So PsP vs Dreamcast so we can assume that- BATTle Royale

  • 59 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for caribo2222
#1 Posted by caribo2222 (1181 posts) -

So we can assume-

1.Gaming PC

2.Ps3

3.Xbox360

4.Xbox

5.Wii

6.Gamecube

7.Ps2

8.PsP

9.Dreamcast

10.NDS

11.N64

12.PS1

So if the NDS is more powrfull than the N64 where the hell is my Zelda Majora's mask port, they got Mario 64 on there why not Zelda!!

and... Psp > Dreamcast :)

Avatar image for SpaceMountain86
#2 Posted by SpaceMountain86 (728 posts) -

There's no way in Hell I'll ever take you seriously if you think the PSP is more powerful than Dreamcast was or the DS is more powerful than the N64. Are you blind?

Avatar image for caribo2222
#3 Posted by caribo2222 (1181 posts) -

There's no way in Hell I'll ever take you seriously if you think the PSP is more powerful than Dreamcast was or the DS is more powerful than the N64. Are you blind?

SpaceMountain86

Prove me wrong, and they have better graphics too

Avatar image for caribo2222
#5 Posted by caribo2222 (1181 posts) -

Mario 64 N64-

Image 4

Mario 64 Ds-

Image 2

You lose

Avatar image for caribo2222
#6 Posted by caribo2222 (1181 posts) -

Nail in the coffin-

Psp-

Image 8

Image 6

Image 7

Image 26

Dreamcast-

Image 8

Image 24

Avatar image for Threebabycows
#7 Posted by Threebabycows (1086 posts) -

So we can assume-

1.Gaming PC

2.Ps3

3.Xbox360

4.Xbox

5.Wii

6.Gamecube

7.Ps2

8.PsP

9.Dreamcast

10.NDS

11.N64

12.PS1

So if the NDS is more powrfull than the N64 where the hell is my Zelda Majora's mask port, they got Mario 64 on there why not Zelda!!

and... Psp > Dreamcast :)

caribo2222

Do not agree.

Avatar image for zero_snake99
#8 Posted by zero_snake99 (3478 posts) -
PS1 > N64 I can't think of an N64 game that looked better than most PS games.
Avatar image for Threebabycows
#9 Posted by Threebabycows (1086 posts) -

PS1 > N64 I can't think of an N64 game that looked better than most PS games.zero_snake99

No it was pretty proven N64>PS1.

Avatar image for Rougehunter
#10 Posted by Rougehunter (5873 posts) -

PS1 > N64 I can't think of an N64 game that looked better than most PS games.zero_snake99
Banjo tooie, Perfect dark, Rogue sqaudren, Majora's mask, and turok 2. That was easy

Avatar image for Mario2007
#11 Posted by Mario2007 (2520 posts) -

Nail in the coffin-

Psp-

Image 8

Image 6

Image 7

Image 26

Dreamcast-

Image 8

Image 24

caribo2222

Oh wow that wasn't cherry picked at all. How about posting some specs?

Avatar image for zero_snake99
#12 Posted by zero_snake99 (3478 posts) -

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]PS1 > N64 I can't think of an N64 game that looked better than most PS games.Rougehunter

Banjo tooie, Perfect dark, Rogue sqaudren, Majora's mask, and turok 2. That was easy

Meh, I don't think so, I'll start looking up old games since I'm nostalgiang now. brb with results.
Avatar image for SeanBond
#13 Posted by SeanBond (2136 posts) -

Nail in the coffin-

Psp-

Image 8

Image 6

Image 7

Image 26

Dreamcast-

Image 8

Image 24

caribo2222

Where are the facts on a hardware comparison? As far as I know, the DC is in someways more powerful than the PS2 (although I'm pretty sure the PS2 kills it in floating point and maybe polygon pushing as well), and the PSP isn't quite as powerful as the PS2, so I would guess that the PSP is also not quite as powerful as the DC is. You're also talking about games that were designed for two different types of systems (consoles vs. portables). Crisis Core and GoW for the PSP are both amazing looking games, but neither one had quite as much going on as a game like Shenmue, which was also released early in the lifespan of the DC than either GoW or CC were in that of the PSP. I'm not 100% sure you'd be able to get a game like Shenume running on the PSP; you had at times dozens of independent and unique characters on screen at once, interacting with different people/locales, and I'm just not sure the PSP could handle that. On the other hand, again, I don't know the hardware of the DC and PSP offhand, so I can't really be 100% on that.

edit: I'd also like to point out that those screenshots are in clearly different resolutions; the PSP ones are running natively widescreen, the DC ones aren't. That won't help an accurate comparison either...

Avatar image for SeanBond
#14 Posted by SeanBond (2136 posts) -
[QUOTE="Rougehunter"]

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]PS1 > N64 I can't think of an N64 game that looked better than most PS games.zero_snake99

Banjo tooie, Perfect dark, Rogue sqaudren, Majora's mask, and turok 2. That was easy

Meh, I don't think so, I'll start looking up old games since I'm nostalgiang now. brb with results.

I mean...wasn't the N64 64 bit, and the PSX 32 bit? That should kill the argument right there. The PSX had an advantage in that it was using CDs as media vs. cartridges, but the N64 was more powerful from a purely graphical standpoint.
Avatar image for Mario2007
#15 Posted by Mario2007 (2520 posts) -

[QUOTE="caribo2222"]

Nail in the coffin-

Psp-

Image 8

Image 6

Image 7

Image 26

Dreamcast-

Image 8

Image 24

SeanBond

Where are the facts on a hardware comparison? As far as I know, the DC is in someways more powerful than the PS2 (although I'm pretty sure the PS2 kills it in floating point and maybe polygon pushing as well), and the PSP isn't quite as powerful as the PS2, so I would guess that the PSP is also not quite as powerful as the DC is. You're also talking about games that were designed for two different types of systems (consoles vs. portables). Crisis Core and GoW for the PSP are both amazing looking games, but neither one had quite as much going on as a game like Shenmue, which was also released early in the lifespan of the DC than either GoW or CC were in that of the PSP. I'm not 100% sure you'd be able to get a game like Shenume running on the PSP; you had at times dozens of independent and unique characters on screen at once, interacting with different people/locales, and I'm just not sure the PSP could handle that. On the other hand, again, I don't know the hardware of the DC and PSP offhand, so I can't really be 100% on that.

Plus, DC never reached it's full potential. We really don't know what kind of graphics it could have produced.

Avatar image for zero_snake99
#16 Posted by zero_snake99 (3478 posts) -

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"][QUOTE="Rougehunter"]Banjo tooie, Perfect dark, Rogue sqaudren, Majora's mask, and turok 2. That was easy

SeanBond

Meh, I don't think so, I'll start looking up old games since I'm nostalgiang now. brb with results.

I mean...wasn't the N64 64 bit, and the PSX 32 bit? That should kill the argument right there. The PSX had an advantage in that it was using CDs as media vs. cartridges, but the N64 was more powerful from a purely graphical standpoint.

Nooo no no. Lol, my CS professor would go crazy if he heard you say the n64 was 64 bit. They CLAIMED it was 64 bit, but in actuality, it just had like two 32 bit processors or something.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R4300i

This is what the n64 used. It used 2 of those side by side.

Avatar image for zero_snake99
#17 Posted by zero_snake99 (3478 posts) -

[QUOTE="SeanBond"][QUOTE="zero_snake99"] Meh, I don't think so, I'll start looking up old games since I'm nostalgiang now. brb with results.zero_snake99

I mean...wasn't the N64 64 bit, and the PSX 32 bit? That should kill the argument right there. The PSX had an advantage in that it was using CDs as media vs. cartridges, but the N64 was more powerful from a purely graphical standpoint.

Nooo no no. Lol, my CS professor would go crazy if he heard you say the n64 was 64 bit. They CLAIMED it was 64 bit, but in actuality, it just had like two 32 bit processors or something.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R4300i

This is what the n64 used. It used 2 of those side by side.

I looked up more about the N64. It can execute 64 bit processes, but apparently it was useless since 64 bit processes used more overhead. Overhead the n64 didn't have to spare. It's a weird architecture to be honest. Nothing like it these days or even in it's time.

Avatar image for zero_snake99
#18 Posted by zero_snake99 (3478 posts) -
Ok, so I looked up a bunch of old school games. Both 64 and PS had great lookin games for its time. Though, it seems like the PS had better texture processes. Comparing games like Medal of Honor vs Golden Eye/Perfect dark shows the texture sizes/detail on each one. Medal of honor came out better texture wise. Each console threw out similar amounts of polys. Some good 64 games were already mentioned. Some good PS games are Tomba, Tekken games (I think Tekken 2 or Tekken 3 was the first game to be displayed at 480i) GT2, the FF games, so on. Bloody Roar was a great looking fighting game. Idk, theoretically, the PS is more powerful according to its specs. Had better sound processing, texil (textured pixel) output, but when you think about it, it doesn't seem like many games would be able to make use of such things. 64 had a more powerful bus speed, though PS had more mips. I'm not sure what to judge higher.
Avatar image for MegajerkNYC
#19 Posted by MegajerkNYC (505 posts) -

Ok, so I looked up a bunch of old school games. Both 64 and PS had great lookin games for its time. Though, it seems like the PS had better texture processes. Comparing games like Medal of Honor vs Golden Eye/Perfect dark shows the texture sizes/detail on each one. Medal of honor came out better texture wise. Each console threw out similar amounts of polys. Some good 64 games were already mentioned. Some good PS games are Tomba, Tekken games (I think Tekken 2 or Tekken 3 was the first game to be displayed at 480i) GT2, the FF games, so on. Bloody Roar was a great looking fighting game. Idk, theoretically, the PS is more powerful according to its specs. Had better sound processing, texil (textured pixel) output, but when you think about it, it doesn't seem like many games would be able to make use of such things. 64 had a more powerful bus speed, though PS had more mips. I'm not sure what to judge higher.zero_snake99

Nope sorry bro N64 had way better graphics. The only thing PS1 did better was CGI/FMV.

Avatar image for gameofthering
#20 Posted by gameofthering (11276 posts) -

Nail in the coffin-

Psp-

Image 8

Image 6

Image 7

Image 26

Dreamcast-

Image 8

Image 24

caribo2222

Dreamcast

Avatar image for 2-10-08
#21 Posted by 2-10-08 (2775 posts) -

First of all, I own all of those systems. Now the PSP does in no way have better graphics than the dreamcast. Xbox being better than wii is debateable as well.

Avatar image for FILIPINOMAZTER
#22 Posted by FILIPINOMAZTER (1627 posts) -
[QUOTE="Rougehunter"]

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]PS1 > N64 I can't think of an N64 game that looked better than most PS games.zero_snake99

Banjo tooie, Perfect dark, Rogue sqaudren, Majora's mask, and turok 2. That was easy

Meh, I don't think so, I'll start looking up old games since I'm nostalgiang now. brb with results.

show me a ps1 game that look better on the games he mentioned
Avatar image for Thunderdrone
#24 Posted by Thunderdrone (7154 posts) -

Here let me fix it for you...

1.Gaming PC (not really a unified platform with standard SKU(s), but whatever)

2.Ps3

3.Xbox360

4.Wii

5.Xbox

6.Gamecube

7.Ps2

8.PsP

9.Dreamcast

10.N64

11.PS1

12.NDS

Avatar image for gameofthering
#25 Posted by gameofthering (11276 posts) -

Dreamcast should be above PSP then it's correct.

Avatar image for falconclan
#26 Posted by falconclan (15885 posts) -

Why would anyone compare my favorite console of all time, the mighty Dreamcast, to a portable system?

Avatar image for falconclan
#27 Posted by falconclan (15885 posts) -

Here let me fix it for you...

1.Gaming PC (not really a unified platform with standard SKU(s), but whatever)

2.Ps3

3.Xbox360

4.Wii

5.Xbox

6.Gamecube

7.Dreamcast

8.PS2

9.PSP

10.N64

11.PS1

12.NDS

Thunderdrone

I fixed if for ya good buddy. All you sony lovers out there just need to face it, they lied to your face showing CG and claiming it as in game, and killed the dreamcast. PS2's win last generation was based on a lie.

Avatar image for Thunderdrone
#28 Posted by Thunderdrone (7154 posts) -

Ok, so I looked up a bunch of old school games. Both 64 and PS had great lookin games for its time. Though, it seems like the PS had better texture processes. Comparing games like Medal of Honor vs Golden Eye/Perfect dark shows the texture sizes/detail on each one. Medal of honor came out better texture wise. Each console threw out similar amounts of polys. Some good 64 games were already mentioned. Some good PS games are Tomba, Tekken games (I think Tekken 2 or Tekken 3 was the first game to be displayed at 480i) GT2, the FF games, so on. Bloody Roar was a great looking fighting game. Idk, theoretically, the PS is more powerful according to its specs. Had better sound processing, texil (textured pixel) output, but when you think about it, it doesn't seem like many games would be able to make use of such things. 64 had a more powerful bus speed, though PS had more mips. I'm not sure what to judge higher.zero_snake99

Dude *sigh* the Nintendo 64 was overall the superior system.

Avatar image for kobraka1
#29 Posted by kobraka1 (890 posts) -

but whats the better system not based on sales. ill take a dreamcast over a PSP any day.

Avatar image for Thunderdrone
#30 Posted by Thunderdrone (7154 posts) -
I fixed if for ya good buddy. All you sony lovers out there just need to face it, they lied to your face showing CG and claiming it as in game, and killed the dreamcast. PS2's win last generation was based on a lie.falconclan
The funny thing is that the Dreamcast could handle higher texture resolutions than the PS2. Namco devs said (years later of course) that they where surprised when they had to compress Soulcalibur 2 textures to be able to run it on the PS2. But everywhere else, the PS2 naturally topped the Dreamcast.
Avatar image for falconclan
#31 Posted by falconclan (15885 posts) -

[QUOTE="falconclan"] I fixed if for ya good buddy. All you sony lovers out there just need to face it, they lied to your face showing CG and claiming it as in game, and killed the dreamcast. PS2's win last generation was based on a lie.Thunderdrone
The funny thing is that the Dreamcast could handle higher texture resolutions than the PS2. Namco devs said (years later of course) that they where surprised when they had to compress Soulcalibur 2 textures to be able to run it on the PS2. But everywhere else, the PS2 naturally topped the Dreamcast.

Yeah, years later. If the dreamcast wasn't lynched because sony likes to lie to their fanbase and hype their rabid fanboys up (Someone at a local store told me the beginning of tekken tag was running "On the fly", he only got mad when I told him he was an idiot. Anyways thats just and example of Sony Fanboy.) Dreamcast could have out done the ps2 too, if it had more years.

Avatar image for Asim90
#32 Posted by Asim90 (3692 posts) -

The DS is not graphically better than the N64 or the PS1. DS games do look pretty good, the remake of Super Mario 64 probably being the best, but that does not look better than the Crash Bandicoot or Spyro games on the PS1.

Avatar image for MarthRingman
#33 Posted by MarthRingman (1104 posts) -

The DS is not graphically better than the N64 or the PS1. DS games do look pretty good, the remake of Super Mario 64 probably being the best, but that does not look better than the Crash Bandicoot or Spyro games on the PS1.

Asim90
Mario 64 definitely looks nicer on DS. Maybe it couldn't do Ocarina of Time, but I'm pretty positive the DSi could.
Avatar image for 2-10-08
#34 Posted by 2-10-08 (2775 posts) -
[QUOTE="Asim90"]

The DS is not graphically better than the N64 or the PS1. DS games do look pretty good, the remake of Super Mario 64 probably being the best, but that does not look better than the Crash Bandicoot or Spyro games on the PS1.

MarthRingman
Mario 64 definitely looks nicer on DS. Maybe it couldn't do Ocarina of Time, but I'm pretty positive the DSi could.

The Dsi isn't any more powerful than the original DS.
Avatar image for Asim90
#35 Posted by Asim90 (3692 posts) -

[QUOTE="Asim90"]

The DS is not graphically better than the N64 or the PS1. DS games do look pretty good, the remake of Super Mario 64 probably being the best, but that does not look better than the Crash Bandicoot or Spyro games on the PS1.

MarthRingman

Mario 64 definitely looks nicer on DS. Maybe it couldn't do Ocarina of Time, but I'm pretty positive the DSi could.

I have to disagree, I think it looks considerably better on the Nintendo 64. The colours are more vibrant and the quality is much better, the DS version is just a scaled down version and characters and environments seem to have a smaller poly count. Also, the DS and DSi are graphically exactly the same. The DSi has a slightly faster processor, thats all.

Avatar image for zero_snake99
#36 Posted by zero_snake99 (3478 posts) -

Yeah, the 64 seems to have a better GPU. I looked around at some sites seeing how what looked etc etc. 64 does have better graphics, though PS1 had some good contenders.

1

2

3

4

5

Avatar image for swazidoughman
#37 Posted by swazidoughman (3521 posts) -

Yeah, the 64 seems to have a better GPU. I looked around at some sites seeing how what looked etc etc. 64 does have better graphics, though PS1 had some good contenders.

2

3

zero_snake99

Those screenshots are done with emulators.

PS1 games don't have any texture filtering.

Avatar image for zero_snake99
#38 Posted by zero_snake99 (3478 posts) -

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]

Yeah, the 64 seems to have a better GPU. I looked around at some sites seeing how what looked etc etc. 64 does have better graphics, though PS1 had some good contenders.

2

3

swazidoughman

Those screenshots are done with emulators.

PS1 games don't have any texture filtering.

Woops, idk y I didn't notice that. The Tekken one should have been obvious with the AA going, though the FF8 one looks legit.

Avatar image for swazidoughman
#39 Posted by swazidoughman (3521 posts) -

[QUOTE="swazidoughman"]

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]

Yeah, the 64 seems to have a better GPU. I looked around at some sites seeing how what looked etc etc. 64 does have better graphics, though PS1 had some good contenders.

2

3

zero_snake99

Those screenshots are done with emulators.

PS1 games don't have any texture filtering.

Woops, idk y I didn't notice that. The Tekken one should have been obvious with the AA going, though the FF8 one looks legit.

Both of those images have texture filtering, which is something that PS1 games don't have.

Avatar image for chapnzaba
#40 Posted by chapnzaba (2302 posts) -
It was correct except for the bottom 3. Fix it and you've got yourself a list!
Avatar image for Threebabycows
#41 Posted by Threebabycows (1086 posts) -

So we can assume-

1.Gaming PC

2.Ps3/Xbox360(both Xbox 360/PS3 are interchangable in this list so...)

4.Xbox

5.Wii

6.Gamecube

7.Ps2

8.PsP

9.Dreamcast

10.NDS

11.N64

12.PS1

So if the NDS is more powrfull than the N64 where the hell is my Zelda Majora's mask port, they got Mario 64 on there why not Zelda!!

and... Psp > Dreamcast :)

caribo2222

FIX'D

Avatar image for dcps210go
#42 Posted by dcps210go (313 posts) -

Breakdown Specs

1.DS +4 mb +67 mhz & 33mhz 120,000 pps(both 32-bit Arms working at ?32-16-bits?)

2.PsOne R3000A 32bit bus -2mb -33mhz 360 pps 1mb gpu 360,000 pps

3.Dreamcast 128bit bus(+100mhz PowerVR NEC graphics gpu & 200mhz 32bit SH-4 cpu) 26mb(+8 video 16 system 2 sound 64bit sdram running at 800 100mhz) +360 MIPs 1.4 Gigaflops PFR(pixel fill rate 100 m +rgb16.78m) windows ce and sega os 7 million pps

4.PSP 128bit bus(-2 R4000 32bit cpu+1 gpu single chip) 32mb interface -2ram 4 32bit dram total at 166mhz 1-333 mhz@1.2 volts(max 222mhz before firmware) 2.6 Gigaflops -166mhz Pixel Bus ?24bit rgb texture compression? -low res;P(PFR - +664m rgb 16.77) linux firmware os est 10 million texturized pps

-256bit bus at 166 all due to amount of voltage can deter performance with power given to the screen. I have my theories...it is a portable afterall.

*Definitions: Psp, DS, Psone and DC are all homebrew, emulation, hacking systems but DC is proven best at all of it with GLquake and easily pirating (downgraded 2xreads) copied cdr imgs. Arm is used for sound in Dreamcast and DS graphics, the MIP@1.4 pipelines is possibly faster than an amd athlon processor. Pcs, Xbox 360/Ps3 uses MIPs (Millions instructions per second). In addition:it has a parallel vector point unit @32-bits with a 64-bit instruction set while psp only has one vector point unit and one floating point @32bits. Hence 128 bit graphics. Keynote:The r4000 of the PSP is an n64 psone processor (in the same family as) with only 100 MIPS used aka 'R4200' instead of the 360 MIPS of the dreamcast. Both chips r by NEC as is the PowerVR, a arcade board manufacturer (collaborated with Sega's Naomi or more commonly known as Sega Model3) making cpus...to copy its design and make it cheaper. Evident in the transition between Psone and its System11 arcade board. NEC basically dumbs down company CPUs on consoles except for its PowerVR and Sega's SH4 Arcade equivalents. So why exactly did the more powerful sega SH4 arcade board become defunct?! Possibly manufacturing costs from Sega because Sega's Genesis put it on the map. Saturn selling well over 17.5 million died in 2000 and this alone would not kill the console so quickly. Who knows really, Dreamcast's release had come out one year earlier than expected to counter Sony's Ps2.

key :)++ means excels in -- :(is behind

PSOne vs DS First, in the following comparisons spec data will be drawn. The point made now will be DS. DS is better than Psone, its processor is at 67 mhz + a sub processor at 33mhz (as compared to n64's 99 and 67 cpu gpu ratio). Psone is only at 33. DS is glitch free and most games on the DS don't mimic Japanime RPG effects except for a few. First the best rated games on DS are Nintendogs, Final Fantasy and Metroid have full polygonal structures while Psone has games like Final Fantasy 7 that do not. This is mostly due to artistic development. DS is like N64 where it draws around 120 instead of 360 pps this is countered with its smooth games@4mb of ram instead of 3. Thus making it a faster 2d app and at the same time making it more powerful in 3d. DS also dominates in 3d shooters. Psone is horrible at doom-like games plagued with slowdown, glitches and a plethora of problems on non-PC and PC ports. Psone has the advantages of a big screen but the low resolution of the DS displayed on a tv can be the same and the advantages of color/explosion effects in the psone is a preference over capability via emu. The CDRom and RGB colors are naturally better on PSone making this a close call. I personally give it to DS because of the capability to render graphics(not movies) and emulators fix most of the color depth issues. Only thing that saves Psone is the 3d fighting games where all the polys are condensed in one small area and effects. DS has what is called texture mapping or in simple terms a way to make big environments nice. Mario and Spyro are some keen examples. Spyro has no large areas and pop-up! DS games never have enough polys, they excel in never having problems with fps and glitches. DS lacks vram which is why its worst actually though.

Screens

Ridge Racer 4Need for Speed

Psone/DS

Gran turismof355

PSP/Dreamcast

Metal Gear SolidAce Combat x

PSP

headhunterAerowings 2

Dreamcast

  • Above are some actual pixel-size racing/sim game samples to show which excels in the system's primary function hence speed or power. DS excels in speed, Dreamcast in power. Although Psp and Psone has the disadvantage of being slower as well. ((Warning)) Comparisons still vary in output rendering, age, resolution and emulation of captures.

Note:The photos alone are a nail in the coffin in terms of capability and power of the Dreamcast, and DS compared to the psone and psp. Perfect examples on the Sega and Nintendo consoles are lacking in Sonys. DS wins hands down. Even proving my theories wrong where color and space dominate. Notice in the last row psp's late 333mhz game, mgs, show nice models with poly warping, yet still lack shadow, AA, large navigatable environment, and smooth textures. Only Dreamcast has readable sigma in its graphics as well. Psp gives the illusion of good effects without the latter done well.

Dreamcast vs PSP Dreamcast can achieve more graphical functions and its gdroms hold as much such is the case with le mans, sega gt, f355, speed devils and daytona vs Burnout etc. PSP has blur but dreamcast already implemented its own blur effects before that. Everyone knows anti-aliasing and textures is what sony cant do. Psp just looks good because its a market brand with big budgets inturn making movies into games, so what, dreamcast has already been there and done that with res evil and more. Sony is good at one thing; realistic environments (ex/tekken collision grass poly effects) but in the case of dreamcast shenmue, sonic environments destroys it (depends really if you like realtime, lighting, etc). Both being able to do reflections, glare, and blur effectively. If you want to compare Japanese anime 'hit' effects to a PSP just look at Grandia II, virtual on, soa and so on.

Differences between Sony hardware and Sega's:Sony's System 11 board can do more polygons but it cant create lighting and bumpmapping the way Sega's board can. Sony's board can't make everything because it's chips are based on Vector graphics (based on the Riva Tnt 2 before 3dfx was even out). Thats why you see that Bump-mapping is superior on the Dreamcast and you can even notice this on Gamecube (8 layers) and Xbox (4 layers). Because its graphics chip is able to layer the cpus Fat pipeline's polygons fluidly with two layers @ a standard 30 fps - 60 fps (at least 30 fps standard - sonic adventure, lemans, Soa or the 60 fps - Grandia II) depending on the amount of data on screen. Sony does do the lighting sparks blurs environments and transparencies well though given ram and poly data advantages. Sony's idea of a high processor speed with lots of ram is good for multi-apps but its a customized computer nothing more. These things dont matter in this generation because the PCs and Consoles are being designed and built like game machines with fast equalized pipelines. Plus Dreamcast is capable of trilinear filtering, z-buffering, anti-aliasing, per-pixel translucency which is why you can see lighting around the edges of shaded objects. Its better to have 8mb of video-ram instead of 2. Particle effects are done via the GPU on Psone and PSP using polys. Contrary to popular belief, Sony has ONLY ONE processor (the other cpu is for media) for that to make those dazzling graphics yet they dont have what makes graphics nice, an overlapping texturing bump-mapping rendering engine. Dreamcast balances this completely with perfect needs for the developer. Just enough polys for no popups + high res bumpmapping! Lighting effects, flat textures with a big budget lots of space and polys with peripherals wont save you! Just make your library bigger.

The specs of Ps2 vs DC is more fair. Both systems have 800 mb/s ram (dc having an advantage as 64bit SDram to psp/ps2's 32-bit Dram). Dram is slower@that time and implemented as a bandwagon n64 psone cheap 'videogame' console ram (just like the NEC cpus). Another interesting fact is Dreamcast has more videoram and has a close 100mhz to 150mhz and 360 mips range factor (amd athlons alone being 1.2 gflops soyos are extremely fast with wide pipelines DC being 1.4 alone is a HUGE proven accomplishment). Both are = in sound and cpus have 64bit instructions. SDram is also custom for PCs with the smaller amount of Sdram actually being better! well making the pc run faster and more stable. Thats about all though. The superior Ps2 has 6.4glops@450 MIPS giving it the edge.

Comparison conclusion: PSP and Psone have a bigger variety of games and PSone is a console-based system but in no way is it technically better than DC in capability.

History

Psp is a well designed console which ran all the way back in the early 1990s from Sony's System 11 board. Sony's first design for ps2 is based on one ps2 customized chip design called the 'emotion engine' it originated from the psone single board chipset to the two equivalent cpu chips you see in the psp where Sony intended on using one cpu processor. The GPU & CPUs processors decrease in performance and power (30 fps) when at a low battery saving frequency. This 'Super Computer' from the future design was mainly marketed as a ploy. PSP like the Ps2 and Psone before it works best with secondary GPU chips.

Debunking this Thread

To Quote Ps2_rocks "Dreamcast: 200MHz clock rate 16 MB main RAM 8 MB video RAM 800+MBytes/second bus bandwidth 1.4 GFLops 3 million polygons/second peak rendering rate PSP: 333MHz Main Memory: 32MB Embedded DRAM:4MB Bus Bandwidth is 2.6GB per second 2.6GFlops 33M polygon per second (T&L) So PSP>Dreamcast technically."

Answer: You are wrong, ive researched that its processor runs at 100 MIPS, the specs are for you at the top of this post. Consoles are more powerful than portables in terms of power and function. Psp is a Powerful portable. DS as well but it cant do everything consoles can do, making these factors...and age a competitive choice. Researched info and tests so yes Dreamcast is faster.

So we can assume:

1.Gaming PC (preference on everything)

2.Ps3/Xbox360 (memory/texture) Nvidia & Ati preference HDtv

3.Wii (Nvidia textures, faster) HDtv

4.Xbox (4x Nvidia textures ram) RGB Component

5.Gamecube (8x Ati textures) RGB Component

6.Ps2 (lighting, Polys, Memory, TNT2 ATI textures) S-Video

7.Dreamcast (lighting, AM2 ARM NEC Naomi arcade based textures, 2x AA bumpmapping) Component/VGA/HDtv

9.N64 (AA, 3dfx Blurred textures 3D first 62mhz GPU/cartridge, no slowdown) S-Video

11.PS1 (Lighting, Polys, 3D, colors, effects) Composite

12.Saturn (2D, Glitch-free 3D, ram) Composite

Handheld consoles: A major factor or lack of capabilities due to hardware limitations

1.PsP (lighting, polys, ram) Portable/VGA/Emu/RGB (preference on everything)
2.NDS (Textures, 2d-3d Pixels, Fun apps, no slowdown) Portable/VGA/Emu/RGB (preference on everything)

Finally, some adventure games to compare:
*Spryo, Super Mario Advanced, Sonic Adventure, God of War

Special Note: Spyro has good effects yet it loses to super mario because of environments. Gow loses to sonic adventure because of size of environments. Gow, the best graphical game on psp, has visible aa problems flat textures on the buildings as well as smaller characters (it is artfully crafted but everything is fixed, not moving 2d ala tekken+real time). Sword of Beserk has the same features. The polys are less, but its faster with better textures. As for realtime shenmue 1&2 is almost cgi quality in vga so theres no way dreamcast cant make this game even if its not built for it.

Technically and visually speaking of course and with screen resolution captures only accepted and judging upon the amount of capabilities the graphics can achieve and why next to the names. Like when Psone became a suitable candidate against the more powerful Sega Saturn (Psone's System 11 board having a close technical edge against Saturn's in rendering effects and videoram both equally matched in power at least in America). Saturn being just a smarter, more stable system, more so than genesis was and the playstation brand now is. I did not include storage but did include best devices to display the consoles on because movies arent what make a console. The new visual unique achievements (leading technological Graphics manufacturer at that time) of which the console excelled in are included of course.

Sony's Advantages

Overall preferences on this board compare games like GOW to Shenmue, two games using 2 different engines without pointing the lack of AA, res and flat textures for you. Besides, the difference of hardware, function and portability, make the psp hard to compare ds. Such is examples are: Porsche Challenge in car passengers with polys or psone lighting explosion effects in say..Loaded gives the slower psone a quality ds does not have in 3d games. The opposite goes for the faster Dreamcast against PSP with its better at lighting textures bumpmapping and poly functions. Both Psp and Psone show more similarities in poly warping and textures than ps2. Dreamcast has graphics in racing games that psp lacks to do best in missing car models, reflections, physics and textures. Although irrelevant when it comes to gameplay, Sony's brand is known for great cutscenes in cgi or realtime (AI controlled using all of the cpus capability) making space for discs like dvd/blue ray and big budget prevalent. Sony has an advantage in colors and vectors(polys) for details of characters and environments but the other systems have an advantage in speed and textures in multi-functional environments. If you notice the portables dont have multifunctions. Thats because they cant create multiple vector based environment with its tiny pipelines and the cpus are 'simple.'

So why does Sony keep their ram so low? The Sony brand saves costs, except maybe that the fact is, every console needs a faster GPU with more ram. Like in computers the video card is what makes the graphics. It is essential. Instead its Power against Graphics. Psone started with 1meg more, faster ram, against Saturn. So why so little vgram now? Noone knows, but it could be because of the unique graphics and untapped knowledge the Japanese are capable of doing. Eg the realism of GranTurismo or Metalgear simply cant be mimiced and takes lots of cpu power instead vying for the latter. In future consoles this will be problematic, which already is evident in third party ps3 games being hard to program and not being able to function at a full fluid frame rate (fps jumps in gameplay with overhauled graphics) like 360 can (save the idea of 'hard' development problems for ps3 and pther consoles like saturn). Saving function and knowing how to use it puts their exclusive games years ahead of the competition against the best PCs with the most realistic graphics.

Conclusion

In my closing argument, the specs for Dreamcast are 7 million pps, and psp has 2 mb videoram 100 mips@2.6 while dreamcast is 360@1.4. This creates a much smoother and better experience for fighting and racing games. Dreamcast has little if no side scroller adventure games that you see in PSP, God of War being one example. DC is to adventure 3d sidescrollers like the 99 mhz N64 is to 3d/2d fighting&racing games, Ps1 to n64 games/PC ports, Psp/ps2 to ports/arcade games, Gamecube-to-rpgs and DS to 3d/fighting games in that it has been done sucessfully but are very rare (with the exception of Sword of Beserk). All consoles excel in their own field. So basically Psp is not a portable ps2, ps2 cannot power missiles and Dreamcast IS 4 times faster than a Pentium II (or at least equivalent to an AMD athlon!). PSP, ps2 and psone have its advantages, not in shear strength of the systems but in power and speed. Only Dreamcast are stronger systems making PSP an overpowered Psone if anything (Ds lacks in power). It looks like Sega's Dreamcast may just be way too ahead of its time afterall having owned and researched both systems my tests and experiences came to be conclusive.

Avatar image for PS2_ROCKS
#45 Posted by PS2_ROCKS (4679 posts) -

Dreamcast:

  • 200MHz clock rate
  • 16 MB main RAM
    8 MB video RAM
  • 800+ MBytes/second bus bandwidth
  • 1.4 GFLops
    3 million polygons/second peak rendering rate

PSP:

  • 333MHz
  • Main Memory: 32MB
  • Embedded DRAM: 4MB Bus Bandwidth is 2.6GB per second
  • 2.6GFlops
  • 33 M polygon per second (T&L)


So PSP>Dreamcast technically.

Avatar image for Deiuos
#46 Posted by Deiuos (1402 posts) -

i got this

1. SEGA Genesis

2.Gaming PC

3. Xbox 360

4. PS2

5. SNES

6. Dreamcasst

7. Wii

8. N64

9 .PS3

10. Game Gear

11. PsP

12. PS1

13. NDS

not biased at all

Avatar image for AndyAlfredo
#47 Posted by AndyAlfredo (1402 posts) -

PSP>Dreamcast

Why?

Graphics - GOW, Tekken DR, MH, DFF

Tech Specs - see above

Features - full PSOne emulation, PSN, Playstation Store, WiFi, Remote Play, Full Internet Browser (only like Flash Player 6 support, though)

While we're at it-

PSP>N64 We can almost ***late it at full speed, games like Super Mario 64 can play pretty much full.

PSP>PSOne No brainer

PSP>NDS No brainer as well

PSP>Xbox Don't understand why the Xbox is so high on the list. Every good game it had was pretty much redone and done better on the 360. It had a very short lifetime and is totally replaced by the 360. At least PS2 still sells.

Avatar image for AndyAlfredo
#48 Posted by AndyAlfredo (1402 posts) -

i got this

1. SEGA Genesis

2.Gaming PC

3. Xbox 360

4. PS2

5. SNES

6. Dreamcasst

7. Wii

8. N64

9 .PS3

10. Game Gear

11. PsP

12. PS1

13. NDS

not biased at all

Deiuos

Actually, that's a very biased list and frankly the worst I've seen. Gamegear, SNES, Genesis don't belong (I think were sticking strictly mainly 3D systems), PS3 is way better than N64, Wii, PS2 in all categories.

Avatar image for Deiuos
#49 Posted by Deiuos (1402 posts) -

[QUOTE="Deiuos"]

i got this

1. SEGA Genesis

2.Gaming PC

3. Xbox 360

4. PS2

5. SNES

6. Dreamcasst

7. Wii

8. N64

9 .PS3

10. Game Gear

11. PsP

12. PS1

13. NDS

not biased at all

AndyAlfredo

Actually, that's a very biased list and frankly the worst I've seen. Gamegear, SNES, Genesis don't belong (I think were sticking strictly mainly 3D systems), PS3 is way better than N64, Wii, PS2 in all categories.

what are you talking about? do you have any idea how powerful blast processing is? ANY idea what you're messing with? SEGA Genesis > PS3

let's be real about this people