How much more powerful was the N64 compared to the PlayStation anyway?

Celine

Member
Oct 4, 2009
12,563
7
710
Not even close.

N64 was a beast back in the day though, too bad most of the talented developers didn't develop any games for it. The only developers that pushed the console were Nintendo, Rare and Iguana.
*cough* Boss Game Studios *cough* Factor5 *cough*
 

jett

D-Member
Jun 6, 2004
98,879
2
1,575
Tekken 3 is 60fps. And ran in one of the PS1's high resolution modes. However, in my opinion it's not even the best looking fighter on the console.

I'm mentioning Tobal 2 again god damnit!


Also 60fps, also high resolution, cleaner image quality and the use of mostly gourad shading on the characters went a long way in making it age really well. The animation is also, of course, incredible. Not graphically related, but it did full 3D movement before Soul Calibur(and did it better too).

Well, it runs at 60FPS interlaced. Which is really just 30FPS interlacing two frames together at once to give it the illusion of a smooth 60FPS.
This thread is starting to teeter on the edge of insanity. ALL games ran interlaced on the N64 and PS1(and Saturn). And 99% of PS2 games.
 
Jun 7, 2004
21,704
2
0
46
NM USA
Mischief Makers is hideously ugly, I think. I recently bought that as well and, man, it's just terrible looking. I believe it mixes 3D into the game as well.
Well, I thought it was a nice-looking game for the time of release, but whatever...it's just art and not a limitation of the system.
 

milsorgen

Banned
Feb 27, 2011
298
0
0
Pacific Northwest
last.fm
Couldn't it crank out way more polygons per frame? It was just that it had such a weird...memory architecture? that it had to texture those polygons using hideous blurred crap and then somethingsomething fog
Yeah, in just about every metric it was the fastest. Had hardware suppurt for just about all the gfx goodies of the day, particularly anti aliasing which was used with gudsto and hence the 64s trademark blur. From what I recall Nintendo released poor development libraries causing 3rd parties to either go with or write thier own libs. Few did.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,525
1,313
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
This thread is starting to teeter on the edge of insanity. ALL games ran interlaced on the N64 and PS1(and Saturn).
No true. They ran at 240p which is indeed progressive.

A select few games supported higher resolutions which were interlaced but the vast majority of games were not.

Tekken 3 is 320x240 progressive at 60 fps. VF2 runs at a higher interlaced resolution.

Most PS2 games were interlaced (which is where the jaggies complaints stem from).
 

Celine

Member
Oct 4, 2009
12,563
7
710
BTW the game isn't that great but I was always impressed by how Atari ported Mace to N64:

 

georaldc

Member
Feb 23, 2010
4,269
1
660
Seattle, WA
The Saturn really was a 2D machine with extra chips thrown into the box to compete with the PS1. From what I understand most hardware features that were built into the PS1 had to be emulated through software on the Sega Saturn, making it much harder to develop for, as well as making 3D quite a bit slower.

Very few developers also took advantage of both CPU's on the Saturn, though the few that did take advantage of the full hardware actually came up with some really impressive results. AM2, Lobotomy, Travelers Tales, Game Arts, Treasure (with Grandia) and some of Sega's other teams showed some pretty nice things on the Saturn.


Interesting fact: Nvidias first videocard, the NV1 was entirely based on the Sega Saturn and rendered games completely in quads. The first games that supported the NV1 were ports of Saturn games. The NV1 even had a port for Sega Saturn controllers on it. Though outside of Sega, practically nobody supported the Nvidia NV1. The NV2 was actually being developed for Sega's Blackbelt (AKA the Dreamcast) console but never saw the light of day, it almost brought Nvidia to bankruptcy. Though they did bounce back with the NV3 (Rivia 128) which was a true polygon based GPU and supported OpenGL. It was the card that saved their company.
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Saturn originally designed to be a powerhouse 2d machine because Sega didn't take 3d seriously or something? Then they saw the Playstation and rushed to make it capable of 3d graphics
 
Jun 7, 2004
21,704
2
0
46
NM USA
Tekken 3 is 320x240 progressive at 60 fps. VF2 runs at a higher interlaced resolution.
Tekken 3 was progressive? I remember noticing how much the interlace effect was present during a lot of movement. Maybe my memory of it is off. VF2, like LB and AitN, still looked cleaner than anything on PS1, save for the Tobals and DOA.
 

jett

D-Member
Jun 6, 2004
98,879
2
1,575
All three Tekken games on the PS1 run at 60fps.

One of the better looking racing game on N64 with WDC and BAR.
That is simply sad.

No true. They ran at 240p which is indeed progressive.

A select few games supported higher resolutions which were interlaced but the vast majority of games were not.

Tekken 3 is 320x240 progressive at 60 fps. VF2 runs at a higher interlaced resolution.

Most PS2 games were interlaced (which is where the jaggies complaints stem from).
Really? I figured they were all interlaced since the machines aren't capable(obviously) of outputting in progressive scan...it's still nonsense to put down Tekken 3's framerate just because it ran interlaced, though(if it indeed did). However, I'm fairly certain Tekken 3 runs at a resolution higher than 320x240, but I'm gonna have to get you back on that.
 

Combichristoffersen

Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Jun 26, 2009
23,338
1
800
Norway
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Saturn originally designed to be a powerhouse 2d machine because Sega didn't take 3d seriously or something? Then they saw the Playstation and rushed to make it capable of 3d graphics
That's basically what happened, yeah.
 

brumx

Member
Jan 21, 2006
811
0
0
Saturn looked better than both of them but it took until 97 for it to happen and then Sega quit.
 

Skyzard

Banned
Jun 3, 2012
20,772
0
0
I actually ended up playing my n64 way more. Not sure if it was the games or the graphics...but SM64 helped a tonne. Quite an upgrade over crash bandicoot's version of 3d which was more linear..
 

Johnny

Member
Apr 24, 2005
1,127
0
0
Canada
i40.tinypic.com
Really? I figured they were all interlaced since the machines aren't capable(obviously) of outputting in progressive scan...it's still nonsense to put down Tekken 3's framerate just because it ran interlaced, though(if it indeed did). However, I'm fairly certain Tekken 3 runs at a resolution higher than 320x240, but I'm gonna have to get you back on that.
Older consoles were capable of outputting progressive scan signals and usually did, just not 480p. Tekken 3 looks like a 240p title to me, I could be wrong, but stuff like Tobal looks noticeably sharper.
 

ProtomanNeo

Member
Aug 26, 2009
1,396
0
660
Space was the only issue that the 64 ever really ran up against. Had the 64 been CD based the entire landscape of the videogame world would be different.
 

jett

D-Member
Jun 6, 2004
98,879
2
1,575
Emulation shots are neither here nor there I guess but I found these and I just want to share how crazy the textuework in DewPrism was.







For a PS1 game it's bonkers.

Older consoles were capable of outputting progressive scan signals and usually did, just not 480p. Tekken 3 looks like a 240p title to me, I could be wrong, but stuff like Tobal looks noticeably sharper.
Well I have been corrected about the whole interlacing business. Maybe I'm wrong about T3's resolution, I'll check what resolution T3 outputs in an emulator in a little while.
 

DjRoomba

Banned
Feb 19, 2012
1,655
0
0
You never bought Zelda 64? WTF is wrong with you, Shidosh? Man... maybe a new nickname should be Shidouche.
I went from being a Nintendo fan to an outright PlayStation fanboy in those days and even I had to admit that, when I played it, Zelda 64 was the best game ever made.


You can't be serious. My collection is 3:1 in PS1's favor and while I own every possible N64 game I could ever want (including imports) I don't own all the PS1 titles I want to. And if not for the fact
so many were never released outside of Japan, I'd say the Saturn would have more worthwhile titles, too.
well to u and the rest, as i said its subjective, aint it. Yea the ps had more games but cmon we all know that its quality over quantity. Its certainly no ps2. N64 has a number of stone cold classics that hold up today, psone stuff I think does not fair as well.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,525
1,313
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
Really? I figured they were all interlaced since the machines aren't capable(obviously) of outputting in progressive scan...it's still nonsense to put down Tekken 3's framerate just because it ran interlaced, though(if it indeed did). However, I'm fairly certain Tekken 3 runs at a resolution higher than 320x240, but I'm gonna have to get you back on that.
Absolutely.

Standard def monitors could support what is considered "LDTV" which is actually a low resolution progressive image. That doesn't meant the resolution is always 320x240, rather, it simply uses the 240p mode. SNES, for instance, runs everything at 256x224 progressive.

3DO is the one odd exception in that it uses 480i despite only displaying 320x240 imagery. This results in a muddy, flickery mess of an image.

Keep in mind that, with 240p games, you will still see very visible black scan lines running through the image. 240p doesn't actually vary the lines, however, as the image is displayed with every line being drawn in the same location on the screen as the electron beam draws the image. 480i alternates rapidly between odd and even scanlines resulting in flicker.

Maybe my memory of it is off. VF2, like LB and AitN, still looked cleaner than anything on PS1, save for the Tobals and DOA.
Cleaner? Those games used 480i so, while the resolution was higher, the image flickered. Tekken 3 at 240p on a proper CRT produces a more stable image than the higher resolution fighters.
 

Tain

Member
Jun 13, 2004
24,280
3
1,365
horizonvanguard.com
Never even heard of DewPrism, wtf. Looks gorgeous.

oh, it's Threads of Fate? My girlfriend just got that to play on Vita. On a scale of Secret of Mana to Ys, how much of an action game is it?
 

KalBalboa

Banned
Feb 2, 2012
13,276
0
0
Waltham, MA
To me the N64 always came off better at handling a moving-3D camera, but that didn't stop the PlayStation from delivering these visuals:











The PlayStation 1's best games were usually more conservative with their graphical approach (pre-rendered backgrounds, that sort of thing). Games like Resident Evil and Final Fantasy frankly have aged much better than Goldeneye or Conker's Bad Furday, if you ask me thanks to how much texture detail CD-ROMS afforded games. 3D really wasn't concrete enough until the Dreamcast/PS2 days began anyway, and N64 3D games came with the burden of fog or incredibly flat (or sometimes non-existent, as was the case in Mario 64) textures.

I've also always though that Mario 64, while easily one of my favorite games, belonged in the same graphical category as some of the PSX Crash games, not to mention Spyro.








(Here's some Conker gameplay again, for good measure)
 

Combichristoffersen

Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Jun 26, 2009
23,338
1
800
Norway
well to u and the rest, as i said its subjective, aint it. Yea the ps had more games but cmon we all know that its quality over quantity. Its certainly no ps2. N64 has a few stone cold classics that hold up today, psone stuff I think does not fair as well.
Personally I think the PS1 had both quality and quantity. Unless you were a fan of Nintendo's first-party games, the N64 had slim pickings compared to the PS1. No Final Fantasies, no Metal Gear Solid, no Tekken, no Silent Hill, no Resident Evil (although it did get a late port of Resident Evil 2) etc. I'll give you that the PS1 is no PS2 though, as the PS2 has arguably the best library of any console ever released.

Also, I remember wanting Threads of Fate so badly, but it never got an official PAL release :( What would be the easiest way to get a PSN card/PSN code to get it off the US store?
 

Xdrive05

Member
Nov 1, 2005
7,126
28
1,255
34
Are the cartridges the only reason why N64 had really low-res textures? In other words, if N64 used CD's, then would the "vaseline filter" not have been a thing?
 

biggersmaller

Banned
Sep 14, 2007
4,677
0
0
MPLS
The best looking 3D N64 game vs the best looking 3D PSX game will favor the N64. This reflects the more powerful hardware, and the original point of this thread.

However, I had way more fun with the PSX as it had way more games worth playing at the time.
 

Tain

Member
Jun 13, 2004
24,280
3
1,365
horizonvanguard.com
Are the cartridges the only reason why N64 had really low-res textures? In other words, if N64 used CD's, then would the "vaseline filter" not have been a thing?
Nah, it's been covered in the thread that the maximum size for any given N64 texture is 4kb, a limitation that has nothing to do with storage.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,525
1,313
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
Are the cartridges the only reason why N64 had really low-res textures? In other words, if N64 used CD's, then would the "vaseline filter" not have been a thing?
No. It was the limited texture memory available to the system (just 4kb).

The vaseline filter you speak of isn't necessarily the result of the textures, however.
 

jett

D-Member
Jun 6, 2004
98,879
2
1,575
Absolutely.

Standard def monitors could support what is considered "LDTV" which is actually a low resolution progressive image. That doesn't meant the resolution is always 320x240, rather, it simply uses the 240p mode. SNES, for instance, runs everything at 256x224 progressive.

3DO is the one odd exception in that it uses 480i despite only displaying 320x240 imagery. This results in a muddy, flickery mess of an image.

Keep in mind that, with 240p games, you will still see very visible black scan lines running through the image. 240p doesn't actually vary the lines, however, as the image is displayed with every line being drawn in the same location on the screen as the electron beam draws the image. 480i alternates rapidly between odd and even scanlines resulting in flicker.


Cleaner? Those games used 480i so, while the resolution was higher, the image flickered. Tekken 3 at 240p on a proper CRT produces a more stable image than the higher resolution fighters.
Well all right. BTW, here's a direct feed image of Tekken 3, untouched!



It did run at a higher resolution than 320x240. :p
 

Xdrive05

Member
Nov 1, 2005
7,126
28
1,255
34
Nah, it's been covered in the thread that the maximum size for any given N64 texture is 4kb, a limitation that has nothing to do with storage.
Thanks. It sounds like that was part of the design. Maybe the thought was, "Yo, we stickin' with carts! So let's limit it to 4k. Pass the bowl!"
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,525
1,313
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
Well all right. BTW, here's a direct feed image of Tekken 3, untouched!



It did run at a higher resolution than 320x240. :p
Hmmm, surprising.

It has been a while since I've played the game. If you ignore those black bars they it seems like they're using 320x480 instead.

I'll have to load it up on my CRT again for a comparison.

Still, 99% of the games on PSX and N64 ran at 240p using a variety of resolution that were 320x240 or lower.
 

zephervack

Member
Apr 12, 2010
7,162
1
0
Canada
www.neogaf.com
Fun facts:

The N64 had 4kb of texture memory, but could put its framebuffer and Z buffer anywhere in main memory. This led to some seriously cool debug modes where you could visualize all your RAM - the black spaces were places you were allocating a lot of memory you weren't using.

4kb = one 64x64x8 bit texture (256 color palette.) There were many other texture formats that were valid, but no texture could ever go over 4kb.

Its main memory was 9 bits per byte instead of 8 bits. The extra bit was used as a coverage bit for its built in antialiasing, which really sucked to work around when you wanted something to actually be crisp. It was pretty much free, though.

It had an actual Z buffer and perspective correct texturing. This was Seriously Cool At The Time.

Its graphics chip was programmable; there was 4kb (if I am remembering right) of space for microcode that implemented vertex transform and display list processing. This wasn't generally something we were allowed to do ourselves.

The entire PilotWings 64 game occupied 8 megabytes of memory (the size of its cartridge.) For some perspective, 8 megs = two 1024x1024x32 bit texture maps - a pretty common size in games these days.

Good times, good times.
I absolutely love reading stuff like this.

Another funny thing: A screenshot of Super Mario World saved as a BMP file is bigger than the entire ROM of Super Mario World, which includes the music, art, gameplay code etc.

I know its a silly comparison but I find it amazing to be honest, Im sure the music in SNES games wasnt stored but actually generated on the fly by programming functions.
 

Tain

Member
Jun 13, 2004
24,280
3
1,365
horizonvanguard.com
Interesting. Tekken 3 arcade apparently runs at 512x480. Both versions running above 240p, but with the PSX version taking a horizontal resolution hit.

Lots of weird resolutions in that generation. Dynamite Deka/Die Hard Arcade runs at 640x240, if I'm remembering right.
 

kswiston

Member
Mar 25, 2005
35,145
1
0
Canada
Why is it that every time we have one of these threads we get people posting shots comparing a game running on an emulator at a higher resolution than the original system was capable of to some blurry 1990s screen capture taken from Gamespot?

If you are going to post up-rezzed emulator screens, do it for both systems. If you want to use native resolution screen captures, do it for both systems. Plenty of images in this thread that I know for a fact are a lot clearer than anything I was seeing on either console in the 90s.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,525
1,313
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
Interesting. Tekken 3 arcade apparently runs at 512x480. Both versions running above 240p, but with the PSX version taking a horizontal resolution hit.

Lots of weird resolutions in that generation. Dynamite Deka/Die Hard Arcade runs at 640x240, if I'm remembering right.
People complain about sub-HD resolutions today but it has always been commonplace with consoles. Resolutions vary all the time.

PS2 games were especially notorious of this with an insanely wide variety of resolutions used in different games.
 

jett

D-Member
Jun 6, 2004
98,879
2
1,575
Hmmm, surprising.

It has been a while since I've played the game. If you ignore those black bars they it seems like they're using 320x480 instead.

I'll have to load it up on my CRT again for a comparison.

Still, 99% of the games on PSX and N64 ran at 240p using a variety of resolution that were 320x240 or lower.
Lots of wonky resolutions were used on the PS1. Tobal 2 runs at 512x512, Crash at 512x384, etc.
 

Mama Robotnik

Member
Apr 11, 2008
7,999
1
985
Awful lot of upscaled emulated images entering this thread recently. It just muddies the waters rather than enabling discussion.
 

Brak

Member
Nov 29, 2006
2,095
0
0
Saskatchewan, Canada
People complain about sub-HD resolutions today but it has always been commonplace with consoles. Resolutions vary all the time.

PS2 games were especially notorious of this with an insanely wide variety of resolutions used in different games.
Yeah, but the console makers never used resolution as a bullet point until this generation. So I feel like it's more of a false advertising complaint. Obviously there are some people who would be counting pixels anyway, but it wouldn't be such an issue if Sony and Microsoft hadn't made such bold claims about their consoles' abilities.
 

-KRS-

Member
Sep 9, 2009
4,875
0
0
Sweden
enlisy.com
I imagine the cartridge medium is what really crippled the N64s textures. It did allow them to have next to no loading times, though. Tough decision to make back then.
It was carts combined with the tiny 4kB texture buffer and AA on everything that crippled it. Especially the texture buffer. Mostly what they did was to simply just stretch out a 4kB texture over an object, so it gets blurry as hell. Some developers were a bit smarter and put several textures next to each other on objects to get less stretching, but that introduced other problems with performance and whatnot. Earlier games like SM64 used more gouraud shading on many objects so they didn't have to use textures at all, so it's not a big problem in these games. But as soon as games started using more and more textures it became pretty apparent.

Edit: eh beaten. but this thread is too big to read through it all :p
 

Johnny

Member
Apr 24, 2005
1,127
0
0
Canada
i40.tinypic.com
Well all right. BTW, here's a direct feed image of Tekken 3, untouched!



It did run at a higher resolution than 320x240. :p
I went ahead an booted up Tekken 3 and noticed the interlace flicker right away, but couldn't understand why the game looked kind of chunky still. This explains it.
 

jett

D-Member
Jun 6, 2004
98,879
2
1,575
I went ahead an booted up Tekken 3 and noticed the interlace flicker right away, but couldn't understand why the game looked kind of chunky still. This explains it.
Yeah that flickering is a dead giveaway for games with a vertical resolution of 480 or higher. That's how I knew T3 was a "high-res" game back in the day.
 

KalBalboa

Banned
Feb 2, 2012
13,276
0
0
Waltham, MA
Why is it that every time we have one of these threads we get people posting shots comparing a game running on an emulator at a higher resolution than the original system was capable of to some blurry 1990s screen capture taken from Gamespot?

If you are going to post up-rezzed emulator screens, do it for both systems. If you want to use native resolution screen captures, do it for both systems. Plenty of images in this thread that I know for a fact are a lot clearer than anything I was seeing on either console in the 90s.
When people show this:


I feel compelled to post this:



Awful lot of upscaled emulated images entering this thread recently. It just muddies the waters rather than enabling discussion.
This is pretty much why I felt the need to chime in after seeing Conker & Goldeneye "screens" being posted with some in-game Gran Turismo, Spyro, and Oddworld shots. Certain PSone Wipeout games, believe it or not, actually had modes that let them run at double the resolution (640x480), hence my posting of that shot in particular. That Nemesis shot looks like a PSone game, to me, possibly doubled in res, but the geometry and textures look the same.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,525
1,313
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
This is pretty much why I felt the need to chime in after seeing Conker & Goldeneye "screens" being posted with some in-game Gran Turismo, Spyro, and Oddworld shots. Certain PSone Wipeout games, believe it or not, actually had modes that let them run at double the resolution (640x480), hence my posting of that shot in particular. That Nemesis shot looks like a PSone game, to me, possibly doubled in res, but the geometry and textures look the same.
Which Wipeout?

I've heard people claim that Wipeout 3 ran at a high resolution mode but I can definitely confirm that, by default at least, it runs at 320x240. Unlike Tekken 3, I'm certain of this one.
 

vio

Member
Jan 4, 2009
3,482
0
0
N64 bigest advantage over PS1 was perspective correction. Yes n64 had bilinear filtering, but at such a low resolution it just made things worse in my opinion. All n64 games were blurry mess in my eyes. Another reasons why n64 graphic look like that is because textures were made to look great as PIXEL ART.

PS1 was better used thanks to huge support from developers. On end N64 did not have anything that beats Gran Turismo 2, Tekken 3 or Sould Blade, Crash Bandicoot 3, Soul Reaver, Wipeout XL/3 and so much more it is not even funny. Also PS1 had amazing sound, and thanks to use of CDs more music and FMW. 2

Anyways, am not trying to convince anyone. Fanboys will stay fanboys.
To answer OP, N64 was indeed more powerfull but in same time it badly crippled by cartridges.
 

KalBalboa

Banned
Feb 2, 2012
13,276
0
0
Waltham, MA
Which Wipeout?

I've heard people claim that Wipeout 3 ran at a high resolution mode but I can definitely confirm that, by default at least, it runs at 320x240. Unlike Tekken 3, I'm certain of this one.
Wipeout 3 and maaaybe XL, but I could be wrong. A few other PSone games did it too.
 

Calen

Member
Aug 15, 2007
353
0
830
48
Tarzana, CA
No mipmapping. Possibly even lacking bilinear filtering.
The PS1 didn't have mipmapping or bilinear filtering, but the texture warp/jiggle was caused by its lack of a proper perspective divide (it only did affine texture mapping.) This is the same reason Ultima Underworld looks different from Quake et al; Quake does a perspective divide every 16 texels which pretty much eliminates visible warp.
 

iosef

Member
Jul 10, 2007
450
0
0
While I lol at the re-litigating of a past console war in this thread, I lol harder at people using emulator screenshots throughout
 

Snakeyes

Member
Sep 20, 2009
7,560
0
745
PS1 was better used thanks to huge support from developers. On end N64 did not have anything that beats Gran Turismo 2, Tekken 3 or Sould Blade, Crash Bandicoot 3, Soul Reaver, Wipeout XL/3 and so much more it is not even funny. Also PS1 had amazing sound, and thanks to use of CDs more music and FMW. 2
Are you talking in terms of gameplay? Because stuff like Banjo Tooie, Conker, Perfect Dark, Turok 2, Rush 2049, etc... looks way ahead of anything on PS1.
 

MYE

Banned
Jul 20, 2009
16,499
0
0
What is this shit about N64 models being low poly?


^models from Turok 2


Lighting and detailed models.
Again, Turok 2

Textures


Draw distance


Lighting and geometry


Wasnt there also a Megaman on the N64?


Textures and draw distance