Sony exec plays up Cell chip's strengths
The PS3 launch and sales figures will prove crucial to the processor's success elsewhere, and Sony are remaining very tight-lipped on their plans for the technology. Sony are also being slow to send out upgraded PS3 prototypes to game developers, with one developer claiming that "the machine we have is 10 times slower than the PS3 should be" -- this may have repercussions for launch titles if Sony fail to deliver further prototypes on time.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Samuel Febres @ Dec 23rd 2005 2:13PM
"the machine we have is 10 times slower than the PS3 should be"
Wow, that doesn't sound good.
Samuel Febres @ Dec 23rd 2005 2:14PM
"the machine we have is 10 times slower than the PS3 should be"
Wow, that doesn't sound good. Potential energy and actual energy really are two differnt things.
mandarin @ Dec 23rd 2005 2:25PM
Looks like those geriatric, proprietary-minded blowhards will trip again..
jason w @ Dec 23rd 2005 2:41PM
Look I got a 360 and love it. I dont even believe all the bull sh*t this page puts up about the 360 and the down fall because of lax sales in japan. With all that being said, Sony knows how to make a good system. The PSP is a nice system even though the loads are a bitch. No one can discout the PS2 even though it wasnt my main system this gen. I think Sony needs to make sure the ames are ready for the launch. If that happens then the system will be fine. WIth blue ray(could make loads as long as the psp's) will help the system. I dont know or care if the system will be first or second in this new gen race, but im sure it will have its share of great games.
Evan @ Dec 23rd 2005 2:52PM
if many of you guys read what microsoft said about ps3 its kinda on the ball... ps3 has awsome specs on paper but they arnt even all around. Yea its cpu is great n stuff but it lacks alot of stuff..
Developers went crazy over the x360 when they got their hands on it and rarely had issues
vin @ Dec 23rd 2005 3:23PM
Wow joystiq blows really hard. I wonder why they didnt post the actual link to this article? hmmm ...maybe because that statement ( the machine we have is 10 times slower than the PS3 should be" ) was said because the dev kits they have do not have the RSX chip installed. View link below.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2005/tc20051222_242937.htm
Nico @ Dec 23rd 2005 3:24PM
The Cell is really looking good and im really looking forward to the gameplay changes it will bring inform of better physics handeling and other processor heavy tasks. No question IBM has put out a powerhouse of a CPU chip.
Im really hpoing this chip can bring realisticly destructable enviroments to gaming, and im not talking red faction style here. Not to mention the theoretical benefits of distributed computing, sharing cell power people?
Good times
RocketPunch @ Dec 23rd 2005 4:07PM
At the end of the day, I don't think any future console launch titles from any company will be worst that the 360 launch titles. How all 360 owner enjoying their 2 games when they are all patched up?
SuicideNinja @ Dec 23rd 2005 4:18PM
A processor isn't going to bring out destructible environments. The programmers do that. They could do it now, but it wouldn't leave much room for a full game. Things like that will end up being middleware, such as the Unreal engines.
The Cell is just more proprietary crap. The idea behind it is good, but it is doubtful that Sony will get what they want from it nor execute it correctly (not counting the PS3). If Apple is disappointed in the Cell, you have to wonder. Apple machines are powerhouses, whether it be a Mac or an Xserver, and they want no part of the Cell.
-
I have to argue that Sony does NOT make good gaming hardware. Forget about the games for a minute and just consider the hardware. The PS2 used horribly cheap hardware (i.e. lasers) and was a nightmare to develop for. The PSP uses a cheap LCD screen (blurs easily) and UMD trays.
What Sony is good at is getting good licenses and having the support of good developers and publishers. They have had the weakest system for the last 2 generations! But they have the games support, which is what counts. Without that, they would be leading the bottom of the pile.
IHateFrasierCrane @ Dec 23rd 2005 4:29PM
#8 - Surely you jest.
Have you seen what an average console launch generally consists of? The 360 launch was fantastic given that the system was rushed out the door. One of the better console launches.
80s @ Dec 23rd 2005 5:13PM
'Kenshi Manabe, Sony's semiconductor chief, has gone on record as saying that the Cell processor will be "as good as the Pentium, if not better".'
An AMD chip? ;) Any way, what kind of pentium is it comparable to?
Nico @ Dec 23rd 2005 5:16PM
Yeah the 360 launch was great... You cant buy one anywere, except in Japan were nobody wants it. Lots of defective units(psu), it scratches your discs, games are defective(king kong, cod2). Sorry but the launch was crap and so are most of the games. Imo the 360 is a live upgrade...
Anyway the only game that looks to change the image problem the 360 has is Gears of war, witch in return looks really really sweet. I hope, for the sake of the 360 that Gears of War lives up to the hype. If it does I may even get a 360, when microsoft finally manages to produce more than 4 consoles that is...
nick @ Dec 23rd 2005 5:35PM
I don't know. Sony is using a Power PC chip. And IBM's biggest Power PC supporter [Apple] recently went to Intel.
I'm sure the Cell is nice, but the question of how nice is still debatable.
Sienar @ Dec 23rd 2005 5:39PM
#7
Seriously, I had a PS2 on launch day and the only game that was really worth playing was SSX, and thats not saying a whole lot. And you are the people that bitch about the 360 being just current gen games with better graphics, well remember Tekken Tag Tournament?
Overall the 360 launch is fairly good with the likes of COD2, Condemend, PGR3 and Perfect Dark(even thought the single player blows), and then there is live as well. But like I said, it's a fairly decent launch thats better than the PS2, Xbox and Gamecube launches-but still not as good as the Dreamcast
Kamalot @ Dec 23rd 2005 5:55PM
Why use a Cell chip?
It may be as good or better than a Pentium.
The Pentium chips have uncountable tools for writing software on them. You won't have trouble trying to hire someone for your team that can write for a Pentium.
So please, spend the time learning how to write for this new, completely different chip. Good luck trying to find staff. Oh, and tools? You get what Sony decides to provide you. Best of luck to you.
Remember the same claims about the Emotion engine?
Here's another one. There are new Intel and AMD chips released every year. How many Emotion Engine chips have been released? One? Yeah. Who expects the Cell chip to be cutting edge 5 years from now?
This talk from Sony and their paid analysts is redicilous. I don't know anyone doped up enough to really believe that Sony will sell 200 million PS3s in 5 years. They only just now shipped over 100 million of the PS2. Why on earth will 2X as many people buy a PS3, at a time when gaming is in decline?
I wish Sony would share what they're smoking. Then perhaps we'd all believe this drivel.
Nico @ Dec 23rd 2005 5:56PM
"A processor isn't going to bring out destructible environments. The programmers do that. They could do it now, but it wouldn't leave much room for a full game. Things like that will end up being middleware, such as the Unreal engines."
Yes the engines handle destructable enviroments but they need a fast processor to handle the load. Cell is a powerfull processor so it should be able to handle it. Of course im basing my assumtions on mostly PR related information, but the main reason im interested in the ps3 is the Cell, we will see how good it is come launch. Anandtech has a nice run down on it if your interested.
Sony and IBM has also released alot of info about the Cell to spark interest among developers(not only games). I really hope this will help create lots of soft mods for the ps3, the os will be linux too so you bet there will be lots of nice mods out. Cant wait. The only danger is Sonys hardline against homebrew on the PSP. I really hope this attitude wont carry over to the ps3.
Denjinflash @ Dec 23rd 2005 6:45PM
"Seriously, I had a PS2 on launch day and the only game that was really worth playing was SSX, and thats not saying a whole lot. And you are the people that bitch about the 360 being just current gen games with better graphics, well remember Tekken Tag Tournament?
Overall the 360 launch is fairly good with the likes of COD2, Condemend, PGR3 and Perfect Dark(even thought the single player blows), and then there is live as well. But like I said, it's a fairly decent launch thats better than the PS2, Xbox and Gamecube launches-but still not as good as the Dreamcast"
very true.
anyway, i hope the cell chip will live up to the hype, too. things will probably start off slow considering it's harder to develop for and all.
also the ps3 better have a higher build quality than the ps2! we've all had these bastards break on us...
Lou @ Dec 23rd 2005 7:05PM
Sony throws out market b.s. to scare people into waiting for the PS3. They did it with the PS1 & 2 and people believed them. Just look at the dual 1080p 120fps claim. Give me a break. Also, Pentiums are in the 3.8Ghz rabge and they are coming out dual-core. Let's not even talk about how AMD is kicking Intel's butt now with multi-core 64-bit cpus.
I'm no fan of Microsoft, but I think the 360 is going to be on par with the PS3 in overall power. Sony's advantage is the higher storage blue-ray drive. So I'd call it about even. Still neither platform brings much new to the table. In the end, the games only look twice as good as XBOX 1 games and even Revolution games are guarranteed to look that good.
In the end, it's going to all be about the Revolution controller.
Pretty Obvious @ Dec 23rd 2005 7:13PM
The 360 had one of the best launches in console history. Do you recall the PS2's launch? The worst in console history. Ive played Kong all the way through, no problems. Stop hatin on the 360, Sony fanboy.
Bruce Wayne III @ Dec 23rd 2005 8:30PM
Come on guys: Apple went from PowerPC to Intel and didn't go for the Cell.
BUT, they have to be looking at general purpose CPU's, and the Cell is NOT a general purpose CPU. It's NOT designed to be the Mac OS X, Windows XP or Linux core. It could run those OS's, but it's designed for gaming, physics, broadband hdtv streams etc.
Two different CPU designs for two different purposes...
talpking @ Dec 23rd 2005 10:10PM
" I don't know. Sony is using a Power PC chip. And IBM's biggest Power PC supporter [Apple] recently went to Intel.
I'm sure the Cell is nice, but the question of how nice is still debatable."
Apple and Sony are using different processors for far different reasons. PowerPC has no future on the desktop. IBM does not want to keep throwing money down the drain. IBM will never rival Intel in the PC market.
#15 The reason their are not going to use a Pentium or an AMD is because they cannot own any of the IP. Microsoft learned this the hard way with the first Xbox. Sony and Nintendo already knew this. The console makers must be able to lower costs over the lifespan of the system. Intel nor AMD will allow third parties to make their chips.
For all the AMD fanboys, the Pentium 4 was crippled by Intel on purpose. Look at the performance of the new Pentium M(Yonah) It kills a dual-core Athlon 64. That's WITHOUT an on-die northbidge. In five years AMD will not matter.
Momus @ Dec 23rd 2005 10:38PM
I have ESP.
Thus, I can tell you with certainty that the following will happen:
The hype will turn out to be overblown.
The gimmicks will be ignored.
The Cell chip will not catch on.
The Blu-Ray drives will break down.
HDTV's will continue to go unowned by the majority of gamers.
You may still be wondering how I came to develop my amazing extrasensory perception. Well, I'll tell you.
I LEARN FROM THE FUCKING PAST.
Embassy @ Dec 24th 2005 1:20AM
yeh im sorry but relatively speaking the 360 was pretty good...not great...but it covered most of the bases...
as for the ps3..like many have said...u have to look at sonys track record here..which..to put lightly..isnt the greatest in terms of hardware quality and potentail overall power...BOTH of which the ps2 lacked...but time will tell..when this thing actually becomes tangible and not just some theory and specs on paper..we'll see wat sony is truly up to...
Alex K. @ Dec 24th 2005 9:32AM
"should be as good at the pentium"
well i hate to break it to you sony, but the athlon 64 is better than the pentium. being "as good" as a pentium means nothing towards gameplay or graphics, especially since the GPU is doing the bulk of the work and since the pentium gets crushed in gaming performance by the athlon 64s. so being "as good" as the pentium...is that really innovative chip design? is that really bringing something new to the table?
Alex K. @ Dec 24th 2005 10:31AM
For all the AMD fanboys, the Pentium 4 was crippled by Intel on purpose. Look at the performance of the new Pentium M(Yonah) It kills a dual-core Athlon 64. That's WITHOUT an on-die northbidge. In five years AMD will not matter.
you do realize that the intel yonah processors are a completely different chip than the Pentium 4 cores, right?
the pentium M line is built from scratch and is completely different from Pentium 4s
not only that, but pentium Ms are 32 bit exclusively. AMD's turions are 64 bit. if AMD stuck on a second core to the turion and people started running a 64 bit OS (HEY THERE'S THIS ONE CALLED WINDOWS VISTA COMING OUT THAT'S OPTIMIZED FOR AMD 64 BIT AND THE 32 BIT VERSION WILL BE A PORT EQUIVILANT TO PUTTING AN XBOX GAME ON A PS2!) then the turion will easily kill the yonah, where intel is resorting to smaller manufactering processes instead of efficient chip design.
not to mention intel's God-awful 64 bit Pentium 4s that don't actually perform faster than the 32 bits because intel didn't bother putting R&D money into anything besides lowering costs and increasing revenue by forcing OEMs to ONLY buy intel processors in order to get a decent price.
when an AMD processor with a 512kb l2 cache can outperform an intel processor with a 2MB l2 cache, you know there's something wrong with intel's designs.
LuckyK @ Dec 24th 2005 11:38AM
If Joystiq bothered to give the entire quote from that exec, you'd see it was a little different. He said that without RSX, the PS3 kits are 10 times slower than the final system should be. In other words, RSX will make PS3 ten times faster than their current kits :p
Funny how you can spin things, eh?
If I were you, though, I wouldn't pay literal attention to what this anonymous game exec is saying. I doubt more game execs are technically inclined, and I furthermore doubt this was anything but hyperbolic emphasis.
LuckyK @ Dec 24th 2005 11:40AM
Oh, and on the "as good as, or better than Pentium" quote, he wasn't talking technically, but in terms of impact on the market, specfically their market (consumer electronics etc).
jason w @ Dec 24th 2005 11:44AM
OK after my last post that I thought gave sony the benifit of the dout, I need to defend the 360s launch games. All you need to do it compare it to the ps2s launch games (a f_cuking fire works sin come on) and you can see the 360 has some nice games. I still havent finished 1/2 of them and do spend a few hours a day on the system. Now if sony launches with crap like that again we will see.
mike @ Dec 24th 2005 2:56PM
you people are just trash talking almost every single people i know is waiting for ps3 and 200 million units sold can be cause poepel have more money today and that is a fact at the end 360 suck real bad i was impressed at first but now it look pretty normal to me another thing i hate about your comments is that you are questioning true fact about ps3 power cause at the end you dont have nothing else to do
gorthon @ Dec 24th 2005 5:40PM
has anyone actually seen anything with a cell processor in it running?
Edward Doura @ Dec 24th 2005 11:42PM
Never mind the hype by Microsoft and Sony. I own a 360 and love it. I can't put down Call of Duty 2 and Need for Speed. Never before have I been so taken in by games for any other system. I'll most likely buy a PS3 too. There is no need to take sides. If you're a gamer, just enjoy the ride that MS and Sony are delivering!
TC @ Dec 25th 2005 5:36PM
I work in the IT industry alongside colleagues who program multi-core applications for a living (on Solaris Servers etc.)Although they haven't got their hands on Cell technology yet, they all seem to agree that the potential is there to actually improve game experiences. The also seem to think that a single graphics render of a scene would look practically indistinguishable between xbox360 and PS3. The advantage with Cell(and Nico was kinda heading in the right direction with the destructable environments comment with this one) is that you can allocate an entire subroutine (such as falling material physics) to a single SPE/processor, and have all these processes running on the float rather than rely on the integer power of the processor to call each subroutine individually, where you would have to limit the rest of the game world to provent slowdown when an 'action' occurs (ie: use fewer polys, drop the framerate etc).
Conversely, an Apple workstation would be better having raw interger muscle, as this is good for ray-trace renders and stuff that workstations are generally used for.
Although it may well be tricky to get to grips with Cell architecture at first (a lot of complaints are from game developers that are upset they can't just 'port' from one system to the other!), my colleagues rekon that as the system runs Linux natively it shouldn't be too difficult to work out.
I must admit to being a fan of the Cell's potential, whether Sony deliver on that ability has yet to be seen; and in the meantime I await delivery of my 360 (two months on preorder!)to keep me ticking over until then!
SuicideNinja @ Dec 25th 2005 9:56PM
Sony is still prone to hardware failures, whether it be hardware in the market, or marketing new hardware. They just got lucky with their false hype with the Playstation brand so far. The PS2 is the worst system available right now in terms of hardware and features.
If the 360 has games you want, holding your breath for the PS3 may be a disappointment. The thing people forget so quickly is that the ONLY reason Sony has done so well is because of the games on their systems. It has never been their hardware or features. Microsoft will be getting more games for their system this time around, so Sony isn't necessarily going to blow the competition away this time. Don't expect the PS3 to be an amazing improvement over the 360 either, if it is any improvement at all. Sony has fibbed and disappointed before.
Micrsoft and Nintendo are trying to bring in new features and different ways to play while Sony is just pushing new hardware. Hence they try to give special attention to the "cell" and non-playable demos. Don't fall for it...again.
When I get my PS3, I am hoping that it won't turn into a boring money pit like the PS2. I already know that the features the 360 has will have me playing it more (XBL, XBL Arcade, Media streaming, Custom Soundtracks, etc). I'm happy with DVDs, so Bluray is a non-issue (HD is nice, but not a necessity). I like the idea of dual screens, but I don't see developers using the option. The hardware features are mostly fluff, nothing really useful.
Besides, who cares about the processor if you can get the same quality of games on both systems? Get the system with the features and games you want if you are only going to get one.
m3mnoch @ Dec 26th 2005 12:57PM
momus: you're damn funny. aside from the proprietary ps3 parts (cell and blu-ray) your esp can apply to any launch in history. good stuff. even the ps3 specific parts are analogous to other proprietary features. hell, it took microsoft a generation to get live right. it was pretty non-feature complete on the first xbox. it kicks all kinds of ass now.
that'll be the way of this generations features. hdtv, blu-ray and the cell processor. nice work on the forecasting.
---
tc: just because you work with "colleagues" (you're in technical support? or accounting? not r&d for sure.) who "program multi-core applications" (not games) for "solaris servers" (old alphas? oh! right! solaris is open sourced now so you will buy sun's overpriced hardware!) doesn't mean you guys know anything about game development. do you have a whole core dedicated to the network stack? or maybe the ui? no. you don't. because that's not an efficient way to manage capacity.
i'm so tired of people listening to this whole "i'm a journalist so i'm good at guessing what developers will use the multi-core processors on the 360 and ps3 for!" line of crap. "they can run one core for physics! and one for ai!"
whatever.
aside from the fact that both ai and physics (destructible environments and "falling material physics") are all about traversing bsp trees and NOT FLOATING POINT CALCULATIONS and the spe's have NO BRANCH PREDICTION, let's pretend they did use the spe cores to do some said "branching." so, when one of the other cores is maxed out, the physics core or the ai core could just be simply sitting there. empty. that's wasted potential. why max two or three of the cores at a time when you can use all of them?
that's why this whole multi-core thing is useless without heavy multithreading management. how exactly is the ps3 going to handle that when, from what i understand, the ppe only has a max of 2 hardware threads? so, it can only talk to 2 of the 7 processors at the same time? huh? can someone explain that one to me? because i HAVE to be misunderstanding that one.
the only real operations that make sense pushing off to the spe's (aside from graphics operations, of course. they're a wet dream for those.) is sound. or, maybe some other ambient resource like that is basically "running" constantly in the background no matter what is going on.
---
and finally: vin. yes. joystiq "sucks" because they quoted an article and didn't include the link. that's just dumb use of the web. but, i'm afraid that has more to do with jennie than joystiq in general.
but they don't suck because they are trying to take it out of context with the whole "they have do not have the RSX chip installed" thing. of course they don't actually have the damn final processors in them. they are alpha dev kits! that's why the quote says "the machine" and not "the processor."
chill vin. bad hyperlinking, yes. anti-ps3 propaganda, no.
m3mnoch.
m3mnoch @ Dec 26th 2005 1:19PM
ah hell. i also forgot to mention a couple things on the games catalog issue.
i find it amusing that sony's (a consumer electronics company) biggest asset is their support from developers. well. that's also their biggest liability because microsoft's (a software company) biggest asset is their relationships with their developers.
because they're nice? nope. because they make developer's lives easier. they make great development tools. every game developer out there has sung the praises of xna and what it's doing to change the industry. it's going to be very, very hard, from a business perspective, to look at two platforms and NOT say, "the 360 is easier to develop for. we can turn a game around faster. we can very easily port it to the pc. and we'll sell just as many if not more units than on a ps3." lower development costs + same revenue = bigger profits. microsoft knows this. game developers know this. apparently, sony missed the boat.
that is why you hear about tons of former playstation only developers looking into the 360. that's why you just plain hear about tons of ALL KINDS of developers looking at the 360. pc, console, arcade, episodic, multimedia, small, big, everyone is looking at the relatively low costs to develop games for the 360.
microsoft learned a long, long time ago that to get developers in your corner, you have to put the easiest, most powerful software development tools into their hands.
m3mnoch.
troy @ Dec 26th 2005 10:07PM
Are you people forgeting the SEGA Dreamcast Fiasco!? Same here Rev is going for that DS approach to PSP. 360 will be the PSP (since console gaming systems ain't into the low-quality res rated E *BS*). And PS3 will be like the PS2, with no rivals (hopefully no ToshibaPhillip Game Station)and the best hardware allround...
P.S Don't worry i'm no fanboy, I buy all consoles, but this is my take on whats happening etc.
m3mnoch @ Dec 29th 2005 4:48PM
um. the dreamcast had no developer support to speak of (because of its obscurity and crappy development tools) and no marketing budget warchest.
no money for marketing means no consumers will buy it. no consumers buying it means no developeres will code for it. that's why they had a few launch games and nothing else. it's a huge financial burden to shoulder a console and push it into the mainstream.
raise your hand if you think sony, nintendo or microsoft have "no money" and "no developers."
i hate uneducated dreamcast comparisons.
m3mnoch.