PS3 hardware slow and broken

[cablekiller]

AFTER BREAKING THE news to me about PS3 RSX speeds earlier on the flight to Japan, my row-mate said 'if you think that's interesting, wait till you see this. Cell is hurting, badly'.
For those of you that believe in religions with karmic tendencies, scoops like this meant one of two things, the wings of the plane are about to fall off and I am going to die in a fiery ball, or worse yet, the movie selection will be worrisome. Cell memory access appears to be broken, RSX has half the triangle setup rate of the ATI chip in XBox360, and the true horror, Big Momma's House 2 and a Queen Latifa movie.

With the movie selection still making my brain throb from the glances I caught, I furiously took notes on what the source was saying. He started out saying that the RSX can only write about half as much vertex data as it can fetch, not an ideal situation by any stretch, but survivable.

Then came the horrible news, RSX appears to be limited to setting up 275 Million triangles/second, anemic compared to the 500+ million in XBox360. When asked about this apparent thumping dished out by MS, the reply from one notable ISV relations boffin was a terse 'What a Piece of Junk'. Talk about a steak in the heart.

Half the triangle setup capability in the PS3, could things get worse? Yes, far far worse, how about another disparity of three orders of magnitude? No, I am not joking, looking at Sony's own figures, Cell appears to be pretty badly broken.

For main memory, it looks like Cell has about 25GBps of main memory bandwidth, and RSX is about 15-20GBps. Achievable bandwidth is between about two thirds of that and nearly 100%, clearly the elves in the caves surrounding Rambus central did something right with XDR. That is the happy news.

For local memory, the measured vs theoretical bandwidth is missing, I wonder why? 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...)".

If you can write at 250x the read speed, it makes Cell local memory just about useless. That means you do all your work out of main memory, and the whole point of local is, well, pointless. This can lead to contention issues for the main memory bus, and all sorts of nightmarish to debug performance problems. Basically, if this Sony presentation to PS3 devs shown to us is correct, it looks like PS3 will be hobbled in a serious way.

The next slide goes on to say "Don't read from local memory, but write to main memory with RSX(tm) and read it from there instead", and repeats the table numbers. This is very very bad. The number of times the presentation goes on to say that it is correct, and the lack of anything like "this will be fixed by production steppings, so take measures X, Y and Z" say to me that it is not a fixable snafu. Remember at E3 when I said that the PS3 demos there were object sparse? Any guesses why?

Someone screwed up so badly it looks like it will relegate the console to second place behind the 360. All the devs I talked to were lukewarm on the 360 architecture but universally negative on the PS3. Revelations like this go a long way to explain why you keep hearing about simmering problems from the Sony devs.

You end up with a console with half the triangle setup rate of the 360, a crippled CPU that is a ***** to program, and tools that are atrocious compared to the 360. To make matters worse, you have an arrogant set of execs telling us that twice the price is worth it for half the power, a year late. If it isn't already too late, Sony had better do something about this recto-cranial inversion or it may very well sink the console. µ

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

[Dizz]

I would say something but i dont feel like arguing with crazyamerica about how im a PS3 fanboy. actually i dont give a $hit, all this doesnt mean a damn thing. if the games look as good or better than the 360 then what does this mean to us? nothin at all, to people that dont have a dev kit it means absolutly nothin. its starting to get old coming on this site and see PS3 hardware specs can do this and cant do that when to the consumer it means nothin. PS3 has some good point in some areas the xbox 360 has some good point in some areas but they both have weak points.

[FordGTGuy]

Originally Posted by Dizz

I would say something but i dont feel like arguing with crazyamerica about how im a PS3 fanboy. actually i dont give a $hit, all this doesnt mean a damn thing. if the games look as good or better than the 360 then what does this mean to us? nothin at all, to people that dont have a dev kit it means absolutly nothin. its starting to get old coming on this site and see PS3 hardware specs can do this and cant do that when to the consumer it means nothin. PS3 has some good point in some areas the xbox 360 has some good point in some areas but they both have weak points.

This is starting to get really stupid, the 360 and PS3 both have strengths and weaknesses but it seems that the 360's weaknesses are as strong or better than the PS3's strengths. You ask how this affects the consumer? That like asking why would someone be pissed someone sold them a bunch of spoiled fruit for almost double the price his friend got for the same amount that was fresh. It affects the consumer greatly since it will be his problem and not the company since he bought and now has to deal with it. Thats right and thats what it is the PS3 hardware can do somethings and can't do others but atleast the 360 is out there proving itself as we speak and doing a damn well job showing its great points and covering its weaker points. LMAO you think the games will look the same even if the hardware is alot slower?

Heres how having half the polygon writing power will affect games:
1) lower polygon objects
2) worst graphics
3) smaller areas of gameplay or more loading times between areas
4) less objects at one time
5) less games that can be ported because of the hardware restraints
and more.

I could go on for a page but when it comes down to it the PS3 was thrown together and whats happening is a direct result.

[BossCheese]

So does this confirm the rumors that Assasin's Creed was actually being played/ shown on a hidden 360 at E3?? I hope so, cause that game looks...

[DMB14]

I was under the impression that the Inquirer was full of sh!t. I doubt the PS3 is that weak.

[citizen X]

So does this confirm the rumors that Assasin's Creed was actually being played/ shown on a hidden 360 at E3?? I hope so, cause that game looks...

lol..dude that game is pretty damn nice but where did u hear any one talking about it on this thread?..i heard of the rumors but i see no connection

I was under the impression that the Inquirer was full of sh!t. I doubt the PS3 is that weak.

i know the PS3 isn’t as powerful as Sony is saying it is but im having a really hard time believing all of this... i cant see a company this big making such a large mistake like this

[DMB14]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that it's not gonna be twice as powerful as the 360 like Sony wants us to believe. I'm expecting differences similar to the gap between PS2 and Xbox 1, with PS3 having a slight advantage.

[Bigdaddy99]

Have you people forgotten how sony hyped the ps2? Remember the emotion engine? What a joke...the games look like crap, but it didn't matter, sony won. The same thing is coming, although I think the Wii will win in Japan. The ps3 will sell faster than any console in history...because if it doesn't, sony will have to file re-organization bankruptcy.

[FordGTGuy]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy99

Have you people forgotten how sony hyped the ps2? Remember the emotion engine? What a joke...the games look like crap, but it didn't matter, sony won. The same thing is coming, although I think the Wii will win in Japan. The ps3 will sell faster than any console in history...because if it doesn't, sony will have to file re-organization bankruptcy.

it may sell the fastest in Japan but with 10 million 360s sold by then no one is going to go out and get a 600$ console with no games that compare with ones that will already by on 360 by then.

[Shotty]

We hardcore gamers don't reflect which console wins, its the casual gamer that decides. Ask any casual gamer and this is probably what you will get, xbox is good for multiplayer and ps2 has more games. They dont read forums, it's all from what they hear from people and on the news. Games like Halo have really hyped up the xbox. Halo is the only game to be talked about on the news, I remember the press made a big deal about Halo. I don't see anything about Grand Turismo or Metal Gear. Now games like Gears of War are going to do the same thing. If we have people lineing up for it like Halo it's going to be on the news but it might get overshadowed by the wii and ps3launch.

[citizen X]

you guys ALL have very good points..but the question for me is..what will people (the consumers) do when they see games like MASS EFFECT, GOW, FORZA 2, wich are all only going to be playable on the 360, and see how beautiful and over the top these games will be right when the PS3 comes out with games that look a little better then the 360's launch titles.. i know PS3 will sell like hotcakes but how many people will buy the system when both systems are in stored filling the shelvs?..when we get both the PS3 and the 360 in stores and at a point where people can play a PS3 kiosk and 360 kiosk and choices right then and there?..thats when the real war begins.. in till then MS has the whole market. it will just come down to what MS will do with the time they have left..

[FordGTGuy]

I'm very proud of this thread and we have had some very good points w/o starting an arguement and keeping it intelligent.

[Dizz]

Originally Posted by FordGTGuy

This is starting to get really stupid, the 360 and PS3 both have strengths and weaknesses but it seems that the 360's weaknesses are as strong or better than the PS3's strengths. You ask how this affects the consumer? That like asking why would someone be pissed someone sold them a bunch of spoiled fruit for almost double the price his friend got for the same amount that was fresh. It affects the consumer greatly since it will be his problem and not the company since he bought and now has to deal with it. Thats right and thats what it is the PS3 hardware can do somethings and can't do others but atleast the 360 is out there proving itself as we speak and doing a damn well job showing its great points and covering its weaker points. LMAO you think the games will look the same even if the hardware is alot slower?

Heres how having half the polygon writing power will affect games:
1) lower polygon objects
2) worst graphics
3) smaller areas of gameplay or more loading times between areas
4) less objects at one time
5) less games that can be ported because of the hardware restraints
and more.

I could go on for a page but when it comes down to it the PS3 was thrown together and whats happening is a direct result.

I dont think that was my point. my point was if they can make a 360 game and are able to perfectly port it over to the PS3 then whats the big deal? i dont hear anyone complaining about how bad MGS4 looks (and it looks damn good) look im only saying there are different ways a developer can use the hardware, i remember when the PS2 first came out and they said it was a biatch to program for but still the PS2 had alot of good games. but like i said numbers and code dont mean **** to the customer as long as they look and play good people will buy it.

[cablekiller]

I dont think that was my point. my point was if they can make a 360 game and are able to perfectly port it over to the PS3 then whats the big deal? i dont hear anyone complaining about how bad MGS4 looks (and it looks damn good) look im only saying there are different ways a developer can use the hardware, i remember when the PS2 first came out and they said it was a biatch to program for but still the PS2 had alot of good games. but like i said numbers and code dont mean **** to the customer as long as they look and play good people will buy it.

And pay a lot more for the system and the game itself.

[Dizz]

well if thats what they (including myself) want to do. and i dont remember them saying the games will cost more than 360 games.

[FordGTGuy]

Originally Posted by Dizz

well if thats what they (including myself) want to do. and i dont remember them saying the games will cost more than 360 games.

of course they aren't gonna say that but anyone with any sense would know that the games will cost more.

[Scotracer]

I had read somewhere that the games would range from 65 to 73 Euros (so about the same in dollars), then if you take into account games and hardware are more expensive in the UK, I could spending more than £60 on a game. Sorry but £50 for game is already too much (360 prices), I am not willing to spend anymore than that.

[Dizz]

Originally Posted by FordGTGuy

of course they aren't gonna say that but anyone with any sense would know that the games will cost more.

Ok and if they cost the same as 360 games can i slap you? or call you stupid? i highly doubt PS3 games will cost more than $59.99

[FordGTGuy]

Originally Posted by Dizz

Ok and if they cost the same as 360 games can i slap you? or call you stupid? i highly doubt PS3 games will cost more than $59.99

DVD-9 is 99 cents a disc and its cheaper and you need less man power to make a 360 game

Blu-Ray is 14.99 cents a disc and its more expensive and you need more man power to make a PS3 game.