Thread 12015168

>two 64-bit ALUs vs GC's 2x32-bit ALUs
>much stronger FPU coprocessors (COP1 + VU0, 2.5GFlops combined vs GC's 1.9Gflop CPU embedded FPUs)
>48GB/s GS (Gigachad Silicon) VRAM vs 10.4GB/s Flopper 1T (One(1) Trans) SRAM
>highly programmable vertex units (ATI FLOPper can't even)
GC has a more powerful GPU for vector calculations, and a higher clocked CPU with more cache, but that's about it. PS2 has a much better CPU a lot more capable of multithreading thanks to the powerful ALUs. More powerful FPUs, partly shared with the CPU and GPU, which allows complex calculations and vertex effects. GPU intensive games run poorly on the PS2, but CPU intensive games will have a hard time running at all on the Gamecube. And having a barely programmable GPU (only a very small amount of FPU is shared by CPU and GPU) makes it difficult for the GC to render particle effects and complex shadings.

>>12015168 (OP)
PS2 has big disc energy.

>>12015168 (OP)
Wasn't that post proven to be from a LARPer?

>>12015181
Yes. It's some guy from Germany who claims to work for Nintendo. Richard Parr from Criterion is from Engerland and has never worked for Nintendo. Truly a strange choice to link directly to the supposed quote where people can easily figure this out.

>>12015168 (OP)
Interesting. So that's why 6th gen had so many multiplat games that were on PS2 and Xbox but skipped Gamecube, like MGS2, Silent Hill 2, GTA3, etc.

>>12015245
MGS2 and SH2 were indeed built for PS2 and could be brute forced to run on Xbox. The shading and particle effects required PS2's multithreading and vector capability. GTA games were cancelled for other reasons though. But yeah porting native PS2 games to GC likely would've required more effort than porting them to Xbox.

>>12015168 (OP)
Everybody knows this. Cubies have been spreading disinfo for 2 decades just because they're asshurt their underpowered nogames smeleemachine couldn't run GTA III.

>>12015168 (OP)
Why can't the PS2 play Monkey Ball at 60 FPS?

>>12015314
Dev skill issue. Programming the emotion engine is so hard that many devs chose to ignore many of the VPU functions and didn't care to multithread the workload.

>>12015330
Kutaragi really was an example of an idiot admiring complexity, and the poor performance of his consoles reflects it.

>>12015335
Sony wanted the most cost efficient system possible to deliver the best performance. Emotion Engine + Graphics Synthesizer contains only 54 million transistors combined while Gamecube's Flipper GPU alone contains 51 million and it contains less embedded VRAM than PS2's GS. Flipper GPU + Gekko CPU amounts to about 70 million transistors and that doesn't include the external encoder chip (PS2 already has it within Emotion Engine's die).

Gamecube was only cheaper because Nintendo subsidized it.

>>12015403
>Sony wanted the most cost efficient system possible to deliver the best performance.
That's every manufacturer ever. The PS2 failed in this regard though.

>>12015408
>The PS2 failed in this regard though.
Not if you actually knew how to use the hardware. Pic related was pretty much impossible on any other platform.

>>12015452
Good point. Even high end PCs of the time would struggle to run this.

>>12015452
What specific thing was the PS2 better than other consoles at? Genuinely asking

>>12015452
>one model copy and pasted 2000 times in simplistic environments
I don't get what's supposed to be impressive here.

>>12015473
Already mentioned in the OP.
>2x64-bit ALUs: gives it ability to process two 64-bit integer arithmetic operations in parallel, or a single 128-bit one in a cycle. That's better than what even the Xbox 360's Xenon had (a single 128-bit ALU). Other systems of its time (PowerPC and Pentium) had only 2x32-bit ALUS.
>tight CPU coupling with a graphics function vector co-processor (VPU0) giving high flexibility to transform and lighting (T&L) as well as giving more power to game logic processing when it's not used for T&L.
>insane 48GB/s graphics fillrate making particle effect rendering absolutely fast

>>12015483
Those copy and pasted enemies still need to have their coordinates and other values tracked all the time. The impressive particle effects used for bows and other visuals will also eat up CPU time. This is where the twin 64-bit ALU comes into play, one ALU is keeping track of particles and enemies while the other is running other game logics, maintaining 60 fps all the time. Also that copy paste tactic couldn't work that well without a monster VRAM data rate.

The PS2 was the first and only console to achieve this level of face animation in 2006, despite being a hardware from 2000.
Only later, as motion capture became increasingly common, the newer consoles was able to compute everything necessary to output such animations smoothly and in real time. Even compared to LA Noire, the PS2 animations look more realistic and natural in FFXII.

>>12015623
Other consoles achieved comparable of better facial animation before that like RE4 on GC or HL2 on Xbox

>>12015641
RE4 is close, but not that impressive
HL2 is far behind, just like every tech demo.

Lmao @ this thread, disingenuous shitter general

>>12015662
I can't tell if you're baiting or delusional. The characters in the FF webm have basically no emotion, it's just their mouths flapping and their eyes moving a bit

>>12015623
Starfox Adventures has much better facial animations.

brb destroying my gamecube

>>12015662
>but not that impressive
RE4 looks next gen on GCN. So much so the PS2 port had to rely on pre-renders of what the Gamecube could do in real time.

>>12015168 (OP)
>48GB/s GS VRAM
>10.4GB/s SRAM
U wot m8?
The PS2s 4MB of DRAM, not VRAM operate at a peak bandwidth of 48GB/s, but that gamecube number isn't even correct. Gamecube has 3MB of SRAM capable of 18GB/s.

>GC has a more powerful GPU for vector calculations, and a higher clocked CPU with more cache, but that's about it.
That's not about it, that IS it. We're talking about 2001. Better vector calculations means more polygons at a higher fill rate with more complex scenery on-screen at better draw distances. It means you can render in 3D things that are sprite billboards on PS2.

>GPU intensive games run poorly on the PS2, but CPU intensive games will have a hard time running at all on the Gamecube.
The only thing CPU intensive in this era is Havok physics, and none of these console games have it fully implemented compared to PC games of the era like HL2/Soldier of Fortune 2.

>And having a barely programmable GPU (only a very small amount of FPU is shared by CPU and GPU) makes it difficult for the GC to render particle effects and complex shadings.
Particle effects and complex shadings that the PS2 exclusively used in 1st and 2nd party games and exclusives targeting the console from Konami, From Software, and Capcom. Every other developer, especially western third-party developers just turned the special effects from the Xbox/GC versions off for the PS2 port because they couldn't figure out the emotion engine.

It's obviously a better console than the flopcube, you don't have to make up stuff to make it seem even better than it actually is. The video output and special effects engine were dated a year after the console launched, that's its one weakness.

>>12015168 (OP)
There's nothing on the gamecube that looks anywhere as impressive as Gran Turismo, MG3 or even GoW 2
no one plays nintento games aside from tendies
there's a reason the ps2 sold so much more and even when for Free people still emulate PS2 a lot more more than GC even though Dolphin is superior to PCSX2

>>12015803
RE4 on a CRT looks better than any PS2 game, and that includes the PS2 version of RE4

>>12015725
>RE4 looks next gen on GCN
It looks less impressive than OG Xbox.

>>12015725
>game that was developed for gamecube first and was horrible everywhere else was butchered and unoptimized on PS2
Duh.
>So much so the PS2 port had to rely on pre-renders of what the Gamecube could do in real time.
The PC port was the same. Gamecube does have a more powerful GPU than PS2, but those changes had nothing to do with the PS2 hardware not being able to run it.

>>12015673
It's cartoony shit

>>12015673
Yup, so does Sonic Adventure.

>>12015820
Most Xbox console exclusives are pretty underwhelming visually because they were built with shitty PCs as a baseline. On the subject of facial animations, it's really hard to think of an Xbox exclusive that competes in that area. The character models in the Halo games for example look and animate like they were design to run on an N64. I guess it'd be something like Conker (technically not an exclusive) or Blinx, simply for the exaggerated toon aesthetic. The DOA games have nice-looking character models, but they all have dead-eyed blow-up doll faces that fail to convey any emotion. It's a real weakness for the system. Shenmue II would be right up there for best facial animations on the platform and that's a fucking Dreamcast port.

>>12015168 (OP)
Then why does Resident Evil 4 look atrocious on the PS2? Why do the Tony Hawk games look better on even the Dreamcast than the PS2?

>>12015928
>Why do the Tony Hawk games look better on even the Dreamcast than the PS2?
?

The Dreamcast and PS2 don't have any Tony Hawk games in common and THPS3 on PS2 looks FAR better than THPS2 on Dreamcast, because it's a next-gen title and not a touched-up port of a PS1 game.

>>12015168 (OP)
PS2 couldn't even render walking through water in RE4. They changed water to a brown floor.

>>12015168 (OP)
>but muh shitty capcom ports made for quick buck because gamecube didn't sell!

>>12015168 (OP)
PS2 has that 20th century schizo architecture while GC is a boring soulless ATI powerpc shitcan

>>12015928
>Then why does Resident Evil 4 look atrocious on the PS2?
Question about the PS2 version, wasn't it true widescreen, while the GC version had forced black bars on the top and bottom of the screen? Not sure if that contributed to the difference in visuals.

Here's how the PS2 could be saved...

>>12015953
The widescreen mode on PS2 is anamorphic, there's no increase in resolution.

>>12015959
If it is anamorphic widescreen then it does increase the resolution.

letterboxed means black bars are covering the top, so on a widescreen TV you have to zoom in. the active resolution is reduced, for ex a 640x480 game would only show like 640x360 of graphics.
anamorphic means the full 640x480 is used and has to be stretched horizontally out to the correct widescreen aspect ratio. you use more lines of video and so the quality is higher.

>>12015979
It just stretches the image vertically, distorting the image until you stretch it out horizontally with your TV.

>>12015738
>The PS2s 4MB of DRAM, not VRAM operate at a peak bandwidth of 48GB/s
That's the VRAM. DRAM is the type of memory it is.
>Better vector calculations means more polygons at a higher fill rate with more complex scenery on-screen at better draw distances.
The fillrate is lower because the VRAM has less bandwidth.
>The only thing CPU intensive in this era is Havok physics, and none of these console games have it fully implemented compared to PC games of the era like HL2/Soldier of Fortune 2.
Psi-Ops, Destroy All Humans 1&2, and Incredible Hulk used Havok. Other games like FlatOut 1&2, Driv3r, and BurnOut 3 used other physics engines. It's true that The Incredible Hulk was a watered down port of the Xbox 360 and PS3 though,but still, the PS2 could handle it well. Considering none of these games came out on GameCube.
>Particle effects and complex shadings that the PS2 exclusively used in 1st and 2nd party games and exclusives targeting the console from Konami, From Software, and Capcom.
GoW 2 is known to have taken advantage of PS2 hardware extensively. Jak 3 had lots of physics action and bump mapping. BurnOut 3 used many techniques unique to PS2's GS with ASM despite being a third party game.
>The video output and special effects engine were dated a year after the console launched, that's its one weakness.
Of course, it was the first and cheapest console to manufacture of its gen. But its dual 64-bit ALUs remained exceptional even until the PS3/360 gen, and its highly programmable graphics pipeline was quite ahead of its time.

>>12015927
Unlike JRPG slop, Halo games have large nearly open world environment to render. Riddick had cutting edge stencil shading and materials. Not enough polygon and texture budget to render faces in a detailed way. DoA's blowup doll looking models is just skill issue. Xbox had far more powerful shader units than the PS2 so they used more flat looking low quality textures to be shaded later, while many PS2 games used pre-shaded textures.

Also PS2 games were moviegames while Xbox games were real games. The development resources were distributed accordingly.

>>12015623
>realistic face animations
>not showing SH3 from 2003

>>12015623
Why do JRPG characters look like drag queens.

>>12015473
it had more fillrate than the GC and Xbox combined

>>12016057
Even more than twice of PS3's and 360's actually.

Ps2 was engineered to beat the Dreamcast and when Xbox showed up the industry had already chosen programmable pixel shaders as the future. GameCube was never designed to be a contender for most powerful hardware unlike N64

>>12015168 (OP)
Debunked , they had a version running on gamecube but couldnt release due to limitations from networkplay and poor sales

The only thing this game is doing is streaming extra geometry directly from the disc due to poor data transfer rate , also F- Zero GX has way more geometry and particles on screen at a blistering solid 60fps, this engine couldnt even run barely at 30fps on PS2, since is a monkey ball engine

https://youtu.be/By7c4Icnvew

Also Star Wars Rogue Squadron 3 obliterates anything on GC or XBOX , mobs of up to 150 TIE fighters and 200 stormtroopers on the screen at the same time. The special effects in the game offer a new particle system, an overhauled lighting system that refines the shadows and self shadowing (something not seen in any game that generation) and even per-pixel atmospheric light scattering. You'll even find an impressive version of the snazzy overbrightening technique making the rounds in the latest batch of PlayStation 2 and Xbox games. As you'd imagine, detail in the game has been bumped up considerably with intricate high-res textures and bump mapping. The team has added several flourishes to sell you on the experiences you'll have in the game. A real-time inverse kinematic animation system and cloth simulation further add the little touches that make the characters in the game come to life. A dedicated rendering system for the vegetation you'll encounter in the game, such as trees, grass, and ferns, complements the package. You'll also see motion blur, depth of field, and video feedback effects when in the cockpit of a ship or on the back of a speederbike to add to the intensity of the battles in the game and besides all that even targets 60fps!

>>12015168 (OP)
Maybe some games have more polys but Gamecube games in general just have better looking textures including the resolution and the quality of the filtering. I just can't imagine Pickmin looking good on ps2 full of jaggies. Its not like N64 where you can see a vast difference, ps2 games were mostly ported with no trouble at all. Maybe GT3 and 4 would have some issues since its super optimized.

>>12016154
>F- Zero GX has way more geometry
PS2 was no geometry pusher. But it's better for actually running game codes.
>Star Wars Rogue Squadron 3 obliterates anything on GC or XBOX
Xbox? No.
>mobs of up to 150 TIE fighters and 200 stormtroopers on the screen at the same time
Enemies 15 feet away from you turn into 2D sprites running 30 fps and the ones 50 feet from you turn into stick figures running 5 fps. It can show that many, but they're always divided into small groups to keep the CPU and GPU not to shit themselves. Yes it's an absolutely gorgeous looking game, but it's not more impressive than Demon Chaos or some other CPU intensive PS2 titles. Demon Chaos is more impressive since it renders even larger groups and uses a lot of particle effects for arrows and blood splatter alongside that, at a constant 60 fps. Tasks you couldn't offload to the GPU.
>self shadowing
That's pretty common for PS2 games actually.
>per-pixel atmospheric light scattering
>overbrightening
>bump mapping
>motion blur
>depth of field
These are all effects rendered using the ATI GPU shaders. Nobody here said PS2 has more powerful GPU than GC. PS2's CPU and FPU are more powerful and the GPU is capable of handing more complex particle effects.
>targets 60fps
Wreckless on PS2 also targets 60 fps and runs a lot better than the Gamecube port. True Crime NYC also runs way better on PS2. CPU intensive games are flailing on the Gamecube because it lacks dual 64-bit ALUs and powerful enough vector processor.

>>12015168 (OP)
Most games ran 60fps on GC making it the better console

>>12017782
lol no they don’t, ps2 has more 60fps games

Call me when they make a PS2 version of RE4 that looks on par or better than the GC version

I can wait

>>12016154
>blistering 60fps
faggot terminology

>>12016154
holy chatGPT

>>12018031
PS2 mogs so hard it's not even funny....

>>12018064
Boom. Done.

I was impressed by how well PCs ran games back then. Was it expensive as hell? Yes, but it ran at the highest resolution, frame rate, and with more effects. I think that was the time when PCs surpassed consoles.

>>12018428
It wasn't really that expensive. You could build a gaming PC for $600 more or less. AMD CPUs and gaming GPUs were cheaper than they are now, inflation not adjusted of course. Prebuilt PCs were very expensive though indeed.

This thread is full of nocoders. Every single post is LARP or ragebait. Where's the people who actually know something worth a damn?

>>12018938
It doesn't take a coooooder to know that bigger ALU means more instructions could be handled at the same time.

I find it bizarre that people now use the term "coding" to mean programming. For decades, we used the word "coding" for the work of low-level staff in a business programming team. The designer would write a detailed flow chart, then the "coders" would write code to implement the flow chart. This is quite different from what we did and do in the hacker community -- with us, one person designs the program and writes its code as a single activity. When I developed GNU programs, that was programming, but it was definitely not coding.

>>12020012
Coding usually means high level language while programming is interchangeable for high or low level language. It's all just semantics though. And yes, understanding how hardware works doesn't require you to be a coder. But becoming familiar with how the system performs in specific tasks does ideally require you to have been involved in software projects.

>>12020012
Interesting point. I always wondered what was the difference between programming and coding.

>>12018031
>Edge, however, gave the Japanese import five out of ten, saying, "The fundamental problem with Sega GT is the game's inability to decide whether to stay close to Sega's arcade roots or venture down the simulation route, choosing instead to hover uncomfortably somewhere in between."
What a fucking shit take