How Powerful will PS3 be ?

[NayNay1991x]

How powerful will the PS3 be?

"On paper, the PS3 is 2x more powerful than the Xbox 360 and 15x more powerful than the Nintendo Revolution is predicted to be. It has a processing capacity of 2.18 TFLOPS, which is put into context when you realise that some of the fastest computers in existence can only do 36 Terraflops. It is said to be 35x more powerful than the PlayStation 2 is.

At E3 2006, Sony showed off a large number of playable games. Whilst they all looked impressive, many who were present could not see a big difference in terms of visuals between the PS3 and Xbox 360. However, Gran Turismo HD far surpassed anything seen before, as it was demonstrated in 1080p at 60 frames per second"

Yeh 15 times more powerful than Wii... my [snipped]

 

[aaronkupen]

Thing is, that more power is with all the Processor SPE's turned on, which will not be the case for PS3. Last TIme I heard, the Ps3 will only have 5 active ones, which will cut down on the performance.

Also, you will not notice a difference in games until a couple years from now, once develoeprs get more comfortable with the PS3 architecture. Until then, 360 and PS3 will pretty much be the same.

I'm sure Killians will reply to this soon, he can give you a much more detailed response as to why the PS3 isn't as powerful "as it seems".

 

[WeGotSnakes]

Will the bluray make THAT much of a difference in the PS3's gaming? I think it's just a gimmick that is too expensive to catch on to be the norm in gaming.

 

[killians45]

You guessed right aaronkupen Anyhow, here's my take on the PS3, and this is standard economics and some advanced tech. Anyhow, whenever a new console is made, especially one with radical new architecture, it takes the community of programmers at least a year, maybe two since the architecture is so radically different to fully optimize its hardware and special instruction sets. New ways of compiling code, easier workarounds to eke out performance boosts, thus shortening code, it takes a long time. As aaron stated, you haven't seen the full potential of the new consoles. PS3 will begin to look better, as will the 360 as coders developement tools become more robust. The best comparison I can think of is on the old NES. How the games were a normal affair as far as graphics, then one day Donkey Kong Country came out setting a new graphical standard. How did they suddenly get such better graphics? New developement tools and vast experience, that's how. Now, as far as the SPE's, they are not exactly as they seem. Yes, when it comes to working out physics engines, AI, etc they will be monsters. However, in the long run they are not ideal for game creation. The main reason for this is due to lack of branch prediction. The cell is not like a normal processor, it is not multipurpose. The PS3 has only ONE multipurpose processor to the 360's three multipurpose processors. The SPE's are built, essentialy to run certain types of code at very high speeds. Thats where the FP calculations come in, good in some cases, not so good in others. I have also learned the the PPE has a lower IPC (instructions per cycle) then a standard desktop, however it has a higher clock speed. How this will effect the final outcome is anyones guess. Here is some info on the Cell and 360 for comparison. It is lengthy reading, so hope you have some time:

Xbox360:

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/xbox360-1.ars
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/xbox360-2.ars

PS3/actually just cell info so not all info is exact because the PS3 is a little bit different

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/cell-1.ars
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/cell-2.ars

hands on article on the PS3

http://games.kikizo.com/news/200602/065_p1.asp

Now, as far as the bluray, don't bet on it making things better. It costs money to write games. Developer time, printing, deadlines (you have to get these games shipped fast, otherwise you will release a game whose game engine is now out dated). So, time constraints and economics come into play when it comes to all that extra space on these disks. Only thing that would be feasible (FOR NOW) would be to use the extra room for extra content, movies, whatever. Game enhancements though? Don't bet on it. Cost way to much and would take far to much time to do it, and like I said. They have time restraints to worry about, and the cost of production would be sky high. Think $60 to $70 is to much for a game? The price would be much more. Now, one way they could use it is to speed things up by keeping files uncompressed, but again you are not looking at gameplay and graphics updates. So, nope. Thats why I think they should of ditched bluray and gone with a cheaper alternative that still afforded more space, and brought the price of the PS3 down, however sony has their new format baby that they want to take over our living rooms and they'll go through any means they can to achieve this, even if it means paying more for a game console.

 

[aaronkupen]

Again killians, that was a very amazing post. I don't even try to mention everything I know about these things cause there is just no reason with you around .

 

[killians45]

lol, thanks Unfortunately there is a lack of info on the PS3 but from all that I've read, it doesn't deliver on it's promises. It's a great concept, however I would of prefered them to forgo the bluray and added in another more multipurpose cores.

 

[aaronkupen]

Yah, I mean I kind of agree there. I just constantly seem to be defending it because of this huge outcry and hatred against Sony the past couple years. But for me, I really don't care what is in it, it could have a pentium 4 processor with a cd rom. If the games are there, and I tend to like the games on playstation better based off the past two generations, then I will play it regardless of price or hardware. I don't see the sense in buying a system that is 100-200 dollars cheaper to save some money if I don't like the games that much. That is pretty much the reason why I support Playstation 3... as of now.

You are right though, it doesn't deliver on it's promises performance wise and "price" wise. Also, the online system will most likely be flawed based off of what is known so far. This is sort of to be expected though, Sony does tend to not fully deliver on most things they say.

 

[killians45]

Don't get me wrong, I prefer my xbox to sony however, it doesn't mean I don't want one. I would LOVE to get ahold of a PS3, however finances for me right now just doesn't permit it. The next thing I'm gonna get is a Wii, so 360 and a Wii but thats because I have a 5 month old and figured by the time they are in good supply and alot of games are out, it will be time for me to initiate my young un into the world of console and computer gaming. Oh, and I do have to say one thing. Gears of War for the win! Holy crap, I'm am ABSOLUTELY STUNNED!

 

[TheOrangeDude]

if you believe a single thing sony said. you are in seriouse trouble. cause all sony do is lying. back ps2 days they claim that ps2 this and that but how ever when it comes out it really just a peice crap like xbox. they cant really compare to pc at all. specially now that 8800gtx is out pc will over run those console like no tomorrow.

 

[aaronkupen]

So you base whether or not PC's are better than consoles just on the graphics?