Kojima Productions: The 3DS is much more powerful than the PS2.

dont see that power from 3DS screenshots ive seen

Harisemo

.

Looks pretty good to me.

[QUOTE="tomarlyn"][QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

than what?

theuncharted34

consoles use PC tech. Example - from the n64 to the ps3 and 360, that is 10 years of advancement in PC tech. Just because consoles are static for 5 years at a time doesn't mean they don't use the best of the best tech when they release. Minus the wii of course. I mean, it took Pc hardware 6+months to catch up with the 360 hardware.

What? Apparently you don't know much about the tech available at the time. lol.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="tomarlyn"] PC tech moves a lot faster than console/handheld tech.zero_snake99

consoles use PC tech. Example - from the n64 to the ps3 and 360, that is 10 years of advancement in PC tech. Just because consoles are static for 5 years at a time doesn't mean they don't use the best of the best tech when they release. Minus the wii of course. I mean, it took Pc hardware 6+months to catch up with the 360 hardware.

What? Apparently you don't know much about the tech available at the time. lol.

Yup. It took the Pc that long to get unified shaders in their cards. I may be wrong but I don't think I am. Even if that was wrong the rest of my post was right. Btw an example in which I know i'm right. The N64 was stronger than the Market hardware for Pc's for a while. Texture filtering.

The CPU is much more powerful than PS2's CPU, the only problem with the 3DS is the weak GPU. themyth01

Weak in what sense? It can do per-pixel lighting, HDR, ect. The "shiny" clear graphics on the 3DS wouldn't be possible on the PS2 or PSP. The only thing where the PS2 (and PSP) are better is the poly count, but the graphics are a lot more advanced on the 3DS.

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

consoles use PC tech. Example - from the n64 to the ps3 and 360, that is 10 years of advancement in PC tech. Just because consoles are static for 5 years at a time doesn't mean they don't use the best of the best tech when they release. Minus the wii of course. I mean, it took Pc hardware 6+months to catch up with the 360 hardware.

theuncharted34

What? Apparently you don't know much about the tech available at the time. lol.

Yup. It took the Pc that long to get unified shaders in their cards. I may be wrong but I don't think I am. Even if that was wrong the rest of my post was right. Btw an example in which I know i'm right. The N64 was stronger than the Market hardware for Pc's for a while. Texture filtering.

never trust tech demos. Final Fantasy X´s E3 demo looked much better then the final product

ohthemanatee

Do you have a vlink to a video of that tech demo?

I am actually interested in seeing how good it looked.

I forgot what the E3 tech demo looked like.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]

What? Apparently you don't know much about the tech available at the time. lol.

zero_snake99

Yup. It took the Pc that long to get unified shaders in their cards. I may be wrong but I don't think I am. Even if that was wrong the rest of my post was right. Btw an example in which I know i'm right. The N64 was stronger than the Market hardware for Pc's for a while. Texture filtering.

Nah, I disagree. The xenos was more powerful than the 7800GTX, because that's what's in the ps3. And John Carmack said the Ps3's Gpu is weaker than Xenos. See?

Sorry, the PS2 was not capable of this:

tomarlyn

Great graphics for a handheld but the blood splatter looks weird.

It seems that guy was keeping a strawberry jelly sandwich somewhere on the back of his shirt and the monster threw him against the glass which smashed his sandwich and got jelly everywhere.

Nah, I disagree. The xenos was more powerful than the 7800GTX, because that's what's in the ps3. And John Carmack said the Ps3's Gpu is weaker than Xenos. See?

theuncharted34

The Xenos was weaker than a 7800GTX PC video card.

And the PS3 was even weaker.

consoles use PC tech. Example - from the n64 to the ps3 and 360, that is 10 years of advancement in PC tech. Just because consoles are static for 5 years at a time doesn't mean they don't use the best of the best tech when they release. Minus the wii of course. I mean, it took Pc hardware 6+months to catch up with the 360 hardware.

theuncharted34

The PC was already ahead in hardware before the Xbox 360 was released.

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"][QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

Yup. It took the Pc that long to get unified shaders in their cards. I may be wrong but I don't think I am. Even if that was wrong the rest of my post was right. Btw an example in which I know i'm right. The N64 was stronger than the Market hardware for Pc's for a while. Texture filtering.

theuncharted34

Nah, I disagree. The xenos was more powerful than the 7800GTX, because that's what's in the ps3. And John Carmack said the Ps3's Gpu is weaker than Xenos. See?

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"] Just because it introduced unified shaders doesn't make it mean it was better than the other tech out there. Don't get me wrong, unified shaders are great, and ATI used the xenos to introduce that new technology, but in 2005 the 7800GTX was available. As pricey as it was, it's still greater than what the Xenos can offer.zero_snake99

Nah, I disagree. The xenos was more powerful than the 7800GTX, because that's what's in the ps3. And John Carmack said the Ps3's Gpu is weaker than Xenos. See?

I didn't know that. Why is it gimped?

[QUOTE="tomarlyn"]

[QUOTE="Harisemo"]

Resident Evil etc

PS2_ROCKS

Sorry, the PS2 was not capable of this:

And this is the 3DS version of MGS3 versus PS2 capabilities:

MGS3 is one of the PS2's best looking games too.

Ok I don't see what you are seei- *sees your username* Oh, nevermind then, PS2_ROCKS

BTW I think mostlyeveryone realized by now that the 3DS looks better than PS2 games.

o_0 most cellphones nowadays are more powerful than the PS2...

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

please do not reply to me ever again. Ever. Because I don't care. Do you understand what I am saying to you right now?

Hakkai007

Oh so you can only post an insulting troll pic.

I guess logic and reasoning is too much for you.

When you want to have a real argument you can argue with me or anyone else who knows a lot about computers.

You right now are ignorant in that area.

And no ignorance is not an insult it just means you don't have knowledge in that area.

anyone else. I don't care who. Just not you. when a person asks someone else to stop, and they don't, They just keep on trying to find reasons to prove me wrong in the most annoying manor, even when I'm speaking my opinions. Remember when I said RE4 looked better than Metro 2033? I meant artistically. Then you continued to insinuate me as a console fanboy. Bashing me at any chance you get. Putting words in my mouth like saying I think UC2 looks better than crysis. My god, you are the worst type of person. Seems like a Troll to me. Please do not reply to me ever again. Please. I don't know what else to say. Do you feel compelled to reply to this? Don't. Remeber this. I've just wasted 4 minutes of my life because you do not listen.

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"][QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

Nah, I disagree. The xenos was more powerful than the 7800GTX, because that's what's in the ps3. And John Carmack said the Ps3's Gpu is weaker than Xenos. See?

theuncharted34

I didn't know that. Why is it gimped?

I didn't know that. Why is it gimped?

theuncharted34

It has half the ROPs of a 7800gtx with 8 instead of 16.

It also had a 128bit bus compared to the 256bit 7800gtx.

And also around half the memory bandwidth at 22.4GB/s when the 7800gtx has 54.4GB/s

I think the fill rate was a lot weaker.

Also the 7800GTX had a 512mb vram version.

your not going to see it in the shots, !

nintendo said its gonna be hard to display 3d in the shots,

you are going to play the game your self ,

and then see,

and yes the 3ds is slightly more powerful then a nintendo wii which is more powerful then a gc we all know the later was more powerful then a ps2

Speaking of PS3 - I think it's funny they chose the outdated GeForce 7800 instead of the new (back then) GeForce 8800 and only 512 megs of split ram. It's like you would give a car a very powerful engine (Cell CPU) but small wheels with low quality tyres. If they went for the GeForce 8800 with some more ram, they would have a real graphics advantage over the 360 and the PS3 could maybe even run games the 360 couldn't (like Crysis for example).

Speaking of PS3 - I think it's funny they chose the outdated GeForce 7800 instead of the new (back then) GeForce 8800 and only 512 megs of split ram. It's like you would give a car a very powerful engine (Cell CPU) but small wheels with low quality tyres. If they went for the GeForce 8800 with some more ram, they would have a real graphics advantage over the 360 and the PS3 could maybe even run games the 360 couldn't (like Crysis for example).

nameless12345

1000 U.S. Dollars. You think 599 US Dollars is a lol worthy quote? :P

[QUOTE="tagyhag"][QUOTE="zero_snake99"] Completely irrelevant with regards to the type of tech we have today.zero_snake99

Aww don't get mad. :lol:

But as it stands, I'm going to be playing a Gamecube with 3D graphics on the go, I'm sorry if that doesn't impress you.

Speaking of PS3 - I think it's funny they chose the outdated GeForce 7800 instead of the new (back then) GeForce 8800 and only 512 megs of split ram. It's like you would give a car a very powerful engine (Cell CPU) but small wheels with low quality tyres. If they went for the GeForce 8800 with some more ram, they would have a real graphics advantage over the 360 and the PS3 could maybe even run games the 360 couldn't (like Crysis for example).

nameless12345

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Speaking of PS3 - I think it's funny they chose the outdated GeForce 7800 instead of the new (back then) GeForce 8800 and only 512 megs of split ram. It's like you would give a car a very powerful engine (Cell CPU) but small wheels with low quality tyres. If they went for the GeForce 8800 with some more ram, they would have a real graphics advantage over the 360 and the PS3 could maybe even run games the 360 couldn't (like Crysis for example).

theuncharted34

1000 U.S. Dollars. You think 599 US Dollars is a lol worthy quote? :P

No, it would be only 999 US Dollars :lol:

But seriously, I think they could go for the GeForce 8800 with atleast half more ram and release the console a bit later, sometime in 2007.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Speaking of PS3 - I think it's funny they chose the outdated GeForce 7800 instead of the new (back then) GeForce 8800 and only 512 megs of split ram. It's like you would give a car a very powerful engine (Cell CPU) but small wheels with low quality tyres. If they went for the GeForce 8800 with some more ram, they would have a real graphics advantage over the 360 and the PS3 could maybe even run games the 360 couldn't (like Crysis for example).

Ilikemyname420

Why not compensate? A bit worse CPU (Cell with "only" four SPEs for example) with a much better GPU (the GeForce 8800) and some more ram. Would make the graphics a lot better.

[QUOTE="Ilikemyname420"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Speaking of PS3 - I think it's funny they chose the outdated GeForce 7800 instead of the new (back then) GeForce 8800 and only 512 megs of split ram. It's like you would give a car a very powerful engine (Cell CPU) but small wheels with low quality tyres. If they went for the GeForce 8800 with some more ram, they would have a real graphics advantage over the 360 and the PS3 could maybe even run games the 360 couldn't (like Crysis for example).

nameless12345

Why not compensate? A bit worse CPU (Cell with "only" four SPEs for example) with a much better GPU (the GeForce 8800) and some more ram. Would make the graphics a lot better.

[QUOTE="crippled_ram"][QUOTE="Harisemo"]

dont see that power from 3DS screenshots ive seen

Loco_Live

▲ Probally the pre-rendered bullshots they've released. ▲

Some of you people are ridiculous, I swear. Picture the PS2, taking note of its size.. And now the 3DS (which is capable of 3d btw)... NOW YOU UNDERSTAND. Damn kids nowadays instead of being grateful for the technology that exists for nothing else other than our enjoyment, they keep complaining.

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"][QUOTE="tagyhag"] Oh? You know of a tech that can pump out graphics like the 3DS with 3D at a smaller size? tagyhag

Aww don't get mad. :lol:

But as it stands, I'm going to be playing a Gamecube with 3D graphics on the go, I'm sorry if that doesn't impress you.

Of course will be stronger than PS2, GX and xbox 1, i mean it has been years since these systems

comparing a current not even released handheld console with a 10 year old console, nice comparison.
bring on the psp2 and then we'll talk.

The screenshots I saw so far were about on par with the older PS2 titles, but I'm sure the quality will increase as devs know how to work with it, just like with the PS2. But up to now, show me any 3DS bullshot (yes I'm going that far) that looks nearly as good as GoW2 in game :S 3DS is on the level of the PSP and PSP2 will crush the 3DS in it's power. To bad it'll still lose on a sales basis, like all the other devices that were better and stronger than Nintendos "one-gen-behind-power"

I think it's a pretty big step for handheld gaming to be more powerful than that of consoles last generation. What where people honestly expecting, 360/PS3 graphics on a handheld? Right..

I think it's a pretty big step for handheld gaming to be more powerful than that of consoles last generation. What where people honestly expecting, 360/PS3 graphics on a handheld? Right..

Dahaka-UK

I honestly expect something close to this gen console visuals after devs have had time with the hardware and develop engines tailored to the 3DS.

The screenshots I saw so far were about on par with the older PS2 titles, but I'm sure the quality will increase as devs know how to work with it, just like with the PS2. But up to now, show me any 3DS bullshot (yes I'm going that far) that looks nearly as good as GoW2 in game :S 3DS is on the level of the PSP and PSP2 will crush the 3DS in it's power. To bad it'll still lose on a sales basis, like all the other devices that were better and stronger than Nintendos "one-gen-behind-power"

ArchoNils2

The "one gen behind in power" is the reason why Nintendo has never lost their leadership of the handheld market. Nintendo handhelds thrive on being affordable, offering great battery life, and having a large selection of games. None of Nintendo's competitors have gotten the message that all the power in the world in meaningless if consumers are going to go for the cheaper system that has better battery life and the games they want to play.

If does not matter if the PSP 2 offers power that crushes the 3DS, if it eats away at the battery life and raises the price of the handheld. Keep this in mind, if Sony keeps down the path of "more power will win us the handheld wars!!" then they might have to enjoy being in second place for yet another round of the handheld wars.

The "More power is the way to defeat Nintendo and become the king of the handheld market." mindset never allowed Sega, Atari, SNK, NEC, Tiger, Bandai, or Sony topple Nintendo's handheld. If Sony can't figure this out with the PSP2, then they are facing an uphill battle against the 3DS.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"] Just because it introduced unified shaders doesn't make it mean it was better than the other tech out there. Don't get me wrong, unified shaders are great, and ATI used the xenos to introduce that new technology, but in 2005 the 7800GTX was available. As pricey as it was, it's still greater than what the Xenos can offer.zero_snake99

Nah, I disagree. The xenos was more powerful than the 7800GTX, because that's what's in the ps3. And John Carmack said the Ps3's Gpu is weaker than Xenos. See?

Compared to 7800 GTX(430Mhz) , RSX(550? Mhz) 's shader power is around 7900 and RSX has slightly larger register set i.e. fastest known data storage method. RSX was gimped with just 8 ROPs.

Compared to 7800 GTX(430Mhz) , RSX(550? Mhz) 's shader power is around 7900 and RSX has slightly larger register set i.e. fastest known data storage method. RSX was gimped with just 8 ROPs.

ronvalencia

It has half the ROPs of a 7800gtx with 8 instead of 16.

It also had a 128bit bus compared to the 256bit 7800gtx.

And also around half the memory bandwidth at 22.4GB/s when the 7800gtx has 54.4GB/s

I think the fill rate was a lot weaker.

Also the 7800GTX had a 512mb vram version.

There is probably more gimped features but I will look at the spec sheet later.

[QUOTE="tagyhag"]

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"] Here's an idea. Let's not have ridiculous requirements just to try to prove a point. Size is no longer a relevance when comparing tech from today to 2010. As we saw, PSP wasn't too far off from PS2. Just because it's "that small" doesn't mean crap. The Emotion Engine had 10.5 million transistors as opposed to something like the six core i7 which has 1.17 billion transistors on a 32nm form factor.zero_snake99

Aww don't get mad. :lol:

But as it stands, I'm going to be playing a Gamecube with 3D graphics on the go, I'm sorry if that doesn't impress you.

If Nintendo wanted the best mobile tech, they'd have a massive monstrosity the size of the Ipad with about 1 hour of battery life that gets so hot it melts your pants. Oh yeah, and anything that's not actually out is irrelevant, don't you think?

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"][QUOTE="tagyhag"]

Aww don't get mad. :lol:

But as it stands, I'm going to be playing a Gamecube with 3D graphics on the go, I'm sorry if that doesn't impress you.

789shadow

If Nintendo wanted the best mobile tech, they'd have a massive monstrosity the size of the Ipad with about 1 hour of battery life that gets so hot it melts your pants. Oh yeah, and anything that's not actually out is irrelevant, don't you think?

...what are you going on about? I know they could have gotten a lot better hardware, but with obvious compromises (power consumption being the major part). The fact is word originally had it that Nintendo was going to use the Tegra, in which they used the PICA200 instead, which is vastly inferior (though still a great chip). I'm not attacking nintendo, but all you folks seem to think I am. Someone originally said that the 3DS was more powerful than the PS2, and thats impressive for it's size... when in this day and age... no, not really. Then someone said that it's a 3D gamecube on the god, and he's sorry it doesn't impress me, it does, but there is MUCH better mobile tech out there... that's all I'm saying. I'm not saying the 3DS is bad, but people are making these arbitrary tech comparisons with technology of 10 years ago.

That's all I have to say.

[QUOTE="ohthemanatee"]

[QUOTE="jasonharris48"] never trust tech demos. Final Fantasy X´s E3 demo looked much better then the final product

Bread_or_Decide

Gamers never learn....

I remember people posting up screen shots of Red Steel to prove the Wii had good graphics. Then it came out and we saw what it really looked like.

Also, people need to consider what handhelds are. Sony is going to have a tough time making something a lot more powerful than this becuase of battery life. Battery life has no improved dramatically in the last years when compared to other technology. Increasing power in systems this small means decreasing battery life. Nintendo found what seems to be (if their battery estimations are correct) a good balance between power and battery life. The PSP2 will be bigger, with one screen so maybe they can balance out battery power better in that system.

o_0 most cellphones nowadays are more powerful than the PS2...

Ilikemyname420