Atari Jaguar vs the Nintendo 64

[Atari forever!]

None. At all.

 

Jaguar - 64-bit data bus, rated at 106.364 megabytes/second (Jaguar faq, almost certainly wrong)

 

N64 - 9-bit data bus at 500 Mhz providing 562.5 MB/s peak bandwidth (wiki, possibly wrong)

 

 

Interesting. One would have thought that the Jaguar's ability to process data 64 bits at a time would give it some advantage over a system which could only process 32 bits in one instruction. But I am no techie, and have no clue how these machines actually work.

 

As for speed, here is what Atari wrote in a Jaguar catalog, probably from late 1994: "Bus Bandwidth (Megabytes/Sec.): 106.4 (compared to 3DO's 50 Megabytes/Sec). And an incredible 850 million pixels-per-second rendering speed (compared to 3DO's 64 million pixels per second)."

 

Atari was obviously saying that (for the time at least) their machine was pretty fast, even when compared to the 3DO.

 

As for graphics, obviously the N64 beats the Jaguar, but there are times when I don't see a difference. Try playing Zero 5 on the Jaguar, get into a major shootout with one of those HUGE texture-mapped polygon-based spaceships, look at the stuff exploding around you, the light effects, and the cool techno-music (ala Tempest 2000) blaring through, and not the SLIGHTEST bit of slowdown, and ask yourself: can the N64 do this any better?

[LinkoVitch]

Depends on your definition of 'process'.. The Jag can Blit (copy) 64 bit wide chunks of data back and forth in RAM.. it can pull in 64 bit wide chunks of data to paste to the screen..
There ends it's 64bit wide data processing..

 

the 2 RISC CPU's are 32 bit cores, they read/write in 32bits.. the DSP only has a 16bit databus to main RAM too..

 

64bits is the width of the bus, not the speed. 32bit bus may be half the width, but if the clock rate is more than double that of your 64bit bus it's going to shift a lot more data. I am not 100% but I am pretty sure modern computers until recently were mainly 32bit and running at GHz speeds... 64bit DOESN'T instantly make a system more powerful, it just means it can push a larger amount of data along in a single instance.

 

I'd also not believe any marketing hype produced.. Unless both platforms are rendering exactly the same thing it's not a valid comparison. One may be rendering a perfectly flat image and the other a texture mapped light source 4000 face object.

[Bill Loguidice]

 

As for speed, here is what Atari wrote in a Jaguar catalog, probably from late 1994: "Bus Bandwidth (Megabytes/Sec.): 106.4 (compared to 3DO's 50 Megabytes/Sec). And an incredible 850 million pixels-per-second rendering speed (compared to 3DO's 64 million pixels per second)."

 

Atari was obviously saying that (for the time at least) their machine was pretty fast, even when compared to the 3DO.

 

As for graphics, obviously the N64 beats the Jaguar, but there are times when I don't see a difference. Try playing Zero 5 on the Jaguar, get into a major shootout with one of those HUGE texture-mapped polygon-based spaceships, look at the stuff exploding around you, the light effects, and the cool techno-music (ala Tempest 2000) blaring through, and not the SLIGHTEST bit of slowdown, and ask yourself: can the N64 do this any better?

 

Obviously, then, there are other bottlenecks at play, because we didn't see a real world performance gap between the Jaguar and 3DO, except in situations where the 3DO was poorly programmed. In fact, in many ways, thanks to its much larger game library and greater third party support, the 3DO was able to showcase superior capabilities to the Jaguar. So clearly, there were other things at play.

 

Zero 5 is a tough comparison to make. It's definitely one of the Jaguar's more impressive games, with all of its rendering capability thrown into the in-game objects rather than environments (good call in my opinion). Honestly, though, I see nothing in that that the Nintendo 64 couldn't replicate and do better (textures, additional polygons, etc.), but again, to be fair, that's what the Nintendo 64 was DESIGNED to do. What the Jaguar really needed to demonstrate "superiority" was a balls-to-the-wall, big budget, big concept, 2D game, something we never got either.

[Atari forever!]

Linko: I appreciate that information. It is very helpfull.

 

Bill: you make good points. As far as a "big concept" 2D game on the Jaguar, for those who insist that Alien vs. Predator is 2D because it uses sprites and not polygons, well, there you have it. It is quite an impressive game, coming from 1994. It makes players feel like they are in a movie. Plus, there is NO slowdown. You can stand on Level 1, among all those aliens and oil crates (with the cheat on), blow them all up, lots of stuff is going on on-screen, but it doesn't slow down a bit. And though the Marine moves slowly, the Alien moves really fast, and it never gets choppy. Pretty impressive for 1994, when Nintendo was still working on building their 64-bit machine.

 

And as for Zero 5, if the N64 was designed to do stuff like that and the Jaguar was not, yet there we have Zero 5, playing and sounding as it does on the Jaguar, that's pretty impressive. If I'm not mistaken, even the N64 sometimes experiences slowdown, but look at Zero 5 on the old Atari Jaguar: no slowdown at all no matter how hectic it gets and no matter what music is being played.

 

So the Jaguar had the potential to do that kind of stuff. Just, sadly, lots of developers didn't deliver the goods.

[JagChris]

What Bill said. Also like what Kskunk said that 3DO was underpowered compared to the Jaguar, but Tripp was a software guy and made sure the development enviroment was really good. This is why we seen more out of the 3DO than the Jaguar.

 

 

But comparing the Jaguar to the N64, well there are only going to be a few obscure things liike 2D sprites the Jaguar will be able to run with the N64 on. And flexibility.

 

 

[108 Stars]

AvP again.... it's a nice game, but technically I find Doom way more impressive. AvP does not slow down, but it doesn't have the same smooth movement Doom has to begin with, I explained this before somewhere, hard to describe... AvP feels like you are moving on a grid, field to field like those old dungeon crawlers, just with more steps inbetween. That's why it appears the slow marine is choppier than the fast Alien. Doom on the other hand feels like pixel perfect smooth movement. Also in AvP the stuff in the distance quickly disappears into blackness which doesn't happen like that in Doom. Add to that that they did not manage to include accurate hit detection, resulting in your weapons hitting the wall when you clearly aim beside it.

 

Honestly, I find AvP not to be an impressive feat on the Jaguar.

Stuff like Zero 5 or Phase Zero show the Jag's potential. Rayman. But then again, on the topic of Jag vs N64 (or 3DO, PlayStation and Sat) even then I don't think any of that couldn't be done as well or better on the other platforms. The early release date and low price point compared to the competition just have to show in the capabilities the system has somehow.

 

Really, not being a programmer I think the Jaguar's true competition is the 32X. I would guess those systems are more comparable in power. And both beat each other in certain genres. The 32X has excellent ports of Virtua Fighter and Virtua Racing 32X, possibly hinting at what Fight for Life and Checkered Flag could have been if they had been coded better. On the other hand 32X Doom suffers from lazy programming, only using one of the 2 CPUs at all, where the Jaguar shines.

Edited November 5, 2013 by 108 Stars

[Bill Loguidice]

Doom being brought up again... I think what's unfortunate is that clearly Doom wasn't optimized fully (it was famously a fairly quick port), but was still excellent and pointed to what should have been more games like that, only better. We never did see more and in fact it can be argued that from a technological standpoint (and to tie back to the original topic), Doom 64 on the Nintendo 64 was even better. Again, the Jaguar was a victim of circumstance, never really having a chance to shine, and, when it did (for instance with Zero 5), it was the end. (On a side note, my personal favorite Jaguar game is, of all things, Wolfenstein 3D. I love the updated audio-visuals.)

[Crazy Climber]

That was Buddybuddies. Last thing I heard from him was he was selling his collection.

BUDDYBUDDIES! Thats right! Yeah, he was a bit of a speed collector...they usually cash out after a year or two of serious spending.

[+Gemintronic]

The Jag is for playing. I pity the foo who picks up a CD for $500 dollars and then later gets bored of collecting.

[108 Stars]

The Jag is for playing.

Someone should have told Atari Corp that before they let all the trash get through QA that they did.^^

[+Gemintronic]

Someone should have told Atari Corp that before they let all the trash get through QA that they did.^^

 

Nobody respects QA. You're usually treated as a roadblock to release instead of a partner in development.

[Atari forever!]

Doom being brought up again... I think what's unfortunate is that clearly Doom wasn't optimized fully (it was famously a fairly quick port), but was still excellent and pointed to what should have been more games like that, only better. We never did see more and in fact it can be argued that from a technological standpoint (and to tie back to the original topic), Doom 64 on the Nintendo 64 was even better. Again, the Jaguar was a victim of circumstance, never really having a chance to shine, and, when it did (for instance with Zero 5), it was the end. (On a side note, my personal favorite Jaguar game is, of all things, Wolfenstein 3D. I love the updated audio-visuals.)

Yeah, Wolfenstein 3D is one of my top 3 Jaguar games (AvP is number 1). The Jaguar version is easily the best port ever, probably even better than the PC original. Super-smooth, super-fast, and extremely playable, with great in-game music, it's simply a perfect game. (Killing Hitler at the end ain't bad either...)

 

As for 108's argument about the 32X, I think the Jaguar is clearly more powerful. Fight For Life is as technically impressive (I'm not talking gameplay here) as Virtua Fighter on the 32X (though not as nice as the Saturn version). The FFL Beta is even better.

 

And for those who don't get why I bring up Zero 5, watch this:

[108 Stars]

As for 108's argument about the 32X, I think the Jaguar is clearly more powerful. Fight For Life is as technically impressive (I'm not talking gameplay here) as Virtua Fighter on the 32X (though not as nice as the Saturn version). The FFL Beta is even better.

I have to disagree. FFL is so painfully slow, this is something I would not just attribute to gameplay. VF is nice and quick in comparison, and suffers less from slowdown than the Saturn version (which in turn was a dirty port and later made better with VF Remix). The only thing FFL has going for it imo is texture mapping, but I still think VF 32X is technically more impressive.

 

Here's Stellar Assult on 32X; it lacks the textres of Zero 5, but is nice and smooth otherwise.

 

 

Darxide, similar game with texture mapping, but admittedly not as smooth.

 

 

Metal Head would be a nice example of a game for the 32X using texture mapping.

 

 

To be clear, I am not saying the 32X is better than the Jag, it is probably not. But from seeing the systems 3D performance in games I would argue that both should fairly close. At least close than thee Jag would be to a PlayStation or the likes.

Edited November 5, 2013 by 108 Stars

[Andromeda Stardust]

562.5/32 = 17.5 MHz... sounds a little low... (562.5*8)/32 = 140MHz .. sounds feasible... Assuming a full 32bit xfer per clock tick obviously.

140Mhz is one hell of an overclock. The stock CPU runs at 60-something Mhz, I believe.

[Andromeda Stardust]

Yeah, Wolfenstein 3D is one of my top 3 Jaguar games (AvP is number 1). The Jaguar version is easily the best port ever, probably even better than the PC original. Super-smooth, super-fast, and extremely playable, with great in-game music, it's simply a perfect game. (Killing Hitler at the end ain't bad either...)

 

As for 108's argument about the 32X, I think the Jaguar is clearly more powerful. Fight For Life is as technically impressive (I'm not talking gameplay here) as Virtua Fighter on the 32X (though not as nice as the Saturn version). The FFL Beta is even better.

 

And for those who don't get why I bring up Zero 5, watch this:

No offence, but Star Fox 64 blows that game into the next Galaxy. Is that the best 3D Jag can do???

[JagChris]

I never really seen that video of Zero5 before or played the game. Impressive for the Jaguar. Even has some texturing and really nice particle explosions.

 

No offence, but Star Fox 64 blows that game into the next Galaxy. Is that the best 3D Jag can do???

 

 

Since its a first genertion 3D game from those developers on the Jaguar, no it isn't. It's just some of the best we've seen.

Edited November 6, 2013 by JagChris

[NinSEGA]

Darxide, similar game with texture mapping, but admittedly not as smooth.

 

I didn't realize this before, but... DAMN, does that look good for a 32X game.

[Andromeda Stardust]

It's just some of the best we've seen.

Writing's on the wall, man...

[JagChris]

Writing's on the wall, man...

 

Hey fella, don't roll your eyes at me. Don't make me get up....

 

 

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

Hey fella, don't roll your eyes at me. Don't make me get up....

 

 

It's a long drive to my house in Louisiana, LOL! I'm giving you a time out. Now be a good boy, go to your room, unplug your PC, and play Zero 5 on your Jag for at least 64 minutes... |

 

If your controller isn't broken out of frustration, I'll let you into the den and battle you in Mario Kart64! May the best man win...

Edited November 6, 2013 by stardust4ever

[Gregory DG]

Pretty sure Sega had more $$ for development than Atari did back then. Atari was relying on smaller dev houses hoping they'd come up with something amazing while Sega was buying the "wow" factor in their games.

[NeoGeo64]

Yeah, Wolfenstein 3D is one of my top 3 Jaguar games (AvP is number 1). The Jaguar version is easily the best port ever, probably even better than the PC original. Super-smooth, super-fast, and extremely playable, with great in-game music, it's simply a perfect game. (Killing Hitler at the end ain't bad either...)

 

As for 108's argument about the 32X, I think the Jaguar is clearly more powerful. Fight For Life is as technically impressive (I'm not talking gameplay here) as Virtua Fighter on the 32X (though not as nice as the Saturn version). The FFL Beta is even better.

 

And for those who don't get why I bring up Zero 5, watch this:

You're right about the Jag being as technically impressive as the 32X in the 3D department. And to top it off, the Jaguar has WAY better sound. The 32X sounds like shit.

[Gunstar]

No offence, but Star Fox 64 blows that game into the next Galaxy. Is that the best 3D Jag can do???

I still say WHO GIVES A SHIT. The N64 is 3 YEARS NEWER, and OF COURSE it is going to be more powerful; do you really think a console that came out 3 years later wouldn't be much more powerful?!? The mere fact that the Jaguar has games like Zero 5 proves it was a powerful machine for it's day and even comparing Starfox 64 to ANY Jaguar game is nonsense. Why not compare the N64's 007 or Perfect Dark to Dreamcast's Half-Life or the Xbox's Halo and ask if it's the best the N64 can do? Dumb*sses.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Gunstar

[108 Stars]

I still say WHO GIVES A SHIT. The N64 is 3 YEARS NEWER, and OF COURSE it is going to be more powerful; do you really think a console that came out 3 years later wouldn't be much more powerful?!? The mere fact that the Jaguar has games like Zero 5 proves it was a powerful machine for it's day and even comparing Starfox 64 to ANY Jaguar game is nonsense. Why not compare the N64's 007 or Perfect Dark to Dreamcast's Half-Life or the Xbox's Halo and ask if it's the best the N64 can do? Dumb*sses.

I think you missed the point of him just making fun of this whole debate.^^

Edited November 6, 2013 by 108 Stars

[Austin]

Here's Stellar Assult on 32X; it lacks the textres of Zero 5, but is nice and smooth otherwise.

Stellar Assault to me is more impressive. There's not much in the way of texture mapping, sure, but all of the objects seem to be made up of a nice chunk of polygons, and the background is made up of more than a constantly flowing backdrop of stars.

 

And for those who don't get why I bring up Zero 5, watch this:

Honestly, I think games like I-War and Missile Command 3D are more impressive. Zero 5 is a good game, but these other games have more going on. Not just objects and projectiles, but also far more involved backgrounds, and actual rooms and so forth. Zero 5 has some nice texturing here and there while managing to keep a brisk framerate (arguably the best on the Jag when it comes to a 3D game), but there's barely anything else going on outside of a handful of enemy objects. Certain scenes that are fully texture mapped also seem to be relatively small and have little happening outside of the rendered scene (e.g., the polygonal tube scene near the end of the video you linked to).

 

Since its a first genertion 3D game from those developers on the Jaguar, no it isn't. It's just some of the best we've seen.

It could also very well be the best it can do. I think a small group of individuals here tend to be a little too optimistic when it comes to theorizing what the Jaguar is actually capable of.

 

The N64 is 3 YEARS NEWER, and OF COURSE it is going to be more powerful; do you really think a console that came out 3 years later wouldn't be much more powerful?!?

Yeah, I think that's what most of us are trying to get at here. However, there's a small minority still laughably living a twenty year old fantasy that the Jaguar was and still is more powerful than anything else on the market, even compared to platforms years down the line (re: the Nintendo 64).