T3h cell?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]NVIDIA RSX doesn't equal ATI Xenos e.g. 1. RSX doesn't have tessellation hardware, 2. RSX's pixel shader shalls during texture fetch, 3. RSX is vertex shader limited.AnnoyedDragon
I'm not interested in nit picking on this old debate, what I said was correct, Cell can enhance a games visuals at the cost of taking performance from typical CPU tasks.
Console hardware doesn't change. The limitation remains the same e.g. PS3's final LPV rendering stage is half of Xbox 360's resolution. The programmer may have to use 1 to 4 SPEs to cover the short fall. PPE X1+ SPE X2 for non-rendering game workloads and 1 SPE for system. This CryEngine3 beta is not using ATI Xenos's tessellation hardware.
Overall, both consoles are about the same.
Console hardware doesn't change. The limitation remains the same e.g. PS3's final LPV rendering stage is half of Xbox 360's resolution. The programmer may have to use 1 to 4 SPEs to cover the short fall. PPE X1+ SPE X2 for non-rendering game workloads and 1 SPE for system.ronvalencia
That's guess work on your part.
Note I am not defending PS3, in fact I am criticising it, PS3 is going to have to increasingly steal from CPU related tasks if it wants to enhance its graphics. One could call it the ultimate graphics wh**e console, favouring graphics over the possibility of enhancing game play.
This CryEngine3 beta is not using ATI Xenos's tessellation hardware.
ronvalencia
From what I hear the tessellation on 360 is mostly useless since it is a very early model, hence why very few games use it.
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]Console hardware doesn't change. The limitation remains the same e.g. PS3's final LPV rendering stage is half of Xbox 360's resolution. The programmer may have to use 1 to 4 SPEs to cover the short fall. PPE X1+ SPE X2 for non-rendering game workloads and 1 SPE for system.AnnoyedDragon
That's guess work on your part.
Note I am not defending PS3, in fact I am criticising it, PS3 is going to have to increasingly steal from CPU related tasks if it wants to enhance its graphics. One could call it the ultimate graphics wh**e console, favouring graphics over the possibility of enhancing game play.
Yes, but it's not like Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2 have poor physics or AI, which are cpu tasks. KZ2 has great AI and some nice physics. Ditto for U2 but Uncharted 2's AI isn't quite up to the bar set by KZ2 so the use of the SPEs to assist with graphical assets didn't hinder either game in those areas.Yes, but it's not like Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2 have poor physics or AI, which are cpu tasks. KZ2 has great AI and some nice physics. Ditto for U2 but Uncharted 2's AI isn't quite up to the bar set by KZ2 so the use of the SPEs to assist with graphical assets didn't hinder either game in those areas.jyoung312
For now, but as people demand more graphics; they will have to steal more performance from other areas.
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]Console hardware doesn't change. The limitation remains the same e.g. PS3's final LPV rendering stage is half of Xbox 360's resolution. The programmer may have to use 1 to 4 SPEs to cover the short fall. PPE X1+ SPE X2 for non-rendering game workloads and 1 SPE for system.AnnoyedDragon
That's guess work on your part.
Note I am not defending PS3, in fact I am criticising it, PS3 is going to have to increasingly steal from CPU related tasks if it wants to enhance its graphics. One could call it the ultimate graphics wh**e console, favouring graphics over the possibility of enhancing game play.
The guesswork is easy i.e. IF the Xbox 360 has 3 PPE for non-rendering workload, then PS3 would need PPE + 2 SPEs. The rest of SPEs can be geared towards rendering. Besides shaders, ATI Xeno still has specialized hardware. ATI Xenos'sshaders is a bit more friendly for GpGPU type work.
The guesswork is easy i.e. IF the Xbox 360 has 3 PPE for non-rendering workload, then PS3 would need PPE + 2 SPEs. The rest of SPEs can be geared towards rendering. Besides shaders, Xbox 360 still has specialized hardware.ronvalencia
You are equating SPE's as offering the same performance as the PPE, they are too different to be able to make such assumptions.
Alan Wake looks as good as Uncharted 2
http://www.gameblog.fr/news_13854_alan-wake-5-minutes-de-gameplay-ineditSaying it doesnt look as good after watching that is a flatout lie.
Also id like to see those Killzone 2 screenshots that dont have majority Neutral colors.
[QUOTE="jyoung312"]Yes, but it's not like Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2 have poor physics or AI, which are cpu tasks. KZ2 has great AI and some nice physics. Ditto for U2 but Uncharted 2's AI isn't quite up to the bar set by KZ2 so the use of the SPEs to assist with graphical assets didn't hinder either game in those areas.AnnoyedDragon
For now, but as people demand more graphics; they will have to steal more performance from other areas.
I think I'll be quite content if future ps3 exclusives look and play as well as KZ2 and Uncharted 2. The only real sacrifice this games make is that the engines will likely never support splitscreen play.[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]The guesswork is easy i.e. IF the Xbox 360 has 3 PPE for non-rendering workload, then PS3 would need PPE + 2 SPEs. The rest of SPEs can be geared towards rendering. Besides shaders, Xbox 360 still has specialized hardware.AnnoyedDragon
You are equating SPE's as offering the same performance as the PPE, they are too different to be able to make such assumptions.
One could run lapack on both PPE and SPE...
One could run lapack on both PPE and SPE...ronvalencia
SPE's are stream processors optimized for high floating point calculations, you cannot dedicate SPE's like you can cores, they are not the same as a general purpose core.
SPE's are vector processors optimized for general purpose work, but that doesn't make them as good as actual general purpose processors at CPU based work.
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]One could run lapack on both PPE and SPE...AnnoyedDragon
SPE's are stream processors optimized for high floating point calculations, you cannot dedicate SPE's like you can cores, they are not the same as a general purpose core.
SPE's are vector processors optimized for general purpose work, but that doesn't make them as good as actual general purpose processors at CPU based work.
In http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/metro-2033-4a-engine-impresses-blog-entryCELL is being use as a six thread CPU i.e. Xbox 360's PPE X3 has 6 threads e.g. "all hardware threads at 100 per cent load". CELL has two threads from PPE and 6 threads from SPE (last SPE not available for userland)i.e. that could be 1 PPE and4 SPEs.
In http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/metro-2033-4a-engine-impresses-blog-entry CELL is being use as a six thread CPU i.e. Xbox 360's PPE X3 has 6 threads.ronvalencia
Your links change nothing, SPE's are not CPU cores, that's like saying one of my 8800GTs have 112 cores. Stream processors do not operate in the same way that CPU cores do, they are not optimized for the same sort of work.
I'm not sure why you are insisting on this argument, seeing how you have been arguing against PS3 so far. You want to believe PS3 has that much of an advantage over 360?
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]In http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/metro-2033-4a-engine-impresses-blog-entry CELL is being use as a six thread CPU i.e. Xbox 360's PPE X3 has 6 threads.AnnoyedDragon
Your links change nothing, SPE's are not CPU cores, that's like saying one of my 8800GTs have 112 cores. Stream processors do not operate in the same way that CPU cores do, they are not optimized for the same sort of work.
I'm not sure why you are insisting on this argument, seeing how you have been arguing against PS3 so far. You want to believe PS3 has that much of an advantage over 360?
If you read http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-metro2033-article
Notice they are using CELL as 6 threaded CPU i.e. that could be PPE(dual thread) + 4 SPEs in the context of Xbox 360's CPU threads (6 threads). In-order processors relies on multi-threads for maximising IPC. You may have 2 SPEs for boosting the RSX.
As for PS3's superiority, refer to Crytek's CryEngine3 beta benchmarks.
Anyway, CUDA cores are dual issue scalar processors i.e. not vectors. You have to group them if they run as 4-vec processors. CUDA cores are also double pumped i.e. 112 is effectively 224 when normalise to the GPU's main clockspeed. Another topic.
If you read http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-metro2033-article Notice they are using CELL as 6 threaded CPU i.e. that's PPE(dual thread) + 4 SPEs in the context of Xbox 360's CPU threads (6 threads). In-order processors relies on multi-threads for maximising IPC. Anyway, CUDA cores are dual issue scalar processors i.e. not vectors. You have to group them if they run as 4-vec processors. CUDA cores are also double pumped i.e. 112 is effectively 224 when normalise to the GPU's main clockspeed.ronvalencia
I didn't require an explanation on Cuda cores... I'm not going to change what I am saying because stream processors 'are not' the same as CPU cores, you linking to that article doesn't change that. They aren't designed to operate like cores, the way those developers are treating it doesn't change that.
What do you want? If I agree with you then you have argued PS3 has considerably more performance than 360, seeing how you have decided SPE's are equivalent to PPE's; and PS3 has 6 SPE's while 360 only has 3 PPE's. Wasn't you out to argue against PS3; not make it sound superior?
[QUOTE="jyoung312"]Yes, but it's not like Uncharted 2 or Killzone 2 have poor physics or AI, which are cpu tasks. KZ2 has great AI and some nice physics. Ditto for U2 but Uncharted 2's AI isn't quite up to the bar set by KZ2 so the use of the SPEs to assist with graphical assets didn't hinder either game in those areas.AnnoyedDragon
For now, but as people demand more graphics; they will have to steal more performance from other areas.
stealing performance? how are they stealing performance when the processor isnt even maxed out yet? its possible for them to improve bothstealing performance? how are they stealing performance when the processor isnt even maxed out yet? its possible for them to improve bothi_am_interested
Isn't even maxed out yet? Come on, people should know better by now, they say that all the time.
Cells performance is finite, regardless of what the hype tells you, all hardware has finite capabilities and that performance is distributed between different tasks.
[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]stealing performance? how are they stealing performance when the processor isnt even maxed out yet? its possible for them to improve bothAnnoyedDragon
Isn't even maxed out yet? Come on, people should know better by now, they say that all the time.
Cells performance is finite, regardless of what the hype tells you, all hardware has finite capabilities and that performance is distributed between different tasks.
yeah, it is finitethat doesnt mean companies out there have taken complete advantage of it
have you ever programmed for the PS3 and its Cell?
cause im wondering who i should trust, you or my buddy who does ps3 programming for capcom?
yeah, it is finite
that doesnt mean companies out there have taken complete advantage of it
have you ever programmed for the PS3 and its Cell?
cause im wondering who i should trust, you or my buddy who does ps3 programming for capcom?
i_am_interested
There he goes, pulling the "you're not a dev, so I'll believe anything I want" card. You even decided to pull the old friend in the industry claim...
Here's a tip, Cell will never be fully utilized, there are people who will say PS2 was never fully utilized. Even when they stop making the platform they will say it was never fully utilized, that's the way they are.
do you have any cell programming experience at all?
or do you just read papers spread all over the internet?
you probably thought killzone 2 maxed out the ps3? then Uncharted 2? and let me guess you think GOW3 maxes it out too?
do you have any cell programming experience at all?
or do you just read papers spread all over the internet?
you probably thought killzone 2 maxed out the ps3? then Uncharted 2? and let me guess you think GOW3 maxes it out too?i_am_interested
Stop playing the "not a dev" card.
If you want to buy into console marketing propaganda be my guest, but don't expect others to. Your criticisms don't even make any sense, you admit you recognise it has finite performance; but not that the performance has to be distributed between different tasks.
If you recognise the performance is finite then you recognise giving performance to one task takes it away from another.
What exactly are you objecting to?
[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]
do you have any cell programming experience at all?
or do you just read papers spread all over the internet?
you probably thought killzone 2 maxed out the ps3? then Uncharted 2? and let me guess you think GOW3 maxes it out too?AnnoyedDragon
Stop playing the "not a dev" card.
If you want to buy into console marketing propaganda be my guest, but don't expect others to. Your criticisms don't even make any sense, you admit you recognise it has finite performance; but not that the performance has to be distributed between different tasks.
If you recognise the performance is finite then you recognise giving performance to one task takes it away from another.
What exactly are you objecting to?
what im objecting to SPECIFICALLY is you saying that companies like ND and GG (which you responded to in another guy's quote) have reached a point where apparently YOU think the PS3 is maxed out to a point where they NOW have to start exchanging GRAPHICS power for some other kind of game related process such as AI or Animations as a tradeoff because theres no more power left there
and im saying youre flat out wrong, theres still room for them (in this case ND and GG) to improve both
yeah i do recognize that performance is finite, and guess what, none of these developers have hit it yet, not even SSM
what im objecting to SPECIFICALLY is you saying that companies like ND and GG (which you responded to in another guy's quote) have reached a point where apparently YOU think the PS3 is maxed out to a point where they NOW have to start exchanging GRAPHICS power for some other kind of game related process such as AI or Animations as a tradeoff because theres no more power left there
and im saying youre flat out wrong, theres still room for them (in this case ND and GG) to improve both
yeah i do recognize that performance is finite, and guess what, none of these developers have hit it yet, not even SSM
i_am_interested
You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless. People said they were happy with what those games did, I simply noted as people demanded more graphics they would eventually sacrifice in other areas.
Honestly no matter what I say; you Cell indorectinated fanboys will always think there is a bit more performance to tap from it, that is the way you have always been. You don't recognise resource distribution, you just think they will buff everything at the cost of nothing because they will simply magically unlock extra performance.
I pitty you, you may recognise performance is finite on a intellectual level; but not the emotional level hype appeal to. Hence your fanboy rage at even the suggestion that Cell may have to compromise anything. It's never enough for you, you always expect more, even after KZ2/U2 you expect more. Sony is their own worse enemy, their monstrous hype has created people like you, people that will never be satisfied and constantly expect more; which leads to the cannibalism I warned about.
[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]
what im objecting to SPECIFICALLY is you saying that companies like ND and GG (which you responded to in another guy's quote) have reached a point where apparently YOU think the PS3 is maxed out to a point where they NOW have to start exchanging GRAPHICS power for some other kind of game related process such as AI or Animations as a tradeoff because theres no more power left there
and im saying youre flat out wrong, theres still room for them (in this case ND and GG) to improve both
yeah i do recognize that performance is finite, and guess what, none of these developers have hit it yet, not even SSM
AnnoyedDragon
You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless. People said they were happy with what those games did, I simply noted as people demanded more graphics they would eventually sacrifice in other areas.
Honestly no matter what I say; you Cell indorectinated fanboys will always think there is a bit more performance to tap from it, that is the way you have always been. You don't recognise resource distribution, you just think they will buff everything at the cost of nothing because they will simply magically unlock extra performance.
I pitty you, you may recognise performance is finite on a intellectual level; but not the emotional level hype appeal to. Hence your fanboy rage at even the suggestion that Cell may have to compromise anything. It's never enough for you, you always expect more, even after KZ2/U2 you expect more. Sony is their own worse enemy, their monstrous hype has created people like you, people that will never be satisfied and constantly expect more; which leads to the cannibalism I warned about.
who are you dude? Cervat Yerli? you really think you understand developing for the cell processor dont you? game developers are still trying to wrap their head around this processor and here you are claiming that you understand it better than everyone else when youre not even a game programmerActually... there has been NO games close to KZ2 or Uncharted 2... which I think is the TC's point.How about we wait until the gen is finished before we make rash decisions now.
It's been shown that both systems are quite close with each other, and it's the differences in engines that help give a game the graphical edge.
lundy86_4
[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"][QUOTE="i_am_interested"]
what im objecting to SPECIFICALLY is you saying that companies like ND and GG (which you responded to in another guy's quote) have reached a point where apparently YOU think the PS3 is maxed out to a point where they NOW have to start exchanging GRAPHICS power for some other kind of game related process such as AI or Animations as a tradeoff because theres no more power left there
and im saying youre flat out wrong, theres still room for them (in this case ND and GG) to improve both
yeah i do recognize that performance is finite, and guess what, none of these developers have hit it yet, not even SSM
i_am_interested
You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless. People said they were happy with what those games did, I simply noted as people demanded more graphics they would eventually sacrifice in other areas.
Honestly no matter what I say; you Cell indorectinated fanboys will always think there is a bit more performance to tap from it, that is the way you have always been. You don't recognise resource distribution, you just think they will buff everything at the cost of nothing because they will simply magically unlock extra performance.
I pitty you, you may recognise performance is finite on a intellectual level; but not the emotional level hype appeal to. Hence your fanboy rage at even the suggestion that Cell may have to compromise anything. It's never enough for you, you always expect more, even after KZ2/U2 you expect more. Sony is their own worse enemy, their monstrous hype has created people like you, people that will never be satisfied and constantly expect more; which leads to the cannibalism I warned about.
who are you dude? Cervat Yerli? you really think you understand developing for the cell processor dont you? game developers are still trying to wrap their head around this processor and here you are claiming that you understand it better than everyone else when youre not even a game programmer Regardless of whether or not he's a programmer... both GG & ND have stated that they still could have got more power out of the PS3. At any rate... KZ2 came out a year ago and is still unmatched by the 360. The 360 hasn't even PREVIEWED anything to match KZ2. It's pretty safe to say they won't be able to at this point. They sure as hell don't appear to be on track to catch up with Uncharted 2. We didn't have to wait a complete gen to know that the Xbox & Game cube had better gfx than the PS2. It was apparent... the difference in gfx b/w the PS3 & 360 seems even more well defined... I thought it was still debatable when MGS4 came out. But after KZ2, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, & GOWIII... really not anything left to debate. The PS3 just keeps moving farther ahead. Doesn't mean that 360 games don't look good, b/c they do. But there is a very discernible difference b/w PS3 & 360 exclusives at this point.who are you dude? Cervat Yerli? you really think you understand developing for the cell processor dont you? game developers are still trying to wrap their head around this processor and here you are claiming that you understand it better than everyone else when youre not even a game programmeri_am_interested
Still playing that card huh?
No, I don't understand developing for the Cell; and neither do you. I haven't claimed to understand its performance capabilities, that would be you.
You are not informed, you are hype driven, you are hyped by claims made by developers Sony controls. Regardless of what you think Cell is capable of you have no choice but to recognise all hardware has finite capability, so it is pure fanboyism that is causing you to reject my perfectly reasonable comments.
As time goes by, as people like you expect and demand more, they will canibolize resources meant for CPU related work to up the graphics. That's the problem of using a hybrid processor, graphics wh***s would have every ounce of performance put into eye candy.
It's Sony's own fault for that ridiculous 2005 conference, they set the expectations far too high.
[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]who are you dude? Cervat Yerli? you really think you understand developing for the cell processor dont you? game developers are still trying to wrap their head around this processor and here you are claiming that you understand it better than everyone else when youre not even a game programmerAnnoyedDragon
Still playing that card huh?
No, I don't understand developing for the Cell; and neither do you. I haven't claimed to understand its capabilities, that would be you.
You are not informed, you are hype driven, you are hyped by claims made by developers Sony controls. Regardless of what you think Cell is capable of you have no choice but to recognise all hardware has finite capability, so it is pure fanboyism that is causing you to reject my perfectly reasonable comments.
As time goes by, as people like you expect and demand more, they will canibolize resources meant for CPU related work to up the graphics. That's the problem of using a hybrid processor, graphics wh***s would have every ounce of performance put into eye candy.
It's Sony's own fault for that ridiculous 2005 conference, they set the expectations far too high.
its cool, let your sony hate flow through, blame everything on that 2005 conference instead of moving past thathere we go back to the original argument, of you saying that they have to tradeoff improved game data for improved graphics and me saying they can improve both
by claiming that they have to tradeoff CPU resources in order to improve one facet while degrading another - youre claiming that theyve reached that max point as if you know its capabilities and that you know where that max point is (is that you Cevat Yerli???)
of course people like me do expect more, and you know what? theyre going to deliver just like they have been doing
For discovery development phase, you can download IBM's CELL simulator/emulator.do you have any cell programming experience at all?
or do you just read papers spread all over the internet?
you probably thought killzone 2 maxed out the ps3? then Uncharted 2? and let me guess you think GOW3 maxes it out too?i_am_interested
its cool, let your sony hate flow through, blame everything on that 2005 conference instead of moving past that
here we go back to the original argument, of you saying that they have to tradeoff improved game data for improved graphics and me saying they can improve both
by claiming that they have to tradeoff CPU resources in order to improve one facet while degrading another - youre claiming that theyve reached that max point as if you know its capabilities and that you know where that max point is (is that you Cevat Yerli???)
of course people like me do expect more, and you know what? theyre going to deliver just like they have been doing
i_am_interested
It's funny you're dissing the 2005 conference, considering it's the source of the hype you are under the influence of right now. Perhaps you should move past it? Stop thinking Cell is a bottomless pit of performance, a home super computer. You type you recognise performance is finite, but you certainly don't act like it.
No, that's just your hype knee yerk reacting to my suggestion that it could reach max one day, the very suggestion of which must annoy Cell advocates. You will want to note that I said whether or not it is maxed is irrelevant, the reason being:
"You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless."
What you don't get, what I have been emphasizing, is regardless of whether Cell is maxed or not today; it WILL hit the scenario I described. Don't tell me you recognise Cell is finite then completely reject the idea of it one day hitting that limit.
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]If you read http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-metro2033-article Notice they are using CELL as 6 threaded CPU i.e. that's PPE(dual thread) + 4 SPEs in the context of Xbox 360's CPU threads (6 threads). In-order processors relies on multi-threads for maximising IPC. Anyway, CUDA cores are dual issue scalar processors i.e. not vectors. You have to group them if they run as 4-vec processors. CUDA cores are also double pumped i.e. 112 is effectively 224 when normalise to the GPU's main clockspeed.AnnoyedDragon
I didn't require an explanation on Cuda cores... I'm not going to change what I am saying because stream processors 'are not' the same as CPU cores, you linking to that article doesn't change that. They aren't designed to operate like cores, the way those developers are treating it doesn't change that.
What do you want? If I agree with you then you have argued PS3 has considerably more performance than 360, seeing how you have decided SPE's are equivalent to PPE's; and PS3 has 6 SPE's while 360 only has 3 PPE's. Wasn't you out to argue against PS3; not make it sound superior?
My view, how about some benchmark numbers from Crytek's CryEngine3 beta?My view, how about some benchmark numbers from Crytek's CryEngine3 beta? ronvalencia
You keep contradicting yourself.
You say each SPE is equivalent to a PPE, which would mean PS3 offers a lot more performance than 360 under your own claims. Then you claim 360 is equivalent/more powerful; which is in contradiction to you insisting each SPE is as powerful as a 360 PPE.
[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]
its cool, let your sony hate flow through, blame everything on that 2005 conference instead of moving past that
here we go back to the original argument, of you saying that they have to tradeoff improved game data for improved graphics and me saying they can improve both
by claiming that they have to tradeoff CPU resources in order to improve one facet while degrading another - youre claiming that theyve reached that max point as if you know its capabilities and that you know where that max point is (is that you Cevat Yerli???)
of course people like me do expect more, and you know what? theyre going to deliver just like they have been doing
AnnoyedDragon
It's funny you're dissing the 2005 conference, considering it's the source of the hype you are under the influence of right now. Perhaps you should move past it? Stop thinking Cell is a bottomless pit of performance, a home super computer. You type you recognise performance is finite, but you certainly don't act like it.
No, that's just your hype knee yerk reacting to my suggestion that it could reach max one day, the very suggestion of which must annoy Cell advocates. You will want to note that I said whether or not it is maxed is irrelevant, the reason being:
"You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless."
What you don't get, what I have been emphasizing, is regardless of whether Cell is maxed or not today; it WILL hit the scenario I described. Don't tell me you recognise Cell is finite then completely reject the idea of it one day hitting that limit.
no, im not under that 2005 conference hype, i didnt even watch it to be honest
how many times have i said that i understand that the processor's power is finite??? 3 times?
yeah, eventually they will reach that point where they have to start CONSIDERING tradeoffs, EVENTUALLY
and guess what? that point of consideration isnt today nor is that point represented by any games that have been announced to come
that is unless youre Cevat Yerli and you know exactly where that max point is - and when its going to come and what game is going to show it
[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]
what im objecting to SPECIFICALLY is you saying that companies like ND and GG (which you responded to in another guy's quote) have reached a point where apparently YOU think the PS3 is maxed out to a point where they NOW have to start exchanging GRAPHICS power for some other kind of game related process such as AI or Animations as a tradeoff because theres no more power left there
and im saying youre flat out wrong, theres still room for them (in this case ND and GG) to improve both
yeah i do recognize that performance is finite, and guess what, none of these developers have hit it yet, not even SSM
You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless. People said they were happy with what those games did, I simply noted as people demanded more graphics they would eventually sacrifice in other areas.
Honestly no matter what I say; you Cell indorectinated fanboys will always think there is a bit more performance to tap from it, that is the way you have always been. You don't recognise resource distribution, you just think they will buff everything at the cost of nothing because they will simply magically unlock extra performance.
I pitty you, you may recognise performance is finite on a intellectual level; but not the emotional level hype appeal to. Hence your fanboy rage at even the suggestion that Cell may have to compromise anything. It's never enough for you, you always expect more, even after KZ2/U2 you expect more. Sony is their own worse enemy, their monstrous hype has created people like you, people that will never be satisfied and constantly expect more; which leads to the cannibalism I warned about.
who are you dude? Cervat Yerli? you really think you understand developing for the cell processor dont you? game developers are still trying to wrap their head around this processor and here you are claiming that you understand it better than everyone else when youre not even a game programmer Read http://research.scea.com/ps3_deferred_shading.pdf 5 SPEs vs 20 pipelined enabled G70."Read http://research.scea.com/ps3_deferred_shading.pdf 5 SPEs vs 20 pipelined enabled G70. "
what about it? what exactly do you want me to get from it?
none of what there is to read has anything to do with any actual game code, especially for specific games that have been mentioned in this thread
no, im not under that 2005 conference hype, i didnt even watch it to be honest
how many times have i said that i understand that the processor's power is finite??? 3 times?
yeah, eventually they will reach that point where they have to start CONSIDERING tradeoffs, EVENTUALLY
and guess what? that point of consideration isnt today nor is that point represented by any games that have been announced to come
that is unless youre Cevat Yerli and you know exactly where that max point is - and when its going to come and what game is going to show iti_am_interested
Here is where your problem is. You don't know if that is true and neither do I, but you accept that without question; while downplaying my argument which you do in fact recognise.
All you have is the words of developers under the payroll of Sony, who I am sure is completely honest about Cell capability. You can reject what I say all you want, but you are still placing your faith in something questionable.
Consoles always show improvements right to the end, but that's in how they manage resources; and not them somehow unlocking more performance. I doubt PS3 has shown the best it ever will when we are only a few years in, but you have unreasonable expectations.
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]My view, how about some benchmark numbers from Crytek's CryEngine3 beta? AnnoyedDragon
You keep contradicting yourself.
You say each SPE is equivalent to a PPE, which would mean PS3 offers a lot more performance than 360 under your own claims. Then you claim 360 is equivalent/more powerful; which is in contradiction to you insisting each SPE is as powerful as a 360 PPE.
In the end, one must look at PS3 and Xbox 360 as a total system. What does the CryEngine3 beta benchmark tells you?[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]
no, im not under that 2005 conference hype, i didnt even watch it to be honest
how many times have i said that i understand that the processor's power is finite??? 3 times?
yeah, eventually they will reach that point where they have to start CONSIDERING tradeoffs, EVENTUALLY
and guess what? that point of consideration isnt today nor is that point represented by any games that have been announced to come
that is unless youre Cevat Yerli and you know exactly where that max point is - and when its going to come and what game is going to show itAnnoyedDragon
Here is where your problem is. You don't know if that is true and neither do I, but you accept that without question; while downplaying my argument which you do in fact recognise.
All you have is the words of developers under the payroll of Sony, who I am sure is completely honest about Cell capability. You can reject what I say all you want, but you are still placing your faith in something questionable.
Consoles always show improvements right to the end, but that's in how they manage resources; and not them somehow unlocking more performance. I doubt PS3 has shown the best it ever will when we are only a few years in, but you have unreasonable expectations.
so, you, too, should quit stating assumptions on what you know nothing about.
[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]
no, im not under that 2005 conference hype, i didnt even watch it to be honest
how many times have i said that i understand that the processor's power is finite??? 3 times?
yeah, eventually they will reach that point where they have to start CONSIDERING tradeoffs, EVENTUALLY
and guess what? that point of consideration isnt today nor is that point represented by any games that have been announced to come
that is unless youre Cevat Yerli and you know exactly where that max point is - and when its going to come and what game is going to show itAnnoyedDragon
Here is where your problem is. You don't know if that is true and neither do I, but you accept that without question; while downplaying my argument which you do in fact recognise.
All you have is the words of developers under the payroll of Sony, who I am sure is completely honest about Cell capability. You can reject what I say all you want, but you are still placing your faith in something questionable.
Consoles always show improvements right to the end, but that's in how they manage resources; and not them somehow unlocking more performance. I doubt PS3 has shown the best it ever will when we are only a few years in, but you have unreasonable expectations.
where have i mentioned words from sony payroll? did i say i know someone at sony? did i say i know someone under sony's payroll? did i quote someone from under sony's pay roll? i dont think i ever used anything of that sort yeah,
consoles have shown improvement to the end, and that has been on part of managing resources, but with that being true still doesnt mean that theyve maxed the cell out yet
i accept it without question? you mean sort of how you accept that its reached a point of resource managment in order to improve one while degrading another without question? or do you question that too with the possibility that maybe im right about them being able to improve both?
because thats what the original argument is if you happen to remember, improving one while degrading another VS improving both
It shows some finite limits on CELL relative to G70 (Geforce 7800 GTX)."Read http://research.scea.com/ps3_deferred_shading.pdf 5 SPEs vs 20 pipelined enabled G70. "
what about it? what exactly do you want me to get from it?
none of what there is to read has anything to do with any actual game code, especially for specific games that have been mentioned in this thread
i_am_interested
Are you going to claim 6SPE+RSX would beat Geforce 8800 GT/Radeon HD 3850/4650?
In the end, one must look at PS3 and Xbox 360 as a total system. What does the CryEngine3 beta benchmark tells you?ronvalencia
You have made it quite clear what the beta benchmark says, but that doesn't make a stream processor something it is not.
then why do you post on this platform of superiority? are you a developer? do you know how all this stuff works? no?
clone01
Simple logic, all hardware has finite performance, you don't have to be a developer to figure that out. There are factual arguments that can be made without developer experience, some things are just obvious to anyone. Take for instance fitting 1GB worth of information into 256mb ram simultaneously, cannot happen.
Yet why criticise just me? This is a two way conversation; and the opposing side doesn't seem to offer nothing to back up his end than marketing.
[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]It shows some finite limits on G70 vs CELL. Are you going to claim 6SPE+RSX would beat Geforce 8800 GT/Radeon HD 38504650?"Read http://research.scea.com/ps3_deferred_shading.pdf 5 SPEs vs 20 pipelined enabled G70. "
what about it? what exactly do you want me to get from it?
none of what there is to read has anything to do with any actual game code, especially for specific games that have been mentioned in this thread
ronvalencia
in all of my posts in this thread, i dont think ive come anywhere close to making a claim such as that
ive never even referred to the radeon or geforce
where are you getting that from?
why are you trying to make bogus hardware comparisons on MY behalf when i havent even mentioned any graphics cards in this thread, ANY
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]In the end, one must look at PS3 and Xbox 360 as a total system. What does the CryEngine3 beta benchmark tells you?AnnoyedDragon
You have made it quite clear what the beta benchmark says, but that doesn't make a stream processor something it is not.
then why do you post on this platform of superiority? are you a developer? do you know how all this stuff works? no?
clone01
Simple logic, all hardware has finite performance, you don't have to be a developer to figure that out. There are factual arguments that can be made without developer experience, some things are just obvious to anyone. Take for instance fitting 1GB worth of information into 256mb ram simultaneously, cannot happen.
Yet why criticise just me? This is a two way conversation; and the opposing side doesn't seem to offer nothing to back up his end than marketing.
nah, not simple logic. honestly, you have no idea how the development process works. unless you've really worked in the industry, you've no experience. i call shenanigan's on your post.where have i mentioned words from sony payroll? did i say i know someone at sony? did i say i know someone under sony's payroll? did i quote someone from under sony's pay roll? i dont think i ever used anything of that sort yeah,
i_am_interested
What is this nonsense? You go on about Cell not being fully utilized, an idea you could have only gotten from Sony/1st party PR, then you deny going by anything said from these people.
So what are you telling me? That you "believe" Cell has great untapped potential and you came to that conclusion on your own, with no outside suggestion?
consoles have shown improvement to the end, and that has been on part of managing resources, but with that being true still doesnt mean that theyve maxed the cell out yet
i_am_interested
You haven't paid attention to what I said before, I said whether or not Cell is maxed is irrelevant to the scenario I described, a scenario you agreed with just one response ago.
i accept it without question? you mean sort of how you accept that its reached a point of resource managment in order to improve one while degrading another without question? or do you question that too with the possibility that maybe im right about them being able to improve both?
because thats what the original argument is if you happen to remember, improving one while degrading another VS improving both
i_am_interested
Aren't you listening to what I am saying?
"You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless."
You came up with the idea that I said Cell is maxed, why do you keep ignoring what I'm actually saying? That regardless of whether it is maxed or not; it will reach the scenario I described.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment