The Power of the "Cell"!

[xtop]

Originally Posted by Shin-Ra

NCAA Football 09's running at 60FPS this year so I wouldn't worry too much about that.

it was a joke lol

[Brian Cash]

ps3 games are getting better and better everyday im not even considering getting games for 360 if ps3 has the same one

[MrVorhees]

Originally Posted by lch

ya, now only if those game developer want to use the power.

Thing is, unfortunately on neutral games (xbox and ps3) like GTA4, Assassins Creed ect. are beeing developed on the technical specs for xbox360, not for the PS3. And the PS3 always get the direct copy

Thats why i prefer PS3 exclusiv titles like Resistance, Motorstorm, MGS, all these games are beeing made on PS3 technical spezifications, impossible to "direct copy" them for the xbox360 !!

I wish the developers would use the PS3 as main mashine for games andnot the xbox360, so games like GTA4 for exapmle would be much better, more space = more content, more details, more clips, bigger story ect.

Its almost the same stupid thing like Blu-ray VS HD DVD, blu-ray always got screwed from neutral studios, cause neutral studios almost always made the transfers on HD DVD lower technical spezifications.
And this is happening to the PS3 (thx to the xbox lower technical specs.) as well.

[gavomatic57]

Originally Posted by kingofgrills

This confirms what Sony, IBM, and developers "in the know" have been saying about the Cell processor since it's creation now. Hopefully, more developers will start with the PS3 as lead platform and really try to push the boundaries of the Cell/RSX combo. In order to do that they need to really shoot far beyond what they previously would have thought possible.

Also, if they really work at it, maybe EA can get Madden 2010 up to 60 FPS.

Trouble is, pushing the boundaries of the PS3 is an expensive business and its easier to develop for the 360 & Windows (basically the same) and then try to port it to the PS3, especially for the smaller developers. Its a huge shame.

The tide seems to be turning slowly though. There seems to be a resurgence in Unix-like platforms such as Linux and the open source standards that come with it - opengl and openal for instance and rumblings of anti-MS sentiment. The mac seems to be getting more popular and linux use is growing too.

[Victhor]

Development of the Cell 3 might be man's downfall. It will be the foundation of a super artificial intelligence that will try to wipe us out.

This is the effect of too much blu movie watching.

[Proteus]

People, in general, can not even conceptualize how powerful Cell is.

I'm so glad Ascended has been able to find and post some good articles on this topic.

I'll keep pushing it, that's for sure. Until developers 'grow up' and realize that just because it's different does not mean it's not as easy once learned, we won't see the PS3 even being tapped at all.

This kind of rendering without even using a GPU is proof positive of the capabilities of Cell and the PS3 regardless of the 'RAM' and 'GPU' issues Xbox fanboys like to spew out. Those things don't matter so much at all with Cell. Period. They are just supplemental little things... like dust.

[xtop]

Originally Posted by Proteus

People, in general, can not even conceptualize how powerful Cell is.

I'm so glad Ascended has been able to find and post some good articles on this topic.

I'll keep pushing it, that's for sure. Until developers 'grow up' and realize that just because it's different does not mean it's not as easy once learned, we won't see the PS3 even being tapped at all.

This kind of rendering without even using a GPU is proof positive of the capabilities of Cell and the PS3 regardless of the 'RAM' and 'GPU' issues Xbox fanboys like to spew out. Those things don't matter so much at all with Cell. Period. They are just supplemental little things... like dust.

you must also keep in mind that there's more going on in a game then what they're showing in the ray tracing demo not to mention the low amount of ram available. the cell is by no means tapped, but i have a feeling we'll never see its full potential in games for other reasons

[PS3-Playb3yond]

Wow, good post. Didn't know most of the stuff you posted there. It's more powerful than the Centrino Duo processor, unbelieveable.

[xtop]

Originally Posted by PS3-Playb3yond

Wow, good post. Didn't know most of the stuff you posted there. It's more powerful than the Centrino Duo processor, unbelieveable.

i don't think thats a shock to anyone, especially considering the folding@home results

[PS3-Playb3yond]

Originally Posted by xtop

i don't think thats a shock to anyone, especially considering the folding@home results

Well, right. But I never really understood how powerful the cell is until now, you know.

[Teazle]

Thanks Ascended for the links. The comments are especially interesting. Reading through them I can't help but think, "Gabe Newell, you can ___ my ___, you ___ !!"

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by gavomatic57

Its just a shame the market only seems to cater for the lowest common denominator isn't it, although the PS3 could potentially outlive the next 2 Xboxes, if only developers put the effort in.

I'd also like to see a Cell motherboard that I could buy, so I could run linux with a lot more RAM!

There's not much chance the PS3 will even out last the next Xbox. I'm pretty sure the next Xbox will be able to beat the PS3 in all areas, but I don't think it will be by a huge margin (as far as the look and sound of the games). I guess we'll see. Traditionally, there is a 4x increase in power per generation.

Originally Posted by BluRayExplosion

So they've announced the Cell 3.... since when do underpants gnomes design microprocessors?! You guys skipped step two!

At least as far as Google and I can figure, Cell 2 hasn't been announced yet...?

I think "Cell 2" was the one that ran at 5GHz on a 45nm scale. I believe it was presented at a conference where Intel announced that scaled up 80 core wafer.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by GSX600F

I wish the developers would use the PS3 as main mashine for games andnot the xbox360, so games like GTA4 for exapmle would be much better, more space = more content, more details, more clips, bigger story ect.

Its almost the same stupid thing like Blu-ray VS HD DVD, blu-ray always got screwed from neutral studios, cause neutral studios almost always made the transfers on HD DVD lower technical spezifications.
And this is happening to the PS3 (thx to the xbox lower technical specs.) as well.

I belive most developers are now building game titles on the PS3 first and porting them over to the Xbox 360. It just makes more sense, if they want to avoid a lot of headaches. The new Sony pitch is that building your games on the PS3 platform first, allows you to make a BETTER Xbox 360 game. It seems to be working.

Of course, the multiplatform games will still be limited to the common abilities of both consoles. It is mostly a HD DVD vs. Blu-ray situation, except for the fact that the PS3 can't necessarily beat the Xbox 360 in EVERY category.

Originally Posted by gavomatic57

Trouble is, pushing the boundaries of the PS3 is an expensive business and its easier to develop for the 360 & Windows (basically the same) and then try to port it to the PS3, especially for the smaller developers. Its a huge shame.

The tide seems to be turning slowly though. There seems to be a resurgence in Unix-like platforms such as Linux and the open source standards that come with it - opengl and openal for instance and rumblings of anti-MS sentiment. The mac seems to be getting more popular and linux use is growing too.

Yes, development costs are higher than they've ever been, so are game prices. It isn't easier to port games from the Xbox 360 to the PS3 (I think that was Sony's plan from the beginning). I think they purposely did that so developers couldn't give the shaft to the PS3 and convince all gamers that the Xbox 360 was going to be the best investment for this enitre generation of gaming.

The reason the costs for the PS3 game development is higher than the Xbox 360's is because this is a new way of building games. Anytime you are breaking new ground, there will be additional costs involved. But, the benefits will be MORE than worth it for the games and gamers alike.

The tide IS turning...quickly. It's practically a rip current.

Originally Posted by Victhor

Development of the Cell 3 might be man's downfall. It will be the foundation of a super artificial intelligence that will try to wipe us out.

This the effect of too much blu movie watching.

Wait...

Originally Posted by Proteus

People, in general, can not even conceptualize how powerful Cell is.

I'm so glad Ascended has been able to find and post some good articles on this topic.

I'll keep pushing it, that's for sure. Until developers 'grow up' and realize that just because it's different does not mean it's not as easy once learned, we won't see the PS3 even being tapped at all.

This kind of rendering without even using a GPU is proof positive of the capabilities of Cell and the PS3 regardless of the 'RAM' and 'GPU' issues Xbox fanboys like to spew out. Those things don't matter so much at all with Cell. Period. They are just supplemental little things... like dust.

It's tricky about the whole GPU and RAM debate. It's all about what you are trying to achieve while building a console. The PS3 is a better balanced system. The architecture is flexible enough to overcome it's shortcomings via creative thinking. The PS3 was built around the concept of speed.

Originally Posted by xtop

you must also keep in mind that there's more going on in a game then what they're showing in the ray tracing demo not to mention the low amount of ram available. the cell is by no means tapped, but i have a feeling we'll never see its full potential in games for other reasons

That is very true. There IS more going on in a game than what they're showing in that ray tracing demo. 512MB of RAM is low for designing around PC games, but this whole PS3 venture is about doing things a different way to achieve greater performance.

I think we WILL is the PS3's full potential for no another reason but it's a gaming console built on a 8 to10 lifecycle. That will make development on the PS4 MUCH easier and lss expensive as a result.

Originally Posted by xtop

i don't think thats a shock to anyone, especially considering the folding@home results

Of course, other would say that it's just number crunching and that's not a real world indicator of gaming power. Just like the graphics card article listed the GFLOPs of the GeForce 8800GTX at being much higher than the GFLOPs of the Cell. Yet, the Cell kicked it's @ss at ray-tracing the Stanford Bunny. That's why I used these articles. It clearly shows gaming aspects being accomplished with somewhat real world results.

Originally Posted by Teazle

Thanks Ascended for the links. The comments are especially interesting. Reading through them I can't help but think, "Gabe Newell, you can ___ my ___, you ___ !!"

I know!

[Kuraudo]

I hear you brotha, and yeah it sucks.

Originally Posted by GSX600F

Thing is, unfortunately on neutral games (xbox and ps3) like GTA4, Assassins Creed ect. are beeing developed on the technical specs for xbox360, not for the PS3. And the PS3 always get the direct copy

Thats why i prefer PS3 exclusiv titles like Resistance, Motorstorm, MGS, all these games are beeing made on PS3 technical spezifications, impossible to "direct copy" them for the xbox360 !!

I wish the developers would use the PS3 as main mashine for games andnot the xbox360, so games like GTA4 for exapmle would be much better, more space = more content, more details, more clips, bigger story ect.

Its almost the same stupid thing like Blu-ray VS HD DVD, blu-ray always got screwed from neutral studios, cause neutral studios almost always made the transfers on HD DVD lower technical spezifications.
And this is happening to the PS3 (thx to the xbox lower technical specs.) as well.

[MrVorhees]

yes i have read somewhere that game developer will use the PS3 as leading platform for games somewhere in 2008 , i forgot the link where i read this.

But not YET as you can see for example GTA, Assassins Creed, Dark Sector ect. all games wich are specialized for 360 technical specs.

Xbox biggest disadvantage? clearly the space for games (DVD vs Blu-ray)

i personally believe also the game graphics and resolutions on the PS3 will be much better than on xbox360 in future, we just have to be patient a little bit more until the full power of the cell shows its possibilities

[Ascended_Saiyan]

A lot of developers are developing on the PS3, at this time. Plus, that still doesn't change the fact that the multiplatform games will be limited to the lowest common denominator.

The ONLY way that could change is if developers are will to put more time in on the PS3 after they have ported the maximum the Xbox 360 could handle. That goes against the very nature of 3rd party developers. Plus, it would increase the amount of money spent on development. It's not good business from their perspective.

[richieb1971]

Ray tracing is about billions of calculations per second. Since thats cell's strength its no wonder it beats other processors.

The PS3's bottleneck is memory. Thats the reason we won't see PS3 make the best use of the cell processor. To be honest, the processing power of the PS3 is ridiculous, it just doesn't have the other means to back up the Cell processor.

Its like Cell is running in the fast lane, and everything else is in the slow lane. Besides that, until Sony gets middleware out alot of the companies aren't going to bother getting the best use of cell.

[gavomatic57]

Originally Posted by richieb1971

Ray tracing is about billions of calculations per second. Since thats cell's strength its no wonder it beats other processors.

The PS3's bottleneck is memory. Thats the reason we won't see PS3 make the best use of the cell processor. To be honest, the processing power of the PS3 is ridiculous, it just doesn't have the other means to back up the Cell processor.

Its like Cell is running in the fast lane, and everything else is in the slow lane. Besides that, until Sony gets middleware out alot of the companies aren't going to bother getting the best use of cell.

I'm also a bit worried about the GPU - RSX is basically a reworked Geforce 7800GTX. I had a 7900GT a few a year or two ago and whilst it was great at the time, its pretty much a relic now.

That said, it seemed to handle Oblivion ok and that brought most PC's to their knees.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by richieb1971

Ray tracing is about billions of calculations per second. Since thats cell's strength its no wonder it beats other processors.

The PS3's bottleneck is memory. Thats the reason we won't see PS3 make the best use of the cell processor. To be honest, the processing power of the PS3 is ridiculous, it just doesn't have the other means to back up the Cell processor.

Its like Cell is running in the fast lane, and everything else is in the slow lane. Besides that, until Sony gets middleware out alot of the companies aren't going to bother getting the best use of cell.

Data streaming overcomes a lot of the issues that would be associated with only having 512MB for video (256MB XDR + 256MB DDR3). Frame buffer was never as issue according to Factor 5. That is why Lair ran at 1080p/30fps with 7.1 uncompressed audio. I believe it had 2xAA as well as a number of other gfx. The game did have some studder, but that could have been more from just learning how to program on the Cell (it was their first attempt) than anything else. GT5:Prologue runs at a smooth 1080p/60fps.

Then, procedural textures will probably play a large role in future games (like in Afrika). Textures could be dumped off directly from the Cell to the RSX for extra detail.

Originally Posted by gavomatic57

I'm also a bit worried about the GPU - RSX is basically a reworked Geforce 7800GTX. I had a 7900GT a few a year or two ago and whilst it was great at the time, its pretty much a relic now.

That said, it seemed to handle Oblivion ok and that brought most PC's to their knees.

We have already seen 1080p games this early in it's lifecycle. There doesn't seem to be an issue. I would say we should be past that worry at this point.

I would say there were some SERIOUS modifications (texture cache, pipeline size, post lighting cache, etc). Remember, you can modify a Honda Civic to blow the doors off a Corvette in the quarter mile. Therefore, it's origins shouldn't be of much concern.

[ra1024]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

There's not much chance the PS3 will even out last the next Xbox. I'm pretty sure the next Xbox will be able to beat the PS3 in all areas, but I don't think it will be by a huge margin (as far as the look and sound of the games). I guess we'll see. Traditionally, there is a 4x increase in power per generation.

I originally thought a 10 year life cycle was very optimistic for the PS3 but after learning a lot about the cell architecture, I'm beginning to see how that's not out of the question. I went to school for electrical engineering so I had to study a lot of underlying computer architecture and the cell truly is the next generation of computing. I think the only way the next Xbox will outpower the PS3 is if it's using a cell chip.

The current cell chip contains basically 1 traditional cpu and 8 very fast vector processors (only 6 available for PS3 devs). I don't fully understand the difference between vector processors and traditional cpus but what I gather is that they are brute force number crunchers in a huge way. The 4x increase in power might apply to the next Xbox but the cell is already well above that imo.

With the current trend in gaming being more realistic physics and lighting, the cell is perfectly positioned to be the dominant platform for devs that develop for it. I don't think the next Xbox can survive without going to a cell architecture.