250°

Nintendo 64 vs. PlayStation 1: Which Console is More Powerful (In Terms of Tech Specs)

The N64 and the PS1 were major rivals in the world of gaming. So which one actually had the better technical specs?

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com
oakshin1903d ago

N64 but over the years it was obvious ps1 demo disk had more legs then the whole N64 library

AspiringProGenji1903d ago (Edited 1903d ago )

Can confirm. I had a 64 with some great games and I borrowed a PS1 with a demo disk and somehow it was more fun playing those games then Imagining the rest of the game in my sleep lol

naruga1903d ago (Edited 1903d ago )

N64 was nt more powerful ...a lot of silicon capabilities were not available by N64 (in contrary to PS1 that was a powerhouse even PCs couldnt port its games properly) , it just created the illusion of better graphics by almost not having pixels ...N64 games nowdays seem like crap in front of the very well aged PS1 games ....and lets not talk about library... day to night differences in term of quality and quantity of course ....the only advantage N64 had over PS1 was the hype of the nintnedo fans that were untrustful toward newborn PS that time , and so showed some support to the nintedo console ....as for the PS1 demos literally were more fun and had more content than the whole N64 library

oakshin1903d ago (Edited 1903d ago )

Back in the 90s if you worked at blockbuster you would get 5 free rentals a week and free consoles from people bring them back saying they was broke for refund knowing damn well they just wonted there money back so I got alot of free games and consoles in that time period

_SilverHawk_1903d ago

The ps1 vs the n64 reminds me of the ps2 vs the gamecube because the Nintendo systems were released later than the playstation systems with seemingly better specs but the playstation systems displayed a lot of games surpassing what was seen on the Nintendo systems.

indysurfn1903d ago

I've owned every major console. Not a fanboy of Sony but I would still have to say Sony PS1 even though it was no where near as powerful as N64 would be the console I would buy if I could only have one. Anyone remember a little game that the VERY ANNOUNCEMENT of coming to PS1, PS1 #1 in sales? It was called Final Fantasy VII. Enough said.

Imalwaysright1903d ago

_SilverHawk_

What a load of crap. Gamecube wasn't just more powerful than the PS2. It was almost as powerful as the original Xbox and was far more powerful than the PS2 https://www.youtube.com/wat...

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1903d ago
indysurfn1903d ago

I like the love of the Demo disk but it was not better than the N64 library. That is being ridiculous. I remember buying something just so I could get a Final fantasy demo disc. And a couple other final fantasy games. Unless you are a fanboy that missed out on N64 games, you know your going over the top.

rainslacker1903d ago

Depends on when you played the demo disc. The N64 had some dry years, and some of those PS1 demo discs you could play for hours. Especially the PSM demo discs.

Segata1903d ago

More even than marketing would have you know. Raw specs show N64 is but, in reality, one did some things better than the other and vice versa. Saturn is a misunderstood system as being less powerful. It actually could do quite a lot but it was just a pain in the ass so most didn't do the extra work. I don't think any of them had one standing clearly over the others in power. N64's biggest downfall is no CD-Rom.

Vee770391903d ago

At the time I believe not having a CD rom is why i liked the n64 at the time being able to jump in a game quicker for a cartridge was the selling point for me plus its nintendo so. If your cd rims got scratched up it took forever for a game to load some time 10 to 15 minutes

AspiringProGenji1903d ago

There were cons with CD room but allowing bigger games and worlds sure made up for all of that

indysurfn1903d ago

Vee77039 You right isnt it great that we are turning full circle? Nintendo SWITCH I can already start a game back up in 3 seconds. And soon with PS5 and XseriesX we will be doing the same thing. No loading screens and starting my SWITCH when I start Playing Dragon Quest XI at lunch is a game changer! And then instant turn it off without losing a second! Soon this will be on ALL the major players! (I said MAJOR Stadia, be quiet)!

indysurfn1903d ago (Edited 1903d ago )

Speaking of kicking Stadia......:
PS5 is not out YET.....But it already has it's place at the top of the N4G page. (because its here to stay)---
Xbox SeriesX is not out YET...But it already has it's place at the N4g Page. (because its here to stay)---
Stadia is OUT!!!!......But it does NOT have a place at the top of N4G. (because....it may not be here to stay) ---

rainslacker1903d ago

Saturn wasn't particularly hard to code for, it just had a lot of things it could do because of all the processors, so you had to know what they were to utilize them. If you knew this, then the Saturn was kind of a godly system for it's time. PS1 surpassed it with game content, but Saturn had better 2D/3D combinations than PS1 did. PS1 did some other things really well, like overlays of different types of media, and it had better streaming of assets features than Saturn, which kind of required everything to be in memory to use.

Segata1902d ago

Saturn was difficult because of 2 things. The coprocessors and it didn't use polygons. It used quads instead of triangles. In theory that is better but in practice it's less practical and takes a lot more work. Saturn also while capable, was very difficult to get transparencies working. Most gave up even SEGA at times and used a mesh instead. Some games like Mega Man 8 use them. Now as for 2D. That is the one area Saturn truly shined over both. Any 2D fighting game on Saturn VS PS1. PS1 always had fewer frames and worse coloring. Saturn was also Nvidia's introduction to a GPU market on PCs as well. It didn't do well because of it using Quads.

rainslacker1902d ago

You're talking about specific things that if you wanted to do them, the system had to jump through hoops to make happen. That's like saying the PS4 is difficult to code for because it can't do ray-tracing. That's not really what it means when you talk about difficulty to code for. If used in the way it was intended, it was pretty straight forward. Yes, it had a lot of processors, but they all did what they were supposed to do, and when thought out, could deliver results. 3D, yeah it wasn't the best, but when trying to integrate 2D with 3D, which wasn't uncommon for it's life span, it did better than the PS1. PS1, as I said, did other things well, and was also easy to code for.

howiewowwee1903d ago

it's a mario vs. snake thing.

anonymousfan1903d ago

Yup I think their success was far more due to their gaming libraries than respective power.

indysurfn1903d ago

Actually it was a ANNOUNCEMENT that FFVII was swithcing over to Sony. Snake was not the big name yet, Not until it got good ratings and every thing became about Konami. It was Square that spiked the sales. But after Snake came out is when it was a system seller. The biggest Gun at the time was SQuare then the EA, Konami, Capcoms. grand theft auto's.

jeenyus1903d ago

If you're new to these it's fine. But if you know the consoles, everyone knows N64 was far more powerful and only its cartridge was beneath PSX's specs.

rataranian1903d ago

The PS demo disk should be put in a museum of awesomeness.

chrisx1903d ago

Soul blade trailer, Porsche challenge...who could forget code name: Tenka? I played that disc countless times

Show all comments (40)
60°

Valve Makes Up for Steam Deck Repair Delay by Gifting Free Game

Valve gave a user Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 for free as compensation for the long wait during their Steam Deck repair.

170°

Sony Aims To Sell 15 Million PS5 Units This Year, but Is Shifting Focus to Monthly Active Users

Sony CEO Hiroki Totoki and CFO Lin Tao talked about the state of the PlayStation business and the strategy and targets going forward, including how they're responding to the tariffs.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
1Victor2d ago

I wonder how the USA tariffs war will affect that projection. 🤔

S2Killinit2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I think they take that into consideration when they announce their projections. Currently, after the xbox price increase, the PRO is cheaper than the series x! That is ridiculous, and it can’t last.

darthv722d ago

you keep saying that but the price of a PS5 Pro is S699.99 (US) and the price of a Series X is $599.99 (US)

S2Killinit2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

The series x with 2 TB storage space is more expensive than PS5 PRO which also has 2 TB storage space.

darthv722d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Oh so you are pitting a regular Pro with a special edition X... got it. If you are going so far as trying to compare apples to apples... please add in the optical drive and stand to the Pro. Seeing as the X has both of those by default.

I will help you if you are unable to do so.
PS5 Pro 2tb: $699.99, Optical Drive: $79.99, Stand: $29.99 = $809.97
Xbox Series X Galaxy Black Special Edition 2TB: $729.99

2d ago
S2Killinit1d 16h ago (Edited 1d 16h ago )

The PS5 PRO has 2TB storage. The series X with 2TB storage and much weaker, is… more expensive! So yeah, Im pointing out that fact.

Also, the PRO does not require a stand.

Ps: regular series 2TB is $749 (where did u get 729?)

darthv721d 14h ago

Its right here on the official XB site: https://www.xbox.com/en-US/...

Okay, so no stand for the Pro, but you might still want the optical drive. So $779.98 vs $729.99. A properly outfitted Pro is still more $$ than a 2tb X.

S2Killinit1d 1h ago (Edited 1d ago )

Do I need to mention that the series x is not nearly as powerful as the PS5 PRO?

And no, the PS5 PRO runs just fine without a drive, and people don’t have to buy the drive right away, assuming they want it.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1d 1h ago
drivxr2d ago

I wonder why they are shifting focus to MAU.

RaiderNation2d ago

Because that's where the real money is made, in microtransactions.

Profchaos2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

People are spending less time playing is a typical trigger for this.

The less time spent playing the less likely you are to spend more money on games and services including subs or even the next console.

Increased engagement equals more money.

2d ago
DarXyde2d ago

Same reason Microsoft does it: it looks better to investors and it's a solution when unit sales slow down.

Personally, I'm not a fan of this metric; and by using it, you're kind of signaling that you're moving into the "This is a PlayStation" era.

Z5011d 20h ago

Because the PS4 also has users and not necessarily sales

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1d 20h ago
2d ago
2d ago
310°

Sony Announces Large Profits Growth for PlayStation; Expects Further Wins in Current Fiscal Year

Sony announced its financial results for the fiscal year 2024, and things are certainly looking up, despite a decline in PS5 sales.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
CrimsonWing692d ago

Expect sh*t to slow down if prices aren’t kept in check.

Redgrave2d ago

Who downvotes the truth?

Even PSN itself is too damn high.jpg

S2Killinit2d ago

Gamepass is already at 20$ per month if im not mistaken.

toxic-inferno2d ago

@neutralgamer1992

Not all of us. I'm a big PlayStation fan, and have been since the PSOne. But I can't begin to defend what's happening currently.

At least Nintendo release a large number of games from their major franchises. Sony is just not banking on their established franchises, and yet are raising prices. Not great.

S2Killinit2d ago

Im pretty sure we are going to see a price increase for PRO. I mean think about it, its currently cheaper than xbox series x! That cannot last.

Eonjay2d ago

I'm absolutely sure we will not see a price increase. I don't think we should 'expect' to see price increase because it just adds validity to what Nintendo and Microsoft have done.

darthv722d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Sorry to pop that bubble but the Pro is not cheaper than a series x... generally speaking (like you are). It is cheaper than one specific version, and doing so by not including the optical drive and stand like the X has by default.

So keep on trying to convince people you are right when everyone knows it's quite the opposite. A stock Pro is $699.99 and a stock X is $599.99. A special edition galactic black 2tb X is $729.99. And if you really want to compare apples to apples... adding the aforementioned optical drive and stand brings that Pro to $809.97 and then they would be on equal footing.

Twisting truths to fit a narrative... I expect better from you S2.

S2Killinit1d 16h ago (Edited 1d 16h ago )

The PS5 PRO has 2TB storage. And the series X with 2TB is more expensive. Which in my opinion is insane conseidering how much more powerful the PRO is. The PS5PRO does not need a stand, it can be used without a stand.

TheKingKratos2d ago

So the Pro is not offering any push in sales at all ?

CrashMania2d ago

It's still an expensive, niche product ultimately. And they exceeded their sales projections for units sold by half a million.

lawox2d ago

"18.5 million units have been shipped during the full fiscal year. This is actually ahead of the 18 million units target set by the company."

They beat their yearly estimate. It's not broken down by device, but it's clearly performing well enough. Since it's been released it's consistently been the second best selling SKU on Amazon only after the the Slim with disc.

2d ago
Bathyj2d ago

18 million a year is in the toilet?
I remember when 10 was considered good
Hell Microsoft would take that right now.
Probably pay $100b for it.

2d ago
BeHunted2d ago

If their profits fall next quarter, we'll probably see more price hikes. I can't imagine having to pay £20 a month for PlayStation Plus.

S2Killinit2d ago

I think gamepass is already paying that much.

2d ago
drivxr2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Decline in hardware sales.
Behind on lifetime sales and decline in first party sales.
Third party content and PSN came through to save the day.
Things will improve starting with the next Ghost game.

Hopefully a steady flow of first party content by end of '25

rlow12d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I guess you get downvoted for stating facts from Sony’s own lips. What I’m curious about is what their top games of the year were and how much Xbox games contributed to the increase?

CrashMania2d ago

Well, generally 3rd party publisher games contribute the most anyway, so no different to capcom, EA and so on contributing to this figure.

lawox2d ago

That's because the report is actually really good.

They beat the console sales estimate that they set last year March, they have increased users both due to the record numbers of PS4 users and strong PS5 sales which is leading to great profits in sales and user spend.

This report is about the financial health of the PlayStation brand and as a platform PlayStation is stronger than ever. Heck they even have Microsoft putting their biggest franchises on the platform.

2d ago
S2Killinit1d 15h ago (Edited 1d 15h ago )

Well, the facts in the article are positive. Nothing wrong with his comment, but in my opinion it doesn't correctly indicate all the facts and nuances that give context to the reality of things. I downvoted for that only.

Make sense?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1d 15h ago
Lightning772d ago

This is exactly what happened to Xbox year's ago. They had no first party and started seeing decline in 1st party sales, which effected their third party games which eventually effected their console sales. A slow decline across the board.

Calm down PS fans I'm not saying PS is becoming like old Xbox. I'm showing examples of the importance of first party output. Look how Xbox finally has compelling first party and things are on a up swing(despite years going on a downswing). I know thanks to PS releases which helps a ton, (which is why Xbox hardware only dropped 6% instead of 30+% like it usually does) The point still stands despite what Genz Trends may go, first party and compelling games sell hardware and software still. Sony's financial quarter is an example of this, of what lower First party output looks like.

No matter they'll be right back on track in due time any time especially with DS2 (not my type of game but I know many like it) and Yotei. They're not Xbox and let things get bad for so many years on end.

crazyCoconuts2d ago

"I'm showing examples of the importance of first party output. "
First party is mostly relevant for the sole purpose of creating EXCLUSIVES that are needed to stay competitive. With Xbox consoles collapsing and no more Xbox exclusives, first party is way less important. PlayStation as a platform now has free reign to profit without the high expense of needing exclusive first party titles.

red2tango2d ago

Sony has been very lazy with 1st party games compared to the PS4 era. And even the PS4 era was nothing compared to the PS3 era in terms of games.

S2Killinit1d 15h ago (Edited 1d 15h ago )

We have Ghost and Intergalactic coming. And then Marathon which is not exclusive to PlayStation. I think Covid and that chip shortage put a speedbump in game development because game manufacturers dont want even more risk that their game will arrive to too little hardware, but the games are starting to show up.

Lightning772d ago

"With Xbox consoles collapsing and no more Xbox exclusives, first party is way less important."

Absolutely not. If that was the case then Nintendo would put Mario on Sega Genesis and Sonic on Super Nintendo. I know things are way different 30+ years later but not much has really changed in terms of exclusives and their impact on hardware. Especially early in the console life cycle.

Sony made all the money this quarter handover fist. Profits isn't a issue for them right now. I was just saying lower hardware sales and lower first party sales will hurt them or any console manufacturer of they don't have the compelling games in the long run. Just like it hurt Xbox. IF Sony keeps up not having lower first part output. Which we know they're not.

crazyCoconuts2d ago

Well no big exclusives in the last two years yet PS is doing great. What are people gonna do? Buy an Xbox?

S2Killinit1d 15h ago

I agree with you. But they have had plenty of exclusives so far. Has it been ideal? Nope. I have a feeling we are seeing a resurgence with the effects of covid and that chip shortage now behind us.

Lightning772d ago

No it's just like 360 where they had no games yet ppl still bought it because they sold ppl on the games early on that gen the fans were locked in and invested. They were riding the good will and was dubbed the shooter, racer box. The games dried up and they never recovered from it which hurt them in the long run. Same here with PS they still make the big bucks because they had games early on and the fans locked in and will continue to lock in for a little while longer despite lacking in first party.

S2Killinit1d 15h ago (Edited 1d 15h ago )

I agree. But the problem with xbox was that for some crazy reason MS thought game development wasnt all that important to a platform holder. They literally did not fund games with their own studios. When they lost marketshare they couldnt justify paying for exclusives with large install bases making it too expensive. That is not the scenario with PlayStation.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1d 15h ago
Show all comments (46)