No, not at the moment. Some are a bit old, and it might take some work to get working again with the changes I've made to my code/model format since then. When I have time to do DC dev, I'm busy working on HarleQuest, so I couldn't upload any right now.
Crazy Taxi is not a good example of streaming on the DC. Crazy Taxi was designed first as an arcade game for the Naomi, with double video and main RAM, where the entire map could be loaded into memory at once. I think I there was an interview somewhere that Sega wasn't sure if they could port it to the DC because of that. The streaming system was added on for the home port, so it's just enough to work. The attract mode for both home and arcade are different, with the arcade version teleporting around the map between each cut (since it doesn't need to load,) while the home version always cuts to nearby areas, slowly making a circuit around the map (so it has time to load.)
The rendering library for Crazy Taxi is the same as the one used for games like Dead or Alive 2, Virtua Tennis, House of the Dead 2, and Outtrigger, so it's really not intened for anything open world in the first place. And Crazy Taxi is an arcade game. The map was designed gameplay first, and had to fit in the Naomi main RAM. Arcade games are designed with very short schedules, so there's no time to create a large detailed world, and with the game's time limit you probably aren't going to be stopping to take the time to look at things closely, so there's no reason to bother adding tons of detail anyways.
The DC version of Crazy Taxi doesn't stream textures, just geometry. Almost all arcade textures were reduced to quarter resolution to fit in the DC's video RAM. You could probably still fit most the arcade textures on the DC, if you compressed the uncompressed textures and improved the compression ratio on the ones that were compressed. Crazy Taxi 2 has higher resolution textures because they started with the DC's limits in mind, and cut back on the variety to make them fit.
With a more space efficient model format, you could actually load the entire Crazy Taxi map into memory on the DC. The map is about 325K vertices and 200K tris, so if you had 16 byte vertices (6 byte position, 2 byte spherical coord normal, 4 byte color, 4 byte UV) and estimate an 8 byte average overhead per tri for indices/materials/culling info/etc, the whole map mesh could fit in less than 7MB. With the model format actually used, its 12.8MB. Nothing on the disc is compressed, besides audio and textures, so it wastes bandwidth and time loading.
There really isn't anything on the DC that attempts to push the DC's streaming capabilities. Sega was too focused on arcade style games where it's uncommon, and Shenmue's streaming is likely limited because of it's Saturn roots. I guess JGR or Omicron might be the best examples? Of course, they're nothing like GTA.
For the PSP, apparently 8MB of RAM is reserved for the OS. On the DC, only 64KB of RAM is reserved for some syscalls (mainly for disc access). So the developer has access to 24+2MB of RAM on the original PSP, versus 16+8+2 MB of RAM for the DC. The DC's compressed textures are smaller than the PSP's, but the PVR also has to store scene data in video RAM, so it balances out a bit. They're pretty close to the same. The unified RAM in the PSP is nicer since you have the freedom to do stuff like trade sound effects for textures, where as with non-unified you're stuck with what the hardware demands. If you wanted to, I guess you could also say that the PSP has an additional memory advantage because it's limited to a lower resolution. It's frame buffer is smaller and it can get by with lower resolution textures, so it effectively has more RAM.
Talking about a DC game and comparing it to its ports has nothing to do with this thread, about how the DC can handle ports from other systems?
You seem to be overly focused on the question of, "Can the DC do an exact replica of a complex PS2 game?" That's not an interesting question to ask, in the same way it's not interesting to ask, "Can an Atari 2600 do an exact replica of a complex XBSX game." The answer is obvious, so it's pointless to discuss. No one cares about it. It's more interesting to ask, "How well would the DC handle running a complex PS2 game?" That's what everyone else is interested in.
Maybe someone could make another thread where we could discuss philosophy on what it means for one system to be able to run a game from another. How accurate does the conversion have to be to count as the same game? Is it the same game if there's 2% more slow down on one system, but otherwise identical? What if it drops a single frame in one cutscene, but is identical everywhere else? What about less slowdown, or the same amount but in different places? Does converting non-interactive in-engine cutscenes to lossless FMV count being a different game? Would changing the texture compression format mean that the games aren't the same, since the compression artifacts would be different? Could you say that the XBSX can't run Smash Ultimate, because Nintendo would never agree to it? Those questions are more interesting to discuss than how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or if the DC can run the PS2 version of GTA3 exactly.
