For any doubters........ - Blu-ray Forum

Pilam69 · 08-19-2007, 09:34 AM

This is a bit technical but the overall gist is that the PS3 may be the most well thought out, adaptable, advanced system ever. (duh). Maybe someone should call EA and have them read this over for some hints on how to get their Sh!t together.

http://playstation-disorder.com/comm...p?blog_id=795&

Friday, August 17, 2007

Permalink
The Beauty and the Beast

PS3What is one of the most heard prejudice when you ask people about the PS3? I guess number one is "The PLAYSTATION 3 is difficult to program, more difficult than other consoles". Well, this statement as such is of course stupid. Compared to let's say the PS2, the PS3 is a big improvement. While you had to use assembler code on the PS2 for almost all advanced stuff, the PS3 basically just needs C++ or C code in most cases. This is even true for the Cell SPEs, the main differenciator.

But before we even start let me already make a short disclaimer here as the article itself as well as the material that gets referenced are not easily digestable ;-) Anyway, I tried to use common sense terminology wherever possible as I am not a geek either ;-) I have also linked to several Wikipedia articles to explain some of the technologies that are used here in more detail.

The Beast

Of course what people could mean by that statement is the fact that the next generation consoles as well as PCs are now based on multi-core architectures, i.e. several CPUs can be used at any time to run all sorts of parallel code to achieve what we finally call next-gen gameplay. So, that again is no different for the various platforms.

The real difference becomes obvious when we look at the guts, i.e. the different CPUs used within the various platforms / consoles. Starting with the 360 we find the so-called Xenon CPU which features 3 symetrical PPC cores, being able to run two parallel threads at a time. Each core features an additional vector processing unit that can be used to do some fast vector operations. Those three cores are all programmed the same way using the same memory resources which makes the development of multi-threaded code easier, as there is only one programming model used.

The PC on the other side is very similar in a sence that the latest Intel and AMD chips are all multi-core based (usually dual core technology) which basically leads to the same pros and cons in terms of generating multi-threaded code.

Looking at the Cell, things are a little different: one of the design goals of the Cell chip was to produce the best performance / size ratio at the time of production of all the chips being out there. This was achieved by breaking with a lot of design principles that have been used at that time. First of all the Cell is not symetrical in the way the Xenon or Intel/AMD chips are.

Cell Large

Fig 1. The PS3 Hardware Architecture (click for larger view)

The Cell features one dual-threaded PowerPC Element (PPE), very similar to one of the Xenon cores, that acts as a conductor for wha seems to be the orchestra, a set of 7 Synergistic Processing Elements (SPE), which are symetric cores which are once again very much simplified compared to the PPE. Think of those SPE's as very fast and flexible vector units. Even though we are taling about 7 SPU's here, keep in mind that the PS3 dedicates one single SPU for the PS3 OS that handles a couple of background tasks. Looking at Fig. 1, The PPE as well as the SPE'S are connected via a very fast Element Interconnect Bus (EIB) which allows the PPE to talk to the SPE's, as well as the SPE's to talk to each other. Finally, all memory access is going thru the EIB and various memory and IO controllers.

What's interesting to note: even though the PS3 has destinct memory for the Cell CPU as well as the RSX GPU, this memory is somewhat "unified" in way that the RSX can access the different memory areas rather fast with a peak of 20 GB/s. In that sense, the PS3 architecture combines the best of both worlds, separated memory areas for CPU and GPU (no concurrent access issues), still being able for the GPU to use the respective other memory area for its own purposes. The 360 for instance uses a unified memory model where there is no distinction between different memory types, but with the problem of concurrent access to the same memory from CPU and GPU. Again, from a programming point of view, the 360 is easier to handle as you don't have to make a decision where certain stuff needs to reside.

One other complexity that needs to be handled by the programmer is the data feed to and from the SPE's. As the SPE are very simplistic processing units, they only feature are relativly small local storage (LS) of 256 KB. This storage is used for the SPE's program running at one point in time on a SPE. The data that gets processed by the SPE needs to come from the main memory or the graphics memory via DMA commands that need to be issued just in time for the data to be ready for processing. The same is true for writing back stuff. The other option of course is that data will be consumed by another SPE after it has been processed by the first one.

Emotion Engine

Fig 2: The PS2's Emotion Engine

On last comment on the PS3 architecture before we dive into the Beauty section ;-) The overall PS3 architecture is very similar to the PS2 from a certain viewing distance. Take the PPE on the one hand and compare it with the MIPS core within the PS2 Emotion Engine (Fig. 2). Then take a look at the PS2's 2 Vector Processing Units (VU1 & 2) which are in a sense simplified SPE's. In a way, the PS3 architecture is a blown up and extended PS2 architecture. The design goals on both platforms are obviously very similar: powerful and flexible. Both platforms are optimized for streaming data processing. Keep in mind that the way this data gets routed through the Cell as well as through the Emotion Engine is not fixed. There are many configurations possible on both platforms where of course the Cell is even more powerful in that discipline. Check out those references for a more detailed look into this topic [3] and [2 Slide 20 ff].
The Beauty

So far we have seen the beast part of the PS3, a platform that has some programming challenges in terms of keeping the various SPE's busy and managing the different memory types efficiently. Let's now come to the beauty aspects of it: its flexibility. As you can already see in Fig 1. the RSX GPU is the other major component with the PS3 architecture.

The RSX chip is very similar to any other standard PC based GPU with the exception, that it can access both memory types (main and graphics) almost at the same speed. Beside that it most likely features (no official specs have been released so far) a graphics pipeline consisting of 24 pixel shaders, 8 vertex shaders, 8 ROPS (raster operation units), and 550MHz clock speed.

Looking at those shaders as very specialized vector units similar to the Cells SPE's, again one could think of off-loading some of the tasks within the GPU's graphics pipeline to the Cell. In other words, you can use the Cell to seamlessly extend the GPU's capability and power. Let's take a look at two examples where this can be seen in real life in order to see that this is not just theory.

The first example is the already discussed "Deferred Rendering Killzone 2" presentation that was given at the develop conference in Brighton this July. Check out my article on that one if you need more details.

The second example I just found on the SCEA research website a couple of days ago. The article "Deferred Pixel Shading on the PLAYSTATION®3" perfectly describes the benefits of what we just discussed: the Cell providing additional pixel shaders to the graphics pipeline that are even more powerful as the RSX build-in pixel shaders. In a nutshell the result of the exercise (the implementation of a certain soft shadowing alogorithm) described in the article is that 5 SPE's basically acting as pixel shaders achieve the same performance as the 24 pixel shaders used on a NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX running on Linux based system. Btw, the used NVIDIA GPU is very similar to the RSX GPU used in the PS3.
Conclusion

Similar to the PS2, a platform that even for today's standards surprises us with visual qualities we wouldn't have expected from the console in the first place, the PS3 is a very flexible gaming platform. Almost nothing is carved in stone and it is really up to the developers to unleash the power of the architecture. This makes all sense as opposite to the PC world, hardware improvements are not an option for console makers. With a lifecycle of at least 10 years, the PS3 needs to be still capable of running new algorithms and methods which we don't even know by now.

Those are just two examples of how the combination of Cell and the RSX can achieve goals that sometimes even the designing engineers havn't thought about. A great outlook for the future if you ask me.

This is not possible with a fixed hardware architecture that is designed to make life easier for developers. Sure, on the PC side you can easily extend your hardware, for consoles that's not an option. Or maybe we will see another Xbox just in couple more years, something that is most likely to happen for the Wii anyhow.

Additional Links

1.
"Introduction to the graphics pipeline of the PS3" (PDF)
Presentation from Eurographics 07 by Cetric Perthuis, SCEA
2.
"CELL: A New Platform for Digital Entertainment" (HTML)
Presentation by Dominic Mallinson & Marc DeLoura SCEA
3.
Cell Software Model (PDF)
IBM programming course
4.
"Deferred Pixel Shading on the PS3" (PDF)
Article by Alan Heirich and Louis Bavoil, SCEA
5.
"Deferred Rendering in Killzone 2" (PDF)
Presentation from develop conference 07 by Michal Valient, Guerrilla

bluearth · 08-19-2007, 05:42 PM

I'm not a techno freak, but after reading that you can tell the Japanese really build technology that lasts. They plan for the future.

Microsoft, on the other hand, believes in replacing and upgrading existing products on a regular basis for money making reasons rather than build something that can last 5+ years

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think I heard 360 games like Gears of War already use 90%+ of the 360's 3 cores. I doubt anyone is that close to maxing out the PS3, not because of difficulty of programming, but because of the vast potential the architecture allows

warhawk21114 · 08-19-2007, 06:14 PM

PS 1 had a good long run, and the PS 2 is still going strong. These things are built to last a long time! So that entails ps3 is here to stay. If I already hadnt made up my mind, reading this would tell me to go out and pick one up. I will once I get the dough. But its nice to know that the ps3 is built to last.

KingDeezie · 08-19-2007, 06:39 PM

Not that I don't love my PS3 and hope it lasts for a few years, but lets get serious people....

Most people on this board are tech-junkies and want nothing but the latest and greatest, myself included.

How come people on this board pretend that in 10 years they are still going to be clutching to their PS3's?? Its just totally untrue...

We are all pouring thousands to tens of thousands of dollars into upgrading our systems so that we can enjoy the best that is currently available to us in the home entertainment market.

Does anyone really think that the meat and potatoes of the PS3 are still going to be able to compete in five years with the newest consoles that are out? I highly doubt it.

The fact of the matter is, is that in five years I bet there will be a new Microsoft and Sony console out, and the PS3 will just like the PS2 is now, a great system on the slow decline of new content. I understand that its a very powerful machine by todays standards, but not by standards five years from now, especially with how fast technology is always growing.

CYMBOL · 08-19-2007, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingDeezie

Not that I don't love my PS3 and hope it lasts for a few years, but lets get serious people....

Most people on this board are tech-junkies and want nothing but the latest and greatest, myself included.

How come people on this board pretend that in 10 years they are still going to be clutching to their PS3's?? Its just totally untrue...

We are all pouring thousands to tens of thousands of dollars into upgrading our systems so that we can enjoy the best that is currently available to us in the home entertainment market.

Does anyone really think that the meat and potatoes of the PS3 are still going to be able to compete in five years with the newest consoles that are out? I highly doubt it.

The fact of the matter is, is that in five years I bet there will be a new Microsoft and Sony console out, and the PS3 will just like the PS2 is now, a great system on the slow decline of new content. I understand that its a very powerful machine by todays standards, but not by standards five years from now, especially with how fast technology is always growing.

Five years? Yes, I'll still have the PS3. Why?

Well, I had my same DVD player for 7 years - guess what, they only recently came out with something worth upgrading for - HD.

I had my same receiver for over 10 years - guess what, they only recently came out with lossless. Alright, time to upgrade.

And last, if they are having this hard of a time getting people to see the difference between DVD and HD discs, what is going to be coming in the near future to offer a definitive difference for people to upgrade from HD discs?

Even with "True-Color" people won't see that big of a difference. Sound, are we going to get more lossless?

I think we are good for a little while. The next thing that come out is going to have to be substantial for people to move ahead.

We'll see.

bluearth · 08-19-2007, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingDeezie

Not that I don't love my PS3 and hope it lasts for a few years, but lets get serious people....

Most people on this board are tech-junkies and want nothing but the latest and greatest, myself included.

How come people on this board pretend that in 10 years they are still going to be clutching to their PS3's?? Its just totally untrue...

We are all pouring thousands to tens of thousands of dollars into upgrading our systems so that we can enjoy the best that is currently available to us in the home entertainment market.

Does anyone really think that the meat and potatoes of the PS3 are still going to be able to compete in five years with the newest consoles that are out? I highly doubt it.

The fact of the matter is, is that in five years I bet there will be a new Microsoft and Sony console out, and the PS3 will just like the PS2 is now, a great system on the slow decline of new content. I understand that its a very powerful machine by todays standards, but not by standards five years from now, especially with how fast technology is always growing.

Your type, the technology enthusiast who must have the latest technology, is in the small minority. Here's why

The best and latest technology and best graphics don't always mean something will sell better in the console world. If that were the case PS3 would be outselling the other consoles but it's not.

I don't know about the PS3 being THE console in 10 years but I can see the PS3 being the center of gaming for millions for at LEAST 7 years.

Let's say 4 years from now Microsoft launches Xbox 3 at $450. By that time the PS3 will be around $250.

Just like how the PS2 has outsold the 360 in almost every month of it's existance the older PS3 will outsell the new xbox because of price and the number of games available for it. If Sony can outsell the new xbox at a 2-1 ratio with the older PS3 and make money off the now cheap PS3 hardware why would they consider a new Playstation? In my opinion the graphics on PS3 are good enough. The top games no longer have jaggies and look nice. Graphics don't need to improve more, gameplay does. The Wii attests to that. So does Little Big Planet.

Sony is planning for the long run with the PS3, I've never seen a console designed to last as long as the PS3. Cutting edge blu-ray drive, 60GB HDD on all consoles, vast multimedia capabilities, and Playstation Home.

I see Sony waiting about 2 years after the New Xbox to release the PS4 which will give them the ability to make the PS4 have graphics much better than Xbox 3. It looks good for Sony. I have no idea what nintendo may do.

Gamekid · 08-19-2007, 07:31 PM

A lot of good points to talk about. I think a strong point to think about is not the amount of games for the ps3, but what you can do with it. Like with being online. You can use the web browser that would probably rank in at second place with no charge. No offense to anyone that uses xbox live. It's great, but if I had to choose between xbox live and sony's home, I would choose sony's home because the price of xbox live adds up in just one year. Another advantage is that sony has the psp, microsoft doesn't have a handheld so sony has an advantage right there. I think that with firmware updates, this will be the same for both systems. A price cut has helped, but I can't help but think that buying an 80 GB ps3 with a 60 dollar retail value game just isn't worth it. When GTA IV and Burnout 5 come up, which would do better in terms of selling?

Steelmaker · 08-20-2007, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamekid

A lot of good points to talk about. I think a strong point to think about is not the amount of games for the ps3, but what you can do with it. Like with being online. You can use the web browser that would probably rank in at second place with no charge. No offense to anyone that uses xbox live. It's great, but if I had to choose between xbox live and sony's home, I would choose sony's home because the price of xbox live adds up in just one year. Another advantage is that sony has the psp, microsoft doesn't have a handheld so sony has an advantage right there. I think that with firmware updates, this will be the same for both systems. A price cut has helped, but I can't help but think that buying an 80 GB ps3 with a 60 dollar retail value game just isn't worth it. When GTA IV and Burnout 5 come up, which would do better in terms of selling?

That's a great point! I have my PS3 connected to a 60" 1080p hdtv, plus I have it connected to the internet, plus I have a PSP. So far I own 5 PS3 games and about 10 blu ray movies. So for myself, I'm enjoying every single feature that the PS3 offers! I am maxing out what the PS3 can do for me at my house. I can see the awesomeness of this machine because I take advantage of all it's features.

However the flip side of that is I am the minority. Yes I see the PS3 for what it is but to all the Wal Mart shoppers out there, they can't see it because they are either uninformed or cannot afford everything that's needed to fully take advantage of the PS3. For myself, I am glad that Sony decided to go high end this generation. However I do think it's going to cost them some market share this generation because of this approach. I know they are all about making their system "future proof" but that's simply unrealistic. No one can predict the future and trends change. Did ANYONE honestly expect the Wii to be such a phenomenon? Did anyone expect the DS to beat out the PSP the way it has?

Gamekid · 08-20-2007, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

That's a great point! I have my PS3 connected to a 60" 1080p hdtv, plus I have it connected to the internet, plus I have a PSP. So far I own 5 PS3 games and about 10 blu ray movies. So for myself, I'm enjoying every single feature that the PS3 offers! I am maxing out what the PS3 can do for me at my house. I can see the awesomeness of this machine because I take advantage of all it's features.

However the flip side of that is I am the minority. Yes I see the PS3 for what it is but to all the Wal Mart shoppers out there, they can't see it because they are either uninformed or cannot afford everything that's needed to fully take advantage of the PS3. For myself, I am glad that Sony decided to go high end this generation. However I do think it's going to cost them some market share this generation because of this approach. I know they are all about making their system "future proof" but that's simply unrealistic. No one can predict the future and trends change. Did ANYONE honestly expect the Wii to be such a phenomenon? Did anyone expect the DS to beat out the PSP the way it has?

The wii and ds are the number one systems now. Not only because of the price, but because of what they offer. A lot of people really doubted Nintendo when they said that their next gen console would not be HD based, which is OK, but it goes to show that you don't need bumped up graphics to enjoy games.

IamNhobdy · 08-20-2007, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

Did ANYONE honestly expect the Wii to be such a phenomenon?

Actually, I did. I know many people who were overly excited about the Wii. In fact, I'm one of only two people in my group of friends that doesn't have one yet, and some of their parents have one too. You have to remember that the very young and the elderly outnumber the rest of us. And then there are people like me who got the PS3, but eventually plan to get a Wii. But I'm gonna wait to see if the Blu-ray enabled Wii is more than just a rumor.

Gamekid · 08-20-2007, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamNhobdy

Actually, I did. I know many people who were overly excited about the Wii. In fact, I'm one of only two people in my group of friends that doesn't have one yet, and some of their parents have one too. You have to remember that the very young and the elderly outnumber the rest of us. And then there are people like me who got the PS3, but eventually plan to get a Wii. But I'm gonna wait to see if the Blu-ray enabled Wii is more than just a rumor.

I hate to disapoint you, but I highly doubt that a blu-ray enabled wii will be available anytime soon. I do know that in Japan, there is a wii that can play DVD's, but Nintendo will not release that wii over here in the United States, not sure why. Blu-ray really belongs to Sony, not Nintendo. Nintendo wants to have a console that is affordable and for everyone. The ps3 doesn't fit this description.

red_5ive · 08-20-2007, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingDeezie

Not that I don't love my PS3 and hope it lasts for a few years, but lets get serious people....

Most people on this board are tech-junkies and want nothing but the latest and greatest, myself included.

I'd have to agree since I've been victim of constant upgrade addiction since the early 90's when I got my first PC, Laser Disc and Pro-Logic receiver (WOOHOO!).

But in context of the PS3 being a blu-ray player, I'll try to keep it for that purpose if it lasts 10 years and there isn't a hi-def media replacement in that time (I cringe at that idea every time I look at my dvd collection and my now growing BR collection). Nevertheless, given that it's been less than 10 years since I bought my first dvd player (1998) and the face of home entertainment has changed drastically in the last 5 years, I fear that you're right - we'll be upgrading before we know it.

Gamekid · 08-20-2007, 06:09 PM

I think that the great thing about next gen hardware is that you're really not limited in any way. If you look at the ps3, at launch, there were things missing that you just either didn't have or couldn't do or both and now, look at all the things that have been added to the ps3, a lot. I'm happy with my ps3 and I plan to keep it until ps4 comes out. The only way that I would switch my ps3 is if a newer model of the ps3 comes out. I believe that the 80 GB ps3 is exactly the same as the 60, just 20 extra gigs of space.

Pilam69 · 08-20-2007, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamekid

I think that the great thing about next gen hardware is that you're really not limited in any way. If you look at the ps3, at launch, there were things missing that you just either didn't have or couldn't do or both and now, look at all the things that have been added to the ps3, a lot. I'm happy with my ps3 and I plan to keep it until ps4 comes out. The only way that I would switch my ps3 is if a newer model of the ps3 comes out. I believe that the 80 GB ps3 is exactly the same as the 60, just 20 extra gigs of space.

The 80GB version has no emotion engine (PS2 chipset) so the backwards compatibility is done by emulation which works for less games. If you have a big PS2 catalog you would want a 60GB version.

eat_me_cool · 08-20-2007, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamNhobdy

Actually, I did. I know many people who were overly excited about the Wii. In fact, I'm one of only two people in my group of friends that doesn't have one yet, and some of their parents have one too. You have to remember that the very young and the elderly outnumber the rest of us. And then there are people like me who got the PS3, but eventually plan to get a Wii. But I'm gonna wait to see if the Blu-ray enabled Wii is more than just a rumor.

Me too. I predicted, before launch, that it would sell 100million.

And I haven't bought one yet.

Gamekid · 08-21-2007, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilam69

The 80GB version has no emotion engine (PS2 chipset) so the backwards compatibility is done by emulation which works for less games. If you have a big PS2 catalog you would want a 60GB version.

Consider the following example
1) If you bought one of the 60 GB ps3's that have the ps1 and ps2 chipsets and you updated the firmware to the latest version
2) If you bought one of the later 60 GB ps3's that do not have the ps1 or the ps2 chips and you upgraded the firmware to the latest version
Based on the above two examples, would both of these lead you to the same path, in other words, there is no advantage? I believe that some ps1 and ps2 games do not work at all on the ps3, but these games are the ones that no one cares about.

The Don · 08-21-2007, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamNhobdy

Actually, I did. I know many people who were overly excited about the Wii. In fact, I'm one of only two people in my group of friends that doesn't have one yet, and some of their parents have one too. You have to remember that the very young and the elderly outnumber the rest of us. And then there are people like me who got the PS3, but eventually plan to get a Wii. But I'm gonna wait to see if the Blu-ray enabled Wii is more than just a rumor.

I thought the Wii would be a better system than it is now and the pricetag only solidified my point in the Wii being successful..

08-19-2007, 09:34 AM	#1
Pilam69 Senior Member Member since:Apr 2007 Blu-ray collection:126	For any doubters........ This is a bit technical but the overall gist is that the PS3 may be the most well thought out, adaptable, advanced system ever. (duh). Maybe someone should call EA and have them read this over for some hints on how to get their Sh!t together. http://playstation-disorder.com/comm...p?blog_id=795& Friday, August 17, 2007 Permalink The Beauty and the Beast PS3What is one of the most heard prejudice when you ask people about the PS3? I guess number one is "The PLAYSTATION 3 is difficult to program, more difficult than other consoles". Well, this statement as such is of course stupid. Compared to let's say the PS2, the PS3 is a big improvement. While you had to use assembler code on the PS2 for almost all advanced stuff, the PS3 basically just needs C++ or C code in most cases. This is even true for the Cell SPEs, the main differenciator. But before we even start let me already make a short disclaimer here as the article itself as well as the material that gets referenced are not easily digestable ;-) Anyway, I tried to use common sense terminology wherever possible as I am not a geek either ;-) I have also linked to several Wikipedia articles to explain some of the technologies that are used here in more detail. The Beast Of course what people could mean by that statement is the fact that the next generation consoles as well as PCs are now based on multi-core architectures, i.e. several CPUs can be used at any time to run all sorts of parallel code to achieve what we finally call next-gen gameplay. So, that again is no different for the various platforms. The real difference becomes obvious when we look at the guts, i.e. the different CPUs used within the various platforms / consoles. Starting with the 360 we find the so-called Xenon CPU which features 3 symetrical PPC cores, being able to run two parallel threads at a time. Each core features an additional vector processing unit that can be used to do some fast vector operations. Those three cores are all programmed the same way using the same memory resources which makes the development of multi-threaded code easier, as there is only one programming model used. The PC on the other side is very similar in a sence that the latest Intel and AMD chips are all multi-core based (usually dual core technology) which basically leads to the same pros and cons in terms of generating multi-threaded code. Looking at the Cell, things are a little different: one of the design goals of the Cell chip was to produce the best performance / size ratio at the time of production of all the chips being out there. This was achieved by breaking with a lot of design principles that have been used at that time. First of all the Cell is not symetrical in the way the Xenon or Intel/AMD chips are. Cell Large Fig 1. The PS3 Hardware Architecture (click for larger view) The Cell features one dual-threaded PowerPC Element (PPE), very similar to one of the Xenon cores, that acts as a conductor for wha seems to be the orchestra, a set of 7 Synergistic Processing Elements (SPE), which are symetric cores which are once again very much simplified compared to the PPE. Think of those SPE's as very fast and flexible vector units. Even though we are taling about 7 SPU's here, keep in mind that the PS3 dedicates one single SPU for the PS3 OS that handles a couple of background tasks. Looking at Fig. 1, The PPE as well as the SPE'S are connected via a very fast Element Interconnect Bus (EIB) which allows the PPE to talk to the SPE's, as well as the SPE's to talk to each other. Finally, all memory access is going thru the EIB and various memory and IO controllers. What's interesting to note: even though the PS3 has destinct memory for the Cell CPU as well as the RSX GPU, this memory is somewhat "unified" in way that the RSX can access the different memory areas rather fast with a peak of 20 GB/s. In that sense, the PS3 architecture combines the best of both worlds, separated memory areas for CPU and GPU (no concurrent access issues), still being able for the GPU to use the respective other memory area for its own purposes. The 360 for instance uses a unified memory model where there is no distinction between different memory types, but with the problem of concurrent access to the same memory from CPU and GPU. Again, from a programming point of view, the 360 is easier to handle as you don't have to make a decision where certain stuff needs to reside. One other complexity that needs to be handled by the programmer is the data feed to and from the SPE's. As the SPE are very simplistic processing units, they only feature are relativly small local storage (LS) of 256 KB. This storage is used for the SPE's program running at one point in time on a SPE. The data that gets processed by the SPE needs to come from the main memory or the graphics memory via DMA commands that need to be issued just in time for the data to be ready for processing. The same is true for writing back stuff. The other option of course is that data will be consumed by another SPE after it has been processed by the first one. Emotion Engine Fig 2: The PS2's Emotion Engine On last comment on the PS3 architecture before we dive into the Beauty section ;-) The overall PS3 architecture is very similar to the PS2 from a certain viewing distance. Take the PPE on the one hand and compare it with the MIPS core within the PS2 Emotion Engine (Fig. 2). Then take a look at the PS2's 2 Vector Processing Units (VU1 & 2) which are in a sense simplified SPE's. In a way, the PS3 architecture is a blown up and extended PS2 architecture. The design goals on both platforms are obviously very similar: powerful and flexible. Both platforms are optimized for streaming data processing. Keep in mind that the way this data gets routed through the Cell as well as through the Emotion Engine is not fixed. There are many configurations possible on both platforms where of course the Cell is even more powerful in that discipline. Check out those references for a more detailed look into this topic [3] and [2 Slide 20 ff]. The Beauty So far we have seen the beast part of the PS3, a platform that has some programming challenges in terms of keeping the various SPE's busy and managing the different memory types efficiently. Let's now come to the beauty aspects of it: its flexibility. As you can already see in Fig 1. the RSX GPU is the other major component with the PS3 architecture. The RSX chip is very similar to any other standard PC based GPU with the exception, that it can access both memory types (main and graphics) almost at the same speed. Beside that it most likely features (no official specs have been released so far) a graphics pipeline consisting of 24 pixel shaders, 8 vertex shaders, 8 ROPS (raster operation units), and 550MHz clock speed. Looking at those shaders as very specialized vector units similar to the Cells SPE's, again one could think of off-loading some of the tasks within the GPU's graphics pipeline to the Cell. In other words, you can use the Cell to seamlessly extend the GPU's capability and power. Let's take a look at two examples where this can be seen in real life in order to see that this is not just theory. The first example is the already discussed "Deferred Rendering Killzone 2" presentation that was given at the develop conference in Brighton this July. Check out my article on that one if you need more details. The second example I just found on the SCEA research website a couple of days ago. The article "Deferred Pixel Shading on the PLAYSTATION®3" perfectly describes the benefits of what we just discussed: the Cell providing additional pixel shaders to the graphics pipeline that are even more powerful as the RSX build-in pixel shaders. In a nutshell the result of the exercise (the implementation of a certain soft shadowing alogorithm) described in the article is that 5 SPE's basically acting as pixel shaders achieve the same performance as the 24 pixel shaders used on a NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX running on Linux based system. Btw, the used NVIDIA GPU is very similar to the RSX GPU used in the PS3. Conclusion Similar to the PS2, a platform that even for today's standards surprises us with visual qualities we wouldn't have expected from the console in the first place, the PS3 is a very flexible gaming platform. Almost nothing is carved in stone and it is really up to the developers to unleash the power of the architecture. This makes all sense as opposite to the PC world, hardware improvements are not an option for console makers. With a lifecycle of at least 10 years, the PS3 needs to be still capable of running new algorithms and methods which we don't even know by now. Those are just two examples of how the combination of Cell and the RSX can achieve goals that sometimes even the designing engineers havn't thought about. A great outlook for the future if you ask me. This is not possible with a fixed hardware architecture that is designed to make life easier for developers. Sure, on the PC side you can easily extend your hardware, for consoles that's not an option. Or maybe we will see another Xbox just in couple more years, something that is most likely to happen for the Wii anyhow. Additional Links 1. "Introduction to the graphics pipeline of the PS3" (PDF) Presentation from Eurographics 07 by Cetric Perthuis, SCEA 2. "CELL: A New Platform for Digital Entertainment" (HTML) Presentation by Dominic Mallinson & Marc DeLoura SCEA 3. Cell Software Model (PDF) IBM programming course 4. "Deferred Pixel Shading on the PS3" (PDF) Article by Alan Heirich and Louis Bavoil, SCEA 5. "Deferred Rendering in Killzone 2" (PDF) Presentation from develop conference 07 by Michal Valient, Guerrilla

08-19-2007, 05:42 PM	#2
bluearth Blu-ray Guru Member since:Feb 2007 Blu-ray collection:92 Blu-ray reviews:2	I'm not a techno freak, but after reading that you can tell the Japanese really build technology that lasts. They plan for the future. Microsoft, on the other hand, believes in replacing and upgrading existing products on a regular basis for money making reasons rather than build something that can last 5+ years Correct me if I'm wrong but I think I heard 360 games like Gears of War already use 90%+ of the 360's 3 cores. I doubt anyone is that close to maxing out the PS3, not because of difficulty of programming, but because of the vast potential the architecture allows Last edited by bluearth; 08-19-2007 at 05:44 PM.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Rebuttal to all the doubters?	Feedback Forum	mikejet	6	11-05-2008 01:24 PM
PS3 better than high-end HTPC's .. for the doubters	PS3	ps3andlovinit	1	09-18-2007 05:10 PM
look doubters finaly get their just rewards	PS3	joeorc	1	01-27-2007 01:11 PM

08-19-2007, 06:14 PM	#3
warhawk21114 Active Member Member since:Jun 2007 Location:Maryland Blu-ray collection:4	PS 1 had a good long run, and the PS 2 is still going strong. These things are built to last a long time! So that entails ps3 is here to stay. If I already hadnt made up my mind, reading this would tell me to go out and pick one up. I will once I get the dough. But its nice to know that the ps3 is built to last.

08-19-2007, 06:39 PM	#4
KingDeezie Active Member Member since:Mar 2007	Not that I don't love my PS3 and hope it lasts for a few years, but lets get serious people.... Most people on this board are tech-junkies and want nothing but the latest and greatest, myself included. How come people on this board pretend that in 10 years they are still going to be clutching to their PS3's?? Its just totally untrue... We are all pouring thousands to tens of thousands of dollars into upgrading our systems so that we can enjoy the best that is currently available to us in the home entertainment market. Does anyone really think that the meat and potatoes of the PS3 are still going to be able to compete in five years with the newest consoles that are out? I highly doubt it. The fact of the matter is, is that in five years I bet there will be a new Microsoft and Sony console out, and the PS3 will just like the PS2 is now, a great system on the slow decline of new content. I understand that its a very powerful machine by todays standards, but not by standards five years from now, especially with how fast technology is always growing.

08-19-2007, 07:31 PM	#7
Gamekid Power Member Member since:Feb 2006	A lot of good points to talk about. I think a strong point to think about is not the amount of games for the ps3, but what you can do with it. Like with being online. You can use the web browser that would probably rank in at second place with no charge. No offense to anyone that uses xbox live. It's great, but if I had to choose between xbox live and sony's home, I would choose sony's home because the price of xbox live adds up in just one year. Another advantage is that sony has the psp, microsoft doesn't have a handheld so sony has an advantage right there. I think that with firmware updates, this will be the same for both systems. A price cut has helped, but I can't help but think that buying an 80 GB ps3 with a 60 dollar retail value game just isn't worth it. When GTA IV and Burnout 5 come up, which would do better in terms of selling?

08-20-2007, 06:09 PM	#13
Gamekid Power Member Member since:Feb 2006	I think that the great thing about next gen hardware is that you're really not limited in any way. If you look at the ps3, at launch, there were things missing that you just either didn't have or couldn't do or both and now, look at all the things that have been added to the ps3, a lot. I'm happy with my ps3 and I plan to keep it until ps4 comes out. The only way that I would switch my ps3 is if a newer model of the ps3 comes out. I believe that the 80 GB ps3 is exactly the same as the 60, just 20 extra gigs of space.

Best PS3 Game Deals