Yamauchi on the PS3: "...beginning of a new world..."

[hugo]

well then considering the Xbox 360 has more pipes than X1800 XT with better performance with each unified pipe structure at 500 Mhz, it looks like even more of a beast. Also consider that for the Cell to get more than 256 of ram it needs to go through RSX, wasting bandwidth, for RSX to need more than 256 of ram it needs to go through Cell, further waste of bandwidth, then considering that RSX uses the same architecture and technology as G70 which seemingly is rather very poor or cannot do HDR and AA at the same time, the Cell (as someone here said) would need to do AA after the RSX does HDR which would even further waste bandwidth. At the end the performance of both machines will be the same but I believe because of Xenos it will be able to compete graphically with the R580

Why do you say that the RSX cannot handle HDR and AA at the same time?We're talking about a GPU which has 300+M transistors with undisclosed specs even until today.The Cell processor can communicate directly with the RSX without going through a south bridge.So why are you saying that it's a bottleneck in the setup?There is even a possibility that the PS3 can have 512mb of XDR at the last minute if they wanted to.Sony now has the time advantage.You never know..they are full of surprises as the console launch get nearer.I am very certain that Sony is aware of every single flaw that their console will have now because they have the Xbox 360 to compare.They are still making minor changes to the Cell today and it would be foolish if they're not doing it with the RSX.

 

[jvd]

So I'll ask you, do you think the RSX will be bandwidth limited according to it's needs?

Personaly I would like to see a 256-bit bus, however expensive it might be, as with in RPG's I like to level up much more than is required before a boss fight... that's just my style... I'm sure though It will defy my expectations regardless.

I think the rsx will be bandwidth limited surely . I think you can never have enough bandwidth avalible . However its all about balance and I dunno how balanced things will be.

I think if the rsx can do hdr and fsaa at the same time it will be very bandwidth limited . But if it can't and can only do one or the other then it should be fine . I just don't really see any 1080p 4x fsaa with fp 16 hdr games coming to the market with decent graphics .

IT will be interesting to see what hte ps3 devs come up with and if they can use the raw power of the cell and the rsx to its fullest or will the lack of some features missing compared to the xenos handy cap it through out its life ? (i.e fsaa and hdr)

 

[hugo]

Consoles only get downgraded looking at thier history.

Did the Xbox 360's specs got downgraded?

 

[jvd]

Why do you say that the RSX cannot handle HDR and AA at the same time?We're talking about a GPU which has 300+M transistors with undisclosed specs even until today.The Cell processor can communicate directly with the RSX without going through a south bridge.So why are you saying that it's a bottleneck in the setup?There is even a possibility that the PS3 can have 512mb of XDR at the last minute if they wanted to.Sony now has the time advantage.You never know..they are full of surprises as the console launch get nearer.I am very certain that Sony is aware of every single flaw that they're console will have now because they have the Xbox 360 to compare.They are still making minor changes to the Cell today and it would be foolish if they're not doing it with the RSX.

The general assumption is that the rsx is based off the g70 and the g70 can only do hdr or fsaa but not the two together .

As for the cell and rsx i don't think there is a bottleneck there. The bottleneck would really be the limited amount of bandwidth avalible to the rsx .

As for the ps3 with 512megs of xdr well i think that would be the wrong way to do it . The xdr ram will be the more expensive of the ram pool and it will still be limited to 25gb/s (i think this is correct) even with the extra ram . Unless they double the bus and add more cost above the 256 megs of more ram .

You don't just go in and throw in more stuff and not have to take out others. Just look at tim sweeny and his take on the hardrive not being bundled . Over at ign he said it was either the hardrive being bundled or 256 megs of more ram . As you can see ram isn't just some cheap thing to throw in on a whim .

We aren't talking about building one ps3 here where another 20$ to the cost isn't a big deal. We are talking about absorbing these costs in the millions of units The more the ps3 costs to make the more sony is going to loose per unit or the more expensive it will cost us both of which will hurt its performance in the market place.

ANd finaly i doubt any changes are going on . If sony wants to launch a ps3 anywhere in the world this coming spring things are pretty much locked down at the design lvl . Clock speeds may change up/ down but that is about all your going to see. Its to close to a rumored spring launch. Remember they will hae to start building the systems about 3 months before the launch . I believe june is the last spring month ? so they have 8 months before june ? Subtract 3 months from that for production and your at 5 months . Then figure it takes a few weeks to a month to go from the last tap out of the hardware to mass production and we are at 4 months away.

So i'm going to go out on a limb and say that the rsx and cell are done and are now going to be taped out for bug fixes and respins

 

[jvd]

Did the Xbox 360's specs got downgraded?

xbox and gamecube specs yes .

xbox 360 specs no . THey weren't upgraded either unless u count pre announcement when we found out they added another 256 megs of ram .

 

[pakpassion]

The general assumption is that the rsx is based off the g70 and the g70 can only do hdr or fsaa but not the two together .

As for the cell and rsx i don't think there is a bottleneck there. The bottleneck would really be the limited amount of bandwidth avalible to the rsx .

As for the ps3 with 512megs of xdr well i think that would be the wrong way to do it . The xdr ram will be the more expensive of the ram pool and it will still be limited to 25gb/s (i think this is correct) even with the extra ram . Unless they double the bus and add more cost above the 256 megs of more ram .

You don't just go in and throw in more stuff and not have to take out others. Just look at tim sweeny and his take on the hardrive not being bundled . Over at ign he said it was either the hardrive being bundled or 256 megs of more ram . As you can see ram isn't just some cheap thing to throw in on a whim .

We aren't talking about building one ps3 here where another 20$ to the cost isn't a big deal. We are talking about absorbing these costs in the millions of units The more the ps3 costs to make the more sony is going to loose per unit or the more expensive it will cost us both of which will hurt its performance in the market place.

ANd finaly i doubt any changes are going on . If sony wants to launch a ps3 anywhere in the world this coming spring things are pretty much locked down at the design lvl . Clock speeds may change up/ down but that is about all your going to see. Its to close to a rumored spring launch. Remember they will hae to start building the systems about 3 months before the launch . I believe june is the last spring month ? so they have 8 months before june ? Subtract 3 months from that for production and your at 5 months . Then figure it takes a few weeks to a month to go from the last tap out of the hardware to mass production and we are at 4 months away.

So i'm going to go out on a limb and say that the rsx and cell are done and are now going to be taped out for bug fixes and respins

256 mb XDR Ram

 

[hugo]

As for the ps3 with 512megs of xdr well i think that would be the wrong way to do it . The xdr ram will be the more expensive of the ram pool and it will still be limited to 25gb/s (i think this is correct) even with the extra ram . Unless they double the bus and add more cost above the 256 megs of more ram .

Yes I know there's a separate pool of ram in the PS3 which is separated between the CPU and GPU.But why does the upcoming finalised PS3 dev kit contain 512mb of XDR instead?Does that mean that there will be some bus difference between the dev. kit and the console itself?Does the Xbox 360 dev kit specs differ from the the console as well?

 

[pakpassion]

I think the rsx will be bandwidth limited surely . I think you can never have enough bandwidth avalible . However its all about balance and I dunno how balanced things will be.

I think if the rsx can do hdr and fsaa at the same time it will be very bandwidth limited . But if it can't and can only do one or the other then it should be fine . I just don't really see any 1080p 4x fsaa with fp 16 hdr games coming to the market with decent graphics .

IT will be interesting to see what hte ps3 devs come up with and if they can use the raw power of the cell and the rsx to its fullest or will the lack of some features missing compared to the xenos handy cap it through out its life ? (i.e fsaa and hdr)

according to Carmack and Gabe Nevell, developers of Doom 3 and Half Life 2, the Cell isnt as powerful as people assume, especially when they come up with 2x more powerful. Sure 2x more for Realtime and CGI rendering but not for gameplay where Branch predictions is used for taking advantage of fast processors for developing apps (SPEs lack BPs). The Nvidia interview in PSM says the RSX shares the same technology and same philosophy of the G70 but its faster. well we already know its clock is faster , we dont know or think anything else can be added unless architecture is changed.

 

[pakpassion]

Yes I know there's a separate pool of ram in the PS3 which is separated between the CPU and GPU.But why does the upcoming finalised PS3 dev kit contain 512mb of XDR instead?Does that mean that there will be some bus difference between the dev. kit and the console itself?Does the Xbox 360 dev kit specs differ from the the console as well?

512mb is development kit much like PS2 dev kits had 128 MB

 

[mckmas8808]

But if it can't and can only do one or the other then it should be fine . I just don't really see any 1080p 4x fsaa with fp 16 hdr games coming to the market with decent graphics .

Well if the game is 1080p should it need 4X fsaa? Why so much?

 

[hugo]

according to Carmack and Gabe Nevell, developers of Doom 3 and Half Life 2, the Cell isnt as powerful as people assume, especially when they come up with 2x more powerful. Sure 2x more for Realtime and CGI rendering but not for gameplay where Branch predictions is used for taking advantage of fast processors for developing apps (SPEs lack BPs). The Nvidia interview in PSM says the RSX shares the same technology and same philosophy of the G70 but its faster. well we already know its clock is faster , we dont know or think anything else can be added unless architecture is changed.

They can have any interview to speculate whatever they want but fact is there isn't word from Ken-san and Mr Jen themselves.So I take them as pure speculation.Technologies and philosophies can be shared but it never in any case means that the G70=RSX.It's just like saying that the G70 has HDR lighting and the RSX can do as well.Does that make them the same?

 

[hugo]

512mb is development kit much like PS2 dev kits had 128 MB

128mb of the same type of RAM or from a different pool?The PS3 has 2 different pools.I am not saying that the PS3 must have the same amount of RAM the dev kit but I was trying to say that the possibility upgrading the amount of RAM is surely there.

 

[jvd]

Yes I know there's a separate pool of ram in the PS3 which is separated between the CPU and GPU.But why does the upcoming finalised PS3 dev kit contain 512mb of XDR instead?Does that mean that there will be some bus difference between the dev. kit and the console itself?Does the Xbox 360 dev kit specs differ from the the console as well?

I doubt it , the 512 mbs of xdr may be there for debuging purpose as they have to run debuging code and need more ram . It could also be there to offset the fact that gddr 700mhz ram may be in short supply .

Look suddenly doubleing the xdr ram will double the xdr ram costs . Then it will increase the pcb costs . It also will not be all that usefull as the cell is going to be eating up some of that bandwidth . So lets say for fun the cell chip will use 5gb/s of badnwidth. That leaves 20gb/s of badnwidht less. Where as they could have put in cheaper gddr 3 ram and have the 22gb/s ram bandwidth .

I jsut don't see more than 256/256 happening. Sony already has the larger transistor counts and a next gen optical drive and while ms can take out the hardrive and have a cheap 300$ sku i doubt sony will make a ps3 with only a dvd drive . So they will most likely be at a cost disadvantage .

according to Carmack and Gabe Nevell, developers of Doom 3 and Half Life 2, the Cell isnt as powerful as people assume, especially when they come up with 2x more powerful. Sure 2x more for Realtime and CGI rendering but not for gameplay where Branch predictions is used for taking advantage of fast processors for developing apps (SPEs lack BPs). The Nvidia interview in PSM says the RSX shares the same technology and same philosophy of the G70 but its faster. well we already know its clock is faster , we dont know or think anything else can be added unless architecture is changed.

I don't know what the cell chips capabilitys are in practice. I know that on paper its a flops beast but from what i understand its not an interger beast. How that translate into game performance i don't know and idon't feel like getting into it .

All i will say is i expect anything done on the xbox 360 to be done on the ps3 and vice versa with the xbox having some strengths and the ps3 having other strengths of course .

The only thing i'm interested in about the rsx is if it can do hdr + fsaa as i believe this is the major disadvantage compared to the xenos .

 

[hugo]

I jsut don't see more than 256/256 happening. Sony already has the larger transistor counts and a next gen optical drive and while ms can take out the hardrive and have a cheap 300$ sku i doubt sony will make a ps3 with only a dvd drive . So they will most likely be at a cost disadvantage .

All i will say is i expect anything done on the xbox 360 to be done on the ps3 and vice versa with the xbox having some strengths and the ps3 having other strengths of course .

The only thing i'm interested in about the rsx is if it can do hdr + fsaa as i believe this is the major disadvantage compared to the xenos .

It doesn't matter much for Sony even if their console cost more than the X360 by say $200.Initially MS may get away by building their console base but Sony has long term plans to play catch up and they will eventually overtake their competitors.MS is trying to hit big just like what the Dreamcast did but if Sony executes this time with a console that has the specs advantage coupled with its establish brand,the Dreamcast fast move won't help.

The PS3 will be a complete failure if the PS3 == Xbox360.They opted to launch their console at a later date because they wanted the time to build a console with the best specs this gen.Failing to do so means target unaccomplished.

 

[pakpassion]

It doesn't matter much for Sony even if their console cost more than the X360 by say $200.Initially MS may get away by building their console base but Sony has long term plans to play catch up and they will eventually overtake their competitors.MS is trying to hit big just like what the Dreamcast did but if Sony executes this time with a console that has the specs advantage coupled with its establish brand,the Dreamcast fast move won't help.

The PS3 will be a complete failure if the PS3 == Xbox360.They opted to launch their console at a later date because they wanted the time to build a console with the best specs this gen.Failing to do so means target unaccomplished.

Why would it be a failure. if it weould be a failure then PS2 was a failure too because its games looked barely better than Dreamcast games which were older than PS2. the Xbox 360 graphics card from all sources seems better and Cell seems better than Xbox 360 in terms of GFLOPS. I think its ps2-xbox repeating itself all over again

 

[jvd]

It doesn't matter much for Sony even if their console cost more than the X360 by say $200.Initially MS may get away by building their console base but Sony has long term plans to play catch up and they will eventually overtake their competitors.MS is trying to hit big just like what the Dreamcast did but if Sony executes this time with a console that has the specs advantage coupled with its establish brand,the Dreamcast fast move won't help.

Of course it matters .

FIrst off a 200$ price premium over the xbox 360 is a huge thing. Current info puts it at over 375$ per unit made. Meaning a ps3 would cost with your 200$ figure 575$ . To launch at 400$ they are loosing 175$ a unit . If they sold 10 million in thier first year like the ps2 did that is what 1.75 billion in the first year alone . If they price the unit at 500$ that is still 75$ loss or 750million and they will be a 100$ more than the xbox 360 premium bundle.

Loosing 750m + isn't in thier long term plans as this will will last for many years . Of course it wont stay that much but it will take it along time for thier cost to come down .

Just look at how much this attitude hurt ms this generation. They built a more powerfull unit cost be damned and lost billions a year keeping in a price war with sony .

As for your last comment about the dreamcast. Ms is far from bankrupt and has a much better reputation than sega had after failing with the sega cd , 32x and saturn.

So no i doubt sony will spend more than they have to on the unit wit hthe goal being to ramp down costs as quickly as possible as they did with the ps2 . Sony knows the sooner they can hit the sub 200$ price point the more buyers will buy the unit and if ms can hit it first and do it with out loosing millions a year it will put them in a much better position than sony will be in bleeding money .

edit * I see sony sticking with thier 200gflop cell figures and 2tflop performance figures to win the hype war and then using thier software as much as possible to get the sales away from ms . I don't see them making the hardware even more expensive even if it will give them a true graphical edge.

 

[hugo]

Why would it be a failure. if it weould be a failure then PS2 was a failure too because its games looked barely better than Dreamcast games which were older than PS2. the Xbox 360 graphics card from all sources seems better and Cell seems better than Xbox 360 in terms of GFLOPS. I think its ps2-xbox repeating itself all over again

Don't just think.Last time Sony did almost everything by themselves and MS launched the Xbox more than 1/2 year later than the PS2.The PS2 still manages to dominate the market.
This time with their base and brand establishment,they aim to further secure their position by aiming for a most powerful console route which they failed in the last round.

The Xenos isn't better than the RSX in all ways.It's still not as good as the RSX in terms of GFLOPS,clock rate and pixel shading capabilities.Flexibility is still the main advantage that Xenos has but for the performance crown it's still early to decide.

 

[jvd]

Don't just think.Last time Sony did almost everything by themselves and MS launched the Xbox more than 1/2 year later than the PS2.The PS2 still manages to dominate the market.
This time with their base and brand establishment,they aim to further secure their position by aiming for a most powerful console route which they failed in the last round.

The Xenos isn't better than the RSX in all ways.It's still not as good as the RSX in terms of GFLOPS,clock rate and pixel shading capabilities.Flexibility is still the main advantage that Xenos has but for the performance crown it's still early to decide.

Don't forget that hte xbox launched after the ps2 and the ps2 already had an established base of 10 million . It had software pricing that was lower than the xbox (it had games on the shelves for a year )

This time it will be the reverse . The xbox will be on the market and will have the larger installed base and the cheaper software .

Remember everyone starts at 0 installed base. However ms launches first which means while sony is still at 0 the xbox installed base will start climbing and it will be in the market in some places for almost a year before the ps3 is released

 

[hugo]

Of course it matters .

Just look at how much this attitude hurt ms this generation. They built a more powerfull unit cost be damned and lost billions a year keeping in a price war with sony .

As for your last comment about the dreamcast. Ms is far from bankrupt and has a much better reputation than sega had after failing with the sega cd , 32x and saturn.

edit * I see sony sticking with thier 200gflop cell figures and 2tflop performance figures to win the hype war and then using thier software as much as possible to get the sales away from ms . I don't see them making the hardware even more expensive even if it will give them a true graphical edge.

That's partly because MS entrusted their design partners to do almost everything for them last gen.They still lack their own fabbing plants today.

No doubt that the PS3 and Xbox360 games will not look far part from each other but I believe that the PS3 will have the slight advantage.Their early real time rendered demos are already showing better HDR lighting effects with more vivid colours that I believe is atributed to Nvidia's better pixel shading technologies.

 

[Azrael]

It's still not as good as the RSX in terms of GFLOPS,clock rate and pixel shading capabilities.Flexibility is still the main advantage that Xenos has but for the performance crown it's still early to decide.

GFLOPS is a useless number, as is clock rate on completly different architectures and Xenos is most certianly better than the 7800 GTX in shader capabilities by not a small margin. PS the 50 more mhz of the RSX will not help alleviate that fact either.