Will a home-built computer be able to have the same graphics and capabilities as a PS3? I try using a Nintendo 64 emulator on my 800 Mhz computer, but on some games, it has problems. Will a computer that has about $1100 worth of good hardware be able to play PS3 games on an emulator?

First of all, there won't be a PS3 emulator for a long time. As game systems become increasingly more complex, it becomes far more difficult to emulate them with software alone. Even Microsoft's own design team can't completely emulate their old XBox with software on the Xbox-360. Sony's emulation solution is to actually include the hardware from their previous generation machines in their new generation machines. That is to say, in every PS3 there will be (effectively) an entire PS2/PS1 machine inside as well.  
 
Even if there was an emulator, it would take a machine far more powerful than the original machine because of emulation overhead. For example, the N64 ran a RISC processor at less than 100Mhz with 4MB of RAM, and your computer can barely keep up. Considering that the PS3 will have more power (in a few areas) than even the most expensive desktop computer, that is another problem.  
 
In short, no. Just buy the damn game console.

 
Well...I guess you sold me on game systems instead of computers. Wow. I am really shocked by your answer. Does everyone agree with him?

Yup he is right, would take a PC with Dual Core 20GHz CPU and 2 graphics cards that are 8 times as powerfull as they are today to get a PS3 emulator running smoothly thats if they can get it emulated.
 
After all a PS3 is basicly a PC anyway and how hard would it be to emulate a PC...

 
How about this then: Does a good $1200 dollar PC have better graphics than a PS3?

^
 
Thats an entirely different type of question. I think an appropriate question would be, are the gaming capabilities of a $1,200 machine comparable to those of a PS3?
 
The answer is? We don't know its not out yet. What most people will agree on though is that $1,200 buys a lot more "game" & capability with a Computer then with a PS3.
 
A $1,200 system would leave room for a good videocard(s) (perhaps even SLI), and some great graphics.

 
Is a $1200 computer better than the XBox 360? Oh, by the way, why is not Halo 2 on the PC yet? I came out a while ago on the XBox? Is is completely different?

 
Yes that is true at the moment.  But Sony plans to change to software emulation for the PS2 on the PS3.  Now whether they will actually get it working remains to be seen.

I could tell you what £1200 could get you but as for thease silly little $$'s I have not got a clue
 
A say £700 (About $1200) PC would get you enough to play Oblivion at the same level as a 360 if you went all on the graphics and cut short on a few of the other things.
 
But at the moment the queston should be what would I rather have... well a PC at the moment, as the 360 does not really offer me anything excluseive. If it was not for the price I would not have even got a 360 but at £270 it is alot cheaper than a top end GFX card or 2.

 
Yes.  A $1100 home-built computer can outperform a PS3 on a game that is released for both PC and PS3.  Play the PC version on the PC and the PS3 version on the PS3 and the PC should provide better fps, higher resolution, more eye candy, etc.  
 
This assumes the game company provided a game release for PS3 and PC that were of equal software quality.  Often a game will be designed in the PS3 development suite and then a quick port to PC at the very end so you have high quality PS3 code and crap PC code.  Then the fanboys from each side start flamewars about which platform is better.  A game is almost never designed for PC and then ported to the console since the console SDK is more restrictive.  
   
 

 
Emulator is a whole different story.  The emulator code adds a huge overhead to the system that pushes the processing and software requirements through the roof.  Often driver issues will complicate things even if you had enough raw CPU power.  Console makers don't want you to use emulators so they don't make it easy to get the drivers right.  Plus there are so many hardware combinations possible on PCs that it is very difficult to get it all correct for every combination of hardware.
 
If I was to make a wild speculation, a $1100 PC with today's best hardware would probably be able to emulate the last generation of console (ie. PS2) at the console level of play.  This is for two reasons.  The emulator software would require today's CPU to overcome the emulator CPU overhead of the last generation console.  Emulator and driver software would need this much time the become stable enough for a good playing experience.  You would need to build you system with hardware that the emulator maker used in their testing to get the best driver compatibility.
 
If a game is only avaliable on the console, you are better off playing it on the console than to try emulating.  If it's avaliable on PC and console, the PC will probably be better.

 
More like a 2500 dollar pc to play oblivion the way the xbox 360 does... I know 8)

oh your question about halo 2 its comming out for windows Vista. Also the only reason a game come out on a PC later or not at all is because the developer doesn't want to recode/port it. Basicaly as of right now any game that come out for any console that is currently out can be "converted"  (whether that means ported or build from the ground up like it should be) to be ran on the PC.  
 
And another thing about halo its basicaly a FPS game, and currently PC's are the kings of FPS. When Halo/CE came out for PC is was consider by most average at best even though it was a hit on for Xbox. The reason most PC player had seen must better for years, I mean only in the xbox or late ps2 console year where they (developers) even able to create decend FPS due to the power of the system however on PCs there have been great true 3rd fps since the quake/unreal years of 1996.

Nah you can get a full PC with a X1900 XT-X 512MB with 3500+ and 2GB's of ram with all the other parts for $1205 (not including monitor)
 
And that will run ANY game better than the 360... As for the PS3 it has or might have a built in physics card which will add about $200 to a PC.

i doubt a pc with parts for that price will outpreform a ps, ....are only games important? if ur answer is yes go with the sp lol thats its main purpose isnt it only to play games on it (with relatively high quality visulas...so far)  

 
How about this then: Does a good $1200 dollar PC have better graphics than a PS3?
 
Mine does.

The thing about a PC is that you can upgrade or buy a better one every month if you wanted. When the PS3 first comes out it will be great of course and better than or the same as a $3k computer. However, six months from the launch date there will be new computer graphics cards that that blow away what was available when the PS3 launched. And there are years in between a major consule release. After a year the computer will be far cooler for gaming than that year old consule.
 
We have this debate every time a new consule is released. Nothing changes. People are on the consule bandwagon for a while and then when it's obvious PCs are in the lead people are back to lovin them.
 
Computers do so much more than gaming...that's all that I need to know.

At $600, a PC can not compete with the PS3. You should take notice that a PC is capable of other tasks that the PS3 is not, such as CAD, video editing, and much more. Buying a PC for only gaming can be a very silly thing when a much smaller amount of money can be spent to still get a very good gaming experience.

 
How about this then: Does a good $1200 dollar PC have better graphics than a PS3?
Depends what parts you buy for it.  PC are much better for gaming, I don't suggest buying any console.  For pure gaming, consoles are better if you're on a $500-$600 budget.
 
I just had a thought.  Console makers are making a mistake by raising console prices to the $500-$600 range.  It used to be a console was a no-brainer for pure gaming losers because they were cheap ($300).  But now... well... you can get a decent gaming PC for $700.
 
Are they trying to compete with PCs?  If so... they're making a big mistake.