One bleak opinion of PSP:

Goodbye, Sony PSP
http://videogames.yahoo.com/feature/goodbye-sony-psp/1276225

@MikeB

Quote:

Uncharted: Drake's Fortune launched in time for Christmas 2007, by many considered to be the best looking console game (amongst others like Metal Gear Solid 4, but MGS4 mostly for other reasons). I think we are going to see more 1080p PS3 games in the future when 1080p HDTVs considerably outsell 720p sets and of course due to ever maturing game engines.

Just to put it out there once more:

I do agree and believe (and I think I have been pretty consistent in this) PS3 will eventually "max" out higher than Xbox 360. It is just taking longer and results are not that all consistent.

Maybe in Xbox 360s final year or two it will finally look consistently least impressive? Will that help Sony before the next generation launches?

Amongst hardcore gamers, it might. Those who are looking for the best performance, like on Xbox 1. OTOH, many hardcore gamers really like Live, so Sony better improve on PSN/Home.

As for the larger audience, I think Sony needs to lower the price and go for the slimline soon. If Microsoft can match or better that, Sony will have a hard time passing Xbox 360. If Microsoft can not match that, and Sony can do their trickery right, then the second place is attainable of course.

Winning Wii? I think that would require Nintendo replacing it soon (and Sony forging on with PS3 for a decade) or its sales bombing suddenly. Otherwise the momentum Wii enjoys will probably keep it in the lead at least for its active run this generation.

My guess is Sony will try a less of a leap for PS4 just to keep up with the competition and to release sooner. New Cell, new GPU, more memory, BD? The market just doesn't seem to reward for late entry with a more expensive/faster box (see Xbox 1 and PS3 as recent examples).

@jtsiren

Quote:

As for the larger audience, I think Sony needs to lower the price and go for the slimlinOne soon. If Microsoft can match or better that, Sony will have a hard time passing Xbox 360. If Microsoft can not match that, and Sony can do their trickery right, then the second place is attainable of course.

One item floating around is the 360 Jasper replacement named Valhalla. This rumor is a unified CPU/GPU chip on 65nm or 45nm. The reduction in power and unification would allow to further cut costs and produce their own slimline model. IMO they should wait a slimline Xbox360 to launch 1 year before the Xbox3. Then Microsoft could have a low end competitor and a high end console. Kinda like how Sony treats the PS2 and PS3 currently.

@Hammer

Quote:

Toshiba Spurs engine doesn't have a PPE core. It uses the host's CPU i.e. Intel Core 2. Toshiba Spurs engine is pretty useless since ATI CAL (part of Catalyst 8.12 driver package) and NV CUDA (via Badaboom 1.1; now supports both main profile and baseline profile) supports H264 transcoding. RoadRunner is pretty useless in personal computing market . One can use NVIDIA GT260/GT280 in lanparty and run Linpack to beat that score. But since you started HPC discussions, refer to http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1226945999108.html With only 170 Tesla S1070(aka Geforce GT280) enables Tokyo Institute of Technology to enter Top 500 Supercomputers. Unlike PS3's CELL and RoadRunner's CELL i.e. they are not the same , Tesla S1070's GPU is the same core as Geforce GT2x0.

My point was Cell technology is not just being used in PS3s, it's being used elsewhere and indeed it is.

As for GPUs being fast, this is true but they are also less flexible and the individual ALUs run slower than Cell. To run on a GPU your problem has to decompose into thousands of independent threads with minimal branching, you also need a control processor and there is an overhead communicating with it.

Cell on the other hand doesn't need nearly as many threads, data can be shared and branching doesn't hurt nearly as much. There is a control processor built in so the communication overhead is small and you don't always have to use it as the SPEs can run pretty much anything.

_________________
Whyzzat?

@minator

http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/kz2halo32.jpg

Although unfair to Killzone 2 (being higher resolution and far better in motion and has much better and more impressive online) I think this is funny.

@minator

Quote:

My point was Cell technology is not just being used in PS3s, it's being used elsewhere and indeed it is.

Different processing cores and wildly different performance i.e. consumers’ version is far from HTP/server version.

Quote:

As for GPUs being fast, this is true but they are also less flexible

Depends on the GPU. This statement is said for Radeon X1900. Remember, the workloads we are talking about are games related.

After ~4 years of development, how come KZ2 only uses 60 percent of SPE resources?

In HPC front, DX10 GpGPUs are targeting the same markets as CELL. Also, ray-tracing is a not exclusive advantage for CELL anymore e.g. http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/38145/135/

In terms of results , Geforce 8800 GT/9800GT(G92) or Radeon HD 4670(RV730)/4830(RV770) based PC can run console ported games higher than PS3 games i.e. the majority PS3 games are about 720p. Refer to http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241

Quote:

and the individual ALUs run slower than Cell.

DX10 scalar processor array (RV770, CUDA only) has auto-vector nature. Individual ALUs in GPUs run at a lower clock speed. For CUDA GPUs, stream processors from 950Mhz to 1.55Ghz (e.g. Geforce 9700M GT, less than 35 watts).

If Geforce 9700M GT has target goal of 80 watts, the clock speed would be higher.

Quote:

To run on a GPU your problem has to decompose into thousands of independent threads

The purpose of running thousands of threads is to keep the arithmetic intensity at a high level i.e. this is for performance. One can run crap code on CUDA.
With scalar processor array, this links with it's auto-vector nature.

For performance and SIMD approach, you have find dependancies.

Quote:

with minimal branching,

DX10 GPUs was designed to handle shader branching. Branching overheads is dependent on the GPU design.

Quote:

you also need a control processor and there is an overhead communicating with it.

With Fold@Home CUDA, the CPU usage is around 1 to 3 percent from Core 2 duo @ 2.2Ghz. Communication overhead is dependent on the GPU design.

Quote:

Cell on the other hand doesn't need nearly as many threads, data can be shared

Ahem, shared L2 cache banks in G80s.

Quote:

and branching doesn't hurt nearly as much. There is a control processor built in so the communication overhead is small and you don't always have to use it as the SPEs can run pretty much anything.

How come SPEs didn't run the same CPU Fold@Home Path? Running normal CPU code will also hurt SPE’s performance, unless you claim SPEs doesn't need optimisations.

Again, the workloads we are talking about are games related.

Are sure you want open up SPEs+RSX vs G92 or RV730/RV770 in gaming workloads?

Last edited by Hammer on 01-Jan-2009 at 01:39 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 01-Jan-2009 at 01:18 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 01-Jan-2009 at 12:01 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 31-Dec-2008 at 11:55 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 31-Dec-2008 at 09:21 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 31-Dec-2008 at 09:11 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 31-Dec-2008 at 08:55 PM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @minator http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/kz2halo32.jpg Although unfair to Killzone 2 (being higher resolution and far better in motion and has much better and more impressive online) I think this is funny.

I wouldn't use that site to wipe my you know what with. While there, make sure to check out their entirely unsubstantiated console 'projections' (no data nor reasons given, but obviously they have much Sony love), and of course, this laughable bit, giving Haze a 10/10.
http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/?cat=17

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@wegster

From http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123069467545545011.html
There's a book on how Sony indirectly funds Microsoft's rival console.

"Playing the Fool" - How Sony inadvertently helped a competitor and lost position in the videogame market.

Quote:

When the companies entered into their partnership in 2001, Sony, Toshiba and IBM committed themselves to spending $400 million over five years to design the Cell, not counting the millions of dollars it would take to build two production facilities for making the chip itself. IBM provided the bulk of the manpower, with the design team headquartered at its Austin, Texas, offices. Sony and Toshiba sent teams of engineers to Austin to live and work with their partners in an effort to have the Cell ready for the Playstation 3's target launch, Christmas 2005. But a funny thing happened along the way: A new "partner" entered the picture. In late 2002, Microsoft approached IBM about making the chip for Microsoft's rival game console, the (as yet unnamed) Xbox 360. In 2003, IBM's Adam Bennett showed Microsoft specs for the still-in-development Cell core. Microsoft was interested and contracted with IBM for their own chip, to be built around the core that IBM was still building with Sony. All three of the original partners had agreed that IBM would eventually sell the Cell to other clients. But it does not seem to have occurred to Sony that IBM would sell key parts of the Cell before it was complete and to Sony's primary videogame-console competitor. The result was that Sony's R&D money was spent creating a component for Microsoft to use against it.

Last edited by Hammer on 31-Dec-2008 at 09:29 PM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @wegster From http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123069467545545011.html There's a book on how Sony indirectly funds Microsoft's rival console. "Playing the Fool" - How Sony inadvertently helped a competitor and lost position in the videogame market.

Thanks, look forward to the book's release. No surprise though, knowing sadly how IBM 'works' :-/

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@wegster

Doesn't matter, IMO that pic is funny. Maybe the website is run by a XBox fan for all that I know. Two high profile exclusives compared, both about 2 years from release.

Happy new year!

@wegster

Quote:

wegster wrote: @MikeB Quote: MikeB wrote: @minator http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/kz2halo32.jpg Although unfair to Killzone 2 (being higher resolution and far better in motion and has much better and more impressive online) I think this is funny. I wouldn't use that site to wipe my you know what with. While there, make sure to check out their entirely unsubstantiated console 'projections' (no data nor reasons given, but obviously they have much Sony love), and of course, this laughable bit, giving Haze a 10/10. http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/?cat=17

I thought it was funny.

Here's something they didn't include.
Resistance 2: Week 1 US Sales: 237K
Halo 3: Week 1 US Sales: 1,700K

Someone's laughing all the way to the bank.

@BrianK

So? That does not per se proof Halo 3 not to be a heavily overhyped game.

For example Pacman on the Atari 2600 sold over 7 million copies (amongst the console's userbase it sold much better than the Halo series did, attach rate 70%). It's probably the most horrible version of the game out there though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-ot7wUVgyo

Sure Microsoft made some extra money, but they already make plenty of money from their monopoly.

Last edited by MikeB on 01-Jan-2009 at 09:51 AM.

@MikeB

Quote:

So? That does not per se proof Halo 3 not to be a heavily overhyped game.

We're talking Halo3 v R2 for comparison points. Halo3 made more sales and more money than R2. Overhyped or simply better marketed? IMO that choice is a value judgement via the observer. To the business perspective, eg making money, Halo 3 was clearly the better choice.

Quote:

It's probably the most horrible version of the game out there

Videogames are a business. The job of companies is to make money. What companies try to do is find that niche where costs are minimized and profits maximized. This allows them to say around for another year. Certainly the best selling movie, CD, or book are unlikely to be the best written or most innovative. Instead what they are is a fair mix that grabs the widest audience and in turn made the producers the most money.

Is everyone going to run out tomorrow and buy R2 because it may be the one game that makes the PS3 shine above the competition? Nope and the sales prove it.

Does Halo3 not being the best graphics mean it's crap and people won't buy it? Nope and the sales prove it.


Quote:

Sure Microsoft made some extra money, but they already make plenty of money from their monopoly.

Yup you hate Microsoft. We know. Too bad you can't move this mote from your eye and judge the product on it's individuals merits.

@BrianK

Quote:

To the business perspective, eg making money, Halo 3 was clearly the better choice.

Yes, but I don't own Microsoft or Sony stock, so I look at things mostly from a consumer perspective. Pacman on the 2600 may have sold very well, but I would simply have had no use for that game.

@MikeB

Quote:

Yes, but I don't own Microsoft or Sony stock, so I look at things mostly from a consumer perspective. Pacman on the 2600 may have sold very well, but I would simply have had no use for that game.

This isn't a consumer perspective. This is a MikeB's use. There's 1 MikeB so they make consoles not for MikeB but hoping to find a good position in the overall market. Make enough consumers happy that one can churn a profit on the entertainment division. In the case of Pacman maybe it's not MikeBs game but it was 7Million other people's game. In the consumer perspective it was an attractive product.

@BrianK

Quote:

Make enough consumers happy that one can churn a profit on the entertainment division. In the case of Pacman maybe it's not MikeBs game but it was 7Million other people's game. In the consumer perspective it was an attractive product.

I am very certain these people if these people would have had the opportunity to buy a version of Pacman closer to the arcade original fitting their budget they would have.

Last edited by MikeB on 01-Jan-2009 at 04:46 PM.

@Hammer

Quote:

From http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123069467545545011.html There's a book on how Sony indirectly funds Microsoft's rival console. "Playing the Fool" - How Sony inadvertently helped a competitor and lost position in the videogame market.

Unfortunately it appears the WSJ has blown the story out of all proportion.

The PPE in Cell is similar to the cores in the 360's processor but this is based on a respin of an existing PPC research design (nothing to do with the POWER4 or the G5). It appears this was offered to MS but it was always IBM's to offer, it's not the same as offering Cell.

From what I've read MS's original plans were for something more like Cell but IBM talked them into using the PPC cores and they had them modified to add more powerful vector units.

--

It does bring up some interesting questions though. IBM will probably be only too happy to offer Cell to other companies for the next generation, could we see an XBox720 or even a Wii2 with a Cell? Sony will have anew uber Cell and I expect MS may end up going with a cut down Laraabee, however at 32nm the current Cell might be cool enough to go into something like Wii.

_________________
Whyzzat?

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @wegster Doesn't matter, IMO that pic is funny. Maybe the website is run by a XBox fan for all that I know. Two high profile exclusives compared, both about 2 years from release. Happy new year!

Sure, it's funny, but you certainly should care, as you do anything you can to discredit any 'xbox fan sites' for credibility. In this case, with their sheer insanity and pro-Sony 'at all costs', evidenced by giving Haze of all things, a 10 rating....this is akin to if you started a web site and rated XBox games - just zero credibility.

It also looks like KillZone was using movie footage, note the lack of the HUD anywhere? Not exactly a fair comparison, as much as I dislike MS. For all we know, it could be SD in game for the 360, versus 1080p movie clips for Killzone. :-/

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@wegster

Quote:

, evidenced by giving Haze of all things, a 10 rating...

Jeesh Wegster, it's a satire website. And a pretty harmless one at that, no personal attacks or anything like that..

Quote:

It also looks like KillZone was using movie footage, note the lack of the HUD anywhere?

It's all in-game (also cut scenes are rendered in realtime), you don't know much about this game it seems. Having no HUD is a design decision (amount of ammo is shown on the gun's display itself, for example), they want the game to feel as immersive as possible.

Last edited by MikeB on 01-Jan-2009 at 06:58 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

I am very certain these people if these people would have had the opportunity to buy a version of Pacman closer to the arcade original fitting their budget they would have

In the market we have consumers. Consumers have wants, eg the thousand dollar Pac-Man coin-op day on launch in their home. However, the consumer isn't going to pay thousands of dollars. Their want is also to get that game not at thousands of dollars but something reasonable for their budget. If the product isn't a reasonable price then it's not going to sell. Clearly the reason that 7M Pac_Man games for the Atari 2600 sold and 7M additional stand alone coinops did not sell is that the market demand (people willing to pay the price) was greater for the cartidge.