[flipacholas]

If you check the other articles about the PlayStation [1] and the Nintendo 64 [2], you'll see that the design of a 3D-capable console in the 90s was a significant challenge for every company. Thus, each one proposed a different solution (with different pros and cons), yet all very interesting to analyse and compare. That's the reason this article was written.

[1] https://www.copetti.org/writings/consoles/playstation/

[2] https://www.copetti.org/writings/consoles/nintendo-64/

[m45t3r]

> you'll see that the design of a 3D-capable console in the 90s was a significant challenge for every company.

While this is true, I still think that the PlayStation had the most interesting and forwarding looking design of its generation, especially considering the constraints. The design is significantly cheaper than both Saturn and Nintendo 64, it was fully 3D (compared to Saturn for example), using CD as media was spot-on and also having the MJPEG decoder (that allowed PlayStation to have not only significantly higher video quality than its rivals, but also allowed video to be used for backgrounds for much better quality graphics, see for example Resident Evil or Final Fantasy series).

I really wanted to see a design inspired in the first PlayStation with more memory (since the low memory compared to its rivals was an issue it seemed, especially in e.g.: 2D fighting games where the amount of animations had to be cut a lot compared to Saturn) and maybe some more hardware accelators to help fix some of the issues that plagued the platform.

[ehaliewicz2]

It is not really any more 3D than the Saturn as it still does texture mapping in 2D space, same as the saturn. It's biggest advantage when it came to 3D graphics, aside from higher performance, was it's UV mapping. They both stretch flat 2D textured shapes around to fake 3D.

The N64 is really far beyond the other two in terms of being "fully 3D", with it's fully perspective correct z buffering and texture mapping, let alone mipmapping with bilinear blending and subpixel correct rasterization.

[Grazester]

This should have been no struggle for Sega. They basically invented the modern 3D game and dominated in the arcade with very advanced 3D games at the time. Did they not leverage Yu Suzuki and the AM division when creating the Saturn? Then again rumor has it they were still stuck on 2D for the home market and then saw the PlayStation specs and freaked and ordered 2 of everything in the Saturn.

[JohnBooty]

    This should have been no struggle for Sega. They basically 
    invented the modern 3D game and dominated in the arcade with 
    very advanced 3D games at the time

Way different challenges!

The Model 2 arcade hardware cost over $15,000 when new in 1993. Look at those Model 1 and Model 2, that's some serious silicon. Multiple layers of PCB stacked with chips. The texture mapping chips were from partnerships with Lockheed Martin and GE. There was no home market for 3D accelerators yet; the only companies doing it were folks creating graphics chips for military training use and high end CAD work.

https://sega.fandom.com/wiki/Sega_Model_2

https://segaretro.org/Sega_Model_1

Contrast that with the Saturn. Instead of a $15,000 price target they had to design something that they could sell for $399 and wouldn't consume a kilowatt of power.

Although, in the end, I think the main hurdle was a failure to predict the 3D revolution that Playstation ushered in.

[VyseofArcadia]

In interviews IIRC ex-Sega staff has stated that they thought they had one more console generation before a 3D-first console was viable to the home market. Sure, they could do it right then and there, but it would be kind of janky. Consumers would rather have solid arcade-quality 2D games than glitchy home ports of 3D ones. Then Sony decided that the wow factor was worth kind of janky graphics (affine texture mapping, egregious pop-in, only 16-bit color, aliasing out the wazoo, etc.) and the rest is history.

Nintendo managed largely not-janky graphics with the N64, but it did come out 2-3 years after the Saturn and Playstation.

[ac2u]

It's been years since since I read the book "Console Wars", but if memory serves me correctly SGI shopped their tech to SEGA first before Nintendo secured it for the N64.

[nolok]

Oh I was not criticizing the article per se, my apologies if it came out as such, I just thought this piece of information was important to understand why they ended up with such a random mash of chips.

[flipacholas]

Ah no worries! From my side I was only trying to explain more about the origins of the article, since I see it often mentioned/speculated in many forums.

By the way, I'm always open to criticism ! (https://github.com/flipacholas/Architecture-of-consoles/issu...)

[christkv]

I do wonder what would have happened if the N64 had included a much bigger texture cache. It seemed the tiny size was it biggest con.

[mrguyorama]

The other big problem with the N64 was that the RAM had such high latency that it completely undid any benefit from the supposedly higher bandwidth that RDRAM had and the console was constantly memory starved.

The RDP could rasterize hundreds of thousands of triangles a second but as soon as you put any texture or shading on them, the memory accesses slowed you right down. UMA plus high latency memory was the wrong move.

In fact, in many situations you can "de-optimize" the rendering to draw and redraw more, as long as it uses less memory bandwidth, and end up with a higher FPS in your game.

[rightbyte]

Wasn't the thing you put in the slot infront of the cart a ram extension slot?

I think you can play Rogue Squadron with and without if you want to compare.

Or do youe mean some lower cache level?