LouCipher wrote:While I agree that a tegra 2 couldn't handle ps2 emulation, tegra 3 just might. It's going to be a quad-core 1.5ghz part, so it should have the muscle. The real trick iis that pcsx2 is built for x86 hardware, and it would take a lot of work to get it running efficiently on arm. We'll see. I've been following emulation for years, and the general tune is always "system x won't be emulated for decades, the hardware can't handle it", but a couple years later, it can.
PCSX2 wasn't able to use more than two cores before a few days, and now that it does (even if it's not that well), many games still aren't full speed with a quad @ 4.6GHz, with x86/x64 instruction sets and optimizations as well as a much more powerful architecture (a few times faster per clock), an insane bus/memory bandwidth, and a few hundred times faster GPU.
Don't fall into Nvidia marketing tricks, Kal El (Tegra 3) won't be able to handle PS2 emulation, or optimistically, maybe a few 2D games not running close to full speed at best (maybe more possible with a GC emu though, since it's an easier one to emulate), but it does require much more power than a poor Tegra 3 still to run a 3D game at decent framerates.
Any low end C2D will trash Tegra 3 CPU in real world performance (Nvidia lies about it being on par with E7200 are just pathetic - and still, an E7200 is a low end mobile C2D, not able to handle 90% of PS2 games at reasonable speed).
Thanks to Schtruck and Yonghz we can play PSX and N64 already and that's incredibly awesome. We should all wait patiently that we get enough grunt from our smartphones for PS2 and GC emulation, and enjoy what is possible as of now.