AcuraZine - Acura Enthusiast Community

AcuraZine - Acura Enthusiast Community (https://acurazine.com/forums/)
-   Console & Computer Gaming (https://acurazine.com/forums/console-computer-gaming-13/)
-   -   Sony: PS3 news (https://acurazine.com/forums/console-computer-gaming-13/sony-ps3-news-306840/)

cusdaddy 05-16-2005 06:29 PM

Sony: PS3 news
 
Sony is currently unveiling the specs of the PS3. Here's what was shown so far:

Blu-Ray Disc support
2.5 inch detachable HDD
Up to 7 Bluetooth controllers
6 USB ports
1 3.2 ghz Cell Processor
256MB RAM XDR RAM
256MB RAM GDDR VRAM
GPU - NVidia RSX

Multimedia Features (video chat, internet access, digital photography, digital audio, video)

Moog-Type-S 05-16-2005 06:40 PM

Blue-Ray :thumbsup:
...no HD-DVD:dunno:

cusdaddy 05-16-2005 06:41 PM

Here are my thoughts:

I admit I am a bigger Xbox than PS fan, but this next gen should be VERY interesting.

I'm actually bit underwhelmed by what Sony is offering here. I hoped it would be a big improvement over the 360 since it is launching up to possibly a year later in the US, but it looks to be an improvement in some areas, same in some, and less powerful in others.

The CPU has close to 2x higher PEAK performance than the Xbox 360 CPU, but the Cell only has 1 PPU vs 3 in the Xbox 360. The Cell has 7 PPE's, which are very fast if used in the proper manner (this is how it hits a high peak performance #). The issue is that it is VERY difficult to get peak performance out of PPE's. They only support specific functions and perform in-line processing. The PPU is a more general purpose CPU and for many circumstances preferable. There is a reason why general purpose CPU's (P4, Athlon64, Power PC) control the market.

An example is the PS2 vs Xbox1 processor. The PS2's "Emotion Engine" has close to 3x the peak CPU performance (FLOPS) than the Xbox PIII, but the more general purpose design of the PIII used in the Xbox combined with a GPU made the system easier to program and usually superior on the graphics front. Only really well designed games such as the GT series show the true potential of the PS2. I have a feeling it will be similar with the 360 vs P3.

Another negative is the GPU. The are estimating 2x NVidia 6800 performance which puts it at ~32 threads. The ATI GPU has 48 threads and has unified shaders which is something never done before and a true innovation in the Graphics front. There isn't enough info on the RSX, but it appears closer to the 6800 from what I've been reading. In addition, the 360's ATI GPU has 10mb of embedded ram which puts it at a HUGE advantage over the PS3 NVidia GPU.

Bluetooth and the multimedia features are great.

Overall, I think it will be a great and close race. As I said 1000x in the past, games and other features (online, multimedia) will make the difference this next generation.

It has lower memory bandwidth than the Xbox 360 and it doesn't have embedded VRAM

caball88 05-16-2005 07:05 PM


Originally Posted by cusdaddy
Here are my thoughts:

I admit I am a bigger Xbox than PS fan, but this next gen should be VERY interesting.

I'm actually bit underwhelmed by what Sony is offering here. I hoped it would be a big improvement over the 360 since it is launching up to possibly a year later in the US, but it looks to be an improvement in some areas, same in some, and less powerful in others.

The CPU has close to 2x higher PEAK performance than the Xbox 360 CPU, but the Cell only has 1 PPU vs 3 in the Xbox 360. The Cell has 7 PPE's, which are very fast if used in the proper manner (this is how it hits a high peak performance #). The issue is that it is VERY difficult to get peak performance out of PPE's. They only support specific functions and perform in-line processing. The PPU is a more general purpose CPU and for many circumstances preferable. There is a reason why general purpose CPU's (P4, Athlon64, Power PC) control the market.

An example is the PS2 vs Xbox1 processor. The PS2's "Emotion Engine" has close to 3x the peak CPU performance (FLOPS) than the Xbox PIII, but the more general purpose design of the PIII used in the Xbox combined with a GPU made the system easier to program and usually superior on the graphics front. Only really well designed games such as the GT series show the true potential of the PS2. I have a feeling it will be similar with the 360 vs P3.

Another negative is the GPU. The are estimating 2x NVidia 6800 performance which puts it at ~32 threads. The ATI GPU has 48 threads and has unified shaders which is something never done before and a true innovation in the Graphics front. There isn't enough info on the RSX, but it appears closer to the 6800 from what I've been reading. In addition, the 360's ATI GPU has 10mb of embedded ram which puts it at a HUGE advantage over the PS3 NVidia GPU.

Bluetooth and the multimedia features are great.

Overall, I think it will be a great and close race. As I said 1000x in the past, games and other features (online, multimedia) will make the difference this next generation.

It has lower memory bandwidth than the Xbox 360 and it doesn't have embedded VRAM

i completely agree with what you have stated and its nice to see someone make intelligent comments on this whole xbox360 vs ps3 deal. based on the current known specs of the xbox360 and ps3, the box appears to have a more realistic performance edge in the real world. it is easier for developers to make games that look and perform better on that system. the embedded dram on the ATI board is a huge plus that most general users do not understand the benefits. but the point is moot as the systems are so powerful that the difference will be neglible and it will come down to software support and feature rich services. i also don't understand why people take sides between the two systems. personally i think if you enjoy video games then you should get both systems. you are just robbing yourself of the experience of some great games only available on individual systems. i know the systems are not cheap so if one had to make a decision between the two you would have to weigh your options.

cusdaddy 05-16-2005 07:09 PM


Originally Posted by caball88
i completely agree with what you have stated and its nice to see someone make intelligent comments on this whole xbox360 vs ps3 deal. based on the current known specs of the xbox360 and ps3, the box appears to have a more realistic performance edge in the real world. it is easier for developers to make games that look and perform better on that system. the embedded dram on the ATI board is a huge plus that most general users do not understand the benefits. but the point is moot as the systems are so powerful that the difference will be neglible and it will come down to software support and feature rich services. i also don't understand why people take sides between the two systems. personally i think if you enjoy video games then you should get both systems. you are just robbing yourself of the experience of some great games only available on individual systems. i know the systems are not cheap so if one had to make a decision between the two you would have to weigh your options.

:agree: x100

Even though I prefer the Xbox, I'll be getting both the 360 and PS3. I like a little ribbing but in the end both are great systems

cusdaddy 05-16-2005 07:38 PM

A good post at Beyond3d which pretty much sums up what I said before:

Here's another good post from Beyond3d... Pretty much says what I've been saying:

I see nothing for X360 fans to be worried about. The PS3 doesn't even have any Edram to help with bandwidth. The systems are a wash in realworld performance. The X360 if anything is more efficient in 3 ways:

1. New GPU capable of running either vertex or pixel shader operations as needed by software.

2. Edram. (256GB/s bandwidth)

3. Even though complicated in its own right, the CPU is definately more staight forward than the CELL.

They both have the same amount of RAM, so no real winner there. Well actually, unified memory might give the X360 the advantage there too.

EDIT: Just pointing these out, they pretty much make up the difference between PS3's "brawn" and X360's efficiency. This is even closer than GC vs XBOX, but they both have the same amount of ram. Also, it looks like the PS3's HDD is just an addon while X360s is standard. (if it's standard some games will use for caching data) Just makes up a little for lack of Blu Ray, and again, what speed BR drive is that anyways?

Davediego 05-16-2005 07:43 PM

I thought I read somewhere today that the nvidia gpu will have 16mb of embedded ram. Also video cards dont have "threads", they have pipelines. Its completely unclear just how many pipelines the ATI gpu will have at the moment, "48 billion shader operations a second" does not mean it has 48pipelines. It could have 16pipelines with 3 shader units per pipeline.

Also its entirely unclear if the unified shader architecture will actually be better or not. Nvidia has explicity stated they think its better to optimize pixel and vertex shader units individually for maximum performance rather than combining them into a single unit for potentially diminished performance.

bottom line, we really dont know enough about either yet

cusdaddy 05-16-2005 07:56 PM


Originally Posted by Davediego
I thought I read somewhere today that the nvidia gpu will have 16mb of embedded ram. Also video cards dont have "threads", they have pipelines. Its completely unclear just how many pipelines the ATI gpu will have at the moment, "48 billion shader operations a second" does not mean it has 48pipelines. It could have 16pipelines with 3 shader units per pipeline.

Also its entirely unclear if the unified shader architecture will actually be better or not. Nvidia has explicity stated they think its better to optimize pixel and vertex shader units individually for maximum performance rather than combining them into a single unit for potentially diminished performance.

bottom line, we really dont know enough about either yet

I'm sure if the RSX had 16mb of embedded DRAM, they would have stated it in the detailed specs released tonight.

I called it 48 threads because with Unified Shaders, they aren't really pipelines either. Unified shaders are the future - Many influential developers and the next version of DirectX (10) will have full support for unified shaders. It will be interesting but neither system blows the other out of the water.

cusdaddy 05-16-2005 08:22 PM

Here's another good quote from an admitted PS fanboy from Beyond3d... Almost every post feels exactly the same way I do:

I'm sort of split in regards to PS3. The raw hardware specs leave me with a cold feeling of disappointment (the geek in me was expecting monster specs I suppose). Only 256MB main RAM and apparantly no eDRAM for GPU is, well...not exactly top notch, and the non-unified memory layout can make it messy for programmers to balance memory requirements on top of all the other juggling acts of keeping track of a main CPU + 7 SPEs. The "low" clock speed for the cell isn't encouraging the geek in me either. While I didn't expect 4.6GHz, I sure hoped for an even 4, just for the nice round number. Oh well, that's the punishment for getting ones' hopes up! *spanks self*

Memory problems could perhaps be fixed by harddrive swapping, but as the specs sheet mentions harddrive SLOT makes me wonder if the unit will actually be delivered with one included as standard. If it has to be purchased separately I wonder if software will be written to take advantage of it as virtual memory...

On the other hand, the I/O capabilities of this thing are just CRAZY. 3xgigabit ethernet, bluetooth, wireless ethernet, 3xflashrom slots (I expected like, two MEMORYSTICK slots, and here it offers both SD and CF in addition to MS! Insane!), plus more USB ports than you can shake a stick at... Crazy! Plus the design of the unit is just plain gorgeous, particulary in black. I'll be afraid to touch it, with that glossy finish...

Controller on the other hand... Well, if I thought x360 controller looked like a toy, what on earth should I call THIS freaky thing?! I guess Logitech will sue Sony now, didn't they make a batarang controller for the PC once? Or is this Logitech's surplus stock they sold to Sony? I know they made the Eyetoy for Sony, maybe they're having a corporate relationship of some sort...

Controller = super weird and ugly, and I'm disappointed there hasn't been any evolution in the sony camp EITHER. Same damn stick layout, same damn button layout... I wonder, will two of the shoulder buttons be turned into analog paddles just like with the XB/GC (and DC I might add)? I sure wish so.

All my hopes for a better, cooler controller now lives with the originators of the modern joypad; Nintendo. Don't let me down, Miyamoto!

Oh, and one final "disappointment": doesn't seem to be a dedicated sound DSP in PS3 just like with x360. From what I can read in the specs, it appears the main CPU is dedicated to rendering sound also. Oh well.

Still, native support for dolby digital sounds great! And apparantly there is VGA out too? Not sure, but I hope so. If that's the case I can just hook up the PS3 to my Dell 1905FP and the optical SPDIF to my Z680s and game away, that would be GREAT.

srika 05-16-2005 08:40 PM


Originally Posted by Davediego
bottom line, we really dont know enough about either yet

thank you.

:ninja:

slayer202 05-16-2005 08:51 PM

games will make the systems. the graphics on both will be great. we dont need to hear the details. the ps discs hold 50gb. is that the same as now or more?

srika 05-16-2005 09:11 PM


Originally Posted by slayer202
games will make the systems. the graphics on both will be great. we dont need to hear the details. the ps discs hold 50gb. is that the same as now or more?

umm

fsttyms1 05-16-2005 09:13 PM

im sorry but i dont see those specs as correct, nor can we really jump to judgement yet since neither have released hard specs. but on that note every thing i have read on the cell chip designed for the ps3 they are running it at 4.5ghz

Zapata 05-16-2005 09:20 PM

ppl, 10mnths away yet....shit....have fun with the 360.

Zapata 05-16-2005 09:21 PM

btw...

1080p :butthead: so much for "true" hd experience :fluffy:

srika 05-16-2005 09:51 PM


Originally Posted by fsttyms1
im sorry but i dont see those specs as correct, nor can we really jump to judgement yet since neither have released hard specs. but on that note every thing i have read on the cell chip designed for the ps3 they are running it at 4.5ghz

yes they are obviously "releasing" these subpar specs so that Microsoft gets the wrong picture. Then when 360 is already released, boo ya, Sony reveals that the PS3 will be running at 9x4.5 gigaflops per deca-nanosecond and support direct neural connection to the user's brain causing dream-like state of mental stimulation, llol. All hardware specifications and performance numerology relating to the PS3 will be measured in units that have not even been introduced to the technological worlds yet, resulting in an utmost total pwnage.

Mizouse 05-16-2005 09:52 PM

:drool:

Davediego 05-16-2005 09:54 PM


Originally Posted by cusdaddy
I'm sure if the RSX had 16mb of embedded DRAM, they would have stated it in the detailed specs released tonight.

I called it 48 threads because with Unified Shaders, they aren't really pipelines either. Unified shaders are the future - Many influential developers and the next version of DirectX (10) will have full support for unified shaders. It will be interesting but neither system blows the other out of the water.


just because the gpu has "unified shaders" does not mean it no longer has pipelines. the way the current class of gpus work is they have a certain number of pipelines, lets stick with 16 for now, and each pipeline can perform work typically on only a single pixel at once. with a 16pipeline gpu, this means you get 16pixels processed per clock. Now, if you want to add shaders in, you can stick a shader unit on each pipeline, you can have less shader units than pipelines and have to share shader units accross different pipelines, and any other number of different configurations.

The current class of gpus from both Nvidia and ATI have discrete vertex and shader units. A unified shader architecture has a single shader unit that is a combination of both the vertex and a shader unit. A gpu with a unified shader unit is still going to have pipelines, and the number of pipelines is still going to be very relevant to performance.

Lets say I'm correc that the xbox360 gpu has 16pipes and 3 unified shader units per pipeline. The ps3 gpu has 32pipelines, at the same clock speed it could have twice the pixel processing power, and since it has an abundance of dedicated video ram, it has plenty of processing power to perform anti-aliasing even without the embedded ram. Desktop gpu's have been doing just fine without embedded ram for years, the ps3 gpu not having embedded ram is not necessarily a drawback if the other parts of the gpu can make up for it, which is quite likely.

srika 05-16-2005 09:57 PM

Yea I seriously doubt any of these new systems will have bottlenecks at any part of the hardware configuration, seeing how they are designed from the ground up as stand-alone, dedicated gaming machines. Of course, we have seen choppiness in both Xbox and PS2 games so this realization naturally also rests substantially in the hands of the software developers...

Mizouse 05-16-2005 10:13 PM

biggest thing i like about PS3

from gamespot:
Sony also confirmed the machine would be backward compatible all the way to the original PlayStation.

Mizouse 05-16-2005 11:01 PM

for those that havent seen it:

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen001.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen002.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen003.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen004.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen005.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen006.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen007.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen008.jpg

:drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :leghump: :boink:

IMO it looks great :thumbsup: xbox 360 just doesnt look all that great to me appearance wise :yuck: .. and the controller for PS3 i dunno about that :dunno:

Zapata 05-16-2005 11:35 PM


Originally Posted by Mizouse
the controller for PS3 i dunno about that :dunno:



IGN.com reviewer said the controller looked small. I don't care what it looks like as long as the ergonomics are good.

srika 05-16-2005 11:41 PM

ok one more thing - that better not be the final text logo... they need to change it ASAP. I am absolutely floored that they chose the same font as the "Spiderman" movies - or very damn close to it - too close..... :rolleyes:

Silver™ 05-17-2005 03:10 AM

Looks like a BOSE Lifestyle system :shrug:

And the controller has got to go, looks like a freaking boomerang.

Can't wait to buy one though :drool:

Davediego 05-17-2005 03:34 AM


Originally Posted by Silver™
Looks like a BOSE Lifestyle system :shrug:

And the controller has got to go, looks like a freaking boomerang.

Can't wait to buy one though :drool:

:rofl: nailed it, knew it looked familiar

cusdaddy 05-17-2005 07:17 AM


Originally Posted by srika
yes they are obviously "releasing" these subpar specs so that Microsoft gets the wrong picture. Then when 360 is already released, boo ya, Sony reveals that the PS3 will be running at 9x4.5 gigaflops per deca-nanosecond and support direct neural connection to the user's brain causing dream-like state of mental stimulation, llol. All hardware specifications and performance numerology relating to the PS3 will be measured in units that have not even been introduced to the technological worlds yet, resulting in an utmost total pwnage.

Both the Cell and Xbox 360 CPU's are produced using a .90nm fab process and both have at their core a PowerPC PPU. Both are running at the exact same 3.2ghz speed for a reason - heat. There is no way in a 4.5ghz processor can be produced using .90 processing. Even the .65nm P4's can't hit above 3.6ghz. The specs are final.

cusdaddy 05-17-2005 07:18 AM

In regards to Killzone, I'm sure it was pre-rendered. Here is what even the PS3.ign.com site had to say:

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614924p1.html

"Look, we want it to be real. We honestly do. If it is, we'd feel complete -- whole. But we have suspicions we simply cannot shake.

In August of 2004 this editor visited the offices of Guerilla in Amsterdam. There team members admitted that Killzone 2 development was well underway, but that they did not intend to release on PlayStation 3 and that they had, in fact, not even been provided with PS3 development kits at the time. That means that between August of 2004 and May of right now, Guerilla received tools and made a game for a system they knew pretty much nothing about -- a game that is as ridiculously polished as this one, no less. I don't care how fantastic of a developer your company might be, something like that just doesn't happen.

We're inclined to mistrust Killzone 2's gameplay legitimacy even further because of the way the video plays out. No shooter in existence features characters that do exactly the right thing at exactly the right time all the time. It seems as if the entire Killzone 2 showing was like a wish that did not waver, not even once. Then there's the way the control seems suspiciously fast to be done on analog sticks. The circumstantial evidence is just too much to ignore, you know?

All that being said, I cannot in good faith tout Killzone 2 as the best looking game ever because I really don't think it's a real game yet. But it sure is one hell of a CG sequence that, if in anyway happens to be representative of the final product, shows us what next-generation shooting should be like."

fsttyms1 05-17-2005 09:21 AM


Originally Posted by cusdaddy
Both the Cell and Xbox 360 CPU's are produced using a .90nm fab process and both have at their core a PowerPC PPU. Both are running at the exact same 3.2ghz speed for a reason - heat. There is no way in a 4.5ghz processor can be produced using .90 processing. Even the .65nm P4's can't hit above 3.6ghz. The specs are final.

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/585/585865p1.html


http://www.howtofixcomputers.com/bb/sutra483536.html

Product Development

The disclosed specs for the prototype chip were not maxed-out data created
for the conference. The development team has confirmed operation at up to
5.2GHz on the first prototype chip obtained in April 2004, but the ISSCC
presentations on Cell merely stated "4GHz or higher". More than likely, the
companies are expecting to use about 4GHz in actual equipment for reasons of
higher IC yield, lower dissipation and simplified board design. The initial
chip exhibited no problems with logical operations, and was able to boot the
operating system (OS). Dissipation, however, was a major issue. Masakazu
Suzuoki, VP, Microprocessor Development Dept, Semiconductor Business Div at
SCE, feels that this has been resolved: "We had a difficult time reducing
dissipation at the start, but finally found the solution in the second half
of 2004."


none of us will truly know till sony reveles the actual specs so every thing is just speculation, but i highly doubt they will be out done by the Xbox

Whiskers 05-17-2005 09:38 AM

You can use the PSP as an additional screen and controller.

Black CL-S 4-Life 05-17-2005 10:15 AM

Good comparison PS3 vs XBOX 360 info here
http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-S...tures_headline

Whiskers 05-17-2005 10:23 AM


Originally Posted by Black CL-S 4-Life
Good comparison PS3 vs XBOX 360 info here
http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-S...tures_headline

With the specs of both, I can't imagine how the price tag could be 250-300....

Davediego 05-17-2005 10:56 AM


Originally Posted by cusdaddy
Both the Cell and Xbox 360 CPU's are produced using a .90nm fab process and both have at their core a PowerPC PPU. Both are running at the exact same 3.2ghz speed for a reason - heat. There is no way in a 4.5ghz processor can be produced using .90 processing. Even the .65nm P4's can't hit above 3.6ghz. The specs are final.

first off, there is no 65nm pentium4 yet, and there won't be until next year ;) Secondly you cant compare clock speeds across completely different cpu architectures, they're completely irrelevant to one another (ie a 2.4ghz athlon64 has much better performance in most cases than a 3.6ghz p4). If someone wanted to they would have no problem designing a cpu to run at 4.5ghz on a 90nm process, it just might not do very much.

Thirdly, sony is relying on a 65nm plant to solve their heat problems, which IMO is a very risky move if they want to have a spring 2006 launch. That means they'd have to have a 65nm manufacturing process at least as aggressive as intel, which will be really hard to accomplish as intel typically leads new process sizes by a year ahead of anyone else in the industry.

cusdaddy 05-17-2005 08:40 PM


Originally Posted by Davediego
first off, there is no 65nm pentium4 yet, and there won't be until next year ;) Secondly you cant compare clock speeds across completely different cpu architectures, they're completely irrelevant to one another (ie a 2.4ghz athlon64 has much better performance in most cases than a 3.6ghz p4). If someone wanted to they would have no problem designing a cpu to run at 4.5ghz on a 90nm process, it just might not do very much.

Thirdly, sony is relying on a 65nm plant to solve their heat problems, which IMO is a very risky move if they want to have a spring 2006 launch. That means they'd have to have a 65nm manufacturing process at least as aggressive as intel, which will be really hard to accomplish as intel typically leads new process sizes by a year ahead of anyone else in the industry.

Oh really???

"Last week at an Intel analysts meeting, CEO Paul Otellini reportedly demonstrated a computer running the Windows XP operating system based on what Intel said was a 65-nm version of its Pentium processor."

http://www.crn.com/sections/breaking...cleId=55800608

It's not in mass production, but Intel has samples of their chips running on the .65 process.

The core chip of the Cell is a Power-PC PPU. The PowerPC processor has had a very difficult time ramping up in clock speed (look at the G5 for the past few years) and it would require a significant redesign to achieve speeds well above the 4ghz mark, regardless if it's a .90 or .65 chip.

caball88 05-17-2005 10:47 PM


Originally Posted by wsklar
With the specs of both, I can't imagine how the price tag could be 250-300....

both companies are selling at a lost or at least just breaking even. the only ones that might make a buck or two of it is the retailers who get it at cost which in this case might not be that much lower than the retail price. the important thing is to price the system so that buyers will want to purchase it and make the money back on the software and service side. if you could turn any of the 2 systems into a pc you would have one hell of a system.

srika 05-17-2005 10:56 PM


Originally Posted by cusdaddy
Both the Cell and Xbox 360 CPU's are produced using a .90nm fab process and both have at their core a PowerPC PPU. Both are running at the exact same 3.2ghz speed for a reason - heat. There is no way in a 4.5ghz processor can be produced using .90 processing. Even the .65nm P4's can't hit above 3.6ghz. The specs are final.

Man you are taking me WAYYY too seriously, too seriously for your own good. But something I feel is most likely true is that Sony's specs ARE NOT final. And regarding the comment you make saying that "there is no way" a 4.5GHz processor can be produced using .90 processing - you are thinking inside the box. You need to think outside the box, no pun intended. :)

srika 05-17-2005 10:57 PM


Originally Posted by fsttyms1
http://ps2.ign.com/articles/585/585865p1.html


http://www.howtofixcomputers.com/bb/sutra483536.html

Product Development

The disclosed specs for the prototype chip were not maxed-out data created
for the conference. The development team has confirmed operation at up to
5.2GHz on the first prototype chip obtained in April 2004, but the ISSCC
presentations on Cell merely stated "4GHz or higher". More than likely, the
companies are expecting to use about 4GHz in actual equipment for reasons of
higher IC yield, lower dissipation and simplified board design. The initial
chip exhibited no problems with logical operations, and was able to boot the
operating system (OS). Dissipation, however, was a major issue. Masakazu
Suzuoki, VP, Microprocessor Development Dept, Semiconductor Business Div at
SCE, feels that this has been resolved: "We had a difficult time reducing
dissipation at the start, but finally found the solution in the second half
of 2004."

translation: pwnage.

srika 05-17-2005 10:58 PM


Originally Posted by wsklar
You can use the PSP as an additional screen and controller.

cool feature - might be nice to have it as an additional screen, but I seriously doubt I will have any desire to use it as a controller...

srika 05-17-2005 11:00 PM


Originally Posted by wsklar
With the specs of both, I can't imagine how the price tag could be 250-300....

no doubt.... if they are able to keep them to within even ~$350, damn - that is going to be the deal of the century.

srika 05-17-2005 11:55 PM

PS3 as shown by CEO of SCEI... gives good idea of its size.

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg....xpo_ksd101.jpg

srika 05-17-2005 11:58 PM

PS3 may include the option of being a full-featured portable outdoor grill. More details as they become available.

http://home.centurytel.net/mrsdeets/sonyforeman.jpg


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:21 PM.


© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands