Playstation 4 using PowerVR-gpu?

[T2k]

This message is hidden because Wreckage is on your ignore list.

God, I looove the new forum engine!

 

[akugami]

Sony Ericsson's Satio - a waaay superior phone when compared to the iCrap - uses the same chip: http://developer.sonyericsson.com/s...newssept09/p_sony_ericsson_satio_opengl2.jsp#
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RsyrX6skmE

I have an iPhone, it's not a bad product. It's jokingly called the Jesus phone but that's only a joke. It has its pros and cons. Not complete crap. I haven't used the Satio and really have no desire to. I hate Sony Ericsson phones. I've always been a Nokia guy until the iPhone. Just a matter of preference for me.

The thing is that PowerVR chips have been used in portable devices and the graphics capabilities are not that bad. So rumors of it being used in next gen portable gaming devices (Sony PSP, Gameboy, maybe a MS released portable) is not farfetched.

But for a gaming console...seems questionable. Especially when you consider that development houses are demanding greater flexibility in interoperability. Many game engines are now designed so that they can quickly port games to multiple consoles or the PC with minimal effort. Using something like PowerVR which is different from what ATI, nVidia and even the upcoming Larrabee seems questionable from that standpoint. One of the major flaws of the PS3 was the cost, both to developers and to consumers. Moving to PowerVR just seems like a move that doesn't make sense from that perspective.

IBM CPUs used in the current consoles are crap. Remember when Anand reviewed them and provided benchmarks a couple years back? Thats right, the whole thing was "pulled". They are cheap, plain and simple.

It's not always about the power of the system. The CPU's used in current gen consoles aren't really that bad even if they're nothing special. They're good enough to get the job done and that's what the console makers care about. That and cost of course.

God, I looove the new forum engine!

I don't like the guy either but that wasn't really necessary. In fact, Wreckage didn't say a single flammatory thing in that comment. Let's give him grief for his obvious shenanigans but let's give him credit for the very very very few times he is behaving or actually contributing.

 

[EarthwormJim]

Originally Posted by Wreckage
Finally Sega Dreamcast II

I bet the next Xbox will use Larrabee.

God, I looove the new forum engine!

It's a pretty tame post, so I'll just quote it for you.

 

[nitromullet]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't really understand why any of the console makers would be interested in designing their own chips or using non-ubiquitous hardware in their consoles. It seems to me that by basically using cheap, almost over the counter hardware they could focus on developing their console's OS and API for developers much quicker and cheaper.

...why didn't MS continue with the concept they used in the original Xbox of selling a console that was basically just a paired down PC?

 

[ZimZum]

Its not unprecedented. ARTX was behind the R300 that blew everything else at the time out of the water. Before that they really hadn't done much.

 

[dguy6789]

When the Xbox was launching, Microsoft was afraid that people would think it was a computer and not a game console and not buy it if they were shopping for a console. It's a bit ironic that the current generation Xbox 360 and PS3 are closer to PCs than any other console generation.

As for why they didn't keep using the same kind of mainstream PC components, I read that IBM offered them better deals on CPUs than AMD or Intel did this generation and that is pretty much the only reason.

 

[T2k]

I have an iPhone, it's not a bad product. It's jokingly called the Jesus phone but that's only a joke. It has its pros and cons. Not complete crap.

I passionately hate it for fooling the population into this thinking of " it's fine if I cannot install whatever I want on MY phone, it's fine if my phone cannot do two random tasks simultaneously, it's fine if I can only sync into ONE company's cloud" etc etc etc.

OTOH I love Apple for showing these retards at Microsoft and Nokia that users, first and foremost, are interested in responsiveness. Yes, that's #1, nothing else.

I haven't used the Satio and really have no desire to. I hate Sony Ericsson phones. I've always been a Nokia guy until the iPhone. Just a matter of preference for me.

I hadf a lot of Nokia phones and I seriously think that Nokia sucks big time, their R&D sucks... it was total laughing stock when they released their first N95 or which one with an extra battery added to make sure it will last one day - that's fuckin' lame, a joke, not engineering.
Aside of the inherent shittiness of all WinMo phones Nokia produced probably the most buggiest, lames phones in the past 5-6 years. They cornered the el cheapo market early on and SE never wanted to compete there. SE's big mistake was to rely on their own UIQ for too long...
Also SE's PR and marketing people suck big time, no question about it but their phones were always innovative and full of advanced features - did you see X10? I got a dev unit for a day or two and it's AMAZING, even with its current bugs (it's slated for Feb 2010 release.)
Nice proiducts, great features, horrible business execution - time for a new management, I think.

The thing is that PowerVR chips have been used in portable devices and the graphics capabilities are not that bad. So rumors of it being used in next gen portable gaming devices (Sony PSP, Gameboy, maybe a MS released portable) is not farfetched.

But for a gaming console...seems questionable. Especially when you consider that development houses are demanding greater flexibility in interoperability. Many game engines are now designed so that they can quickly port games to multiple consoles or the PC with minimal effort. Using something like PowerVR which is different from what ATI, nVidia and even the upcoming Larrabee seems questionable from that standpoint. One of the major flaws of the PS3 was the cost, both to developers and to consumers. Moving to PowerVR just seems like a move that doesn't make sense from that perspective.

Yeah, it sounds like a crazy move to me too.

I don't like the guy either but that wasn't really necessary. In fact, Wreckage didn't say a single flammatory thing in that comment. Let's give him grief for his obvious shenanigans but let's give him credit for the very very very few times he is behaving or actually contributing.

My point was that I didn't even know what he just said... :awe:

 

[T2k]

Something tells me that you're confusing Flipper with R300...

Its not unprecedented. ARTX was behind the R300 that blew everything else at the time out of the water.

Except that they (Orton et al) became ATI long time before R300, right...

Before that they really hadn't done much.

...except N64's then-amazing graphics core, of course, designed by the same group of people (Orton et al) at SGI's graphics division who soon founded ArtX and created Flipper for Nintendo.

 

[T2k]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't really understand why any of the console makers would be interested in designing their own chips or using non-ubiquitous hardware in their consoles. It seems to me that by basically using cheap, almost over the counter hardware they could focus on developing their console's OS and API for developers much quicker and cheaper.

Except that they have to keep paying the royalties (a la Sony-Nvidia) or, worse, they have to keep buying chips for the same price (a la Nintendo-ATI.)

...why didn't MS continue with the concept they used in the original Xbox of selling a console that was basically just a paired down PC?

Perhaps because it sucked more than anything before?

 

[Idontcare]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't really understand why any of the console makers would be interested in designing their own chips or using non-ubiquitous hardware in their consoles. It seems to me that by basically using cheap, almost over the counter hardware they could focus on developing their console's OS and API for developers much quicker and cheaper.

...why didn't MS continue with the concept they used in the original Xbox of selling a console that was basically just a paired down PC?

Presumably it is more about having control (legal and technical) over the microarchitecture as a means of restricting competition and retaining exclusivity on your platform.

 

[nitromullet]

Perhaps because it sucked more than anything before?

I'm not trying to argue the point, just curious... Care to elaborate?

 

[lopri]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't really understand why any of the console makers would be interested in designing their own chips or using non-ubiquitous hardware in their consoles. It seems to me that by basically using cheap, almost over the counter hardware they could focus on developing their console's OS and API for developers much quicker and cheaper.

Even with custom OS/API, people will easily figure out what to do with the same hardware. I'd imagine PC sales would go down quite a bit. (I wouldn't mind running Windows on PS4. ) And most consoles are underpriced for what the actual hardware is, and console makers recoup the loss from game sales. It'd be hard to keep the cost under control if every other part is outsourced. (Remember the MS-NV drama over XBox price cut?)

 

[akugami]

...It'd be hard to keep the cost under control if every other part is outsourced. (Remember the MS-NV drama over XBox price cut?)

I think that was just a case where Microsoft's lawyers and negotiators, who are suppose to watch out for things like that, had a collective brain fart and allowed nVidia to get one over on them.

@T2K, I'll just have to disagree on Nokia front. Nokia is as big as it is for a reason. Their phones are pretty good, the top of the line like the N95 aside because they are way overpriced. At the time the N95 really wasn't a bad phone feature wise. Have had good experiences with them. Granted their recent phones like the N97 seems to have progressed little in comparison to their own previous phones as well as in comparison to phones from other companies. For a mid-range phone that doesn't require much in the way of smartphone features such as for my wife, I'd get her a Nokia.

Apple has apps for what I need/want/use my phone for and that's all that matters to me. I've got an app for ebook reading, some games, and something that can read as well as edit Office 2007 files. Throw in email and web browsing and I'm pretty set. As a pure phone, it's mediocre though. Voice quality is so-so and I think the ringtones are not loud enough. I've also had issues with the phone hanging at times when you slide to answer a phone call. It'd get stuck and I'd have to power it down and back on then give a call back to whoever called me.

 

[Voo]

I'd imagine PC sales would go down quite a bit. (I wouldn't mind running Windows on PS4. ) And most consoles are underpriced for what the actual hardware is, and console makers recoup the loss from game sales.

As far as I know there were some datacenters who bought playstations en masse for exactly that reason.
Afaik the consoles are sold at a loss and they try to make money by selling games, so that's not actually what you'd call a solid businessmodel if they end in a datacenter

 

[jvroig]

All Sony is good at is pulling out these laughably pompous names like "Reality Synthesizer" aka RSX for a sub-GF7900 chip...

You've got a couple of harsh words for Sony, aside from the quoted phrase above, but I don't disagree that they deserve it. When the PS3 was being hyped, sometimes you'd really come away from reading their press releases / previews / teasers thinking they managed to cram a Cray into a console. "Reality Synthesizer" haha. That was also priceless.

Oh well, they are probably run by marketing people, can't blame them.

 

[BenSkywalker]

This sounds to good to be true? Can anyone shed some light on this?

Years ago, before game developers used a render sort order on their geometry, PowerVR came up with a chip that would transform all the geometry for a frame, store it and analyze it one 'bin' at a time to see what was visible and what wasn't to figure out what should be drawn to the screen. In overdraw heavy situations without software side sorts this could offer incredible performance compared to its' raw specifications. Handling rendering in this fashion also would now allow MSAA for nigh no performance hit. All sounds great, until you dig into it a bit more.

First thing is z culling, all current hardware supports it, and developers now support render sort order to maximize its' effectiveness. This greatly reduces the advantage that TBDRs have over IMR(Immediate mode rendering- everything nV and ATi). Then you have their long standing history of having problems with large amounts of geometric data(where to store it all out, read/write thrashing from having to reduce the pixel size per bin etc). Another huge factor is that the amount of die space dedicated to basic rasterization is shrinking at a very fast pace. The amount of shader hardware on current GPUs makes the potential die area savings one of a relatively moderate percentage when looked at as a whole part, not the x00% you see spoken of by advocates of the technology.

Pretty much, the only people you will see really thinking that this would be anything other then a terrible idea are those that either work for PowerVR, or are fans of this odd ball technology. It exhibits tons of issues in games frequently, the driver file for their last PC parts was almost entirely made up of game specific settings in order to get most of the stuff to render properly most of the time. Obviously this rumor is about a console, not a PC part, but it would make porting issues a big factor.

Kyro2 used to outperform the Geforce2 when using 32Bit and 4x FSAA

In some games, if they had the right driver profile and if they worked properly. I ran both a Kyro2 and a GeForce2, the GeForce utterly throttled it as an overall gaming solution, it wasn't remotely close.

So rumors of it being used in next gen portable gaming devices (Sony PSP, Gameboy, maybe a MS released portable) is not farfetched.

This is what really makes this entire thing utterly laughable for anyone who follows the industry. Sony is going to use a device designed for two year old cell phones in their next gen console? Seriously? Noone should buy this at all. PVR may end up providing the graphics chip for the PS4, but it certainly won't be a two year old cell phone graphics chip.

When the Xbox was launching, Microsoft was afraid that people would think it was a computer and not a game console and not buy it if they were shopping for a console. It's a bit ironic that the current generation Xbox 360 and PS3 are closer to PCs than any other console generation.

You think so? I'm not seeing it. I thought the Famicom with DD was far more PC like then what we have today.

As far as I know there were some datacenters who bought playstations en masse for exactly that reason.

The Navy or Air Force just bought a couple thousand PS3s because they needed a supercomputer and the PS3s were by far the cheapest way to get one.

It'd be hard to keep the cost under control if every other part is outsourced. (Remember the MS-NV drama over XBox price cut?)

License the IP and tie it into royalties. This is what Sony is doing now, you have a clearly defined cost. MS screwed up because they agreed upon a chip price point for a given volume, they didn't hit the volume numbers they agreed upon so nV wouldn't drop their prices. Sony signed a smarter deal then MS did, will work out much better for them and nV long term by the looks of it.

To best sum up where PVR is right now, they are being bested by nVidia's 1 watt chip, that is PVR's highest end offering. Saying they are going to displace ATi or nVidia for the design win in the PS4 at this point is absurd. Oh, BTW- at this point in time the PS3 was supposed to be all Larrabee like and be using a second Cell to render all the graphics without a GPU at all, Sony has been known to make quite a few changes to their platform in the 2-3 years leading up to launch

 

[GodisanAtheist]

Even with custom OS/API, people will easily figure out what to do with the same hardware. I'd imagine PC sales would go down quite a bit. (I wouldn't mind running Windows on PS4. ) And most consoles are underpriced for what the actual hardware is, and console makers recoup the loss from game sales. It'd be hard to keep the cost under control if every other part is outsourced. (Remember the MS-NV drama over XBox price cut?)

-That sounds like a good argument for going x86 compatible on console hardware, not the other way around!

If MS makes all its money on the game license rather than the console itself, it would follow that they'd simply want to make an x86 compatible console and allow Xbox games to function on PC's, but PC games not compatible with the console. They sell more licensed games and make more money while keeping their controlled console environment free from competition. As it stands, PC gamers get cheaper games because there is no licensing cost but as a consequence have to often wait months to get a game if ever (which usually turns out to be a lackluster port). If the future of PC gaming is 80% ported games, 20% dedicated stuff it only makes sense for MS to streamline the dev process (only have to release xbox/pc hybrid version), significantly increase their volume of sales (if not substantially), and make money off the whole bit at the same time. This would not affect dedicated PC games at all in any way shape or form.

As far as HW licensing costs: there is little doubt in my mind that should MS approach AMD with the prospects of getting a contract to supply all the CPUs and GPUs in the next gen Xbox, they could get AMD to sign off on clubbing baby seals and molesting ducklings or whatever else.

 

[akugami]

So rumors of it being used in next gen portable gaming devices (Sony PSP, Gameboy, maybe a MS released portable) is not farfetched.

This is what really makes this entire thing utterly laughable for anyone who follows the industry. Sony is going to use a device designed for two year old cell phones in their next gen console? Seriously? Noone should buy this at all. PVR may end up providing the graphics chip for the PS4, but it certainly won't be a two year old cell phone graphics chip.

The thing is that I have said I think it is a far fetched idea and unlikely for Sony to use the Power series of GPU's in their PS4. Just that it isn't out of the question for use in a portable system such as the PSP or a future Gameboy. Notice in the text you quoted me I said portable systems. They (Imagination Technologies) is actually a decent sized force in the mobile front.

Again, I never said or implied Sony was likely to use the PowerVR GPU's in the PS4. In fact, I professed skepticism at such an idea in this very thread. PowerVR have competed with ATI and nVidia in the past on the desktop video card front so it's not out of the realm of possibility that they are gearing up to compete with them by providing a GPU chipset to a console maker like Sony. I just think it is unlikely.

 

[Ben90]

The Navy or Air Force just bought a couple thousand PS3s because they needed a supercomputer and the PS3s were by far the cheapest way to get one.

While im not disagreeing that companies have clustered PS3s for "supercomputer" performance, i still find it extremely unlikely that once nehalem came out, its cheaper to buy ps3s than hook a core i7 up to 256mb of ram

 

[bunnyfubbles]

-That sounds like a good argument for going x86 compatible on console hardware, not the other way around!

If MS makes all its money on the game license rather than the console itself, it would follow that they'd simply want to make an x86 compatible console and allow Xbox games to function on PC's, but PC games not compatible with the console. They sell more licensed games and make more money while keeping their controlled console environment free from competition. As it stands, PC gamers get cheaper games because there is no licensing cost but as a consequence have to often wait months to get a game if ever (which usually turns out to be a lackluster port). If the future of PC gaming is 80% ported games, 20% dedicated stuff it only makes sense for MS to streamline the dev process (only have to release xbox/pc hybrid version), significantly increase their volume of sales (if not substantially), and make money off the whole bit at the same time. This would not affect dedicated PC games at all in any way shape or form.

As far as HW licensing costs: there is little doubt in my mind that should MS approach AMD with the prospects of getting a contract to supply all the CPUs and GPUs in the next gen Xbox, they could get AMD to sign off on clubbing baby seals and molesting ducklings or whatever else.

The thing about consoles is how hard they can be to pirate for (relative to PC gaming). Making XBox game playable on the PC would probably open up that can of worms in making it easier to pirate the XBox games.

Granted, I'm sure there would be a way around this such as Microsoft requiring some sort of add-in hardware (such as a board and/or ROM drive) - hardware that could help protect the games as well as be necessary as they'd contain components that would help make the games run.

 

[exdeath]

Biggest disadvantage to TBDR is lack of depth buffer. So many special effects and rendering algorithms and post processing techniques (shadows and HDR lighting effects for example) require real time random access to a full scene depth/stencil buffer. TBDR only processes depth internally one tile at a time without saving it (this is actually where it get's it's increased performance).

When 1080p and current polygon counts, it wouldn't be feasible to even attempt to build a supplemental depth buffer in software with the CPUs.

I wonder where the current programmable shader paradigm stands in regards to this and accessing depth values in the pixel shaders. I've been out of graphics programming for a bit.

 

[extra]

It's funny. Everytime a new console is hyped up and announced it's going to be so much better than any pcs, it's going to have video that's so much better, it's going to be like a supercomputer in your living room and deliver zomg graphics so good your balls melt off...etc, etc.

Then when it's released it's not that great and high end pcs are much better. Why would anyone possibly think anything would be different the next time around? It won't be.

 

[BenSkywalker]

While im not disagreeing that companies have clustered PS3s for "supercomputer" performance, i still find it extremely unlikely that once nehalem came out, its cheaper to buy ps3s than hook a core i7 up to 256mb of ram

http://www.dailytech.com/USAF+Orders+2200+Sony+PlayStation+3+Consoles/article16963.htm

This is news that happened this week, if they need SP performance, Cell utterly destroys Nehalem. The gap with DP isn't as bad, mixed mode would have Cell trouncing Nehalem. GPUs are the only real competition to Cell in this space atm.

Notice in the text you quoted me I said portable systems.

I was agreeing with you

Then when it's released it's not that great and high end pcs are much better.

High end PCs tend to quickly surpass the consoles on the GPU front, not so much in other areas.

 

[akugami]

@BenSkywalker

My bad. Thought you were disagreeing or misreading something I wrote. Looks like I misread what you wrote instead. Don't always agree with you but I don't have any beef with you.

 

[T2k]

High end PCs tend to quickly surpass the consoles on the GPU front, not so much in other areas.

Almost literally in any area a new PC wins hands down.