WTF ROFL! "GBA is more powerful than SNES and equivalent to PSX"

[StageLeft]

I'd say it's maybe as good as an SNES, but definitely not better and quite possible worse like you say. PSX is fantasy land talk.

EDIT: OK so it is just as good as an SNES.

Personally I'm still underimpressed with it. It's nifty but we've had SNESs for a DAMN long time. I was hoping that Nintendo could make a more powerful thing than the GBA. I suppose they could have but costs would have been worse. Get something as powerful as a PSX on the size of the GBA and now we're talking.

 

[blurredvision]

I've always heard it's almost as powerful as the PSX, it's just that the GBA just doesn't have a dedicated 3D graphics chip like the PSX had. Of course, this is because of size and power consumption.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: WoodchuckCharlie
I've always heard it's almost as powerful as the PSX, it's just that the GBA just doesn't have a dedicated 3D graphics chip like the PSX had. Of course, this is because of size and power consumption.

Doesn't that kind of make it less powerful then since gaming is the only real concern?

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: WoodchuckCharlie
I've always heard it's almost as powerful as the PSX, it's just that the GBA just doesn't have a dedicated 3D graphics chip like the PSX had. Of course, this is because of size and power consumption.

Doesn't that kind of make it less powerful then since gaming is the only real concern?

Not all games are 3d, Shmabbles.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: werk

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: WoodchuckCharlie
I've always heard it's almost as powerful as the PSX, it's just that the GBA just doesn't have a dedicated 3D graphics chip like the PSX had. Of course, this is because of size and power consumption.

Doesn't that kind of make it less powerful then since gaming is the only real concern?

Not all games are 3d, Shmabbles.

Well if it's not 3d chances are you don't need much processing power anyway! The GBA can never have games that look as nice as the PSX, and since both are only for gaming, in my book that means the GBA is inferior.

 

[0roo0roo]

snes or psx don't force you to squint at dark screens. stupid nintendo.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
snes or psx don't force you to squint at dark screens. stupid nintendo.

That's beside the point - the fact that you need a 5 million candle power spotlight to see the POS screen on those GBAs.

 

[ElFenix]

it is more powerful than the SNES, and the spec sheet says it CAN push more polys than the PSX (which was pretty awful as far as 3D hardware goes)

golden sun looks better than ANY rpg i played on SNES

 

[DanTMWTMP]

hmm...metriod fusion kinda looks better than snes version.....that's my opinion though.... it is probably better than snes...but not as good as psx...

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: BD2003
GBA is still half assed as far as I'm concerned. There's not enough buttons, the screen needs a backlight in the worst way, and they should have duplicated the SNES's resolution if all they want to do is make ports.

Wow...
I actually found it refreshing to not have 3 D-pads, 4 finger triggers, 8 pushbuttons, 6 buttons on the top of the controler, umpteen footpedals and a tube I have to blow into.

4 buttons is a nice change of pace and I don't miss those zillion extra buttons at all.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: Jzero

Originally posted by: BD2003
GBA is still half assed as far as I'm concerned. There's not enough buttons, the screen needs a backlight in the worst way, and they should have duplicated the SNES's resolution if all they want to do is make ports.

Wow...
I actually found it refreshing to not have 3 D-pads, 4 finger triggers, 8 pushbuttons, 6 buttons on the top of the controler, umpteen footpedals and a tube I have to blow into.

4 buttons is a nice change of pace and I don't miss those zillion extra buttons at all.

I like less buttons as well (my XBox's controller infuriates me), but I wish the GBA had the exact same controller scheme as the SNES (2 more buttons), what with all the SNES ports and all.

 

[FishTankX]

Technically there are 2 things holding the GBA back. Lack of RAM and lack of cache. These two things will keep the GBA limited for a while.. I mean, technically the GBA has 1/8 the RAM that the PSX does (256 K compared to 2 megs) and only 32K of cache and 64K of VRAM compared to the PS's 1 meg. It's just no comparison. 1/8 the RAM and 1/16th the VRAM. It does use a Strong Arm processor which does give it decent CPU power, but it's RAM limitations means that the GBA will never match the PS.

If memory serves me correclty the GBA has as much VRAM and RAM and half the Cache as the SNES. But it has a significantly more powerful CPU, at nearly 4X the frequency. But I find it ludicrous that any mobile system would match a full sized console, even if it was created 5 years after. I mean, mobile systems will probably *just* get to the PS's level in the next hardware cycle. The advantage that the GBA has over the SNES that allows it to challange the playstation (To your friend) is that it has a much lower dot pitch than the run of the mill TV, allowing it to get away with much lower resolution.

While we're on this topic, this is also a major detraction point for the PS2 also. not a lack of RAM, but a lack of VRAM, and even a more unforgivable mistake, a lack of VRAM compression! That was absurd! The Dreamcast had 8:1 compression with it's 8 megs of VRAM which allowed it to store 64 megs of textures after compression. Why couldn't sony incorporate the same into the PS2?

 

[GermyBoy]

Something to keep into consideration is that this isn't a huge deal with GBA and SNES games being 32Mb tops. If you compared the amount of RAM, cache, VRAM and everything to the psx, with slower cd access times, it's much faster.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: GermyBoy
Something to keep into consideration is that this isn't a huge deal with GBA and SNES games being 32Mb tops. If you compared the amount of RAM, cache, VRAM and everything to the psx, with slower cd access times, it's much faster.

Are both limited to 32Mb cartridges? I thought the SNES could do 2x the GBA.

 

[dugweb]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: GermyBoy
Something to keep into consideration is that this isn't a huge deal with GBA and SNES games being 32Mb tops. If you compared the amount of RAM, cache, VRAM and everything to the psx, with slower cd access times, it's much faster.

Are both limited to 32Mb cartridges? I thought the SNES could do 2x the GBA.

Actually it's the SNES that is limited to 16 mb carts (mb = megabytes not bits right?)

 

[ed21x]

nope... the SNES has their own compression algorithm which is assentially 12 megs = ~1 mb, with a 32 meg limit. This is actually quite amazing consdering that a game as huge as DKC with over 100 levels fits on 3 floppies, you can put four copies of MarioKart on a single floppy, and the entire 3d world of Mario64 fits on 8 megabytes. I still can't figure out how they managed to pull that off.