PC Watch (my translation): PS3 Evaluation System, and much,

Discussion in 'Console Technology' started by nondescript, Jul 24, 2005.

  1. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    I think PS2's design philosophy was a bit different. Back in those console days the CPU still did the TnL. Also the GS with all that eDRAM was already a big chip so it would've been inmpossible to add on a TnL unit that's why in the end you had the VUs on the EE.
     
  2. jvd

    jvd
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Messages:
    12,724
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    new jersey
    Tons of questions though . How many triangles are the spe's going to output ?

    Did they make the right choice ? HOwever I highly doubt they juts chopped out the vertex shaders .

    The gs was being designed in 1996-1998 , the first tnl gpu came out in 1999 and i'm sure that for 1999 sony made a good choice as the tnl gpus of the time weren't all that advanced .However there are alot of other features missing out of the graphics card that evne the tnt 1 had .

    I"m sure in the end the programers and developers did things with the cpu that sony never thought of . But they also had to spend alot of time reinventing the wheel so to speak .
     
  3. DemoCoder

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Messages:
    4,733
    Likes Received:
    81
    Location:
    California
    Nowadays, the pixel shaders do most of the "L" part of TnL. Per-pixel lighting is replacing per-vertex. With topology processing and more complex shading algorithms coming into play, the traditional VS isn't flexible enough anyway.
     
  4. London Geezer

    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2002
    Messages:
    24,151
    Likes Received:
    10,297
    That was my question too. Though i'm pretty sure they'll fare quite well. My worry is the bandwidth between Cell and RSX, which is bound to be much lower than the bandwidth you'd get if the geometry was calculated all inside the RSX.

    I do have a feeling that keeping all dynamic geometry of a scene/frame on Cell, the geometry can interact better with animation and physics, being all on the CPU.
     
  5. Titanio

    Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    5,670
    Likes Received:
    51
    To clarify, they haven't, if RSX is the same config as G70, of course. There'd be 8 vertex shaders there. But when you look at how much processing their doing, if you look at Gflops, about 85% of the programmable power in RSX is with the pixel shaders.

    I'd venture to guess that for most games, the VS in RSX would be enough. What I was addressing was the rarer situation where more would be needed.

    Geometry that changes from frame to frame, due to collision detection etc. has to be passed across from CPU to GPU anyway..(and geometry has to be passed back from the GPU too for collision detection/physics).
     
  6. sklaar

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...