Why does Sony create such wacky architectures?

[zidane1strife]

Hmmm, what are the stats on the naomi2?
From what I've heard previously it's top on lights mostly... but when you take that out gpus like that in the xbox can eat it for breakfast in flexibility and features... Or is that wrong?

Many casual gamers I know aren't impressed by VF4, on the other hand give em some high poly models(RE:RB), and watch the expression...
How does it fare in geometry, and animation of models?

Most casuals don't care much about the lighting unless it's a splinter cell esque use of it. How does it fare in the areas of shadows, particles and the like? Or in the various motion blurring, heat haze, and other effects like that?

I dunno much about it so I'd like to know were this supposed miracle h/w stands?

 

[PC-Engine]

The cost of a PS2 in March 2000 to manufacture (launch date) was over $300. I believe in 2001 it was just around $300. Also, bear in mind PS2 first specs were released in March 1999.

...and?

Look... it would have been more expensive to manufacture than PS2 IMHO if you wanted to come out in that time-frame... just because Namco is ripping people off by selling basically a stock PS2 as an Arcade machine, do not start telling me how easy Naomi 2 would have fit in a console...

Umm...no and I've already gave reasons why N2 wasn't more expensive than System 246.

DC is basically N1. It's about half the size as PS2. N2 would fit in a PS2 sized console.

 

[PC-Engine]

Hmmm, what are the stats on the naomi2?
From what I've heard previously it's top on lights mostly... but when you take that out gpus like that in the xbox can eat it for breakfast in flexibility and features... Or is that wrong?

Many casual gamers I know aren't impressed by VF4, on the other hand give em some high poly models(RE:RB), and watch the expression...
How does it fare in geometry, and animation of models?

Most casuals don't care much about the lighting unless it's a splinter cell esque use of it. How does it fare in the areas of shadows, particles and the like? Or in the various motion blurring, heat haze, and other effects like that?

I dunno much about it so I'd like to know were this supposed miracle h/w stands?

I never said N2 beats Xbox in all areas. I said it beats Xbox, GCN, and PS2 in lighting. This from technology that's even older than PS2

Goto the arcade and look at VF4 then compare it to DOA3. They don't look that much different.

With regard to particle effects, the GCN doesn't have dedicated hardware for particle effects either, but it can do them pretty well.

 

[Panajev2001a]

unless System 246 wasn't sold at $299 and now $199 I do believe your argument...

If we took Naomi 2 with all that RAM and the two GPUs and the Elan chip, in 2000-2001, we would have spent more money manufacturing than Sony...

 

[PC-Engine]

unless System 246 wasn't sold at $299 and now $199 I do believe your argument...

If we took Naomi 2 with all that RAM and the two GPUs and the Elan chip, in 2000-2001, we would have spent more money manufacturing than Sony...

The point is at launch the two costs about the same to manufacture. PS2 got cheaper because it needed to...it's a console that in turn made System 246 cheaper . N2 didn't have to go through major cost reductions because it's an arcade board and never released as a console.

In other words at launch, the PS2 costs between $400-$500 to manufacture. An N2 based console can be manufactured at the same costs, maybe even cheaper at that same timeframe. The RAM argument doesn't really hold water either. We're talking the system as a whole not just the cost of RAM not to mention N2 used cheap slow mass produced by everyone SDRAM. The fact that N2 used more RAM than PS2 is irrelevant.

 

[Fafalada]

it's a console that in turn made System 246 cheaper.

A 100$ would hardly make a notable difference with arcade boards that sell for several thousand.
At any rate, last I checked (some six months ago) Naomi 2 kits were close to double the price of system 246 - difference was in thousands, not hundreds $.

 

[PC-Engine]

it's a console that in turn made System 246 cheaper.

A 100$ would hardly make a notable difference with arcade boards that sell for several thousand.
At any rate, last I checked (some six months ago) Naomi 2 kits were close to double the price of system 246 - difference was in thousands, not hundreds $.

Selling price and cost to manufacture are not the same thing. Please read the previous posts.

I'm using System 246 and PS2 as one and the same with regard to manufacturing costs. I'm not talking about selling price. What System 246 or N2 sells for is irrelevant...well maybe not to V3

 

[V3]

A 100$ would hardly make a notable difference with arcade boards that sell for several thousand.
At any rate, last I checked (some six months ago) Naomi 2 kits were close to double the price of system 246 - difference was in thousands, not hundreds $.

Sega ripped me off At least they could have pass the saving to their consumers. VF4 is already more expensive then the rest.

 

[PC-Engine]

A 100$ would hardly make a notable difference with arcade boards that sell for several thousand.
At any rate, last I checked (some six months ago) Naomi 2 kits were close to double the price of system 246 - difference was in thousands, not hundreds $.

Sega ripped me off At least they could have pass the saving to their consumers. VF4 is already more expensive then the rest.

Yeah, but you're killing two birds with one stone as N2 is backwards compatible with N1. I guess if you're not an arcade operator then it doesn't apply

 

[V3]

In other words at launch, the PS2 costs between $400-$500 to manufacture. An N2 based console can be manufactured at the same costs, maybe even cheaper at that same timeframe.

And the DVD feature would be missing, PS2 would be in deep trouble without that DVD feature. That's what its good for early on

 

[V3]

Yeah, but you're killing two birds with one stone as N2 is backwards compatible with N1

Yeah, but I don't use it for N1 games, its only for VF4. If there was a N1 base VF it would be different story. I mean even in Arcade, I can't imagine the operator bought N2 for N1 games, as N1 board are alot cheaper.

The real question is not why Sony didn't use N2 but, why did Sega released Dreamcast ?

What they should have done, was just released N1 in the arcade, and wait for N2 to be release in Arcade but also as Dreamcast. By then the library of N1 would be great, and Sega should be in position to entice customers with the N2 line up. And able to gauge that Sony was including DVD with PS2. Sega screw up big time. Instead, people were bitching about Model 3 comparison.

 

[PC-Engine]

What they should have done, was just released N1 in the arcade, and wait for N2 to be release in Arcade but also as Dreamcast. By then the library of N1 would be great, and Sega should be in position to entice customers with the N2 line up. And able to gauge that Sony was including DVD with PS2. Sega screw up big time. Instead, people were bitching about Model 3 comparison.

Hmm you know in hindsight, that sounds like a really good strategy...almost perfect actually. Anyway I think the reason why SEGA released the DC because SONY was already in a comfortable position as they already had the PSX. I guess SEGA wanted to be first off the block with the "next generation". That's probably why SONY released PS2 so soon after DC as they didn't need to if SEGA hadn't released DC in the first place.

 

[Fafalada]

What System 246 or N2 sells for is irrelevant...

Well you were the one to compare N2 to 246. And since N2 hardware was never mass produced, and we have no actual info on production costs, the selling prices of two competing hw are the only reliable thing you can compare.
Add that N2 is pretty much the most expensive arcade kit in recent history, while 246 is amongst the cheaper ones.

As for specs, just this on the whole 'lighting' issue - even with an edge in vertex processing over consoles, the fillrate weakness more then levels the playing field.
Unless we limit lighting to vertex only, which would considerably handicap Xbox and even more so GC - not to mention it just doesn't look as good

 

[Phil]

I never said N2 beats Xbox in all areas. I said it beats Xbox, GCN, and PS2 in lighting. This from technology that's even older than PS2

Of course, what you also did said though is that:

"We do know that it was not the best design available at the time."

obviously in regards to PS2 and the 'better' Naomi 2 board. Now, we've discussed production costs (of which you still haven't backed up anything yet) - if we assume now that you are correct and that they are comparable from a manufacturing point of view, what makes you think that the Naomi 2 features a better design?

Also, about the cost issue: lets say they had been comparable to manufacture sometime at the beginning of 2000, how much would production costs fall over 5 years until the next console hits stores?

Personally, I still doubt they'd be comparable in regards to costs. IMO your numbers are a bit too speculative...

 

[PC-Engine]

Well you were the one to compare N2 to 246.

Manufacturing costs...

And since N2 hardware was never mass produced, and we have no actual info on production costs, the selling prices of two competing hw are the only reliable thing you can compare.

Hehe if it's not mass produced then what is it? Are you saying N2 is built to order in a garage by Jobs and Wosniak? If you read the previous posts like I told you, you'll realize that N1 uses the exact same chips as DC which is mass produced. Only difference between N2 and N1 with regard to "new" chips is the TnL chip which is also mass produced. I hope one has the ability to extrapolate costs from that information. Why don't we just compare the selling price of a Viper vs that of an Enzo?

Add that N2 is pretty much the most expensive arcade kit in recent history, while 246 is amongst the cheaper ones.

Which is irrelevant with regard to manufacturing costs.

obviously in regards to PS2 and the 'better' Naomi 2 board. Now, we've discussed production costs (of which you still haven't backed up anything yet) - if we assume now that you are correct and that they are comparable from a manufacturing point of view, what makes you think that the Naomi 2 features a better design?

How much more "backing up" does one need? If there's not enough evidence for you to extrapolate the costs then sorry. Like I said before do a little research. All of this talk and you still can't figure out why I think it's a better design? Please go back and read the previous posts as these redundant question are getting VERY old or are you just ignoring everything that's been posted?

Also, about the cost issue: lets say they had been comparable to manufacture sometime at the beginning of 2000, how much would production costs fall over 5 years until the next console hits stores?

What about it? N2 was never released as a console and no major cost reductions were done so who knows. There's no reason why it couldn't be reduced. The chips are made by NEC/Hitachi. You speak as though SONY/Toshiba has a patent on cost reduction. Why should it be any different? Doesn't Xbox and GCN benefit in cost reduction over time? Doesn't most computer/electronic equipment?

 

[Panajev2001a]

Doesn't Xbox and GCN benefit in cost reduction over time?

Yes, but much less as MS and Nintendo contract out the chips and get the price they and the manufacturer agree to for a certain number of chips shipped and the third party manufacturer wants to make profit on chips sold...

There is also an advantage in making your own chips...

 

[PC-Engine]

Doesn't Xbox and GCN benefit in cost reduction over time?

Yes, but much less as MS and Nintendo contract out the chips and get the price they and the manufacturer agree to for a certain number of chips shipped and the third party manufacturer wants to make profit on chips sold...

There is also an advantage in making your own chips...

Umm doesn't it cost money to build your own fabs?

Isn't that what Toshiba/SONY did for the PS2 chips?

 

[marconelly!]

I said it beats Xbox, GCN, and PS2 in lighting. This from technology that's even older than PS2

You must be joking? N2 AFAIK doesn't support per pixel lighting. I'd be extremely surpised if it could render full scene bumpmapped game (does it even support bumpmapping in hardware), like Halo 2 seems to be. Every N2 game that I know of uses only vertex lighting.

Besides that, if N2 games released so far are anything to go by, effects like DOF, motion blur, heat haze, particles, etc, were either non existing or very sparse.

 

[PC-Engine]

I said it beats Xbox, GCN, and PS2 in lighting. This from technology that's even older than PS2

You must be joking? N2 AFAIK doesn't support per pixel lighting. I'd be extremely surpised if it could render full scene bumpmapped game (does it even support bumpmapping in hardware), like Halo 2 seems to be. Every N2 game that I know of uses only vertex lighting..

Actually it does support bumpmapping and perpixel lighting.

Besides that, if N2 games released so far are anything to go by, effects like DOF, motion blur, heat haze, particles, etc, were either non existing or very sparse

N2 can do most of those effects

 

[Bowie]

Regarding the PS2, when multitexturing the fillrate drops not to mention the geometry has to be resent.

PC-Engine, this also applies to DC/Naomi/Naomi2.