Pocket Gamer's feature is certainly an eye-opener. Of particular note is a fascinating diagram of screen sizes, overlaying each other. The PSP's wide screen LCD far exceeds the size of its nearest competitor, the Nomad. Even with such impressive statistics, the system remains one of the lightest handhelds created, and doesn't stand out as disproportionately larger than the others. This is a must-read feature for any PSP fan.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
4-26-2007 @ 1:18PM
jack said...
whats a nomad
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 1:32PM
Thomas said...
awwwwww everyone knows that the psp is the best handheld system ever created... but with that power, what new innovation has it brought to the video gaming table.. it's just a ps2, in portable fashion. Now... being portable isn't anything new. The psp would have been better served if it would allow for user generated content (homebrew). Allow homebrew, but stop piracy... that should be Sony's goal... not stopping homebrew all together...
the psp has a lot of innovation, from ps1 titles, streaming content from ps3, web browser...
take that 333 mhz of energy/effort and put it back into the psp... let get more ps1 games up, more psp colors.. let get those downloadable movies up and running...
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 2:05PM
required said...
"what new innovation..?"
Thomas, you're kidding right? You must have never had a gameboy.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 2:06PM
Colin said...
Not in the article but I just worked it out:
Atari Lynx: $312 in today's dollars
Gameboy: $148 in today's dollars
Game Gear: $236 in today's dollars
Sega Nomad: $237 in today's dollars
GBA: $114 in today's dollars
NGage: $330 in today's dollars
DS: $130
PSP: $170
(I've rounded up to the next dollar in all cases)
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 3:16PM
Adam said...
A pure mhz count is not necessarily indicative of the power of the handheld, there's graphical power and work done per cycle to factor in as well. Still: is it news that the psp is more powerful than the DS, etc.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 3:38PM
txa1265 said...
Of course this isn't news ...
Sad thing is, if there was a load time chart it would look like the MHz chart ;) UMD might be high-capacity, but boy is it ever a pig ...
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 3:43PM
Michael said...
>certainly an eye-opener
Heh? Which part were you not aware of? Screen size? CPU speed? An eye opener - perhaps to somebody who has never seen a PSP...
Michael
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 3:45PM
Stef Geiger said...
Uhhh... how is this an eye-opener? Did we need a graph for this? Shock! The PSP is a hundred times faster than the original gameboy! I hadn't expected such technological advancement over a nearly 20 year-old system!
And I don't think there's a soul out there that isn't aware of the fact that the PSP is a far more powerful system than even the DS.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 4:30PM
trystero said...
They skipped the GP2X in that list? Dual ARM [email protected] with no overclocking? I would think that would give all of those systems save possibly the PSP a run for the money.
http://wiki.gp2x.org/wiki/Main_Page
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 4:50PM
PSP_Rising said...
Most hand held gamers already knew this except for the 10 million kiddies that don't have a clue and just want Mario... I don't think the above graph is accurate at all. The Atari Lynx and the Game Gear both ran at 3.6 Mzh and had custom chips whereas the pathetic GB ran at only 2.2. Sure it won out in the end, not because of the hardware by no means IMO was more due to marketing much in the same manner the DS is outselling the PSP.
PSP is the ultimate power in the Hand Held Universe I suggest we use it...
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 4:58PM
required said...
txa1265, brain training on the DS has the worst load times I have ever experienced. Not surprising since the DS is nearly two gameboys duct tapped together and brain training, amusingly enough, heavily taxes the system.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 4:59PM
required said...
btw, I clicked the link with my eyes wide open.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 5:03PM
txa1265 said...
Re: required - are you talking 'Brain Age'? I'll have to check it out (have it at home). Top Spin 2 for the DS is my worst one - it takes forever to load and runs (and looks) like crap.
But I know you have suggested that the DS has longer load times and shorter battery life than the PSP before. Sorry, but that is utter nonsense - you can likely find games (like above) that have longer loads than some PSP games. But I can name at least three dozen mainstream PSP games that have longer start-to-game times and level load times than *any* DS game. And that is no surprise - one is reading flash storage and the other from a rotating disc ... the physics make it impossible for the PSP to win that battle, especially since it has to load more data to feed the hungry screen.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 5:29PM
required said...
"you can likely find games (like above) that have longer loads than some PSP games." - txa1265
txa1265, that alone validates my comment, and removes it from being "utter nonsense".
The PSP pulls the same amount of data off its UMD and processes it quicker than the DS can pull data off its little card and process it. This is due to how all around underpowered the DS is, it simply can't work with data as fast as the PSP can.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 5:31PM
Colin said...
@Stef...
It is an 'eye opener' for those wishing to compare systems over time that might never have heard of some of the older systems not just the current DS VS PSP issue.
It was nice to go down memory lane and see how my old LYNX compared to my current PSP.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 5:43PM
PSP_Rising said...
The Atai Lynx is part of my collection and still gets some playtime! Much more than the GB..
Here is some info from my site that shows some more comparisons as well
http://www.trekstersdomain.com/lynx_ii.htm
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 6:04PM
PSP_Rising said...
Why do people even try to compare load times between DS and PSP??? Apples and Oranges. Of course the UMD takes longer, even if it was flash like the DS it would take longer as there is MUCH MORE DATA to load as the PSP has vastly more memory. I own almost 20 games and out of the them all Star Wars Battlefront II has the longest load times but in comparison to the PC it's does not have a long load time at all. The rest of my collection load times have never been an issue. Here is a great comparison, name me a DS/PSP game (same title)& compare how long they take to load, and compare how they look. You will not find a game that fits this description as there are no comparable DS games even come close to the look of a PSP game of the same name.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 6:18PM
txa1265 said...
txa1265, that alone validates my comment, and removes it from being "utter nonsense".
So, by that logic I can cite a single DS game that looks better than a single PSP game and claim that the DS has better graphics ... ? That is *exactly* what you are doing, y'know.
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 8:05PM
required said...
"That is *exactly* what you are doing, y'know."
No it is not. I simply called you out for making a mountain out of a mole hill (few games have load times worth mentioning).
I'm curious now that you mention it, what game do you feel looks better on the DS than it does on the PSP?
Reply
4-26-2007 @ 8:37PM
txa1265 said...
Lunar Knights on the DS looks better than Generation of Chaos on the PSP ... in fact, it also looks better than Ys: Ark of Nephitshim.
Seriously, there are less than a half-dozen PSP games with load-times under 30 seconds for a level, and less than a half dozen DS games with load times of more than 5 seconds for a level. The DS acts like a handheld and the PSP like a console. On multiplatform games I've player (Madden, Tiger, Test Drive, Snoopy, etc) the PSP takes longer than the PC to load!
I just have no idea how you can claim that load times aren't significant - it takes an order of magnitude longer on most PSP games than on most DS games. That is why I say that your claim is as ridiculous as my claiming that the DS has better graphics. The DS has worse graphics. The PSP has worse load times.
Reply