Gpx2 Unvailed!!

[DaveC]

Well, i guess we will all see then the GPx2 Web admin answers our questions once again at the sugestion page. Which i guess it will be tomorrow morning. I've asked about if the EMU's will be included.

And DaveC, Did you honestly think the GP32 would be as it is now back in 2002-2003? I really think guys like Reese and Ryleh would try to optimize the emus for this system too, if they get one, and if professional coders like that does it, why would they not use both?.

​

No but I did think they would have the sense to at LEAST make it backwards compatible, even to the point of including a SD/SMC combo slot to read both formats (this is done on PPCs alot). Ok so it has a weak CPU and not much RAM but at least if it ran the old emus etc it would give some current users, especially NLU/FLU owners, a reason to upgrade. Plus it would start out with something. The new one will have 0 emus/HB the day it is released. It would be a true successor to the GP32 rather than a competitor as it is now. You may as well get a PSP or Zodiac or DS. Those have just as much in common with the new GP32 too as none of these will run GP32 apps either.

Really why bother with this thing? What does it do that the current one doesn't? can it run NeoGeo? Not at 200 MHz it won't, unless you shut off sound and run it at FS4. So why throw out the current emus for this? Why? For 40 more MHz and a couple of extra buttons? It just isn't logical.

And the key phrase you said is "if they get one" yeah, big if. I don't see why they would get one. The additional 40 MHz is hardly good enough to make them throw everything out the window and start from scratch.

​

40 MHz? Isn't it kind of flawed comparing an overclocked GP32 to the regular clockspeed of the GPX2? It's more like 90 MHz with both of them overclocked. Also who knows, maybe this thing will be much cheaper than we think it is.

​

You don't know if this thing is overclockable. It may not be due to the fact that the GPU is integrated and maybe OC'ing would throw off the video timing or something. Or it just may be unstable over 200. All we have as a definite now is 200MHz.

 

[Julius]

he only console that is even slightly feasable for emulation is the PS1

No it won't be. Trust me.

But what are the cons of a faster CPU?
1. Much higher price
2. Higher energy consumption, thus less battery time (those 8-16h on the GPx2 sound amazing btw and I love that it still uses 2 AAs)
3. (actually connected to the 2.) Higher heat production by the cpu, which in result needs more passive cooling, thus making the console heavier, probably bigger and even more expensive.

Those are all unlikely, their would be a smallish hike in price - and the energy consumption/heat would not be really very big as, the faster CPUs are often more efficient than the slower CPUs.

​

So which one do you think could be emulated also? Dreamcast amulators don't even run properly on a 2Ghz PC, PSP is not doable, DS will not work because of the touchscreen (besides that is is probably also too fast). Dont even think of PS2 or Xbox...

Ok maybe Dosbox is an additional option, but it runs 368 games on my 2.4ghz PC, so forget about that also.

Sooo.... what does that leave.... hmm the only thing I can think of that actually might be possible with a faster CPU is the Amiga1200, but I don't know enought about Amiga emulation to tell if it is feasable or not.


Concerning the faster CPU itself, I admit I don't know the exact prices of faster ARM cpus but I bet the difference is more than you think. Oh and usually faster CPUs are only more efficient because they are build with newer technology, which in this case just isn't true, actually slower CPUs with modern technology tend to be much more energy efficient than faster ones.

 

[x68000]

the dreamcast - 'a weaker machine' if you class a 128-bit system which could pull fantastic model3 & naomi ports off as weak then you are a craaaazy man.

And davec is just bringing this thread down with his 1 track rantings.

Be constructive or be gone.

 

[Hanz™]

So which one do you think could be emulated also? Dreamcast amulators don't even run properly on a 2Ghz PC, PSP is not doable, DS will not work because of the touchscreen (besides that is is probably also too fast). Dont even think of PS2 or Xbox...

Ok maybe Dosbox is an additional option, but it runs 368 games on my 2.4ghz PC, so forget about that also.

Sooo.... what does that leave.... hmm the only thing I can think of that actually might be possible with a faster CPU is the Amiga1200, but I don't know enought about Amiga emulation to tell if it is feasable or not.

Well thats my point we are unlikely to get any new systems emulated with this.

 

[x68000]

course we will. Mega cd, pc engine super/arcade cd, x68000, further mame development to name but a few - have faith

 

[jmetal88]

Well, I have a job that I have kept for several months now, and all the managers like me, so hopefully I will keep it quite a while longer. That said, I plan to get both new GP consoles and use them both for their own benefits. But, I will get GPx2 first, just because I REALLY like the way it seems to be put together. Besides, who can argue with cheaper?

 

[rabbits with hats]

course we will. Mega cd, pc engine super/arcade cd, x68000, further mame development to name but a few - have faith

​

:lol:

yay!

 

[sir diggy]

Concerning the faster CPU itself, I admit I don't know the exact prices of faster ARM cpus but I bet the difference is more than you think.

How can the Giz get away with 400 Mhz then? Those damn things dont cost that much PLUS it has a camera, Bluetooth, etc.

This just aint fair to do to us!! :angry: Cheap bastards.

 

[Julius]

the dreamcast - 'a weaker machine' if you class a 128-bit system which could pull fantastic model3 & naomi ports off as weak then you are a craaaazy man.

And davec is just bringing this thread down with his 1 track rantings.

Be constructive or be gone.

​

Which is due to the 3d GPU of the Dreamcast which is basicly useless for emulation, and the CPU itself is certainly weaker than a 250mhz Arm9.

And btw, the GPU of the Dreamcast is also more or less useless for Homebrew developers as well, since it doesn't support OpenGL (only some obscure special system).

(and to be honest, those Dreamcast 3d games arn't really that good looking from a technical point of view, they are just done by really good developers that could work around the limitations, which in turn could be made for the GPx2 also, theoreticly And a software 3d renderer looks just as good on a small screen.)

 

[x68000]

i doubt they could look that good on a gpx2!! if shenmue 1&2 becomes available i'll shit myself!

dreamcast came out in 1998, ps2 1999 - and for the first year or two after the ps2's launch, the dreamcast wasgraphically as good as if not better. The likes of soul calibur, shenmue, and all the countless AM2 conversions still look stunning. Dreamcast is still a current generation console remember

 

[sir diggy]

I lived off of Dreamcast in college.
(Ate it rather than breakfast before class)

I got 2.3mil on SkateHeaven in TonyHawk2. Would love to do it again on a GPwhatever.

 

[Julius]

Well thats my point we are unlikely to get any new systems emulated with this.

​

Ahh so we actually agree, that faster CPU or not it will not change much?


Quoted from x68000:

course we will. Mega cd, pc engine super/arcade cd, x68000, further mame development to name but a few - have faith

Ok didn't think of those, but some of them are maybe also possible on the GPx2, don't know enought about these systems.

How can the Giz get away with 400 Mhz then? Those damn things dont cost that much PLUS it has a camera, Bluetooth, etc.

Initial price of the Gizmondo: 229 UK pounds (sorry couldn't find a quick US dollar figure).
That is about twice as much as the Gpx2, and sorry but that advertisement supported version of the gizmondo doesn't count.


Edit: Yes the dreamcast is an awesome machine, and I still use it quite often (and the homebrew community is nearly as nice as that of the GP32), but from a pure technical point of view it isn't better than the GPx2 (well except for the hardware texture renderer, which is great on a TV, but nor really that noticable on a 320x240 display).

 

[sir diggy]

I'd pay that for PS1/N64 emulation. You wouldn't?

 

[Jarska333]

I'm wondering, if the "cheaper than GP32" refers to the launch price of GP32, or what it was selling for just a week ago on GBAX, and earlier on lik-sang?

How much would you people pay for portable SNES?

 

[no_skill]

they are no_skill....

i dont think they set up a "customer suggestions" site and dont hear to what we are saying...

@ Jarska333: post it @ customer suggestions

​

gbax already takes preorders and it kinda makes me think that the new gp32 is almost being shipped. thus i think they won't have time to add any new features. software things maybe, but i guess the hardware design is done.

 

[Julius]

I'd pay that for PS1/N64 emulation. You wouldn't?

​

N64 emulation isn't going to happen unless it is a 1ghz cpu or something like that.

And PS1? Well I am surely not paying much more for that, unless the system was basicly a portable PS1 with perfect emulation (including controllers etc), and that just isn't going to happen.

 

[Hanz™]

Ahh so we actually agree, that faster CPU or not it will not change much?

Yes it would. A PSX may be able to be partially emulated with a 400+mhz CPU but it wouldn't be able to be with a 200+mhz one.
I remember there was an emulator called Connectix VGS (the one that sony bought heh heh heh) that ran pretty well on a 266mhz PC - it did not require a GPU and was I think more compatible and faster than Bleem ever was.

Edit: obviously having no floating point processor will mean you would need a greater processor than was needed by a PC...

 

[WarmFluffyUK]

Sounds like some people want an open source PSP.

Actually I'm using a PSP to write this!

 

[shinneri]

How much would you people pay for portable SNES?

​

About the same as what I payed for my BLU ($180... and $20-30 shipping).

And yes, if PS1 was possible, I'd be willing to pay a good bit more.

 

[no_skill]

Very interesting. And a bit disappointing.

The PSP is better hardware for the money - for those who don't realize it, the PSP also has 2 CPU's - ask Squidge. And both can go faster than the GPX2's. PSP also has more versatile controls, the screen is nearly an inch bigger, and it has many commercial games as well as homebrew. And for those who have not experienced the latest emus on PSP yet - they are incredible (much better than GP32 & Zodiac's), and it's only been a few months since emus were dev'd for PSP.

Speaking as someone who was just playing some PCE-Engine CD games and NeoGeo CD games at full speed, full screen on PSP, it's hard to warm up to the PCX2. Too little too late IMO. The only good thing here is keeping compatability with the GP32. But honestly, the PSP is still better. I may sell my BLU and get a GPX2 out of sheer curiosity, but it's not any real competition to the PSP, neither commercially or for homebrew.

​

psp really is an option for homebrew/emulators?
i thought about getting one. the commercial games look interesting too. i'll wait some time after the new gp32 is released and sort things out. maybe they've got something that really makes me get the gp32, but with the current specs it doesn't look like that.