PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: square_marker on June 12, 2002, 01:09:26 PM
-
I am not talking flaws like, had to make 4 versions, just processor wise. I would have to say that games run a lot smoother on other systems and the PS2 itself is hard to design games for, not to developer friendly. (So I heard)
-
whats your point :rolleyes:
-
ummmm, its over two years old?
they dont give it away for free with a poster of naked natalie portman?
-
to create disscussion and exploit Sony\'s mistakes. Dont get me wrong, I love my PS2 but i mean come on.
Yes mm, it has been two years, now it is time to look back on the mistakes of their production of the PS2....jesus u people r mean!!! :bounce: :bounce:
-
the EE was top of the food chain back then (and still is in most cases)
-
Originally posted by square_marker
to create disscussion and exploit Sony\'s mistakes.
lol not really my favorite subject matter,
sonys launch date of oct 25 in the states was too early, they werent able to get the 1,000,000 units out
what do you mean by games run smoother on other systems? frame rate?
-
We\'re not mean, just a little bloodthirsty, maybe? *bites s_m\'s leg*
Yah, it isn\'t developer friendly, but so what. There\'ll be a steady increase in software quality as time goes by, making it interesting to follow the developers\' progress. Who knows what\'s still to come (...maybe nothing special, you never know). The other consoles are easier to access, so they\'ll be maxed out sooner. Just like PSOne games kept surprising after many years, while the N64 was maxed out by a rather early Zelda title... It\'s probable, that PS2 games, visually, won\'t be going near those on the GCN or XBox, but with so many good games, who cares, I don\'t *goes back to playing Maximo* :p
-
I am not talking flaws like, had to make 4 versions, just processor wise. I would have to say that games run a lot smoother on other systems and the PS2 itself is hard to design games for, not to developer friendly. (So I heard)
I would have to differ with you about games running less smoth on PS2 than on other titles. IMHO, most PS2 games are able to maintain a constant 60 fps, while there are a lot more games I could point out on Xbox that can\'t even hold a smooth constant framerate. It either runs at a constant framerate or not - it\'s up to the developer to get it there.
Also, the developer-friendly issue will always be a problem no matter what you\'re dealing with. Some developers prefer the hardware close architecture, compared to the pretty basic DirectX programming on todays PC (or Xbox). On DirectX based platforms, you\'ll always have less freedom, but easier access to do great things. Systems, with more freedom will be harder to push, but have a great advantage to be able to compete for a very long time.
And the whole topic is pretty useless btw. Every console has their problems which could have been avoided - but, it\'s what resulted in that time, for that cost etc. When PS2 was made, memory for example was very expensive, so teh engineers probably looked for a way to make a system with less memory needs (large bandwidth, small caches) - had the memory been increased, then the price would have been a problem. Today, memory is a bit cheaper, thus making it possible for engineers to design a system with more memory but still being able to sell it at a reasonable price.
Personally, I like the approach of "freedom of development" Sony made, and by that, giving the PS2 a chance to compete very well against 2 year newer consoles. That\'s quite an achievement already. ;)
-
Originally posted by seven
IMHO, most PS2 games are able to maintain a constant 60 fps...
Something like "most games maintain a constant 60fps", cannot be an opinion. That would be a fact. And most games really don\'t do dat, which is a true to life fact :)
-
Originally posted by Hawke
Something like "most games maintain a constant 60fps", cannot be an opinion. That would be a fact. And most games really don\'t do dat, which is a true to life fact :)
oops, posted it wrong in a hurry. What I ment to say is, that most games on PS2 maintain a constant framerate most of the time. In other words, I\'m suprised to see you complain about framerate, since it\'s something that has less to do how a console was designed, but up to developers to secure a constant framerate -> not the console maker.
-
Then again, given the hardware, it\'s either easier or harder to make an extri-grooveyh -looking game utilizing bump-mapping and specular effects and whatnot, that manages to keep a high, constant fps. And of course developers want to make cool looking games, they have to cater for the \\/\\/|-|0r3z... :)
Framerates on console games have never been an issue for me, maybe because I\'ve managed to avoid the games that had the worst problems (like Driver 2), but on the PC... OK so I got a crappy comp, grargh, suX0rz. It\'s just that what\'s done is done, on a console, there\'s no way of improving what you\'re seeing on the TV screen, just live with it.
-
I believe the PS2 biggest flaw is the connection from the EE (of was that the GIF?) to the GS (GPU chip). At a measly 1.2 GB/s, it will forever limit the PS2\'s texturing ability to the point when the Dreamcast can challenge it in that area.
-
Originally posted by square_marker
I am not talking flaws like, had to make 4 versions, just processor wise. I would have to say that games run a lot smoother on other systems and the PS2 itself is hard to design games for, not to developer friendly. (So I heard)
so true...PS2 is **** to develop for...and it\'s not good when you develop games...more time,more money...have a look at this...
http://www.teamxbox.com/news.php?id=3331...it\'s really interesting...""nVIDIA Corporation, the worldwide leader in visual processing solutions, today introduced the Cg Language Specification - C for Graphics. Cg is a high level programming language that enables content developers to create cinematic-quality real-time graphics easier and faster. Developed in close collaboration with Microsoft Corporation, Cg gives developers a new level of abstraction, removing the need for them to program directly to the graphics hardware. The common, familiar C-like syntax enables rapid development of stunning, real-time shaders and visual effects for graphics platforms,...""
-
Originally posted by nonamer
I believe the PS2 biggest flaw is the connection from the EE (of was that the GIF?) to the GS (GPU chip). At a measly 1.2 GB/s, it will forever limit the PS2\'s texturing ability to the point when the Dreamcast can challenge it in that area.
true! The 1.2 GB/s plus the lack of hardware compression plus the fact you halve fill rate when you add one more texture make the PS2 the weakest console in texturing capabilities this gen,even inferior to DC(--->power VR2:D ) Shame to the Toy Story graphics machine!:rolleyes:
-
true! The 1.2 GB/s plus the lack of hardware compression plus the fact you halve fill rate when you add one more texture make the PS2 the weakest console in texturing capabilities this gen,even inferior to DC(--->power VR2 ) Shame to the Toy Story graphics machine!
Perhaps you should know what your talking about before making such a comment.
Inferior to the DC? Please, go find a job xbox fanboy
-
:laughing:
Good ol\' Master Basher Bizio is back..
The guy who cant fight his own battles..
Pure comedy.
Now where was I? Oh yes.. Leaving this pathetic thread.
-
Originally posted by mm
ummmm, its over two years old?
they dont give it away for free with a poster of naked natalie portman?
:eek: What they gave a way a free poster
//me goes of to check my PS2 card board box for the free poster so that me can "kill" some kitens ;)
-
Originally posted by Chrono
Perhaps you should know what your talking about before making such a comment.
Inferior to the DC? Please, go find a job xbox fanboy
oh my god...I study and I have a job...that\'s the reason why I\'m not very often on videogames forums...tell such a thing to the loser fastson...who spends his whole sad life here:D
...but back to the topic...who said PS2 is inferior to DC ? you can\'t even understand what people say...and...I know why...you\'re retard...
I said PS2 is inferior in texturing capabilities...not overall to DC!
idiot!:)
-
Originally posted by fastson
:laughing:
Good ol\' Master Basher Bizio is back..
The guy who cant fight his own battles..
Pure comedy.
Now where was I? Oh yes.. Leaving this pathetic thread.
why pathetic? here a little tech info for you...hope you understand why PS2 is so poor in texturing capabilities...Sony opted for a innovative,"tangled",complex design for the PS2...and I think it was not a smart move...
The theoretical fillrate of the GS is great,but theory is not always reality.
First of all, trying to keep 16 pixel pipelines busy is very very difficult!
Ask any programmers how difficult it is to load balance over multiple processors!...and consider that PS2 has only one pixel unit per pipeline,so if you wanted to have 2 textures per pixel instead of 1,you would have to halve the fillrate.
The Xbox has two pixel processing units per pipeline, so doing 2 textures per pixel would actually not decrease max fillrate at all...and it\'s not the whole story...I know for sure PS2 only does 1 texture per pass,so it requires a huge amount of memory reads.
Look at these two cases!...
4 textures per pixel --->On the PS2, the max theoretical fillrate would be (1/2)^4, or 1/16th of the stated fillrate at hardware sites. Plus,the PS2 would need 4 reads to accomplish this. All this is simply max fillrate,because real fillrate will be lower due to textures not being resident on the VRAM,which is even more important when you must read for each pass.
All this would take a minimum of 4 cycles which would be about 27 nanoseconds.
On the GCN, you also have only one pixel processing unit per pipeline,which yields 1/16th of the max theoretical fillrate. The upside is that the GC only needs 1 read to accomplish this.
All this would take a minimum of 4 cycles which would be about 25 nanoseconds.
On the Xbox,you have 2 pixel processing units per pipeline,so the max theoretical fillrate would be 1/2 of the max theoretical fillrate. The Xbox would only need one read to do this,and it would require at least 2 cycles or about 9 nanoseconds.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 textures per pixel --->On the PS2, the max theoretical fillrate would be (1/2)^8,or 1/256th of the stated fillrate at hardware sites.
Plus,the PS2 would need 8 reads to accomplish this. All this would take a minimum of 8 cycles which would be about 53 nanoseconds.
On the GCN,you also have only one pixel processing unit per pipeline,which yields 1/256th of the max theoretical fillrate. The upside is that the GC only needs 1 read to accomplish this.
All this would take a minimum of 8 cycles which would be about 49 nanoseconds.
On the Xbox,you have 2 pixel processing units per pipeline,so the max theoretical fillrate would be 1/8 of the max theoretical fillrate. The Xbox would need two reads to do this,and it would require at least 4 cycles or about 17 nanoseconds.
So,if you wanna multitexture, the PS2 is "poor",the GCN is very Good and the XBox the best!
...however,in conclusion,I should say that in terms of hardware, the GC would be the most efficient of them all and the PS2 is the least efficient console!
fasty fasty go play your PS2 games:laughing: instead of wasting your fanboysh time here!
-
Originally posted by BizioEE
oh my god...I study and I have a job...that\'s the reason why I\'m not very often on videogames forums...tell such a thing to the loser fastson...who spends his whole sad life here:D
...but back to the topic...who said PS2 is inferior to DC ? you can\'t even understand what people say...and...I know why...you\'re retard...
I said PS2 is inferior in texturing capabilities...not overall to DC!
idiot!:)
Clean out your PM box!!!
Anyway, I know this is the Console Debating forum. Considered to be the more heated discussions, but don\'t resort to calling names...your arguement will be more than enough to set them off...
-
Originally posted by Ginko
Clean out your PM box!!!
Anyway, I know this is the Console Debating forum. Considered to be the more heated discussions, but don\'t resort to calling names...your arguement will be more than enough to set them off...
you\'re right!:) ...and I\'ll clean out...soon...
hope you\'re fine!
ps:Ginko,Halo is the best game I\'ve ever played...can\'t wait for Halo2!
-
Originally posted by BizioEE
you\'re right!:) ...and I\'ll clean out...soon...
Thanx! I have something to send you...
ps:Ginko,Halo is the best game I\'ve ever played...can\'t wait for Halo2!
NiGHTS is the best game I\'ve ever played...but Halo is a close second. ;)
-
Yes PS2 sucks at texturing..
Know what? These textures in these shots look good to me.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fw1.480.telia.com%2F%7Eu48019550%2Fps2%2Fffx%2F4.jpg&hash=ab29ef4f4ba2cb138a0c99e0fba918ec2cba95bc)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fw1.480.telia.com%2F%7Eu48019256%2Fps2%2Fico%2Fico10.jpg&hash=98d3d4d7f89bbe49e8b6807126fbd01dac2544e0)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fw1.480.telia.com%2F%7Eu48019256%2Fps2%2Fbgda%2Fb6.jpg&hash=637338b64535413670ad36740bcc36e8c62b1e1f)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fw1.480.telia.com%2F%7Eu48019256%2Fps2%2Frm%2Frm1.jpg&hash=f58ff719fe3d33d3d6cf249d2102c5c72df56e02)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fw1.480.telia.com%2F%7Eu48019256%2Fgt3.jpg&hash=36f8313051849db6979237e7152ce8ce0ae67caf)
EDIT: Stupid lame picture limit!
-
Originally posted by fastson
EDIT: Stupid lame picture limit!
That\'s alright fastson, one picture is worth a thousand Bizio cut and pastes:laughing:
Reminds me of back in the PS2 launch days when guys would run around offering proof with quotes and links on how PS2s VRAM was not enough to handle Crazy Taxi:p
-
actually faston. The textures do suck :(
PC will always have the best graphics.
-
Originally posted by ViVi
actually faston. The textures do suck :(
PC will always have the best graphics.
:rolleyes:
All PC games have the same syndrome..
Low polygon (blocky), high textured games..
All the same.
Makes me go - puke -
-
PC games graphics>console games graphics. Its the truth.
-
PC games graphics>console games graphics. Its the truth.
If you have a decent to monster rig to compare to the current consoles...you pay for what you get. If consoles were meant to show super-computer capabilities, they would be priced as such...that would suck.
-
Originally posted by Bozco
PC games graphics>console games graphics. Its the truth.
Nah..
PC games look very sterile.. blocky..
sure they have a very high res, and the textures are awesome.. but it lacks the organic look IMO.
But DOOM 3 looks sweet though.
-
PC games graphics>console games graphics. Its the truth.
Yeah, just too bad the PC hasn\'t got too many of those games that prove your statement valid. I still find it quite amazing how GT3 remains to be one of the best looking racers to date - and that one\'s out since almost a year now (on 2 year old hardware)...
Oh and Bizio, keep it coming. It\'s always quite amusing when you post stuff off TXB.. :p
-
thats it, im never creating a thread again....
o wait, i just created 2 more...
CRAPFACES :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
-
Originally posted by square_marker
thats it, im never creating a thread again....
o wait, i just created 2 more...
CRAPFACES
hugs square_marker
Controversy and a mild amount of chaos have a home now in console debating...I say bring it on!!!
-
Originally posted by Heretic
That\'s alright fastson, one picture is worth a thousand Bizio cut and pastes:laughing:
Bizio can explain to you why PS2 is weak in texturing whenever he wants...nice try however...and try to prove me wrong instead of talking ****...I\'ve just said why I posted opinions of other guys in another thread...
still...the pics fastson posted show PS2 is not good in texturing...it\'s a limitation of the hardware...is it too difficult to admit for PS2 fanboys?
-
Originally posted by BizioEE
Bizio can explain to you why PS2 is weak in texturing whenever he wants...nice try however...and try to prove me wrong instead of talking ****...I\'ve just said why I posted opinions of other guys...
still...the pics fastson posted show PS2 is not good in texturing...it\'s a limitation of the hardware...is it too difficult to admit for PS2 fanboys?
Again.. Do the textures in those pictures SUCK?
-
Originally posted by seven
It\'s always quite amusing when you post stuff off TXB.. :p
well...some members at TXB are very skilled...and often I ask them explanations...it\'s really interesting...and I\'m learning a lot of things...plus some of them are really nice,unbiased and they could teach you many things...or do you think you\'re too biased and ignorant to talk with them?
-
Some rational people do occupy TXB, some being the key word here (in this case, some=~1/1000). I can\'t see how they survive there, because mostly it\'s like some weird, dark world, filled with amoeba-like beings (struggling not to laugh themselves to death when someone mocks the P
- S2) that slither about in primordial ooze, while volcanoes spit out lava like there\'s no tomorrow, trying the to kill the little bastards before they start evolving further and gaining more foothold in the world.
Maybe that was a little harsh... sorry... :)
-
Originally posted by Hawke
Some rational people do occupy TXB, some being the key word here (in this case, some=~1/1000). I can\'t see how they survive there, because mostly it\'s like some weird, dark world, filled with amoeba-like beings (struggling not to laugh themselves to death when someone mocks the P- S2) that slither about in primordial ooze, while volcanoes spit out lava like there\'s no tomorrow, trying the to kill the little bastards before they start evolving further and gaining more foothold in the world.
Maybe that was a little harsh... sorry... :)
I find all sayings like this odd coming from this board, since the same could be said of PSX2. Oh well, it\'s just like what my sig says.
-
Originally posted by nonamer
the same could be said of PSX2. .
I disagree
-
Originally posted by nonamer
I find all sayings like this odd coming from this board, since the same could be said of PSX2. Oh well, it\'s just like what my sig says.
I disagree. But that\'s just me. Aaand perhaps a bunch of other people. Sure, we\'re not perfect either, and all those dolts out there are allowed an equally lame view of us, so... it\'s a tie?
U know, it\'s been a while since we\'ve seen a 7 page thread here filled with "HAAHAHAHAHAA LOLOLLOLOLLLOOMFGROFL GAAHHAHAATAHTS s0 funne, POS2 suxxx!!" ... okay, maybe it wasn\'t seven pages, more like 6... just one example :)
-
The PS2 textures don\'t suck, but they aren\'t too great either, imo...and, althought GT\'s textures look great in that pic, when you actually play it you see all sorts of nasty, low-rez textures, and walls where textures have simply been streatched.....
Oh, and btw, all you PS2 owners MUST play Rez.;) :D
-
Originally posted by CS2x
when you actually play it you see all sorts of nasty, low-rez textures, and walls where textures have simply been streatched.....
your starting to hate now
-
I see nothing more than someone stating the facts and being realistic.
Oh yeah, Rez rulez OK! :D
-
Originally posted by Clowd
I disagree
Especially interesting coming from you.
-
Originally posted by nonamer
Especially interesting coming from you.
until i post x obox sucks, you cant really say this
-
no reason to post that and reconfirm ...... errr what was i saying?
-
Originally posted by Clowd
until i post x obox sucks...........
isn\'t that my LINE :mad:
;)
damn it its nearly a week since i bashed the box, this job hunting is cutting in on some serious hate time :(
Plus i can do iorny like its Doomsday or something
//me thinks of something funny to poke fun at
"ah ah ah Bill gates has bad breath...errmmm ok maybe he dosen\'t...please don\'t sue me billy ;) only joking you make a wonderful s©readsheet and wordprocessr plus spool chooker ;)"
-
still...the pics fastson posted show PS2 is not good in texturing...it\'s a limitation of the hardware...is it too difficult to admit for PS2 fanboys?
Admit what? Just because of people who prejudge consoles from what they see say so? They take crappy games to prove their arguement and then call it fact and all this crap about limitation of the hardware. If I\'d do the same, I could go on all day long about how Xbox sucks at framerates, horrendous blur and blame "limitation of the hardware" for it. Not quite valid is it?
-
Originally posted by Clowd
until i post x obox sucks, you cant really say this
Yeah I can, considering how some of your statements in the past seem to lack any sense of reason whatsoever.
-
Im sorry but i dont know what statements your talking about can you refresh my memory?
-
Originally posted by Clowd
Im sorry but i dont know what statements your talking about can you refresh my memory?
Like in here:
http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22141
Or here, where the biasness of the news comes and goes depending on where you thought it came from:
http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22292
Perhaps there are better examples, but overall I\'ve never a good example of logic coming from you.
-
Originally posted by nonamer
Like in here:
http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22141
Or here, where the biasness of the news comes and goes depending on where you thought it came from:
http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22292
Perhaps there are better examples, but overall I\'ve never a good example of logic coming from you.
i proved in that first link i was the only one who knew about the van allen belt = 1 point to Clowd
In that second link biozee or whoever posted that news posted it with from team x box, as you can see they edited the news, got it from the original source and changed the link to eurogamer, no team x box as it originally was, i cant blame you for thinking i was talking nonsense there when the post was edited to make me look like a fool = 1 point to Clowd
Total tally
Clowd = 2
nonamer = 0
-
I want the x box to fail because it will teach m$ a lesson, that they just cant buy into any business they want
While this is but one example, it speaks volumes.
[edit]
here\'s some more:
"PS2 fans are the most informed"
"PS2 fans are more informed, the ones in japan, they know what console to buy, and what console to buy 800 of, so they have good taste and are informed, the fans in american seem to be bought by m$ 500 million ad campaign, not so in japan, who can blame the fans in american, bought into the hype"
or how about when you said there should only be one console, I\'m almost sure you inclined it should be PS2...I\'m still looking for it...
-
Originally posted by Clowd
i proved in that first link i was the only one who knew about the van allen belt = 1 point to Clowd
Which was disproven before you even posted in there. Read up on that rebuttle(sp?) 5 post down from the top. Plus the fact that you didn\'t believe that humans landed on the Moon in the first place pretty much says it all.
In that second link biozee or whoever posted that news posted it with from team x box, as you can see they edited the news, got it from the original source and changed the link to eurogamer, no team x box as it originally was, i cant blame you for thinking i was talking nonsense there when the post was edited to make me look like a fool = 1 point to Clowd[/quote
The actually text of that piece of news nevered changed, yet your outlook on the bias of that newsbit seems to change.
Total tally
Clowd = 2
nonamer = 0
Why are you keeping score?
-
he has the "alteredbeast" desease
people who take stuff a little too seriously
-
Originally posted by nonamer
The actually text of that piece of news nevered changed, yet your outlook on the bias of that newsbit seems to change.
Im seeing that you never seen the team x box bit of that news? There was about 2 paragraphs of team x box bits on the end of the newsbit, very bias stuff
-
Originally posted by BizioEE
I said PS2 is inferior in texturing capabilities...not overall to DC!
idiot!:)
tell me how this thread is useless now...it is creating discussion
-
Xbox has a crappy processing chip. It\'s Intel but it is basically a Celeron. 733mhz but CISC while PS2 is like 300mhz but RISC. Most ppl get fooled by the numbers but 733mhz CISC is nothing comparing to PS2\'s chip and it definitely aint no Pentium 3 chip as they try to market it. If definitely does not say that on the chip.
PS2 has double Xbox\'s Floating Point Performance as well. So when it comes to running complex games and holding good graphics at the same time, PS2 is easily much better.
Sorry for the dumb Xbox owners. They basically got ****ed by MS.
-
Originally posted by smoke\'emtrees
Xbox has a crappy processing chip. It\'s Intel but it is basically a Celeron. 733mhz but CISC while PS2 is like 300mhz but RISC. Most ppl get fooled by the numbers but 733mhz CISC is nothing comparing to PS2\'s chip and it definitely aint no Pentium 3 chip as they try to market it. If definitely does not say that on the chip.
PS2 has double Xbox\'s Floating Point Performance as well. So when it comes to running complex games and holding good graphics at the same time, PS2 is easily much better.
Sorry for the dumb Xbox owners. They basically got ****ed by MS.
That\'s...a whole lotta information. :(
All I need to know is what games are where, not whats under the hood. :)
-
Xbox has a crappy processing chip. It\'s Intel but it is basically a Celeron. 733mhz but CISC while PS2 is like 300mhz but RISC. Most ppl get fooled by the numbers but 733mhz CISC is nothing comparing to PS2\'s chip and it definitely aint no Pentium 3 chip as they try to market it. If definitely does not say that on the chip.
Do you even know the meaning of CISC and RISC, yet alone the difference?
The XCPU btw is as much a Pentium as it is a Celeron. Not that it would matter anyway.
PS2 has double Xbox\'s Floating Point Performance as well. So when it comes to running complex games and holding good graphics at the same time, PS2 is easily much better.
Guess so, but that doesn\'t mean PS2\'s better. :rolleyes: Both chips handle different tasks... not trying to underrate the Emotion Engine, but you can\'t compare Apples to Oranges.
No offence smoke\'emtrees, but it doesn\'t fair well when you bring up old threads. Unless you really bring in some good and valid arguements, don\'t bother bringing up old threads. ;)
-
Do you know the difference between CISC and RISC??? CISC is better used for running Windows while RISC is better used for stuff like games.
Do you know the difference between Pentium and Celeron? If you did, you would not want Celeron unless you want a short hardware life
I\'m just pointing out the flaws of Xbox as they claim to be the most powerful and they are full of it. We already know the serious lack of good games but their main argument is how great their hardware is.
Floating Point Peformance is a very important factor unless you want simple games that just show off nice pretty colors. Whether PS2 games will end up using that potential is another question but I know that Xbox has have that potential and it already shows.
-
Do you know the difference between CISC and RISC??? CISC is better used for running Windows while RISC is better used for stuff like games.
I have a bad feeling you don\'t know what the real difference is. But okay, I\'ll give you a chance to prove me otherwise. You seem to think that RISC is better for handling OS\'s... fine, so tell me what makes you think that CISC is better for OS\'s and a RISC for games?
Do you know the difference between Pentium and Celeron? If you did, you would not want Celeron unless you want a short hardware life
Again, I presume you don\'t really know the difference or else you wouldn\'t be making such a big deal out of it. As I said, the CPU of the Xbox is not a Pentium nor is it Celeron.
I\'m just pointing out the flaws of Xbox as they claim to be the most powerful and they are full of it. We already know the serious lack of good games but their main argument is how great their hardware is.
Floating point Peformance is a very important factor unless you want simple games that just show off nice pretty colors. Whether PS2 games will end up using that potential is another question but I know that Xbox has have that potential and it already shows.
Believe it or not, I am known for being one of the most biased PS2 members around here and I will agree that we might feel the same way about Microsoft and there claims. The way you post and deliever your arguements though, give me unfortunately more reason to defend Xbox more than taking yourside simply because your points are so weak and foolish, furthermore absolutely irrelevant. One thing for example is your floating point arguement. Of course the PS2 has a much higher floatingpoint performance than the XCPU, but guess what - it also needs to since it has to handle much more performance consuming tasks. Ever wonder what the XCPU does? Yeah, a bit of AI here and there and other in-game devoted tasks. It does not need a super highperformance chip for that. Duh!!
-
smoke\'em trees = 420blunt &LiteItUp
-
Believe it or not, I am known for being one of the most biased PS2 members around here and I will agree that we might feel the same way about Microsoft and there claims.
Not as of lately...IMO, you\'ve lightened up quite a bit.
--->Has a fondness for the old, cut-throat seven...likes the new just as much.
-
Do you know the difference between CISC and RISC??? CISC is better used for running Windows while RISC is better used for stuff like games.
i cant believe someone would say that and actually believe it
ignorance is truly bliss
-
This is going to get ugly.
I think he\'s smoking something other than trees. :rolleyes:
-
This thread still alive?
-
I just hope smok\'em doesn\'t argue in the same vain as coke or clowd. Neither one of them has common sense, the lack thereof can be a powerful tool to piss people off...
We\'ll see what happens...
-
You know Ken Kutargi said it best "Microsoft has taken themselves out of the console war already with the x box\'s cpu."
He didnt say CPU exactly but something about the x box\'s graphics or Cpu, whatever the case he said microsoft x box is exactly what smoke\'m entrees has been saying about it, a big polygon pusher with nothing else
-
Thank you Clowd
To seven:
Ok then Mr. I know it all. You are so damn smart then please enlighten me and all others. And I am not being completely sarcastic because I just got back into learning bout PCs, although I did some research bout the MS Xbox chip and asked two ppl at work bout the validity of statement of CISC vs RISC. So then teach me master.
Xbox chip is inferior. This is shown in their games. The graphics chip is superior, but who cares when the gameplay sux.
MS is not using Intel anymore for the Xbox 2 and it just seems like they realized they got ripped off.
Xbox fanboys try claim that Xbox chip is a P3 chip while it is not. More like a Celeron 2.
-
gr0an
dude yer making us look bad, sheesh
oh and, RISC > CISC
-
I thought ps2 could push more polygons than xbox, am I being misinformed here? I read somewhere that xbox could do 38 million polys max with two textures on them, but when the textures where of, there\'d still be only a max of 38 million.
(ps2 can do like 66 million or something)
someone?
-
uGH, if this thread turns into tech-babble then im out
pointless to argue about specs when its the games and gameplay that counts (and are very worth arguing about :))
-
I\'m with mm...laters.
will check in to make sure someone\'s not flinging too much poop
-
Ok then Mr. I know it all. You are so damn smart then please enlighten me and all others. And I am not being completely sarcastic because I just got back into learning bout PCs, although I did some research bout the MS Xbox chip and asked two ppl at work bout the validity of statement of CISC vs RISC. So then teach me master.
I\'m disappointed now. I was really hoping you would fill me in on your thoughts.. :(
A CISC based processor uses complex instructions to minimize program code and therefore also RAM. In that essence, less code is needed to perform a complex task.
A reduced instruction set computer, as the name already lets you assume, uses less and more simplified instructionsets to perform its tasks. Because of that, programs tend to be bigger because they require more steps or instructions to perform a complex instruction.
Conclusion: While a RISC is faster at performing instructions than a CISC, it needs to process more instructions to perform the same task. There\'s more to it, but I won\'t go into addressing modes, registers etc.
I really don\'t see why you\'re basing your whole PS2 is better than Xbox arguement on a simple CISC vs RISC arguement. There are much more important and interesting things to argue about when comparing those two (totally different) platforms. It\'s like argueing PS2\'s graphics suck because it only has 2 controller ports. :rolleyes:
Xbox chip is inferior. This is shown in their games. The graphics chip is superior, but who cares when the gameplay sux.
If you\'re unhappy with the gameplay, you should blame the developer instead of a piece of hardware that just does its job. ;)
MS is not using Intel anymore for the Xbox 2 and it just seems like they realized they got ripped off.
LOL, what are you saying? Microsoft\'s dumping (lets assume this is true) Intel because of their CISC/x86 architecture that enables windows to run on any PC? That\'s got to be the most pathetic reasoning I\'ve ever heard.
Xbox fanboys try claim that Xbox chip is a P3 chip while it is not. More like a Celeron 2.
*points to last reply where this has already been answered.
-
Not as of lately...IMO, you\'ve lightened up quite a bit.
Yeah, perhaps... maybe just because there aren\'t any real good debates on anymore. I\'ve also been in quite a lot of stress at work, so I wasn\'t able to post here that often either. :-/
You seemed to have lightened up quite a bit aswell too tho...
-
Yeah, perhaps... maybe just because there aren\'t any real good debates on anymore. I\'ve also been in quite a lot of stress at work, so I wasn\'t able to post here that often either. :-/
Same here, I\'m exhausted from stress and have lost a little bit of my edge...that and even since console discussion opened alot of people have gone soft. shakes fist towards console discussion:mad:
likes your avatar:)
-
..is jealous of all the attention seven is getting from Ginko..
-
C\'mon Bob, you always know I come home to you...
-
Yah, but you\'ve been so stressed over work lately.. you havent been able to perform to your usual standard.. :mad: :(
So then i start to thinking.. is it really the work.. or maybe Mr. Seven inches over there is just more man than I am.. :(
..*just realised he has put way too much effort into this post*..
-
I\'ve been a bit tired, but I promise I\'ll make it up to you...
I consider all others warm-ups for you.
Not nearly as much effort as you put in me
-
Promises promises promises... it\'s all i ever get from you these days. I\'m still waiting for a ring to go on this finger mister.
Warm ups? Warm ups?? Generally in warm ups people tend to break a sweat.. and last more than 15 seconds. Hell, I don\'t even know what you are doing anymore. It feels like a mosquito is biting me... At least once you are bitten by a mosquito.. its somewhat satisfying to scratch the sore.. which is more than i can say for whatever you are doing down there.....:(
..oh dear god..
-
You know what?!? Why don\'t we just take a break from eachother...you can call me when you start to realize what you lost...
grumbles...takes me for granted, doesn\'t appreciate all I do for him...
:(
-
OMG!...
tell me you didnt say that!!?!... please...
i thought... i thought you...... i dont know what i thought :(
I\'m..... going...... if you change your mind, I\'ll be in bed..... you do still know where the bedroom is dont you??
:(
*..I can\'t believe he doesnt want to be with me..*
-
ok, this thread has certainly run its course