Can PS3 outperform new Onyx4 (probably no)?

oh god... :rolleyes:

give me a multi-thousands-pound machine based on Cell then we'll talk....

come on, we're comparing a graphics workstation worth thousands of pounds-dollars with a machine that will come out at around 300-400 quid...

maybe by the time ps3 comes out this will be slightly outdated, but come on let's be serious for a moment.... :rolleyes:
 
Well...


What does 1000x the performance of PS2 mean? 1000x the fillrate of PS2 (1,200Gpixel/sec), 1000x the polygon thruput of PS2 (66,000Mpixels/sec)?

When I first heard of the claim that PS3 will have 1000x the performance of PS2, I initially thought that PS3 would have 1000x the fillrate and polygon thruput of PS2.
 
bbot said:
Well...


What does 1000x the performance of PS2 mean? 1000x the fillrate of PS2 (1,200Gpixel/sec), 1000x the polygon thruput of PS2 (66,000Mpixels/sec)?

When I first heard of the claim that PS3 will have 1000x the performance of PS2, I initially thought that PS3 would have 1000x the fillrate and polygon thruput of PS2.
Click to expand...


we talked about this loads of times and came to the conclusion that ps3 will performs some effects, namely bump mapping and displacement mapping for example, that would slow down ps2 so much it justifies the 1000x figure Sony are talking about....

u see my point... it's not 1000x polygon throughput or 1000x fillrate or 1000x the clock speed or things like that. it's an overall performance guess. and don't forget some of it is HYPE.
 
I think it will likely be able to, that is if the specs are higher(likely)...

Actually, now that I think about it that 4.8B is probably peak poly rate, if we use the ps2 scale, even at the currently expected 1Tflops ps3 should be able to exceed that peak number by over 2X...

Expect sony to taut(correct word?) stuff like that when they unveil the ps3


editedii
 
bbot said:
What does 1000x the performance of PS2 mean? 1000x the fillrate of PS2 (1,200Gpixel/sec), 1000x the polygon thruput of PS2 (66,000Mpixels/sec)?
Click to expand...

1000x overall system performance, including not just higher raw performance (NOT 1000x as much as PS2 obviously, but still lots more), but better filtering, antialiasing, higher color depth etc as well.

There's no way PS3 could get anywhere near this new SGI monster as far as performance is concerned, of that we may rest assured.


*G*
 
bbot said:
Well...


What does 1000x the performance of PS2 mean? 1000x the fillrate of PS2 (1,200Gpixel/sec), 1000x the polygon thruput of PS2 (66,000Mpixels/sec)?

When I first heard of the claim that PS3 will have 1000x the performance of PS2, I initially thought that PS3 would have 1000x the fillrate and polygon thruput of PS2.
Click to expand...

it's PR (and very poor PR while we are at it) try not read into it too much.
 
Compete doing what exactly? The Onyx4 in its highest configuration has 32 ATi R3x0 cores with 8GB of memory dedicated to rendering. Meanwhile, Sony has less than 3 years to bring a product to market that matches or exceeds the performance of this machine at 1/100th the cost.

Not saying it isn't posible, but IMO unlikely.
 
just like ps2 was pushing more polygons per second than any graphics workstation out at the time, ps3 will push some things more than graphics workstation out at the same time.
still, the fact that ps2 was able to push a lot of polygons didnt mean it could produce graphics that was on par with those workstations, and it will be the same for PS3.....
after all, the main focus of graphics workstation is not exactly real-time polygon performance, rather on shading and other things that have nothing to do with real time rendering. after all, when u can dedicate hours for a single frame, would u care how many polygons u can push per second, after a certain level?
 
Okay that is it, THAT IS IT!!!

I can't stand it anymore this "PS3 will have 1000 times the performance of PS2?", why does everyone consider this fact and not speculation based off one little comment that was made 3 years ago?

Okay I'm fine now, I personally don't see PS3 being able to match the Onix 4 just yet, but who knows what will happen, we could be in for a good surprise.
 
The PS3 will be 1000x more powerful than the PS2, of that I'm sure. Just like the GeForce3 was 7 times faster than the GeForce2, and the Pentium 4 is as fast clock-for-clock as the Pentium 3.

To paraphrase Star Wars, it's all true - from a marketing point of view.
 
The PS3 will be 1000x more powerful than the PS2, of that I'm sure. Just like the GeForce3 was 7 times faster than the GeForce2, and the Pentium 4 is as fast clock-for-clock as the Pentium 3.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, it's just that I'm sick of that term being thrown around all the time, it's really starting to bug me now.
 
PS3 wont match, let alone beat, the Onyx4 UltimateVision. not even a single Onyx4. much like the PS1 did not match or beat the RealityEngine.
 
BoddoZerg said:
The PS3 will be 1000x more powerful than the PS2, of that I'm sure. Just like the GeForce3 was 7 times faster than the GeForce2, and the Pentium 4 is as fast clock-for-clock as the Pentium 3.

To paraphrase Star Wars, it's all true - from a marketing point of view.
Click to expand...


Geforce 3 was beaten by the geforce 2 ultra in alot of benchmarks at release. So i don't know where you got 7 times from.



Also in terms of pr . Nvidia has claimed for the geforce 2-fx that they could do toy story in realtime. Have we seen that ? No. So i'm pretty sure the 1000 times faster is some very stupid thing. Like the controller ports are a 1000 times faster than the ps2 ones . So lets wait and see how big of a marketing hat the quoted person had on .
 
much like the PS1 did not match or beat the RealityEngine.
Click to expand...

Well the Reality Engine was a graphics subsystem not a whole computer, and I don't believe there was any comparison of an IRIS Crimson (the machine the Reality Engine shipped with) with an RE setup to the Playstation when Sony had finished the hardware. They did compare various specs of the PS2 to the Onyx/RE2 though. Although the Playstation's GTE could hang with an Crimson/RE's GTE in some cases.
 
Right well the PS1 graphics subsystem (GTE + graphics chip) did not beat the RealityEngine. or you could say it like this: the PS1 did not beat the Onyx2 (or Crimsion) w/ RealityEngine.

IIRC, the PS2 was compared to the InfiniteReality. not RE or RE2. Sony claimed PS2 could display about twice as many textured, featured polygons (25M) as IR2 (12M)

IR1 is around 10x more powerful than RE1/RE2. (10M+ pps vs 1M pps)
 
WHY is it so hard for some people to at least try and understand that PS3 will be able to do some effects that would take ages on ps2 to perform?

what would be the framerate of a game running at 720p, with hundreds of millions of polygons and hundreds of megabytes of textures, advanced pixel shading and physics ON PS2??

i guess a typical PS3 game would run a game like the above at 60fps (or something similar, depending on whether they decide to go the polygon way or the shaders way, but my guess is they will keep the monster poly performance at the cost of other things, just like they did with ps2)... but how would it run on PS2? first of all, it would not run at all since ps2 just cannot store all that data in memory, and the lack of decent blend modes... but still, i guess it would take quite a while for ps2 to render a frame like that at that resolution with those pixel effects....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
New Qualcomm silicon for new Surface May 2024
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
wco81
W
G
Tech Differences between Switch and 7th Gen (PS3/360) Games
2
Replies
21
Views
6K
GuardHei
G
Rys
Reopening Architecture and Products + rules and guidelines changes
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
13K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
digitalwanderer
Thinking of upgrading my monitor in a reasonable way.
8 9 10
Replies
196
Views
28K
Davros
D
G
"New" Nintendo Switch (OLED Model) [2021-07-06]
6 7 8
Replies
150
Views
25K
pharma
P
Back
Top