@GoldenElementXL said:
@scatteh316:
Um no.
The Xbox/PS2 gap was bigger.
http://www.theverge.com/products/compare/1678/1668/1680/1666
That links not even very accurate, nor does it explain that the GC and Xbox were 32bit, the PS2 was 128 bit, and the DC used the Hitachi SH-4 processor is a 64 bit processor. It also has no resolution for the PS2 in that link, although GT4 was 1080i and various other games supported 480p. In fact, the PS2 had games in 480p as well and was the first console that had retail component video plugs. It has an Audio/Video spot, but no specs for PS2 or the sweet Gamecube which also supported 480p for certain games. The link is just bad. It doesn't break down Sony's emotion engine (the PS2 CPU crushed the competition), nor does it explain the gap in years (1998, 2000, 2001). It's verge so it's expected, but it's certainly not a good link to prove a point since it lacks way too much information. If you are suggesting looking simply at CPU speed, that's not enough. Can't even look at resolution, it's missing for two consoles. Knowing how much work is being done per cycle is relevant, but then again, it's old news. Yes, the PS2 was graphically inferior to the Xbox, but that link doesn't have enough information to prove it as it's missing information. There's nothing to really compare there. You can look at RAM too, the link does provide that. 16 MB for the Dreamcast, 24 MB for the GC, 32 MB for the PS2, and 64 MB for the Xbox. That's a component to scrutinize, but it's not enough for a good breakdown of each box and looking RAM suggests PS2 > GC. Again, there is more to it than RAM or CPU speed.
For the Xbox, it has 10 GB for storage, but the Xbox had 8 GB. There were a few early models that shipped with 10 GB, but since it was in blocks it didn't matter and all models were formatted to 8GB! What's the point of stating 10 GB if the consumer can only use 8GB? They could have written 8 GB or 10 GB, but all systems used 8 GB, but nope. It's just a bad link. The verge got that wrong even. The more I look at that link, the more problems I find.
In the old SW days we had tons of much better links and comparison charts for discussion (in very long threads) for the Dreamcast, Xbox, Gamecube, and PS2 and nearly all of them were better than the verge link you provided. I would link them, but it seems they were purged. Still, I did find this old Wii vs. the original Xbox SW link. Funny thing, I'm even in that link talking about specs regarding Xbox vs. Wii. I clicked on that verge link as a curio and came away disappointed as it has a lot of wrong or incomplete spots. I knew it was the verge so my expectations were low and they certainly delivered.
If you believe the gap is bigger and your source is that link, then you should re-examine your beliefs. I don't have a pony in this race, I'm simply disputing that poor link as some sort of evidence.
Log in to comment