Fujitsu at 90 nm tells us something about 65 nm CPUs

[London Geezer]

yes, 480i with a decent amount of AA and AF will look close enough to DVD IQ for the vast majority of people to be happy.
of course for me and u it won't, but we will be playing the games at HDTV resolutions so who cares...
i think something should be done about informing people of HDTV, and together with falling prices and a slow introduction on the market (to eventually have all TV's capable of HDTV resolution) then people will take advantage of HDTV res.
today and i guess for at least another 2-3 years, people do not care about HDTV, hell most people don't even know what it is and what it does.... all they know is that "plasma TV's are COOL MAN BUT SO F**KING EXPENSIVE YO!!"...
u know what i mean...
i think HDTV res will be supported widely since it is already supported today. it's obvious, not-supporting them would mean a major step back in evolution....

 

[notAFanB]

I'm with jvd and London-boy on this one. 720p 'won't' be needed since HDTV penetration by then is likely not to skyrocket. however this is really a moot point since the capacity for sch resolutions is already feasable this gen (well for xbox anyway), next gen it should very well be a trivial luxery

And they dont cost much.

try Europe, we can be summed up in word...moronic.

Yes but there are tons of things that are hardcoded into the r300 . There are also tons of bandwitdh saving tech , fsaa tech , aniso tech , bump maping , displacement maping and other stuff that is all hardcoded into the chip. It makes designing games faster and many times performance of those effects are better in hardware than software .

What makes you think that the scalar operations such as the above won't be 'hardcoded' into PS3? goin down that alley we could say that CELL could very well be an all in one solution with performs (gasp) old old software rasteristion!

seriouly tho with the exception of displacement mapping(at least iin it's current post tranform form) the rest don't exactly reqiured masses of extra logic today. and BM today is not hardcoded in the traditional sense, it is however really fast to implement under the DX model we are using.

 

[chaphack]

I say it is good to have rather than not have. Yeay know "options"? There is no excuse for hardware coming in 3 years time, to not support HDTV. Whatmore it provides additional ammo for future fanbozzzy battles.

 

[notAFanB]

Whatmore it provides additional ammo for future battles

battles? eh?


oh the BBC posted a news article regarding hte state of SONY's crrent finances.

here is the link


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3206641.stm

 

[London Geezer]

oh the BBC posted a news article regarding hte state of SONY's crrent finances.

here is the link


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3206641.stm

now u're just teasing!!!

Chap, the options for HDTV are present on today's consoles, of course they will be in next gen consoles too...

 

[chaphack]

Chap, the options for HDTV are present on today's consoles, of course they will be in next gen consoles too...

more like console(<-see no "S")
PS2 is struggling to go DTV res while GC is making do with it. DTV res is common with Xbox, but only a few are in HDTV res. So Xbox wins!

THUS, i hope that guys like Pana, who love the maths, do take note of increased resolution. Don be doing 480p, go forth and reach for IT, yeay for 720p/1080i and even 1080p~

 

[London Geezer]

Chap, the options for HDTV are present on today's consoles, of course they will be in next gen consoles too...

more like console(<-see no "S")
PS2 is struggling to go DTV res while GC is making do with it. DTV res is common with Xbox, but only a few are in HDTV res. So Xbox wins!

THUS, i hope that guys like Pana, who love the maths, do take note of increased resolution. Don be doing 480p, go forth and reach for IT, yeay for 720p/1080i and even 1080p~

(i'm not gonna go into this one)

Whatever chap, the point is, if the option is present in thie generation, it WILL be supported even more 2-3 years down the line don't you think? I think it's pretty obvious.

 

[jvd]

we may see games towards the end of the systems life that come out only in hdtv res. But i highly doubt it . As i said the gen after this one coming up will be teh hdtv gen.

if they went from ntsc to hdtv and tried to add aniso the games wouldn't be as large of a jump as psx - ps2 . I just don't see them throwing away that power and visual quality for a few hundred thousand at most that can take advantage of hdtv . Even worse the gap will be even smaller compared to computers . Most users still run pc games at 800x600. 1027 x 768 (this correct dunno off the top of my head) is just becoming standard . When someone has a r500 and a 3 gig computer and then go and play first gen games it wont look so good for sony. It wont look good for ms either

 

[Brimstone]

No matter how good a GPU is, it's not going to bridge the monsterous gap between between .13u/.11u and .065u. Any neat feature will be crushed by overwhelming brute power on the PS3, even if it doesn't get close to 1TFLOP. While the 9600/GF4 (they have about the same # of transistors FYI) may come close to the 5900 in certain situations, you'll be hard press to say they are even the same league performance wise overall. Here, you're looking at a 4x-6x times difference in transistors. Might as well as compare the GF2 to the 5900. Only way you're going to get comparable performance out of the R5x0 is to do a dual core on a more advance process, but if you're going to do that might as well as get a real DX10 part and look better in the process.

You're making an assumption based on assumptions and stating it as fact. Again, I'm not prepared to directly compare R500 and PS3 as it's foolish, both are unfinished unannnounced unfinalized products that we know little about.

This is what we do know: According to this and this and this R500 will be 90nm and have 300 million transistors. We know Cell will be 65nm, and the amount of ram that's on the chip will take up over 300 million transistors.

Speculation on this board (quoting Panajev here) is that Cell will be 500-800 million transistors. Which means it would be 200-500 million transistors of actual logic (again this is based on speculation). If we are to compare these processors based purely on the number of transistors they contain (which as I've said is ridiculously stupid) it's not clear which one is better. Depending on what speculation you believe R500 might have 1.5 times as much logic, or Cell might have 1.6 times as much logic, or anywhere in between (but Cell certainly won't have 4x-6x more, not even 2x more, maybe not even as much!).

My opinion is that the technology will be roughly on par. Both R500 and PS3 will be insanely powerful compared to what we have today. However I don't think there will be any PC games to really take advantage of R500 at first, except maybe some tech demos. But then again, if PS3 launches in early 2006 R500 will have been here for a year already, and we'll be talking about R600...

Some games might take advantage of the R500 and NV50 in 2005. Didn't Epic, the people that make the Unreal games and engine, already announce their next game is expected in 2005? If I remember correctly, the game is going to be a Microsoft exclusive, meaning it will probably come out for both the PC and Xbox2. I could be remembering this incorrectly though.

If Epic follows a similar strategy with licensing its engine technology, quite a few games will be built upon the latest Unreal engine in 2005/2006.

 

[rabidrabbit]

'Regular' low res tv versus HDTV support in consoles is comparable to
4:3 to 16:9 support in current consoles.
16:9 is pushed as the new standard, the 16:9 tv:s are affordable in cost and I believe that most who buy a new (non portable) TV set opt for 16:9 format.

Still, the consoles. The hardware in all of them is capable of true 16:9 anisotropic picture, but not nearly all of the games offer that option.

Do some of you think that even if HDTV sets will gain as much support as 16:9 format TVs (highly doubtful, in 2005-2010), there will be many games that offer HDTV resolution option? 16:9 format is easier to implement in a game than increased resolution and thus increased needs in processing power.

 

[jvd]

'Regular' low res tv versus HDTV support in consoles is comparable to
4:3 to 16:9 support in current consoles.
16:9 is pushed as the new standard, the 16:9 tv:s are affordable in cost and I believe that most who buy a new (non portable) TV set opt for 16:9 format.

Still, the consoles. The hardware in all of them is capable of true 16:9 anisotropic picture, but not nearly all of the games offer that option.

Do some of you think that even if HDTV sets will gain as much support as 16:9 format TVs (highly doubtful, in 2005-2010), there will be many games that offer HDTV resolution option? 16:9 format is easier to implement in a game than increased resolution and thus increased needs in processing power.

actually many people just buy whatever. I've seen many people in best buy listen to the guy. Them saying we don't need anything fancy we just want to watch tv . So its just like cable. It took cable a very very long time to take off. It will be the same here .

 

[rabidrabbit]

Well, surprisingly many people do not need anything fancy, cos they 'just watch the tv' (and occasional DVD and the kid plays videogames).

So they just buy what they need, HDTV is just a luxury item for majority.

 

[jvd]

Well, surprisingly many people do not need anything fancy, cos they 'just watch the tv' (and occasional DVD and the kid plays videogames).

So they just buy what they need, HDTV is just a luxury item for majority.

Bahhhhh we need better than hdtv darn it and we need it 20 years ago.

But really the tv companys should have just switched over to hdtv and dumped the old modles.

 

[chaphack]

Like i say HDTV is much much common than you think. please note HDTV does not neccesary mean those cool plasmas/lcds shitz, most 30inchers plus CRT TV support HDTV resolution.

 

[jvd]

Like i say HDTV is much much common than you think. please note HDTV does not neccesary mean those cool plasmas/lcds shitz, most 30inchers plus CRT TV support HDTV resolution.

yes chap i know what hdtvs are . I know they are common in stores. I know they are not common at homes . Went to best buy with my friend from school. He was setting up his new apartment. There was a 27 inch hdtv for 300$ and a 27 ntsc tv for 200$. he bought the cheaper of the two . Note the price diffrence goes up quickly as you move to bigger sets . Actually an 80 inch tv costs about 2 grand , the hdtv version is 4 grand.

 

[rabidrabbit]

How common?
Any figures? Out of TV's in stores, how many of them are HDTV?
Out of TV's sold, how many of them are HDTV?
What is the difference in price, for example 32" low res direct view crt vs. 32" direct view crt HDTV ?
I'm quite unaware of HDTV in usa (and Japan), but in Europe it is so very rare in direct view crt tv:s.
Edit: I see jvd answered this above, thanks.

Who knows, maybe in couple of years time there will be a revolution in television sets, and more and more tv's are flat and high resolution and affordable.
There are signs of it, and I hope it will be so.

 

[jvd]

How common?
Any figures? Out of TV's in stores, how many of them are HDTV?
Out of TV's sold, how many of them are HDTV?
What is the difference in price, for example 32" low res direct view crt vs. 32" direct view crt HDTV ?
I'm quite unaware of HDTV in usa (and Japan), but in Europe it is so very rare in direct view crt tv:s.

Who knows, maybe in couple of years time there will be a revolution in television sets, and more and more tv's are flat and high resolution and affordable.
There are signs of it, and I hope it will be so.

before hdtv you could get a 50 inch projection tv for about 1,500 . Which was extremly cheap for the size of the screen. I actually got my 27 inch toshiba (that my sister now uses ) which is hdtv ready for 200$ . Now hdtv versions are 500$ or so of the quality of the screen and the features it has .

To give you an idea broadcasts were supposed to switch over to hdtv by 2004 , now its 2007. So they can't be all that commen .

 

[chaphack]

i am not sure, but many many 30inchers plus, support HDTV res. they dont cost much more than normal sets. HDTV cost/availability is really not much a deal today....i think...imo..

 

[rabidrabbit]

Are even those cheapest HDTV sets capacle of the amximum HDTV resolution? (which is ????)
Or are they limited to just the lowest HDTV compatible resolution? (which is ???)

 

[London Geezer]

i am not sure, but many many 30inchers plus, support HDTV res. they dont cost much more than normal sets. HDTV cost/availability is really not much a deal today....i think...imo..

Yeah... KEYWORD: IN YOUR OPINION.

Just for the sake of argument, chap, if you want an HDTV compatible TV, in Europe u'd have to buy a Plasma or LCD TV.... which settles the argument for price and market penetration really.