"[RSX] ... we're still waiting" - Anon games exec, BusinessWeek article

[Titanio]

Why add SPEs to RSX? RSX will be able to communicate with 7 of them at 35Gb/s given what we know already. What benefit would more of them be? What could they do on RSX's die that they cannot where they are in Cell?

Just for argument's sake - I don't think there will be SPEs in RSX - it could allow them to adopt a much more flexible vertex/geometry shading model. I know you kind of can have that already by just using the SPEs on Cell..but you'd also eliminate CPU<->GPU bandwidth usage for those tasks. And maybe in terms of CPU-GPU co-operation, it might be easier to get SPEs to play with other SPEs vs vertex shaders (?)

Have to say, I have thought about the possibility before. It's possibly something that could have happened, maybe if they (Sony and nVidia) had more time, to incorporate more of Sony's tech. I don't think you can easily just transplant SPEs out of the Cell architecture and use them in isolation on another chip..it'd probably be a bit more complicated than that, and thus require time.

On tema's other comments, I think eDram is out the window given Kutaragi's comments.

You gotta wonder, though, how much of Sony's tech, if any, will be in RSX. I think the most likely outcome is that it'll be 90-100% nVidia stuff (be that G70, G71, whatever).

 

[Qroach]

that's some wishful thinking. but why would they wait for anything to reannouce the RSX core?

 

[Titanio]

that's some wishful thinking. but why would they wait for anything to reannouce the RSX core?

Why do companies wait for anything to announce anything?

If RSX is only recently finished, that's a pretty good reason to wait to confirm the spec, or more of the spec. Even if nothing has changed since E3, there's still detail we're missing that they could/should announce.

 

[Bad_Boy]

maybe CES06?

 

[tema]

On tema's other comments, I think eDram is out the window given Kutaragi's comments.

They need backward compatibility and a z-framebuffer cache.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/video/d2.png

Nvidia can dispose of the left column and use SPEs with less trannies.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/video/d1.png

 

[Titanio]

They need backward compatibility and a z-framebuffer cache.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/video/d2.png

A 4MB z/framebuffer cache might be moving out of cache territory and into tiling territory, probably

Must eDram be provided to achieve backwards compatability? Naive question, perhaps, but could Cell alone perhaps not provide emulation for PS2 games? There's plenty of bw within and between the SPUs to emulate the eDram.

Nvidia can dispose of the left column and use SPEs with less trannies.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/video/d1.png

How many transistors does that "column" occupy?

 

[MrWibble]

You're a brave boy

Brave wasn't the word *I* was thinking of.

 

[nAo]

Brave wasn't the word *I* was thinking of.

Sometime you can't tell the difference, you know..

 

[dskneo]

What exactly was the ps2 competing with when it released and for the immediate year or so after? Dreamcast? PS1? N64?

the semi-powerfull Dreamcast was released 1 year early.
Xbox and GC 2 years after, about 4 years ago..
it beat Dreamcast with HYPE, and Xbox/GC with games/publicity...

so... how hard is it now for PS3 ?

The most powerfull contender, X360, is released half a year early, Sony is fighting it with HYPE (and with good results, again).
the next contender is Revolution, a very weak console with funny controler.

gee, thats harder! "not"
the last 3 years of PS2 life were probably way harder than PS3 will ever face its entire life...
There's no "graphics advantage" to the contenders this time.

 

[m1nd_x]

the semi-powerfull Dreamcast was released 1 year early.
Xbox and GC 2 years after, about 4 years ago..
it beat Dreamcast with HYPE, and Xbox/GC with games/publicity...

so... how hard is it now for PS3 ?

The most powerfull contender, X360, is released half a year early, Sony is fighting it with HYPE (and with good results, again).
the next contender is Revolution, a very weak console with funny controler.

gee, thats harder! "not"
the last 3 years of PS2 life were probably way harder than PS3 will ever face its entire life...
There's no "graphics advantage" to the contenders this time.

Dreamcast was on it's way out, the company had exhausted too many financial resources and didn't have enough third-party support.

Xbox was MS's first attempt at a console, a new contendor released with limited third-party support and not too much of a line-up, released with much skeptisism everyone from Ken 'Kutaragi saying that it's going to be dead on arrival to news journalists the world over claiming it's some huge MS conspiracy. PS2 already had an install base and tons of titles people could recognize coming (MGS, FF, Tekken, etc etc) as well as the entire PS1 back catolouge.

Nintendo didn't provide as much competition as they should've because they lacked third party support that they lost with N64.
-----------------
Fast forward to the present, Xbox360 is out, they have 3rd party support from everyone I can think of. Name recognition, movie tie-ins with Peter Jackson (Halo), they've got new and promising franchises. They also have good hardware that many believe is comparable to the PS3's. Released earlier in the perfect season to get a fast install base and get some games sold. It's going to be cheaper when you consider that people can pick-up a Core system and get some gaming in... it could likely hit $200-250 within a year of release and see the install base skyrocket in time for the bigger game releases. They're pretty much in the complete opposite position that they were starting out with the original Xbox.

Revolution is coming out with an innovative controller and is attempting to reach the gamers of today and other people that might have not found games to be accesible to them. They'll likely launch at a lower price point than Xbox360 and be a lot cheaper than PS3, making their console less of a burdon to purchase if the right games are there at the right time.

All those factors cut into Sony's dominance, the previous gen was a wash for them because they were well established and started off with all of the games people wanted and hype beyond the imagination. I don't think they have as much going for them this time around and they face stiffer competition.

 

[Sis]

the semi-powerfull Dreamcast was released 1 year early.
Xbox and GC 2 years after, about 4 years ago..
it beat Dreamcast with HYPE, and Xbox/GC with games/publicity...

so... how hard is it now for PS3 ?

The most powerfull contender, X360, is released half a year early, Sony is fighting it with HYPE (and with good results, again).
the next contender is Revolution, a very weak console with funny controler.

gee, thats harder! "not"
the last 3 years of PS2 life were probably way harder than PS3 will ever face its entire life...
There's no "graphics advantage" to the contenders this time.

Jan. of '01 the Dreamcast was canceled by Sega. The PS2 had that competition for exactly 10 months. In NA, it only had Dreamcast competition for a whole 2 months. Xbox came almost 18 months later (roughly, since the PS2 released first in Japan and Xbox in NA).

Once a console has momentum it's very hard to compete against, especially once it gets under a certain price point--or at least that's the thinking from the MS camp. So I disagree with your point thatt the last 3 years were the hardest.

.Sis

 

[MechanizedDeath]

Jan. of '01 the Dreamcast was canceled by Sega. The PS2 had that competition for exactly 10 months. In NA, it only had Dreamcast competition for a whole 2 months. Xbox came almost 18 months later (roughly, since the PS2 released first in Japan and Xbox in NA).

Once a console has momentum it's very hard to compete against, especially once it gets under a certain price point--or at least that's the thinking from the MS camp. So I disagree with your point thatt the last 3 years were the hardest.

.Sis

DC got killed on hype alone. The PS2 was the reason that system died, not Sega's finances. If the system had been a success, Sega's financial situation would have been taken care of. The XB and GC came onto the scene a year later, and never managed to close the gap. They were not 20M units down when they first launched. Not enough credit is ever given to Sony for outperforming the competition. They've done it two generations running, posting large growth each time, and the best we get is that their competition was weak/stupid. When the PS3 lands, MS should have sold 3-5M units. You mean to tell me they'll be 20M units down at the end of the generation? PEACE.

 

[expletive]

the semi-powerfull Dreamcast was released 1 year early.
Xbox and GC 2 years after, about 4 years ago..
it beat Dreamcast with HYPE, and Xbox/GC with games/publicity...

so... how hard is it now for PS3 ?

The most powerfull contender, X360, is released half a year early, Sony is fighting it with HYPE (and with good results, again).

Good reasults? Last i checked MS was selling every 360 they could make in 80% of the global markets theyre in, what would have been 'bad results'?

gee, thats harder! "not"
the last 3 years of PS2 life were probably way harder than PS3 will ever face its entire life...
There's no "graphics advantage" to the contenders this time.

You realize the installed base advantage the PS2 had during the last 3 years of its life dont you?

I'm pretty sure MS would be quite happy with a 40 million+ installed unit lead before the PS3 launched...

 

[demoniq]

Good reasults? Last i checked MS was selling every 360 they could make in 80% of the global markets theyre in, what would have been 'bad results'?

As if selling 300,000 consoles in a region with population of 300,000,000 is difficult.
Good results could also mean generating a lot of anticipation with public not necessarily
preventing your competitor from selling out.

You realize the installed base advantage the PS2 had during the last 3 years of its life dont you?

I'm pretty sure MS would be quite happy with a 40 million+ installed unit lead before the PS3 launched...

The installed base didn't go out of its way to convince others to get PS2 or at least not to get XBox.
Nobody new anything about XBox where as PlayStation name was already well
recognized. Besides if you're a parent clueless about specs, would you get your kid a
console with "play" in its name or 2 X's ?

 

[MechanizedDeath]

You realize the installed base advantage the PS2 had during the last 3 years of its life dont you?

I'm pretty sure MS would be quite happy with a 40 million+ installed unit lead before the PS3 launched...

Source: SCEI

2001/10/10 	20.04 million units (Japan: 6.86 million/ USA: 8.55 million/ Europe: 4.63 million)
2001/12/31 	24.99 million units (Japan: 8.30 million/ USA: 9.87 million/ Europe: 6.82 million)

Sony only had a 20M unit lead worldwide, with 9M or so in North America when the XB launched. The PS2's lead is now at 80M worldwide and 20M in North America. Sony did most of its damage after the competition, and dominated the DC before it even launched. PEACE.

 

[scooby_dooby]

lol, this board is hilarious.}

what do we have, like half a dozen people arguign that sony will sell 200million PS3's in 5 years!???

what planet to you guys come from? delusion?

100million would be waaaaay beyond reasonable expectations, 200 million is just retarded, and I can't believe that anyone would even attempt to try and argue that point.

Analysts have them on track for roughly 20million by the end of 2008, yet the "experts" on this board peg them at 200million only 3 years later. Are you kidding me?

It's pretty funny that the only logical people in this thread, like qroach, and expletive, who make complete and total sense, are being attacked as if they don't know what they're talking about, by a bunch of people trying to argue the RIDICULOUS notion that sony will sell 200million in 5 years.

WHat are youg uys smoking? I want a hit!

 

[MechanizedDeath]

lol, this board is hilarious.}

what do we have, like half a dozen people arguign that sony will sell 200million PS3's in 5 years!???

what planet to you guys come from? delusion?

100million would be waaaaay beyond reasonable expectations, 200 million is just retarded, and I can't believe that anyone would even attempt to try and argue that point.

Analysts have them on track for roughly 20million by the end of 2008, yet the "experts" on this board peg them at 200million only 3 years later. Are you kidding me?

It's pretty funny that the only logical people in this thread, like qroach, and expletive, who make complete and total sense, are being attacked as if they don't know what they're talking about, by a bunch of people trying to argue the RIDICULOUS notion that sony will sell 200million in 5 years.

WHat are youg uys smoking? I want a hit!

This is just baiting, really. But in any case, I was wondering which analysts have Sony pegged at shipping only 20M PS3s by 2008. If they only match the PS2's success, that would be a single-year shipping number. Even when they had production problems early on, they still shipped 9M in a year. 20M would be a considerable step back from the 28M they sold in the first two years of the PS2's life. PEACE.

 

[Sis]

DC got killed on hype alone. The PS2 was the reason that system died, not Sega's finances. If the system had been a success, Sega's financial situation would have been taken care of. The XB and GC came onto the scene a year later, and never managed to close the gap. They were not 20M units down when they first launched. Not enough credit is ever given to Sony for outperforming the competition. They've done it two generations running, posting large growth each time, and the best we get is that their competition was weak/stupid. When the PS3 lands, MS should have sold 3-5M units. You mean to tell me they'll be 20M units down at the end of the generation? PEACE.

I don't know that I agree that Sony killed DC on hype alone, since the DC was selling decently. I also don't know how you can argue that having a 20 million install base with no other competitor in sight is anything but a significant challenge to overcome.

That said, I would hope that my posting history shows that I have nothing but the utmost respect for Sony's handling of the Playstation. They seem to know exactly the right balance of power/feature set, launch timing, and game library.

And I have yet to see them make a single misstep in the launch of the PS3.

None of this speaks to whether they will have a more difficult challenge this time around, since I think it's obvious they do at face value.

.Sis

 

[Titanio]

100million would be waaaaay beyond reasonable expectations

Really? Since both previous Playstations have easily reached and passed that point, I don't see what's so unreasonable about expecting the third to also do so..

Analysts have them on track for roughly 20million by the end of 2008, yet the "experts" on this board peg them at 200million only 3 years later.

No, actually, it was another of those analysts you obviously store so much faith in.

 

[tema]

4MB EDRAM compatibility first, cache second. Nvidia cache in kb. Cell only emulates EE, tricky to emulate GS games.
Vertex pipeline and Purevideo 120 million trannies, 45 Gflops.
2 SPEs 50 million trannies, 50 Gflops use Cell bw.
4MB EDRAM 40 million trannies.
G70 vertex pipeline is old. RSX use Cell and 20 1:1 Pixel/ROP.