Recent content by DarkRage

It is. And it matches Dave's comments. Bigger than expected for me. Some will argue that with 512MB the difference has to be lower or non-existant. And they are rigth... for now. I see 512MB being not enough for games in 1 year, and PCI-E 2.0 can be handy when that happens. Thanks all.

Thanks for the info. I suppose you will provide more details in a future full-review article or can you share some of your results now? Because 512 MB are enough rigth now, but maybe in 1 year, when more then 512MB are needed, the PCI-E version makes the difference.

I have unsuccessfully tried to find any related benchmark to this issue: is the PCI-E 2.0 support from the new chipsets worthy to take into account or there is no significant performance difference between PSI-E 1.0 and 2.0. Because we know about the double bandwidth, but not the real impact it...

Hard to say. From an architectural point of view, xbox should be easier. However, the gap in power between PS2 and PS3 is bigger than between xbox platforms, and it should make it easier for brute and inefficient approaches. So, maybe, "it depends..." Muchas de nada.

Probably loading all the data from the hard drive, with no usage of the BR drive.

Thanks. So what about a not-so-complex choice between 720p@60fps and 1080p@30fps? I'm all for 720p (that's what my TV can show anyway) but it could be ineteresting for some guys.

One question for developers... How feasible do you see to have both options for the player? For example, maximum detail at 720p and medium detail at 1080p. I know it means more effort for testing, balancing, etc, but... does it make any sense for you? do you know if some studios are...

I guess that can be said about Cell too. But I remember a different thing said from your own team. An unified architecture *might* allow for new rendering techniques not available at acceptable performance with traditional architectures. Something similar with Cell, BTW.

It is my understanding that PS2 hardware included for backwards compatibility is just a temporary solution, which will be removed as soon as Sony improves the software emulation in order to save manufacturing costs. With that approach, you can not rely on having the eDRAM there. It could be...

GPU centric designs, even more than 360. More flexible ALUs in GPUs => graphics and physics in GPU. A "simple" CPU can deal with other tasks (a cheap 4 Intel Core3 would be enough). But the heart would be the GPU: Hundreds of flexible and efficient ALUs. Not multiplied by 30. Just 8-10...

Maybe I am wrong, but I think to remember nVidia talking about 1.1 billion. Anyway, not interesting. I am more interested in how Cell and RSX cooperate.

Nope AFAIK. Anyway, pointless comparison.

Additional stuff for allowing backwards compatibility? GS had some capabilities very different than today's GPUs.

As Ageia physX has got some similarities with Cell for the task in this thread, it can be interesting to have a quick look at new results on that card with updated drivers: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2759 Still dissapointing.

And what about the syntetic benchmark the card is coming with? It is with their own API and no interference from the GPU.