Log in

View Full Version : Ps2 Vs Dc



DukenukemX
07-16-2002, 03:49 AM
Ok I came across a great article which is about if PS2 is more powerful then DC.

http://www.dcemulation.com/article-ps2vsdc.htm

I know you must be thinking PS2 kicks ass but you don't know the half of it.

The rest of you must be thinking it's all about the games. Who cares whats better. :mega:

I'll rip some stuff from the article and explain.

The truth is that the PS2 has never displayed more than 2-3 million polys in a game. The main problem is a memory one. With only a 4MB VRAM cache on its GS graphics processor, the PS2 is severely limited in what it can achieve on screen. While it's true that 32MB of main memory and the fairly powerful Emotion Engine processor are capable of producing in the neighborhood of 10-12 million textured and lit polygons/second, the poor design of the GS and its small pipeline to main memory restrict the final number to roughly half of that.

Techno jumbo stuff you must know.

To better understand the PS2's limitations and the Dreamcast's strengths, you need only look at the available video memory for your answer. While the DC has 8MB of VRAM, the PS2 has only 4MB of VRAM. The main problem arises because a polygon takes up roughly 40 bytes of RAM. When you have 5 million of them in a given second, this amounts to 5 million/60fps = 83,333 polygons in a give frame of animation. If each of these polygons uses 40 bytes of VRAM, you will use 3.33 MB displaying these 5 million PPS. This doesn't leave the PS2 much room for it's framebuffer which uses around 1.2MB just to display the end data, not to mention that you still need to leave room for textures to put on those polygons.

In other words the PS2 can do the math but displaying it is another problem. Think of it as a Pentium 4 with a TNT2 video card but worse.

The Dreamcast is a wonderful texturing beast, due in large part to the efficiency of the PVR2DC's graphics methodology. Two things help the PVR2DC - hardware texture decompression and infinite planes deferred rendering. Unlike the PS2's GS graphics processor, the PVR2DC is capable of decompressing textures on the fly. Thus, DC programmers usually take 20-25MB of texture data and compress it at a 5:1 (sometimes 8:1) ratio to reduce the amount of texture data to only 4 or 5MB. Then, the texture data is sent over the bus to the PVR2DC which simply decompresses the data at the moment of rendering into it's original huge size.

The DC, GameCube, and X-Box all have texture compression technology. Somehow the creators of PS2 thought that 4 megabytes of video memory with no compression seemed like a good idea at the time. :shrug:

By contrast, the PS2's GS processor has no ability to decompress textures on the fly. This means that all texture data must flow over the relatively small pipeline between main memory and the GS 4MB VRAM cache, at it's original large size. Currently, this fact has limited PS2 games to only around 10 MB of texture data/frame, and this is why the buildings look so similar in Ridge Racer 5. Lack of variety in texturing has made most PS2 games look extremely plain when compared to Dreamcast games like Sonic Adventure, Shenmue, and even Draconus: Cult of the Wyrm.

PS2 crapy graphics chip limits the PS2 with games. Don't believe me? Look at the pics.

http://maxpayne.godgames.com/screenshots/xbox_screen5.jpg

Max Payne on X-Box

http://maxpayne.godgames.com/screenshots/ps2screen6.jpg

The PS2 port has terrible image quality. The Frame rate on the PS2 has been said to be crap to hell.

http://maxpayne.godgames.com/screenshots/06.jpg

PCs rule in image quality. Looks amazing don't it. :)

Developers have responded to these PS2 programming challenges in a number of ways. Some developers like THQ (Summoner) have used a form of CRT (Cathode Ray Tube) blending to fake the effects that true anti- aliasing would offer. This is something which the DC has had for over two years, but unlike the DC CRT method, the PS2 method results in washed out, blurry textures. Tekken Tag Tournament is the perfect US launch title example. While they have eliminated the jagged edges which plague the Japanese version, the end result is that all of the textures in the game seem blurry or washed out. Hardly what I would call revolutionary for a next-generation console.

Another developmental problem, which is the reason for the jaggies in the first place, is serious lack of kit functions that will intelligently enable developers to overcome some of the limitations of the small size of the GS VRAM cache. While all Dreamcast games run at 640x480 resolution, many PS2 games only utilitize a 640x240 field- rendered display which fakes a 640x480 display. Bad jaggies are the result, and these need to be hidden through some form of anti-aliasing (AA, not yet available), or by using the CRT method described above, with all its unintended consequences.

No real AA in PS2. Even worse resolution then DC. :rolleyes:

Moreover, the EE processor is actually three separate CPUs in one core. Most developers, for lack of proper tools, are using only one third of the EE's processing ability, because both vector units (VP1 & VP2) are too hard to program. Certainly future games will take advantage of these units, thereby freeing the main CPU to implement some fairly nice AI routines, but the cost of developing these techniques has become enormous - something which I will outline in the next article.

The PS2 is like another Saturn when it comes to developing. So I leave you with this thought. Is the PS2 better then DC? I think not. :mischief:

Warlock
07-16-2002, 03:58 AM
Yes, the DC pretty much could blow the PS2 out of the water graphically, and the sad fact is that the PS2 SHOULD be able to produce better graphics.. of course the whole thing is a mess so it can't really without going crazy with the framerate or something.. but I suppose it doesn't really matter since DC is offcially retired

DukenukemX
07-16-2002, 04:04 AM
Whats even worse is that Sega dumped the DC for PS2. :(

At least they're making games for X-Box or GameCube but most of there games are going to PS2. When Doom3 comes out I think X-Box and maybe GameCube could use this against Sonys PS2. I don't think PS2 can pull it off.

Beldaran
07-16-2002, 04:09 AM
Just goes to show that PC's are best if you are a graphics or FPS junky.

Rafnul
07-16-2002, 04:11 AM
I think it's the programmers and graphic designers who limit the PS2's capabilities.

Warlock
07-16-2002, 04:58 AM
Actually, I'd say most of them are going to GC/Xbox.. I havn't seen many Sega PS2 games (other than Ecco the Dolphin, and possibly a sports game or two).. Xbox is probably getting the most at the moment, although I don't think they actually have that many yet (but I do know they showed a lot at e3.. Shinobi, etc).. GC has/is getting a shit load of Sonic games, plus that crazy volleyball game :D I'm sure there is other stuff too..

DukenukemX
07-16-2002, 04:58 AM
If you look at the ground in both the PC pic and the PS2 pic the PS2 pic has a almost solid color ground. Theres no detail in the pic.

The PC and X-Box look identical. Gee I wonder why? :rolleyes:

:update:

More Pics on DC VS PS2

http://ps2media.ign.com/media/news/image/other/sc.jpg

This pic of Soul Calibur looks clean with no jaggies.

http://ps2media.ign.com/media/news/image/other/doa2jaggy.jpg

This PS2 pic of DOA2 shows that textures blur and the amount of jaggies are bad.

ZeldaLord
07-16-2002, 06:04 AM
Originally posted by DukenukemX
http://ps2media.ign.com/media/news/image/other/doa2jaggy.jpg

This PS2 pic of DOA2 shows that textures blur and the amount of jaggies are bad.

If I didn't know better, I'd say that was a PS1 shot...

Maverick_Zero
07-16-2002, 07:29 AM
Why do you keep saying PC, did youmisread the topic cuz it's DC that we're talking about. I love my dreamcast and I always will. SNK produced for the dreamcast and made one of the best games I've ever played Fatal Fury Mark of the WOlves is in it. It is THE BEST fighting game I've ever played 2d or 3d. It's great. Anyway back to the topic. Yeah DC can produce great graphics at a good framerate. Have you seen some of the Sonic Adventure cut scenes they look amazing.

Masamune
07-16-2002, 08:05 AM
DC should be on top where as PS2 should be.... second best i guess! if pirating hadn't totally screwed the dreamcast, then it would probably be somewhere on top.... on the other hand, everyone goes for newer stuff. i told this kid that DC was more powerful than PS2 and he says "nuh uh!". "why?" i ask. "cause it's newer, stupid!" he replies in a snotty tone. then i comence the beating up of the punk ritual. but that's proof that kids go for newer stuff! you could re release the original atari and make it look badass and the kids would come running with $300 dollars to buy it... :sweat:

MottZilla
07-16-2002, 07:18 PM
It's true that the PS2 is limited by poor design and is difficult to program for. The DC would have performed much better than the PS2 had it been given more support and had more money. Sony is backed by things other than video games. As is Mircosoft...

Anyways...

DemoQuestFan
07-16-2002, 10:26 PM
Originally posted by Warlock
Yes, the DC pretty much could blow the PS2 out of the water graphically, and the sad fact is that the PS2 SHOULD be able to produce better graphics.. of course the whole thing is a mess so it can't really without going crazy with the framerate or something.. but I suppose it doesn't really matter since DC is offcially retired

Right! Didn't stop them from killing it off. I like that Sonic Adventure 2 was done for the GameCube too. I have it on DC and its just as good if not better on the GCN.

Blonde799
07-17-2002, 09:27 AM
I really hate these topics:angry:.
So.....
If the DC was better than PS2 then why did it die and now collects dust like the saturn?
Possible reasons could be.....
1. Bad games rained on the DC to start.
2. Developers manage to push the limits of the PS2, and get very good results.
3. Because some don't look at graphical quality as closely as others. Who cares who can process what?
4. PS2 had more features IMO.
5. There was a time in the DC's life when people hungered for RPGs. The DC did little to satisfy this.
6. The DC gave bad internet experiences for ones with a bad ISP.
7. THE DC WAS TOO GODDAMN LOUD!:laughing:
8. And don't get me started on how you have to erase your internal memory on the DC.:lol:
9. A big strain to use the DC controller on some games. Weird to adjust to also.

I'm not a PS2 fanboy, and I like the different consoles for different reasons. I like the dreamcast for sonic adventure 2 and games like soul calibur, but I like the PS2 for DMC, and timesplitters. I just think the DC should've died when it did, because it wouldn't have survived with the competition anyway. Too bad sega won't release a hikaru console.:)

Warlock
07-17-2002, 02:47 PM
No, DC died because Sega SUCKS at marketing consoles. They were already practically broke to begin with.. and they didn't market the thing as much as Sony did (not to mention Sony had the PSX behind it.. "if the PSX was good PS2 must be good too!"). Besides that, Sega has released a few systems that were failures, particularly the Sega Saturn.. so that marred the DC with some bad mojo from the start. I think Sega's problem is that they just didn't market their systems well, or else it was the timing.. I mean, they release DC first and of course, PS2 is coming next year and is supposed to be "better", so why buy a DC?

I never actually did buy a DC, but the thing did have quite a few awesome games on it. And graphically, it still blows PS2 out of the water.. plus the thing ran like a dream.. from what I saw anyways, it had pretty solid framerates on it's games. The controller was a bit big, but not that big of a deal.. and what are you talkin' bout RPGs? It had Shenmue!

Raichu86
07-17-2002, 06:51 PM
I think the PS2 is better. However, I'd never buy either one.

vegeta1215
07-18-2002, 01:19 AM
I read that article a while back and was just like, "wow", because with the power it had, DC could've really been big. But you can't get anywhere without games, and I think that's what it lacked, I dunno.

3-Headed Monkey
07-18-2002, 01:42 AM
Originally posted by DemoQuestFan


Right! Didn't stop them from killing it off. I like that Sonic Adventure 2 was done for the GameCube too. I have it on DC and its just as good if not better on the GCN.

Don't let the multiplayer feature fool you, it's a GREAT single-player game, but the multiplayer is horrible. I'd say it's PROBABLY about the same as DC. I have the GC version, just so you know.

Cloral
07-18-2002, 02:48 AM
DC was really on the same generation level as PS2 and XBox and GC. Because it came out so long before them though, most people didn't seem to notice. I think the big thing that hurt it was that it kinda came out during the middle of a generation. There weren't any other systems coming out at the same time as it, so people didn't have any other systems to compate it to when talking about which system they were going to get. And people who had a PSX or N64 probably didn't want to get another system in the middle of the generation, they wanted to wait for the next generation to get a system that would surely be better, right? That's why most people didn't give the DC much consideration. But now that you can get one so cheap, I think I'm going to get one off eBay. And you can get decently good games too for about $10 (my local Software etc was selling off the last of its stock of DC games for about this much apiece).

MottZilla
07-18-2002, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by Blonde799
I really hate these topics:angry:.
So.....
If the DC was better than PS2 then why did it die and now collects dust like the saturn?
Possible reasons could be.....
1. Bad games rained on the DC to start.

What bad games? Maybe a lack of supprt from 3rd parties which isn't Sega's fault.

2. Developers manage to push the limits of the PS2, and get very good results.

HA. Even the professionals have had a really difficult time with the PS2. It WAS designed poorly. It's really a POS. They shot themselves in the foot the way they design it. The thing is they have money thanks to other sony products and they can market it because of their money.

3. Because some don't look at graphical quality as closely as others. Who cares who can process what?

You can't deny many ps2 games look like shit compared to Soul Calibur or Sonic Adventure.

4. PS2 had more features IMO.

What features warrented the insane 300$ price tag? Playing DVDs, oh damn, that's great cause my DVD player couldn't do that. Neither could my PC's DVD rom. Playing PSX games, wow, my old PSX and PSone couldn't do that. Certainly not my PC either.

5. There was a time in the DC's life when people hungered for RPGs. The DC did little to satisfy this.

Not Sega's fault. 3rd parties were welcome and Sega shipped full dev kits to even the smallest of 3rd parties. Still, no Square interested or anything else. Why? Probably cause they are crawled up sony's ass nowdays. That's also probably why all their RPGs are boring and stupid now anyway. FF7 was alright though I guess.

6. The DC gave bad internet experiences for ones with a bad ISP.

It's not Sega's fault you have a shitty ISP.

7. THE DC WAS TOO GODDAMN LOUD!:laughing:

The fan and drive make minimal noise. You are just taking cheap shots at a great system.

8. And don't get me started on how you have to erase your internal memory on the DC.:lol:

Are you on drugs? There is no such thing. The dreamcast has an internal clock you set. That's all. You probably don't even have a DC.

9. A big strain to use the DC controller on some games. Weird to adjust to also.

The same could be said of the dual shock controller. People are just used to it because of SNES which design was used to make the PSX controllers.

I'm not a PS2 fanboy, and I like the different consoles for different reasons. I like the dreamcast for sonic adventure 2 and games like soul calibur, but I like the PS2 for DMC, and timesplitters. I just think the DC should've died when it did, because it wouldn't have survived with the competition anyway. Too bad sega won't release a hikaru console.:)

You're not a PS2 fanboy, just an idiot.