PSP2 features - the handheld version *renamed

Status
Not open for further replies.
I definitely don't see it happening CPU-wise either, even a quad core 1.5GHz Cortex-A9 + NEON can't be seen as competitive with a tri-core 3.2GHz Xenon, especially when considering SIMD capabilities. OoOE is great but it can't overcome those kinds of clock deltas. I really doubt you'd see that sort of Cortex-A9 in a 2011 handheld anyway.
 
Exactly. Three 3.2GHz wide-SIMD dual-threaded cores is not going to see any competition in a handheld for years. I doubt even processing-per-pixel would be competitive at a much small resolution than 720p. Kotaku's sources are clearly dreaming.
 
I definitely don't see it happening CPU-wise either, even a quad core 1.5GHz Cortex-A9 + NEON can't be seen as competitive with a tri-core 3.2GHz Xenon, especially when considering SIMD capabilities. OoOE is great but it can't overcome those kinds of clock deltas. I really doubt you'd see that sort of Cortex-A9 in a 2011 handheld anyway.


When they say things like this, shouldn't they be read as: can look the same on a small screen instead of: Is just as fast? On a 5'' screen you won't need the same amount of detail to make something look as good as on a 50'' screen.
 
I don't see that much about CPU usage that scales with resolution.

Well perhaps not directly.. But scale or lod surely. I mean on a smaller screen with a smaller resolution you wouldn't need to display or render as much. Obviously this is beneficial for the GPU but it also means less animations\physics(if any) etc that needs to be done CPU side.

As a whole wouldn't CPU load be directly related with total resolution to some extent?
 
Well perhaps not directly.. But scale or lod surely. I mean on a smaller screen with a smaller resolution you wouldn't need to display or render as much. Obviously this is beneficial for the GPU but it also means less animations\physics(if any) etc that needs to be done CPU side.

That really doesn't work linearly. By that logic PC games should need much less detail because they're usually ran on displays that are much smaller than TV screens. The difference is that you sit much closer to a desktop monitor, and you hold a screen much closer to your face. "Retina Display" might be the point of diminishing returns, but that's nearly 720p.

So I guess when you have 66% of the same fillrate + at least the same geometry capabilities and image quality you can do 720p quality on a Retina display. Or 30% for 1020p quality. Current handheld technology is nowhere near this.

As a whole wouldn't CPU load be directly related with total resolution to some extent?

Why should it be?
 
i agree with exophase
cpu wise it cant and wont be near 360

and the whole resolution point is moot, being an hd screen means its resolution is at least par with 720p
 
Is that kind of resolution doable on a portable system? I'm assuming it isn't as big as conventional "tablets"..

Also I imagine that would be a bit of a strain on the hardware?
 
iPhone 4 is 960x640 and smaller than PSP. It's ahead of the curve in the industry, but most other phones are at least 800x480.

The rumors are saying that PSP has a large screen that Sony is calling "HD", so if any of that is true I expect it to be of decent resolution.
 
Well that's what I mean. Is it really 1280x720p?

That is to say, is that even doable on a handheld? I can't imagine it can fit a full 720p image.
 
I don't see that much about CPU usage that scales with resolution.
The problem comes with the ill-defined term 'power'. More powerful by what measure. It could be a direct processing comparison, or a relative measure, in the same way I can say an ant is more powerful than a man because it can lift many times its body weight.

Resolution wise, if you Google smallest 720p screen you get things like this 5 incher and this 4.3" 720p screen. So they exist and it's likely PSP2's components will need to be able to fill that much screen estate, and I imagine HDMI out for play on a TV.
 
If Sony gives the GPU of the next portable PlayStation similar budgets for power consumption, heat dissipation, and die area as the first PSP's, a resulting Series5XT core won't be compared to anything but PS3's and X360's GPUs.
 
If Sony gives the GPU of the next portable PlayStation similar budgets for power consumption, heat dissipation, and die area as the first PSP's, a resulting Series5XT core won't be compared to anything but PS3's and X360's GPUs.

That budget still won't be anywhere near the 100W or so that the PS3 and X360 pulls at 45/40 nm.
Even if Sony waits until they can massproduce at a one step finer lithographic node (such as 2H of 2011 for launch before Christmas 2011), there is still no way that they can approach the PS3 and X360 in absolute performance terms. A factor of 50 or so in power draw is a rather large handicap.

However, as has been pointed out, by dropping polygon counts, lower the amount of debris rendered, perhaps lower the number of simultaneous on-screen opponents, being a bit less ambitious in areas where it's hard to notice such as shadow rendering, et cetera they can probably get subjectively relatively close to the current generation. Particularly so on a 4-5 inch screen.

But then again, I'm known to have low standards. :)
 
However, as has been pointed out, by dropping polygon counts, lower the amount of debris rendered, perhaps lower the number of simultaneous on-screen opponents, being a bit less ambitious in areas where it's hard to notice such as shadow rendering, et cetera they can probably get subjectively relatively close to the current generation. Particularly so on a 4-5 inch screen.

But then again, I'm known to have low standards. :)

The real point from this is that typical gauging of image quality doesn't scale very linearly with resources. If you throw 10x more rendering effort at a scene you might get something that people on average only find 1.5x as good. But that 1.5x is still a big deal to people, and being on a smaller screen doesn't actually push it down that much, especially when you're lowering things like model count.
 
At this point, performance isn't necessarily going to sell a PSP2. I really don't think anyone is looking for console performance on portable devices now.

What would probably be more useful is media playback and other features now available on smart phones, which can also play games. But the most popular smart phone games are simple so all the performance that's being talked about is overkill.

If a gamer these days is going to spend $200 or more on a handheld, when he may already have a smart phone, it's got to differentiate itself. Dedicated controls and console-like graphics aren't necessarily going to do it.

Smart phones now have these apps. which offer convenience on the go. It may be that now, even gamers are looking more for utility than entertainment, reserving their serious gaming time for the console.

PSP2 may not sell unless it is a converged device. And in the era of 99 cent games, they may have to seriously re-think the traditional games pricing/licensing model.
 
It's hard to imagine console performance in handhelds not selling to someone. A large amount of 3DS's positive reception is due to its visuals; can we really say that they're at exactly the point where no one would be impressed by anything better?

But it's kind of hard to talk to people who keep insisting that phones have won the handheld gaming war and there's no more market for non-casual games on portables :/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top