Support NeoGAF

[cyberheater]

Grammar police should take your keyboard back ;P

Caught before my edit. Damn

 

[StuBurns]

No

When I said everything I meant sound related.

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.

 

[Aizu_Itsuko]

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.

What DCKing said.

The GameCube benefited from a smaller fabrication process thanks to those extra 18 months.

On a 250nm process the PS2 was massive (the GS was 272mm^2 big IIRC).

 

[cyberheater]

I know so many people with a HDTVs that don't have digital cable. Makes me so angry.

I know folks that hook up there 5.1 amps via stereo RCA leads. 0__o

 

[Metalmurphy]

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.

 

[bgassassin]

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.

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.

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.

That's also an end of 2004 decision with a pre-delay 2005 launch target. That's why I called it "last minute". They just benefited from shortages in other areas. I also feel kinda bad that you gave a great detailed post on stuff I was already familiar with, but I did take a couple new things from it.

That said I definitely agree that PS4 will be more competitive right off the bat.

 

[SneakyStephan]

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.

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.

 

[StuBurns]

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.

DS2 is 13.4 on 360. Want another shot?

 

[Shtof]

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.

 

[cyberheater]

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.

Don't a lot of PS3 games repeat game data on the disk to improve performance?

 

[StuBurns]

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.

 

[cyberheater]

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.

Then only allow component. But definitely no composite.

 

[Deified Data]

The question is, will that added power make the platform completely bass-ackwards to develop for, as is the case with PS3?

 

[Metalmurphy]

DS2 is 13.4 on 360. Want another shot?

Didn't knew it was on 2 DVDs

Driver San Francisco: 9256MB
BF3: 9.34 GB
Mortal Kombat: 9.33 GB (has extra character so I guess you can't compare it much, but still 2GB more just for Kratos?)

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.

Don't a lot of PS3 games repeat game data on the disk to improve performance?

By alot, you mean Oblivion?

 

[Shtof]

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.

Yeah, I could care less about that debate, just thought it's been too long since we saw this classic picture.

 

[iamshadowlark]

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.

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.

edit:



Wat? o_0

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.

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.

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.

 

[SMT]

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.! I never broke a single thing in their house, it was my cousins!

Whatever, I have a better T.V., so they can eat it.

 

[Emitan]

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.

My grandparents have a really nice, big HDTV but all they watch is Fox News and Law & Order on it :/

 

[StuBurns]

Didn't knew it was on 2 DVDs

Driver San Francisco: 9256MB
BF3: 9.34 GB

BF3 is 16GB on 360, are you taking this piss at this point?

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.

 

[Wazzim]

The question is, will that added power make the platform completely bass-ackwards to develop for, as is the case with PS3?

Depends on the (in)competency of the hardware designer.

 

[Imp the Dimp]

In 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.

 

[Auto_aim1]

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.

 

[Metalmurphy]

BF3 is 16GB on 360, are you taking this piss at this point?

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.

Also that's the second time you ignore the "other" game.

More:
Knights Contract: 19GB
LOTR Conquest: 9.63 GB

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.

Name them.

Oblivion has duplicate data, Resistance (not mp) has padding, what else?

 

[rdrr gnr]

In 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.

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? lolololol

 

[KageMaru]

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.

BF3 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.

By alot, you mean Oblivion?

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.

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.

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.

 

[StuBurns]

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?

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.

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.

 

[Metalmurphy]

BF3 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.

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

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 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.

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.

I failed because you decided to ignore the others?

Undead Nightmare: 9.15 GB
Black Ops: 14587MB
Force Unleashed: 10857MB
New Vegas: 8722MB

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.

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?

 

[bgassassin]

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.

My claim is that OoO CPUs are readily available. That's not an assumption. And how Cell is implemented by IBM is irrelevant if they are in different future products. An OoO Cell is different architecture compared to what Cell is now and would have to be built from the ground up. And yes GPGPUs have shortcomings, but they aren't on the same level as what Cell brought to the table.

But this debate is pretty pointless IMO anyway. Don't get your hopes up for Cell being in PS4.

 

[AngelSoldier]

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.

Erm. Nope.

Xbox version even when installed has load times between Menu's. PS3 version is 14.446GB, while the 360 one is 7.8GB, which means that again the PS3 has better quality Audio/Video.

In fact if you look at the 13-2 OT, there are plenty of complaints about how 13-2 looks a little worse here and there then 13 did. My guess ? Because they were desperate to fit it all on one Xbox DVD, they cut corners here and there.

Just go here: http://blog.livedoor.jp/ps360/archives/53310037.html

Beware it's in Japanese but there, they clearly point out that the PS3 version is the better of the two. Higher quality, and higher frame rates.

Didn't think so, Billychu.



Oh, FF13 did blow alright.

And nice how you ignore the other 200 multiplats that look better on 360.

First, it is your opinion that FF13 "Blew." Opinions are nothing more then objectionable words.

Second, my point was not about multiplats at all, instead I was trying to point out that Blu-ray has indeed helped the Playstation in certain instances.

But I digress, nice to know I'm not the only console warrior !

 

[StuBurns]

failed because you decided to ignore the others?

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.

Erm. Nope.

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.

 

[Metalmurphy]

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.

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.

Oh and 8.2 on 360 On a 7GB disc? That's impressive.

Vanquish: 9536.7MB

That's 11 btw.

Medal of Honor: 17356.9MB

Oops, make that 12.

 

[KageMaru]

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

Not sure if I'm understanding you correctly here but that 14GB number I mentioned earlier does not include the HD install. If we were to include that, the total size would be 15.5GB.

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.

You both are fighting the same pointless argument. While you ask to prove which ones use duplicated data, someone can ask you to prove which games don't. I'm hopeful that no console warrior was sad enough to actually track that data since it's pretty pointless in the grand scheme of things.

We know it's been an option to developers since day one, we know that most games don't use all the space on the blu-ray, and that's all we pretty much know. If I were making a PS3 game or port, I don't see a reason why I wouldn't duplicate priority assets for every level along with the usual install. Though I'm not saying all games do it, I don't see a reason why they wouldn't if it improves performance in the end.

 

[StuBurns]

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.

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.

 

[BradleyLove]

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?

Seriously dude, stop arguing when you're completely out of your depth.

1) You cannot pass compressed PCM to an amp. It's simply not possible. The end.
2) Compressed does not equal lossey. DTS Master HD is a compressed format that is lossless. As is Dolby TrueHD.

If the original source sound contains compression artifacts (for example, with Dolby Digital), if the DD is converted and passed to your amp as uncompressed PCM then yes, you still hear the artifacts. So for example, on PS3 you can set it to either bitstream (i.e. pass the DD5.1 stream) or convert and pass as U-PCM. In theory both should sound the same but in practice, amps tend to add their own flavour when decompressing bitstreamed audio.

When PCM is passed to an amp, the amp plays the audio as is. It doesn't add any flavour which is why some folks prefer to have the player (in this case PS3) do the conversion to PCM, some (like me) prefer the amp to do the conversion to PCM (should probably point out, PCM is pretty much the final step ignoring the conversion to analogue via DACs).

Games store sounds on disc in whatever format (WAV, mp3, etc) and then these are mixed as appropriate (i.e. positioned, levelled and if necessary, packaged into DD5.1). When you select PCM output, the packaging step isn't done. Now if your source sound is PCM (like I suspect most if not all Sony FP games are), then you're getting the best possible sound when running PCM output as the sound files are not being compressed further into DD5.1.

Ultimately, the point is you do not understand what is meant by uncompressed PCM. To reiterate, it has nothing to do with lossey/lossless formats. It's simply a method of passing sound information to an amp. PCM is only as good as the source files but using the same source files, it will always sound better than compressed lossey formats when gaming.

 

[dragonelite]

Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.

 

[Emitan]

Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.

Square will never abandon them unless they have to. They have a fetish for them.

 

[KageMaru]

Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.

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.

 

[Metalmurphy]

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 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?

Anyway, I listed 12 going through a shitty list of "compressed" ISOs that only had around 50, with some exclusives, had I been able to find a full list with raw sizes it would have been ALOT more.


Oh and afaik, xgd3 does not increase the size of the disc, which is 7.95GB, it only increased the previous available limit which was 6.8GB

 

[Garcia el Gringo]

Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.

Prerendered cutscenes are so unimpressive now. I only want to see them when they're masking a little load time.

 

[AngelSoldier]

Makes me wonder if next gen is good enough we dont need prerendered cutscenes anymore and can get by with realtime rendered cutscenes.

I'd be ecstatic if Next-gen graphics were like FFXIII's FMVs, or Armored Core V's FMV's ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEz9F5jvgso

Best graphics ever or best graphics ever ?

 

[brain_stew]

So which console do you think Nvidia is working on?
.

Nvidia say a lot of things. I fully expect all three major consoles to use an AMD GPU next generation.

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).

RSX has a built in hardware scaler, its just broken and only supports horizontal scaling. Its one of the many areas where Nvidia dropped the ball with RSX.

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.

Microsoft ended up with a console with better looking games despite launching a year earlier, at lower cost and without all the massive R & D expensive of coming up with a new CPU architecture. It was a horribly misguided investment for Sony.

 

[dragonelite]

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.

Not with bink compression

 

[StuBurns]

PCM is only as good as the source files

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.

For the most part, the source files appear to be exactly the same. Meaning the bluray drive is not assisting with the audio quality. That's even if you (for no great reason) imagine forcing every imaginary non-BR PS3 game on to a single disc, which of course they wouldn't.

Not that it even matters, 'worthless' might have been a bit extreme, and many of the posts before your complaints made it very clear I do see the value of it as a consumer, 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.

 

[Lonely1]

So which console do you think Nvidia is working on?

Because they have confirmed they are working on one.

Google's.

 

[iamshadowlark]

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.

LOL what don't I know now? Theres no documentation on the incredibly high instruction latency of GPGPUs when performing GP calculations? No documentation on the small ass local memory stores? No documentation on the piss-poor thread management performance? No documentation on how poor they are at code with a lot of jumps? Think you could try to run a game loop on a GPGPU? How big of a data set would you expect a GPGPU to be able to handle?

 

[Jharp]

Holy shit, it's like I'm really reading a GameFAQs argument.

 

[DCKing]

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.

 

[Emitan]

So which console do you think Nvidia is working on?

Because they have confirmed they are working on one.

Apple TV + Chromebox Love Machine

 

[gofreak]

Dunno if it's conclusively indicative of a change in vendor - probably not - but Sony has been hiring lately for compiler engineers and the like for 'next generation' tools, including one to help develop a front end for a new shading language. But I guess they'd need new additions to their current shading language for a new nVidia chip too, so maybe not too insightful...

(I guess it could also refer to Vita, but I presume that's already sorted)

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.

IIRC, MS was unhappy with the royalty arrangement on Xbox, but I don't recall hearing any rumblings that Sony was unhappy with the deal they got on RSX. Maybe they weren't 100% happy with RSX technically, but I am sure they would acknowledge their own choices played a role in what nVidia was able to get to them. They may well go with someone else, but I don't know if we can say that Sony definitely soured on nVidia in the way MS did.

 

[cyberheater]

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.

And I can't see how anyone who doesn't wear fanboy googles can argue otherwise. From a pure games machine perspective, they would have been better off with a much cheaper and faster DVD drive.