CONFIRMED: PS3 to use "Nvidia-based Graphics processor&

[Vennt]

I guess I'm repeating myself but I don't get this. Did everyone think the PS3 graphics tech was going to suck or something and now that they've announced an agreement with Nvidia it is going to rock?? Before this announcement, what exactly did you think SONY was going to use for PS3 graphics? Some outdated technology or the latest cutting edge technology? If you say latest cutting edge, then it's the actual tech that is exciting, not the particular partner who makes it.

I'll admit this was my belief:

V. Good CPU (Cell) + V. Average GPU/Rasterizer (Sony/Toshiba) + Pigheaded development environment.

After todays announcement:

V. Good CPU (Cell) + V. Good GPU (nVidia) + Developer-friendly dev environment. (Sony/nVidia/IBM)

If you were expecting a competitive, yet eccentric all Sony design then it only goes to follow that removing some of the weakest links (Sony/Toshiba's GFX ) and replace it with expertise from market leaders in the field, then obviously your expectations are going to have been raised some.

 

[cybamerc]

Some people believe that it would be powerful but lack some nifty features.

And that may still be the case relative to the ATI parts. Perhaps even by design. The point is that we just don't know what they're up to. There's absolutely nothing in this announcement that suggests Sony will end up with a superior graphics chip than either M$ or Nintendo.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

But as you stated before Vince: It doesn't matter. The consumer won't see the difference. Games, marketing, branding. That's where the real battle will be fought. I'm not claiming a win on either side at this point. We need to see the actual games and marketing campaigns that will be unveiled over the next several months. Nothing is really a given at this point. Nothing's ever been a given in this business.

 

[Titanio]

Some people believe that it would be powerful but lack some nifty features.

And that may still be the case relative to the ATI parts. Perhaps even by design. The point is that we just don't know what they're up to. There's absolutely nothing in this announcement that suggests Sony will end up with a superior graphics chip than either M$ or Nintendo.

There is, actually, a fair bit that suggests that.

Perhaps you mean, nothing that confirms that?

 

[McFly]

I'm not disputing that but what you have to keep in mind is that the average consumer is uninformed and lacks common sense. Ultimately it will come down to marketing which platform is the more powerful in the mind of the consumer.

I can already see a big advert poster with the Top 500 Supercomputer list on it where 9/10 is covered with "Playstation 3".

But most likely they just have to write Playstation 3 in big letters and the release date on a complete white background and it will sell the first ten millions.

Fredi

 

[cybamerc]

But most likely they just have to write Playstation 3 in big letters and the release date on a complete white background and it will sell the first ten millions.

PlayStation is certainly a powerful brand but if there's anyone you shouldn't underestimate it's M$ marketing department. Anyone who can make Xbox look like a success deserves some sort of respect.

Don't expect this to be DC vs. PS2 redux.

 

[Vince]

But as you stated before Vince: It doesn't matter. The consumer won't see the difference. Games, marketing, branding. That's where the real battle will be fought. I'm not claiming a win on either side at this point. We need to see the actual games and marketing campaigns that will be unveiled over the next several months. Nothing is really a given at this point. Nothing's ever been a given in this business.

I think the consumer will see a difference (contrary to what everyone is predicting) and I think Sony will be sure to press it home as they did against Sega. They'll sell it on the PlayStation branding and biad heavily on the preformance delta and digital lifestyle enabled by the nexus of Broadband, Cell, Blu-Ray and Wi-Fi -- as I told Quincey.

Sony could route Microsoft, look at the hype generated by two press releases in two weeks. And compare these two weeks to the last 2 months of basically full disclosure of X2 specs via developers.

 

[Megadrive1988]

in the end we all win, thanks to increased competition. if Sony knew that it would be facing a tough competitor to PS2, Sony might have sought outside help for graphics rather than developing the GS on its own. (or with Toshiba)

GS is amazing concidering the timeframe when it was locked down. (1997-1998). but PS3 can only gain from Nvidia's help on the hardware & software/api/tools side.

all 3 consoles should have relatively close graphics quality. (nvidia vs ati, ati) it remains to be seen if Sony's supposedly large lead in CPU power will translate into much more awesome looking and playing games.

 

[McFly]

Don't expect this to be DC vs. PS2 redux.

Yeah, the difference will be that MS will not run out of money like Sega.

Seriously, I don't expect that MS will get more market share next gen from Sonys side, but that's just my personal opinion and only if PS3 is what I expect it to be.

Fredi

 

[Farid]

Please. We don't know what Nvidia is contributing to this project

We don't know? We don't have actual details, true, but we have official statement, clear statement, i must add:

Both companies are jointly developing a custom graphics processing unit (GPU) incorporating NVIDIA's next-generation GeForce(TM) and SCEI's system solutions for next-generation computer entertainment systems featuring the Cell* processor.
This collaboration is made under a broad, multi-year, royalty-bearing agreement. The powerful custom GPU
"Our collaboration includes not only the chip development but also a variety of graphics development tools and middleware, essential for efficient content creation."

And it says that Nvidia contribute to the project with their next generation Geforce and with providing tools and software solutions.
Now you can ask to what extent, of course, but you can't affirm that we don't know anything about the deal.

PS3 = Great CPU + Good Enough GPU
XBoX2 = Very Good CPU + Great GPU (ATI)

Now it's almost as if all bases are covered...if Nvidia and Sony can deliver.

And if ATI and MS can deliver the goods.
It does work both ways.

 

[Fafalada]

It would make more sense now than ever wouldn't it? Smile Clipping is only performed on a small percentage of the total amount of polys in a normal scene after all. No need to waste dedicated hardware on that, when you have ~ 1 TFLOP under the hood.

*slaps Squeak around*

If your seperating the VS and PS over an external bus who says you won't still be clipping on the A/SPU's

Because I trust(pray?) at least someone amongst NVidia engineers can implement H-Space rasterizer behind Sony's back if they refuse them the silicon for a functional triangle clipper?

 

[cybamerc]

Seriously, I don't expect that MS will get more market share next gen from Sonys side, but that's just my personal opinion and only if PS3 is what I expect it to be.

I don't think Sony's success is a given. Certainly they're in no immediate danger of ending up last but if M$ handles the Xbox 2 launch properly and deals with Sony marketing in an effective manner Sony (and Nintendo) could find themselves in a very challenging situation. I have no love for M$ so I obviously hope they fail but I'm certainly not going to make the mistake and underestimate the potential of Xbox 2.

 

[Farid]

*slaps Squeak around*

Do you hear that sound? It's the sound of a line based S|APU debugger, Faf... And it comes for you!

 

[Sabastian]

NVidia was also being less than enthusiastic about any potential Xbox2 business, for a good bit before MS tapped ATi as their partner.

I'd say Microsoft pretty much closed the door on NVidia due to licensing/cost issues with the original Xbox's GPU, rather than for technical reasons.

If this deal has been in the works for two years... then the hard nosed stance with MS was a smart move. The matter wrt the xbox chipset was that MS had agreed to pay x dollars for the GPU's they bought from NV. Though when MS came under pricing and marketing concerns MS wanted to change the contract or at least overlook the original deal to lower the pricing on the xbox console to make it more competitive. NV wanted to keep pricing as was but MS played its hand and suggested that its arch rival (ATi) would get the contract for the next console if NV was not more flexible in pricing.. NV ether had a deal in the works already with Sony or was willing to go cheap with royalties on a sony console. (mainly because of expected sales volume of the PS3.) In the short term they did well because the xbox chipset pricing/earnings has saved their assess on more then one earnings report AFAIK. In the long term however depending on how low the royalties are for the PS3 they might not well be better off then they were with MS. In fact their earnings might be in line with what they are getting now from MS. Sony would be a horribly shrewd negotiator on the outsourcing of their GPU design. In short this deal might not be all roses for NV in terms of earning prospective from royalties.

What they will be garnering though is developer attention.. at the highest level. The Play station console is viewed by MS by not so much a treat to market share in the console arena .. MS is worried about PC gaming being wiped out by console gaming.. and this translates into a loss of revenue for MS. The PC needs to be regarded as a superior gaming console in order to drive PC sales and we all know that the vast majority of PC's come equipped with what OS? Sony's CEO made a direct challenge, not so long ago, that their console would soon surpass and overtake the PC for gaming.. mayhap that has come to be in some ways. Bill Gates initiated the xbox console because of that threat. In some indirect and other very direct ways Sony and Microsoft are direct competitors. Both very interested in what technology is going in living rooms globally. Multimedia convergence is the grail both establishments are acutely interested in. Sony has an edge in marketing but it is loosing that edge over Microsoft with the Xbox currently.

heh, where was I? Oh yeah, NV. NV might not have made that sweet of a deal with Sony. In fact it might have been to save face considering Microsoft rejected them for their next console. Something tells me their contract with Sony is very .. very flexible. It might not be that great of a deal in the end, but it sure looks good on NV in the face of lost market share to ATi in the PC arena. It is ironic though IMHO that rumors of the NV50 and NV48 being dumped over the past week are a prelude to this announcement. Maybe there are a lot of NV enginers suddendly with a very different project on their hands presently?.. I wouldn't be horribly surprised by that... in fact I'd put money on it that this is exactly what has happend.. just recently.

 

[cybamerc]

Now you can ask to what extent, of course, but you can't affirm that we don't know anything about the deal.

Virtually nothing then. All we have is a bunch of generic terms. For all we know Sony could have gone with Nvidia for their software rather than their hardware. My point is that this announcement tells us nothing about how the PS3 will compare to what the competition is working or that Sony is better off for having gone with Nvidia.

 

[Tuttle]

Seriously, I don't expect that MS will get more market share next gen from Sonys side, but that's just my personal opinion and only if PS3 is what I expect it to be.

I don't think Sony's success is a given. Certainly they're in no immediate danger of ending up last but if M$ handles the Xbox 2 launch properly and deals with Sony marketing in an effective manner Sony (and Nintendo) could find themselves in a very challenging situation. I have no love for M$ so I obviously hope they fail but I'm certainly not going to make the mistake and underestimate the potential of Xbox 2.

How exactly is MS handling the launch of the xbox 2 going to make console consumers want to play new versions of games they didn't care about this generation?

 

[Xenus]

Simply put its Sony's market to lose so unless the PS3 is a complete pile Sony will hold the lead in the console market.

 

[cybamerc]

How exactly is MS handling the launch of the xbox 2 going to make console consumers want to play new versions of games they didn't care about this generation?

They key to Xbox 2's success will be 3. parties... just as it has been for Sony. As a publisher M$ compares favorably to Sony in the West.

 

[London Geezer]

Seriously, I don't expect that MS will get more market share next gen from Sonys side, but that's just my personal opinion and only if PS3 is what I expect it to be.

I don't think Sony's success is a given. Certainly they're in no immediate danger of ending up last but if M$ handles the Xbox 2 launch properly and deals with Sony marketing in an effective manner Sony (and Nintendo) could find themselves in a very challenging situation. I have no love for M$ so I obviously hope they fail but I'm certainly not going to make the mistake and underestimate the potential of Xbox 2.

How exactly is MS handling the launch of the xbox 2 going to make console consumers want to play new versions of games they didn't care about this generation?

Oh come on, i'm not the MS lover myself, but they are MS and i give them some more credit than that. I expect them to get some new games, they'll do well until PS3 is released, then we'll see how things go.
Give them for dead already is a bit premature.
If anyone can dream about taking a few percent of market share from Sony, it's MS.
If even they can't do it, i really don't know who can.

 

[Tuttle]

In fact it might have been to save face considering Microsoft rejected them for their next console.

Rejected? I don't follow NVIDIA that close, but I seem to remember public statements from them pretty much ruling out any interest in working with MS again.