UK teams working on PlayStation HUB, PS3 backward-compatibility

[Old_Timer!]

source: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=16310

emulation for backwards compatibility progressing well, claims source

Key elements of the technology for PlayStation 3 - including the PlayStation Network Platform and the software to enable back-compatibility with PS and PS2 games - are being worked on at Sony's UK studios, GamesIndustry.biz has learned.

Sources at Sony Computer Entertainment Europe have revealed that technology for the PlayStation Network Platform is being developed at Sony's London studio, under the internal name of "PlayStation HUB".

This tallies in with our earlier report about the progress in developing a billing system for the platform with the Royal Bank of Scotland, with testing on that aspect of the network system due to begin next month.

However, as yet it's not clear whether PlayStation HUB is the final name for the system which will be used in the company's marketing, or if a more consumer-friendly name will be chosen before the PS3 launches in November.

Elsewhere in Sony's UK division, other teams are working on the backwards compatibility for the PlayStation 3 - which, one programmer on this project has revealed to GamesIndustry.biz, will be accomplished in software rather than by building the PS2 hardware into the PS3 console, as was the case with the PS2's emulation of the PSone.

Sony has already pledged that all PS2 games which adhered to the company's TRC (technical requirements checklist) will be playable on the PS3 - and according to our source, the software emulation system is progressing well and may indeed meet that lofty goal.

He claimed that a surprising number of PS2 titles are already working on PS3 prototype hardware, and revealed that the emulation tricks being used to mimic the behaviour of the notoriously complex PS2 processors are getting whole swathes of game titles up and running on an ongoing basis.

While our source was positive about the progress being made on backwards compatibility, the team is undoubtedly working under fierce deadline pressures - as if the vast, vast majority of the PS2's software library is not up and running by November, it will be hugely embarrassing for Sony in the wake of the company's frequent touting of compatibility with an existing software library as one of the key features of PS3, and one of its key advantages over the Xbox 360.

[VG Aficionado]

Finally some news on backwards compatibility :) It looks like it will be quite good.

I would like Phil to demonstrate BC and enhancements at PS3's E3 conference.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Lookin good. Now all I need is the promise of at least one memory card port for my ps2 memory card. Or some practical means of transfer.

[cliffbo]

Lookin good. Now all I need is the promise of at least one memory card port for my ps2 memory card. Or some practical means of transfer.

USB me thinks

[venomv]

That would be the best way to go I think.

[Leedogg]

+rep oldtimer thanks for the info, yea usb would be the best bet. Even though, sony would probably sell it on the side.

[venomv]

Im leaning that way to, the good thing is if for some whacked reason Sony doesn't sell anything like that we will still probably get a third party one, even though I hope I will never have to buy a third party anything this time around. I had 3 controls break on my this time, and they where all third party.

[cliffbo]

i got one free with a mag a while back! give them away with the PS3 or PSP.

[venomv]

i got one free with a mag a while back! give them away with the PS3 or PSP.

Ehh? What free?

[cliffbo]

Ehh? What free?

usb to usb connector sorry lol

[LiquidEagle]

So if it's all in software, that means we can download updates for it to work out compatibility issues, plus it can enhance the game with maybe some AA or something down the road, right?

[venomv]

Ok, hopefully we won't have to worry about that though.

@Liquid I don't like the fact it is all software and not hardware, seems like there may be more issues. But it also seems to me that they might be able to enhance the games more then they could normally could then if they just put the EE and GS in there.

[chrismt]

I hope all this software emulation for backwards compatibility wont lead to a bloated mess, overheating, or a BluSOD.

[section]

At least software emulation solution is lot cheaper than full blown hardware backwards compatability. It's interesting to ponder about their solutions though because PS2 has to my knowledge got some very proprietary components which could be very tricky to emulate, but then again I'm not that much PS2 expert that I could say this and that about how they will achieve the emulation.

But I think it will be all good, can't think any reason why the emulation itself would lead to overheating or "bloated mess".

And blue screens are proprietary MS achievements :)

[Crossbar]

At least software emulation solution is lot cheaper than full blown hardware backwards compatability. It's interesting to ponder about their solutions though because PS2 has to my knowledge got some very proprietary components which could be very tricky to emulate, but then again I'm not that much PS2 expert that I could say this and that about how they will achieve the emulation.
I am also very curious about how they will achieve this in software mainly, specifically the fact that the GS contained 4MB of blazingly fast EDRAM, perhaps a reasonably sized fast cache will take care of the bulk of memory accesses and that's good enough, but it's probaly unlikely they would rely on something so unpredictable as a cache. Maybe some local store?

Nevermind, anyway it would be great if they didn't have to spend transistors on backward compatibility, transistors that would just sit around as dead meat when PS3 games are running.

[casualkiss]

I am also very curious about how they will achieve this in software mainly, specifically the fact that the GS contained 4MB of blazingly fast EDRAM, perhaps a reasonably sized fast cache will take care of the bulk of memory accesses and that's good enough, but it's probaly unlikely they would rely on something so unpredictable as a cache. Maybe some local store?

Are you sure the PS2 has 4MB of EDRAM? I was under the assumption that it had 32MB Rambus DRAM and 4MB of VRAM, in which case the PS3 shouldn't have too many problems.

[RavenFox]

Sony Hardware being made to run Sony software. I mean c'mon guys if anyone can make there stuff work its them. This is not the same as switching companies like Microsoft did.

[Crossbar]

Are you sure the PS2 has 4MB of EDRAM?
Yes, this is the PS2 we are talking about. :angelgrin

4MB Multiported Embedded DRAM
38.4 Gigabytes per Second eDRAM Bandwidth (19.2 GB/s in each direction)

http://www.pcvsconsole.com/features/consoles/playstation2.php

[VG Aficionado]

Hmmm, Wikipedia has quite different info. Oddly enough, they do not mention the amount of DRAM.

Graphics: "Graphics Synthesizer" clocked at 147 MHz

* Variable from 256x224 to 1280x1024 pixels
* DRAM Bus bandwidth: 47.0GB per second
* DRAM Bus width: 2560-bit (composed of three independendent buses: 1024-bit write, 1024-bit read, 512-bit read/write)
* Pixel Configuration: RGB:Alpha:Z Buffer (24:8, 15:1 for RGB, 16, 24, or 32-bit Z buffer)
* Maximum Polygon Rate: 75 million polygons per second (1)
* Dedicated connection to: Main CPU and VU1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation_2

I'm curious as to how they will solve this, mostly taking into account they probably plan to enhance PS2 game graphics, and therefore I assume even more bandwidth would be needed.

[cliffbo]

Hmmm, Wikipedia has quite different info. Oddly enough, they do not mention the amount of DRAM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation_2

I'm curious as to how they will solve this, mostly taking into account they probably plan to enhance PS2 game graphics, and therefore I assume even more bandwidth would be needed.

then get over there and correct it fellas thats what wikipedia is for

[Crossbar]

Hmmm, Wikipedia has quite different info. Oddly enough, they do not mention the amount of DRAM.

Sorry, I left out this line in my quote:
9.6 Gigabytes per Second eDRAM Texture Bandwidth which corresponds to the 512 bit wide read/write bus in wikipedia. Both sources are saying the same.

[Z]

curious to know that the b/c is done all in software. Kuturagi said b/c was going to cost them. how could be that costly if it is only software? maybe the cost of the software development itself? they even said PS2 ran PS1 games through software alone. that is amazing if I got that right.

[Crossbar]

curious to know that the b/c is done all in software. Kuturagi said b/c was going to cost them. how could be that costly if it is only software? maybe the cost of the software development itself? they even said PS2 ran PS1 games through software alone. that is amazing if I got that right.
Software does not come for free either, but there may be a few things that are actually solved in hardware, very likley some GS specific feature. The EE may very likely be emulated in software all of it.

[xbdestroya]

Wow can't believe I'm only reading this today...

Anyway I'll be impressed/pleased if they indeed do manage a software emulation solution; there's really been no solid indication of such until this article, and so I'm still a little skeptical as whether or not to believe this. That said, tossing out the EE+GS chip would certainly be good for costs.

Hopefully we'll get more word on this from some devs as to whether or not software emulation is indeed the path being pursued.

And yeah, 4MB of eDRAM on the GS - don't be confused by the VRAM designation of old, people use to just toss that term around.

[LiquidEagle]

So does that mean the PS2 has no VRAM by technical definition?

Also, how much do you imagine it would lower costs, xb? I can't see the EE+GS (I think the two together are called Dragon once they got unified in production) costing much more than their weight in dirt these days when we have heavy hitters like the Cell on the horizon.

[venomv]

Or their weight in silicon for that matter.

[cpiasminc]

curious to know that the b/c is done all in software. Kuturagi said b/c was going to cost them. how could be that costly if it is only software? maybe the cost of the software development itself? they even said PS2 ran PS1 games through software alone. that is amazing if I got that right.
Software can easily be more expensive than hardware if it has to be constantly updated and maintained. That means you're paying people to constantly keep things up and running. At least with hardware, all the bugs have to be worked out early, and you amortize those costs over the course of the product's lifespan. Of course, the relative expanse of time does make a difference here. No chip is cheap, and it brings with it additional costs.

I don't know if I would say that the PS1 b/c on PS2 was software "alone" -- the two machines did share a common chip -- it's just that it does take some software and microcoding work to make sure that the system goes through the IOP for execution rather than EE, and in addition most everything else does have to be emulated. Which is why you got things like texture filtering for free on PS1 games.

In any case, software is the only way b/c on a console should ever be implemented in my book. When you start bringing hardware into the equation, you end up affecting the overall system architecture and hence, holding it back with old designs that are otherwise of no value.

I can't see the EE+GS (I think the two together are called Dragon once they got unified in production) costing much more than their weight in dirt these days when we have heavy hitters like the Cell on the horizon.
Mmmmm... the cost of the die itself is probably next to nothing, but the cost of packaging, verification, motherboard design changes, additional components to actually drive the darn thing... to say nothing of the opportunity cost of taking up fab space to produce this old chip in far higher volumes than is currently necessary.

And in either case, you've got the cost of developing software and microcode to run the old games bypassing the current hardware and running on the old chip. At least with pure emulation, you have a larger, but at least solely software development cost.

[Arnaud_M]

At least with pure emulation, you have a larger, but at least solely software development cost.

And furthermore you have some liberties to improve things. Such as ... such as ... err ... why not four PS2 emulated on the same time in 4-way split-screen on a 1080 resolution :-D You plug 4 controllers on the PS3, each player has his own 1/4 of the TV :-D

Arnaud

PS: will not happen, I know, I know

[LiquidEagle]

Hehe you bring another point to mind, Arnaud -- it better let us play PS2 & PS1 games 4-player without having to buy different multi-taps or something! You can't use a PS1 multi-tap for PS2 games, and vice versa, so that was frustrating, not to mention the fact that PS2 should have had 4 controller ports from the get-go. Anyways, I hope the PS3's software emulation will let us play PS1 & 2 games 4+ players (Madden games support up to 8, right?) using PS3's controllers so we don't have to buy some wild peripheral to replace a $35 piece of equipment a lot of us have already bought. Same goes for online, I hope PS2 games are playable online through PS3 so my Subsistence playing doesn't miss a beat :-p. Hopefully other things like DDR pads & light guns work on PS3 as well :-/

If we were able to do what you're talking about and run 4 PS2 instances on one screen, I bet the disc would explode in about .001 seconds or so :laugh:

I see what you mean though, cpiasminc -- Throwing in these old chips could really hamper what Sony/Tosh/IBM are trying to do here with the Cell/RSX architecture, and force them to adhere in one way or another to "the old ways." Software sounds like more of a gamble though since PS2 games have very different methods of coding & stuff (I'm sure you know lots more about this than I do), and software emulation may not 100% guarantee full functionality like Sony is promising. Then again, software can be updated throughout the course of the system so any initial kinks can be worked out, and hopefully Sony will devote enough resources to make the software emulation go above & beyond and give us some Anti-Aliasing on first-party games or something. I say first-party games because I'm guessing they all used similar libraries & technology, which would make it easy for Sony to know how to make them all include AA & such.

[xbdestroya]

I'm going to have to disagree here with Cpi a little, in that although the EE+GS is certainly small when compared to Cell and/or RSX, it's die is still the same size as a Pentium 4 and/or an Athlon64 on the 90nm process node. (EE+GS is 86mm^2) So I mean, we're not talking about chump change here y'know? :smoke:

Now that being said, it won't come as a surprise then that I agree that being forced to include such a chip - and produce it in perpetuity - would be very much against Sony's long-term interests. That said, Kutaragi has made reference to a 'cost in hardware.' Honestly that could mean anything. I think I'm not alone in wanting well executed backwards compatability, and I think Sony wants this too; but on the other hand for the reasons already stated, EE+GS would be a terrible thing to have to resort to.

My own theory/hope is that there may be a hardware 'consideration' made elsewhere in the system. Maybe RSX, maybe not - I don't know. But something that would have utility within the Playstation 3 environment as well, and not just a crutch for PS2 B/C.

Keep in mind that if Sony did include a EE+GS, so much the better for the consumer then. But I would be disappointed if Sony had to go with that solution, simply for lack of elegence.

[version]

impossible emulating with software , that game which used vu0+vu1 shared registers cycle to cycle

mips core
vu0
vu1
vif0
vif1
gif
gs
edram
iop
dma
spram
etc......

for every element need a 3ghz PPE
cell is big endian, EE is little endian this is a big problem :), and SPEs not as good in emulation than a general procesor

[overclocked]

I'm going to have to disagree here with Cpi a little, in that although the EE+GS is certainly small when compared to Cell and/or RSX, it's die is still the same size as a Pentium 4 and/or an Athlon64 on the 90nm process node. (EE+GS is 86mm^2) So I mean, we're not talking about chump change here y'know? :smoke:


"Dragon" is being manufactured on 200m wafers from what i remember right?
Assuming 85-90% yields thats about ~280 functional dies on 200mm wafers.

All Cell is on 300mm but RSX was on both(?) or?
Anyway Cell dd2@ 235mm2 assuming 75% yields 200 functional dies per 300mm wafer. Btw this is counting in the defective dies at edges etc so should be accurate numbers to play with depending on how fun we want to have. :heybaby:

Ok gussing game with RSX diesize. First say 196mm2(smallest i can think of with any honor left in my body)
RSX with 80% yields @300mm Wafers outputs 260 functional dies.
Same formula but with 200mm wafers outputs 110 functional dies.

Ok if RSX is 256mm2 and squared shape as the above calculation
we get on 300mm wafers 197 functional dies
and on 200mm wafers around 80 functional dies.

Hadnt anything to do soo... :angelgrin

[xbdestroya]

Which reminds me! Athlon64's are all on 200mm wafers at the moment as well - so yeah basically the EE+GS@90nm should be very very similar to an A64 in price, save of course that AMD fabs on SOI whereas EE+GS is not.

[Saibo]

USB me thinks


Would a USB flash drive work?, i got the 512 MB one, great for transfering files. :mickey:

[Crossbar]

impossible emulating with software , that game which used vu0+vu1 shared registers cycle to cycle

mips core
etc......

for every element need a 3ghz PPE
cell is big endian, EE is little endian this is a big problem :), and SPEs not as good in emulation than a general procesor
version if you want to continue making shit up, you could at least put some effort in it to make it a little believable. I think you should spend some more time with the Cell documentation. :book:

[CreativeWriter]

I know next to nothing about this, but it's all fascinating to me. It seems like emulating via software alone would be far more difficult that simply reproducing Dragon in PS3, perhaps even giving the old PS2 chips something to do while CELL and RSX handle normal PS3 gaming... I don't know, running the linux kernel, for instance, though admittedly, I have no understanding of if that's even possible. You'd think you could run audio effects or something through the old chips, make them useful in some capacity... coordinate the cooling fans (lol). Either way, software emulation is sure to have some issues on launch... I mean, running Shadow of the Colossus on software alone? It'll be impressive if it works... which is pretty much what I've been saying about every announced PS3 attribute.

[Crossbar]

Emulating a CPU on another CPU is not ground-breaking. It has been done many times before. Anyone remember when Macintosh moved from the 680x0 to the PowerPC, and now recently moved to an x86 CPU each time they supported old programs through emulation, sure there have been some performance issues in certain programs, but the performance delta between the CPUs has not been as large as between the PS2 and PS3 hw.

The general purpose processing of the EE should not be that hard to emulate within spec on Cell, the PPE core is probably sufficient, (@version: it supports both little endian and big endian). My only concern is that some very efficient GS features, will not have corresponding functions in the "G71" hw and therefore may need specific support to be able to run within the PS2 spec.

Here's a snippet from my favourite old Kutaragi interview
Impress PC Watch: Will the PS3's backward compatibility with the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 be done through hardware?

Ken Kutaragi: It will be done through a combination of hardware and software. We can do it with software alone, but it's important to make it as close to perfect as possible. Third-party developers sometimes do things that are unimaginable. For example, there are cases where their games run, but not according to the console's specifications. There are times when games pass through our tests, but are written in ways that make us say, "What in the world is this code?!" We need to support backward compatibility towards those kinds of games as well, so trying to create compatibility by software alone is difficult. There are things that will be required by hardware. However, with the powers of [a machine like] the PS3, some parts can be handled by hardware, and some parts by software.

IPW: What about the endian (byte order) when emulating CPU codes with software?

KK: The Cell is bi-endian (has the ability to switch between usage of big endian and little endian ordering), so there are no problems.

IPW: The Xbox 360's backward compatibility will be done by software, since [there is] no other choice since they don't manufacture their own chips...

KK: The current Xbox will become antiquated once the new machine comes out this November. When that happens, the Xbox will be killing itself. The only way to avoid that is to support 100 percent compatibility from its [Xbox 360's] launch date, but Microsoft won't be able to commit to that. It's technically difficult.

[VG Aficionado]

Impress PC Watch: Will the PS3's backward compatibility with the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 be done through hardware?

Ken Kutaragi: It will be done through a combination of hardware and software. We can do it with software alone, but it's important to make it as close to perfect as possible. Third-party developers sometimes do things that are unimaginable. For example, there are cases where their games run, but not according to the console's specifications. There are times when games pass through our tests, but are written in ways that make us say, "What in the world is this code?!" We need to support backward compatibility towards those kinds of games as well, so trying to create compatibility by software alone is difficult. There are things that will be required by hardware. However, with the powers of [a machine like] the PS3, some parts can be handled by hardware, and some parts by software.Hehe, yeah, I remember this part. I want to find out the truth about PS3's backwards compatibility, but above all, whether 95%+ of PS2 games will actually work well with enhancements.

[version]

emulating a processor on another , need 10-20 times power if timing is important
if timing not important possible JIT emulator, in this case need 2-3 times power

on consoles timing IMPORTANT ,hence impossible to emulate on one cell , maybe on two ,MAYBE....

[Sephiroth_VII]

I haven't read that interview!!!! Quickly crossbar, gimme a link!!!

@Version: Shut it...

[xbdestroya]

Hey hey now Sephiroth, Version's entitled to post whatever. :)

He may toss out some random stuff now and them, but he gets the brain juices flowing with some of his tidbits - it's just the Version style! A lot of us are used to it. ;)

And he's right that timing's important on consoles (but I still think Cell will be able to handle it).

[Leedogg]

Didn't Sony put either the CPU or the bios from the PS1 to help the PS2 emulate the PS1 games? If they did that why can't they use the bios from the PS2 and put it on the PS3?

I might be talking out my head, but thats what I'm thinking.

[xbdestroya]

Well, the bios isn't a big deal - it's the hardware that's difficult. And what we're talking about here is just that: to what extent will Sony include extra hardware for the purpose of PS2 emulation.

[Crossbar]

I haven't read that interview!!!! Quickly crossbar, gimme a link!!!

Here you are:
http://forums.gamebattles.com/archive/index.php/t-359794.html

The original at gamespot is gone, but I guess the Japanese original can be found somewhere......

[version]

i hope , sony can to do with only software, but dont belief
but i know that i had blowjob when used iop on ps2

[Leedogg]

i found something interesting about Playstation 2 plays PS1 games.


Sony's successor to the PlayStation is the PlayStation 2, which is backward compatible with its predecessor, in the sense that it can play almost every PlayStation game. This was done by embedding the most important parts of the PSone inside the PlayStation 2 design. Unlike emulators that run on the PC, the PlayStation 2 actually contains the original PlayStation processor, allowing games to run exactly as they do on the PlayStation.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation

I wouldn't be surprised if Sony puts the Emotion Engine chip and the PS1 chip inside the PS3. Whether they can integrate the two chips into one, I don't know. :shrug:

[xbdestroya]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation

I wouldn't be surprised if Sony puts the Emotion Engine chip and the PS1 chip inside the PS3. Whether they can integrate the two chips into one, I don't know. :shrug:

Yeah but truthfully the EmotionEngine isn't even the big question mark - it's really the GraphicsSynthesizer+eDRAM. Somehow, Sony's going to need to simulate that sort of high-bandwidth environment.

[Crossbar]

emulating a processor on another , need 10-20 times power if timing is important
if timing not important possible JIT emulator, in this case need 2-3 times power

on consoles timing IMPORTANT ,hence impossible to emulate on one cell , maybe on two ,MAYBE....
I don´t know why I bother to write this?:whogives:

Why do you rule out JIT compilation? That would fit the vu-processors small programs pretty well, you could use one of the PPEs hardware threads to run it and mainly use the VMX-unit which then would run without interfering to much with the other hw thread which could emulate the basic MIPS core.

Cell running at 3.2 GHz PPE cache: 512 kB, EE running at 300 MHz cache: 8kB.
Impossible? I don't think so.

Splitting the emulation of one single program on two discrete CPUs, now that is impossible!!!!!!

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Isn't ps3 35 times as powerful as ps2? Isn't that kind of enough?

[VG Aficionado]

I definately don't think it's as simple as saying "System 'X' can be emulated on system 'Y' which is n times more powerful", mostly in the case of PS2. There must be a good number of factors to take into account for that.

The thing I find the most intriguing is: how will they emulate the eDRAM?

[LaLiLuLeLo]

yeah, damn sony and their proprietary hardware. If ps3 was simply built on say, emotion engine 2 and GS 2, then I'm sure it wouldn't be an issue at all(?)

[VG Aficionado]

I guess that if Sony intends to make PS4 backwards compatible, it will have to feature an evolution of Cell and, hopefully, a new Nvidia GPU, as well as an improved Blu-ray drive.

[xbdestroya]

Yeah I think that's definitely Sony's plan for PS4 - new NVidia GPU and multi-core Cell, with some other possible improvements.

[Z]

yeah, damn sony and their proprietary hardware. If ps3 was simply built on say, emotion engine 2 and GS 2, then I'm sure it wouldn't be an issue at all(?)
yeah, and then we would end up with something less than half the power of PS3. ;)

talking about PS4, I think it would be easier for b/c support since it will likely use an advanced Cell archetecture. that, and by that time, they'll only need to focus on PS3 support. PS1&2 games would be downloadable. I think PSP games (and PSP2?) would be downloadable by then as well. :)

[overclocked]

I definately don't think it's as simple as saying "System 'X' can be emulated on system 'Y' which is n times more powerful", mostly in the case of PS2. There must be a good number of factors to take into account for that.

The thing I find the most intriguing is: how will they emulate the eDRAM?

Nah your right, often its in that area around 10times if you go brute force(on pc).
If we take the Xbox360 fiasco its mainly because the chip is more advanced and they cant dynamically recompile some shaders cause that messes up all.

On PS3 my guess is that Cell recompile the code on the fly with no .exe
files needed to be downloaded. I think there could be a couple of circumstances where an exe from the game would be needed but im not so sure.
Edram and the whole structure should be emuluted the same way, as the code is dynamically changed to fit the new enviroment there are other paths to take.
I only do/done pre-art and some in art but thats my best guess. :honor: