cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
Grammar police should take your keyboard back ;P
Caught before my edit. Damn
Grammar police should take your keyboard back ;P
No
When I said everything I meant sound related.
What DCKing said.GameCube didn't use any tech that didn't exist when the PS2 launched, and it launched for $100 less at a profit while PS2 was sold at a loss initially. 18 months isn't enough to make that big of a difference.
I know so many people with a HDTVs that don't have digital cable. Makes me so angry.
No? Okay, why did you edit "It's all streamed." to "It's all, or mostly all, streamed."? Just for kicks?
I think people should check out the size of PS3 games, in no way are they double the size of 360 games or anything. They also tend to have repeated data for quicker loading. I would imagine exactly the same audio assets are being used in the vast majority of multiplatform games.
An advanced cell would most certainly be OoO. And again I repeat, GPGPUs would provide just as many challenges and learning curves as the spes did, and would still be inferior at the same type of code.
I don't think it necessarily made a huge impact. Sony announced PS3 would be using an Nvidia GPU at the end of 2004. While released in 2006, it was a mild customization of the latest Nvidia PC GPU to hit the scene in late 2005. (The same time X360 launched)
They couldn't just decide at the last minute to ditch a dual Cell non GPU design and go with what they did. The non conventional GPU-less option obviously had to have been in the early stages of design. The engineers start thinking about the next, next gen console the same year a new one comes out.
RSX turned out to be less flexible than Xenos, the vertex shading in particular, due to a fixed number of pipelines. And it's easy to say in hindsight Sony should have used a stronger GPU, but at the time, RSX was a safe option. ATI just had better stuff at the time Sony was finalizing the hw for PS3. The timing was bad since RSX was based on the trailing edge of the legacy way of making GPUs for years, before a new paradigm shift of unified shaders.
RSX was considered a balanced design for a GPU at the time. It had the full number of pixel/vertex pipelines of the high end PC chip. But like the Nvidia PC cards it was based on, it ended up being less future proof, and the programmers were forced into tapping into the Cell's advanced features to assist with the rendering, in order to maintain parity with what the unified Xenos shaders were effortlessly cranking out. Xenos could automatically and somewhat efficiently balance a load, while RSX was locked into 16 pixel pipes and 8 vertex pipes. Plus Nvidia screwed them. The RSX had a fatal design flaw with the scaling function.
These issues, along with the Blu-ray shortage, caused PS3 to launch late and over budget.
From a business perspective, I think PS4 will be far more competitive off the bat.
It scares me to think how many folks will buy a PS4 and use a composite lead on a 14inch tv in their bedroom. I would love for all next gen systems to be HD HDMI only.
I think you should. Many have almost twice the size. Many are just plain ports so they obviously wouldn't be bigger. Dead Space 2 for example is 12GB compressed.
No? Okay, why did you edit "It's all streamed." to "It's all, or mostly all, streamed."? Just for kicks?
I think people should check out the size of PS3 games, in no way are they double the size of 360 games or anything. They also tend to have repeated data for quicker loading. I would imagine exactly the same audio assets are being used in the vast majority of multiplatform games.
I think you should. Many have almost twice the size. Many are just plain ports so they obviously wouldn't be bigger. Dead Space 2 for example is 12GB compressed.
Lots go over the 360s DVD size limit.
http://community.futureshop.ca/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/972i50EB73FB20FDFF15/image-size/original?v=mpbl-1&px=-1[IMG][/QUOTE]
It's not on 360 for comparison. Although they did talk a lot of shit about how 50GB wasn't enough, and the game is like 30GB, with plenty of prerendered cutscenes. But yes, a very large game.
I'm not saying no PS3 games sound better, or that uncompressed audio is a myth. I'm saying the damage including the bluray cost SCE was not worth it for the very small advantage it provided.
So fuck those with an old plasma or crt hd tv?
Maybe they could make it a pain in the ass to first time set up using composite, or constantly badger the user to use HDMI when setting it up, but there are plenty of hdtvs out there still that don't have hdmi.
Didn't knew it was on 2 DVDsDS2 is 13.4 on 360. Want another shot?
By alot, you mean Oblivion?Don't a lot of PS3 games repeat game data on the disk to improve performance?
It's not on 360 for comparison. Although they did talk a lot of shit about how 50GB wasn't enough, and the game is like 30GB, with plenty of prerendered cutscenes. But yes, a very large game.
I was aware of IBM discontinuing Cell, I've spoke on it already. The fact the matter is "Cell" or more specifically the SPEs still have considerable uses in the console space and I'd be shocked if they didn't find their way into the PS4 in some sort of configuration.No, it was $400 million of R&D, much more than MS or Nintendo (duh) spent. They did lose/invest billions of money selling the thing, though.
I was specifically referring to computation performance. I'm not denying that Cell doesn't have its merits, but if Sony wanted to improve graphics they should have included a better GPU. Maybe that was not an option in 2006, but they can't hope for a Cell to have any meaningful to contribute to the graphics alongside a 2012 tech GPU in the PS4, which is the entire point of this discussion.
What did I say to get such a condescending response? I think it was clear from the context that here I was talking about the (lack of) merits of continued Cell architecture development by the STI alliance after the PS3 release, not about the merits of the PS3 hardware itself. I'm not denying Cell is doing its job in the PS3.
IBM's 'new Cell' was a die shrink and rebrand of the original Cell for supercomputers that apparently only improved its double precision performance (which is irrelevant for gaming) to match what was already achieved by competitors. 2008 is more than three years ago, and IBM has since then switched to using GPGPUs in their supercomputers (edit: also this). It is likely that there's a Cell in the PS4, but there's no way Cell is going to be the primary chip.
Sony potentially going with an AMD Fusion chip actually fits the trend they always had to include massive floating point and vector computation power on the CPU. I wonder if it's going to happen.
edit:
Wat? o_0
And your claim is not lol? Also you wouldn't be building a cell from the ground up, IBM has already said they will implement Cell's designs in some if there future products. Also GPGPUs shortcomings are highly documented, I suggest you read up.bgassassin said:That's an assumption. I don't have a problem with assumptions when there is nothing else to go by, but OoO CPUs being readily available is fact and modifying one for a console would be better from a cost and developer standpoint than building a new OoO Cell from the ground up. And you're grossly overestimating the "learning curves and challenges" of utilizing GPGPUs over the new architecture of this Cell you're proposing.
Oh the horror, but I've seen it in real life. People usually sit 7 meters away from their 50" screen and responds with "how can it look better than this?".
You want messed up? My grandparents use RF cables with their 50 inch HDTV, there's dots everywhere, the picture looks stretched, and whenever I go to their dreaded manor, they're watching 90210 and commenting on the ladies and their clothing, who they're sleeping with, etc.
I mean, how can you tell what's going on in this haze of myopia?
The worst part is, they still consider me a kid, and don't want me to tamper with the T.V.!
Whatever, I have a better T.V., so they can eat it.
BF3 is 16GB on 360, are you taking this piss at this point?Didn't knew it was on 2 DVDs
Driver San Francisco: 9256MB
BF3: 9.34 GB
The question is, will that added power make the platform completely bass-ackwards to develop for, as is the case with PS3?
First of all, you can't take this (PSM) rumour seriously. Ease of development usually depends on the tools provided by the platform holder and how balanced the entire system is. It helps if it is less 'exotic' or if the system is built using common off-the-shelf parts. If you look at the Vita, it gives a slight hint that the PS4 will end up being the same i.e. easier to work with.The question is, will that added power make the platform completely bass-ackwards to develop for, as is the case with PS3?
BF3 has both normal AND high res textures AND TONS of repeated data. You don't play with both discs at once. You play with one.BF3 is 16GB on 360, are you taking this piss at this point?
Name them.And lots of PS3 games have lots of repeated data for quicker loading, so if you do find the site, make sure it notes what data is duplicated.
Why? Console developers will always choose to dedicate those resources to other factors. I think one can except a 720p standard, but AA, refresh rates, and anti-tearing measures? lololololIn all honesty, I couldn't care less which console has the edge over the other. FFS just get developers to focus on IQ rather than graphical effects. I want locked 1080p, 4xMSAA, triple buffering/Vsync/whatevernotearingplz and AT LEAST super constant, rock solid 30 fps if not 60.
Didn't knew it was on 2 DVDs
Driver San Francisco: 9256MB
BF3: 9.34 GB
If I could find the website I once saw that listed them all I would have posted alot more. But I'll keep lookin
*edit* These are compressed btw.
By alot, you mean Oblivion?
The GPGPUs still have considerable bottlenecks when trying to simultaneously render and do these simulations and things. Hence why the features are still not being used. The SPUs are still a better solution.
It makes no difference what duplicated data is on BF3, the point is you tried to prove games were bigger on PS3 twice, and utterly failed because you have no idea, and just assumed it and hoped you were correct and could back it up later, and you weren't, and are unwilling to admit it.BF3 has both normal AND high res textures AND TONS of repeated data. You don't play with both discs at once. You play with one.
Name them.
Oblivion has duplicate data, Resistance has padding, what else?
The sizes I'm giving are "compressed" ISOs. I can't find the website I once saw which had the raw size. And yes I did mention aftewards that not only it's a two disc game, it also has both the normal and high res textures/meshes versionsBF3 is actually 12.3GB on the PS3 and 14GB on the 360 IIRC, though it's safe to say some data was duplicated since it was a two disc game on the 360.
I didn't say it was the only one, someone else is saying "lots of PS3 games have lots of repeated data for quicker loading". I want to know which ones.So you think Oblivion is the only game to duplicate data to minimize seek times? lol Sure keep on thinking that. On top of the duplicated data, PS3 games tend to have multiple region's worth of audio stored on the disc where that's not always the case for the 360.
I failed because you decided to ignore the others?It makes no difference what duplicated data is on BF3, the point is you tried to prove games were bigger on PS3 twice, and utterly failed because you have no idea, and just assumed it and hoped you were correct and could back it up later, and you weren't, and are unwilling to admit it.
Bullshit. It's documented where? We know Oblivion did it. Where is it well known and well documented for the "lots" of other games you mentioned?And no, I won't be listing games with repeated data, it's well known, well documented, if you choose to not believe it, that's fine. I'm not going explain myself given the obscene display of arrogance from you in the last half hour. I really don't care all that much.
And your claim is not lol? Also you wouldn't be building a cell from the ground up, IBM has already said they will implement Cell's designs in some if there future products. Also GPGPUs shortcomings are highly documented, I suggest you read up.
No doubt, it's a nice feature.
But look what happened with XIII-2. The 360 version wasn't up to scratch last time, so they go real time with most the cutscenes, the PS3 version is performing worse than last time around, and they brought the 360 version up to the PS3 version more or less.
The only reason the PS3 version of XIII was so much better was a later decision to go multiplatform. XIII-2 is now on par, and what was a huge advantage is now a minor one.
Didn't think so, Billychu.
Oh, FF13 did blow alright.
And nice how you ignore the other 200 multiplats that look better on 360.
You named three, two of them were actually bigger on 360 because you didn't even bother to see if they were two DVDs, and the other is 9GB on PS3 and 8.2 on 360, less than the difference between the larger 360 ones in fact. So yes, I ignored them, as I will every single post you make from now.failed because you decided to ignore the others?
I was talking about the framerate and IQ which are now on par more or less. Yes, the cutscenes are still much better on PS3. But the package as a whole is far far closer to parity than last time.Erm. Nope.
You named three, two of them were actually bigger on 360 because you didn't even bother to see if they were two DVDs, and the other is 9GB on PS3 and 8.2 on 360, less than the difference between the larger 360 ones in fact. So yes, I ignored them, as I will every single post you make from now.
The sizes I'm giving are "compressed" ISOs. I can't find the website I once saw which had the raw size. And yes I did mention aftewards that not only it's a two disc game, it also has both the normal and high res textures/meshes versions
I didn't say it was the only one, someone else is saying "lots of PS3 games have lots of repeated data for quicker loading". I want to know which ones.
Yes, by all means edit your posts to add games so it appears as if I ignored them, as you tried with your moronic sound claim earlier and later denied, it is the mature and proper way to go about it. And 360 discs got a significant capacity bump last year, maybe you slept thru that news.I listed 10 so far, without having access to the list I once saw, and that's the only real reason why you're ignoring, quitting while you think you're ahead. Classy.
Seriously dude, stop arguing when you're completely out of your depth.But you do believe every time someone shoots a gun, there is disc seek for the sample, and it's placed directly into the game without going to RAM?
You believe that? You believe the device somehow searches for compression artifacting and refuses to output anything with it?
Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.
Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.
I edited cause I said I'd keep looking, I also put others in new posts without editing, what's you're excuse for ignoring those now?Yes, by all means edit your posts to add games so it appears as if I ignored them, as you tried with your moronic sound claim earlier and later denied, it is the mature and proper way to go about it. And 360 discs got a significant capacity bump last year, maybe you slept thru that news.
Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.
Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.
So which console do you think Nvidia is working on?
.
PS4 better have a freakin hardware scaler built in so I don't have to send a 720p feed to a 1080p TV. That was a bonehead omission on the PS3. Forcing TV's to do the scaling can lead to a number of issues with many 1080p TVs (more lag, more screen cutoff, etc).
I definitely wouldn't call cell a bad investment. It didn't reach the penetration that STI hoped for but it certainly has shown its weight in gold, which is why IBM absorbed it into there other lines.
There will be less need, but pre-rendered FMV will always be able to exceed what can be displayed in real time, so I expect it to stick around.
Well you're in luck, because as 'out of my depth' as you may believe I am, my degree happens to be sound technology. And thru the mostly pointless things you just stated, this is the bit that matters.PCM is only as good as the source files
So which console do you think Nvidia is working on?
Because they have confirmed they are working on one.
You really don't know that and this is all vague to begin with. "Simulations and things"? I'm going to assume simulations are mostly physics related tasks, but what are "things"?
IMO the reason why the features are still not being used is the same reason why many DX11 features aren't being used: it's not widespread enough to invest into just yet. When the PS4 and 720 launch with DX11 cards, then you'll truly see what they can do. Very much like how multi-core development didn't pick up until the current systems launched.
When and where have they said that? The Wii U is confirmed to have an AMD GPU, and both Microsoft and Sony hate Nvidia's guts after they apparently screwed both of them over with the Xbox 1 and PS3 respectively. Something to do with high licensing costs or something. RSX also has many flaws that Sony doesn't like one bit.So which console do you think Nvidia is working on?
Because they have confirmed they are working on one.
So which console do you think Nvidia is working on?
Because they have confirmed they are working on one.
When and where have they said that? The Wii U is confirmed to have an AMD GPU, and both Microsoft and Sony hate Nvidia's guts after they apparently screwed both of them over with the Xbox 1 and PS3 respectively. Something to do with high licensing costs or something. RSX also has many flaws that Sony doesn't like one bit.
the point was, it cost Sony massively, and I don't believe the advantages it provides warrant the huge costs it needed. If you do think so, that's fine, but I disagree.