- Joined
- Apr 26, 2002
- Posts
- 15,120
PS3 Chip details -- More overstatement??
- Thread starter Tacitus
- Start date
Heh. I will laugh so hard when Cell turns out to be the same kind of bullsiht the "Emotion Engine" was. It's pretty clear the PC field is finally shaking off the X86 limits, and the other consoles are already on Mac G5 chips (which don't have those particular hardware limitation) But now Sony's going to show the whole world how it's done, because they make soooo many computer CPU's now.
Anyone remember when they made long-winded speeches about how computers would be using the Emotion Engine? Same old Hype game.
Anyone remember when they made long-winded speeches about how computers would be using the Emotion Engine? Same old Hype game.
Highlander67
Sultan of Slugs
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2001
- Posts
- 2,565
One thing that I have leaarned over the years about Sony is they are the King of Hype. It never ceases to amaze me how they draw a crowd in with making alot of promises that 9 times out of 10 end up getting lost at the last minute or are never mentioned again. Anyone remember the PSX released in Japan? They ended up cutting out half the features that were promised which makes it not worth a 1/5 of the price they sold it for.
The Playstation 2 was no different. I can't imagine what feature(s) they will cut from the PSP and Inevitably cut from the PS3. The PS3 will sell based on one good feature that they won't cut, Backwards compatibility with the PS2 and PS1. That selling point alone is what makes it interesting to buy.
As for the new Cell chip, I think it's overrated and will not be as promised. Will it be good?, i'm sure it will sport some nice features. The fact they want to use it in all their products may be a good decision or a bad one, depends on how they utilize it. Only time will tell.
The Playstation 2 was no different. I can't imagine what feature(s) they will cut from the PSP and Inevitably cut from the PS3. The PS3 will sell based on one good feature that they won't cut, Backwards compatibility with the PS2 and PS1. That selling point alone is what makes it interesting to buy.
As for the new Cell chip, I think it's overrated and will not be as promised. Will it be good?, i'm sure it will sport some nice features. The fact they want to use it in all their products may be a good decision or a bad one, depends on how they utilize it. Only time will tell.
The only "emotion" I felt when the PS2 launched was disappointment 
.
It lacked the promised HDD and ethernet support, and the graphics were below that of my beloved DC. Comparing the Street Fighter EX to Soul Caliber is pretty funny.
So, there is no question that Sony plays the hype game better than they make consoles. However, if they somehow get their act together and release GOOD launch games, I woudl think about getting a PS3 at launch.
If not, I'll have had the Xbox next already (hopefully) and I'll be happy with that.
.It lacked the promised HDD and ethernet support, and the graphics were below that of my beloved DC. Comparing the Street Fighter EX to Soul Caliber is pretty funny.
So, there is no question that Sony plays the hype game better than they make consoles. However, if they somehow get their act together and release GOOD launch games, I woudl think about getting a PS3 at launch.
If not, I'll have had the Xbox next already (hopefully) and I'll be happy with that.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2002
- Posts
- 15,120
I really *really* think that the new Xbox is going to blow the PS out of the water in the states.
It won't replace it, it certainly won't 'dethrone' it, but I truly believe, it'll be another SNES/Genesis war.. it won't be as lopsided as this generation.
It'll be good because it'll be an innovation war.
I'l give it to Bill.. when he's in a war, he uses both barrels. I fully expect it on this go 'round.
It won't replace it, it certainly won't 'dethrone' it, but I truly believe, it'll be another SNES/Genesis war.. it won't be as lopsided as this generation.
It'll be good because it'll be an innovation war.
I'l give it to Bill.. when he's in a war, he uses both barrels. I fully expect it on this go 'round.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2002
- Posts
- 24,310
hasn't anyone learned, the chips don't mean shit, it's the graphics processor in the system...
and who would actually believe a damn thing sony says about specs after the PS2 hype and the "PSX" hype (when they cut half the damn features a week before it shipped).
and who would actually believe a damn thing sony says about specs after the PS2 hype and the "PSX" hype (when they cut half the damn features a week before it shipped).
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2002
- Posts
- 24,310
VanillaThunder said:
no doubt, when the xbox came out, the PS2 already had a 20 million + userbase, there was no way they were gonna beat that, all they had to do was make a name for themselves and gain market share, and they did that by outselling the cube. and it's already clear xbox has the best online functionality, i don't see that changing with the next system.
when xbox 2 hits and it's an even war, MSFT = teh ownage.
VanillaThunder said:
Of course, the hype game is nothing new, but Sony's "omg amazing" processors are particularly blatant. Neither Microsoft or Nintendo is claiming that their design for the Revolution or XB2 will magically make my tv better.
I do sincerely think of the current speculation that XB2 won't have the HDD or backwards compatibility ultimately proves true, Microsoft may have shot themselves in the foot so well they'll have trouble running another round. At the same time, I have this suspicion that Cell development may be so expensive/unworkable in the end it may stop the PS3 dead in its tracks.
Nesagwa said:
No, I won't even speculate on Nintendo while they're in secrecy mode. I don't see Nintendo coming out #1 in the US in any case, although it could get a serious boost if another company managed to implode their console (which is unlikely, but few people would have predicted Sega managing to so completely wipe themselves out of the console market in the mid 90's)
Mark of the Wolves
mullet bullet
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2002
- Posts
- 6,984
I think you guys are forgetting the fact that IBM and Toshiba are working on this. Not to mention Sony isn't stupid enough to make another chip like the EE when developers can't figure out how to do anything with it. I will wait until May until I say anything about it really since there isn't really anything solid. It's easy to see how things will happen. Xbox 2 launches fall 2005, everyone is still hyped about PS3 so they wait and don't buy it(sort of like what happened with Dreamcast) and then fall 2006 Nintendo Revolution and PS3 launch about the same time and we have a complete reverse of this generation. Were the newest consoles slaughter the others.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2003
- Posts
- 6,261
sony will for the third time make their console stupidly hard to program for which means once again all the games that come out in the first two generations will look like shit becoz they will either be games that were half finished on the ps2 then "ported" to the ps3 or be rush finished in one year deadlines by ppl unused to the hardware on hardware overly complicated to program on.....
Dude it's not just Sony "hyping" this, it's IBM and Toshiba. Apparantly at its heart it's just a general CPU using a new design.
Supposedly CELL was just a massively multi-core CPU, but unlike what multi-core stuff we're seeing out of AMD, Intel, Motorola, or IBM (via Power5/G5 stuffs) it's not just going to be two processor cores on one die it's supposed to be N number of "CELL Cores" depending on how powerful you need the chip to be. Obviously with this approach each CELL core isn't going to be anywhere near as powerful as the cores we'll soon be seeing coming out of the big chip vendors.
You're all right that the entire article is really just pure hype though. I love the statement "Cell will be 10 times more powerful than conventional chips and able to shepherd large chunks of data over broadband networks."
Well duh, it's called distributed computing. All you do is send processor instructions out onto a network, and then you're still limited to your network protocol, and that's still good old TCP/IP if they're talking about doing this over the internet.
I also love the 10 times more powerful claim. I somehow doubt IBM is going to leapfrog itself 10 times over the Power5 chips or manage to beat out Intel and AMD's new offerings.
Also his "Current PC architecture is nearing its limits." statement is very misleading. The only thing you could possibly state that towards is the fact that we can't follow the same speed improvement techniques that they've been using on microprocessors for the past 30 years (aka shrink the die and up the clock rate). He's right in that massively multi-core stuff is the future, but the way he says the statement implies that x86 or RISC chip architecture is nearing its limits, which I hardly think is the case.
Supposedly CELL was just a massively multi-core CPU, but unlike what multi-core stuff we're seeing out of AMD, Intel, Motorola, or IBM (via Power5/G5 stuffs) it's not just going to be two processor cores on one die it's supposed to be N number of "CELL Cores" depending on how powerful you need the chip to be. Obviously with this approach each CELL core isn't going to be anywhere near as powerful as the cores we'll soon be seeing coming out of the big chip vendors.
You're all right that the entire article is really just pure hype though. I love the statement "Cell will be 10 times more powerful than conventional chips and able to shepherd large chunks of data over broadband networks."
Well duh, it's called distributed computing. All you do is send processor instructions out onto a network, and then you're still limited to your network protocol, and that's still good old TCP/IP if they're talking about doing this over the internet.
I also love the 10 times more powerful claim. I somehow doubt IBM is going to leapfrog itself 10 times over the Power5 chips or manage to beat out Intel and AMD's new offerings.
Also his "Current PC architecture is nearing its limits." statement is very misleading. The only thing you could possibly state that towards is the fact that we can't follow the same speed improvement techniques that they've been using on microprocessors for the past 30 years (aka shrink the die and up the clock rate). He's right in that massively multi-core stuff is the future, but the way he says the statement implies that x86 or RISC chip architecture is nearing its limits, which I hardly think is the case.
GamersAbyss
Chin's Drinking Partner
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2001
- Posts
- 2,750
I buy the US and Jap import of every system that comes out anyway so I hope they are all good!
Loopz
Formerly Punjab,
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2001
- Posts
- 12,871
Sony's simply the new Nintendo, except they don't make any decent games.
Nintendo used to apply equal hype to their consoles, whether it be stories of the Yakuza hijacking Super Famicom shipments, or starving stores of precious shipments of Super Mario Bros. 2 and Zelda II...it's all nothing new. I would also say that just like Nintendo, Sony's systems seem to always have some kind of massive flaw, like the Super Fami's 3.58 mhz processor = PS2's meager video RAM. At least Nintendo made incredible games and systems that don't break long before they should.
Should XBox 2 somehow dig up backwards compliance with XBox games, I think the next generation could be a rout. Especially if they come up with a really sweet design that is smaller and looks very cool. Can't underestimate the importance of consumer design when trying to succeed in Japan. Remember, no console manufacturer has ever won three successive console wars.
8-Bit Battle: Nintendo
16-Bit Rumble: Nintendo (Japan), Nintendo-Sega (Tied-US), Sega (Europe).
32/64-Bit Wars: Sony
128 Next Gen Assault: Sony
Console War V: ???
Nintendo used to apply equal hype to their consoles, whether it be stories of the Yakuza hijacking Super Famicom shipments, or starving stores of precious shipments of Super Mario Bros. 2 and Zelda II...it's all nothing new. I would also say that just like Nintendo, Sony's systems seem to always have some kind of massive flaw, like the Super Fami's 3.58 mhz processor = PS2's meager video RAM. At least Nintendo made incredible games and systems that don't break long before they should.
Should XBox 2 somehow dig up backwards compliance with XBox games, I think the next generation could be a rout. Especially if they come up with a really sweet design that is smaller and looks very cool. Can't underestimate the importance of consumer design when trying to succeed in Japan. Remember, no console manufacturer has ever won three successive console wars.
8-Bit Battle: Nintendo
16-Bit Rumble: Nintendo (Japan), Nintendo-Sega (Tied-US), Sega (Europe).
32/64-Bit Wars: Sony
128 Next Gen Assault: Sony
Console War V: ???
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2003
- Posts
- 11,434
jethrek said:
Maybe the Revolution will end up as revolutionary as the "Project Reality" was? Let's not turn this thread into stupid fanboy arguments, please.
beelzebubble said:
PlayStation (1) programming was fairly easy, unlike PlayStation2 programming. The "hard to program for" system of that era was the Saturn.
Both the PSP and PlayStation3 are supposed to be as easy to program for as the original PlayStation - just check how good Ridge Racers looks.
JHendrix said:
Not really misleading - the current PC architecture is 32bit CISC, and has been 32bit CISC for a long long while. Sure, we already have first 64bit processors, but... applications are still written for 32bit processors, and even OS' are as well. This new 64bit processors have to run all current apps in 32bit mode, and not make use of their real potential - just think about it, every single application would have to be coded specifically for 64bit processors for the computing leap to really be done, otherwise we will be emulating 32bit forever.
And anyway, fixed console hardware has always advantages over dynamic PC hardware. Why? Because there is where optimization relies - static hardware.
Loopz said:
Meh I dunno. I think MS could probably come out with this incredibly powerful system a year before anyone else, and have it still be as good as their competitors power wise, and have it be 1" thick and weigh 7 ounces and the Japanese still wouldn't buy it, simply because it's not from Japan.
I hope I'm wrong, but if that holds true that could just relegate MS to a constant second or third place in the console industry.
Nintendo I can't see pulling ahead to #1 again at least in the next generation. It's possible though, all they really need is a decent system put out on time and actual 3rd party support. I still don't think that a system can be #1 without main line Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior games on it, and right now it looks like those are staying in Sony's camp.
The next round is going to be pretty interesting for everyone but Sony. I think they'll stay on top just because they'll keep Japan in their pocket and the rest of the world will follow suit; I don't think they'll command as much of the market as they did this time though.
For Nintendo I can see them either coming out in a big second or ending up like Sega after the DC. It depends a lot on how well the DS does against the PSP and if Nintendo can get 3rd party people on board, along with getting a system out on time to compete.
MS is weird though. They're either going to take a strong second and make some decent profits or if they don't show good market share and don't make any cash then it'll be interesting to see if they'll stick it out making consoles. They do have share holders to be accountable to.