Re: Revolution (so far) has MASSIVELY disappointing specs: ATI, IBM didn't seem to do much for Nintendo. REV = CUBE 1.5, EXACTLY - 50 *percent* more speed/power, not *even* 2-3x

"Chris F" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:vp2q22ptvmjqpoo3v4g0e9irenaat31j44@xxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 11:16:19 +0100, "[ste parker]"
<imaginey@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Slitheen wrote:
"Rob R. Ainscough" <robains@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23pxk4IEVGHA.5828@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

So is XBOX 360 if you do the same comparison to a PC.


Not quite. I'm starting to see stuff for X360 that looks true next gen,
the
PC will catch it fast...but not yet.


Are you still using a 486 or something? My PC has had visuals at least
as good as anything I've seen on 360 for a couple of years now, and I
fall well into "mid range".

sorry ste, but i don't agree with you there at all.

iv'e got a pretty high spec pc, and the 360 definitely goes a step
further on a lot of the games.

Yeah but I blame the way PC programmers work as in games. If it doesn't
work, why bother trying to make it work. Just up the specs or something or
wait for hardware to catch up... Call of Duty 2 anyone, Doom 3, etc....

I say x86 programmers are lazy but may get a backlash if I said that though
;)

--
Skipai


.