Subject:
|
Re: Sony unveils Playstation 2
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Mar 1999 01:28:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
232 times
|
| |
|
|
> > It used to flip-flop back and forth ever since the Atari days, but with
> > the advent of the 3D accelerator, I'm inclined to agree. No console will
> > ever catch up to a computer again, technology wise. Of course, if the
> > PSX will do HDTV, and has USB and firewire ports along with a PCMCIA
> > slot, the $400 max pricetag vs. the $1500 computer may be a very
> > interesting issue.
>
> Yeah, but you don't HAVE to spend $1500 to get a computer that will
> play games better than any console anymore, especially when you remove
Granted, "not anymore". When the playstation came out, a voodoo card
alone was half the cost of a playstation, never mind CPU prices. Now,
the cost of a playstation-level computer is under $400. Same thing will
happen when the Dreamcast and PSX2 emerge. The cost will be 4:1, then
gradually settle down to 2:1.
> the price of the monitor (which you should, since you can't play a
> console without a tv).
TVs cost less than monitors, but in the same proportion as computers
cost to consoles (and for the same reasons). A 19" TV and a 19" monitor
have a significant cost difference (and quality difference to justify
that cost).
> I built my Celeron 300a/450 with 128mb for $519. That didn't include
> HD or CD since I had extras of those, but even figuring in another
> $250 for those (more than you'd have to spend to get 5 gigs and a
> decent cd, which is what I have in that machine) you're barely pushing
> $800.
Yes, but it won't do PSX2 or Dreamcast performance. For that, you need
the monster you have at work. :) No doubt that the technology will
become available for the desktop by the time the PSX2 comes around (I've
been talking with a guy over in NGO's forums, who implied that something
even better than Metabyte's PGP will be announced at next week's Game
Developer Conference).
Also, the OC-ability of the Celeron is an independent incident. I don't
see that kind of thing happening again. No chip has even came close to
being as consistently OC-able as the 300a (50% OC). From what I've read
(www.anandtech.com was the source for this tidbit), the next closest
chip was the old AMD 5x86-133 that some people got to go as high as 180
or something like that. That's still only 30-35%.
> Still a lot more than $400, though. Although decent little eMachines
> can be had for $400.
I think that's the more important aspect. It's not that the PSX2 can do
a gazillion things a second. More important is that the growing
marketshare is in the lower end, and these people are willing to
sacrifice the ability to play quake8 for the chance to play all of the
rest of the games with little no hitches, and play them online, etc.
etc. Games that don't tax the machine will really start to take off.
Even StarCraft and Diablo run fine on a P-100.
Adam
bwappo@ee.net
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Sony unveils Playstation 2
|
| (...) Don't get me started on the cost of 3d accelerators. :) As an early adopter I paid $600 for my 2 12mb voodoo2 cards. Now the same thing can be had for less than $250, I think. 'Course, I got 9 months or so of use out of them. (...) Oh yeah, (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Sony unveils Playstation 2
|
| (...) Yeah, but you don't HAVE to spend $1500 to get a computer that will play games better than any console anymore, especially when you remove the price of the monitor (which you should, since you can't play a console without a tv). I built my (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
