nVidia shader patent (REYES/Raytracing/GI) destined for PS3?

[London Geezer]

A "computer" for home use does not need to perform all the functions, run similar types of software as a "computer" for business use.

A mainstream "computer" user doesn't need to run cad-applications, heavy database software, complicated spreadsheet, publishing software...

A home "computer" user is not the same as a geek computer user.

A home "computer" user wants to edit/view/listen photographs, video, music, maybe write a few sheets of text, e-mail, internet, video/voice/text chat, play games.... mostly entertainment. Some "heavy" user might want to keep track of family income, bills etc...

How many (non geek) PC users are really using their computers for other than entertainment.

People want the option of having many differing levels of computers from power users all the way down to light users. Apple already does many of these things yet they still can't increase their marketshare beyond niche status. How is a light PS3 computer gonna even compete beyond even Apples tiny share? PCs are dirt cheap nowadays so cost isn't even going to be an advantage for a so called PS3 computer.

Why not? PS3 itself will cost much less than a PC, and it will cost much less than a PC that outputs the same level of graphics, at least for the first year or so.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Do they really? Or is it just because they really have no other option?

Yes they do really. If they didn't then every PC being sold would be a light version. The more powerful PCs cost more than the light versions. People wouldn't buy the higher priced ones if they didn't want the higher performance. It doesn't matter what the power users actually use that power for if they indeed even use it. The point is they want choices since it's their money. It's like cars. Do you have to actually race them for you to go out and buy a Porsche? Most sportscars never touch a race track.

You can't play Half-Life 2 on a "light version PC"

What do you think drives the sales of those high end PC´s, that people need all that power to run huge databases in Access?

Edited to include the quotes

 

[PC-Engine]

You can't play Half-Life 2 on a "light version PC"

What do you think drives the sales of those high end PC´s, that people need all that power to rin huge databases in Access?

And I never said you could, since I never claimed that higher power PCs were mainly used for games. You're confusing the issue anyway. You need a powerful video card AND a powerful cpu to play highend games. A powerful PC doesn't necessarily mean a powerful videocard. Most people who buy powerful PCs want it just because of extra piece of mind not because they use it for playing games like HL2.

 

[London Geezer]

Do they really? Or is it just because they really have no other option?

Yes they do really. If they didn't then every PC being sold would be a light version. The more powerful PCs cost more than the light versions. People wouldn't buy the higher priced ones if they didn't want the higher performance. It doesn't matter what the power users actually use that power for if they indeed even use it. The point is they want choices since it's their money. It's like cars. Do you have to actually race them for you to go out and buy a Porsche? Most sportscars never touch a race track.

Doesn't matter, that's a flawed argument, high end video cards (which will cost MORE than a whole PS3) are bought to play the latest games with full eye candy on.
People don't buy 6800U's to run CAD or Excel.

 

[rabidrabbit]

rabbit, I've added a few more comments to my previous post.

ok, but I'm too lazy to turn the page

 

[PC-Engine]

Doesn't matter, that's a flawed argument, high end video cards (which will cost MORE than a whole PS3) are bought to play the latest games with full eye candy on.
People don't buy 6800U's to run CAD or Excel.

I'm full aware that a highend graphics card would cost more than a whole PS3. That's only relevent if you're talking about the hardcore PC gamer which is a small group relative to the non hardcore and non gamer. The majority of PCs being sold is not for game playing. It's being used for other things. Just because it's being used for other light stuff, doesn't mean people don't want a fast cpu, RAM, DVD burner drive etc. Besides new videocards come out every few months anyway so the PS3 PC would already be surpased by the time it makes it onto shelves and those same PS3s graphics won't be able to be updated until PS4 comes out.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Majority of PCs sold are to companies, I think

But the majority of home PC's sold need not be as high end as they are.
Many people buying them are easy to sell a high end PC to, 'cos they know little what they really need or want.

 

[PC-Engine]

Majority of PCs sold are to companies, I think

But the majority of home PC's sold need not be as high end as they are.
Many people buying them are easy to sell a high end PC to, 'cos they know little what they really need or want.

Yes but that's a given not to mention companies don't buy them for games.

Sure but people don't want SONY to tell them what they need and want and how to spend their own money.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Majority of PCs sold are to companies, I think

But the majority of home PC's sold need not be as high end as they are.
Many people buying them are easy to sell a high end PC to, 'cos they know little what they really need or want.

Yes but that's a given not to mention companies don't buy them for games.

Sure but people don't want SONY to tell them what they need and want and how to spend their own money.

No, but do they need the salesman from your local electronics shop?

 

[PC-Engine]

Majority of PCs sold are to companies, I think

But the majority of home PC's sold need not be as high end as they are.
Many people buying them are easy to sell a high end PC to, 'cos they know little what they really need or want.

Yes but that's a given not to mention companies don't buy them for games.

Sure but people don't want SONY to tell them what they need and want and how to spend their own money.

No, but do they need the salesman from your local electronics shop?

You're not required to ask for sales advice. If you already know what you want you just buy it no sales advice required.

 

[London Geezer]

I'm full aware that a highend graphics card would cost more than a whole PS3. That's only relevent if you're talking about the hardcore PC gamer which is a small group relative to the non hardcore and non gamer. The majority of PCs being sold is not for game playing. It's being used for other things. Just because it's being used for other light stuff, doesn't mean people don't want a fast cpu, RAM, DVD burner drive etc. Besides new videocards come out every few months anyway so the PS3 PC would already be surpased by the time it makes it onto shelves and those same PS3s graphics won't be able to be updated until PS4 comes out.

But that's my point: we ARE talking about the hardcore PC gamers which are a small group relative to the non hardcore and non gamer, because only the hardcore gamer buys a 6800U or X800PE, cause he wants the maximum detail available to him at the highest framerates (freak).
PS3 will, for a limited time only, produce graphics that are much superior to those available to the geekiest highest end hardestcore gamer, and at a much lower price.

I agree, and have said, that Sony shouldn't be the one to decide what people want to do with their PCs, nor should anyone else.

 

[Phil]

How is a light PS3 computer gonna even compete beyond even Apples tiny share? PCs are dirt cheap nowadays so cost isn't even going to be an advantage for a so called PS3 computer.

Why would they have to? If PS3 is equally successful as PS is and PS2 will be, you can expect a 100 million userbase towards the end of its lifespan. If the PS3 can already take care of most basic functions the average consumer buys a home PC for and one is already sitting there - why buy a more expensive PC? One of the general fears in buying PCs today is its complicated nature, required upgrades and it being out-dated soon. PCs are already on a decline by a certain audience - and it's only pushed by again a different crowd that buys it primarely as a gaming platform.

It's pretty easy to see where it can all lead to. Why again do you think Microsoft got into the industry and why do we read about "fight over the living room"? If Microsoft was so safe about its own future in the PC realm, why would they participate in being in the living room? Answer this and you can pretty much conclude/answer your own questions brought forward above.

 

[PC-Engine]

That's the thing, nobody here can answer that question.

 

[randycat99]

The answer will come as a desktop platform that manages to deliver so much more in capability than any bargain basement emachine could ever dream of, while coming in cheaper than the "built to the hilt" Wintel box, runs a wide range of software (perhaps even under multiple OS's, as well), while simultaneously circumventing all of the common Windows foibles (MS code bloat, registry rot, just plain inexplicably wierd behavior, and legions of security exploits that leave the platform leaking like a sieve). It's a tall order, but not an implausible order coming from a platform born from a clean slate, rather than waiting for Windows to "evolve" to the highly capable, yet secure, OS it so desperately promises to be with every new "release".

 

[PC-Engine]

People like the option of being able to upgrade individual parts of their computers whenever they want. That will be difficult for a closed box PS3 computer. If they decide to make it an open box using industry standard interfaces, the cost will go up. Adding a simple HDD will already raise the cost by at least $50.

 

[randycat99]

The "people" you mention are a niche group, as you were so careful to describe earlier on. It will be irrelevant to the widespread adoption of a successor platform. ...and since when would adding a HD be any more difficult than in a Wintel box?! As has already been implied, CPU and graphics performance will already be in excess in what the typical user (or even the power user, for that matter) will need. So no great need to pick and choose and upgrade there. However, since you bring it up, "upgrading" may well become an obsolete pasttime, in exchange for scaleability. Need more resources? Your nearby PS3 may well double your capability by just connecting it to your Cell desktop with a high-speed link. Need more? Daisychain another PS3 to the setup. Falling behind after 5 yrs or so? Replace both units with a PS4 and connect that to your Cell desktop.

This all sounds fanciful, but not at all impossible once x86 is left behind and a clean-sheet design with implicit scaleability native to its architecture takes hold. Given that kind of potential and that sort of userbase, what developer wouldn't try this new boat?

 

[PC-Engine]

I guess it would be a neat idea for the average person to only have to daisy chain systems together for more power. If they can implement that with a single unified power supply and keep the units small, cool, and quiet, it would be an attractive option for the average person and even some of the hardcore. Of course if the software (games mostly) is designed to automatically scale with the additional nodes of computing power, it would be even better. Howver the units would have to be pretty cheap after a year or two for the average person to buy more than one just for the sake of boosting performance.

 

[pahcman]

rather than waiting for Windows to "evolve" to the highly capable, yet secure, OS it so desperately promises to be with every new "release".

Why wait? Windows XP.

You think a new born PS OS can match XP breadth of functions? Hence one of the reasons why consoles have yet replace PC generations after generations, predictions after predictions. Not to forget the cost ceiling too.

 

[j^aws]

rather than waiting for Windows to "evolve" to the highly capable, yet secure, OS it so desperately promises to be with every new "release".

Why wait? Windows XP.

You think a new born PS OS can match XP breadth of functions? Hence one of the reasons why consoles have yet replace PC generations after generations, predictions after predictions. Not to forget the cost ceiling too.

It's sometimes easy in a thread to loose sight of the woods from the trees...

It's not about any particular OS or hardware or a particular company...It's about a clean sheet hardware/software design and patents/IPs being infringed. And the particular IP in question is the topic of this thread, this nVidia shader patent and what this could bring to the table for Sony and PS3.

As I posted earlier,

If this Sony-nVidia collaboration opens up access to these forms of patents/IPs including ones accessible through STI, I can see this being as an extremely bright and fruitfull move.

If they had a paticular direction in mind with CELL and PS3, the last thing they would've wanted was to get hindered by patents and make compromises. And this patent is a juicy one to have access to!

and

...
Indeed...the ideal time to introduce something like this would be in a clean-sheet, legacy free console architecture guaranteed tens of millions in sale, even with a less than perfect introduction! 8)

So it's not about Windows or Linux or Mac OSX they just happen to facilitate the IPs. Whatever this CELL OS will be is irrelevant but the mechanics at work to bring something like this to fruitition has chosen this particular allegiance and path. And MS are aware of this battle in the living room through a console as a trojan horse. Hence rumours of PC like multiple versions of Xenons and bridging PC gaming via XNA.

 

[Urian]

I have a question for all of you.

Is true that the actual GPU/VPU cannot do Raytracing in a good speed because Raytracing is a trigometric calculations technique and the VPU/GPU are specialized in Vectorial calculations technique?