On the topic of "Cell" press releases and such...

[Guden Oden]

I don't think we should take the "up to 10x more powerful" statements too seriously. It's too early for Sony to reveal its cards now (particulary not in a Reuters press release I might add), and this device isn't intended for PS3 anyway, so I would expect them to spread a bit of misdirection and such until the time comes for the true announcement.

I have no idea how fast the BB will be, though I definitely expect it to be faster than 64Gflops.

[a688]

I don't think we should take the "up to 10x more powerful" statements too seriously. It's too early for Sony to reveal its cards now (particulary not in a Reuters press release I might add), and this device isn't intended for PS3 anyway, so I would expect them to spread a bit of misdirection and such until the time comes for the true announcement.

I have no idea how fast the BB will be, though I definitely expect it to be faster than 64Gflops.

I don't know about "not intended for PS3" since it's supposed to use the cell processor. Its not going to be a gaming console but it is using tech that is to be used in th PS3 so it that should give some insight into the cell for the PS3. Whats the processor in the TV going to be used for anyways. I'm aware of processors in current TVs but is the cell going to replace them in general or what?

[Fafalada]

I have no idea how fast the BB will be, though I definitely expect it to be faster than 64Gflops.
Even by DM math, the chip would have to be 2x faster (he downgraded P4 performance by half for some reason - no need to guess what).

Of course by this definition, the fastest desktop is a 2ghz PPC970 (8Flops/clock), which gives you 160GFflops by DM(tm) math. If we're nasty and calculate against dual CPU we are at 320, and with some MHZ increase by end of 2004 we could be approaching 512 8)

Of course spinning the PR spin DMs way wouldn't stop there...

[cthellis42]

Frankly, I have no idea what implementation they'd be sticking in a TV, but I have a LOT of confidence in the ability for information to hit "totally uninformative" levels between engineers, PR, and actual PR release, the article writers who probably don't know anything outside of that release but are writing up something anyway, and the fact that "CELL" gets used in many ways, as it can basically be used when talking about the overall architecture and a host of differing chip implementations. Modular stuff is hard to work with anyway, but in this case there aren't even any finished products locked in spec-stone to be mentioned specifically for whatever's being said.

[Guden Oden]

I don't know about "not intended for PS3" since it's supposed to use the cell processor.

Cell isn't a processor, its a processor architecture. Compare with x86 - you have your antaurs and pentiums and crusoes and athlons and etc.

Whats the processor in the TV going to be used for anyways.

MPEG2 decoding and such I would think.

I'm aware of processors in current TVs but is the cell going to replace them in general or what?

Yes. It would run the whole show, including on-screen menus and such.

[Megadrive1988]

ahh good, I was going to ask, if it is likely we'd be seeing any sort of indication on the transistor count for the Cell that Sony is currently sampling.

[Phil]

I thought it had been said numoures times that "CELL" is an architecture, not a chip as you will find it in consumer electronic devices. Future TV's of Sony will have a CELL variant, but lets not forget the beauty and purpouse of "CELL" - scalability. I expect TVs and similar types of consumer electronics to have a low-powered CELL variant, while the Broadband Engine in PS3 will be a high-powered CELL variant.

And as Guden points out - do we really expect Sony to hand out specific performance information of their next console now and today (and as unclear as in the above article)? No.

[Megadrive1988]

exactly Guden and Phil, Cell is not a processor, but an architecture, one that is modular & scalable.

It's like saying MIPS processor and 800 MFLOPs or PowerPC processor or X86 processor or what have you.

until we know the exact implimentation of Cell for PS3's CPU and likely, the GPU as well, we really won't have a clear picture as to what sort of performance we're looking at.

I'm sure a Cell-based processor for a television will not be as powerful as the Cell-based processor for the PS3. who needs 512 GFlops or more for a television?

[Panajev2001a]

I guess you people are missing out the whole point of CELL; a homogenous execution environment. Having varying clockspeed devices and latency was not a part of SCEI's game plan....

I am pretty sure they will not force the same clock-speed on all CELL based processors and I am also pretty sure that they cannot force the latency to a certain specified level as it would be a massive undertaking bordering on the impossible.

Beside, the embedment into a TV set revealed something very important about CELL; a fanless ULV operation. A chip cannot burn more than 10 watts without a fan, so that means a low clocking speed very probable.

Or we might have a chip with a very silent fan or you might be right and in the WEGA Engine 2.0 they will not have 4 GHz CELL chip.

You are connecting this CELL based processor used for TVs with PlayStation 3's Broadband Engine trying to guess the latter's clock speed from the former's clock speed which is IMHO incorrect.

[london-boy]

DM, you do know that there are TVs (plasmas for example) with fans to keep the chipsets cool enough, right....... If you didn't know, well, they exist. And they are very quiet too, since they don't need to spin at desktop kind of speeds.

[Pepto-Bismol]

I suspect the project is ... oh ... considerably more ambitious than you are guys are giving it credit for!

True, "Cell" is the codename for a class of processors rather than the nomenclature for a particular one. More importantly, however, it's shaping up to be tomorrow's licensed technology standard / guideline -- i.e., the roadmap and rules for an entire design phase (from marketing to mass production) at and below 65nm.

By putting Cells in consumer electronics, Sony is attempting to build "hotspots" in the home. :wink:

[Guden Oden]

I find Deadmeat's claim of anything above 10W power needing a fan a bit humorous, or maybe ignorant. Possibly both. I have a friend who ran a 800MHz P3 CPU with a fairly simple (by today's standards) all-copper heatsink. Zalman flower sinks can take on considerably faster CPUs with no fan. Same friend runs his GFFX* 5900U* with a Zalman VGA cooler; the one that looks like a flattened flower sink, not the heatpipe design.

Yes, it works. We played FarCry on his box at max settings on everything for at least 2 hours without any crashes at all.

Anyway, a fan using Sunon's MagLev bearing tech would run for a very long time even if a fan was required. I have such a fan in my Sony surround sound system.

* = Edit. Brainfart, I guess.

[Deadmeat4]

What did i tell u deadmeat

[cthellis42]

Whatever it is, I'm sure you'll have to say it a lot.

[london-boy]

What did i tell u deadmeat

:shock: :? :lol:

[ManuVlad3.0]

4 Processors: code-named “Cell” produced by IBM on 0.10-micron SOI process.
Clock Speed: 4 GHz
Floating-Point Performance: 256 GFLOPS
Operations per Second: 2 Trillion
3D Geometric Transformations: 2 Billion Polygons per Second
New processor design specifically for broadband communication generation.

256GFLOPS x 4 = 1 TeraFLOPS

System Memory: 512MB
System Memory Bandwidth: 24 GB/sec

Secondary Processor: Emotion Engine on 0.13-micron process (backward compatible with PS2)
Clock Speed: 300 MHz or 375 MHz (selectable)

GS3 (Graphics Synthesizer 3)
Clock Speed: 750 MHz
Embedded DRAM: 32MB
Screen Resolution: variable from 320x224 to 1920x1080
Fillrate: 24 Billion Pixels per Second

Sound: SPU3 + CPU
Number of Voices: 256 ADPCM channels + software

Blu-ray
Built-in Broadband Ethernet Port
120GB Hard Disk Drive


This is possible?

[london-boy]

4 Processors: code-named “Cell” produced by IBM on 0.10-micron SOI process.
Clock Speed: 4 GHz
Floating-Point Performance: 256 GFLOPS
Operations per Second: 2 Trillion
3D Geometric Transformations: 2 Billion Polygons per Second
New processor design specifically for broadband communication generation.

256GFLOPS x 4 = 1 TeraFLOPS

System Memory: 512MB
System Memory Bandwidth: 24 GB/sec

Secondary Processor: Emotion Engine on 0.13-micron process (backward compatible with PS2)
Clock Speed: 300 MHz or 375 MHz (selectable)

GS3 (Graphics Synthesizer 3)
Clock Speed: 750 MHz
Embedded DRAM: 32MB
Screen Resolution: variable from 320x224 to 1920x1080
Fillrate: 24 Billion Pixels per Second

Sound: SPU3 + CPU
Number of Voices: 256 ADPCM channels + software

Blu-ray
Built-in Broadband Ethernet Port
120GB Hard Disk Drive


This is possible?

Depends on where you got it. And it doesn't seem too out-of-this-world to me, apart maybe from the first part.... Also, fillrate of 24GPixels.... Mmmm

[cthellis42]

A 120GB hard drive would certainly NOT make it into a baseline machine, though I suppose it could be the "purchasable expansion drive" made available...

The first information, of course, is fairly dated since it's still pointing at the original process, not .065 micron. (Which does not mean all the numbers below will raise, it just points at it being the "old guesswork" we've seen around based on patents and newsbites.)

As far as the "Secondary Processor" goes, if they stick something like that in it would likely be the EE+GS, rather than just half of it at a larger process. Backward compatability made easy. (Though I'm not sure at what chip cost.)

At any rate, there's been a lot of discussion on "what people think" regarding the PS3 around here. You'd be best served by using the Search button and taking a look around.

[hey69]

why would a 120GB drive be not possible?

120gb in 2006 - 2007 is like a 10gig in 2002

[Guden Oden]

Yeah, 120GB isn't out of the question at all for a product meant to launch in ~2 years. Don't think it'll have 24gpix/s fillrate though, that's way over the top.

Also, it's of course unlikely the CPU will consist of 4 separate chips, and the process won't be .10u...

[cthellis42]

Anything is possible, but I think it highly unlikely. MS found out just how much cost is associated with a "10gig in 2002." (Not to mention I don't think a 120GB drive would be anywhere near the capacity-comparison to a 10GB at that point.)

[thop]

What would you need 120GB for? I mean IMO there is no place for a harddrive in a consoe anyway but that's a different story.

[Paul]

4 Processors: code-named “Cell” produced by IBM on 0.10-micron SOI process.

No.

Clock Speed: 4 GHz

Could be.

Floating-Point Performance: 256 GFLOPS

Probably higher.

Operations per Second: 2 Trillion



Could be, if you lumped it all together into a crude estimate of power.

3D Geometric Transformations: 2 Billion Polygons per Second

Sounds about right.

System Memory: 512MB

Too high, only expect 256 tops.

System Memory Bandwidth: 24 GB/sec

25.6

GS3 (Graphics Synthesizer 3)

No. GS3 and all of the "workstations"(EE2, and 3) have been canned.

Clock Speed: 750 MHz

I imagine.

Embedded DRAM: 32MB

Right on cue.

Screen Resolution: variable from 320x224 to 1920x1080

I expect PS3 to support resolutions all the way up to 1080i.

Fillrate: 24 Billion Pixels per Second

Nah.... Than again Sony surprises when it comes to specs.


Blu-ray

I'm willing to bet money on a BRD-ROM drive in PS3.

[cthellis42]

Is there a real need for so many spaces? C'mon people, condense posts like that! :P

[qwerty2000]

Now it's my turn

4 Processors: code-named “Cell” produced by IBM on 0.10-micron SOI process.

No.

Clock Speed: 4 GHz
Yes

Floating-Point Performance: 256 GFLOPS
4 times the anount


Operations per Second: 2 Trillion
No


3D Geometric Transformations: 2 Billion Polygons per Second
Too low 15-16 billion

System Memory: 512MB
I hope


System Memory Bandwidth: 24 GB/sec
25.6

GS3 (Graphics Synthesizer 3)
Visulaizer


Clock Speed: 750 MHz
2ghz


Embedded DRAM: 32MB
good

Screen Resolution: variable from 320x224 to 1920x1080
I guess

Fillrate: 24 Billion Pixels per Second
Maybe

Blu-ray
yes
[/quote]

[cthellis42]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAUGH, stop that!

At the very least, carve out the carriage returns between lines! Quoting already gives its own spacing! :shock: :shock: :shock:

[cthellis42]

You see?
This is continuing immediately after the quote line.
This is continuing immediately as well.
...but it causes a tiny bit of bunching, so sometimes an extra line isn't amiss.
But really, it's not like you have any trouble reading this...
Do you?
And yet it doesn't stretch what is functionally two sentances worth of text...
...over the next five screens! :P
It would look just perfect, too
...if only one could optionally remove the Quote: text when it doesn't matter.


(And of course if you're just going to do that all day, don't bother with quotes at all, and just italicize or something.)

[Sonic]

I agree. 15 billion pps is way too much unles you're talking about a completely unrealistic number due to bandwidth even with geometry compression that will never be seen in game. I'm fully expecting between 1 - 2 billion pps sustained with all effects on as some devs have been told to expect.

Still no clue on the graphics processor. I'm sure it will use a CELL front end, but what would the back end be?

[qwerty2000]

Sorry Sonic what I ment is 15 billion raw without effects and 2-4 billion with all the effects on.

[Guden Oden]

System Memory: 512MB

Too high, only expect 256 tops.

512, no less. 256MB memory will be peanuts in comparison to total system cost.

System Memory Bandwidth: 24 GB/sec

25.6

50-ish minimum is safe bet I think. 25.6 is practically slow NOW. Towards end of 06, it'll be pedestrian.

I'm willing to bet money on a BRD-ROM drive in PS3.

BRD-ROM? Blue-Ray-D-something-ROM? BR is read/write as standard afaik, assuming they want to push BR with PS3, there's no reason to believe Sony would make such a half-assed attempt at it, they'd seed the market with crippled BR drives, what would be the point? It would just be a larger DVDROM...

[qwerty2000]

I have to agree with you Guden 256MB is not alot by todays standerds. In 2006 ps3 will be in trouble. The system bandwith I was hoping 102.4 GB. But I'm doubting it will be that much 51.2 sounds fine.

[Megadrive1988]

I'd be very disappointed if PlayStation 3's main memory configuration was 256 MB and 25~26 GB/sec bandwidth, especially with XDR having the ability to go to 51 GB and even over 100 GB of bandwith.

I'd be satisfied with 512 MB and ~51 GB bandwidth


yes we know the on-chip memory bandwidth for the CPU and GPU will be far higher, well into the hundreds of GB at least, but main memory is still extremely important.

[Panajev2001a]

Blu-Ray ROM will be cheaper to implement and will allow Sony to separate PlayStation 3 from PSX 2 and other Blu-Ray players occupying a more expensive sector of the market.

There are two specifications for Blu-Ray, two separate ones the Re-Writeable version and the ROM version ( which is being finished as we speak ).

[Fafalada]

"Faf wants to play too"

4 Processors: code-named “Cell” produced by IBM on 0.10-micron SOI process.
.10 micron????

3D Geometric Transformations: 2 Billion Polygons per Second
I say 20GPoly/sec minimum. But they must be tilted 45degrees to the right or performance drops to 30%.

Secondary Processor: Emotion Engine on 0.13-micron process (backward compatible with PS2)
.13 micron????????????????????

Fillrate: 24 Billion Pixels per Second
See polygon performance.

Clock Speed: 300 MHz or 375 MHz (selectable)
Hmm... this sounds eerily familiar in a bad way. "nervous twtiching"

Sound: SPU3 + CPU
Number of Voices: 256 ADPCM channels + software
Oh now I remember...
"Seeing visions of 3xSPU core at higher clock"
Aaagh... please, for the love of god, make it stop!!!!!!!!!!

[Paul]

50-ish minimum is safe bet I think. 25.6 is practically slow NOW. Towards end of 06, it'll be pedestrian.

25.6 is not slow compared to other main DRAM solutions out there. Remember, PS3 will have e-DRAM on the GPU in the hundreds of GB/S.

I don't doubt 50 is probable, but I don't rule out 25.6.

[PC-Engine]

The capacity of the HDD is irrelevent. In the end it will still cost more to add in a HDD than not. HDDs don't grow on trees. :lol:

[Paul]

The capacity of the HDD is irrelevent. In the end it will still cost more to add in a HDD than not. HDDs don't grow on trees.

Unless Sony invents paper HDD's :lol:

[Deadmeat4]

I'm fully expecting between 1 - 2 billion pps sustained with all effects on as some devs have been told to expect.
And you were supposed to be a Sega developer???? I guess I was mistaken. That kinds of explains why you were so harsh on me, since you don't seem to understand....

Still no clue on the graphics processor. I'm sure it will use a CELL front end, but what would the back end be?
4x PSP GPUs. SCEI likes to recycle old designs.(GS, SPU2, IOP, etc. Even PSP chipset is an enhanded PSX chipset)

[I.S.T.]

Were YOU a Sega developer, Deadmeat? You seem to act liek one. Edit: In this topic. edit2: And it's possible he's spoken to Sega devs a lot.

[archie4oz]

Even PSP chipset is an enhanded PSX chipset

:shock:

Man you gotta hook me up with your supplier! That must be some good chronic!

[Vince]

Man you gotta hook me up with your supplier! That must be some good chronic!

HA! You and Sonic crack me up.

[Spidermate]

4x PSP GPUs. SCEI likes to recycle old designs.(GS, SPU2, IOP, etc. Even PSP chipset is an enhanded PSX chipset)

Actually,the Cell is a new design,which is why IBM is involve.Cell is said to only have used some of the basic work of the original EE.And,is recycling THAT big of a deal if it were used?Judging from history itself,the little "recycling" that was used after the PS2 was able to pull off work from CGI movies like the 9800 does now.May I also add that although the PS2 isn't the most powerful of the three systems,the Xbox (the most powerful of the three) doesn't hold much of an advantage in power when you start comparing performance,and this is after two years almost.Now,if you look at the Dreamcast after only eight months and compare that to the PS2,the difference is more than what you see now.So,if you ask me,it really isn't a bad thing when using recycled ideas -- as long you know how to utilize and evolve its previous performance in a way in which it was never done before.

[london-boy]

:shock: I just read that!! "4 PSP GPUs"??!?!?! Now i get Archie's joke!!! :lol:

[Megadrive1988]

May I also add that although the PS2 isn't the most powerful of the three systems,the Xbox (the most powerful of the three) doesn't hold much of an advantage in power when you start comparing performance

well, the reality is, each 1 of the 3 current consoles has strengths and weaknesses over the other 2.

PS2 has some advantages over Xbox and Gamecube (raw fillrate, graphics memory bandwidth, programmablity/flexibility)

Xbox has some advantages over PS2 and Gamecube (textures/texels per clock, pixel shading, harddrive, amount of memory)

Gamecube has some advantages over PS2 and Xbox (low latency 1T-SRAM, CPU L2 cache, fastest loading times usually)

and if we include Dreamcast in this, it has a few advantages over each of the 3 surviving consoles, but also many weaknesses given that it's the oldest of the 4 (hardware was finished in late 1997 or early 1998)

[qwerty2000]

As for the character models we could be looking at over 2 million polygons per model. Times that by the framerate and the characters on scrren, we could be looking up to billions of polys.

[Guden Oden]

What would we need 2 million polys per model for when they typically will only occupy a fraction of the screen area? Also, even with half a gig of memory, a 2-million poly model is going to occupy a hefty chunk of RAM.

Multiply that by the amount of models actually needed for a realistic game, and it won't be pretty.

[cthellis42]

Two million? Just what are you smoking, boy...? Give us a draw! :P :wink:

[Panajev2001a]

What would we need 2 million polys per model for when they typically will only occupy a fraction of the screen area? Also, even with half a gig of memory, a 2-million poly model is going to occupy a hefty chunk of RAM.

Multiply that by the amount of models actually needed for a realistic game, and it won't be pretty.

HOS, Displacement Mapping, etc... are all things not present in your vocabulary today, huh ;) ?

:).