Have Nintendo Consoles always had weaker hardware than their competitors?

Have Nintendo Consoles always had weaker hardware than their competitors?

Have they always had a cheaper retail price than their competitors?

Wasn't the gamecube the strongest of its generation?

Xbox was but GameCube wasn't too far behind it. PS2 was the weakest of that generation.

If we pretend the Xbox didn't exist, yeah

Why does barely anyone on this board remember the Dreamcast?

>N64
>SNES
>Gamecube, partially

yeah
N64 was the most powerful consumer grade gpu released for like 6 months back in the day

I remembered it, I was just thinking it wasn't worth bringing up because it exited that generation fairly quickly. Nobody was talking about Dreamcast by the mid-2000s.

>>SNES
Not with that shit tier CPU lmao

DC is like in some dimensional void between gens.

And don't even get me started on the Sega Saturn.

Wasn't the N64 stronger than the PS1?

Basic SEGA fuckery
>well make a console even more powerful than the previous gen!
>release it first of the gen and all your competitors have time to make more powerful consoles

Mega Drive, Saturn, DC all suffered from this. They literally made DC to compete against PS1 and N64

>Have Nintendo Consoles always had weaker hardware than their competitors?
t. underage

>the mhz myth in 2017

>NES
>SNES (but blast processing!)
>N64 (arguably)
>GC

No.

>myth

Reminder sonic and blast processing was only created because of how much better the Genesis CPU was in comparison to SNES. You cannot refute this.

What do you mean arguably N64
Aside from cartridges which doesn't really affect the processing power it's the one Nintendo console which actually is by far the most powerful of it's generation

Whose decision was it to make the Wii low-end and why did they continue that trend for a decade with no end in sight?

dreamcast was more powerful

>Mega Drive

Huh? It came out before the Turbografx in America and utterly steamrolled it into obscurity for decades

I remember the let's play of Conker's Bad Fur Day by the devs of that game (which they sadly abandoned years ago without finishing) offering some interesting insight to the N64's tech. One thing they said that really surprised me (to the point where I thought they were joking at first but they weren't) was that cartridges are immensely powerful and have more potential than Blu-ray, but the problem is that they are expensive as fuck to produce so nobody makes games on them anymore.

Yeah and the PS2 as well

DC is 6th gen

The difference between the 68000 and the 65C816 were minuscule compared to the difference between the Genesis VDP and the SNES PPU.

That PL gap between DC and N64 is way too massive to be in the same gen.

>TurboGrafx
>relevant

no one is talking about Jaguar, Neo Geo, 3DO, CDi or the Wonderswan Color either in this thread

So why did a lot of SNES games have slowdowns?

Lower clockspeed and poor optimization. Slowdowns existed on Genesis too.

Because the devs put too much shit on the screen and either didnt give a shit or thought it looked cool

It's not that small, there's a bunch of games that just straight up run slower on SNES than Genesis.
On the other hand, not only could SNES put out better graphics than Genesis could, but the SNES's music solution was much easier to get passable results out of, and was more versatile than the Genesis sound processor in terms of what kinds of music sounded good on it (the Genesis sound processor might've been better at bass-thumpy, heavy songs, but SNES could still do them, while something like Maria and Draco would sound way worse on Genesis no matter what wizardry you pulled).

The Genesis's music was superior, but much harder to use. You could make songs with 5 minute loops if you really wanted to. You can't on the SNES.

I'd believe it like I'm surprised it took this long for a mainline console to go back to carts with the switch.