Look at this Google-cached (pulled down) PlayStation 3 page

Not really,

It didn't have a divide - which complicates things if you want to use it for geometry transformation...
I tended to find it easier to use the SH2 for full geometry transform and culling - dsp could have been used for lighting, but I wasn't implementing lit renderer, just prelit 3D world..

 

...

CELL in $99 DVD players and $200 TV sets? Give me a break.

Other manufacturers don't own Hollywood studios and music labels and they don't benefit anything froms such integration. They simply sell cheap TV sets, DVD players, and Sterero for a living. What consumers do with their product after sales is none of their business.

Exactly, other companies have no incentive to support CELL for above reasons. Why empower your competitor?

Can't be pulled off.

Sony doesn't own Hollywood. Sony is just another player in the consumer electronics market. Sony is not Microsoft.

Are you a Sony employee or a shareholder??? I have not met such a passionate fanboy like you in years.

Linux is open and free, CELL is not.

Yap. Cheap product. Every penny count in cost-cutting, and sticking in a $200 processor in their $99 DVD player is counter-productive.

What's wrong with today's interface? How can they be made any simpler, until the TV sets start reading your voice command?

People don't even know what pervasive computing is.

Still too large. ARM measures 3~30 mm2.

Can never beat ARM.

Of course I do what Kutaragi is upto; I was there myself 3 years ago. Eventually I realized it was not feasible due to programming complexity and moved on to something better. Why do you think I keep repeating the term "Auto parallelism"? Because it is possible.

Ha Ha Ha....

Nintendo is out of console hardware race. Xbox2 will have a 6 Ghz X86 with some kind of nVIDIA or ATI GPU with 8~16 shaders, and this hardware will outperform PSX3; this much isn't very hard to figure out.

To Fafalada

When Sega ran out of horsepower with SH-2, it stuck in another.
When Matsushita ran out of horsepower with PPC602, it stuck in another.
When Kutaragi ran out of horsepower with VU0, he stuck in another.

The EE architecture speaks for itself, VU1 functionality is duplicated by VU0 and it is not particularly tied to CPU, living as just another device on the bus.

This is why I know VU1 was an add on at later date.

That was the very purpose of its addition.

 

this might not make a whole lot of sense for this discussion, but, when Lockheed Martin was making Model 3, they probably only started out with one Real3D-Pro/1000.

that produced 750,000 textured pps with all effects on, so they added a second one to give Model 3 it's 1.5 Mpps peak / 1 Mpps sustained performance

 

A couple hundred people at SCEI, IBM and Toshiba intend to have the last laugh.

 

Deadmeat, about Xbox 2 having a 6Ghz chip... bullshit.

MS will undoubtably be going with Intel right?

The only 6Ghz chip around during the time frame of 2005 is the Intel Tejas, which starts off at around 4.5 Ghz and gets the axe at 9.

Just like it's brother, Xbox 2 will not be using a top of the line CPU.

Look at all the cash MS is losing on Xbox, they aren't ever going to make money on it. They didn't even use a top of the line CPU for Xbox either, are you saying that MS will take even greater a loss with Xbox 2?

When does MS make money in all this? It will be 10 years in a row of losses since they don't have any control over the chips and Intel and Nvidia can make them pay out the nose. I am afraid this is where Sony has MS beat, they have control over their chips, MS does not.

Top of the line 6Ghz Tejas chips aren't going to come cheap.

Oh and please, Nintendo out of the hardware market? Unlike their competitor they are making money, as long as there are little kids playing video games Nintendo will have a market to sell their hardware + software in.

 

Nintendo would not be vigorously preparing software for a machine they never intend to release. I would anticipate Nintendo to drastically reposistion themselves in the market only if their next machine is less successful than GC.

 

Re: ...

OK, I'm game. SHOW ME ONE. Post it! Show me how a compressed 800x600 image can be upscanned to 1600x1200 and still look presentable, let alone better (not just different ) than the original 800x600. POST IT RIGHT FRICKEN HERE! ...and why just 1600x1200? Why not prove your point more directly (and proportionally) by citing that such improvement can be demonstrated by upscanning all the way to 3200x2400? Yes, I truly look forward to seeing a heavily jpeg'd 800x600 image blown up to 3200x2400 and then doctored to actually look better than the original...

Your penchant for misrepresentation is admirable (as admirable as misrepresentation can be taken, that is). No where did I say that ARM was not a general purpose processor. What was even your point with that statement??? Just to post something? Cell can be scaled to serve as a general purpose processor, a DTV decoder, a full-bore gaming console- whatever you need, whatever pricepoint you want to hit. Normal people would see that as a valuable quality. What can your ARM do? (not saying it isn't a versatile piece, as well, but just what can it do that Cell cannot?) Who would turn down more power at comparable cost? They'll just think of ways to use the extra power. Duh!

No where has it been said that it hasn't. What's your point? No where has it been said that Cell needs to beat ARM, either. It only needs to possess the same functionality at a reasonable price point, and that will make it a plausible candidate to serve in the same applications. Why is this so hard to compute in your head?

You assume that Cell can only exist as is predicted for PS3, in its 1 TeraFLOP glory? ("Telaflop"? Do you write for the Onion, or something? Is this some sort of metric for Telatubbies, maybe?) If it is to be used in an ARM-esque application, one would naturally assume it would be scaled down to comparable performance parity so as to achieve the best cost benefit. ...course if you are making millions of them at smaller and smaller process sizes, maybe you won't have to scale down the architecture much at all to compete at a certain price point.

Don't be offended if we just take your assessment of the future as an opinion and not the infallible judgement of God, himself. Perhaps you end up wrong, and your dire prediction of the future turns out to be utterly inconsequential? I fully admit, Cell could go either way. I'm certainly interested to see how it turns out, instead of wallowing in a cloud of FUD to placate my insecurities.

Can you just answer the question, instead of just introducing another question as a form of diversion? Maybe you should let Intel know that they should just stick with ARM for all future CPU's, instead of wasting time coming up with a P5?

I fully see you are just trolling, judging the quality of the counter arguments you have presented here. I'm surprised you haven't been erased from these boards, yet, but maybe there's hope if the powers-that-be would just get on the ball.

 

Microsoft doesnt need super high clockspeed (like 6 Ghz) for XBox2's CPU. what they need is parallelism like PS3's version of CELL.

I'm hoping for a multicore AMD or INTEL CPU. but even so, a 2-4 core AMD or INTEL CPU wont reach even close to 1 TFLOP. that's why the lionshare of XBox2's computational power will come from its nVidia or ATi GPU(s) or VPU(s).

 

You have touched upon a very familiar argument utilized by those enslaved in the Xbox camp. What motivation is there to say Xbox will have a "6 Ghz CPU" other than to perpetuate the "my specs are better than yours" rivalry? In the same breath they will swear up and down that the "PC way" is the "correct way" with lots of hardware features and power made possible in the GPU. So which is it? They can't pick a way. Either it will benefit from a monster CPU or it will rely heavily on the GPU and use a more moderate CPU to drive the game. If it is the latter, there simply is no need for an "uber 6 Ghz CPU". ...but they could not be happy with their MS next gen console if it isn't sporting the baddest CPU on the block, right? Even then, what good is it to attach value to the term "6 Ghz"? If it is only good for 40 or 50 GFLOPs, that certainly doesn't look impressive against 1000 GFLOPs. What does that say? Is it about the games? No. Is it about bragging about dick sizes? Yes. There- I said it. ...and they say the Sony breed is an unusual mindset...

 

In a console environment when things can go 'to the metal' with little overhead, would HyperThreading (or Intel's upcoming 'impoved' HT) be a Good Thing (tm)?

I know currently HT sort of sucks because of resource conflicts and windows overhead, but in a console that wouldn't be a factor.

 

...

There was never a case of a new console unable to outperform ones predating it. Whatever comes out after PSX3 will outperform it, it is a fact.

To Paul

If PSX3 comes out in 2005 in Japan, it will hit the US the next year to launch alongside Xbox2, right? Is 6 Ghz that far-fetched in 2006 holyday season???

Of course not. The top end should be hitting 9~10 Ghz.

Maybe that is not the primary goal of Xbox, at least not right away. Just like the goal of Internet Explorer was not to make money.

6 Ghz is not the top of line in 2006.

Nintendo doesn't have the resources to compete in console hardware biz anymore, they have to defend their GBA business from PSP soon.

To randycat99

Original


Thriple resolution and Interpolated.

You fail to answer my question. Why would other manufacturers use CELL when dedicated hardware solutions are cheaper, runs cooler, and easier to code software for??? CELL was designed for only one purpose, that is to render graphics. It is just not a competitive solution for everything else.

It meets the developer requirements at right price point and packaging. Why do you think billions of 16 bit processors are still in production annually??? Because 16 bit processors are all you need for certain applications and even an ARM would be considered an overkill. Try to see the big overall picture.

When $5~10 solutions deliver sufficient performance and power consumption.

ARM rules in consumer electronic applications and CELL needs to kick ARM out to make your fantasy world of CELLtized TV sets and DVD players a reality.

It is easy to develop for ARM.(Many schools use ARM to teach ASM to their students) Even the most scaled down CELL will still dwarf Emotion Engine in die size, suck up tons of power, and still the same beast to code for.

That will only happen if Sony opens up CELL to everyone, have dozens of second sources paying a loyalty of only 20 cents per chip, allow 3rd party architectural modifications, and find some guru to make "auto parallelization" work.

Of course this will never happen.

6 Ghz P5 can actually be programmed by average coders, whereas the same is not certain for CEL.

What makes you think CELL will do a teraflop in real world???

To Vince

Call me when CELL reaches $1 price point and made available as a licensible source code available to everyone.

If the US market is any indication, there isn't.

You should.

The vast majorty of screens are not Trinitron based.

So what do other venders gain by accepting CELL?

There was never a market for "licensed" product, since the "licensed" product always end up costing more than the original since the original vender is willing to lose money to increase market share, whereas the licensee cannot afford to lose money. The playing field is not even.

This is why 3DO, Saturn clones, and Panasonic Q failed.

Because the bread and butter of consumer electronic industry is low-priced mass market stuffs.

Does Sony have a 60% film market share needed to influence the consumer purchase decision?

Yea, Sony does Charlie's Angel while AOL-Time Warner does Matrix Reloaded and Terminator3.

Only Microsoft can enforce its proprietary technology as a market standard. Sony is not.

CELL is not free and actually very expensive.

The TV and DVD user interface I see is text and simple graphics based and works just fine. No need to fix what is not broken.

That cellphone is ARM powered.

 

Deadmeat you posted 2 pics of similar resolution and not what was requested. ie one 800*600 image versus the blown up interpolated 1600*1200.

in addition you linier scaled the first pic producing an unfair comparison.

wither you are unaware of this or we cross wires an are argueing about disimilar things care to clarify a little?

 

Re: ...

Get out much? Gone shopping lately?

What does this have anything to do with home electronics?

Um, no. Well, perhaps if you're based in China and utilizing cheap labor and parts.

The "bread-and-butter" is high-end products that have commodity value.

I don't know what it is, but you'd be insane to not see the large media empire they control.

Yeah, they've had such a bad last few years.... Superman, Charlies Angels, Men in Black, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Bad Boys2, Ali, XXX, Mr. Deeds, SWAT.

Oh yes, they're insignificant.

Not an excuse. Any company with your anti-advancment attitude will find themselves outdated and out of the game in a soon enough time.

This proves what? That people desire the little bit of pervasive computing they've seen thus far on a little ARM processor? What do you think is going to happen when you allow people to surf or play streaming digital music or video onto their cellphone? Or get pictures and data off their home PC or electronics device seemlessly? Or control their recordable media at home to record a movie on TV from the phone? Or any of the thousands of possibilities that easil;y open up when you have an architecture like this that scales into many electronic devices cost effectivly.

If you can't even admit that this is the future, a connected and seemless future, regardless of if it's Sony and partners leading it - then my conversation to you is futile (which I already know it to be).

 

...

I am trying to show how other manufacturers are at cost disadvantage. With ARM, you only need to pay ARM cents per chip. With CELL, you have to pay IBM(PPC), Toshiba(VU), and Kutaragi(He just wants money), not to mention expensive fabrication(ARM is happy with 0.25 micron process), 10X jump in software development cost, etc.

Well, go check what price range product sells the most. Consumer electronic industry is known for a 5% margin and manufactacturers count pennies to save.

Yap, Sony's films could not prevent the industry from dumping Sony-Phillips's HDCD standard in favor of what is largely Toshiba's proposal intact... Sony is a small fry in the media industry and plays no role in standard setting.

I am not anti-advancement; I actually look at the bills and balance sheet.

ARM is everywhere because it is everything CELL isn't.

1. Simple.
2. Inexpensive.
3. Easy to develop software for.
4. Low power consumption.
5. A dozen 2nd sources competing on price.
6. Excellent tools.

Use faster ARM processors that still sips power in milliwatts.

That is a software functionality and has nothing to do with hardware.

A software functionality once again.

ARM is so open that it even has clones.(Other venders selling ARM compatible processor source code) I don't think anyone will even attempt to clone CELL.

 

I believe he was refering to your 'ain't broke don't fix it' quip regarding DVD Menus.

 

That is not the original. This is:



and it looks much better than that blurry-ass upscaled version.

Yes, true... you see more blur.

From the latest Microsoft's show in Japan (held yesterday):

"We will not let them (Sony) beat us to the market again"

So, if they stay true to the word they will have to lauch at the same time, and in Japan. That is if Sony decides to launch there first, (since they are the ones that control what goes on and when) Consider also that at one point MS wanted to launch Xbox in the same time with PS2, and projected hardware was something as humble as 500MHz Celeron with GF2. In many aspects such hardware wouldn't exactly stack favorably against PS2. I'm saying this to show, and it's evidenced by present Xbox too, that money was an issue for MS when they designed Xbox. They had to cut the corners a lot, they moved production all over the world to make the units as cheap as possible. The reason is, Xbox division manipulates only with the small fragment of Microsoft's wealth, and I don't think that will change much in the next gen.

At the end of the day, it won't matter. If they want to launch at the same time, MS will not be able to concot a hardware that will have a distinct technological edge over PS3, and even if there is some kind of edge, games will not show it, as the complexity of both consoles' graphics will be so high that the whole balast of impressive looking visuals will be in the hands of people who make art assets.

You mean just like Microsoft is yet another player (wannabie) in the media/gaming market?

I could be an ass and tell you to go Here and share your ideas with people who will understand and support you, but this could be more serious.

I think I have told you this before, but I'm telling you again, as a friend: Illusions of grandeur, especially of the kind where you go around and scream that you are right and that people who have proven work behind them are wrong (as of yet, I've never seen any proven work from you), can be a first sign of chemical imabalance or worse, possible schizophrenia. I've witnessed the same sad development of this kind first hand with a good friend of mine. Consider consulting your real-life friends about this, and if they agree, seek some professional help. The saddest thing is, if you have it, you are completely unaware of it, while for the rest of the world it's painfully obvious.

 

Re: ...

As noted above by notAfanB, your comparison is flawed. You need to compare the upscanned image to the original (at its original resolution). The upscanned + filtered image will naturally be more impressive in that it is larger, but ultimately it will just look like a softened version of the original. No extra detail. No real improvement in clarity. To be absolutely consistent with your 16x AA DTV claim, you then need to return the image back to 800x600 as it would be shown on said hypothetical DTV. Compare to the original 800x600. Not that big of a difference? Worth all the processing of upscanning 16x, filtering, and then downscanning for presentation? Dubious. What you are suggesting is akin to a perpetual motion machine.

You have contrived a scenario where it can only fail. Unless you have a running Cell machine you are tinkering with right now, I fail to see how you can be so certain things will be exactly how you say.

Is it or is it not capable of general processor duties?

So a single quantum level Cell unit should be quite adequate for the job. It will be small and the price will be right (using my DMGA-esque crystal ball- see how it works both ways?). Developer requirements will be nothing unusual, as you would be programming for only a single unit, anyway.

No reason a baseline Cell couldn't fulfill that.

Right, and there has never been a market shared by 3 competitors (wink)... Cell will find its specialties and proliferate from there. ARM will probably always be around, as well.

...again with the DMGA crystal ball of infinite vision?

It appears you find it a conceivable scenario then. Thanks.

The point is not whether or not you think they can be programmed. The point is what is the great importance of having a 6 GHz CPU? If it is just 4 Ghz, will that make Xbox2 a failure? Why does the clockrate have any significance at all, if all the power is to come from the GPU in this architecture? You avoided that point altogether and instead diverted to FUD-related issues of programmer friendliness.

Who really knows? It won't matter anyway for those resigned to buying consoles based soley on marketing specs like # of GHz or GFLOPs. PS3 buyers will happily scoop up their "personal 1 TeraFLOP machine", and XBox2 buyers will placate themself with the notion that they have a whopping 6 Ghz CPU inside.

 

...

To notAFanB

This is what was requested, how the 320x240 original and 1280x960 interpolated image would look on IDENTICAL SCREEN SIZE. The 320x240 would look that pixelated when the monitor resolution is set to 320x240, while interpolation of same image to 1280x960 and showing it in 1280x960 resolution would make it look smooth and detailed as the example.

To marconelly!

You need better glasses.

That Xbox was not a game console, but some kind of TVPC. Microsoft was smart enough to realize this wouldn't work and redesigned the thing to outrun PSX2.

Yap. No single company dominates the entertainment media market.

Mean to suggest me that this Vince guy designs systems for a living?

Could be said the same about you too.

Too bad I am not your good friend. Like attracts likes. You have troubled friends because you yourself is most likely troubled with similar problems.

I ask the same from you too. You do need help.

To randycat99

It is legit, this is what you would see if you reset your monitor to 320x240. If this is how far your thoughts will reach on any particular subject, I am very dissapointed.

Because Sony has not filed a patent for the very technique that enables something like CELL work for real world applications. Kutaragi doesn't get it.

At great expense, of course.

What is the transistor count of single PE? 100 million? 200 million? Can you fabricate it on mainstream 0.18 micron fab at a reasonable cost of say $10~20 per chip so that other manufacturers could use it in their $300 products??