XBOX360 CPU more powerful for physics, AI than PS3 Cell

[tranCendenZ]

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/xbox360-2.ars/7

"At any rate, Playstation 3 fanboys shouldn't get all flush over the idea that the Xenon will struggle on non-graphics code. However bad off Xenon will be in that department, the PS3's Cell will probably be worse. The Cell has only one PPE to the Xenon's three, which means that developers will have to cram all their game control, AI, and physics code into at most two threads that are sharing a very narrow execution core with no instruction window. (Don't bother suggesting that the PS3 can use its SPEs for branch-intensive code, because the SPEs lack branch prediction entirely.) Furthermore, the PS3's L2 is only 512K, which is half the size of the Xenon's L2. So the PS3 doesn't get much help with branches in the cache department. In short, the PS3 may fare a bit worse than the Xenon on non-graphics code, but on the upside it will probably fare a bit better on graphics code because of the seven SPEs.

In sum, the Xenon will certainly make the Xbox 360 a 3D graphics powerhouse."

 

[Anthraxxx]

Thanks for the info. It's nice to see info presented in a simple manner without being overrun with fanboyism...

360 certainly does look promising...

 

[DrDevin]

If you read the article it says that both consoles have very poor CPUs when it comes to gameplay related tasks such as AI. This could lead to some very good looking games with only average AI. I would rather play a challenging, interactive game instead of a barly playable tech demo, although the mass market cares about graphics more then anything else. I will stick with my PC until I see some games that provide great gameplay and not just visuals (as it has been assumed that PCs will catch the consoles in GPU performance by the end of this year). You would think these CPUs would have decent branch prediction capabilities but alas.............no.

http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/default.aspx#214

 

[Icarusintel]

this is ridiculous, why skimp on processing for AI and such when making such a powerful machine that's alreadyt going to cost a lot.... i'll get them for the staple games, but i guess if i wanna play real smart games the PC will still be my best bud, save for Metal Gear Solid 4

 

[Prince of China]

Tecmo is supporting the Xbox 360 well. I hope they make Ninja Gaiden 2 on Xbox 360.

 

[DrDevin]

Quoted from the article:

"Rumors and some game developer comments (on the record and off the record) have Xenon's performance on branch-intensive game control, AI, and physics code as ranging from mediocre to downright bad. Xenon will be a streaming media monster, but the parts of the game engine that have to do with making the game fun to play (and not just pretty to look at) are probably going to suffer. Even if the PPE's branch prediction is significantly better than I think it is, the relatively meager 1MB L2 cache that the game control, AI, and physics code will have to share with procedural synthesis and other graphics code will ensure that programmers have a hard time getting good performance out of non-graphics parts of the game.

Furthermore, the Xenon may be capable of running six threads at once, but the three types of branch-intensive code listed above are not as amenable to high levels of thread-level parallelization as graphics code. On the other hand, these types of code do benefit greatly from out-of-order execution, which Xenon lacks completely, a decent amount of execution core width, which Xenon also lacks; branch prediction hardware, which Xenon is probably short on; and large caches, which Xenon is definitely short on. The end result is a recipe for a console that provides developers with a wealth of graphics resources but that asks them to do more with less on the non-graphical side of gaming.

Still, there is some hope on that front. In the PC market where there are multiple processors to support, developers can't fine-tune games for a specific CPU. This heterogeneity of hardware especially hurts with platform-sensitive optimizations like branch hints, which is one reason they don't get used much. In contrast, with the Xenon, the hardware will be fixed, which means that programmers can go all-out in profiling and optimizing branchy game control, AI, and physics code using every trick in the book. Furthermore, console coders can also take heavy advantage of prefetching to overcome the Xenon's cache size limitations. So it's quite possible that as time goes on developers will find ways to get much better branch-intensive code performance out of the hardware. Just don't count on it in the first generation of games, though.

The consoles will not be horrible when it comes to AI and physics as they have a longer lifetime then a PC so they can be optimized but it seems there will be a lot of work to do in order to get good AI/Physics. Like usually (and seconding the article) the first batch of games will probably not be amazing gameplay features but will sure look good. A good PC with a PPU should be better I am thinking.

 

[dream431ca]

Here is why I don't like specs. A lot of people will turn towards the specs and argue which system is more powerful. It's interesting stuff but it is no where near enough. This E3 was really good for a look into the new systems BUT... where are the games????

Xbox360 did show some games but they were so early there was no real impression on the actual gameplay. For the PS3, NO GAMEPLAY at all! I was really disappointed in Sony for that. I will judge the systems when I see the games actually in a playable state. I also like the look of the specs...but with no games to back up the specs, It hurts the system. Again the PS3 is a hype machine just like the PS2. The Xbox360 looks a lot more impressive then the PS3 because they showed some games for it and even though they were early versions, they looked amazing. So right now..Xbox is my favorite.

 

[DrDevin]

Here is why I don't like specs. A lot of people will turn towards the specs and argue which system is more powerful. It's interesting stuff but it is no where near enough. This E3 was really good for a look into the new systems BUT... where are the games????

Xbox360 did show some games but they were so early there was no real impression on the actual gameplay. For the PS3, NO GAMEPLAY at all! I was really disappointed in Sony for that. I will judge the systems when I see the games actually in a playable state. I also like the look of the specs...but with no games to back up the specs, It hurts the system. Again the PS3 is a hype machine just like the PS2. The Xbox360 looks a lot more impressive then the PS3 because they showed some games for it and even though they were early versions, they looked amazing. So right now..Xbox is my favorite.

Im with you completely. They seem to have dropped out the games for hardware and that is why I will wait until there are some good games out there before I decide which one to buy. Besides look at zelda: TP it looks amazing and it is running on the gamecube. If one console has worse specs but looks better who cares!

 

[<RJMC>]

in a gamespot article they compare the 2 consoles and they are very similiar in specs

 

[Reaktor4]

im not trusting anything but benchmarks.

 

[MilkMan12]

The only thing I dont get is why every video for the PS3 looks 30 times better than the XBOX360 videos? I have seen both conferences and most of the videos. Especially after the Killzone 2 video you gotta just ask your eyes which one looks better.

But I could be wrong, if you have any xbox videos that look better than the PS3's then please gimme some links.

After the bathtub video with the water moving so realistically, the gas station explosion, I just cant see how xbox looks better.

 

[Reaktor4]

I dont think the ps3 vids were realtime.

 

[Cole]

The Tech Demos were. Killzone 2 was not a tech demo.

Now I actually do think the PS3 will be far more powerfull than the Xbox 360? Why?
It's come out in late 2006 while the Xbox360 is coming out in 2005..

 

[MilkMan12]

Killzone 2 was in game...we already discussed this and it has been proven to be true. But still even without killzone 2 the rubber duck demo, the vision gt gameplay footage, the indy car racing game footage, and the gas station looks much better than anything I have seen on xbox 360. Unless you guys have vids proving me wrong.

 

[jmjneary]

i have heard from 2 different sony execs that it was a tech demo and using the ungine but still CG. and i have heard from another one that it is ingame. who is telling the truth. Its CG ok if they make it look like that than itll get 10 frames

 

[MilkMan12]

Its ingame, if you watch it closely you will see graphical and engine bugs...bugs like that would not appear in cg because there are no "bugs" per say in CG. If its CG they would get screwed if the game never looked like that. Sony and the game company say its all in game. And it looks entirely possible. It also looks like a game...if it were cg they would make it look much better and there would be no bugs. The face in the first shot looks exactly like the face they showed in their tech demo at their conference.

STILL THATS BESIDES THE POINT...even without killzone 2 the PS3 still looks 50 TIMES better than Xbox 360. The tub demo, the gas station, vision gt footage, indy racing footage. All of the PS3 footage looks much better than the xbox 360 footage.

 

[CommunistPenguin]

I don't care what console is more powerful, because in the end it is the gameplay that keeps me from putting down the controller.

 

[tranCendenZ]

Its ingame, if you watch it closely you will see graphical and engine bugs...bugs like that would not appear in cg because there are no "bugs" per say in CG. If its CG they would get screwed if the game never looked like that. Sony and the game company say its all in game. And it looks entirely possible. It also looks like a game...if it were cg they would make it look much better and there would be no bugs. The face in the first shot looks exactly like the face they showed in their tech demo at their conference.

STILL THATS BESIDES THE POINT...even without killzone 2 the PS3 still looks 50 TIMES better than Xbox 360. The tub demo, the gas station, vision gt footage, indy racing footage. All of the PS3 footage looks much better than the xbox 360 footage.

Prerendered CG generally does look better than realtime. XBOX360 was running off Alpha kits that were dual g5 mac cores with ATI 9800PRO (R350) videocards (like 1/5 the power of final xbox360 - 3 PPC + R500). PS3 trailers were a long CG movie. The few realtime demos they did give (i.e. Unreal3) ran off a high spec PC with SLI 6800 Ultras (about 4x as fast as a 9800PRO), much faster than the X360 alpha dev kit.

In the end though once the hardware is finalized, if the specs stay the same it looks like the XBOX360 will be as fast or faster than the PS3 final hardware. If you want to be disappointed after waiting a year and finding out that Sony pulled a fast one on you yet again, well I guess that is your choice

The animations and shadowing in the Killzone 2 trailer gave away that it was prerendered. If you still believe it was realtime, well, I have an Emotion Engine to sell you

 

[satch919]

Its ingame, if you watch it closely you will see graphical and engine bugs...bugs like that would not appear in cg because there are no "bugs" per say in CG. If its CG they would get screwed if the game never looked like that. Sony and the game company say its all in game. And it looks entirely possible. It also looks like a game...if it were cg they would make it look much better and there would be no bugs. The face in the first shot looks exactly like the face they showed in their tech demo at their conference.

STILL THATS BESIDES THE POINT...even without killzone 2 the PS3 still looks 50 TIMES better than Xbox 360. The tub demo, the gas station, vision gt footage, indy racing footage. All of the PS3 footage looks much better than the xbox 360 footage.

I'd like to believe that it was all being rendered in real time, but I don't think that it was. (Killzone 2)

I would like to see what graphical/engine "bugs" you were talking about. CG films are capable of producing light anomalies and various glitches. Just because its CG doesn't mean its beyond perfection. Just look at lighting techniques used in CG like radiosity for example. If not tuned correctly, the end result can look rather horrid.

Look at Sony's past when unveiling new games or technology. When the PS2 was first announced, we saw what their "Emotion Engine" was supposedly capable of. These tech demos didn't really represent a real game environment, i.e. AI, physics, lighting, animation, texturing etc. Now, what was shown off in real time was impressive. A good example of that would be the next-gen Fight Night game. That was a stunning display of graphics and animation. But again, how much of that was scripted and would actually represent the final product? Its difficult to say at this point.

Bottom line. You should reserve judgement until both systems are running final hardware in a real game environment. Remember, Xbox 360 was rumored to only be running at 20-30% of its full potential. However, based on what I've seen thus far, the PS3 interests me more.

 

[metalSONIC]

Prerendered CG generally does look better than realtime. XBOX360 was running off Alpha kits that were dual g5 mac cores with ATI 9800PRO (R350) videocards (like 1/5 the power of final xbox360 - 3 PPC + R500). PS3 trailers were a long CG movie. The few realtime demos they did give (i.e. Unreal3) ran off a high spec PC with SLI 6800 Ultras (about 4x as fast as a 9800PRO), much faster than the X360 alpha dev kit.

In the end though once the hardware is finalized, if the specs stay the same it looks like the XBOX360 will be as fast or faster than the PS3 final hardware. If you want to be disappointed after waiting a year and finding out that Sony pulled a fast one on you yet again, well I guess that is your choice

The animations and shadowing in the Killzone 2 trailer gave away that it was prerendered. If you still believe it was realtime, well, I have an Emotion Engine to sell you

I think your missing something, Sony execs can't just lie to people and say that it was all realtime when it was actually prerendered. I've heard about 3 or 4 execs saying that it was real-time rendered. Alot of us already think that it wasn't in-game but still rendered real-time, so saying that the animations in Killzone give away that it was all prerendered is stupid. The shadows, I have no idea with that.

It was different with the PS2, but with the PS3, technology has changed and people now have a bigger hope for how good the PS3 could be unlike how the PS2 results were.

It doesn't matter anyway, I can't wait for MGS4, they have always had top notch visuals, every character model that they have created has always looked rather so impressive. So whether or not all these specs and all this crap, the games is what is going to matter. Plus, most games on X-BOX seem a bit too casual. I can't seem to see atleast one non-generic game on the X-BOX.

 

[MilkMan12]

Ok i see what you guys are saying...but we shall wait and see...maybe sony will surprise us. I have no clue what the emotion engine is/was and thought the ps2 lived up to all my expectations when it came out.

The bugs in the killzone trailer

#1 Various times in the begginning, characters randomly pop up (this bug is caused by the game engine and killzone 1 had this same exact bug)

#2 After the two ships land/explode...not only notice how both explosions are the same...but the wreckage and basically the whole ship dissapears when he looks towards the area (like when he looks down at the guy who got knocked over by his friend).

#3 In the whole video there are no projectiles or decals at all whatsoever. Which means they were rushed (which is true) or maybe the dev kit just wasnt enough to animate them...who knows. You never see one shell or bullet hole anywhere. Also he 203 explodes but does nothing to the ground.

Those dont seem like CG mistakes to me and I am sure if it was CG they would have put projectiles and decals and it wouldnt have made a difference to the audience (meaning they wouldnt say "oh theres bullet holes it must be CG") which means they didnt intentionally not put them in. Im sure they werent expecting people like you and I to over analyze their video.

I still could be wrong though.

 

[destrukt]

The only thing I dont get is why every video for the PS3 looks 30 times better than the XBOX360 videos? I have seen both conferences and most of the videos. Especially after the Killzone 2 video you gotta just ask your eyes which one looks better.

But I could be wrong, if you have any xbox videos that look better than the PS3's then please gimme some links.

After the bathtub video with the water moving so realistically, the gas station explosion, I just cant see how xbox looks better.

the xbox360 demo's were running on 2 g5's which have nowhere near as much power as the actual console. developers had to turn off aa and lower the level of graphics considerably.

also, where is your proof that the killzone2 demo was realtime ? last time i heard about it guerilla said themselves 'they were sorry for the confusion, but the video was made to show what the gameplay will be like.'

 

[DarkStar]

#3 In the whole video there are no projectiles or decals at all whatsoever. Which means they were rushed (which is true) or maybe the dev kit just wasnt enough to animate them...who knows. You never see one shell or bullet hole anywhere. Also he 203 explodes but does nothing to the ground.

If that sucker was realtime, one thing they certainly were NOT was rushed.

That puppy is POOOLLLISHED with a capital P.

 

[Cole]

I have no clue what the emotion engine

The emotion engine is what powers the PS2..

It was suppose to "Revolutionize Everything" and bla bla bla. Did it? No.
Guess what! Cell is suppose to "Revolutionize Everything" and bla bila bla!!

I do think the PS3 will be faster, why.
Lets see,
Xbox360 - Late 2005
PS3 - Late 2006.
Why the hell wouldn't it be faster? The Xbox was faster than the Ps2. The Ps2 came out before the Xbox.
If the PS3 is slower than the Xbox360...well....I'll simply laugh at go on with my day.

I expect PS3 graphics to kick Xbox360's graphics away if it comes out a year later. If it dosn't as I said... I'll laugh and go on my Pc.

 

[Absinthe]

Killzone 2 was in game...we already discussed this and it has been proven to be true. But still even without killzone 2 the rubber duck demo, the vision gt gameplay footage, the indy car racing game footage, and the gas station looks much better than anything I have seen on xbox 360. Unless you guys have vids proving me wrong.

The developers (aka the people actually making the damn game) said it was a representation of what they wanted to create. And even if it was in-game (nevermind any technical tricks and exploits that would have undoubtedly been employed), I can guarantee you that you will never play what you saw on the screen.

And the point still stands that Microsoft showed off games whereas Sony showed off tech demos. Yeah, tech demos. The kind of shit where they'll pull all the stops, ignoring any playability.

I can't believe some people are actually being suckered by this. Sony did the same exact crap with the PS2.

 

[Sparta]

When i can find old video's of this "Emotion Engine" that Sony pimped for the PS2?

 

[CommunistPenguin]

The emotion engine is what powers the PS2..

It was suppose to "Revolutionize Everything" and bla bla bla. Did it? No.
Guess what! Cell is suppose to "Revolutionize Everything" and bla bila bla!!

I do think the PS3 will be faster, why.
Lets see,
Xbox360 - Late 2005
PS3 - Late 2006.
Why the hell wouldn't it be faster? The Xbox was faster than the Ps2. The Ps2 came out before the Xbox.
If the PS3 is slower than the Xbox360...well....I'll simply laugh at go on with my day.

I expect PS3 graphics to kick Xbox360's graphics away if it comes out a year later. If it dosn't as I said... I'll laugh and go on my Pc.

Actually, from what I heard Sony is aiming for an April release for the PS3 which early-mid 2006. It also should be noted that thye Revolution is going to be the last console released but is the least powerful.

 

[Zerimski]

If that sucker was realtime, one thing they certainly were NOT was rushed.

That puppy is POOOLLLISHED with a capital P.

One of the guys at Guerilla said that they'd been working on that footage since November of last year. So let's say that was realtime in-game footage, taken from a guy sat in front of a PS3 (which, incidentally, doesn't have a GPU that's out of the development stages). With the above example, we can say about 6 months for every 1 minute on gameplay, with an average length for games of this type to be around the 8-10 hour mark...that's a development time of about 250 years (I know this isn't how it works, but the development times would still be huge )

Every single time Sony have unveiled new hardware, they've flat-out lied about the capabilities. When they had the E3 conference for the launch of the PS2, they claimed that a cutscene from Final Fantasy VIII featuring Squall and Rinoa dancing was real-time in-game graphics.

 

[tranCendenZ]

Ok i see what you guys are saying...but we shall wait and see...maybe sony will surprise us. I have no clue what the emotion engine is/was and thought the ps2 lived up to all my expectations when it came out.

The bugs in the killzone trailer

#1 Various times in the begginning, characters randomly pop up (this bug is caused by the game engine and killzone 1 had this same exact bug)

#2 After the two ships land/explode...not only notice how both explosions are the same...but the wreckage and basically the whole ship dissapears when he looks towards the area (like when he looks down at the guy who got knocked over by his friend).

#3 In the whole video there are no projectiles or decals at all whatsoever. Which means they were rushed (which is true) or maybe the dev kit just wasnt enough to animate them...who knows. You never see one shell or bullet hole anywhere. Also he 203 explodes but does nothing to the ground.

Those dont seem like CG mistakes to me and I am sure if it was CG they would have put projectiles and decals and it wouldnt have made a difference to the audience (meaning they wouldnt say "oh theres bullet holes it must be CG") which means they didnt intentionally not put them in. Im sure they werent expecting people like you and I to over analyze their video.

I still could be wrong though.

You are. It was "prerendered to spec." Meaning that they input the best case scenario specs of the PS3 into the rendering software, and the software did its best to emulate how it would look. Of course, that doesn't take into account animations that are far too complex to not be CG, or shadowing that is obviously prerendered (if you look at the shadows there are no boundaries). They did an elaborate job on the prerender to make it look like gameplay, but it was still a prerender. The GPU for the PS3 isn't even finished yet, how do you expect it to be realtime anyway???

And as someone else mentioned, Sony can and has flat out lied in the past, nothing new there.

 

[Direwolf]

Yeah, Sony has a bad track record for this sort of thing. Not that all the other competitors never promise stuff they can't deliver.

With all the BS floating around we may need to wait till at least one of these systems is released to actually get an idea of what we're getting. The only thing that all the hype right now has done for me is make me admire Nintendo.

 

[<RJMC>]

Yeah, Sony has a bad track record for this sort of thing. Not that all the other competitors never promise stuff they can't deliver.

With all the BS floating around we may need to wait till at least one of these systems is released to actually get an idea of what we're getting. The only thing that all the hype right now has done for me is make me admire Nintendo.

yeah me too

nintendo deserve all respect

 

[Icarusintel]

yeah me too

nintendo deserve all respect

respect nintendo all you want, but unless they show something concrete for the revolution before the launch of the Xbox360 they're gonna lose a lot of sales and probably only have the fanboys left to buy revolution, i think they should get their act together and show something

 

[Raxxman]

Well they did show a Kick Ass Zelda game on a consol that's sub £100

As for the Revolution, well I'll wait and see, Nintendo Consoles are the only one's I've bought for a long time owing to the Uniqueness of the games

 

[tranCendenZ]

Well they did show a Kick Ass Zelda game on a consol that's sub £100

As for the Revolution, well I'll wait and see, Nintendo Consoles are the only one's I've bought for a long time owing to the Uniqueness of the games

I dunno, I just don't feel Nintendo's games are all that unique anymore.

Were they unique on the NES? Heck yeh! On the SNES? Definitely! On the N64... Starting to get old. And then the same franchises again on Gamecube. Franchise characters are nice, but Nintendo really needs to come up with much more original games.

 

[Icarusintel]

Well they did show a Kick Ass Zelda game on a consol that's sub £100

As for the Revolution, well I'll wait and see, Nintendo Consoles are the only one's I've bought for a long time owing to the Uniqueness of the games

Zelda's great, and i'm looking forward to the new zelda game, but they've been coy as shit when it comes to the revolution, they better really have somethiung worthy of the name or they're screwed, since they're already the lowest earning of the console companies