can psx2 pump out more polygons than high end pcs?
Del1122
d
likely to max it out on the ps2 the best they can because everyone has the
same hardware specs. computer developers are usually hesitant because by
making games that use all the advantages of a top of the line graphics card,
they're leaving out a huge audience.
Del1122 <del...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010221231127...@ng-bh1.aol.com...
Andre
The PS 2 can pump out 75 mill polys! Bust after most features are
used it's like a managble 11-12 mill. Pretty sweet conisdering that
the DC does like 3 mill, and it's games look awesome. I expect a good
future for the PS2!
Andre
Andrew Kicks
news:bu799t8h59n4tnok2...@4ax.com...
> Yah, PC's have to cater to the lowest common denomitor. :)
>
> The PS 2 can pump out 75 mill polys! Bust after most features are
> used it's like a managble 11-12 mill. Pretty sweet conisdering that
> the DC does like 3 mill, and it's games look awesome. I expect a good
> future for the PS2!
>
> Andre
>
Time for a lesson, I think.
The Ps2 pushes (after features, textures (and texture decompression), ai,
collision, several renderings (for a single polygon with more than one
texture on it), lights, sound) the same as a dreamcast, at this moment in
time. I do believe, however, that when microcode is written for both VU0
and VU1 it will push more, that does not stop pure textures. And lets face
it, with crap textures what is the point.
Andre
wrote:
Lesson, I think hardly not. :(
Check out any site and they will confirm what I posted. I did not
bash the DC and it does a great job for about 3-4 mill polys. Which
is what we are prob seeing now on PS 2's, my point is wait until
people know how to progam PS2 games. Just got down playing about 6
hours of Tony Hawk 2, it's a PS 1 title, and amazing......
Andre
d
you?
Andrew Kicks <fu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mr4l6.502$kj.1...@news3.cableinet.net...
Andrew Kicks
--
Andrew Kics,
AGVNGC 2nd to the GV
"Any way, may the cube live forever in our hearts, and minds, and souls. "
"d" <unlist...@265724nospam.com> wrote in message
news:BM4l6.8810$LE1.9...@news.uswest.net...
Virvel
this moment in time. look it up in any spec or ask the developers
themselves.
"Andrew Kicks" <fu...@hotmail.com> skrev i melding news:mr4l6.502> Time for
dizy
if u want the exact values do your research
its something like 70mil with an unrendered scene
and taking full advantage of the chip its around the 13-15million mark -
this is SAID by SONY so argue with them if u want to think otherwise, it was
also tested from various places on the net if u look it up u will find it..
but how can u compare to pc? gf2 ultra pumps out 32 million but still cant
do the same type of processing-rendering the ps2 can do (eg look at how
round characters are in games, look at GT3 movies) PC can't render like
that... also another reason why the xbox and ps2 are hard to compare
2 totally different types of hardware = 2 totally different results..
its true the future looks bright for ps2 considering dc games use 3mil and
they look pretty nice.
out..
"Virvel" <a...@as.no> wrote in message
news:g06l6.1289$t21....@news3.oke.nextra.no...
Andrew Kicks
I think you and many of you have been decieved.
--
Andrew Kics,
AGVNGC 2nd to the GV
"Any way, may the cube live forever in our hearts, and minds, and souls. "
"Virvel" <a...@as.no> wrote in message
news:g06l6.1289$t21....@news3.oke.nextra.no...
jes.da.bes
20+million with the PS2.
"dizy" <mi...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:as6l6.3479$v4.1...@ozemail.com.au...
jay jefferson
-j.
ChoJinTeki
typically really have nothing to do with the hardware limits. Did you ever
conceive the possibility that developers have decided that a certain model
is "good enough". Sure they could add all the polygons they want to the
model, but will it really look better in regards to the time it would take
him/her to finish it. A lot of developers might consider the time and decide
that the models are good enough to release in comparison to what else is on
the market right now. I read somewhere that the car models in GT3 took
around 2 weeks each to complete.
Additionally you mention that the polygons are reduced so and so many
polygons when features such as physics, collision detection, AI, and so
forth are added to the code. Not all developers have the same programming
skills when it comes to this stuff. One programmer could write a really slow
bloated physics routine, while another could write an extremely fast,
streamlined physics routine. Game development is a system of checks and
balances between what the developers want to accomplish and what time and
money constraints they have to do it in.
Imran Sheikh
>
> Lesson, I think hardly not. :(
>
> Check out any site and they will confirm what I posted. I did not
> bash the DC and it does a great job for about 3-4 mill polys. Which
> is what we are prob seeing now on PS 2's, my point is wait until
> people know how to progam PS2 games. Just got down playing about 6
> hours of Tony Hawk 2, it's a PS 1 title, and amazing......
>
> Andre
Andre let me put this nicely. That figure for the DC is with a number of
hardware lights (how many i dont know). I doubt if the texturing ability of
the PS2 will ever reach the DC standars. Although of course it will pump out
a large number of polygons
Ims
Phat H Tran
wrote:
>"Andre" <andr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bu799t8h59n4tnok2...@4ax.com...
>> Yah, PC's have to cater to the lowest common denomitor. :)
>>
>> The PS 2 can pump out 75 mill polys! Bust after most features are
>> used it's like a managble 11-12 mill. Pretty sweet conisdering that
>> the DC does like 3 mill, and it's games look awesome. I expect a good
>> future for the PS2!
>>
>> Andre
>>
>
>Time for a lesson, I think.
For you, definitely.
>The Ps2 pushes (after features, textures (and texture decompression), ai,
>collision, several renderings (for a single polygon with more than one
>texture on it), lights, sound) the same as a dreamcast, at this moment in
>time. I do believe, however, that when microcode is written for both VU0
>and VU1 it will push more, that does not stop pure textures. And lets face
>it, with crap textures what is the point.
PS2 developers have claimed 10-20 million polys/s in their game
engines, and they're only in their 1st generation, so they will
certainly disagree with you.
Phat.
---
To e-mail, remove obvious clutter from address.
Phat H Tran
wrote:
>Fair enough, but how come the games still look no better? hmmmm.
Look no better? No all PS2 games automatically look better than DC
games, but have you seen any DC games that look as good as The
Bouncer? Or have all the rendering effects and poly count of GT3? Or
render landscapes as detailed or battles as crowded as Starfighter?
I've had a DC since its North American launch, and I own most of its
supposedly most graphically advanced titles (Shenmue, F355, etc.), and
they are leapfrogged by the PS2, easily.
>I think you and many of you have been decieved.
Even Sega realizes that, in this next-gen race, their hardware is no
match for Sony's, or MS', or even Nintendo's. Only the Sega fanatics
refuse to believe it.
Zee!
better than the DC's. And this is going to only get better with time. Many
of the DC's titles that are out now have maxed out the hardware. The PS/2
has a long way to go before we see the max it can do. It is already looking
better than DC right now. The PS/2 has basically STARTED where the DC
FINISHED. Get over it.
"Phat H Tran" <pt...@you.know.the.drill.rim.net> wrote in message
news:3a963570....@news.rim.net...
Zee!
"jay jefferson" <jjeff...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:l12a9tgu2brb2db87...@4ax.com...
Imran Sheikh
> but how can u compare to pc? gf2 ultra pumps out 32 million but still cant
> do the same type of processing-rendering the ps2 can do (eg look at how
> round characters are in games, look at GT3 movies) PC can't render like
> that... also another reason why the xbox and ps2 are hard to compare
> 2 totally different types of hardware = 2 totally different results..
> its true the future looks bright for ps2 considering dc games use 3mil and
> they look pretty nice.
> out..
Pity the PS2 can't eeven do things like DOT 3 bumpmapping or per pixel
shading etc. In fact the raw fillrate of the GS (1.2 g/sec) is ok, but the
system lacks features (except for maybe NURB support)
Ims
teemoney
1st generation? It's been out a year already. It's on its 3rd generation
games already.
Phat H Tran
wrote:
>Phat H Tran wrote:
>
>1st generation? It's been out a year already. It's on its 3rd generation
>games already.
That's really stupid, even for you. Most of the games being released
now are their respective developers' first game on the PS2, so they
are 1st generation. We won't be seeing the first smattering of 2nd
generation games until around 12-18 months (one development cycle)
into a console's life.
Phat.
Martyn Wilson
of heels performance wise, perhaps not because of the hardware itself
but because its getting more and better developers working on it.
I'm not going to say that the PS2 is a poor console but no one seems
to be mentioning the tile based rendering of the DC's powervr chipset.
You can have a scene where the PS2 has 8million polygons generated and
the DC only has 1million but they look identical. The DC doesn't
render polygons that can't be seen. This is why the DC suffers from
less slowdown even at its reduced speed over the PS2. Shenmue wouldn't
be possible if it wasn't for tile based rendering I think. Texture
compression also helps the DC considerably.
The PS2 is going to be a big success no doubt but its not a fantastic
console in anyway. A DC operating at 300mhz with 32meg memory would
probably be a superior console for most uses.
Its all history now anyway. The DC is dead and the PS2 is king. Game
developers and the public have insured the PS2's success with their
enthusiasm for the format. I can't help but feel that the DC was a
brilliantly conceived console with a design philosophy superior to the
Playstation 2. Just like the design philosophy of the original
Playstation was superior to that of the Saturn.
The Saturn is more powerful than the Playstation with its dual
processors and extra support hardware especially for sound but the
Playstation was easier to develop for and results were better most of
the time. A few Saturn titles showed it to be superior at the end when
Sega was getting the best out of the system but the reality is
developers could get better results from the Playstation sooner most
of the time.
This situation is reversed with the Playstation 2 and DC. The DC is
better for producing great games quickly.
I'm not a Sega fanboy but do own a PSX and DC and plan to get a PS2.
However I must admit the Gamecube is the format I'm most enthusiastic
about. Nintendo make such superbly playable games and at the end of
the day this is the most important fact of all.
Andrew Kicks
--
Andrew Kics,
AGVNGC 2nd to the GV
"Any way, may the cube live forever in our hearts, and minds, and souls. "
"Martyn Wilson" <bonzo...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:il7c9t0p37iclecc3...@4ax.com...
ChoJinTeki
> to be mentioning the tile based rendering of the DC's powervr chipset.
> You can have a scene where the PS2 has 8million polygons generated and
> the DC only has 1million but they look identical. The DC doesn't
> render polygons that can't be seen.
Most 3d hardware does culling. It's nothing special for the DC.
teemoney
Stop it with the lies. All developers have already released their second
load. They're very close to the 3rd gen games.
>
>
> Phat.
d
ChoJinTeki <choji...@NOSPAM.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0Xul6.2546$ws2.1...@ord-read.news.verio.net...
d
ea name?
teemoney <moch...@zdnetmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A970513...@zdnetmail.com...
Pleiades
"ChoJinTeki" <choji...@NOSPAM.hotmail.com> wrote
>
> Most 3d hardware does culling. It's nothing special for the DC.
Only PowerVR uses Deferred Rendering AFAIK. There is a good guide at
www.powervr.org.uk that sort of explains it...
Blake Patterson
<bonzo...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> The Saturn is more powerful than the Playstation with its dual
> processors and extra support hardware especially for sound but the
> Playstation was easier to develop for and results were better most of
> the time. A few Saturn titles showed it to be superior at the end when
> Sega was getting the best out of the system but the reality is
> developers could get better results from the Playstation sooner most
> of the time.
>
The Saturn has no 3D hardware, you moron.
bp
--
"Heisenberg may have slept here."