What Xbox and PS2 uses the most polygons/sec

R

ryoni

Newcomer
What Xbox and PS2 Game uses the most polygons/sec

I know Rogue Squadron 3 Rebel Strike did the most for gamecube.

But no idea about Xbox and PS2. Jax did 15/million a sec right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Poligon performance.

Sony Playstation 2:

Theoretical max: 66 million polygons/sec
Setup limited (in game): 5-6 million polygons/sec

Microsoft Xbox:

Theoretical max: 116 million polygons/sec
Setup limited (in game): 15-20 million polygons/sec
 
Jak games easily use more than 5 million polygons per second, so I´d say your source is downright wrong.
 
I honestly don't know how some people judge how many polys a game is displaying..... not when were taling about MILLONS.

My eyes simply don't understand such numbers, other than "that's a whole lot." I would be 100% unable to say with any certianty "No, your wrong, that game isn't pushing 15 million poly's per second, it's CLEARLY pushing 25 million per second."

Even in the tens of thousands, my eyes can be easily fooled. A huge stadium full of people. One person says 65 tousand people, then next guy says 90 thousand people..... it won't be my eyes settling that kind of argument.
 
BenQ said:
I honestly don't know how some people judge how many polys a game is displaying..... not when were taling about MILLONS.

My eyes simply don't understand such numbers, other than "that's a whole lot." I would be 100% unable to say with any certianty "No, your wrong, that game isn't pushing 15 million poly's per second, it's CLEARLY pushing 25 million per second."

Even in the tens of thousands, my eyes can be easily fooled. A huge stadium full of people. One person says 65 tousand people, then next guy says 90 thousand people..... it won't be my eyes settling that kind of argument.
Click to expand...

The Jak games, together witht he Ratchet and Clank games, are pretty well known and analysed because everyone and their mother has run them through the Performance Analyser (nAo can testify). This gives you real numbers, so it's not like we're making this up.
Then again, i think 15Million is still a bit too much. It might peak that number for some fractions of a second, but that's different. The 5-6million limitation is downright wrong since we also know from Faf that the first Burnout was already pushing 13M at times.
 
london-boy said:
The Jak games, together witht he Ratchet and Clank games, are pretty well known and analysed because everyone and their mother has run them through the Performance Analyser (nAo can testify). This gives you real numbers, so it's not like we're making this up.
Then again, i think 15Million is still a bit too much. It might peak that number for some fractions of a second, but that's different. The 5-6million limitation is downright wrong since we also know from Faf that the first Burnout was already pushing 13M at times.
Click to expand...

That must mean the number of polys that the game engine is pushing right? It can't be the number of polys onscreen, can it? The number of pixels would seem to be a limiting factor.
 
Criterion once said in their site, IIRC, they had a 30M textured poly engine on ps2(probably only achieved that with single texture and in a very simplistic game simulation.). Other uber high numbers are the formula game, I forgot how it's called(probably around 18m shimmering polys, that game had serious iq issues from what I heard.).

The original jack was more than 10M(probably very near that).

I'd imagine CoN goes high too, that team(snowblind?) knew how to code for ps2 superb iq and very detailed char.s and background.(BG had multiple 20k+ chars on screen at 60fps, within nice environments, and given CoN is the next engine of this team it should push some serious polys.).

I think fafracer too pushed some serious polys(IIRC).

Though from what I've seen the xbox is no slouch in the poly department either. Probably pushes 2x most of what ps2 games do in some titles. I'd like to hear top figures too, probably for the most part, the best dev.s polywise on both consoles are not too distant considering the smoothness of the char.s in some games(Kingdom Hearts 2, Ninja Gaiden), though obviously the xbox does offer better textures, more advanced effects, and generally better iq.
 
BenQ said:
That must mean the number of polys that the game engine is pushing right? It can't be the number of polys onscreen, can it? The number of pixels would seem to be a limiting factor.
Click to expand...

It means what it means, polys per second. divide by whatever framerate and you get the polys per frame.
The number of pixel is one of the limiting factors, but it does not limit PS2 to 5Mpps.
 
ryoni said:
I know Rogue Squadron 2 did the most for gamecube.
Click to expand...
I'd be willing to bet that Rogue Squadron 3 beat that game with splitscreen its co-op version of Rogue Squadron 2. And I haven't played it yet, but I've heard RE4 pushes a lot of polys.
london-boy said:
The number of pixel is one of the limiting factors, but it does not limit PS2 to 5Mpps.
Click to expand...
Polygons can be smaller than pixels. If a game has anti-aliasing applied, polys of subpixel size can be represented across multiple pixels.
 
BenQ said:
That must mean the number of polys that the game engine is pushing right? It can't be the number of polys onscreen, can it? The number of pixels would seem to be a limiting factor.
Click to expand...
Polygons aren't related to screen pixels; they're purely a mathematical concept up until the very end when the rasterizer calculates screen pixel values for them to represent them in the real world. The code the emotion engine and its vector units run have no real concept of pixels, and it is quite possible to have more polygons than screen pixels, leading to shimmering artefacts in detailed polygon objects or environments when particular polys cover a pixel one frame and don't in the next.

There's also overdraw to consider. :)

The claim of PS2 being "setup limited" in games at 5-6 million is complete nonsense and made up. Particulary as the setup limit for the graphics synthesizer is over ten times that number. ;)
 
Guden Oden said:
Polygons aren't related to screen pixels; they're purely a mathematical concept up until the very end when the rasterizer calculates screen pixel values for them to represent them in the real world. The code the emotion engine and its vector units run have no real concept of pixels, and it is quite possible to have more polygons than screen pixels, leading to shimmering artefacts in detailed polygon objects or environments when particular polys cover a pixel one frame and don't in the next.

There's also overdraw to consider. :)

The claim of PS2 being "setup limited" in games at 5-6 million is complete nonsense and made up. Particulary as the setup limit for the graphics synthesizer is over ten times that number. ;)
Click to expand...

I agree with you, and I realize that you could have more poly's than pixels, but it still seems like a limiting factor to me. If a poly is so small that it becomes the size of a pixel,or smaller, I can no longer see it, and if I can't see it or the screen itself becomes the limiting fator, what good is it?
 
Depending on the actual polygon and how much fillrate it eats up, it can often be faster on PS2 to forgo backface culling -- it's not that backface culling is resource intensive, but you only end up culling one polygon at a time for the calculation and comparison, so the fillrate of the GS could often be enough that you can just endure the overdraw. Obviously, the fillrate demands of the polygons make a difference, but usually the demanding ones are the ones you can't cull anyway (particles, alpha blended effects)... Character and set polys are usually pretty small on screen and don't individually eat up a lot of fillrate anyway. Especially not at resolutions like 480i.

Also, Jason Rubin's talk months back on creativity (check Gamasutra) mentioned something about Jak averaging around 150-180k polygons per frame during gameplay, though he didn't mention framerate, so I'll assume 30 fps. This was only achieved after they got used to the PS2 as a platform. Initially, their limit was around 40-50k polygons per frame. Again, these being typical through the course of the game -- he never said anything about the peak throughput or in cinematics, which were probably much higher.
 
ShootMyMonkey said:
Also, Jason Rubin's talk months back on creativity (check Gamasutra) mentioned something about Jak averaging around 150-180k polygons per frame during gameplay, though he didn't mention framerate, so I'll assume 30 fps. This was only achieved after they got used to the PS2 as a platform. Initially, their limit was around 40-50k polygons per frame. Again, these being typical through the course of the game -- he never said anything about the peak throughput or in cinematics, which were probably much higher.
Click to expand...
J&D runs at a steady 60fps.
 
ShootMyMonkey said:
Depending on the actual polygon and how much fillrate it eats up, it can often be faster on PS2 to forgo backface culling -- it's not that backface culling is resource intensive, but you only end up culling one polygon at a time for the calculation and comparison, so the fillrate of the GS could often be enough that you can just endure the overdraw. Obviously, the fillrate demands of the polygons make a difference, but usually the demanding ones are the ones you can't cull anyway (particles, alpha blended effects)... Character and set polys are usually pretty small on screen and don't individually eat up a lot of fillrate anyway. Especially not at resolutions like 480i.

Also, Jason Rubin's talk months back on creativity (check Gamasutra) mentioned something about Jak averaging around 150-180k polygons per frame during gameplay, though he didn't mention framerate, so I'll assume 30 fps. This was only achieved after they got used to the PS2 as a platform. Initially, their limit was around 40-50k polygons per frame. Again, these being typical through the course of the game -- he never said anything about the peak throughput or in cinematics, which were probably much higher.
Click to expand...

Jak games run at 60fps, IIRC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
The Life Cycle of a Gamer - is gaming changing forever, or eternal?
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Tkumpathenurple
T
L
Xbox 360 and PS3 top graphics
4 5 6
Replies
100
Views
14K
XboxKING
X
Z
Its not just me, games used to be better
5 6 7
Replies
122
Views
5K
homerdog
homerdog
B
Xbox leadership and the Xbox brand evaluation *spawn
10 11 12
Replies
223
Views
20K
cheapchips
C
Z
Does anyone think YouTube is lame now?
Replies
7
Views
655
Zombietoid
Z
Back
Top