PDA

View Full Version : PS3 Slow and Broken?


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

jAkUp
06-05-06, 01:05 AM
According to The Inquirer it is....

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

Edge
06-05-06, 01:35 AM
*in before the ensuing wall of text from NV40*

Zelda_fan
06-05-06, 01:39 AM
in b4 nv40

Zelda_fan
06-05-06, 01:53 AM
wow, I just read that article. If what they say is true.... local memory is pretty much worthless making the PS3 a seriously gimped system.

PeterJensen
06-05-06, 02:08 AM
omg

Arioch
06-05-06, 03:14 AM
Ibtnv40...

Toss3
06-05-06, 03:23 AM
Wow crap... Hope the inq stays true to almost always being wrong or else sony is screwed. :(

Arioch
06-05-06, 03:31 AM
I have mixed feelings about the PS3. On one hand I want the console to live up to its hype so gaming on it will be stellar. On the other hand some of the way Sony acts comes off as arrogant and pompous and I would delight in their misery.

retsam
06-05-06, 03:49 AM
the ps3 isnt even in production yet...great way to lead the readers in a false conclusion of final products. looks like he is relying on a single source for all his information just look at both articals concerning problems with the ps3... im calling BS on this one and im no fan of sony and will rpobably be buying the WII but this just sounds like a bunch of rubbish (as you brits would say) to me...

harl
06-05-06, 03:53 AM
I don't understand what they mean by local memory

It seems main memory is the XDR for cell and the GDDR3 for RSX
(looking at the speeds because RSX can do 15 and 20 GB/s
with flex I/O)

So cell cand write at 4 GB/s on video memory?
(same bandwith as PciE?)
But only read at 16MB/s!?

If that's the case, why should CELL read directly the video memory?
:confused:

|MaguS|
06-05-06, 04:44 AM
Anyone know what the reference to "local" memory is because I can't figure it out, they mention the RSX and the XDRs memory performance and then move to "local" memory...

Oh and with 16MB/s of writing capablities no game would be possible on running on the CELL CPU which we know isn't true since most early demo's were shown off running on it prior to the completion of the RSX.

I think this entire article is a load of ****. Hell, He thinks that VGT4 is the best and most detailed game on the PS3...

EDIT: Think the "local" memory reference is regarding the on die RAM the CELL CPU has. But Im still not seeing anything to backup any of this article. AnandTech's own CELL Article says alot different. Im gonna call up Tiburon and get something on this.

msxyz
06-05-06, 05:08 AM
Yes, I've a hard time believing that 16Mb figure for anything...

It's about the bandwidth of a 16bit ISA slot (who remeber those black long connectors? I still have a whole collection of video cards from the early '90s based on ISA slots :lol: )

What the Inquirer basically says is that Cell, due to a bug, has an hard time writing directly to the RSX memory (a sort of "fast write" feature) which is referred as "local memory" in that slide.

For what we know that slide may be very old and the bug present only in the first batches of Cell CPUs. Sensationary journalism at its finest.

EDIT: Looking again at the sliders, the problem is the read speed from local memory. Writing is fine, at 4Gb/sec. I don't think reading data BACK from the GPU is a much used feature. A lot of noise about nothing.

SurfMonkey
06-05-06, 07:02 AM
I don't understand what they mean by local memory

It seems main memory is the XDR for cell and the GDDR3 for RSX
(looking at the speeds because RSX can do 15 and 20 GB/s
with flex I/O)

So cell cand write at 4 GB/s on video memory?
(same bandwith as PciE?)
But only read at 16MB/s!?

If that's the case, why should CELL read directly the video memory?
:confused:

Local Memory is GDDR3 and Main memory is XDR. Local memory being the 256Mb that RSX has access to. It looks like cell has to put a request in to RSX in order to access local memory. And RSX processes that when it can.

Don't really see this being that much of an issue really, what is more worrying is the implied "slowness" of the vertex engine. It basically means that the 4Gb bandwidth will be enough as the RSX will be saturated long before that is ever exhausted.

Hopefully more light will be shed on this soon. In the mean time the fact the slides have devstation on them suggests that they are at least 3 or 4 months old. Considering the state of play then (no dev boxes, unfinished cell and/or RSX...) it may all be rosy now.

Namrok
06-05-06, 07:55 AM
*blink* I have no clue what that means, except it looks bad. But then again, lots of things LOOK bad. It'd be interesting to hear from someone who actually has to DEAL with that how much of an impact it makes.

SurfMonkey
06-05-06, 08:05 AM
Basically it means that the PS3 has half the rendering power of the 360 when it comes to dishing out graphics and that the cell and RSX have something of a bottleneck between them when it comes to transfering data.

But with some comments from developers it would seem that either these have been resolved since the slides were created or that it isn't really an issue.

And it was reported by the inq, which in itself is a bit suspect as they never tend to tell the whole story and have a habit of using old news as new news. But since it is out there I'm sure that within a few more hours there will be clarification of the validity of the information.

Namrok
06-05-06, 08:11 AM
Basically it means that the PS3 has half the rendering power of the 360 when it comes to dishing out graphics and that the cell and RSX have something of a bottleneck between them when it comes to transfering data.

Well yeah, I mean that part sort of spoke for itself. The whole slow local memory, fast main memory thing kind of confused me though. Like is it practical to just always use main memory then? How hard is it to code that way/can you even control it? Typically the slower memory has a huge ammount, and the faster memory is limited, but to be honest I have no clue what EXACTLY "local" and "main" refer to.

If its like surfmonkey says and "local" memory is the video cards memory, then yeah, that makes sense for the cell to have cruddy access to it. In fact, I'd bet it being that slow for the CPU to access video card RAM is about normal, and if we saw other statistics for other platforms, we'd see that.

Or maybe not.

ENU291
06-05-06, 08:36 AM
Nb4nv40

ENU291
06-05-06, 08:52 AM
The Cell can write to local memory at 4GB/s but can only read at 16MB/s?? How does SONY let this go into production with a design flaw like that? I've never seen a system design with such a massive memory bottle neck like this before (assuming the INQ is not full of it).

|MaguS|
06-05-06, 09:11 AM
The Cell can write to local memory at 4GB/s but can only read at 16MB/s?? How does SONY let this go into production with a design flaw like that? I've never seen a system design with such a massive memory bottle neck like this before (assuming the INQ is not full of it).

Theres something that were not seeing in regarding the presentation at Devstation considering that writing at 16MB/s is slower then the slowest current market PC.

As for "half the rendering power of the X360", games like MGS4, UT2007 and Heavenly Sword can easily prove this to not be true... considering that they equal anything shown on the X360.

ENU291
06-05-06, 10:04 AM
Theres something that were not seeing in regarding the presentation at Devstation considering that writing at 16MB/s is slower then the slowest current market PC.

As for "half the rendering power of the X360", games like MGS4, UT2007 and Heavenly Sword can easily prove this to not be true... considering that they equal anything shown on the X360.
Read the article again. Writing to local memory seems normal it's READING that is the problem. This seems like a huge typo but you can clearly see in the slides that it states "This is not a typo!".

Hex
06-05-06, 10:19 AM
Can't believe people are actually giving something from the inquirer so much discussion.
Even more so since the event in question was 3 months ago and you would think this would have been mentioned by the other companies or some other site at E3 or after.
(March 1 and 2)

Zelda_fan
06-05-06, 10:38 AM
O NV40 where art thou?

einstein_314
06-05-06, 11:01 AM
O NV40 where art thou?
Probably crying somewhere :D

Zelda_fan
06-05-06, 11:32 AM
Can't believe people are actually giving something from the inquirer so much discussion.
Even more so since the event in question was 3 months ago and you would think this would have been mentioned by the other companies or some other site at E3 or after.
(March 1 and 2)

I'm sure Sony made the devs STFU about it if it is true.

evilchris
06-05-06, 11:35 AM
bLuE-=R4y will make this not matter