it ^_^

uh this is changing, most PC games are starting to feel like they are ported from the console version, even first person shooters... they feel very much console on the 360.

However many games are released for both PC and Xbox at the same time because it's not THAT expensive to add the another platform because they use quite similar tools. With XNA you will see far more PC/Xbox 360 release simotaniosly.

I say if you are fan of western gameplay, as I assume by the titles you mentioned you should go for the Xbox 360, if you are into the japanese games with anime styles and fancy colors go for PS3.

Interesting what you said. I'd probably buy an Xbox 360 but Gran Turismo does look pretty tasty :( .

I'm going to Europe in July and I'd like to buy an xbox cheaply while I'm there.

PS3 will almost have identical performance to the 360, although probably far more expensive.

sorry, but you are wrong.

the PS3 will outperform anything you've ever seen before with the amazing new Cell processor technology, and the best GPU technology from Nvidia that will be able to deliver the amazing Unreal 3 engine at 1080p.

SOE makes me wonder but i think they will pick it up and go with it.

I personally own a Xbox360 and its a huge waste of money. and i would wait for the PS3 and get it. I have it pre-ordered and i cant freakin wait to break that beast open.

Cross platform games will look identical...

No, they will look better. If you compare the original Xbox games running on the xbox to running on the xbox360. just running it on a better system makes it look better. it may not be overwhelming but i know that in Halo 2 there is a pretty big difference between the two.

Many western developers such as id have started focusing their development on Xbox 360 and from there they port it to PC/PS3.

Not many, few have. Valve software and Gabe Newell has many horror stories of trying to port his compaie's creations to the xbox/xbox360 platform. It resulted in almost completely re-writing the code for Half-Life 2 to the Xbox platform. Even if your claim is correct with id software, Quake 4 is horrid on the xbox360, and much much better on the PC.

The Xbox 360 really is not the option to go with, having one myself. I would not buy an Xbox 360 the PS3 will be much more worthwile, yes more expensive but a much better system.

sorry, but you are wrong.

the PS3 will outperform anything you've ever seen before with the amazing new Cell processor technology, and the best GPU technology from Nvidia that will be able to deliver the amazing Unreal 3 engine at 1080p.

SOE makes me wonder but i think they will pick it up and go with it.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Did i mention hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha?

the PS3 will outperform anything you've ever seen before with the amazing new Cell processor technology, and the best GPU technology from Nvidia that will be able to deliver the amazing Unreal 3 engine at 1080p.

He is right but I would still wait till it comes out to compare. Who know what changes they will make between now and launch.

sorry, but you are wrong.

the PS3 will outperform anything you've ever seen before with the amazing new Cell processor technology, and the best GPU technology from Nvidia that will be able to deliver the amazing Unreal 3 engine at 1080p.

SOE makes me wonder but i think they will pick it up and go with it.

I personally own a Xbox360 and its a huge waste of money. and i would wait for the PS3 and get it. I have it pre-ordered and i cant freakin wait to break that beast open.

No, they will look better. If you compare the original Xbox games running on the xbox to running on the xbox360. just running it on a better system makes it look better. it may not be overwhelming but i know that in Halo 2 there is a pretty big difference between the two.

Not many, few have. Valve software and Gabe Newell has many horror stories of trying to port his compaie's creations to the xbox/xbox360 platform. It resulted in almost completely re-writing the code for Half-Life 2 to the Xbox platform. Even if your claim is correct with id software, Quake 4 is horrid on the xbox360, and much much better on the PC.

The Xbox 360 really is not the option to go with, having one myself. I would not buy an Xbox 360 the PS3 will be much more worthwile, yes more expensive but a much better system.

.......hhaha ok now that i stopped laughing...

Cell processor was 218 Gflops of power with PPE and 8 SPEs

Now we take away 1 SPE for redundancy and we get 175-180 Gflops

Now we take away 1 SPE used by the OS and we get 130-135 Glops

Xbox 360 tri core (6 threads) has 118 Gflops

ALl developers have said its much easier to get out Xbox 360 Power with multithreading than PS3 with multiparallelism

RSX is based on G70 technology which is slower than a X1900XTX in most games performance, Xbox 360 GPU is as fast as X1900XTX with the edge in shader technology with its unified shaders.

RSX is 384 Gflops, Xenos is 430-435 Gflops

Have you ever heard of 1st Gen games advantage?

at E3 2005 Sony had a Cell Processor with a 6800 SLI (75% of final system performance)

at E3 2005 Microsoft had a G5 2.4 Ghz with a X800 (30% of final system performance)

The final dev kits were launched in end of September, 2 months before launch thus negating time for devs to get used to hardware.

Now when devs are getting used to hardware, look at the difference it made to Ghost Recon in October XO5 show to Ghost Recon in March release.

Jesus here we go, its funny when people compare an upcoming console with an 5 month old one.

If you want a console with a pc feel in terms of games then go for the Xbox 360. If you want a console with a lot of racing games you might have to think harder. Grand Tourismo and Ridge Racer 7 for PS3 and Burnout, PGR, Ridge Racer 6, for Xbox 360.

the PS3 will outperform anything you've ever seen before with the amazing new Cell processor technology, and the best GPU technology from Nvidia that will be able to deliver the amazing Unreal 3 engine at 1080p.

SOE makes me wonder but i think they will pick it up and go with it.

Sorry, but you are wrong. You've totally fallen for marketing.

A fair few developers have stated that PS3 and Xbox 360 have roughly identical power, and that visual differences will only be noticed right at the end of the console's life...and that even then the differences will be marginal, with the PS3 having the slight edge. They also said that the PS3 is highly unlikely to output in 1080p on all of its games.

You've then got to consider factors such as MOOCHING OFF THE HOMELESS and Xbox Live.

Hmm, PS3 games at 50 quid, XBOX360 games at 50 quid.

Ahh, wait a minute PC games at half the price :D Yay!!!

Also to think about is Aegia Physx, Vista and Direct X 10.0. By the time the PS3 is out this will be only days away for the PC which will move it to a level above both consoles yet again!

I'll stick with my PC thanks, and its higher resolution than 1080i/p!!! ;)

Jesus here we go, its funny when people compare an upcoming console with an 5 month old one.

If you want a console with a pc feel in terms of games then go for the Xbox 360. If you want a console with a lot of racing games you might have to think harder. Grand Tourismo and Ridge Racer 7 for PS3 and Burnout, PGR, Ridge Racer 6, for Xbox 360.

Dont forget Forza 2 for 360 ;)

Hmm, PS3 games at 50 quid, XBOX360 games at 50 quid.

Ahh, wait a minute PC games at half the price :D Yay!!!

Also to think about is Aegia Physx, Vista and Direct X 10.0. By the time the PS3 is out this will be only days away for the PC which will move it to a level above both consoles yet again!

I'll stick with my PC thanks, and its higher resolution than 1080i/p!!! ;)

While I am a pc gamer above a console gamer you can't tell me a pc is cheaper to keep up with than a console. I bought a $400 video card a year and a half ago and it struggle to run the latest games. Oh yeah, I spent $200 upgrading my ram also about 6 months ago and probably will be buying another video card in about 6 months. Good luck running your pc above 1080p resolution, you must've spen $1000 to SLI your rig. What a value.

ok M$ fanboys, you must wait and see.

The people suggesting to wait and compare 2 real devices are fanboys? Oh brother. The Cell design was finalized months ago. So all of this waiting means nothing for the PS3. In November 06 the design will be just the same as it was in November 05. The consoles power will be the same, except that the PS3 is late because Sony is waiting for Blue-ray. Man. Does Sony hype hurt when you swallow it that fast?

Anyway as far as which console to buy. I'd say wait if you can, and compare the two. But if you like FPS games like me, the Xbox 360 (like the Xbox before it) will no doubt be more condusive to shooters. The playstation series generally gets more RPGs and other style games.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • We now know when and how the Universe may truly end by Sayan Sen Image by Marek Pavlík via Pexels| Not representative A study by physicist Henry Tye of Cornell University suggests that the universe may not expand forever. Instead, it could eventually stop expanding, begin contracting and end in a "Big Crunch" roughly 20 billion years from now. The research, published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, was conducted by Tye, Horace White Professor of Physics Emeritus at Cornell University. Using recent observations from major dark-energy surveys, Tye and his collaborators developed a cosmological model that predicts the universe could have a total lifespan of about 33 billion years. Since the universe is currently estimated to be 13.8 billion years old, the model places it near the midpoint of its existence. According to Cornell University's summary of the research, the study centers on the cosmological constant, a term introduced by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity. In modern cosmology, the cosmological constant is commonly used to describe the simplest form of dark energy, the unknown phenomenon believed to be driving the accelerating expansion of the universe. "For the last 20 years, people believed that the cosmological constant is positive, and the universe will expand forever," Tye said in a Cornell University news release. "The new data seem to indicate that the cosmological constant is negative, and that the universe will end in a big crunch." The study draws on data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), two major projects designed to investigate the nature of dark energy. According to Tye, recent observations suggest that dark energy may not behave exactly like a simple cosmological constant. To account for those observations, Tye and his collaborators proposed a model involving an extremely light hypothetical particle that evolves over time. In their calculations, this produces a negative cosmological constant and leads to a future collapse of the universe. The model predicts that cosmic expansion would continue for approximately another 11 billion years before reaching a maximum size, after which the universe would begin contracting and eventually collapse. Scientists have long debated how the universe might end. As explained in an article published in The Conversation by Stephen DiKerby of Michigan State University, several possibilities have been proposed. If dark energy remains constant and positive, the universe could continue expanding indefinitely, gradually becoming colder, darker and more diffuse in a scenario often called the "heat death" of the universe. Other theoretical possibilities include a Big Rip, in which cosmic expansion accelerates so dramatically that galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart, or a Big Crunch, in which expansion reverses and the universe collapses back into an extremely dense state. DiKerby notes that the Big Crunch idea itself is not new. What distinguishes Tye's work is that it attempts to use current observational data to estimate when such a collapse might occur and how it could unfold. Much of the universe's long-term evolution remains uncertain. According to current astrophysical understanding, stars will continue to form and die for billions of years. The Sun, for example, is about halfway through its expected lifespan. Galaxies are also expected to continue merging; the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are projected to collide several billion years from now. At the same time, the nature of dark energy remains one of the biggest unanswered questions in cosmology. While observations indicate that the universe's expansion is accelerating, scientists still do not know what is causing that acceleration. Future observations may therefore alter current predictions about the cosmos's ultimate fate. Tye emphasized that additional evidence will be needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. DESI continues to collect data, while upcoming observations from missions and observatories including Euclid, SPHEREx and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory are expected to provide more precise measurements of dark energy. "People have said before that if the cosmological constant is negative, then the universe will collapse eventually. That's not new," Tye said. "However, here the model tells you when the universe collapses and how it collapses." For now, the study presents one possible future for the cosmos rather than a settled prediction. Whether the universe ultimately ends in a Big Crunch, expands forever, or follows another path entirely remains an open question that future observations will help answer. Source: Cornell University, The Conversation This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • If you look around on Amazon, some of these are available for $9
    • I’m still using an Xbox One S, so time for an upgrade to play this but as much as I hate Sony, I think I’ll get the ps5 pro
    • I bought this game. Played it for an hour, and then got a refund from Steam. Not a fun game at all.
    • Nothing Ear buds with active noise cancellation are at their lowest price ever with 51% off by Fiza Ali Amazon is currently offering the Nothing Ear wireless earbuds at their lowest price ever with 51% off limited prime deal. The earbuds feature an 11mm dynamic drivers with a ceramic diaphragm, and support high-resolution audio codecs including AAC, SBC, LDAC, and LHDC 5.0. They support active noise cancellation of up to 45dB across a frequency range of up to 5000Hz, and include a smart ANC algorithm, adaptive noise cancellation, and a transparency mode that allows surrounding sounds to be heard when needed. Connectivity is provided via Bluetooth 5.3, with support for multiple profiles including HFP, A2DP, AVRCP, and others. The earbuds also support dual connection, allowing them to be paired with two devices at the same time. Additional features include IP54 water and dust resistance for the earbuds and IP55 for the charging case, in-ear detection, pinch controls, low-latency mode, Google Fast Pair, Microsoft Swift Pair, and a three-microphone system per earbud for clearer voice calls. The Nothing X app, available on Android and iOS, provides access to custom EQ settings, bass enhancement, personal sound profiles, ear tip fit testing, firmware updates, customisable controls, dual-device management, and a find-my-earbuds feature. In terms of battery performance, each earbud has a 46mAh battery and the charging case has a 500mAh capacity. With active noise cancellation (ANC) turned off, the earbuds should offer up to 8.5 hours of playback on a single charge and up to 40.5 hours in total with the charging case. With ANC enabled, playback should last up to 5.2 hours on the earbuds and up to 24 hours with the case. For calls, talk time should reach up to 5 hours on the earbuds and 23 hours with the case when ANC is off, while ANC on should provide up to 4 hours on the earbuds and 18 hours with the case. Finally, fast charging should deliver up to 10 hours of playback from 10 minutes of charging when ANC is disabled. Nothing Ear Wireless Earbuds Bluetooth: $73.15 (Amazon US) - 51% off Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      572
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      173
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      73
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!