[Nightmare]

That is a smart $$$ over madonion.com claims that a p3 500 + riva tnt 2 ( not even the ultra one ) is equals to ps2........and his 900mhz cpu rock the hell out of ps2, hahahaha

Sony and Samsung (hmm..if im not mistaken) invested over billions to create this ps2's emotion engine and this guy claims that the performance of a ps2 is equals to a p3 500 + riva tnt 2........ hahaha

check this link to have a good laugh !

http://discuss.madonion.com/forum/s...umber=74505&page=&view=&sb=&o=&fpart=all&vc=1

 

[Samor]

actually he's right....his computer IS more powerful than a ps2. The games for ps2 however, are HIGHLY optimised, something that could never be done on a pc, because of all the different confgurations that exist. The result is that in terms of visual quality the ps2 runs circles around a 500mhz.
So while the ps2 LOOKS more powerful it isn't.

a playstation 1 is 33mhz...did you ever see a pentium 75 do the same? I dont think so, yet the pentium 75 was clearly more powerful!

 

[Sylvan Sorrow]

Amigas are the best example I think, the were like a 14mhz or something REALLY slow, but they could do the same if not more than a 486 Dx2 100mhz

 

[Samor]

yes, good example...

as for a pentium 75 ...I think something in the line of 3do or jaguar.

 

[Nightmare]

Originally posted by Samor
actually he's right....his computer IS more powerful than a ps2. The games for ps2 however, are HIGHLY optimised, something that could never be done on a pc, because of all the different confgurations that exist. The result is that in terms of visual quality the ps2 runs circles around a 500mhz.
So while the ps2 LOOKS more powerful it isn't.

not totally agree, since the ps2 and p3 500 using different cpu, u have to know that the ps2 is using a 128 bit cpu and p3 using a 32 bit cpu.And due to the architecture designs they use are diffrent, i still say that the ps2 cpu is more powerful.

for example, people claims that a 32bit Athlon 1.4 can beat a 32bit p41.7 ........so, i dont think it is impossible for a a 128bit 300 mhz cpu to beat a p3 500 cpu or may be can even has the same speed as p3 900?, or may be can achive p3 600++ speed?

And for the gpu, ps2 is 128bit and it is specifically design for games,and no matter in what way, it is surely far better than a riva tnt 2 ,and i really dont know why it can be about as powerful as ps2's emotion engine?

And i think the most powerful part of the ps2 is the gpu not the cpu.

a playstation 1 is 33mhz...did you ever see a pentium 75 do the same? I dont think so, "yet the pentium 75 was clearly more powerful!"

dont agree....... due to the cpu and architecture design they use are different, u cant really say that a 75mhz is faster than a 33mhz in this case, unless they are using the same cpu which was designed by the same company.

 

[fivefeet8]

I Agree with nightmare.. The ps2 uses a 128 bit cpu.. Pc's use 32 bit and are going to 64 bit next year.. Its really hard to say which is more powerful.. But take a look at MGS 2 for ps2 and think how powerful of a pc would be required to run a game like that.. If it was ported to the pc, you would need a pretty powerful computer to be able to have the same level of graphics as the ps2 version.. I think a p3 500, tnt2 would probably be the minimum requirements.. hehe.. But like it says on the thread, the ps2 is vastly different from the pc.. You can only emulate the ps2 if your pc was 3 to 4 times more powerful than the ps2.. Plus the bandwidth of pc's would have to be larger than the ps2 bandwidth which is 80 gigbytes.. Most pc's nowadays has about 2.1 gigbytes of bandwidth.. Emulation of the ps2 will happen one day, but not in the near future.. Maybe 3 to 5 years from now if memory bandwidth's of PC's exceed 100 gigbytes.. But the ps3 will be out..

 

[Demigod]

It seems you always need a more powerful system to emulate a lesser system, but I think therein lies the very bottleneck/problem: emulation. Games have to be run through an emulation layer so it slows things down a lot. If you were to run PC games, emulated on a PS2 I bet it would be horrendously slow as well. I also found that modern processors are terrible at running legacy applications and games. Games like Descent and Duke Nukem 3D ran perfect on my old Pentium 100 but they don't perform so good (some stuttering, sound problems) on my Pentium 3 700, simply because the processor is optimized for 32bit code. Most people think emulating obslete console and arcade systems should be a breeze on PC but it actually takes a lot more power than it seems. Still, there are some very fast emulators (ZSNES, NeoRageX, Final Burn), so I guess it all depends on the coding of the emulation.

 

[CKemu]

I agree with that the PC had to be more powerful than the actuall console, afterall u r interpriting code not designed for a PC, and 'floating' the console hardware on your machine, overall u are really putting a strain on your machine as its doing 4 times the work to get the same effect as the original console.

With the PS2 emulation will happen its just a case of when and the specs that u will need, larger bandwidth, higher poly pushing, larger texture RAM, and overall better processors, but even with the smaller bandwidth of the PC, u could get away with a 500Mhz+ machine with 128mb RAM with a GeForce 2/3....afterall the RAM specs and Mhz of a PC is far greater than a PS2.

With the X-Box though emulating the hardware and software interface will b relativly easy, I think u will still need a decent machine as the same kinda things have to b taken into account, bandwidth, different code, hardware emulating etc etc.....

 

[Demigod]

Originally posted by fivefeet8
But take a look at MGS 2 for ps2 and think how powerful of a pc would be required to run a game like that.. If it was ported to the pc, you would need a pretty powerful computer to be able to have the same level of graphics as the ps2 version..

I think MGS 2 would work fine on a P3 500 and a TNT2, provided it runs at the same resolution and color depth of the PS2 and uses TV-out (most console games run at a maximum resolution of 640x480x16, usually 320x240x8). The emulator would require some major optimization to emulate some of the PS2's more advanced graphics effects, but I believe it would work. Now try running Max Payne at 1024x768x32 w/ 4xFSAA, emulated on a PS2 and I think we can get a real idea or the current state of PCs and consoles.

I think one of the most advantageous aspects of consoles is that they use multiple specialized processors for things like graphics, sounds and game code. The CPU only does a small fraction of the work. PCs, however, rely heavily on the CPU for everything. The advantages of the console setup can be seen with 3D accelerators, and although 3D accelerators have taken over the role of rendering graphics it only applies to 3D games and applications, and the CPU still does the bulk of the work. Still, with the current level of PC technology I think PS2 emulation is very possible, and I think even a low grade system like mine should be able to handle it fine.

 

[aoshi]

>I think MGS 2 would work fine on a P3 500 and a TNT2, provided it runs at the same resolution and color depth of the PS2 and uses TV-out (most console games run at a maximum resolution of 640x480x16, usually 320x240x8). The emulator would require some major optimization to emulate some of the PS2's more advanced graphics effects, but I believe it would work.

Hell NO! or atleast you can with the processor if you were to play it directly from boot-up without using an OS, or anything between the game and the hardware. And TNT2 is nothing compared to the emotion engine just look at it PS2's gpu has a huge bus capacity not to mention the cpu is right next to the gpu and the tnt2 its not even DDR! also it is only 64 bit! even a GeForce 3 will have a hard time rendering PS2 graphics.

>Now try running Max Payne at 1024x768x32 w/ 4xFSAA, emulated on a PS2 and I think we can get a real idea or the current state of PCs and consoles.

why emulate Max Payne when you can simply port it over(i think it is already in the process) and I don't think PS2 does 4xFSAA. to play it in 1024 by 768 you either need a good HDTV or a VGA converter!

>I think PS2 emulation is very possible, and I think even a low grade system like mine should be able to handle it fine.

well that is what you think... nothing I can do about it

 

[Nightmare]

Originally posted by Demigod79

I think MGS 2 would work fine on a P3 500 and a TNT2

uhm.. yes, it can work fine even on a p2 300 with sis video card...depend on what quality u want to get from the game, either ps2 quality or ps quality,the best texture quality or the worst texture quality

 

[Fou-lu]

To begin with, a x86 platform is a real Frankenstein monster! Come on, it still carries the microcode designed for the 8086 so that the programs are compatible. Trying to compare a PC with a console is a big injustice. The console (except for the Xbox) are made from scratch to be more powerfull than PCs and geared toward games.

 

[Demigod]

Originally posted by aoshi
Hell NO! or atleast you can with the processor if you were to play it directly from boot-up without using an OS, or anything between the game and the hardware.

What do you think DirectX is? It is designed to give direct access to hardware, bypassing the OS completely.

Originally posted by aoshi
And TNT2 is nothing compared to the emotion engine just look at it PS2's gpu has a huge bus capacity not to mention the cpu is right next to the gpu and the tnt2 its not even DDR! also it is only 64 bit! even a GeForce 3 will have a hard time rendering PS2 graphics.

You've gotta be kidding. The GeForce 3 is far superior to the PS2. I've seen the PS2's graphics and I do not think it is superior to the PC's. There are no pixel shading effects or environmental bump mapping. Of course I'm speaking from the current games out there now, future games will surely utilize more of the PS2's features. Still, I think the upcoming PC games (that utilize the GeForce 3 and Radeon's advanced features) will blow the PS2 away. The TNT2 can handle low resolutions (640x480) just fine, and most of the PS2's GPU functions are probably going to have to be emuated by the CPU anyways so it won't have to do much work.

I think overall console games have better textures and smoother polygons (not to mention smoother animation) than most PC games but not better technology. Plus it's hard for console companies to keep up, with companies like nVidia pumping out a new video chipset every 6 months, and CPUs have made great leaps in speed over the past few years (and nosedived in costs, thanks to AMD).

BTW, the TNT2 is a 128-bit videocard. I think you're referring to the TNT2 M64.

 

[Xeven]

I believe Fou-lu had great points.. and arguing bout this crap is about as futile as trying to walk on water.. and trying to compare a system which is using a data driven topology vs a system with an instruction driven topology is nuts..:eyes:

 

[Nightmare]

Originally posted by Fou-lu
To begin with, a x86 platform is a real Frankenstein monster! Come on, it still carries the microcode designed for the 8086 so that the programs are compatible. Trying to compare a PC with a console is a big injustice. The console (except for the Xbox) are made from scratch to be more powerfull than PCs and geared toward games.

I agree, trying to compare a PC with a console is a big injustice, since people has started to use future version of nvidia cards and cpus to blow ps2 away.

subjects like "ps2 kill pc" or "pc kill ps2" are really make nosense....unfair to both pc and ps2...

 

[Fou-lu]

Originally posted by Nightmare



I agree, trying to compare a PC with a console is a big injustice, since people has started to use future version of nvidia cards to blow ps2 away.

...Whatever.

 

[vivrantpig]

well duznt matter if itz as powerful as dat comp or not... look at games on ps2 and look at the ones on pc... hmmmm mgs 2 gt3 gta3!!! i wud rather have the ps2 becuz uv da games. graphic quality iznt always everything......

 

[Demigod]

Originally posted by vivrantpig
well duznt matter if itz as powerful as dat comp or not... look at games on ps2 and look at the ones on pc... hmmmm mgs 2 gt3 gta3!!! i wud rather have the ps2 becuz uv da games. graphic quality iznt always everything......

Yeah, console games are great. The best RPGs and fighting games are on consoles. First person shooters and real-time strategy games are a different story though, and that's where the PC excels at. Most PC games are also geared towards multiplayer while console games are mostly single player(most of my friends go straight for the multiplayer or skirmish option whenever they get a new PC game). I guess there are different markets for each system.

 

[Nightmare]

Originally posted by vivrantpig
well duznt matter if itz as powerful as dat comp or not... look at games on ps2 and look at the ones on pc... hmmmm mgs 2 gt3 gta3!!! i wud rather have the ps2 becuz uv da games. graphic quality iznt always everything......

i hope they can port ps2 games like mgs2, tekken4, doa3, devil may cry , silent hill2 ,soul calibur2, etc ... to pc . But the chances are very low i guess :sad: :sad:

 

[Shadow Lady]

yeah, I´m expecting for that
:idea: