do you really think the ps3 will have best graphics?

[BigPapaSmurf]

i've seen lots of post made saying that pretty much the ps3 graphics will be vastly superior to xbox 2 and gamecube 2. most responses i see say it's because of the cell processors. the thin is that it does not matter how much processing power you got if you dont have a good gpu then all that power goes to waste. ati is developing the next xbox 2 graphics chip and i dont know why some of you are taking them lightly. making graphics chips is ati business i dont see how sony can make a better gpu than ati. also i think you guys are expecting to much out of the next gen machines i dont think they will look that much better than the best looking game out right now. i expect the next gen games looking somewhat better than half life 2 but i would not say they will completely blow it out of the water. to be honest i think at the end of the day ati's next graphics chip will be better than ps3's graphics chip i dont see sony besting ati at their own game.

[ssssss]

Theres a already graphic Discussion thread.

[Marjoh]

Actually, usually the console have better graphics than PC. It just seem the PC have a better one because they could upgrade it. While the console had to wait five years for its successor to arrive. The PS3 is coming out a few months after Xbox 2, so they could improve it. And have you seen the early demo of Unreal Engine?

And yes, take this to the graphics thread. You'll get better answer(s) there.

[Domination]

i've seen lots of post made saying that pretty much the ps3 graphics will be vastly superior to xbox 2 and gamecube 2. most responses i see say it's because of the cell processors. the thin is that it does not matter how much processing power you got if you dont have a good gpu then all that power goes to waste. ati is developing the next xbox 2 graphics chip and i dont know why some of you are taking them lightly. making graphics chips is ati business i dont see how sony can make a better gpu than ati. also i think you guys are expecting to much out of the next gen machines i dont think they will look that much better than the best looking game out right now. i expect the next gen games looking somewhat better than half life 2 but i would not say they will completely blow it out of the water. to be honest i think at the end of the day ati's next graphics chip will be better than ps3's graphics chip i dont see sony besting ati at their own game.

It seems you have confusin' yourself, but I'll get into that later. Before I go on, I would, first, like to ask you how are you so sure that ATI will build a better graphics chip than Sony? What makes you so sure of this?

To answer your question, I really can't say at this point who will be more powerful. But, what I can say is Sony's ambitions are much higher than the others if that helps. This also has a lot more to do with it besides Cell. On top of that, if the Xenon launches earlier than the others, there's a pretty good chance that you will see a difference between the two.

Earlier, you mentioned the CPU meaning absolutely nothing without a good GPU. And that's where you believe ATI shines. Well, you confused one, the very same can also apply to the CPU, which is where ATI isn't so great at. :wink:

BTW, I would like you to name at least one title from a pass generation PC that can go head to head with a current,top quality title of this generation.

[amod20002004]

Xbox2’s graphics won’t look better than ps3 at all. Sony has 4 to 5 months more period than Microsoft to develop powerful console. You know something, why Microsoft is rushing out to introduce xbox2 before ps3. Let me tell you, they don’t have enough powerful hardware to compete with Sony. That’s what I read 8 months ago on Microsoft.com. There was an article published on Microsoft.com, which was saying that if MS didn’t do anything new for xbox2 then xbox2 wouldn’t able to compete with ps3.

[xbdestroya]

Some points to remember.

Just because something comes out later, doesn't mean it's better. S3 and XGI release graphics cards generations after NVidia and ATI all the time, but their cards are always worse.

As for Sony and PS3, they were approached by NVidia a while ago for help on their GPU and Sony turned it down. Now, I don't think Sony would have done that unless they were pretty confident with what they had. 8)

Anyway there's always that chance that PS3 could launch and fail to meet any expectations. It IS totally new technology after all. I mean TOTALLY new. XBox 2 is just another PC-in-a-box. But I have a good feeling about PS3 - I think it's all coming together.

[amod20002004]

Why are you talking like this? Developers of Oni have given hint about in game ps3 graphics.I personally think that Ps3’s graphics will outsell xbox2’s graphics. MS already knows this fact that’s why they are rushing out to introduce their console before Sony.

[xbdestroya]

Well, that's all well and good, but I personally NEVER believe anything the developers say. If you are going to ask me whether I think they would lie, well I think they would stretch the truth, yes. The entire industry is one big broken promise. I trust what I see with my own eyes. :wink:

I think PS3 will be the best, but I remember the hype around PS2 as well. I prefer to take a more measured and less excited wait approach this time.

[solidus]

Well, that's all well and good, but I personally NEVER believe anything the developers say. If you are going to ask me whether I think they would lie, well I think they would stretch the truth, yes. The entire industry is one big broken promise. I trust what I see with my own eyes. :wink:

I think PS3 will be the best, but I remember the hype around PS2 as well. I prefer to take a more measured and less excited wait approach this time.
If i were you i would believe the developers instead of Sony themselves.

[GTShotoKen]

i've seen lots of post made saying that pretty much the ps3 graphics will be vastly superior to xbox 2 and gamecube 2. most responses i see say it's because of the cell processors. the thin is that it does not matter how much processing power you got if you dont have a good gpu then all that power goes to waste. ati is developing the next xbox 2 graphics chip and i dont know why some of you are taking them lightly. making graphics chips is ati business i dont see how sony can make a better gpu than ati. also i think you guys are expecting to much out of the next gen machines i dont think they will look that much better than the best looking game out right now. i expect the next gen games looking somewhat better than half life 2 but i would not say they will completely blow it out of the water. to be honest i think at the end of the day ati's next graphics chip will be better than ps3's graphics chip i dont see sony besting ati at their own game.

Please read up on the Cell architecture before making misinformed statments like this. The cell architecture is much more advanced than any other gpu and cpu. Its complex architecture allows it to compute graphics information on the cpu. You might say that this is kind of weird, but try actually going and finding information on the Cell and you will see what makes this architecture so impressive.

If you have ever heard of "Moor's Law" then you will know how impressive the Cell truly is.

[Xeno]

Here's a good article for you to read, PapaSmurf.There's much more information available on the web if you search :wink:


Sony, SCEI and IBM to develop digital content creation environment based on cell processor
Cell-based workstations to be readied for entertainment applications

Los Angeles, May 11, 2004

Sony Corporation (Sony), Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. (SCEI) and IBM today announced plans to develop a digital content creation environment, the first computing application planned for the Cell* processor. The companies expect to build the first prototype Cell-based workstations in 4Q 2004.
Utilizing massive data bandwidth and vast floating point capabilities, coupled with a parallel processing architecture, the Cell processor based development environment is expected to deliver quantum-leap innovation to entertainment applications. Cell-based workstations will be designed to expand the platform for creating digital content across future movie and video game entertainment industries.

IBM intends to develop the Cell-based workstations to power digital content creation. Sony and SCEI plan to lead the development of the Cell-based operating environment by providing the architecture, algorithms, middleware and data structure for tools needed to create digital content for movies and computer entertainment applications.

"Cell has enormous power for creating broadband content," said Ken Kutaragi, executive deputy president and COO, Sony Corporation, and president and Group CEO, Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. "Today, movies and games are sharing the same world and characters on a common database. Within a few years, both forms of entertainment will be fused and become indistinguishable, offering a seamless experience in the home. Together with IBM, the three companies aim to offer technology that will accelerate the paradigm shift in digital entertainment."

"The Cell-based workstations we are creating with Sony and SCEI will deliver scalable, supercomputer-like performance to the media, entertainment and video game industries," said Dr. John E. Kelly, senior vice president and group executive , IBM Systems and Technology Group. "Our joint Cell processor effort is right on track to bring tremendous impact to the entertainment industry."

The requirements for massive computing power in digital content creation in the entertainment industry have escalated with the use of photo-realistic and ever more complex images and special effects now commonly found in today's motion pictures. Dramatic improvements in processing performance and data throughput are needed to generate these dynamic and realistic scenes. Similarly, the creation of computer entertainment content demands high levels of computational power. Within a couple of years, tremendous floating point calculations will be necessary for complex physics simulation and control of digital characters in digital content creation.

This movement will trigger a convergence of digital entertainment content that can be enabled through the common Cell-based development environment Sony, SCEI and IBM plan to create. The integration and availability of content created using Cell-based environment will enable users to experience a real-time "cyber world" anytime, anywhere through the broadband network. This integration can expand future opportunities for exciting consumer experiences.


http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/news/2004/0511_cell.html


STI cell processor
Next generation processors


Just as the cells in a body unite to form complete physical systems, a "Cell" architecture will allow all kinds of electronic devices (from consumer products to supercomputers) to work together, signaling a new era in Internet entertainment, communications and collaboration.

The Vision:
Breakthrough microprocessor architecture that puts broadband communications right on the chip.

Markets:
· Next-generation communications
· Consumer multimedia applications

STI cell processor defined
Two years ago, Sony and Toshiba and IBM (STI) announced that they had teamed up to design an architecture for what is termed a system-on-a-chip (SoC) design. Code-named Cell, chips based on the architecture will be able to use ultra high-speed broadband connectivity to interoperate with one another as one complete system, similar to the way neural cells interoperate over the brain's network.

Market demand for STI cell processor
IBM expects Cell to define an entirely new way of operating. Cell's underlying architecture will enable it to manifest itself into many forms for many purposes, helping to open up a whole new set of applications. Incorporating this architecture, chips will be developed for everything from handheld devices to mainframe computers.

IBM strategy with STI cell processor
IBM has an unmatched history and capability of building custom chips and believes the one-size-fits-all model of the PC does not apply in the embedded space; embedded applications will require a flexible architecture, like Cell. Cell also brings together, for the first time, many leading-edge IBM chip technologies and circuit designs developed for its servers.

STI cell processor benefits
Cell will take advantage of IBM's most advanced semiconductor development and process technologies. These cells will deliver high performance while consuming small quantities of power.


http://www-1.ibm.com/businesscenter/venturedevelopment/us/en/featurearticle/gcl_xmlid/8649/nav_id/emerging

[BigPapaSmurf]

i still didn't see anything cell being used as a gpu. and to the guy who said sony turned down nvidia i think it had to do with sony not wanting to pay nvidia royalty fee's like microsoft had to do with them. remember that nvidia screwed microsoft with the pricing of their gpu's so thats why sony probably decided to go on their own. but hey you never know sony might end up making a better gpu than ati and maybe they can sell them to the pc market.

[PeanutButterMunky]

^^^^^^

Ugh...you have no idea what you're talking about...

[semiconductor]

Xbox2’s graphics won’t look better than ps3 at all. Sony has 4 to 5 months more period than Microsoft to develop powerful console. You know something, why Microsoft is rushing out to introduce xbox2 before ps3. Let me tell you, they don’t have enough powerful hardware to compete with Sony. That’s what I read 8 months ago on Microsoft.com. There was an article published on Microsoft.com, which was saying that if MS didn’t do anything new for xbox2 then xbox2 wouldn’t able to compete with ps3.

LOL,that ist a joke,yesterday the ps2 came out after the dreamcast,
release date:

Sept 1998 Dreamcast
March 2000 PS2

And??? Many old Dreamcast games looks better than actually Ps2
games,sonys problem is that they say, they have the best console
but it is only a "hype singing" the reality say a another story.We in
germany have Pal ,but sonys konversion from ntsc to pal are very
bad,every game on DC,GC and XBOX has a pal60 Modus for
flickerfree displaying and antialaising,but sonys marketing and
political was made for fast food players,damm boy schoolplayers,cheap TV junkeys,people who buying every shit.

I have a feeling that we see the same story of ps3,Sony present
us next year some graphicdemos,it runs on workstations with more
vram,mainram as the real ps3 console,a big hype singing,after all
then you see the true facts,ps3 power is going down,and it is uncomfortable to program it,the cell chip is
very complex to programming,and it is only a multimedia chip for
many functions,it has no specialised graphicfunctions like the GPU in the Xbox2,many functions for undefined destinations ,will say ,it is
inefficient to programming.And then the ps3 has only 32MB vram and
no hardwaretexturcompression,i think the texturdisplaying are more
bad in comparing of Xbox2 and Nintendos next step technique.

Sonys statements and the reality are two worlds.Sonys quality are

BAD!!!!

[kevindenoyette]

Yeah, the console is just a terrible mess. No wonder it outsells nintendo and microsoft 5 to 1...Oh wait.

[Z]

Yeah, the console is just a terrible mess. No wonder it outsells nintendo and microsoft 5 to 1...Oh wait.
actually, in some regions, PS2 out sells Xbox 17 to 1 :shock:
PSOne out sells Xbox in Japan!!
PS2 is out selling GBA in Japan!! about 54% market share to PS2 and 38% to GBA.

but again, sales don't directly reflect better hardware. :wink:

[nesman]

Poor Sega, I wish the Dreamcast was a sucess too. Reminds me of the old Atari Jaguar days, that console was really ahead of its time. Too bad...
But the problem was that Sega didn't max out its consoles. For example, when Nintendo released the SuperNES, the original NES was still being developed on. NES went all the way to 1993(I think). How do you think Atari 2600 lasted for more than 13 years? Same thing goes for when the 32/64 bit era came along. The SuperNES still competed with N64 and PSX. But I guess SNES got killed once FF7 came along... But on the other hand, Sega released consoles too fast and rushed to be ahead of the game. Poor marketing can be blamed too. Sega Master System was in every way superior to the feeble NES, but NES still won. Why? Because Sega abandoned it and released Genesis. The developers had to switch to 16 bit. But it was no match for the library of games available for the NES. (over 700 games I believe). The PS2 has crushed this era because of its library of games. Let's hope Sony can continue this trend. Sorry for the long rant, but I'm just saying what I think. Feel free to correct me though.

[julps31]

Xbox2’s graphics won’t look better than ps3 at all. Sony has 4 to 5 months more period than Microsoft to develop powerful console. You know something, why Microsoft is rushing out to introduce xbox2 before ps3. Let me tell you, they don’t have enough powerful hardware to compete with Sony. That’s what I read 8 months ago on Microsoft.com. There was an article published on Microsoft.com, which was saying that if MS didn’t do anything new for xbox2 then xbox2 wouldn’t able to compete with ps3.
LOL,that ist a joke,yesterday the ps2 came out after the dreamcast,
release date:
Sept 1998 Dreamcast
March 2000 PS2

And??? Many old Dreamcast games looks better than actually Ps2
games,sonys problem is that they say, they have the best console
but it is only a "hype singing" the reality say a another story.We in
germany have Pal ,but sonys konversion from ntsc to pal are very
bad,every game on DC,GC and XBOX has a pal60 Modus for
flickerfree displaying and antialaising,but sonys marketing and
political was made for fast food players,damm boy schoolplayers,cheap TV junkeys,people who buying every shit.

I have a feeling that we see the same story of ps3,Sony present
us next year some graphicdemos,it runs on workstations with more
vram,mainram as the real ps3 console,a big hype singing,after all
then you see the true facts,ps3 power is going down,and it is uncomfortable to program it,the cell chip is
very complex to programming,and it is only a multimedia chip for
many functions,it has no specialised graphicfunctions like the GPU in the Xbox2,many functions for undefined destinations ,will say ,it is
inefficient to programming.And then the ps3 has only 32MB vram and
no hardwaretexturcompression,i think the texturdisplaying are more
bad in comparing of Xbox2 and Nintendos next step technique.

Sonys statements and the reality are two worlds.Sonys quality are
BAD!!!!
Boo hoo. Some Dreamcast games look better than PS2 games. Name some for me. And I guess you work for Sony? Am i right? Or are you an industry insider who gets all the info about the amount of RAM and the GPU architecture? Plus you say "I think the texture displaying (capabilities of the PS3) are (is) *delete word-"more"* bad (worse) in comparing (in comparison to that) of x-box 2 and Nintendos next step technique." So you know info about the Nintendo Revolution that will show us how its better than the PS3? Tell me more.

[Domination]

Xbox2’s graphics won’t look better than ps3 at all. Sony has 4 to 5 months more period than Microsoft to develop powerful console. You know something, why Microsoft is rushing out to introduce xbox2 before ps3. Let me tell you, they don’t have enough powerful hardware to compete with Sony. That’s what I read 8 months ago on Microsoft.com. There was an article published on Microsoft.com, which was saying that if MS didn’t do anything new for xbox2 then xbox2 wouldn’t able to compete with ps3.

LOL,that ist a joke,yesterday the ps2 came out after the dreamcast,
release date:

Sept 1998 Dreamcast
March 2000 PS2

And??? Many old Dreamcast games looks better than actually Ps2
games,sonys problem is that they say, they have the best console
but it is only a "hype singing" the reality say a another story.We in
germany have Pal ,but sonys konversion from ntsc to pal are very
bad,every game on DC,GC and XBOX has a pal60 Modus for
flickerfree displaying and antialaising,but sonys marketing and
political was made for fast food players,damm boy schoolplayers,cheap TV junkeys,people who buying every shit.

You are absolutely right. It really doesn't matter when a console launches; the results could still be the same or inferior, DEPENDING ON THE DEVELOPER BEHIND THE HARDWARE. But, with Microsoft cutting cost and launching early, there is a fair possibility that they could design a weaker machine (as in raw power).

Let me also remind you that the PS2 was very difficult to program for. Why is it that you have failed to mention this? :roll: Through specs alone, it's more than an obvious fact that the PS2 is much more powerful than the Dreamcast -- even the Xbox and Game Cube in a few ways dispite how dated its hardware is. I don't see why you would even try to argue this.

I have a feeling that we see the same story of ps3,Sony present
us next year some graphicdemos,it runs on workstations with more
vram,mainram as the real ps3 console,a big hype singing,after all
then you see the true facts,ps3 power is going down,and it is uncomfortable to program it,the cell chip is
very complex to programming,and it is only a multimedia chip for
many functions,it has no specialised graphicfunctions like the GPU in the Xbox2,many functions for undefined destinations ,will say ,it is
inefficient to programming.And then the ps3 has only 32MB vram and
no hardwaretexturcompression,i think the texturdisplaying are more
bad in comparing of Xbox2 and Nintendos next step technique.

Sonys statements and the reality are two worlds.Sonys quality are

BAD!!!!

Oh heavens... Ok, this is your opinion. But, let me ask you just one thing... Besides the PS2, how many consoles or stations has Sony built that were incredibly tough to program for? I would really appreciate it if you were as honest and open as possible with your answer without having to dodge the question or beat around it in any way.

I would also like to ask you how much vram did the Dreamcast have for it's time and when was the Xbox and the Game Cube released after the launch of the PS2 on store shelves?

That'll be it.

[amod20002004]

LOL,that ist a joke,yesterday the ps2 came out after the dreamcast,
release date:

Sept 1998 Dreamcast
March 2000 PS2

And??? Many old Dreamcast games looks better than actually Ps2
games,sonys problem is that they say, they have the best console
but it is only a "hype singing" the reality say a another story.We in
germany have Pal ,but sonys konversion from ntsc to pal are very
bad,every game on DC,GC and XBOX has a pal60 Modus for
flickerfree displaying and antialaising,but sonys marketing and
political was made for fast food players,damm boy schoolplayers,cheap TV junkeys,people who buying every shit.

I have a feeling that we see the same story of ps3,Sony present
us next year some graphicdemos,it runs on workstations with more
vram,mainram as the real ps3 console,a big hype singing,after all
then you see the true facts,ps3 power is going down,and it is uncomfortable to program it,the cell chip is
very complex to programming,and it is only a multimedia chip for
many functions,it has no specialised graphicfunctions like the GPU in the Xbox2,many functions for undefined destinations ,will say ,it is
inefficient to programming.And then the ps3 has only 32MB vram and
no hardwaretexturcompression,i think the texturdisplaying are more
bad in comparing of Xbox2 and Nintendos next step technique.

Sonys statements and the reality are two worlds.Sonys quality are

BAD!!!!
My first question to you is, tell me the names of different games from dreamcast, which had shown better graphics than ps2.

I think before any official announcement from Sony you want to declare some facts about Cell.
:P

[cpiasminc]

Well, we still don't really know what sort of pixel pipeline the Cell-driven GPU would really use, so the question of performance and how to program is still very much up in the air. In Xbox2's case, however, we don't know the overall power, but we do know it should likely be more powerful than X800, although no idea how much more powerful... that and it's supposed to support Shader Model 3.0... Which is, of course, a feature we already have on the latest nVidia cards. So the thing is that some development on Xbox2 can already move along nicely right now.

That probably suggests that the first generation of Xbox2 games will have somewhat better graphics than the first generation of PS3 games. I think the real power will lie in how much more expressive the programmability of the PS3 GPU will be. That is, you will probably be able to do a lot more with the PS3 GPU than you could with a standard PC-style GPU which the Xbox2 would have.

[Z]

Well, I don’t think few months will make that big a difference in hardware specs. But I do think it is very helpful for coming up with little tweaks and methods to counter the competitor’s. keep in mind that there is a technicall difference between Cube and Box in favor of the Box. Yet still, games for both are rather undistinguishable.

[Domination]

Well, I don’t think few months will make that big a difference in hardware specs. But I do think it is very helpful for coming up with little tweaks and methods to counter the competitor’s. keep in mind that there is a technicall difference between Cube and Box in favor of the Box. Yet still, games for both are rather undistinguishable.

I believe that was mainly due to Microsoft going with a lot of their internal hardware from off the shelf alone with a much larger investment. :wink:

[ricois300]

Well, we still don't really know what sort of pixel pipeline the Cell-driven GPU would really use, so the question of performance and how to program is still very much up in the air. In Xbox2's case, however, we don't know the overall power, but we do know it should likely be more powerful than X800, although no idea how much more powerful... that and it's supposed to support Shader Model 3.0... Which is, of course, a feature we already have on the latest nVidia cards. So the thing is that some development on Xbox2 can already move along nicely right now.

That probably suggests that the first generation of Xbox2 games will have somewhat better graphics than the first generation of PS3 games. I think the real power will lie in how much more expressive the programmability of the PS3 GPU will be. That is, you will probably be able to do a lot more with the PS3 GPU than you could with a standard PC-style GPU which the Xbox2 would have.

You know more than I do about programming, but wouldn't the PS3 devs be able to start developing their games since the PS3 will be using a form of OpenGL, Collada. I thought that would give them the start of how to design even though they don't exactly know the full power they have to work with.

[cpiasminc]

You know more than I do about programming, but wouldn't the PS3 devs be able to start developing their games since the PS3 will be using a form of OpenGL, Collada. I thought that would give them the start of how to design even though they don't exactly know the full power they have to work with.
No, not really. There's more to programming PS3 than simply using OpenGL (for that matter, we don't know what sort of extensions will be enabled) and Collada file formats. Not all the tools are even close to ready. It's partially also because of the nature of PS3 hardware being a completely new beast to tackle.

While Xbox2's CPUs could get you some predictable single-thread performance (and most people seem to predict that its single thread performance will be Celeron-esque), PS3's single-thread performance will be utterly abysmal. So you need an entirely different programming and design model, and because nothing is really pinned down, just how different it will have to be is still yet unknown. PS3's final dev environment will probably be using very different APIs to take advantage of all these idiosynchracies. It's not as simple as taking the same code and having a magic compiler that irons out all these architectural differences between consoles.

That goes double for the GPU. Since XBox2 has a GPU that is pretty similar in nature to off-the-shelf parts, the programming and capability to program will be the same. PS3's GPU bears little to no similarity and will _probably_ not be programmable using ordinary GLSL (or perhaps conform to an entirely different GLSL version). Moreover, part of the GPU would be essentially the same as the CPU, if we're to trust the block diagrams. So again, a new tool or API has to be presented before you can really do anything about it. Now a handful of studios in Japan probably have access to more info than any studio in the US... I don't know what to say about Elder Scrolls, though. I'm guessing they just have certain assumptions about their codebase for now.

I think the closest thing on the market to CELL (on a CPU level, anyway) is Sun's Niagara, which isn't really SIMD, but at least it comprises very simple cores in a large collection and shows major throughput increases with more TLP. Unfortunately, while Niagara may be available, it's also very expensive and the whole system architecture is designed with other goals in mind than digital media apps. The other thing is that programming for high TLP on a Niagara machine would use typical multithreading APIs like MPI or pthreads... If you remember the patent that Jaws linked to a while back --
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO %2Fsearch-adv.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&p=1&S1=20020038451&OS =20020038451&RS=20020038451
That could suggest a very different multithreading interface in which the OS provides you with scheduling logic on a demand/request basis. Which kind of also pretty well agrees with the whole "software cells" concept. But whatever it is, without it available, it's kind of a waste of time to be working through some other route.

Sony promises some Cell workstations by the end of the year (or I should say, "promised at one point in time, and hasn't mentioned since)... and they too appear to likely end up being expensive early on.

[xbdestroya]

Well, that's all well and good, but I personally NEVER believe anything the developers say. If you are going to ask me whether I think they would lie, well I think they would stretch the truth, yes. The entire industry is one big broken promise. I trust what I see with my own eyes. :wink:

I think PS3 will be the best, but I remember the hype around PS2 as well. I prefer to take a more measured and less excited wait approach this time.
If i were you i would believe the developers instead of Sony themselves.

Well, you're right on that - so let's just say I don't believe either of them. Maybe some of you guys are too young to remember being online before PS2's launch and reading some of the hype back then, but I remember it. And this whole 'networked world' was already supposed to be here, with 'lifelike graphics,' etc...

I love Sony as much as anyone here, but I'm no mindless drone either. NO Sony product will ever receive anything less than 110% percent hype. What's fact and what's fiction with Sony is not known until launch. I'm crossing my fingers hoping that Cell will be everything I need it to be. I'll defend the chip and buy the hype as far as a global paradigm shift, but I won't buy any of the more mundane performance hype until I have something a little more solid to go on that some PR-persons statements. I will ONLY trust engineers and programmers at face value, and sometimes then not even. Presidents, CEO's, PR, and other individuals whose job it is to make the company look good get their statements mined by me, but not bought outright.

[Domination]

Well, that's all well and good, but I personally NEVER believe anything the developers say. If you are going to ask me whether I think they would lie, well I think they would stretch the truth, yes. The entire industry is one big broken promise. I trust what I see with my own eyes. :wink:

I think PS3 will be the best, but I remember the hype around PS2 as well. I prefer to take a more measured and less excited wait approach this time.
If i were you i would believe the developers instead of Sony themselves.

Well, you're right on that - so let's just say I don't believe either of them. Maybe some of you guys are too young to remember being online before PS2's launch and reading some of the hype back then, but I remember it. And this whole 'networked world' was already supposed to be here, with 'lifelike graphics,' etc...

I love Sony as much as anyone here, but I'm no mindless drone either. NO Sony product will ever receive anything less than 110% percent hype. What's fact and what's fiction with Sony is not known until launch. I'm crossing my fingers hoping that Cell will be everything I need it to be. I'll defend the chip and buy the hype as far as a global paradigm shift, but I won't buy any of the more mundane performance hype until I have something a little more solid to go on that some PR-persons statements. I will ONLY trust engineers and programmers at face value, and sometimes then not even. Presidents, CEO's, PR, and other individuals whose job it is to make the company look good get their statements mined by me, but not bought outright.

I agree. But, I wouldn't expect anything to be reliant on just hype alone. I'm sure they'll be SOME truth in these claims next-gen, especially since they are up against a stronger competitor. I would rather wait and see what they are, though.

Another thing I want to to add to that is the hype by Sony for the Emotion Engine.That pretty much spawned from the box they were working on (more popular for its name) the GScube, which was said to be 10x more powerful than the PS2. Sony originally wanted the PS2 to have similiar performance of what they were predicting for the PS3. The only difference was, the project never took off around the time of the PS2, which is how it ended up moving into this/next-generation. So instead of hyping just the PS2, Sony began hyping the GScube as well.

[The_One]

While Xbox2's CPUs could get you some predictable single-thread performance (and most people seem to predict that its single thread performance will be Celeron-esque), PS3's single-thread performance will be utterly abysmal. So you need an entirely different programming and design model, and because nothing is really pinned down, just how different it will have to be is still yet unknown. PS3's final dev environment will probably be using very different APIs to take advantage of all these idiosynchracies. It's not as simple as taking the same code and having a magic compiler that irons out all these architectural differences between consoles. Celeron-esque? That doesn't sound too impressive, however, is this based on the Xbox having three Dual Core PPC5 CPU's or just a single Dual Core CPU?
No, not really. There's more to programming PS3 than simply using OpenGL (for that matter, we don't know what sort of extensions will be enabled) and Collada file formats. Not all the tools are even close to ready. It's partially also because of the nature of PS3 hardware being a completely new beast to tackle. In your opinion, with the current known info, do you think programming for PS3 will be any easier than programming for the PS2?

[xbdestroya]

Well, that's all well and good, but I personally NEVER believe anything the developers say. If you are going to ask me whether I think they would lie, well I think they would stretch the truth, yes. The entire industry is one big broken promise. I trust what I see with my own eyes. :wink:

I think PS3 will be the best, but I remember the hype around PS2 as well. I prefer to take a more measured and less excited wait approach this time.
If i were you i would believe the developers instead of Sony themselves.

Well, you're right on that - so let's just say I don't believe either of them. Maybe some of you guys are too young to remember being online before PS2's launch and reading some of the hype back then, but I remember it. And this whole 'networked world' was already supposed to be here, with 'lifelike graphics,' etc...

I love Sony as much as anyone here, but I'm no mindless drone either. NO Sony product will ever receive anything less than 110% percent hype. What's fact and what's fiction with Sony is not known until launch. I'm crossing my fingers hoping that Cell will be everything I need it to be. I'll defend the chip and buy the hype as far as a global paradigm shift, but I won't buy any of the more mundane performance hype until I have something a little more solid to go on that some PR-persons statements. I will ONLY trust engineers and programmers at face value, and sometimes then not even. Presidents, CEO's, PR, and other individuals whose job it is to make the company look good get their statements mined by me, but not bought outright.

I agree. But, I wouldn't expect anything to be reliant on just hype alone. I'm sure they'll be SOME truth in these claims next-gen, especially since they are up against a stronger competitor. I would rather wait and see what they are, though.

Another thing I want to to add to that is the hype by Sony for the Emotion Engine.That pretty much spawned from the box they were working on (more popular for its name) the GScube, which was said to be 10x more powerful than the PS2. Sony originally wanted the PS2 to have similiar performance of what they were predicting for the PS3. The only difference was, the project never took off around the time of the PS2, which is how it ended up moving into this/next-generation. So instead of hyping just the PS2, Sony began hyping the GScube as well.

Well I'm hoping along with the rest of us that Cell makes good on the hype. I'm very excited about what might happen in the PC/electronics world if Cell really works out the way Sony originally set it out to. That's a good point about the GSCube/Emotion Engine - I forgot that interplay. I just hope it doesn;t repeat with the Cell/APU's thing when it comes to PS3.

[Z]

do you think programming for PS3 will be any easier than programming for the PS2?

Well, Sony did state tha PS3 Development would be easier than PS2. the same is said about the PSP. now, keep inmind that PS2 development isn't 'hard'. it is more 'alien', so to speak- it was new.
they way I see it is if it was really hard, how come we see this crazy support for it? we practically have games out for the PS2 from almost all developers around the world- big AND small.
and this issue was mentioned early after the PS2's release. I haven't heard about it in a while. that points that it is not an issue anymore. :D

[axia777]

All I can say is that is Sony wants PS3 to be sucsessful they MUST have bad assed middleware. Middleware is the key to understanding such a complex system that PS3 will most likely be. I can not state it more strongly, Mioddleware Middleware Middleware Sony!

As for if the PS3 will have the best graphics, it is the GPU that I feel may be the weak link. X-Box:Next is already garranteed a powerful GPU supplied by ATI as we all know with crap loads of features built in. We all know The Cell will most likely be the most powerfull processor, though exactly powerfull we have yet to see. But have we really heard anyting remotely concrete on the PS3 GPU? Not that I know of. Does anyone here know anything on the GHPU that SOnyn plans to use in the PS3? I hope that Sony builds a screamingly powerfull GPU with the Cell as the base of the it. That would be sweet. :wink:

[j^aws]

...
But have we really heard anyting remotely concrete on the PS3 GPU? Not that I know of. Does anyone here know anything on the GHPU that SOnyn plans to use in the PS3? I hope that Sony builds a screamingly powerfull GPU with the Cell as the base of the it. That would be sweet. :wink:

Of course this isn't official but below is a summarization of Cell related patents that maybe in PS3. They're ppt presentations compiled by Dr. Paul Zimmons.

Graphics Cell Patents: http://www.cs.unc.edu/~zimmons/Zimmons__CellGFX.ppt

Cell patents: http://www.cs.unc.edu/~zimmons/CELL.ppt

They should give you an idea. If you're not familiar with the Cell patents, then I'd read them first. Anyway, he mainly concentrates on 4 graphics patents in his ppt...

The first one is about rendering by parallel bricks/tiles...
The second describes programming Cell...
The third is about a hardware candidate for the 'pixel engines' in the form of a global module...
The fourth is another hardware candidate for the 'pixel engines' in the form of SALC/ SALP...

PS. If any mods are reading this, is there a possibility of making these ppts a 'sticky' thread for referral? Just a suggestion as these patents have been posted here before and we seem to get the same common questions...<not directed at anyone in particular> Thanks. :)

[The_One]

PS. If any mods are reading this, is there a possibility of making these ppts a 'sticky' thread for referral? Just a suggestion as these patents have been posted here before and we seem to get the same common questions...<not directed at anyone in particular> Thanks. Agreed.

I only read the first ppt, and it seems pretty interesting, but since I'm using the school's computer lab computer, I can't really take my time to read everything. But a few points caught my eyes:
4 rendering engines capable of some form of pixel shading united by a global module 4 rendering ENGINES in the sense of an "engine", or 4 different Processing Unit used for rendering?

Also, there was a graph with a central cache connected to 4 different "GAIF's", what exactly are GAIF's? (It's ony slide 31).

[julps31]

Sony seems to be making sure that the middleware is there this time. So I wouldn't worry much about that. About the GPU, Sony has the best engineers on theres side so if they work as hard on the GPU and its capabilities as the CPU it will be a big contender in the next-gen console war. With powerfal middleware and a powerful GPU Sony could have the console crown again.

[Omega Blue]

but again, sales don't directly reflect better hardware. :wink:

ah very true but they DO reflect the better console over all :) :!:

[Domination]

do you think programming for PS3 will be any easier than programming for the PS2?

Well, Sony did state tha PS3 Development would be easier than PS2. the same is said about the PSP. now, keep inmind that PS2 development isn't 'hard'. it is more 'alien', so to speak- it was new.
they way I see it is if it was really hard, how come we see this crazy support for it? we practically have games out for the PS2 from almost all developers around the world- big AND small.
and this issue was mentioned early after the PS2's release. I haven't heard about it in a while. that points that it is not an issue anymore. :D

The way it looks, I would say that Sony picked the right time to make the PS2 incredibly tough to program for. If not for this time, Microsoft may have had a much stronger advantage with their software team. But, seeing how Sony realized the mistake they had made when Microsoft was still a moderately small competitor, they were not only able to survive the small advantage the Xbox had with programming for it, but they were also able to rectify their previous mistakes. At least it looks that way.

[The_One]

do you think programming for PS3 will be any easier than programming for the PS2?

Well, Sony did state tha PS3 Development would be easier than PS2. the same is said about the PSP. now, keep inmind that PS2 development isn't 'hard'. it is more 'alien', so to speak- it was new.
they way I see it is if it was really hard, how come we see this crazy support for it? we practically have games out for the PS2 from almost all developers around the world- big AND small.
and this issue was mentioned early after the PS2's release. I haven't heard about it in a while. that points that it is not an issue anymore. :D

The way it looks, I would say that Sony picked the right time to make the PS2 incredibly tough to program for. If not for this time, Microsoft may have had a much stronger advantage with their software team. But, seeing how Sony realized the mistake they had made when Microsoft was still a moderately small competitor, they were not only able to survive the small advantage the Xbox had with programming for it, but they were also able to rectify their previous mistakes. At least it looks that way. That's a good point Domination... If they made the PS3 incredibly hard to program while the PS2 was relatively easy to program for... Then they could be in for a big trouble, since lots of 3rd party support would probably flee to XBox. Learn from your mistakes Sony :D.

[xbdestroya]

do you think programming for PS3 will be any easier than programming for the PS2?

Well, Sony did state tha PS3 Development would be easier than PS2. the same is said about the PSP. now, keep inmind that PS2 development isn't 'hard'. it is more 'alien', so to speak- it was new.
they way I see it is if it was really hard, how come we see this crazy support for it? we practically have games out for the PS2 from almost all developers around the world- big AND small.
and this issue was mentioned early after the PS2's release. I haven't heard about it in a while. that points that it is not an issue anymore. :D

The way it looks, I would say that Sony picked the right time to make the PS2 incredibly tough to program for. If not for this time, Microsoft may have had a much stronger advantage with their software team. But, seeing how Sony realized the mistake they had made when Microsoft was still a moderately small competitor, they were not only able to survive the small advantage the Xbox had with programming for it, but they were also able to rectify their previous mistakes. At least it looks that way.

Very positive way of looking at it - good point.

[Rallyracr420]

The way it looks, I would say that Sony picked the right time to make the PS2 incredibly tough to program for. If not for this time, Microsoft may have had a much stronger advantage with their software team. But, seeing how Sony realized the mistake they had made when Microsoft was still a moderately small competitor, they were not only able to survive the small advantage the Xbox had with programming for it, but they were also able to rectify their previous mistakes. At least it looks that way.

What? I don't understand what you're saying. I think you're saying that if the PS2 was easier to program, then MS would have had an even bigger advantage? Normally if something is easier to use, it gets promoted more, not less. If I'm not reading this right, please let me know what you really meant.

The XBox had huge programming advantages. For the XBox you weren't required to write low level assembly code, which is why developers hated the PS2. Assembly isn't very fun when their exists higher level programming languages that are more efficent to write code with.

I've heard some comments around here that the PS3 is going to be hard to program for with the complexity of the Cell processor. While this makes sense that more processors require more planning with contructing various threads for each, I don't think it will be this way. Simply put, there's no reason for Sony to put any effort into a Colada/OpenGL implementation for the PS3 if these high level routines need to be replaced with low level assembly code. Because of the complexity of the Cell, Sony will be using this extra time they have before the PS3 is released to develop tools that should send the right instructions to the right processor at the right time. This should all be built into the compiler so that developers won't have to waste time figuring out the complexities of the Cell.

[Domination]

The way it looks, I would say that Sony picked the right time to make the PS2 incredibly tough to program for. If not for this time, Microsoft may have had a much stronger advantage with their software team. But, seeing how Sony realized the mistake they had made when Microsoft was still a moderately small competitor, they were not only able to survive the small advantage the Xbox had with programming for it, but they were also able to rectify their previous mistakes. At least it looks that way.

What? I don't understand what you're saying. I think you're saying that if the PS2 was easier to program, then MS would have had an even bigger advantage? Normally if something is easier to use, it gets promoted more, not less. If I'm not reading this right, please let me know what you really meant.

The XBox had huge programming advantages. For the XBox you weren't required to write low level assembly code, which is why developers hated the PS2. Assembly isn't very fun when their exists higher level programming languages that are more efficent to write code with.

I've heard some comments around here that the PS3 is going to be hard to program for with the complexity of the Cell processor. While this makes sense that more processors require more planning with contructing various threads for each, I don't think it will be this way. Simply put, there's no reason for Sony to put any effort into a Colada/OpenGL implementation for the PS3 if these high level routines need to be replaced with low level assembly code. Because of the complexity of the Cell, Sony will be using this extra time they have before the PS3 is released to develop tools that should send the right instructions to the right processor at the right time. This should all be built into the compiler so that developers won't have to waste time figuring out the complexities of the Cell.

Alright, it's obvious that Sony didn't know how far would be enough before developers would complain about the extreme difficultly they would have programming for their console this serious (as in going exclusive to the developer friendly console). What I am saying is Sony could not have picked a better time to make such a mistake. Why do I say this? Well, at the time of the PS2, Microsoft was not big enough to creat an impact with thier developer friendly Xbox console because Sony's hold on the market at that time clearly exceeded theirs -- no matter how difficult it was to program for it, which negated the advantage Microsoft could have had all together. Therefore, in return, what Sony got was an eye-opener while remaining competitive when Microsoft was still at their weakest. If not for them realizing what the developers really wanted as soon as they did, there's a good chance that they could have been entering the next round with just an average console to develop for. In other words, not taking it as serious as they are now. Think of Nintendo and online gaming. This is what I mean by bad timing. Microsoft are already breathing down their neck.

[BigPapaSmurf]

well it looks like sony will be going with nvidia for it's next gpu...

http://www.psinext.com/itex.php?iid=432

i think ati is a little better than nvidia right now. xenon's gpu might be a little better. but i dont think the difference will be much to tell you the truth. but who knows maybe nvidia can take back their crown as the top graphics company. maybe sony can go with dual gpu's like some sli computers. if sony does that then it will own xbox 2 machine hands down graphically. 8)

[BigPapaSmurf]

oh yeah this now means that the ps3 will easier to develop for so sony will reign supreme. i dont see how tecmo can say that the ps3 wont be powerful enough for them. im really starting to think that the ps3 will have 2 gpu's and if thats the case it will be really really powerful.

[Domination]

well it looks like sony will be going with nvidia for it's next gpu...

http://www.psinext.com/itex.php?iid=432

i think ati is a little better than nvidia right now. xenon's gpu might be a little better. but i dont think the difference will be much to tell you the truth. but who knows maybe nvidia can take back their crown as the top graphics company. maybe sony can go with dual gpu's like some sli computers. if sony does that then it will own xbox 2 machine hands down graphically. 8)

Seriously, where are you getting your information from? The Xenon is launching much ealier than the PS3 with ATI only having a part in Microsoft's Xenon graphics performance. Sony is launching later with both nVidia and Sony having a part in the PS3's graphics perfomance. In no way can you even think that their alliance is the same as Microsoft. I suggest you not underestimate what these guys could possbily do with this console.

As for Team Ninja, they didn't choose Sony before, so I doubt they will choose them later if this console so happens to stand behind its hype.

[axia777]

ATI and nvidia are pretty much neck in neck with concern to GPU power. ATI has more power on one side and nvidia has more on the other. What is funny is nvidia's stock on the NASDAQ is almost always worth more. That means their profits are higher and they are most likely selling more graphics cards. I think Sony made the right choice for a partener. Heck, look at UnReal Engine 3.0. Powered on nvidia cards. That is sweet! :wink:

[BigPapaSmurf]

well remember that nvidia also makes money off motherboards so that's probably why their stock is worth more. upon seeing more news i now think the ps3 will be way more powerful than microsoft's next system. good job sony you learned from your mistakes with the ps2.im glad to see you learn from mistakes and are not like nintendo. :)

[axia777]

Nintendo never had a problem with their systems man. GameCube as a system kicks ass. It has major power, just play Metroid:Prime and Prime 2. Good graphics. It is their game stratagey that sucks rocks. Too little, too late I think. But Sony, they had problems graphically with PS2. Anti-aliasing was a bitch and with out that a lot of games look like crap. But I guess Sony realized that nvidia knows more about GPU creation than anybody except for ATI. They saw that they sucked for the most part and stuck to processors, with IBM's help, of course. So now the GPU in PS3 will whup some. I like Sony because they evolve. That means growth and change. That is good. :D

[Rob78]

[quote=amod20002004]Xbox2’s graphics won’t look better than ps3 at all. Sony has 4 to 5 months more period than Microsoft to develop powerful console. You know something, why Microsoft is rushing out to introduce xbox2 before ps3. Let me tell you, they don’t have enough powerful hardware to compete with Sony. That’s what I read 8 months ago on Microsoft.com. There was an article published on Microsoft.com, which was saying that if MS didn’t do anything new for xbox2 then xbox2 wouldn’t able to compete with ps3.

Well,I completely disagree with that,as it has been prooven by many PC sites such as c|Net and PC World that ATi uses more advanced equipment,and has the highest standards(higher than that of nvidia)in the graphic card industry,I don't know where in hell you read this article,because Microsoft is one of the most ambisious companies on the planet,they will not build a new console just to release before Sony.They are beyond the power that Sony has,Bill Gates is one of(if not the) most powerful people in the world,the man own 67 different masions all over the world.Microsoft will never let other companies develop thier products,and they will prevail in the next console war.Here are some comfirmed screens of WarDevil,supposedly one of the X-box 2's launch titles http://xboxmedia.ign.com/xbox/image/article/570/570554/wardevil-20041202101057213.jpg
http://xboxmedia.ign.com/xbox/image/article/570/570554/wardevil-20041202101057916.jpg

[kevindenoyette]

facts time:

1.micrisoft made nearly half a billion dollars losses on the x box
2. the ps 2 outsold the x box 5-1.
3. microsoft is launching earlier than sony ( definately, it's been said by tonnes of people.)
4. microsoft is going the traditional way, paying companies to get their shit made
5. sony invested enormous amounts of money and spent years developing stuff for the ps3.


I hate to say it, but as it stands, I'd say sony has the better chance of winning this war.


besides, the wardevil shots are what it says below. image taken from the trailer, get a source up of the developer explicitly saying "the trailer looks just like in-game play". they won't say it, because the trailer never looks as good as the real graphics, that would defeat the point of it being a trailer.

[GTShotoKen]

facts time:

1.micrisoft made nearly half a billion dollars losses on the x box
2. the ps 2 outsold the x box 5-1.
3. microsoft is launching earlier than sony ( definately, it's been said by tonnes of people.)
4. microsoft is going the traditional way, paying companies to get their shit made
5. sony invested enormous amounts of money and spent years developing stuff for the ps3.


I hate to say it, but as it stands, I'd say sony has the better chance of winning this war.


besides, the wardevil shots are what it says below. image taken from the trailer, get a source up of the developer explicitly saying "the trailer looks just like in-game play". they won't say it, because the trailer never looks as good as the real graphics, that would defeat the point of it being a trailer.

Don't forget that Sony, with IBM, has created the most advanced cpu architecture in decades. 8)

[nesman]

Go Sony, for making so many innovations for us 8)

[Rob78]

Well,I am not good at picking sides,or consoles,or even underwear brand,I am the guy that buys all three systems because he can't make up his mind,I am going to admit that over the past 2 years with my X-Box,I have developed a sort of bias toward MS,and away form Sony,don't take this the wrong way,Sony is an amazing company that makes amazing products,but if you look at Microsoft,90% of us wouldn't be using a PC if it wasn't for Billy,so excuse me if I sound like a fan boy,but Microsoft kicks ass!!!

[GUNDAMSEED]

i won't say that the same way how we would still have been playing games even if PS did not come out i am sure alot of us would be still using a pc . I am sure some one would have come out with a OS it jusy MS did it first .

[DappaDizzle]

HELL YES 2 THE TOPIC

[Brandon]

I am sure some one would have come out with a OS it jusy MS did it first .
Which they copied from Apple ;)

[Rob78]

I am sure some one would have come out with a OS it jusy MS did it first .
Which they copied from Apple ;)Do you use a Mac?

[The_One]

I am sure some one would have come out with a OS it jusy MS did it first .
Which they copied from Apple ;)Do you use a Mac? Yes, and no. Why? I use Macs to render 3D Animation and Imagery -- it's what I do for work ;). At home, I stick to Windows simply because of it's simplicity.

However, what's the point of asking such a question?

[Matt]

Continue here:

http://www.psinext.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4222