Wasn't the PS3 originally specced with something like an custom 8800? Am I making this up?

inlimbo

Newcomer
I know that it launched with a custom hybrid of 7600/7800 architecture and Kutaragi originally wanted two Cells and no GPU at all, but when they originally vetoed the latter and decided a GPU was necessary and theoretical tech demos started showing up like the first MGS4 demo, weren't devs under the impression they were targeting something like an 8800? I swear I remember reading that but I'm having trouble finding evidence. Maybe it was more like they were expecting a fully featured 7800 and got something lesser, then was then even downgraded once more from its original spec? Please shred my illusion here

edit: terrible typo in that title but nothing I can do about it now
 
I find it hard to believe after the fact that they did not order and get exactly what they expected WRT to the GPU used (pruned 7800). At the end of the day, they are the ones paying and ordering something specific.
 
The PS3 only got a NVIDIA GPU somewhere in 2004.

While work on the G80 architecture began in 2002, it may have been possible that an engineering unit exists with an early G80 based GPU, it's still unlikely that Sony seriously considered using G80 due to costs and change in design it required. On top of that the G80 wasn't ready untill 2006 whereas the PS3 was originally supposed to launch in 2005. But this was the era of crazy Ken and Sony weren't fully honest with the specs and power of the machine. Didn't developers received devkit rather late?

There recently was a thread about the viability of a better GPU in the PS3: https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...-rsx-instead-of-something-better-spawn.62928/
 
I know that it launched with a custom hybrid of 7600/7800 architecture and Kutaragi originally wanted two Cells and no GPU at all, but when they originally vetoed the latter and decided a GPU was necessary and theoretical tech demos started showing up like the first MGS4 demo, weren't devs under the impression they were targeting something like an 8800? I swear I remember reading that but I'm having trouble finding evidence. Maybe it was more like they were expecting a fully featured 7800 and got something lesser, then was then even downgraded once more from its original spec? Please shred my illusion here

edit: terrible typo in that title but nothing I can do about it now
Maybe Sony’s math looked something like this…

7800 + Cell = 8800!!! 😂
 
I remember reading the memory bus dropping from 256bit to 128bit caught a lot of people off guard.

It's now possible to overclock RSX using custom firmware and from the video's on YouTube the difference a small increase can make to performance is actually quite surprising.
 
I know we got bad blood, Geezer, but you don't have to rake my shitty memory over the coals ;) . I appreciate the clarification here, though. I don't know where I got this idea, probably just an inflated memory based on all the talk from this era that devs targeting PS3 pre-dev kit had been targeting some inflated specs initially, which in part led to the massive overpromising that was that initial MGS4 teaser. And considering this industry's ability to promise the moon, I give that kinda of rumor making more credit than I might otherwise, so in my head the RSX was promised as something effectively more powerful than the 360's Xenon.

Maybe it's more likely that KojiPro were kind of irresponsibly throwing the kitchen sink at that teaser and hoping to get close to that target, which is something they'd never done before with a real-time demo considering until MGS4 their 3D games always ended looking better than their reveal trailer for the most part. But then even with the E3 2006 trailer downgrades it still looks arguably closer to the 2005 teaser than the final game on average, and that footage is clearly evidence of a game in production and not just a wishful thinking teaser. So it makes me wonder what they were targeting then, even if it is a slideshow to some extent and the realities of designing a game with as much interaction as MGS4 are necessarily going to impact visuals over the course of development. I don't know. The lesson here is that MGS4 probably should've been largely baked global illumination with some select realtime lighting, instead of the other way around as it is in the released title. Maybe we could've got something closer to that teaser and more stable performance along the way. There's some baked global illumination and shadow casting in that 2005 trailer as it is, I think.

edit: had my dates wrong
 
Last edited:
More than anything the reason I make a thread like this is that I'm old enough a gamer that I can't help dreaming about a seventh generation where a PS3 could justify its price as a real premium machine. And while i feel like the quality of bluray player in the machine did justify that price to some extent, and I still have my big OG 60gb PS3 for no other reason than the hardware PS2 BC, I can't help but still dream that dream

A PS3 with a better GPU would've meant even more loss upfront for Sony, a risk that could theoretically wreck them the way the PS3 almost did, but I would think it's hardware advantage also would've quickly made it the standard platform in the way that the 360 ultimately became that standard, even with the complexities of the Cell. Which in my mind quickly makes the PS3 the dominant platform, offsetting whatever loss they'd be taking
 
God, I like to dream about this. No split RAM. Crysis with some day one PS3 port. MGS4 looking insane and maybe playing better as a result, with more overhead to realize what otherwise feels lacking and half-baked about some of its game design next to its predecessors. The latter wasn't just or even primarily the fault of the PS3, I realize. MGS4 was kinda rushed out the door with budget concerns and all that. If Konami wasn't on their backs I feel like the game would've been delayed into 2009 based one particular behind the scenes feature

Native ports of Doom 3 and F.E.A.R. with no compromises. And maybe more importantly F.E.A.R. 2 without the downgrade, though I still think it's a nice looking game if a much less interesting one mechanically. And I guess maybe it would've suffered from parity with the 360 anyway, since those console sales were everything.

But PS3 exclusives, hoo boy. Maybe even The Last Guardian would've come out years earlier and on its original platform with decent enough performance. I could dream all day. But I am frustratingly exactly the daydreamer type.
 
A PS3 Pro would likely have had such a graphics chip, maybe with double the VRAM, though it still wouldn't have solved the difficulties developers were having with the cell and 256mb system ram.
 
Back
Top