PS2 vs XBox - The Full Analysis (don't shoot the messenger)

[One, Two, Middlesboogie]

Full SPEC analysis, from Consolewire... Read into it what you will.

The CPU

Of course, the Central Processing Unit, the heart of every computer or console. Most of the calculations take place here. The XBox has a Intel Pentium (3?) processor which runs at a clock-speed of 733MHz. That's a lot higher than the 300MHz at which the PS2 CPU is running. But does that make the CPU better? Nope.

Here's why the PS2 CPU (Emotion Engine) is a lot more powerful:

-Data bus, cache memory as well as all registers are 128 bits on the PS2 CPU while the XBox CPU is 32 bits.
-The 32MB of Direct Rambus DRAM are implemented on the CPU itself.
-It has a max. performance of 6.2GFLOPS while the XBox CPU can only do a bit over 3 GFLOPS.
-It incorporates two 64-bit integer units (IU) with a 128-bit SIMD multi-media command unit, two independent floating point vector calculation units (VU0, VU1), an MPEG 2 decoder circuit (Image Processing Unit/IPU) and high performance DMA controllers.

Okay now what does this mean? It means that the PS2 can handle heavier physics and 3D engines (and can do more accurate realistic visual effects like splashing water and explosions). It also means that the PS2 can handle a lot more sophisticated Artificial Intelligence programming so that you have intelligent human-like opponents. The CPU also has direct access to the main memory that speed everything up quite a bit. And with a floating point calculation performance of 6.2GFLOPS/second, the overall calculation performance of this new CPU matches that of a super computer. This is a completely new CPU architecture especially designed for sophisticated graphics and physics while the architecture of the XBox CPU is pretty old and simple.

The Graphics Chip and VRAM

This is where the images are rendered. The XBox uses an Nvidia Graphics Processing Unit running at 250MHz and the PS2 uses the Graphics Synthesizer running at 150MHz. Again, judging by these specs the XBox looks better. The XBox GPU has a few advantages over the PS2 GS, for example:

-The XBox GPU can do 125 million polygons while the PS2 GS can only do 75million polygons
-The XBox GPU has a max. resolution of 1920x1080 and the PS2 GS can do 1280x1024 The rest of the graphics chip will be comparable to NV-20 chip.

But the catch is that these advantages don't make a lot of difference on a TV screen, even on an HDTV screen the difference would be barely noticeable (when the console's hardware is used properly). So, is the XBox Graphics Processing Unit better than the PS2 GS? It doesn't look like it, the architecture of the PS2 GS looks far more advanced. For example, PS2 has a parallel rendering engine that contains a 2,560 bit wide data bus that is 20 times the size of leading PC-based graphics accelerators. The Graphics Synthesizer architecture can execute recursive multi-pass rendering processing and filter operations at a very fast speed without the assistance of the main CPU or main bus access. In the past, this level of real-time performance was only achieved when using very expensive,
high performance, dedicated graphics workstations. There is a 48-Gigabyte memory access bandwidth achieved via the integration of the pixel logic and the video memory on a single high performance chip. The quality of the resulting screen image is comparable to high quality pre-rendered 3D graphics. (that is once the game developers have learned how to use it properly) There has also been a misunderstanding about the VideoRAM on the PS2. The VRAM is included in the 32MB of main RAM on the CPU (the developer chooses how much of it he wants to dedicate to VRAM). Everyone thought the 4MB of memory on the GS was the VRAM while that is just a buffer in which all the rendering is done so no external bandwidth is needed (only for texture streaming). Another rumor that's been spread by several gaming sites is that the XBox is capable of texture compression and full scene anti-aliasing while the PS2 isn't. This is simply not true. The PS2 can compress/ decompress textures and do full scene anti-aliasing without causing as much slow-down as on the XBox. And although the XBox GPU can do a lot of effects that are not 'built-in' in the PS2 GS, the PS2 can do all these effects and more in software mode (but at least at the same quality) through the Emotion Engine.

I can understand that this is all a bit confusing if you're not a real tech-freak. It comes down to this: when developers have learned how to use the power of the PS2 GS properly they'll get a lot more out of it than XBox developers will get out of the XBox GPU. The PS2 GS can't do as much polygons as the XBox but this difference won't be noticeable on a TV screen. The PS2 GS can do a lot more advanced visual effects than the XBox GPU.

The RAM

This is the main memory of a console or computer system. There isn't much to say about the RAM. XBox has twice as much RAM as the PS2. Will this give the XBox a huge advantage? Not at all, let's take a look at how the PS2 accesses the RAM:

-32MB Direct RDRAM 2 channels at 800MHz implemented on the CPU itself.

This means that the PS2's powerful Emotion Engine can manipulate the data stored in the RAM at least twice as fast as the XBox can access its memory. This is very important cause all data is stored there (even the graphics because the VRAM is included in those 32MB of RAM). Judging by the information that Microsoft has released it looks like the
PS2 can also compress and decompress images faster than the XBox because of the implementation of the MPEG2 decoder on the CPU. Even if they increase the RAM on the XBox to 128MB, PS2 still has the advantage here.

The Sound Chip

This is where the XBox does beat the PS2. The XBox has 64 sound channels while the PS2 has 48. This won't make the noticeable difference though. What will is that the XBox sound chip is designed for interactive and variable CD quality music which means that the music in games can (if the developers use the feature) change and adapt itself to the gameplay. The PS2 sound chip is simply designed or 'precalculated' CD music. It's possible to do interactive music on the PS2, it's just a bit harder to program (but certainly not impossible, just listen carefully to SSX) than on the XBox which is why you'll probably see more XBox games with interactive music.

Backwards Compatibility and PC ports

As you probably already know, the PS2 can play all old Playstation games and even enhance the graphics and speed up loading times. This gives the PS2 a huge advantage of course. But the XBox has another advantage over the PS2: PC ports. It's very easy for a PC game developer to create an XBox version of his game because the XBox hardware design looks a lot like that of a PC. And while the PS2's hardware architecture is superior to that of the XBox, it's a lot more difficult to make a PS2 version of a PC game because of the huge difference in hardware designs. If a PC developer wants to port a PC game to the XBox he just has to make some modifications in the programming code. But if a PC developer wants to port a PC game to the PS2 he has to rewrite most of the programming code. Of course, in time the developers will get used to the PS2 hardware and they'll be
able to make great PC to PS2 ports.

Conclusion

Microsoft did a great job at making the XBox look a lot better than the PS2 while in reality the PS2 is a lot more powerful. Specifications are just there for marketing purposes. Like they probably made you believe that a 128bits console is always 4 times better than a 32 bits console, which is total bullshit. Of course 128bits is better but it doesn't make a lot of difference. And now Microsoft is trying to make you believe that the XBox is better cause the CPU clock speed (733MHz) is a lot higher than that of all the other consoles. In the end it's the architecture of the hardware that makes the difference. And the PS2's architecture is simply revolutionary. The graphics of the launch titles were great but they'll get a lot better next year because the developers are still getting used to the PS2 hardware. Developers like Square (just look at The Bouncer) and Konami (MGS2? Zone Of Enders?) already learned how to do some cool tricks on the PS2, and this is just the beginning. The PS2's hardware has a lot more depth to it and so you'll see a huge evolution in graphics while the XBox hardware is a lot simpler and the developers will have pushed it to the max pretty soon. Yes, XBox is easier to program for but by the time it comes out developers will already know how to use the power of the PS2. The overall PS2 hardware architecture is a lot more innovative and powerful than that of the XBox.

[abe22]

Say wha'? I can't understand this stuff I need it in crappy english . The only thing I get is the Last sentence. Whats all this HDTV VOU VO1 MPEG crap I don't understand it at all.

[Oddworld Master]

finially


i've been trying ot tell u guys/girls all along but nooooo, no one was gonna listen to OM oh well i tried

i completly agree with that like i've been saying to myself.....i know ps2 is better then xbox but i guess i was always a bit jealous of it.


[ January 26, 2002: Message edited by: Oddworld Master ]

[Majic]

hmmmm.......... cool tricks for ps2? have you had a gander at the kind of stuff doa3 pumps out. but yes, i think after over a year why the hell x box is still just as good in the graphics department and gamespeed power as ps2. i mean, alot of ps2 games look like crap. and graphics for ps1 games improved? hardly a difference is even worthwhile. as far as games concerned, why is everyone dissing and making comparisons when its only been out like a couple months. that seems hardly fair, as MO halo and doa3 are all great. project gotham looks decent, i mean think of what crap that n64 had out at start, thats only if you hate all of x-boxs games right now. and the dvd player, what the hell x-boxs is better. i mean, my friends ps2. i have a double layer dvd, it skip several times through the movie. my old crapy dvd playe at home from like 3 years ago, skips a whole lot. x-box, perfection. but anyway, even if you dont want either one of these i can safely assure that a dreamcast is well worth your 80 bux or whatever, it ruled. and anyway, i dont really believe either companies statements about power and shit, i mean microsoft is kinda stuck up (but they have a great system) but then again sony is all tryin to look da bomb and stuff. basicly what im saying is, ill believe it when i see it. o yea, anyone here like playin online tony hawk more than online halo? jus wondr'n...

BTW, dont bother talkin bout ff10 ive already seen it. its matched.

[Gluk Schmuck]

The word 'full' in the title is misleading as this article only covers the hardware when the ware that REALLY matters is the software.

One of the first generation Xbox titles scored 10/10 in Edge while no PS2 game has scored 10/10 so far. Nuff said!

( Just for reference:
10/10 in Edge:
Gran Turismo, Ocarina of Time, Mario 64, Halo )

[Sydney]

Between a sibling, I own a Playstation 2, so no complaints here.

Gluk, your signature graphic is broken.

[Gluk Schmuck]

I know, Tripod's down for a re-vamp.

It should be working again at the start of next month...

[SeaRex]

Originally posted by Majic_Abe:
...online halo?
BTW, dont bother talkin bout ff10 ive already seen it. its matched.

HALO IS ONLINE??? Holy crap!!! Someone get me a modem! SOMEONE GET ME A MODEM!!!

Don't chew me up here... I don't even own a PS2... but is it just me or does FFX's FMVs look a lot better than any game on the X Box? I mean, Halo was even jerky and bumby at times. Sure it had cool texture and reflection effects, but the FMVs just don't seem up to par...