I can imagine RSX clock speed change. They announced the speed before RSX even taped out. The speed going up or down is a function of yields. Bumping clock speed a 100 mhz is a significant performance boost and it’s almost guaranteed this will not effect long term cost much as yields improve and process shrinks happen. The big question is how bad this change will limit initial supply.
SCE interviews (Kutaragi, Kawanishi)
- Thread starter one
- Start date
flick556 said:
I kinda doubt this based on 7900GTX. It\'s 650mhz, Nvidia\'s highest end part (lower volumes) and must be pretty close to tapped out because the highest vendor standard overclocks are 700 mhz I believe, and even those there are only one or two. Most vendor overclocks on that part are more like 25mhz on the core, whereas on 7800 GTX you saw much higher vendor overclocks from the 430 standard, indicating that core had more headroom.
And in PC space you\'re dealing with volumes nowhere near close to RSX..
It\'s possible but I think a downclock to 500 is much more likely. But on the whole it seems the interviewer is reading way too much into meaningless statements by expecting a spec change.
I think what shifty meant was that the least common denominator for the ps3 still has the hard drive... While the 360 doesn't have the hard drive... Which in layman's, equate that developers will have the hard drive regardless of the SKU... while on the otherside, if they were to make a game to cater 360's 2 SKU, the least common denominator would be without any Hard Drive use...Rockster said:
Shifty Geezer said:
You can online play, Live Arcade, etc with no HDD just fine.
In fact all XBLA games must fit on a memory card. Even streetfighter 2 will do this.
Of course you cant download anything over 64 MB, which means no playable demos etc.
But I dont know, maybe Sony will \"do it right\" where MS did not, but I kinda doubt HDD is really going to lead to vastly faster loading or change the gameplay in a big way. It\'s real best use as on 360 is simply as storage for downloadable content.
In fact, I believe the numbers have been worked out here before, but a 5400 RPM HDD is not all that much faster than a 12X DVD drive. Certainly not as large as the delta to the 4X drive in Xbox1.
Shifty Geezer said:
You can online play, Live Arcade, etc with no HDD just fine.
In fact all XBLA games must fit on a memory card. Even streetfighter 2 will do this.
Of course you cant download anything over 64 MB, which means no playable demos etc.
But I dont know, maybe Sony will \"do it right\" where MS did not, but I kinda doubt HDD is really going to lead to vastly faster loading or change the gameplay in a big way. It\'s real best use as on 360 is simply as storage for downloadable content.
In fact, I believe the numbers have been worked out here before, but a 5400 RPM HDD is not all that much faster than a 12X DVD drive. Certainly not as large as the delta to the 4X drive in Xbox1.
inefficient
Veteran
sonyps35 said:
Seek time is totally different. 12ms vs +100ms. When you need to read files from different parts of the disc, this makes a huge huge difference. Just having a HD as a cache will help a lot in decreasing the overall time it takes to get data from disc.
sonyps35 said:
Side note, it seems a 256 MB memory card was announced at E3 as well. Dunno whether this means the max XBLA game size limit will be raised. Still probably too small for demos though.
http://assets.xbox.com/en-us/e32006/press/Xbox360AccessoriesFS - FINAL.doc
Black Dragon37
Newcomer
Fixed.one said:
Could this be because they actually want to encourage you to use the PS3 as your media hub/server, not PC.darkblu said:
It's no wonder they haven't put too much effort on their PC media software...
I've said this before, but if Sony wants the PS3 to be a media hub/server, good luck to them. The PVR stuff is apparently a very difficult task (and if it wasn't, wouldn't Apple have a mac mini media center version?). It will be interesting to see the details and long term plans, but I don't believe it'll be an easy task to convince people to shift all their media from their PCs onto the PS3.rabidrabbit said:
It might make sense for those who don't have any PC at all. But then, what percentage of consumers who could spend $500-$600 on a consumer electronic device don't have a PC? I'm sure it's a non-zero value, I'm just not sure it's above 1%.
Sony are very different to Apple, in that they are in part a long standing CE goods developer and manufacturer. All these devices that PS3 could converge, they have been at the forefront of their development. They can still make bad choices and overlook some points, but when it comes to experience for convergence devices, surely no-one is better suited than Sony?Sis said:
It's obvious Sony plans to make the PS3 a gateway to their online shops, not the PC.
What content is there on your PC that has been bought from Sony's Connect service? I bet very little or none.
With PS3, it being in the livingroom and the content being available so much easier than on a PC, there's little reason for Sony to invest heavily on their PC software.
You might be able to copy/transfer your exsisting media from PC to PS3, either via WiFi or wired lan, but I don't think any kind of streaming would be possible directly from a Windows PC, as people do not have that much content purchased from Sony in their PC's. Maybe someday from a Sony Homeserver, a network HDD.
What content is there on your PC that has been bought from Sony's Connect service? I bet very little or none.
With PS3, it being in the livingroom and the content being available so much easier than on a PC, there's little reason for Sony to invest heavily on their PC software.
You might be able to copy/transfer your exsisting media from PC to PS3, either via WiFi or wired lan, but I don't think any kind of streaming would be possible directly from a Windows PC, as people do not have that much content purchased from Sony in their PC's. Maybe someday from a Sony Homeserver, a network HDD.
Sis said:
Strictly speaking, we still do not know whether and how PS3 will offer PVR feature since we can't find the video-in port. Assuming it's in...
The difficulty of doing PVR is a blessing in disguise. If Sony can do it well, others would find it hard to follow isn't it ? So it's not really a problem but an opportunity. There is no reason why Sony couldn't/wouldn't give it another stab since PSX ?
As for convincing people to shift all their media from PCs to PS3, you're right. TiVo has done a research which indicated that most people see PC as their media hub. Nonetheless, I see this in no way conflicting with the PS3 vision. As long as PS3 continues to support DLNA (as demo'ed in CES last year), it will be possible to run a software service on the PC to behave like a compatible media server. However while you're in the living room, the center of control and activities is on PS3. The 60Gb disk can serve as yet another repository for people in the family (it depends on how you want to organize your digital shoebox).
In fact, if LocationFree is truly built into PS3, then the media function is extended beyond the home networks too. There are pros and cons why do these should/shouldn't run on a PC.
Finally, Apple will likely extend the iTunes infrastructure to the living room. However I think they are different enough from Sony that they won't be competiting directly.
patsu said:
People are already getting this functionality, as well as timeshifting, very easily and very inexpensively from their cable companies and satellite companies. I dont know how: 1) the PS3 could possibly do it any better, especially with HD. 2) People are going to leave their 2 tuner DVR with timeshifting behind for another box with worse functionality and at a higher (or added) cost.
The PS3 will provide its content via downloads, i dont see how a PVR makes any sense.
patsu said:
Really? Last i checked a mac mini was $599.
Right now Sony and MS are not even in the same league as apple in terms of content delivery and the digital entertainment supply chain...
expletive said:
Again assuming PS3 offers PVR functionality...
In my area, only _digital cable_ subscribers can get DVR. If I don't want to pay higher monthly fee "forever" (US$20.00/month _extra_ for first 3 months, US$39.00/month _extra_ subsequently), a standalone PVR can be a solid alternative. I save US$411.00 the first year, US$468.00 every year after that, minus my initial PS3 investment + HD upgrade.
As for worse functionality... the dual-tuner will be a deal breaker for those who want to watch 1 channel and record another. If PS3 is truly a DLNA + LocationFree media hub, then it opens up the possibility for me to easily view the recorded TV (or live TV) anywhere in the world, even store the recorded media on my PC running DLNA software.
expletive said:Really? Last i checked a mac mini was $599.
Hm ? My microwave costs $599 too but it doesn't mean that it's a direct competitor to PS3.
You can't play the latest and greatest games on the Mac Mini. You can't play Blu-ray on a Mac Mini, etc. etc. On the other hand, you can't play protected AACs on PS3. So IMHO, they are not directly competing.expletive said:
In one of my previous posts, I ranked Apple higher than Sony in the Living Room Domination game. But it doesn't mean the rest can't compete for it. Sony and MS have their own strength. It also doesn't mean we can only have 1 winner here. The market seems big enough for > 1 player.
scooby_dooby
Legend
How the hell is PS3 going to offer PVR functionality? Read my lips: Not going to happen.
You want PVR? Get a 360, install windows vista on your PC, slap a $50 capture card in there and call it a day.
You want PVR? Get a 360, install windows vista on your PC, slap a $50 capture card in there and call it a day.
Similar threads
