Crazy Ken endorsed piracy? LOL!I remember him talking about how you could “age” your DVD movies on PS3. You’d be able to copy them to the HDD, and Cell would upconvert them to HD offline. The longer you aged them the better they’d look.
You are not much into emulation scene, do you?It will never be emulated and it's exclusive games will be forever lost in the cell processor hell.
PS3 was a technical abomination.
It will never be emulated and it's exclusive games will be forever lost in the cell processor hell.
A lot games are already emulated in playable state... there is a lot of work yet but with new processors brute force will make things easier.PS3 was a technical abomination.
It will never be emulated and it's exclusive games will be forever lost in the cell processor hell.
How did they get away with this ?I just miss crazy Ken Kutaragi saying whatever crazy bullshit popped into his head at the time.
I remember him talking about how you could “age” your DVD movies on PS3. You’d be able to copy them to the HDD, and Cell would upconvert them to HD offline. The longer you aged them the better they’d look.
There was also a quote along the lines of “who told you PlayStation 3 was a game console? You didn’t hear that from us. It’s not a game console, it’s a home entertainment SUPERCOMPUTER.”
I mean, it's like partially true, chain a ton of them together and you get a decent and cost-effective number cruncher: https://phys.org/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.htmlHow did they get away with this ?
They didn’t. Sony was trying to have PS3 categorized as a computer rather than a game console so they’d have to pay a lower VAT tax in EU. It didn’t work. EDIT - or maybe not, see post 24How did they get away with this ?
Cell as a chip is a (die) shrunk/condensed supercomputer from the 90s:I mean, it's like partially true, chain a ton of them together and you get a decent and cost-effective number cruncher: https://phys.org/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html
In itself, a supercomputer it is not, granted.
I mean, it's like partially true, chain a ton of them together and you get a decent and cost-effective number cruncher: https://phys.org/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html
In itself, a supercomputer it is not, granted.
This is an urban myth most likely, since computer parts in EU have always had the full fat VAT tax.They didn’t. Sony was trying to have PS3 categorized as a computer rather than a game console so they’d have to pay a lower VAT tax in EU. It didn’t work.
Hmm yeah that may be wrong, I couldn’t find any articles about it. This was the explanation that had been going around the internet at the time.This an urban myth most likely, since computer parts in EU have always had the full fat VAT tax.
Other stuff (like food/medicine) have a reduced rate.
I mean, a bunch of any kind of computers networked together, with some mechanism for managing a workload among them, could be considered a supercomputer.I mean, it's like partially true, chain a ton of them together and you get a decent and cost-effective number cruncher: https://phys.org/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html
In itself, a supercomputer it is not, granted.
Unlike PS3, games actually looked better on Xbox One X. Xbox 360 had double RAM and a better GPU, anything that looked better on PS3 was because it was designed for PS3 and was very difficult to port.PS3 was like xbox one x at launch. Hardrive, hdmi, 3d, bluray.
All necessary console requirements that gen sony had since launch.
The mistake was not investment in tools for cell and devs to ease developers.
Also supposedly ps3 dev kits were expensive and exotic while Microsoft used modified mac desktop powerpc‘s.
Meaning devs were on 360 dev kits almost all multi platform titles.
Portal 2 was higher rez on PS3 than on 360!Unlike PS3, games actually looked better on Xbox One X. Xbox 360 had double RAM and a better GPU, anything that looked better on PS3 was because it was designed for PS3 and was very difficult to port.
No it wasn't, they simply used a different method of AA on each system.Portal 2 was higher rez on PS3 than on 360!
Cell gave compute capabilities (think of CUDA) to a non-compute GeForce 7-based GPU.
Some people argue that the combination of Cell + RSX was equivalent to a GeForce 8 GPGPU.
Judging by games like Uncharted 2/3, TLOU1, GoW Ascension, Heavy Rain, Beyond Two Souls, I'd say that's a fair assessment.
There's no way they could port this to XBOX 360:
If someone is going to argue against Christophe Balestra, then he should read his resume first:
Uncharted 2 "impossible" on Xbox 360
Naughty Dog co-president Christophe Balestra believes the technical demands of Uncharted 2: Among Thieves make the game…www.eurogamer.net
100% SPU utilization (around 150 Gflops for 6 SPUs). Uncharted 3 utilized the entire BD-ROM capacity (46GB) due to having 2D + 3D cutscenes.
Xenos did not support compute shaders, despite having unified shaders. It was something between DX9 and DX10.
You're missing the point.8800 seriers card? The thing is, I bought PS3 and Quad 3GHz + 8800Ultra the same month and untill I bought GTX 680 many years later all multiplatform games run much better on my PC (60fps instead of 30fps, and 1680x1050 resolution instead of subhd or 720p, not to mention higher details settings). Crysis 1 on my PC run only at 30fps and direct 9 very high details tweak (game looked almost as good as dx10 details but run better) but looked like PS4 game. I will never believe CELL + RSX could match my 8800Ultra, but maybe some cheaper 8800gts variant.
PS3 GPU was much slower compared to X360 GPU, and untill developers started using CELL to offload PS3 GPU the majority of multiplatform games run at higher resolution and better performance even compared to X360 (for example GTA4). However when developers started using CELL+RSX combination then PS3 had no problems matching X360 results (for example GTA5). You suggest CELL+RSX combination could not only close the 30% performance gap but even outperform X360. Maybe that's indeed true, but looking at PS3 exclusive games I really cant see nothing that couldnt be done on X360. I still have my all PS3 games (the best looking games like heavenly sword, uncharted 1-3, god of war 3 + ascension, killzone 2-3, motorstorm, TLOU included) and IMHO x360 Gears Of War 3 easily matched the best exclusive games PS3 had to offer (the same forza 4 vs gran turismo 6)
In 2006 GPU technology was advancing very fast unlike these days (after every 12 months we had another GPU generation) and you would think PS3 GPU should crush x360 that launched year earlier (like XBOX OG crushed PS2) but in reality x360 was still holding strong. What MS and ATI engineers have done was really impressive although they have rushed their console a little because x360 hardware clearly wasnt tested they way ut should (ROD). If only Nv would use their 8xxx series technology in PS3 things would look different, 8800gts + Cell would offer insane results, RSX (7600/7800 mix) was a big bottleneck in PS3.
Kojima = KamiyaPS3 = Xbox 360
Oh boy, now you've done it!Kojima = Kamiya
Wrong.Xbox 360 had double RAM
Devs went on record stating PS3 optimizations benefited 360 code.anything that looked better on PS3 was because it was designed for PS3 and was very difficult to port.
PS3 is just a waste of everyone’s time - Gabe Newell
Geforce 7 wouldn't suffice for sure, so we can agree on that. Even GTA5 (and that was multiplatform game) wouldn't run on 8800 GTX / UltraYou're missing the point.
If games like Uncharted 2/3 or TLOU1 were ever ported to PC, GeForce 7 wouldn't suffice. You would need a GeForce 8 minimum to offload SPU code to a CUDA-enabled GPGPU or a very SIMD-heavy x86 CPU (which did not exist at the time, so CUDA it is).
Can we agree on this?
Geforce 7 wouldn't suffice for sure, so we can agree on that. Even GTA5 (and that was multiplatform game) wouldn't run on 8800 GTX / Ultra