Yes , just that the PS2 and PSP have simillar techonlogy processor not like the AMD and Intel . Thats why we can compare them . Also , the less ammount of VRAM can be compansetad with the smaller resolution , meaning less need of space . Overall the PSP is what Sony wanted . A pocket PS2 .

 PSP is newer than the PS2, so your argument that it's weaker is no supported by the latter part of you comment.

 As for the PSP, it has the same amount of RAM as the PS2, and similar processing speeds. The difference is that the CPU has one vector unit instead of two. This seems like a weakness until you take into account that the vestor units were used for rendering, but would mean greater power consumption. So the PSP transfered half of the rendering to a list of hardware rendering on the GPU. This also includes texture compression, the one thing the PS2 lacked (due to Sony realizing too late the design was incompatible).

 Combine that with the same amount of system RAM and VRAM as the PS2, and the PSP is at least as powerul as the PS2. What kept it before was the CPU speed caps, which didn't hinder shading and texturing (as those are generated by the GPU and hardware rendering), but the polygon count, framerate, and draw distance (which are generated largely by the CPU).

 Now the only thing making the PSP's power not apparent is the low resoution. Yet upscaled screenshots do show graphics as good as they actually are.

I agree with all the parts mentioned up there , except the Vram ... wanst that 4-2 mb to the PS2 ? I dont know where I read it , but I know that it doesnt matters because the resolution difference . Just wandering seeing that you know more about there hardware spec. than me .

I think they should drop the portable from the name and call it a playstation pocket instead, portable just sounds smug, calling it pocket sound more humble, something sony should start being a little bit

Didn't they already have the pocketstation for the PS1?

 Yeah it was ... but it wasnt an Ipod rival for sure lol

The PSP2 when it comes out should IMHO:

• Released worldwide in 2010
• $150-$200 in the US, comparable amounts elsewhere in the world
• Significantly faster processor and GPU with 128-256Mb RAM
• Screen resolution along with external displayable resolution of 720p
• Dual analogue along with additional buttons
• Touchscreen LCD
• 16Gb minimum built in storage with additional storage up from 16Gb-128Gb card slot
• Dual battery core allowing 12 hours +
• Superfast WIFI
• Basic Tilt and Swerve functionality similar to SixAxis while playing on external display
• Backwards compatible with UMD with super slim UMD drive compatible with PSP1 UMD and new enhanced UMD storage allowing 4Gb minimum on one disc.
• Sony creating specialist studios for small budget cheap games to be released at $10 each.

I don't think taking the PSP and tacking on tilt or anything like that is going to fix the problems.

I think in order for PSP2 to be successful, Sony needs a brand-new strategy. I honestly don't know what that strategy is...but it's not just more power and sixaxis.

If Sony wants to keep selling it as a multi-purpose device, it needs to start making a profit on the hardware. I'd also like to see them cut down load times (maybe ditch UMD?)

But all of that is kind of traditional thinking, and I don't think traditional thinking is going to take PSP2 very far against the success of the DS. I don't have the answers, but the question is: how will improving PSP along traditional lines improve its performance against DS?

If Sony wants to make the PSP2 a success, take out the function to play games and just sell for all the reasons people actually buy it, it's secondary functions.

Haha , really funny . What they have to do is what we see in q4 07 and q1 08 ... real games ... not that I dont adore the lineup allready , but thats just me I suppose :?