Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Mainboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

Memory Prices

Shop



Sharky Extreme :

Search

Latest News


- Acer Fires Up Two New Ferrari Notebooks
- Belkin Debuts Docking Station for ExpressCard-Equipped Notebooks
- Logitech 5.1 Speaker System Puts Your Ears At Eye Level
- Dell, Nvidia, and Intel Fire Up Overclockable Gaming Notebook
- Gateway Puts Premium Components Into Affordable Home Desktop
News Archives

Features

- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with ATI's Terry Makedon
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Seagate's Joni Clark
- Half-Life 2 Review
- DOOM 3 Review
- Unreal Tournament 2004 Review

Buyer's Guides

- September High-end Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- September Value Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- October Extreme Gaming PC Buyer's Guide

HARDWARE

  • CPUs


  • Motherboards

    - DFI LANPARTY UT nF4 Ultra-D Motherboard Review

  • Video Cards

    - Gigabyte GeForce 7600 GT 256MB Review
    - ASUS EN7900GT TOP 256MB Review
    - ASUS EN7600GT Silent 256MB Review
    - Biostar GeForce 7900 GT 256MB Review





  • SharkyForums.Com - Print: Can anyone here agree that a PS2 is 1000's of times faster than a GF2 Ultra

    Can anyone here agree that a PS2 is 1000's of times faster than a GF2 Ultra
    By RPG Junkie December 30, 2000, 02:51 PM

    I mean CMON, the people over at CNN have no freakin clue when it comes to the speed of vid cards. I think when they said that the PS2 is 1000's of times faster they probably ment soome video card form S3 that shouldnt of even went passed the drawing board, such as the Trio chipset. I bet the GF2 MX can slaughter the PS2. I know mine can.

    By EvilTwin December 30, 2000, 03:29 PM

    of COURSE its t 1000s of times faster if you consider that it only renders at 512x384 the max res for most tvs.

    By BloodRed December 30, 2000, 03:51 PM

    It may be able to compete with some computers, but it's not upgradable so it doesn't matter if it's twice as fast as todays computers, it a year it'll be old, outdated technology. I like games, no matter if they're on a console or a PC, but when it comes to speed and graphics, I'll take a PC over a console any day.

    By iamsostupid December 30, 2000, 04:21 PM

    same here, thats what I was preparing to say.

    By BuggyLoop December 30, 2000, 04:21 PM

    haha, what a bunch of morons, the fps wont go high than the TV refresh, which is 30hz but since its a TV it would be considered like 60hz on a pc monitor.

    so they get 60fps "MAX" at 512x384

    and then the geforce 2, 60 fps at 1024x768

    oh yea it "must" be faster
    and lets not even begind to say just how ugly UT looks on the ps2 (jaggies land)

    By BuggyLoop December 30, 2000, 04:23 PM

    actually it would be 60 fps at 1600x1200 since its an ultra, just to show how much crack CNN are smoking.

    Well they probably got paid by sony to say that since their sales in usa is not going that well (after the hype died down)

    By Snoop Dogg December 30, 2000, 04:32 PM

    LOL people need to remember something...you can't beat its own technology. Computers made Consoles happen so therefore no matter what happens and no matter what anyone says all around Computer Machines will always kick a consoles arse! Its just how it goes people.

    By toonzwile December 30, 2000, 05:17 PM

    Regardless of how fast the PS2 is, it only matters how well the games are for it, or ull never see its power anyway... and for now, u aint gonna see sh*t cuz they aint got no good developer base... i hope for the sake of all ppl who rushed to get one (and now use it to watch DVD movies from Blockbuster) that GT3 will turn the tide to Sony's favor.. only GT3 can save the PS2 now.

    By BuggyLoop December 30, 2000, 05:29 PM

    /waiting for gamecube and xbox

    im gonna buy both no matter what, cause i know they will kickass both (im waiting for gamecube mostly)

    By toonzwile December 30, 2000, 05:32 PM

    quote:Originally posted by BuggyLoop:
    /waiting for gamecube and xbox

    im gonna buy both no matter what, cause i know they will kickass both (im waiting for gamecube mostly)

    Nintendo alone has the games from that legendary japanese developer, but they never have any REAL great games... theyre still too G-rated... get with the Times, Nintendo!!

    By BuggyLoop December 30, 2000, 05:38 PM

    they will trust me, they learned their leason with n64.

    By Bateluer December 30, 2000, 08:24 PM

    Since when do any people with more than an ounce of brains believe anything the Clinton News Network airs? They must be on crack if they actually believe the PS2 is a thousand times faster than computer vid cards! My GF1 DDR can slam more data around at the same res as the PS2, AND I can do FSAA to clean up the picture AND STILL GO FASTER THAN THE PS2!
    HEY CNN, DUMP THE CRACK STASH AND RUN SOME REAL (TRUE) NEWS!

    By Phatman December 30, 2000, 08:26 PM

    There is no way a PS2 is faster than my computer. My brother has a PS2 and it has nice graphics, but compared to my Ultra, it is NOTHING

    By beerisgood December 30, 2000, 09:09 PM

    People, we all know the PS2 is simply slower than the vidcards 2day but we forget the two important things here: the price. the PS2 costs about as much as the ultra (less actually) and can get get way better frames per sec (after all a vidcard alone doesnt do much except lie there and look weird) if you have to add a computer around it youll be looking at the price of 2 or 3 ps2's and people simply cant always afford that.The Simplicity. Also simplisity is a great thing with consoles. kids cant use computers, sure they know how to use the on button or start a game from the start bar. but 4 year old kids dont know how to oc or change bios features. This is why consoles will simply always be handy. I would always choose for a computer too but theres people that wouldnt. and those are the people that have ps1s 2s nintendos and whattever else. As for cnn, yeah well money can get yo anything, and sony has a whole lotta money if you know what i mean

    By jagojago12 December 30, 2000, 11:41 PM

    *If* that 1000x more powerful than a PC thingie is true CNN must have compared it to a 33mhz 386. My prehistoric PC runs UT lots faster at higher resolution than that 512x384 crap you see on TV.

    By BobTheSlob December 31, 2000, 02:19 AM

    If they 3d mark 2000 the PS2 and get higher than (my) 8053, then, I'll agree

    By Mr. Silver December 31, 2000, 12:53 PM

    quote:Originally posted by RPG Junkie:
    I mean CMON, the people over at CNN have no freakin clue when it comes to the speed of vid cards. I think when they said that the PS2 is 1000's of times faster they probably ment soome video card form S3 that shouldnt of even went passed the drawing board, such as the Trio chipset. I bet the GF2 MX can slaughter the PS2. I know mine can.

    Geez, CNN is a good source for news, but not technology. I leave it up to Sharky forums to give me the latest tech info. Last time I heard, the PS2 has like a 300 MHz core, like 32 MB of RAM. Whatever graphics chip is on there is probably equivalent to a GeForce2 MX, but probably weaker. So the PS2 is pretty much weaker then the PC I'm writing this post with (400 MHz K6-2, 64 MB RAM). Heh heh, I laughed when I heard about how the U.S. gov't was afraid nuclear weapons could be guided with PS2s. I'm sure Libya, North Korea, and Iraq already have at least a few crappy Packard Bells that are more powerful than the PS2

    By Vilu December 31, 2000, 01:09 PM

    About PS2, it's not 1000 times as powerful as the normal, everyday pc you see everywhere(500 mhz and 64 or 128 mb of ram, MX or similar for GFX).

    PS2's Graphics Synthesizer is a monster with 16 pipelines, running at 150 mhz(or was that 8 pipelines at 300 mhz?), thus, 2400 megapixels. But alas, true texturing takes two cycles! Thus, what we have is 1200 perspective correct fully lit textured trilinearly(or was that bilinearly?)filtered megapixels. One texture there. T&L is done on Vector Units and the rest of Emotion Engine, by SOFTWARE! Pain in the ass, see. Okay, it has Rambus, which sucks as latency is BAAA-AD!(3.2 gigabytes/s is nice, though, but not the best)... now, it has 4 mb of cache, with loads of bandwidth. But if you want 32 bit rendering at 640x480, that's 3 framebuffers, front back and depth. 3686400 bytes, and the rest of vram is for textures. Now, you have to juggle textures around lots, and this is a pain in the ass as well. PS2 only has very little cache for EE too, so... well, it has the bandwidth for 600 million dual textured pixels, but you have to program it really well. PS2 is about twice as fast as GF2, IF, and I say IF, you program it VERY VERY WELL. PS2 isn't very powerful, it's nowhere what it's advertised to be, and it can't be found in shops either, so **** it.

    By blppt December 31, 2000, 02:25 PM

    If you all remember back when the N64 was released, that news wires reported that it was faster than "10 Pentium PCs". Since the Voodoo1 on one PC kicked the crap out of the N64, we now know not to listen to the newsmedia. They are probably referring to the raw geometry/fpu power of the PS2, versus an UNACCELERATED PC...which conveniently, they forgot to mention in their reports.

    UT is a shining example of how tough it is to program for PS2, especially when you are used to the (generally) superior RAM resources of the PC. Even the DC version looks and plays better according to dailyradar, because apparently it is very tough to adapt the Unreal engine to other technologies than what it was designed for. I mean, look how long it took Epic to get D3D up to the level its at now, and thats just a video card API.

    I dont know if they tried, but the original Unreal had support for the native PowerVR SGL driver, so maybe thats why (along with DC slightly PC similarities) it runs better on DC.

    By iamsostupid December 31, 2000, 02:43 PM

    Oooh yes! They are speaking of a PlayStaytion2, versus a Pentium Pro with integrated video!

    By t@xman December 31, 2000, 04:13 PM

    I bought a PS2 and it ISN'T all its cracked up to be. To be honest I've been thinking about trading it in for a few Dreamcast games. By the time PS2 games are up to the standard of DC games then the Xbox will be out, and lets face it , that'll spank the PS2. Anyone that actually believes the PS2 hype needs to go out and buy one, then realise what a mug they've been. Believe me I've had my fingers burned!
    2 weeks of PS2 games and now I'm back to Counter Strike! and thats on my V3 2000!!!!

    By Fade- January 04, 2001, 06:47 AM

    Wonder when a PS2 emu will be released.. anyone a good coder ?? and can port ps2?

    think it will even look better on a pc, as the n64 emu did. (higher resolution)

    By FaTs January 04, 2001, 09:05 AM

    Simple answer no i can play games at 3x times the res a ps2 can on my gf2 ultra


    Contact Us | www.SharkyForums.com

    Copyright 1999, 2000 internet.com Corporation. All Rights Reserved.


    Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46

    previous page
    next page





    Copyright 2002 INT Media Group, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. About INT Media Group | Press Releases | Privacy Policy | Career Opportunities