If you were in charge of Sony, what hardware config would you have chosen (poll)

Ok the benefit of Blu-ray is that you can play high def movies. The negative of blu-ray is the huge price hike and the other aspects of the console that actually effect graphics such as CPU, GPU and RAM were all one year old by the time the PS3 released.

Had the PS3 released without blu-ray, Sony could have easily priced it at $400 for the 60GB version. The graphics would have been IDENTICAL to what they have now. The only difference is that required installs would not exist and some games would be on 2 or 3 DVDs.

Had Sony released the PS3 with DVD but 1 GB RAM and an 8800 GTX, then it would've been so powerful, that it could run Crysis at 1080p. It would have KILLED the 360 in graphics in 100% of multiplat games and exclusives would be miles ahead. Most PS3 games would run at 1080p and 60 fps with 4X AA. Killzone 2 would've been just amazing in high res and super fluid at 60 fps, it would look A LOT BETTER THAN CRYSIS!

Imagine having a choice between multiplats on 360 vs PS3 with the PS3 version looking a lot better in 1080p and 60 fps, how would that be?

Of course the price of the PS3 would've been initially $600 but it would have KILLER hardware that makes the 360 really look like Xbox 1.5 by comparison. I know the $600 price was a lot but at least you're getting $600 graphics in 2006 and by now the price would've been down to $300 as well and who knows how much momentum Sony would have.

As it turned out the PS3 loses to the 360 in graphics 99% of the time even though it was released 1 year later and at $200 more expensive. But at least you can play Avatar in Blu-ray.

Well, for me I would have much preferred if Sony put in 1 GB of RAM and an 8800 GTX and given us the uber console they promised. I can buy Blu-ray separately if I want to watch movies.

What do you guys think?

What they ended up with was better than their original idea of just using the cell by itself with no rsx at all.ferret-gamer

What they ended up with was better than their original idea of just using the cell by itself with no rsx at all.ferret-gamer

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]What they ended up with was better than their original idea of just using the cell by itself with no rsx at all.alexfla

[QUOTE="alexfla"]

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]What they ended up with was better than their original idea of just using the cell by itself with no rsx at all.JohnF111

[QUOTE="JohnF111"]

[QUOTE="alexfla"]

What does that have to do with anything?

alexfla

[QUOTE="alexfla"]

[QUOTE="JohnF111"] He means Sony originally planned on having no GPU... everything done by the Cell...

JohnF111

[QUOTE="JohnF111"]

[QUOTE="alexfla"]

I know that. But Sony realized they needed the GPU so they teamed up with Nvidia who gave them a modified 7800 card called the RSX.

However, my point is that Sony could have had their PS3 with the RSX for $400 at launch if they didn't include the Blu-ray drive. Or they could've had 1 GB or RAM and the 8800 GTX for the same $600 and the only thing they lose out on is watching movies.

alexfla

4 SPE Cell, Geforce 8800 GPU, 768 MB RAM, Blu-Ray drive, PS2 BC.

edit: oh, and another thing - PS3 came too soon. In 2006, PS2 was still strong, so they could just release the PS3 in 2007.

If I were in charge of Sony, I imagine I would have had access to the information that led them to the configuration they chose, and would have likely gone the same way.

If I were in charge of Sony, I imagine I would have had access to the information that led them to the configuration they chose, and would have likely gone the same way.

Pug-Nasty

what that they wanted to stuff an unnecessary blu ray drive in because they would lose the format war to toshiba if they didnt?

Cell with a Xenos and a gig of regular ddr pooled ram would have been epic.mbrockway

Xenos is not much better than RSX, if at all. While a Geforce 8800 based GPU with more ram could really give the PS3 a graphics advantage over the 360.

[QUOTE="mbrockway"]Cell with a Xenos and a gig of regular ddr pooled ram would have been epic.nameless12345

Xenos is not much better than RSX, if at all. While a Geforce 8800 based GPU with more ram could really give the PS3 a graphics advantage over the 360.

Yes it is.

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

If I were in charge of Sony, I imagine I would have had access to the information that led them to the configuration they chose, and would have likely gone the same way.

markinthedark

what that they wanted to stuff an unnecessary blu ray drive in because they would lose the format war to toshiba if they didnt?

Amongst other things, yeah. If you know that pushing Blu-Ray was important to them, I don't see why you would downplay the reason you think they put it in there. I have enjoyed my ps3s blu-ray capabilities almost as much as I've enjoyed the games I've played on it. Blu-Ray has also allowed them to put more data on the disc, which has been nice for its exclusives.

I could say that MS went with DVD-9 and didn't properly test its hardware so it could rush to market to beat Sony and MS to the punch. It's true, and it worked.

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

If I were in charge of Sony, I imagine I would have had access to the information that led them to the configuration they chose, and would have likely gone the same way.

Pug-Nasty

what that they wanted to stuff an unnecessary blu ray drive in because they would lose the format war to toshiba if they didnt?

Amongst other things, yeah. If you know that pushing Blu-Ray was important to them, I don't see why you would downplay the reason you think they put it in there. I have enjoyed my ps3s blu-ray capabilities almost as much as I've enjoyed the games I've played on it. Blu-Ray has also allowed them to put more data on the disc, which has been nice for its exclusives.

I could say that MS went with DVD-9 and didn't properly test its hardware so it could rush to market to beat Sony and MS to the punch. It's true, and it worked.

It's also the reason some games force you to install them on your HDD.

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

what that they wanted to stuff an unnecessary blu ray drive in because they would lose the format war to toshiba if they didnt?

waltefmoney

Amongst other things, yeah. If you know that pushing Blu-Ray was important to them, I don't see why you would downplay the reason you think they put it in there. I have enjoyed my ps3s blu-ray capabilities almost as much as I've enjoyed the games I've played on it. Blu-Ray has also allowed them to put more data on the disc, which has been nice for its exclusives.

I could say that MS went with DVD-9 and didn't properly test its hardware so it could rush to market to beat Sony and MS to the punch. It's true, and it worked.

It's also the reason some games force you to install them on your HDD.

I guess it's a good thing one of their decisions was the inclusion of an HDD in every console then. There's nothing wrong with installs, in fact one of the things 360 fanboys like to talk about is the fact that you can install every game on the 360. On the ps3, it isn't necessary for every game, as the hardware doesn't break form being used normally.

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

Amongst other things, yeah. If you know that pushing Blu-Ray was important to them, I don't see why you would downplay the reason you think they put it in there. I have enjoyed my ps3s blu-ray capabilities almost as much as I've enjoyed the games I've played on it. Blu-Ray has also allowed them to put more data on the disc, which has been nice for its exclusives.

I could say that MS went with DVD-9 and didn't properly test its hardware so it could rush to market to beat Sony and MS to the punch. It's true, and it worked.

Pug-Nasty

It's also the reason some games force you to install them on your HDD.

I guess it's a good thing one of their decisions was the inclusion of an HDD in every console then. There's nothing wrong with installs, in fact one of the things 360 fanboys like to talk about is the fact that you can install every game on the 360. On the ps3, it isn't necessary for every game, as the hardware doesn't break form being used normally.

That's different. 360 fanboys brag because it's their choice whether to install the game or not.. On the PS3, you can't choose whether to install a game or not - you either have to(you're forced by the developers) or you can't.

That's different? An install is an install. As I said, they put a standard HDD in the system for installs, something developers wanted, which MS didn't want to put in, because they wanted to sell a very cheap SKU, while simultaneously charging outlandish prices for storage.

If you don't like installs, don't install your games. But if you install all your games, don't talk about mandatory installs being a bad thing.

And you can't install all your games because you don't need to. The system won't die from spinning a disc. The 360 just might. MS updated the system to allow for that to curb RROD costs.

That's different? An install is an install. As I said, they put a standard HDD in the system for installs, something developers wanted, which MS didn't want to put in, because they wanted to sell a very cheap SKU, while simultaneously charging outlandish prices for storage.

If you don't like installs, don't install your games. But if you install all your games, don't talk about mandatory installs being a bad thing.

Pug-Nasty

Being forced to install a game is a bad thing. Having the option of installing a game to improve performance, but being able to play it without installing it, is a good thing.

I reckon taking a loss on the PS3 for a little while saved the Blu Ray format. HD-DVD was cheaper and early discs used higher quality codecs than early Blu Rays. And the players themselves were also cheaper. Playstation 3 put a Blu Ray player in a lot of homes. It added extra value to the Blu Ray format in its early days, and Blu Ray in turn added extra value to the PS3.savebattery

I dont know it turned them from the king of consoles into dead last... i wouldnt say it added much value to the PS3... at least the average consumer didnt see it that way. It did wonders for the format, but not for the ps3 imo.

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

That's different? An install is an install. As I said, they put a standard HDD in the system for installs, something developers wanted, which MS didn't want to put in, because they wanted to sell a very cheap SKU, while simultaneously charging outlandish prices for storage.

If you don't like installs, don't install your games. But if you install all your games, don't talk about mandatory installs being a bad thing.

waltefmoney

Being forced to install a game is a bad thing. Having the option of installing a game to improve performance, but being able to play it without installing it, is a good thing.

Eh, being forced to install your games so your system won't overheat, or the scratches they may get from the laser lens won't matter is a bad thing. Having to install a game on a system that comes with an HDD isn't.

I'm not saying that every 360 has these problems, but it is the reason many install their games on 360.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="mbrockway"]Cell with a Xenos and a gig of regular ddr pooled ram would have been epic.waltefmoney

Xenos is not much better than RSX, if at all. While a Geforce 8800 based GPU with more ram could really give the PS3 a graphics advantage over the 360.

Yes it is.

In what ways?

Both are about the power of two Geforce 6800 Ultra cards and both have similar features.

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Xenos is not much better than RSX, if at all. While a Geforce 8800 based GPU with more ram could really give the PS3 a graphics advantage over the 360.

nameless12345

Yes it is.

In what ways?

Both are about the power of two Geforce 6800 Ultra cards and both have similar features.

It's much easier to develop for.

[QUOTE="savebattery"]I reckon taking a loss on the PS3 for a little while saved the Blu Ray format. HD-DVD was cheaper and early discs used higher quality codecs than early Blu Rays. And the players themselves were also cheaper. Playstation 3 put a Blu Ray player in a lot of homes. It added extra value to the Blu Ray format in its early days, and Blu Ray in turn added extra value to the PS3.markinthedark

I dont know it turned them from the king of consoles into dead last... i wouldnt say it added much value to the PS3... at least the average consumer didnt see it that way. It did wonders for the format, but not for the ps3 imo.

[QUOTE="savebattery"]I reckon taking a loss on the PS3 for a little while saved the Blu Ray format. HD-DVD was cheaper and early discs used higher quality codecs than early Blu Rays. And the players themselves were also cheaper. Playstation 3 put a Blu Ray player in a lot of homes. It added extra value to the Blu Ray format in its early days, and Blu Ray in turn added extra value to the PS3.markinthedark

I dont know it turned them from the king of consoles into dead last... i wouldnt say it added much value to the PS3... at least the average consumer didnt see it that way. It did wonders for the format, but not for the ps3 imo.

Blu-Ray being a win in the fromat war is a big win for Sony, as they helped develop it, they also profit from its success. But not just in the sense that all studios use it now, but because Sony has an enormous of movie properties that they can repackage and sell in HD, on blu-ray, and make a profit on older movies that people will rebuy on the new format. It's a pretty big deal for them.

As far as the system, the make it with the view of its lifecycle, not petty races. It's always nice to be number one, but building a winning brand is always important. We'll see the consequences of this gens mis-steps this gen at the beginning of next gen.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

Yes it is.

waltefmoney

In what ways?

Both are about the power of two Geforce 6800 Ultra cards and both have similar features.

It's much easier to develop for.

That's because the 360 has 512 megs of unified ram while PS3 has 256 megs video ram + 256 megs system ram.

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

That's different? An install is an install. As I said, they put a standard HDD in the system for installs, something developers wanted, which MS didn't want to put in, because they wanted to sell a very cheap SKU, while simultaneously charging outlandish prices for storage.

If you don't like installs, don't install your games. But if you install all your games, don't talk about mandatory installs being a bad thing.

waltefmoney

Being forced to install a game is a bad thing. Having the option of installing a game to improve performance, but being able to play it without installing it, is a good thing.

So PC gaming is at a disadvantage because of forced installs? Hardly. It just making a mountain out of a molehill. Installs have been a part of gaming for decades now. But somehow it just this gen became "pwnage" material... :roll:

[QUOTE="mbrockway"]Cell with a Xenos and a gig of regular ddr pooled ram would have been epic.nameless12345

Xenos is not much better than RSX, if at all. While a Geforce 8800 based GPU with more ram could really give the PS3 a graphics advantage over the 360.

Compared to ATI Xenos, the RSX/Geforce 7 is an aging GPU.

From http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=57736&page=5

------------------------

"I could go on for pages listing the types of things the spu's are used for to make up for the machines aging gpu, which may be 7 series NVidia but that's basically a tweaked 6 series NVidia for the most part. But I'll just type a few off the top of my head:"

1) Two ppu/vmx units
There are three ppu/vmx units on the 360, and just one on the PS3. So any load on the 360's remaining two ppu/vmx units must be moved to spu.

2) Vertex culling
You can look back a few years at my first post talking about this, but it's common knowledge now that you need to move as much vertex load as possible to spu otherwise it won't keep pace with the 360.

3) Vertex texture sampling
You can texture sample in vertex shaders on 360 just fine, but it's unusably slow on PS3. Most multi platform games simply won't use this feature on 360 to make keeping parity easier, but if a dev does make use of it then you will have no choice but to move all such functionality to spu.

4) Shader patching
Changing variables in shader programs is cake on the 360. Not so on the PS3 because they are embedded into the shader programs. So you have to use spu's to patch your shader programs.

5) Branching
You never want a lot of branching in general, but when you do really need it the 360 handles it fine, PS3 does not. If you are stuck needing branching in shaders then you will want to move all such functionality to spu.

6) Shader inputs
You can pass plenty of inputs to shaders on 360, but do it on PS3 and your game will grind to a halt. You will want to move all such functionality to spu to minimize the amount of inputs needed on the shader programs.

7) MSAA alternatives
Msaa runs full speed on 360 gpu needing just cpu tiling calculations. Msaa on PS3 gpu is very slow. You will want to move msaa to spu as soon as you can.

8. Post processing
360 is unified architecture meaning post process steps can often be slotted into gpu idle time. This is not as easily doable on PS3, so you will want to move as much post process to spu as possible.

9) Load balancing
360 gpu load balances itself just fine since it's unified. If the load on a given frame shifts to heavy vertex or heavy pixel load then you don't care. Not so on PS3 where such load shifts will cause frame drops. You will want to shift as much load as possible to spu to minimize your peak load on the gpu.

10) Half floats
You can use full floats just fine on the 360 gpu. On the PS3 gpu they cause performance slowdowns. If you really need/have to use shaders with many full floats then you will want to move such functionality over to the spu's.

11) Shader array indexing
You can index into arrays in shaders on the 360 gpu no problem. You can't do that on PS3. If you absolutely need this functionality then you will have to either rework your shaders or move it all to spu.

Etc, etc, etc...

Maybe if they had an "arcade" model, and sold HDDs and Wifi separately, people wouldn't have cried so much about the price.

The only difference I would make is to have a config that's easier to develop for. Not sure what that would mean for the Cell, but so be it.

And I only say that because that's what has affected it's early lead and held back it's potential in some multi-plats.

768MB RAM

Blu-Ray They would be mad not to include this.

8600 GT-like graphics card.

Definitely not the Cell processor... I'd reccomend one of those dual-core processors by AMD available at the time.

Definitely have BC since this would be costing quite a lot and so customers would want a lot in return and would maybe consider selling thier old PS2/1.

A faster Blu-Ray drive would also be good, but I'm not sure if that would've been possible at the time.

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

That's different? An install is an install. As I said, they put a standard HDD in the system for installs, something developers wanted, which MS didn't want to put in, because they wanted to sell a very cheap SKU, while simultaneously charging outlandish prices for storage.

If you don't like installs, don't install your games. But if you install all your games, don't talk about mandatory installs being a bad thing.

waltefmoney

Being forced to install a game is a bad thing. Having the option of installing a game to improve performance, but being able to play it without installing it, is a good thing.

Being forced to install a game is a bad thing BUT being forced to pay for an online service is value! (and I don't mean you in this case, just the general consensus)

i would have added 10 mb of DRAM, end of story.

i would have added 10 mb of DRAM, end of story.

omho88

Why 10? That's a strange number in computers...

Oh, that and it probably won't do a lot unless in very specific circumstances =P

[QUOTE="omho88"]

i would have added 10 mb of DRAM, end of story.

Why 10? That's a strange number in computers...

Oh, that and it probably won't do a lot unless in very specific circumstances =P

[QUOTE="Blade8Aus"]

[QUOTE="omho88"]

i would have added 10 mb of DRAM, end of story.

omho88

Why 10? That's a strange number in computers...

Oh, that and it probably won't do a lot unless in very specific circumstances =P

Actually, ronvalencia just explained the major differences. Xenos is basically built on more modern technology which has more in common with the NVidia 8 series rather than the NVidia 7 series. Oh and yes I am quite aware of the brand that manufactures Xbox 360 graphics cards. 10mb isn't expected to do any miracles.

I picked option 2. If Sony saved blu-ray for next gen and had a $400 launch price they would be so far in the lead by now.

The second or the third options would be the smartest ones.

8800GTX is the correct answer.

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

Being forced to install a game is a bad thing. Having the option of installing a game to improve performance, but being able to play it without installing it, is a good thing.

AncientDozer

Eh, being forced to install your games so your system won't overheat, or the scratches they may get from the laser lens won't matter is a bad thing. Having to install a game on a system that comes with an HDD isn't.

I'm not saying that every 360 has these problems, but it is the reason many install their games on 360.

I doubt that the only time a 360 may scratch a disc will be when moving it. That may the most common cause, but the reason it scratches discs is the bare lens that has no padding, so a disc that is somehow unbalanced, which can happen, would scratch without moving it.

However, I was saying it's a reason 360 users say that full game installs are a good thing, because this bypasses the problems associated with using their console, overheats and scratch discs being rendered useless. You can try to debate these things, but the 360 didn't launch with the full game install feature, and was only implemented after MS lost a ridiculous amount of money on the RROD issue.

People installing games means, for MS, less RRODs, and potentially higher HDD sales.

I like POWA :lol:

Just imagining Uncharted 2 if it had the proper AA it deserved. The extra RAM would've helped too.