[TheChefO]

From 1st gen to the pinnacle of the platform, do you think this performance increase will be repeated this gen?

I'm attempting to gauge perception and expectation for this class of consoles judging from what we've seen of products (released and in the pipeline) and the known specs of the consoles.

(No flamewars please)

[swaaye]

Well Cell is a bitch to program for, so I'd say the potential is there. That is, if they can even figure out how to apply it's rather unique architecture to games in a meaningful way.

That is assuming, of course, that the gains to be had are really tangible. RSX is a lot nicer than GS was and so I don't think it will take long at all to get the most out of it. And graphics quality is what people seem to notice most. I'm not sure how much Cell can influence graphics quality, really. That's not its job.

[Todd33]

My un-expert opinion:

The PS3 tools are supposed to be much better and the RSX (using Opengl) is much more familier to some game programmers. The only "hard" part is the Cell (SPUs) and that should boost 2nd, 3rd, etc. gen titles. 1st/2nd party games like R:FoM and Motorstorm are already pretty amazing, it's 3rd party that need to get their game on.

[tongue_of_colicab]

I wouldnt know if the performance increase can be repeated but just assume it can, would it be as noticable as with ps2? because with ps2 we went from pretty bad to pretty good. With ps3 (or x360 for that matter) we'll go from already pretty good to even better.

[3roxor]

I voted 'Yes, it will without a doubt, be repeated' but the thread starter should have asked specifically about either the PS3 or the XB360 IMO..

[TheChefO]

Originally Posted by 3roxor

the thread starter should have asked specifically about either the PS3 or the XB360 IMO..

It wasn't meant to be directed at one or the other.

[Todd33]

Originally Posted by 3roxor

I voted 'Yes, it will without a doubt, be repeated' but the thread starter should have asked specifically about either the PS3 or the XB360 IMO..

I assumed the PS3, oops. I think the 360 is more like the Xbox. They both have more standard architectures and tools, thus making 1st gen and last gen more alike. For example, Crimson Skies and say Black are not that far apart. I don't think the 360 will exceed Gears much, that's not a bad thing.

That being said the PS3 has room to grow, but not really in the pure graphics domain. I think physics, particles, etc. and things the SPU excel at will make games more interesting, but not likely more pretty.

[TheChefO]

Originally Posted by Todd33

I assumed the PS3, oops. I think the 360 is more like the Xbox. They both have more standard architectures and tools, thus making 1st gen and last gen more alike. For example, Crimson Skies and say Black are not that far apart. I don't think the 360 will exceed Gears much, that's not a bad thing.

That being said the PS3 has room to grow, but not really in the pure graphics domain. I think physics, particles, etc. and things the SPU excel at will make games more interesting, but not likely more pretty.

Thank you Todd for your thorough explanation on your opinion(s).

I would encourage others (if you feel comfortable doing so) to either explain your position or quote another opinion/explanation which matches yours.

[Carl B]

Todd developers are still becoming acquainted with best practice methods for eDRAM utilization; thus, 360 has room to grow as well from a learning curve perspective.

[TheChefO]

Originally Posted by Carl B

Todd developers are still becoming acquainted with best practice methods for eDRAM utilization; thus, 360 has room to grow as well from a learning curve perspective.

I'm glad you're here xbd. Speaking of best practice methods: Aren't dev's also still learning/toying with some of the features of Xenos such as the tesselation unit, memexport etc? Also if someone has some info in that regard, perhaps they could shed some light on the dx9+ feature utilization status of the gpu as well.

If I'm not mistaken, Cell can replicate much (if not all) of this functionality as well. What I'm curious about is what will these features cost processing wise on Cell for specific applications (Might be too early to gauge but as it is I have no idea even what the range would be, and if someone would be so gracious as to enlighten me in this regard, I would appreciate it).

[dobwal]

Performance should be expect as I doubt any console manufacturer has the ability to produce new and forward leaning technology and software tools whose utilization can be maximized from day 1. Its pretty evident that performance will grow as the visual disparity between generation 1 games are quite evident even among the quality titles.

[Todd33]

Originally Posted by Carl B

Todd developers are still becoming acquainted with best practice methods for eDRAM utilization; thus, 360 has room to grow as well from a learning curve perspective.

Doesn't this mainly mean mostly "free" AA, which is pretty minimal in terms of IQ. Maybe the eDRAM has other uses that I don't know about.

[DieH@rd]

CELL stil have much secrets hidden...

[scooby_dooby]

No it won't.

Both of the systems are much easier to use than the PS2 was relatively speaking, which means they will probably both start at a higher point along the curve, and there will be less of a gap between first gen and last.

And the nature of the market will dictate that multi-platform developers not concentrate on any one platform.

Those two factors rule it out completely imo.

Both systems have room to grow, but they difinately will not improve as much as the PS2 did. Propbably somewhere between what we saw with PS2 (huge growth) and Xbox1 (solid growth).

I expect to see a slightly larger gap with PS3 games due mainly to the weaker development tools/documentation initially, and the potential of CELL and the BR disc, but the 360 also has many tricks up it's sleeve that aren't being exploited.

[Ben-Nice]

I don't think you will see the leap from say the PS2 launch games to maybe considered the pinnacle in God of War 2. I think as Scooby stated they are starting at a higher level on the PS3 then the PS2.

[oli2]

Originally Posted by scooby_dooby

Both of the systems are much easier to use than the PS2 was relatively speaking

If i correctly understood, CELL was designed so that as a trully parallel programming model can be used (unlike Xenos that is "simply" multi-threaded).

On that sense, i can not understand how programming the EE could be more difficult, given the fact that even relatively simple algorithms ("quicksort" for example) require cleverness and hability to be "well implemented" in parallel environnement.

I am no game developer, and maybe i don't look at this processor correctly, but if i am right, i think we can't see today the limits of the Cell.

on the other side, RSX will certainly be easier to be quickly understood than GS.

On the Xbox360 side, Xenos is multi-threaded and we all know that the developers are just starting to discover this type of CPU... And Xenon is far from having given all its secrets.

To sum up, i expect huge improvements on both consoles.

[TheChefO]

Originally Posted by oli2

To sum up, i expect huge improvements on both consoles.

I expect increases as well for both consoles (as well as Wii), but the question is: Do you think this improvement (on either or both consoles) will be the same amount of improvement which ps2 saw in it's lifecycle?

[oli2]

Originally Posted by TheChefO

... Do you think this improvement (on either or both consoles) will be the same amount of improvement which ps2 saw in it's lifecycle?

On the "pure graphic look" (what 's in the eye of a lambda consumer), i would say no, definetely no, because until raycasting (why not photocasting) arrives, i think we are in a "diminishing return" phasis.

[Arwin]

I actually missed the option to vote for that the increase will be larger than in the previous generations. I feel that as this generation of hardware is quite simply more complex, there is more to gain from it:

- BluRay (true, PS2 did go from CD to DVD as well)
- HDD standard (not available on PS2)
- Cell with 1 PPE and 6/7 SPEs, supporting a whole lot of different programming models
- RSX in itself still being more complex, and although better understood from its PC origins, coding it to the metal is not the same
- the interaction between the RSX, PPE, and SPEs, all of which have control over and access to different parts of the two memory pools
- motion control (offers more programming options than vibration)
- default online with 1Gbit connection and the ability to patch games
- downloadable games, allowing for a wider range from small to big games, meaning a safer way for experimentation

Adding it all up, and I see more room for growth than in the previous generation.

Which is just very, very cool.

[TheChefO]

Originally Posted by Arwin

Adding it all up, and I see more room for growth than in the previous generation.

Which is just very, very cool.

Just to clarify: (as some of your points raised an eyebrow) this poll is strictly based on improvement within the same platform, not from last gen (ps2/xb/gc) to this gen (xb360/ps3/wii).

[JardeL]

First of all , I am not an expert... I don't know if Emotion Engine assists graphics , maybe it does ... But CELL will assist without a doubt, maybe even much more than EE's ... *

But I don't think that RSX has as much secret as GS ... Programmers are familiar to RSX [ than GS ] ... * Eventually , I don't think PS3 can reach PS2's performance increase [ graphics quality ] ...

For X360 , maybe some improvements [ little gfx tweaks and some AI ] but with all these developer praise for !lovely! MS libraries , improvements won't be comparable to PS2's [ maybe even PS3's ] , IMO ...

*Correct me if i'm wrong...

[Bigus Dickus]

Originally Posted by oli2

If i correctly understood, CELL was designed so that as a trully parallel programming model can be used (unlike Xenos that is "simply" multi-threaded).

Assuming you mean Xenon and not Xenos... well, doesn't matter, I'd have to disagree in either case. Xenon (CPU) is multi core and multithreaded.

[Sis]

Originally Posted by scooby_dooby

No it won't.

Both of the systems are much easier to use than the PS2 was relatively speaking, which means they will probably both start at a higher point along the curve, and there will be less of a gap between first gen and last.

And the nature of the market will dictate that multi-platform developers not concentrate on any one platform.

Those two factors rule it out completely imo.

Both systems have room to grow, but they difinately will not improve as much as the PS2 did. Propbably somewhere between what we saw with PS2 (huge growth) and Xbox1 (solid growth).

I expect to see a slightly larger gap with PS3 games due mainly to the weaker development tools/documentation initially, and the potential of CELL and the BR disc, but the 360 also has many tricks up it's sleeve that aren't being exploited.

I disagree, since both systems introduce multithreading paradigms to deal with which I would expect requires significant and non-trivial learning. I would expect both systems to see large jumps from 1st gen games to "end of life gen" games.

The fact that the tooling experience is there only means that they don't have to take as large a step back as they would have without the tooling, in my opinion.

The multiplatform issue is a bit of a non-issue, since it is the 1st party games that have the opportunity to show off their respective systems.

[Arwin]

Originally Posted by TheChefO

Just to clarify: (as some of your points raised an eyebrow) this poll is strictly based on improvement within the same platform, not from last gen (ps2/xb/gc) to this gen (xb360/ps3/wii).

No, you were actually asking if that improvement within one console's lifecycle would be as big this gen as it would last gen. So yes, I did understand the question (unlike in the other thread, where I clearly didn't ... )

If you were wondering about the CD-DVD comment, the first games on PS2 were released on CD-ROM, and/or CD-ROM sized games on DVD. At the end of the cycle, that had become very rare.

[TheChefO]

Originally Posted by Sis

I disagree, since both systems introduce multithreading paradigms to deal with which I would expect requires significant and non-trivial learning. I would expect both systems to see large jumps from 1st gen games to "end of life gen" games.

The fact that the tooling experience is there only means that they don't have to take as large a step back as they would have without the tooling, in my opinion.

The multiplatform issue is a bit of a non-issue, since it is the 1st party games that have the opportunity to show off their respective systems.

I figured this at first as well when the system specs were announced and the initial topics were discussed on programming difficulty. My prediction was first gen titles would ship using only one core on xb360 and the same relevent ppe core on Cell due to the similarities (and at the time, close launch dates). Developers picked up the programming model much quicker than I figured though and from what I recall, none of the xb360 games shipped using just one core.

With that, I expect improvement through efficiency and a growing technique knowledgebase. However, this growth gap will not be as large as I originally anticipated.