PDA

View Full Version : PS3: Cell is Broken??


saunders45
Jun 5, 2006, 09:21 AM
Interresting story linked from slashdot.....

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32171

http://games.slashdot.org/games/06/06/05/0933239.shtml

atari1356
Jun 5, 2006, 09:31 AM
Yikes... between that and a blu-ray drive that nobody really wants, Sony is really dropping the ball here.

2nyRiggz
Jun 5, 2006, 09:32 AM
Another one of these threads......every report is a bad one....let the hating begin..again.

Note: lets try to reduce these to like once per week instead of our regular 8 times.

Bless

saunders45
Jun 5, 2006, 09:34 AM
I wouldn't call it hating, as much as I would call it catching sony with their pants down. They blatantly lied about the PS2's technology and capabilites, this time around nobody is letting them get away with it.

DougTheImpaler
Jun 5, 2006, 09:40 AM
So theoretically, we could get 30fps with nearly 10M vertices per frame? Is there a game out there that even does a third of that? The theoretical number difference probably means that we'll end up seeing the same out of both systems, but the PS3 is more difficult to program for. SSDD, IMO, because that's what the PS2 was and it somehow managed.

OTOH, I have no intentions of getting a PS3, and I already have my 360. :p

Dagless
Jun 5, 2006, 09:45 AM
I wouldn't call it hating, as much as I would call it catching sony with their pants down. They blatantly lied about the PS2's technology and capabilites, this time around nobody is letting them get away with it.

exactly. if they didn't lie before we would probably be a little nicer now. lies, damned lies and Sony lies.

Haoshiro
Jun 5, 2006, 09:46 AM
Another one of these threads......every report is a bad one....let the hating begin..again.

Note: lets try to reduce these to like once per week instead of our regular 8

Sure this thread could start such hating but just because something isn't positive doesn't mean it isn't true, or should not be mentioned.

That said, we don't really know what this "16MB/s" speed in local memory really means. Someone mentioned that this is a private memory cache that each SPU has, in which case it really is unimportant in the long run. Sure it may be a small bottleneck in some scenarios, but it looks as though it really may be a moot point.

Other mentions of the specs do seem to indicate some bad problems. PS2 had these as well, but many developers eventually found ways around the weak points and focused on the hardware strengths.

To me, this type of news serves one good purpose: a reality check for those arguing on the PS3 power side. It says something pretty simple "PS3 may not be as powerful and earth shattering as you were lead to believe." - doesn't mean the PS3 will fail or not have any success or good games, it just means people should get off their stand where they are shouting unwarranted praises that are based on misconceptions.

ManchesterTrix
Jun 5, 2006, 09:49 AM
I can't read the Slashdot but the Inquirer articles reads like FUD to me.

Haoshiro
Jun 5, 2006, 09:51 AM
So theoretically, we could get 30fps with nearly 10M vertices per frame? Is there a game out there that even does a third of that? The theoretical number difference probably means that we'll end up seeing the same out of both systems, but the PS3 is more difficult to program for. SSDD, IMO, because that's what the PS2 was and it somehow managed.

OTOH, I have no intentions of getting a PS3, and I already have my 360. :p

Yeah, I think even PGR3 on the 360 does more then that. It was said that the interior and exterior of the cars were 40K poly each (80K polys) plus whatever was in the driver, and 10M in the actual sity. My math could be off, but I think that comes out to be somewhere around 35M vertices at 60fps.

Again, I could be off but off the top of my head that is what I recall. :)

2nyRiggz
Jun 5, 2006, 09:55 AM
I can't read the Slashdot but the Inquirer articles reads like FUD to me.

Indeed....thats what i was thinking....who knows if this is true but yet we are are reporting it like its facts....but go on i'll play along.

For the record: i always thought PS3 and 360 were on the same level...never thought PS3 was more powerful or anything like that.


Bless

yellow
Jun 5, 2006, 10:01 AM
Yikes... between that and a blu-ray drive that nobody really wants, Sony is really dropping the ball here.

No one ever told me that I was nobody.

atari1356
Jun 5, 2006, 10:02 AM
I can't read the Slashdot but the Inquirer articles reads like FUD to me.

After reading some of the more informed comments on Slashdot, it appears that you may be right:

suggesting that the RSX is the preferred tool for accessing this particular "local memory". A "cache" which is easily accessible from a completely different processor seems unlikely. If this is the case, then the whole issue is irrelevent, since data flow is primarily from CPU to GPU and not the other way round.
So it seems to me more likely that the AC is correct, and that this story is based on an ignorant or willfull misunderstanding of the presentation.

atari1356
Jun 5, 2006, 10:04 AM
No one ever told me that I was nobody.

Well, I didn't mean you specifically. :p

I should have said "a blu-ray drive that very few people want".

ManchesterTrix
Jun 5, 2006, 10:04 AM
After reading some of the more informed comments on Slashdot, it appears that you may be right:

Which is really sad, because if someone does just want to target Sony, there are plenty of real issues to bring up though none of them have the glossy "OMG THE CHIP IS BORKED! PS3 IS DEAD! 360 for the Win!"

atari1356
Jun 5, 2006, 10:11 AM
Another one of these threads......every report is a bad one....let the hating begin..again.

Note: lets try to reduce these to like once per week instead of our regular 8 times.

Bless

I thought you were the one who liked to "stir the pot" in these console war threads? Oh, that's right, you only like it when it's making the Nintendo fans squirm. :rolleyes: :D

2nyRiggz
Jun 5, 2006, 10:14 AM
^How fun is it when i got like 8 sony threads and NO nintendo/xbox threads....i need more to work with:)

Besides there are more Nintendboys & xboxians than sonyboys...so i got to level it


Bless

harveypooka
Jun 5, 2006, 10:31 AM
The Inquirer has this article:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32171

"RSX is at a solid 22.4GBps for both read and write, good job there green team. Then comes the blue team with Cell. Local memory write is about 4GBps, 40% of the next slowest bandwidth there. Then comes the bomb from hell, the Cell local memory read bandwidth is a stunning 16MBps, note that is a capital M to connote Mega vs a capital G to connote Giga. This is a three order of magnitude oopsie, and it is an oopsie, as Sony put it "(no, this isn't a typo...)"."

Ummmm...

cyberdogl2
Jun 5, 2006, 11:34 AM
the bad news keeps coming for sony. in this abusive relationship we're not taking the crap anymore.

GFLPraxis
Jun 5, 2006, 11:47 AM
Quoting from another board, not sure how accurate:
LMAO. I had to laugh all the way to the bank.

Local storage's read/write at 16MBp/s is bad? How much memory are they expecting the SPE to address, 10 GB? The local SRAM is only 512KB... 16MBp/s is plenty enough.

Not to mention, the RSX memory is WAY off. That's for the FlexIO. The RSX memory is 22.4GBp/s, same as the Xbox 360's Xenon.

The CELL's 25GBp/s is actually faster than the Xenos's 22.4GBp/s, so.. who the hell cares?

As for the triangles... Don't make me laugh, the one thing that the RSX EXCELS at, if nothing else, is pumping out triangles.

Disregard this crap article entirely.

harveypooka
Jun 5, 2006, 11:55 AM
Quoting from another board, not sure how accurate:

Hmmm. It's a tough one. Who knows what Sony have under wraps and development? Only time will tell...the object sparse environments speaks volumes though...doesn't it?

HughJ
Jun 5, 2006, 01:18 PM
to me this is purely speculation (and maybe a bit of spin-doctoring), firstly how can you compare two systems like for like when one of them does not actually exist, secondly ifSony was having all these major problems wouldn't the release date be set back, thirdly Sony or any high profile company would not release such a highly anticipated product such as the PS3 if could not at least (even if marginally) better than thats offered by the oposition.

DougTheImpaler
Jun 5, 2006, 01:33 PM
thirdly Sony or any high profile company would not release such a highly anticipated product such as the PS3 if could not at least (even if marginally) better than thats offered by the oposition.
Thing is, Sony did it before (PS2 < DreamCast in most hardware respects) and yet the PS2 won the generation and SEGA darn near went under. They got rewarded for their hardware, and in truth, they probably will be again, no matter how many people hope otherwise.

srobert
Jun 5, 2006, 02:00 PM
Yeah… it's from one of those bad "starts-with-something-and-ends-with-er" sites. (Inquirer, Register, etc…). They usually have only bad thing to say about everything (Especially Apple ^_^) wether it's true or not.

harveypooka
Jun 5, 2006, 02:00 PM
Sony or any high profile company would not release such a highly anticipated product such as the PS3 if could not at least (even if marginally) better than thats offered by the oposition.

Not sure about this. Cell is a new architecture and from the speculation and rumours around it seems difficult to program for and not as powerful (at least for games as presumed). They may think they're making an ace console, but hey, it's all about the marketing man!
Wii has so much more of a buzz about it and little is really know, that's great marketing. A friend of mine works in a retail outlet and a few years back someone came up to him in store and said "I want an iPod. What does it do?". Stupidity or marketing. Who knows.

harveypooka
Jun 5, 2006, 02:03 PM
Yeah… it's from one of those bad "starts-with-something-and-ends-with-er" sites. (Inquirer, Register, etc…). They usually have only bad thing to say about everything (Especially Apple ^_^) wether it's true or not.

That's not true! The Register rocks! They just have a cynical outlook on most things. The Inquirer is like tabloid tech news though. Stick to Ars Technica for pure tech stuff...way over my head though!

Fukui
Jun 5, 2006, 03:33 PM
Which is really sad, because if someone does just want to target Sony, there are plenty of real issues to bring up though none of them have the glossy "OMG THE CHIP IS BORKED! PS3 IS DEAD! 360 for the Win!"
The article took the slide out of context.

The slide was talking about RSX, therefore "local memory" was the RSX local memory. Which means that when Cell needs to read the RSX's local memory it reads it at 16MB per sec. This is normal as GPUs are consumers, not data providers, CPUs rarely need to read back what the GPU generates as its all throwaway once your process the next frame.

DougTheImpaler
Jun 5, 2006, 05:56 PM
Yeah, I think even PGR3 on the 360 does more then that. It was said that the interior and exterior of the cars were 40K poly each (80K polys) plus whatever was in the driver, and 10M in the actual sity. My math could be off, but I think that comes out to be somewhere around 35M vertices at 60fps.

Again, I could be off but off the top of my head that is what I recall. :)

Does PGR3 run at a fixed 60 FPS? Yeah, probably, given how smooth everything looks...you might be right; the X360 might be pushing more now than the PS3 is capable of. But with some creative programming, I dont' think the difference will be as stark as, say, PS2/Xbox.

GFLPraxis
Jun 5, 2006, 06:02 PM
The article took the slide out of context.

The slide was talking about RSX, therefore "local memory" was the RSX local memory. Which means that when Cell needs to read the RSX's local memory it reads it at 16MB per sec. This is normal as GPUs are consumers, not data providers, CPUs rarely need to read back what the GPU generates as its all throwaway once your process the next frame.

Do you have a source for that? (I don't doubt you, but I'd like to have something to show the fanboys that are going nuts over this article).

zap2
Jun 5, 2006, 06:04 PM
^How fun is it when i got like 8 sony threads and NO nintendo/xbox threads....i need more to work with:)

Besides there are more Nintendboys & xboxians than sonyboys...so i got to level it


Bless

Any possible reason for that;) :D

Fukui
Jun 5, 2006, 07:04 PM
Do you have a source for that? (I don't doubt you, but I'd like to have something to show the fanboys that are going nuts over this article).
http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/D9439D04EA9B080B87256FC00075CC2D/$file/MPR-Cell-details-article-021405.pdf

From the report:
"The XDR controller actually consists of two independent controllers, offering more flexibility than one. The memory interface can support an incredible 25.6GB/s of bandwidth."

Its quite obvious, the enquire report is totally bogus.
Poor enquirer.:(