Sony's been quiet since TGS, is it just the calm before the storm?

[ROG27]

This is why all games are made to final spec of what the console maker tells them. The current dev kit or PC(according to some devs who showed games at E3) might not allow HDR lighting so you give the best you can on what you have.

if you look at the PS3 fight night demo and the 360 demo, you'll notice the 360 demo has sweat,blood,maybe some HDR lighting, and some good shading. The PS3 demo doesn't have those things and thats probably because what EA had at the time of the demo didn't support those things.

But the PS3 demo, which was a far less developed build (and lacked many of the graphical traits as you mentioned), had much superior phyisics, animation, and model deformation....the things which will truly make a game next-gen...thanks to the utilization of CELL. I think Sony's use of CELL is the ace up their sleeve.

As weird as it sounds it's still all about graphics, its just not about object visuals anymore...it's about animation and physics now. I think this is how Sony plans to differentiate themselves this time around.

 

[Titanio]

if you look at the PS3 fight night demo and the 360 demo, you'll notice the 360 demo has sweat,blood,maybe some HDR lighting, and some good shading. The PS3 demo doesn't have those things and thats probably because what EA had at the time of the demo didn't support those things.

The E3 PS3 demo was using HDR, I think, and there was no reason for it not to, as even the Geforce 6800 equipped dev kits they'd have been using at the time allow for HDR. Sweat was there too. Things like blood, environmental detail etc. are probably a function of development time over anything else - the X360 version we're seeing now is a lot more mature than the E3 demo, obviously.

 

[blakjedi]

But the PS3 demo, which was a far less developed build (and lacked many of the graphical traits as you mentioned), had much superior phyisics, animation, and model deformation....

Um... yeah. *shakes head*.

In this thread the only thing that boggles me is the insistence that PS3 is "newer" when by all accounts the reason why folks didnt get xbox hw is cause its NEWER. Xenos wasn't "real" until about august... RSX is basically real because based on best industry guesses its an overclocked 7800 GTX with revised memory controller. RSX is a 7800 1.5

uh what was this thread about again?

 

[EpicZero]

Then there are those who hope those targets will be achieved based on blind faith because a certain company is feeding it to them. Funny how nobody on the Xbox360 side thinks KZ CGI will be achieved on Xbox360 while some on the PS3 side hope it will be achieved only on PS3.

You don't like Sony, I think the entire board gets that, but must you ridiculously take a thread completely off-topic for no other reason?

PC-Engine strikes again. You're like clockwork dude.

Anyway on topic is Sony still planning their own February show? Im kinda not buying the whole CES blowout rumor. Im sure they'll have a Playstation presence but CES doesnt strike me as the type of event to rev up the full-on hype machine.

Yes they are. There is supposed to be a surprise or something at the event, or it may have been before it. I don't believe it will be huge for the PS3 as well, CES is much more than the PlayStation to Sony, they have to show that they are still top dogs in the consumer electronic world. Using the PS could work, but wouldn't they want to focus on, I dunno, maybe an iPod rival, or their new Television line, Blu-Ray, etc...

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

off topic, but how many threads does the cell have? I'm not really tech saavy but I looked up on wikipedia but it didn't say the amount of threads the cell has like it does on the 360's wiki page(2 threads per core). So I just figured it was the same as the xbox cpu so it only had 2 threads but how many does it really have?

 

[blakjedi]

off topic, but how many threads does the cell have? I'm not really tech saavy but I looked up on wikipedia but it didn't say the amount of threads the cell has like it does on the 360's wiki page(2 threads per core). So I just figured it was the same as the xbox cpu so it only had 2 threads but how many does it really have?

9.

2 in the PPE and 7 across the SPEs ( 1 per SPE)

BTW the Xenon has 6 REAL HW threads... sheesh

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

9.

2 in the PPE and 7 across the SPEs ( 1 per SPE)

BTW the Xenon has 6 REAL HW threads... sheesh

so the SPEs are like semi-threads in a sense?

 

[blakjedi]

so the SPEs are like semi-threads in a sense?

no they are full HW threads.

 

[kopaka554]

Joe DeFuria, you're misunderstanding almost every point I'm making, and I get the distinct feeling that it's on purpose. Just to clarify, I never said that Sony could achieve everything they've displayed in real-time just yet. I did, however, say that they definitely would before the generation has concluded.

Also, in regards to the hardware in the actual machines. Meryll Lynch has the Cell pegged at $160 to produce, and the Xenon at $100. They also have both the GPUs at $100 each to produce. The cost factor is on Sony's side, but that's not even the whole story. The hardware is still at least 3-4 months newer in the PS3, and the price is still higher. How you could possibly expect a cheaper and older machine to keep up is beyond me. It reeks of denial.



Of course they can't, they're not ready for graphics of that level. However, they know that they system is capable of these graphics, so why show consumers something they probably won't play? Unless of course it's a purely technical demonstration. This point is articulated by one game: Perfect Dark Zero. Microsoft showed early video and screenshots of a choppy, average looking game, and it did nothing but hurt PDZ's image. What's the point? Show them what they'll be playing, not 'work-in-progress'.



Sony Moving To Main Show Floor At CES
It's going to a huge.

So since the Gamecude cost less than PS2 it is less powerfull right? But isn't there a genaral consences that the Xenos is more powerful than the RSX

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

no they are full HW threads.

oh I figured you were implying that the SPEs weren't real HW threads when you capped REAL after you said the Xenon has 6

 

[blakjedi]

oh I figured you were implying that the SPEs weren't real HW threads when you capped REAL after you said the Xenon has 6

No I only did that because someone said the Ps3 has 8 REAL hard ware threads when it has 9, menwhile the 360 has 6 REAL HW threads.

 

[ROG27]

No I only did that because someone said the Ps3 has 8 REAL hard ware threads when it has 9, menwhile the 360 has 6 REAL HW threads.

Actually...the 3 secondary threads Xcpu runs run at 50% performance because they compete with the primary thread for hardware resources.

This is the nice thing about the spe's each having their own local memory...each is a fully independent hardware thread in it's own right...

The ppe, like each Xcpu core, has a primary and a secondary thread.

so in summary:

Xcpu: 3 primary threads (100% performance) and 3 secondary threads (50% performance)
CELL: 8 primary threads (100% performance....*note spe threads are not as general purpose as ppe threads) and 1 secondary thread (50% performance)

 

[Titanio]

Xcpu: 3 primary threads (100% performance) and 3 secondary threads (50% performance)
CELL: 8 primary threads (100% performance....*note spe threads are not as general purpose as ppe threads) and 1 secondary thread (50% performance)

Not sure if this is the best way to put it, although I suppose it depends how you're looking at it. Ultimately each core can only offer up to 100% of its own performance. That's the bottom line, that'll ultimately be your limiting factor. On a Xenon core, two threads work to maximise that performance/share that performance. The same on a Cell PPE. On a SPU, one thread works to maximise that performance/shares that performance, at least without a context switch.

I get your point, though, obviously a thread that's on a core with another thread won't have free reign there.

 

[ROG27]

Perhaps if you were clearer with your points?



I disagree. Sony may, or may not. I certainly wouldn't say "definitely."



Interesting...the Sony fans outright dismissed the high cost for Cell in that Merril Lynch thread...(when trying to argue against the high cost of PS3)...but now it's correct?



No.

It's still on the same generation of fabrication process. 3-4 months, unless there is a change in process, doesn't mean much at all.



That's the catch, isn't it? You can't show them what they'll be playing if you don't even have final hardware to get an idea of what they will actually be playing. So instead you show a CGI generated video with *cough* guesses *cough* as to the end result.

Maybe instead of being so cynical you should enjoy the effort and ideas put forth by this developer...I have no doubt they will be putting forth an unbelievable effort, seeing as Sony wants this to be one of the flagship titles of their new console. They put a prerendered target video out there to show the what they are aiming for. I say target video because they tried using assets that will be available with the hardware specs they were given at the time. Many times target renders are overshoots, but even if they get 75% there, we will have a real gem on our hands.

People that dream of the possibilities and forget limitations are those who push the envelope. People that sit in forums sounding like cynical, depressed college students are usually unproductive themselves.

 

[ROG27]

Not sure if this is the best way to put it, although I suppose it depends how you're looking at it. Ultimately each core can only offer up to 100% of its own performance. That's the bottom line, that'll ultimately be your limiting factor. On a Xenon core, two threads work to maximise that performance/share that performance. The same on a Cell PPE. On a SPU, one thread works to maximise that performance/shares that performance, at least without a context switch.

I get your point, though, obviously a thread that's on a core with another thread won't have free reign there.

I meant 100% of the performance afforded by that core.

Either way...isolating the spes with their own local memory actually lends itself much more to true parallel processing.

 

[Gholbine]

So since the Gamecude cost less than PS2 it is less powerfull right? But isn't there a genaral consences that the Xenos is more powerful than the RSX

The Gamecube hardware is 2 years newer than the PS2 hardware. How can you possibly not understand this concept? As time goes on and hardware improves, you can get cheaper hardware for less cost! The PS3's hardware is newer and more expensive than the Xbox360's. Expecting the 360 to somehow keep up with the PS3 throughout the generation is just not reasonable.

Interesting...the Sony fans outright dismissed the high cost for Cell in that Merril Lynch thread...(when trying to argue against the high cost of PS3)...but now it's correct?

"the Sony fans". Sorry, that doesn't fly. You can't just lump thousands of people into one, and somehow include me, to make a point on another matter.

That's the catch, isn't it? You can't show them what they'll be playing if you don't even have final hardware to get an idea of what they will actually be playing. So instead you show a CGI generated video with *cough* guesses *cough* as to the end result.

They know what can be achieved with their own hardware. If they believe that Killzone can be achieved, then I'm inclined to just accept that, since they were pretty accurate with their PS2 demos. Aside from that, I really don't care if Killzone is achieved or not, I just don't want to be disappointed with 'work in progress' crap.

 

[AlphaWolf]

The Gamecube hardware is 2 years newer than the PS2 hardware. How can you possibly not understand this concept? As time goes on and hardware improves, you can get cheaper hardware for less cost! The PS3's hardware is newer and more expensive than the Xbox360's. Expecting the 360 to somehow keep up with the PS3 throughout the generation is just not reasonable.

There's a big difference between 2 years and 3-4 months when it comes to hardware.

 

[Gholbine]

There's a big difference between 2 years and 3-4 months when it comes to hardware.

I realize that, but this is on top of the cost factor as well. Even though an extra 3-4 of actual technology might not be significant, what is significant is the fact that existing hardware can come down in price quite a bit in 3-4 months, which only accentuates the cost factor.

Anyway I'm not sure how this thread turned into a pissing contest as to which machine is more powerful, so maybe we should get back on topic?

 

[wireframe]

There's a big difference between 2 years and 3-4 months when it comes to hardware.

I want to point out that i am not necessarily talking about what Gholbine said here, but just the quoted text from you.

This is not always true. Hardware that is vastly different from each other can exist in the same time period. Look at Pentium 4, Athlon 64, and PowerPC for example. Time is not always a great equalizer, especially when it comes to specific functions versus more general products. Each implementation, in this case of a general CPU, has its strengths and weaknesses. The difference here is that gaming consoles, their ultimate function in this case, is common, but their way of going about it is not.

Furthermore, I don't think Xenon has been in development for as long as Cell has. I don't think we need actual confirmation to realize that Xenon is more of an off-the-shelf product from IBM than Cell is.

 

[AlphaWolf]

I want to point out that i am not necessarily talking about what Gholbine said here, but just the quoted text from you.

er... are you saying you want to address my post out of context?

This is not always true. Hardware that is vastly different from each other can exist in the same time period. Look at Pentium 4, Athlon 64, and PowerPC for example. Time is not always a great equalizer, especially when it comes to specific functions versus more general products. Each implementation, in this case of a general CPU, has its strengths and weaknesses. The difference here is that gaming consoles, their ultimate function in this case, is common, but their way of going about it is not.

Furthermore, I don't think Xenon has been in development for as long as Cell has. I don't think we need actual confirmation to realize that Xenon is more of an off-the-shelf product from IBM than Cell is.

The same processes exist in the same time period.