New Purely Gaming OS - READ!!!!!
Right, i've been thinking about this for a while: Why are consoles so much faster than PC's spec for spec? Well, theyre faster because theyre dedicated, and theyre dedicated because they only run the game.
Right, i've been thinking about this for a while:
Why are consoles so much faster than PC's spec for spec?
Well, theyre faster because theyre dedicated, and theyre dedicated because they only run the game.
So, i was thinking, what are the implications of having an OS that only runs the game, or even a loader that only runs the game.
OS
If there was a gaming OS, that asks you to select what game you want to play before it boots, and then loads only the needed drivers for that game.
Loader
Or even have a loader that is used to load all your games, so when you choose to run a game, it reboots the PC, and loads the neccesary drivers, then you're into your game.
This would help in many ways, for example, on my systen, different games run at different speeds depending on what driver set im using.
eg) Quake 3 runs fast with 6.31, but then half life runs slow.
and half life runs fast with 5.32, but then Q3 runs slow.
-This would solve that problem.
So exactly how viable is this?...
Why are consoles so much faster than PC's spec for spec?
Well, theyre faster because theyre dedicated, and theyre dedicated because they only run the game.
So, i was thinking, what are the implications of having an OS that only runs the game, or even a loader that only runs the game.
OS
If there was a gaming OS, that asks you to select what game you want to play before it boots, and then loads only the needed drivers for that game.
Loader
Or even have a loader that is used to load all your games, so when you choose to run a game, it reboots the PC, and loads the neccesary drivers, then you're into your game.
This would help in many ways, for example, on my systen, different games run at different speeds depending on what driver set im using.
eg) Quake 3 runs fast with 6.31, but then half life runs slow.
and half life runs fast with 5.32, but then Q3 runs slow.
-This would solve that problem.
So exactly how viable is this?...
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Why not simply buy the console in the first place?
No 'boot menus' just slam in your CD and away you go.
Seems crazy to turn a PC into a games only system, when the console is half the price of the PC.
No 'boot menus' just slam in your CD and away you go.
Seems crazy to turn a PC into a games only system, when the console is half the price of the PC.
There are more things to consider, the real reason consoles can be faster is the standard hardware found in console systems, The game programmers can optimize the game to fit the hardware, the longer a console is out the more tricks they can use for performance. When a PC software house (a good one anyway)programs a game they make sure it works with all sorts of hardware configurations. So that old p200mmx will run it, but so will that new Athlon 1.2ghz. With dozens of video cards, bios's, driver revisions, Sound cards, and game controllers, special programming for certain hardware would likely go the way of 3dFx's Glide. Part of the PC's allure (with me anyway) is the ability to choose which hardware works best for all of the things I do.
A stripped down OS would definately help. But the performance from specialized programming would be lost. It would probably end not being worth the $$ for the Game OS developers.
That's my guess anyway,
~NT Worker
[This message has been edited by NT_Worker (edited 09 March 2001).]
A stripped down OS would definately help. But the performance from specialized programming would be lost. It would probably end not being worth the $$ for the Game OS developers.
That's my guess anyway,
~NT Worker
[This message has been edited by NT_Worker (edited 09 March 2001).]
How do you think that consoles run faster than a PC?? I have every console out there but a PS2. I don't play them much anymore because my computer plays games so much faster & at a higher resolution. On the dreamcast the target speed is 30-50 frames per second (FPS) @ whatever the televisions resolution is(like 600x400). I can easily hit 90-100 FPS @ 1024X768 & hit 30-50FPS @ 1600x1200. Why do I need a gaming OS when my computer can hit that kind of frame-rate & @ a higher resolution than a console?
------------------
Athlon 700 @ 770
Epox 7kxa
256Mb PC133
Hercules Prophet 32Mb DDR
Sound Blaster X-Gamer
Pioneer 16x DVD
HP 9100i CD-RW
2-30gig 7200RPM WD HD
ViewSonic PF790 19"
Win98SE
Full Tower
------------------
Athlon 700 @ 770
Epox 7kxa
256Mb PC133
Hercules Prophet 32Mb DDR
Sound Blaster X-Gamer
Pioneer 16x DVD
HP 9100i CD-RW
2-30gig 7200RPM WD HD
ViewSonic PF790 19"
Win98SE
Full Tower
Well David, if you *really* wanted to do that, you could probably setup mulitple configuration in Win2K, and then name them for the games you wanted to run optimitized for. Personally, I am too damn lazy for that, and I tend to run different games right after each other (Q3, then UT, then maybe Team Arena) for that to be effective. But, the multi-config option might be what you are looking for.
------------------
Regards,
clutch
------------------
Regards,
clutch
Clutch, you really ought to try HL: Counterstrike! I am not into FPS or twitchers, but CS has got me hooked. Why? Cause there is more to it than fragging. Teamwork and strategy. And you can even win a game without racking up any kills. Its the only game on the PC yet, that makes me feel like I did in my old days playing Paintball - but without the real pain
As for the Game only OS - isn't the new Microshaft X-Box supposed to be that?
As for the Game only OS - isn't the new Microshaft X-Box supposed to be that?
Yeah, i know some peoples PC's play games faster than most consoles, but "spec for spec" they dont.
Look at the dreamcast - POS on paper, yet it plays games infiniately faster than my 500Mhz/196Mb/TNT2
Look at the dreamcast - POS on paper, yet it plays games infiniately faster than my 500Mhz/196Mb/TNT2
I have thought about playing Counterstrike, but unfortunately it involves effort. I just like playing simple-minded games, and the basic FPS does that for me. The only games that I have ever finished in single player mode are Shogo and Forsaken. I have a ton of other games (Unreal, HL, the Quake series, Kingpin, etc) that reportedly have awesome single player experieces. Usually though, I just get bored with them a few levels into the game.
------------------
Regards,
clutch
------------------
Regards,
clutch
Consoles will play faster, cause they're made only for one thing at a time and dont have to access as many different things at the same time. However, with a PC, gaming is not the only thing its designed for.
Of course theres really not a whole lot it the area of upgrades. Oh sure, youve got the memory packs for saving stuff or expanding the paltry memory selection, but thats it. You dont like the graphics--the best you can do it buy a TV. Plus, IMO PCs have better resolution than TVs.
If the sole thing you do is gaming on your PC, you should just have a console.
I like PC games, because I dont have to press eight differnt buttons to do one thing, meanwhile I get killed in the process.
PCs rock-mainly because you dont void your warrenty just by cracking open the case.
Of course theres really not a whole lot it the area of upgrades. Oh sure, youve got the memory packs for saving stuff or expanding the paltry memory selection, but thats it. You dont like the graphics--the best you can do it buy a TV. Plus, IMO PCs have better resolution than TVs.
If the sole thing you do is gaming on your PC, you should just have a console.
I like PC games, because I dont have to press eight differnt buttons to do one thing, meanwhile I get killed in the process.
PCs rock-mainly because you dont void your warrenty just by cracking open the case.
One thing to consider is that consoles have a limited resolution... i could probably get a million gagillion frames per second too if i ran at 640x480, but i don't because it looks like shiat. A gaming OS just isn't viable, the cost is too great and the amount of hardware and configurations is just too great.
In response to everyones posts:
"Yeah..."
And dreamcasts actually render the game at 1024x768, then downsample it to 640x480 for the TV screen.
Crazy or what....
------------------
All your base ARE belong to us.
"Yeah..."
And dreamcasts actually render the game at 1024x768, then downsample it to 640x480 for the TV screen.
Crazy or what....
------------------
All your base ARE belong to us.
Quote:<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DavidNewbould:
Look at the dreamcast - POS on paper, yet it plays games infiniately faster than my 500Mhz/196Mb/TNT2</font>
Well that is because you have an outdated machine. I mean c'mon a TNT2? You can get a really fast Athlon and mobo for cheap. Maybe for you consoles make sense but not for me.
Look at the dreamcast - POS on paper, yet it plays games infiniately faster than my 500Mhz/196Mb/TNT2</font>
Well that is because you have an outdated machine. I mean c'mon a TNT2? You can get a really fast Athlon and mobo for cheap. Maybe for you consoles make sense but not for me.
