Talk:PCSX2

message: PCSX2 is NOT the only PS2 emulator that can play commercial games. There's Play!, which can run several commercial games, and there are others that can as well: hpsx64, NeutrinoSX2, PS2EMU, etc. Might want to re-consider such a statement, as PCSX2 is the only HIGHLY POPULAR PS2 emulator that can run commercial games, but others are catching up. Basically, that statement is simply unverifiable and the contrary is provable.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.108.187.36 (talk) 02:24, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only known PS2 emulator that can run commercial games? Not. 

message: Noticing the argument below between pcsx2 developer Refraction and Oni Lukos, it is also important to clarify that not only is a fast CPU important but also which videocards in a particular series (generation) are optimal.  Since every series (eg Geforce 6 series) has cards running the gamut from weak integrated lowend to immensely more powerful highend we should clarify the cutoff point for which cards in a particular series are ideal for the emulator.
As it stands now these would include for Nvidia: (this is a general rule.  A few games will require more and some games less)
Geforce 6 series: 6800gs and above
Geforce 7 series: 7600gt and above
Geforce 8 series: 8600 and above
Geforce 9 series: 9500gt and above
Geforce 200 series: As of now only highend cards for this series have been release, so pcsx2 is child's play for these monsters
For ATI:
Radeon X1000 series: X1600 and above
Radeon HD 2000 series: 2600 and above
Radeon HD 3000 series: 3650 and above
Radeon HD 4000 series: As of now, only highend cards for this series have been release, so pcsx2 is child's play for these monsters  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.168.24 (talk) 08:22, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, after the argument, I realized that my card wasn't as high-end as I thought. It was, after all, a portable version of a mid/low-end GeForce 7 series, so it probably would not satisfy the requirements very well. I have a GeForce 8600GT M now, so I can try again, but that's still not as good as desktop GeForce 8600GT. Λύκος 14:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Clarification needed on what videocards are acceptable 

message: There is much more information in the Pcsx2 definition.
The two articles are pretty much equivalent now. One of them should be changed to a redirect. Meneth 18:35, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definitely merge this article into the other. 

message: When was the first version released? 86.132.143.245 22:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing info 

message: PCSX2 features online play now.
Even more shocking, it could connect to an *official* monster rancher server, and interaction with people using real PS2's was confirmed.
This link showcases that. Someone please add this to current article,
http://www.pcsx2.net/?p=1#2090  --81.192.40.172 03:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PCSX2 goes online !!! 

message: is it? it doesn't seem to work  —Preceding unsigned comment added by TMV943 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  site shutdown? 

message: With an Nvidia 8600GT 256MB DDR3, PCSX2 0.9.7, GSDX 846 0.1.9 SSE2, SPU2-X 1.4.0 and Lilypad. Framerates without speedhacks are 33-50+ FPS, framerates with EE cyclerate 3 and VU cycle stealing maximum as well as wait loop hack are 60-90+ FPS (in speed) thus making Final Fantasy X playable on low spec dual cores and overclocked Pentium 4s. The framerate does begin to drop as the polygon count rises, but during most of the game the framerate is very consistent and smooth.
For proof (which I know you will demand) search Youtube for "Final Fantasy X Pentium 4" and check the video I posted. I used SPU null in that video [because it's 8% faster] and I'm posting another one soon with sound that is as quick as the SPU null version because I changed the clockspeed from 4 to 4.25 ghz.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dangerousd777 (talk • contribs) 10:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Final Fantasy X playable on a Pentium 4 with Hyperthreading (Prescott) above 3.9 ghz.

message: I would like to notice, that PCSX2 does not work on 64 bit Linux systems!
It works with 32 bit emulation only!(I had it running on Gentoo amd64 bit from under chroot of i686)
32 bit emulation libraries help, but it didn't happen in my case.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.102.114.174 (talk) 22:57, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minimum requirements. 

message: Isn't this section both off-topic, speculative, and in some cases, overtly detailed in side-tracking areas? Discussing AMD vs. Intel is in and of itself a faux-pa in an article not specifically geared for that subject (unless what was referred would be some other publications objective test of performance on specific bits of hardware, of course). It does not have any in-line citations, and it speculatively discusses hardware performance between platforms/pieces of hardware - something which this article is not about. Discussing how the emulator can use threads etcetera is all fine, but going on about certain CPU's versus others is not. I won't edit the article for now, hjowever, someone should sreiously dig into it (the simplest way of doing a "quick and dirty" fix would be to just remove the second half of the "Hardware Requirements" section (i.e. everything but the sentence "Hardware requirements are largely game-dependant although the performance bottleneck of this emulator in most cases is the CPU rather than than the GPU: in short, having a computer with a faster CPU should net you better PCSX2 performance. Some games however may run slower due to unoptimized GFX code or weak GPU cards.")).
81.227.4.20 (talk) 19:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It used to be even longer and more detailed, but I pruned it down to what it is now.  It's still a bit overly detailed, but I don't have a big problem with it.  Intel CPUs are generally faster than AMD CPUs, and it's not controversial to state this in the article.  It could be streamlined into one or two sentences, though. For example:  NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Meh, I'm not so sure. Intel CPU being faster than AMD CPUs is time-dependent, and not an eternal fact; e.g. with the current (early 2014) line up of Intels "Ivy Bridge"/"Haswell" CPUs and AMDs "Vishera"/"Cabini" CPUs, Intel outperforms AMD to almost ridiculous levels (and have been doing that for over a year now), however, back in the Northwood vs K8 days the tables were turned - Intel were struggling like mad with their NetBurst architecture, but just never got around to outperfoming AMD during those times. For that reason, saying that "Intel cpus are generally faster than AMD cpus" doesn't seem to accurate. Further, it is biased to mention brand-names where it is not necessary,. as e.g. here; your sentence "CPU frequency by itself is not a good predictor of performance, as certain CPUs are more efficient than others.  PCSX2 makes extensive use of floating point calculations and limited use of multiple cores, so the Intel Core series will perform better than similar AMD chips" seems heavily biased, as there is no reason top specifically mention neither Intel nor AMD, making the information unnecessary, and it could just as well be written as ""CPU frequency by itself is not a good predictor of performance, as certain CPUs are more efficient than others. Due to it's programming, PCSX2 makes extensive use of floating point calculations and limited use of multiple cores" without loosing any relevant information. For that reason, mentioning brand-names seems unnecessary and fanboyish (to me). 81.227.4.20 (talk) 19:55, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I tried to make the changes, but I was reverted.  Does anyone else have any feelings on the matter?  Personally, I've come to agree with the IP editor above.  This is not the place for advocacy or long, in-depth explanations of CPU trivia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

text: If the issue is between this and this revision, then I agree with the topic creator. The way that was worded is veering off course. Even with the current wording, it is still not completely sourced. « Ryūkotsusei » 22:56, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hardware requirements" 

message: I've just tried searching Wikipedia for information on the PS2emu emulator and found it redirects to this article. Seeing as this is a rival emulator, I wonder if this is some vandalism (or some abuse of marketing). Before I break the redirect, does anyone know why it would redirect (no Talk page on that article)? Was PCSX2 once known as PS2 Emu? Maybe a fork from the project? It isn't mentioned in this page, which is why I'm suspicious... QuickHare (talk) 00:20, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  PS2 Emu Redirection 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on PCSX2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151125071706/http://www.micromart.co.uk/gaming/group-test-retro-console-emulators/1026/retro-console-emulators-group-test-pcsx2-100-review to http://www.micromart.co.uk/gaming/group-test-retro-console-emulators/1026/retro-console-emulators-group-test-pcsx2-100-review
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:22, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Ps 94.129.68.50 (talk) 03:52, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ps 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:07, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:07, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Saw a funny debate over the revision notes, looked around and it got me wondering: is PCSX2 actually "available" on Mac/XBox or not? It looks like MacOS only has a nightly/beta version and no actual full, proper release like Windows or Linux which is curious since it has been around for a while. XBox is also a funny case because its version is a universal Windows application so basically a PC app running on a console, seems to be PCSX2 but put over to console, bu is not named PCSX2 and is a separate fork. Pretty weird. GallantUndertaker769 (talk) 23:22, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Available on Mac, XBox?