Brief inquiry on PS2 GS capabilities.

[Megadrive1988]

It seems that Playstation 3's GPU might only have 4 pipelines. Each PE of the Visualizer has a Pixel Engine. If a Pixel Engine contains just 1 pipe, then PS3 might only have 4 pipes.

however there are several factors that could changed that.

1.) we don't know the exact PS3 configuration of Visualizer(s)

2.) we don't know for certain if 1 Pixel Engine = 1 pixel pipeline

 

[ERP]

The issue is the setup for mip mapping, not the GS side, it's just that pretty much every piece of hardware, since voodoo 1 and a lot before have done it for you. You basically have to compute or fudge the parameters. Usually it ends up being the latter.

I would argue with this.
While it's technically possible to recalculate mip-koefficients per polygon and that should give you accurate lookups - if they wanted me to do this, why are the respective settings not part of the vertex registers and I would have to clutter my display lists with extra texture register settings not to mention the pretty sizeable calculation overhead involved if I do this on per vertex basis?
I don't mind doing something myself if the interface allowing me to do so is accessible as opposed to almost prohibitive.

I agree it's basically impractical to do the calculation correctly, you end up having to pick slope numbers that work, which is far from an ideal solution. I've heard it said that the original GS spec included beter support for mipmapping, and it was one of the cut features due to manufacturing cost.

 

[DeanoC]

OH! and DeanoC, if ya reading, i ain questioning your l33t programming skills(who am i to? )

Feel free to question my skills, I certainly do. 2nd time I might think of a better way.

JUST that im sure you + your team have to work with the limiting constraints of a port job, tons of legacy items left over, impossible to rewrite the PS2 optimised codes to suit the PC platform. Im sure with enough time + resources, SH3 be very doable well on a GF3/8500(which happens be the min requirements), i don see the special of graphiX, especially with the angles and pacing the game take place.

Of course SH3 can be done on a modern(ish) PC. But it works well on a PS2 which demonstrates that the combination of VU1 + GS was relatively well designed as a graphics system. A fast flexible vertex pipeline combined with a high fillrate/high triangle rate rasterisor. Of course decent mipmapping and more texture RAM and it would have been even better...

 

[Fafalada]

You know, technically, if I take a 512x512 texture and scale it down to 64x64, this is a form of "compression" just like CLUT is a form of "compression".

Except that this isn't playing technicalities. Clut is a form of Vector quantization, much like what DC used. Yes the latter has better quality:size ratio, but nobody was arguing about that.
Is MPEG2 somehow not a compression anymore because there are other IDCT based schemes that produce better results like MPEG4?

It seems that Playstation 3's GPU might only have 4 pipelines.

At 2ghz, 4pipelines with 32Flops/cycle each would be plenty (Using old terms this would roughly equal 32GTexel for the whole chip).

 

[Paul]

At 2ghz, 4pipelines with 32Flops/cycle each would be plenty (Using old terms this would roughly equal 32GTexel for the whole chip).

Your expecting 2Ghz???

 

[marconelly!]

Looking better than PS2 SH3 could. NOW i know some be gonna mention the Blaze VGA, but i really doubt it could replicate true VGA IQ of PC power.

Blaze VGA is VGA output. There's no difference in picture sharpness or the quality of signal from regular PC running in the same resolution.

 

[zidane1strife]

Seeing the gs, and the ee make me hopeful for next-gen h/w. Done on .25micron and still being quite impressive for their time... and remaining un-eclipsed in some areas to this day. If they'd been made on cutting edge tech for that time instead of .25m...

Anyway, that's what we're going to see(hopefully soon) next-gen h/w done on cutting edge tech for its time. IMHO that which is delivered(announced) shouldn't just achieve that which most expect, but should sound ridiculously impressive to all.

 

[kaching]

GS sucks...the proof is in the games... What sucks more...

That's a quite a bit of sucking in such a short space...so have you given up on trying to convince everyone that you are just trying to offer a balanced perspective? Because I don't see anyone saying the Xbox GPU or the GC's Flipper "sucks" to warrant your balancing comment about the GS.

Ain that a sign of a poor sighted 3D hardware manufacturer?

Poor sighted? Efforts to downplay performance of any aspect of the PS2 continue to this day, years after the engineers finalized their spec, against the backdrop of record-breaking sales to this day in the console sector.

I'd say that doesn't really qualify as poor-sighted.

 

[Steve Dave Part Deux]

GO- All I know is that it works, perhaps the architecture of the multi-bank dram makes possible what you describe.

 

[chapban.]

It be the truth Kaching, it be the truth.
Of coz its poor sighted. Lock down in 1997 launch in 2000. Almost like 3 years..you don do that with cutting edge hardware. Who cares about the sales? Why is it even mention? Sales are sales, 3D graphiX are 3D graphiX. I don see the connection. :?

 

[kaching]

I guess that's an admission that you don't really care about "balance", if you ever truly did.

I didn't just mention sales, chap. If this design was really locked down all the way back in 1997 then it's even more impressive how farsighted Sony (& Toshiba) engineers were that the 3d hardware in the PS2 is still relevant today, 7 years later. If the 3d capabilities of the PS2 really did "suck" then we wouldn't be speaking about that hardware in the present tense, it would be a footnote by now.

I know it would be convenient for your argument to just ignore sales, to somehow totally divorce the graphics from the reason why close to 70 million people worldwide have bought the PS2. And, certainly, there are a number of other reasons why they do buy the PS2. But given that the PS2 has seen the lion's share of its sales after the Xbox and GC arrived, meaning that most PS2 owners have had a chance to experience superior game graphics in the same price range prior to buying their PS2, your argument is exposed as false. Because there's really only two ways to explain the continued sales domination of the PS2 in relation to its graphic capabilities: either 1) people simply don't care that much about visuals or 2) the majority of the gaming population is really not seeing that big of a difference between the consoles in terms of visuals because they're not busy trying to catalogue every pixel they see on screen in terms of color, how many shader/texture effects are being heaped on it and whether it is contributing to aliasing or texture shimmer.

Either way, Sony engineers properly gauged what the PS2 needed in terms of 3d capabilities to be successful in its marketplace. They built to purpose and have more than seen that purpose fulfilled. Most certainly not the definition of "sucks".

 

[chapban.]

Eh, yeay i do care about balance. Why not? Since it be the truth GS is sucky. As also sucky to lock things down in 1997(NOT my words, but those Sony guys)

The 3d sucks, but it be the lead console, that why it is still relevent today. IF PS2 were not the most selling console, the devs would have move on the greater hardware as standard. Sony sold PS2 not due to its amazing 3d, but hype-hype-hype, early lead, accumlation of games, strong marketing and familiar brand. The 3d suck, but the sales ain. And since we are always be talking about the 3d hardware, why bring sales into the game?

FYI Intel Xtreme Accelerator holds a STRONG share in the 3d market, yet it suck compare to Ati/Nvidia latest. Just because it sold much, does it make it less suck 3d? Just because many are contend with integrated graphics, does it make the 3d less suck? Are you confusing with seeing PS2 as an overall game console(which give admittedly wholesome satisfaction) rather than the point in contention, the GS sucky 3d?

MayB if you distance from the need to defend Sony stance, and just see the GS for itself, it really ain good. Never understood why sales(we know we know, PS2 crushes all today) be coming into here.

Is it convenient for me or for YOU?

 

[aaaaa00]

Re: ...

Wait, what is my GF4 telling me when it says it supports D3DFMT_D24S8 then? I'd call that a 32-bit z-buffer - 24 bits for depth, and 8 for stencil.

Yes 24bit depth precision, that's what DM was talking about.

I don't think it matters. The hardware either allocates 32-bits per pixel when you ask for a zbuffer of D3DFMT_D24S8 or D3DFMT_D24X8, or 16-bits per pixel if you ask for D3DFMT_D16.

Those are the only z-buffer caps bits exposed on my hardware anyway.

 

[Guden Oden]

FYI Intel Xtreme Accelerator holds a STRONG share in the 3d market, yet it suck compare to Ati/Nvidia latest. Just because it sold much, does it make it less suck 3d?

You troll.

Intel integrated graphics couldn't run a modern game if its life depended on it, you know that. The same is HARDLY true of PS2. So stop your PATHETIC trolling, there's nothing wrong with your precious xbox not being the leading console. It's JUST a friggin piece of plastic, just like ps2. You don't have to be so upset by it lagging behind Sony, it CAN'T love you for all the praise and worship you heap on it.

Play your games and be happy, when you start jerking off thinking xbox thoughts and the unfairness of it not being #1 like you're doing now, then it starts to get sick, mmkay? If neccessary, seek professional counseling to deal with the trauma, just as long as you don't keep spewing your biased BS all over this place alright?

 

[chapban.]

FYI Intel Xtreme Accelerator holds a STRONG share in the 3d market, yet it suck compare to Ati/Nvidia latest. Just because it sold much, does it make it less suck 3d?

You troll.

Intel integrated graphics couldn't run a modern game if its life depended on it, you know that. The same is HARDLY true of PS2. So stop your PATHETIC trolling, there's nothing wrong with your precious xbox not being the leading console. It's JUST a friggin piece of plastic, just like ps2. You don't have to be so upset by it lagging behind Sony, it CAN'T love you for all the praise and worship you heap on it.

Play your games and be happy, when you start jerking off thinking xbox thoughts and the unfairness of it not being #1 like you're doing now, then it starts to get sick, mmkay? If neccessary, seek professional counseling to deal with the trauma, just as long as you don't keep spewing your biased BS all over this place alright?

See that Mr Baumann, what did yours truly tell you b4. :?

Talk about taking things the incorrect way.

 

[London Geezer]

FYI Intel Xtreme Accelerator holds a STRONG share in the 3d market, yet it suck compare to Ati/Nvidia latest. Just because it sold much, does it make it less suck 3d? Just because many are contend with integrated graphics, does it make the 3d less suck? Are you confusing with seeing PS2 as an overall game console(which give admittedly wholesome satisfaction) rather than the point in contention, the GS sucky 3d?

Ever heard of things called "offices". I work in one, and here, in ONE office there are around 200 PCs with Intel Extreme Graphics. That is why it is the market leader.

The difference between the 2 markets is so clear it just makes you look stupid when you say these things.

PS2 is a leisure product which people buy for their amusement, PCs with Intel Extreme graphics are bought by offices to run Word and Excel.

Once again, comparing apples to monkeys.

MayB if you distance from the need to defend Sony stance, and just see the GS for itself, it really ain good. Never understood why sales(we know we know, PS2 crushes all today) be coming into here.

Is it convenient for me or for YOU?

And maybe if you distance from the need to bash Sony, you'd listen to DVELOPERS on here telling you the GS isn't really the real problem in PS2, apart from lacking some features.

The reason it isn't used fully (not even close, actually), is because, as explained MANY TIMES before, the EE can't feed him enough data.

Therefore, the GS itself is a hell of a monster which just sits there waiting for the EE to do his thing most of the time...

 

[chapban.]

The GS is a very basic rasterizer, in some ways it's featureset is sub Voodoo2, but it does do most of the basic operations, texturing mipmapping, bi/trilinear texturing, Z buffering etc.

It attempts to make up foir the lack of features with raw fillrate.

nAo also ain too fond with the GS. Same with MrWibble.

Now dear devs, ain wanting to be using you guys as the 'backing', but some really need to let go how certain things are.

 

[Guden Oden]

Talk about taking things the incorrect way.

Uh-huh.

Yeah, I guess I was all wrong there, all PS2 games obviously suck, yes I see the light now.

Christ. Everything'd be just peachy if you'd just adopt a nice live-and-let-live attitude, play your xbox and revel in its superiority if applicable, I don't see why you have to keep bashing the ps2 though. Any somewhat balanced person can see there are good-looking, graphically impressive games on the system, so obviously the machine cannot be the heap of stinking offal you're constantly trying to portray it as.

Again, it is JUST a games console. I haven't even played mine for weeks, last time I used it was to watch some DVD movies. It's not my girlfriend or anything like that, I don't HAVE to defend its honor whilst attacking the credibility of other people's consoles; it won't get jealous on me if I don't.

You try to chill for once, that'd be most welcome.

 

[PC-Engine]

I can make a Pinto do the 1/4 mi in 8 secs too...and?

 

[_phil_]

nAo also ain too fond with the GS. Same with MrWibble.

i'm game artist.i'm ok with GS. Just don' t even try to design against.If you design with ,there's room for fun neat things.