If you haven't already seen it, here's my coverage of Sony's Playstation 3 announcement today. I wrote the story while sitting in Sony's press conference, so it was a bit rushed but I wanted to post some of my additional thoughts that didn't make it into the first article.
Let me start first with the design; to me, the Xbox 360 is very Apple-like while the PS3 is very clearly a Sony product. Personally I prefer the looks of the Xbox 360, but the PS3 doesn't look bad at all in real life.
Although I've yet to use it, the PS3's controller scares me. I'm going to try my hands at it this week, but I really have no idea where that design came from.
The demos on the PS3 were absolutely *amazing*. I wouldn't call them "movie-quality" yet, but the things I saw came very close. Words really can't describe, the demos just looked amazing.
Virtually all of the games/demos on the PS3 had some degree of aliasing, some were unacceptably bad for a console with this sort of power. Don't get me wrong, about 95% of the games looked great, but those that had aliasing looked great...with jaggies. I'm not talking PS2 level of aliasing, but far too much aliasing for this level of hardware.
Without a doubt, ATI and NVIDIA are on very diverging paths with these two consoles. ATI went with a strictly unified memory architecture while NVIDIA used a combination of local graphics memory and GPU addressable system memory. ATI is backing their unified shader architecture, while NVIDIA doesn't appear to have embraced that on the hardware side. I will know more about ATI's GPU later this week, so stay tuned.
The dual HD output feature of the PS3 is very interesting; I'm not sure how many folks will take advantage of the 32:9 aspect ratio mode. I'm wondering whether this feature was put in to support sending different content to separate TVs (e.g. stream video to one display while gaming in another). Then again, I'm not sure how many people have that many HDTVs within close proximity of each other.
Sony clearly wants the PS3 to be much more of a media center style device. The demos weren't only about games, they were about decoding HD streams, navigating through video and picture content, they were about the entire picture. With built in blu-ray, I think the PS3 will have a huge advantage over the Xbox 360 as it should be able to act as a HD-DVD video player as well as a game console.
The 1080p output of the PS3 isn't that big of a deal for me. Given that basically the entire installed base of HDTVs right now only support 1080i, I seriously doubt we'll see a push to 1080p only all that quickly. That being said, I don't doubt that there will be an obvious difference between 1080p and 720p games. Given that it is essentially a resolution change, I see no reason for all developers to offer both 1080p and 720p options in PS3 games unless there are frame rate limitations. I did notice that some demos played much smoother than others, but I think it is far too early to make any calls on performance a full year before the console's release.
I'd say that Sony has the more powerful CPU on paper, but I'm curious to see how much of that gets taken advantage of in the real world. Difficulty of programming aside, the fact of the matter is that console development houses are very much of the write once, compile many mindset. Given the similarity of the Xbox 360's cores to the PS3's PPE, I'm afraid that the array of SPEs may go relatively untapped on the PS3.
From the very start I felt that Sony couldn't possibly bring the Cell to market in the PS3 as a 90nm chip. Disabling one SPE is a particularly interesting move, but one that makes a lot of sense. And the loss of a single SPE isn't a huge deal as I don't foresee the PS3 really being bound by the number of threads its SPE array can execute.
Overall, the PS3 looks to me to be the more complete package. The hardware is a bit more complete than Xbox 360, but at the same time given that it won't launch for another 6+ months after the 360 launches I'm not too surprised. Sony didn't really play up a competitor to Xbox Live, although it is very clear that the PS3 will be a net-enabled box. I have a feeling that Microsoft may bring to the table a much more complete on-line play package, while Sony brings a more powerful, more complete console.
Sony's strength with the PS2 has always been its game library, which I think will continue to be a strength with the PS3 (especially with full backwards compatibility all the way back to PS1). It's just that this time around, Microsoft appears to have a much stronger game library than with the original Xbox - and it's that key difference that will make the 360 and the PS3 worthy competitors.
I will be reporting from the show all week, but for now it's time to enjoy 24 a full 3 hours later than I normally would - how do you west coast folks do it? :)
Take care.
Let me start first with the design; to me, the Xbox 360 is very Apple-like while the PS3 is very clearly a Sony product. Personally I prefer the looks of the Xbox 360, but the PS3 doesn't look bad at all in real life.
Although I've yet to use it, the PS3's controller scares me. I'm going to try my hands at it this week, but I really have no idea where that design came from.
The demos on the PS3 were absolutely *amazing*. I wouldn't call them "movie-quality" yet, but the things I saw came very close. Words really can't describe, the demos just looked amazing.
Virtually all of the games/demos on the PS3 had some degree of aliasing, some were unacceptably bad for a console with this sort of power. Don't get me wrong, about 95% of the games looked great, but those that had aliasing looked great...with jaggies. I'm not talking PS2 level of aliasing, but far too much aliasing for this level of hardware.
Without a doubt, ATI and NVIDIA are on very diverging paths with these two consoles. ATI went with a strictly unified memory architecture while NVIDIA used a combination of local graphics memory and GPU addressable system memory. ATI is backing their unified shader architecture, while NVIDIA doesn't appear to have embraced that on the hardware side. I will know more about ATI's GPU later this week, so stay tuned.
The dual HD output feature of the PS3 is very interesting; I'm not sure how many folks will take advantage of the 32:9 aspect ratio mode. I'm wondering whether this feature was put in to support sending different content to separate TVs (e.g. stream video to one display while gaming in another). Then again, I'm not sure how many people have that many HDTVs within close proximity of each other.
Sony clearly wants the PS3 to be much more of a media center style device. The demos weren't only about games, they were about decoding HD streams, navigating through video and picture content, they were about the entire picture. With built in blu-ray, I think the PS3 will have a huge advantage over the Xbox 360 as it should be able to act as a HD-DVD video player as well as a game console.
The 1080p output of the PS3 isn't that big of a deal for me. Given that basically the entire installed base of HDTVs right now only support 1080i, I seriously doubt we'll see a push to 1080p only all that quickly. That being said, I don't doubt that there will be an obvious difference between 1080p and 720p games. Given that it is essentially a resolution change, I see no reason for all developers to offer both 1080p and 720p options in PS3 games unless there are frame rate limitations. I did notice that some demos played much smoother than others, but I think it is far too early to make any calls on performance a full year before the console's release.
I'd say that Sony has the more powerful CPU on paper, but I'm curious to see how much of that gets taken advantage of in the real world. Difficulty of programming aside, the fact of the matter is that console development houses are very much of the write once, compile many mindset. Given the similarity of the Xbox 360's cores to the PS3's PPE, I'm afraid that the array of SPEs may go relatively untapped on the PS3.
From the very start I felt that Sony couldn't possibly bring the Cell to market in the PS3 as a 90nm chip. Disabling one SPE is a particularly interesting move, but one that makes a lot of sense. And the loss of a single SPE isn't a huge deal as I don't foresee the PS3 really being bound by the number of threads its SPE array can execute.
Overall, the PS3 looks to me to be the more complete package. The hardware is a bit more complete than Xbox 360, but at the same time given that it won't launch for another 6+ months after the 360 launches I'm not too surprised. Sony didn't really play up a competitor to Xbox Live, although it is very clear that the PS3 will be a net-enabled box. I have a feeling that Microsoft may bring to the table a much more complete on-line play package, while Sony brings a more powerful, more complete console.
Sony's strength with the PS2 has always been its game library, which I think will continue to be a strength with the PS3 (especially with full backwards compatibility all the way back to PS1). It's just that this time around, Microsoft appears to have a much stronger game library than with the original Xbox - and it's that key difference that will make the 360 and the PS3 worthy competitors.
I will be reporting from the show all week, but for now it's time to enjoy 24 a full 3 hours later than I normally would - how do you west coast folks do it? :)
Take care.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
125 Comments
View All Comments
Chris - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
I think they MS wanted to announce first so Sony would feel it would have to obviously up them. I feel though that MS might have come to the table with some "Smaller" figures to make Sony think they are winning. MS and Sony have very smart maketing and strategists and who really knows right? But it just seems all too surreal that they'd be so very similar.Another comment - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
As I see it, PS3 is going to have Blu-Ray andmore power for physics calculations. Otherwise
the consoles are fairly evenly matched (even in transistor count). Actually, Xbox 360:s three symmetrical cores might be better for AI and gameplay (?) processing.
The number of controllers (probably) tells you nothing, it should be relatively easy to connect 20 wireless controllers. I would expect Microsoft to bump up some specs, like the number of controllers, 1080 p support (easy with HDMI/DVI, and the ATI chip should be ready for it), and possibly some megahertz more to the graphics processor (Sony has given a target, 550 MHz ?).
It seems to me that the graphics side of PS3 wasn't as it was originally imagined, otherwise I don't really understand why you would put two different very fast memory interfaces in it. When did NVidia come aboard? Seems to me NVidia didn't have time to design a chip for XDR. (Also dual HDMI is easy to do when dual outputs are in most graphics cards. I wouldn't expect any good usage for it.) Also, "The RSX can render pixels to any part of memory, giving it access to the full 512MB of memory of the PS3." sounds like not wanting to admit it has only 256MB of usable video ram.
Even Microsoft's one teraflops figure was overhyped, and now Sony comes with two teraflops. In real world, both should fall far, far behind that figure. (NV possibly has more math units in its shader pipes, but can you efficiently use them?) It may end up being very difficult to recognize the differences between X360 and PS3 games. And many times they should be exactly the same.
Sony should have enough time to redesign their controller if people complain too much about it. Looks strange, but for me the PS/PS2 controllers are uncomfortable too.
I might expect MS to catch sony somewhat in the market share this round (with Sony still leading), but Sony would have to mess up badly for MS to take the lead.
Anonymous - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
killzone and that mudracing game unbelieable.that nvida gpu is the most powerfull ever produced.
Faster then 2 x 6800 Ultra !!! 2006 is gona be good year
paiva - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
the images of killzone is in game people see them ..........................................................................amazingzeroPing - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
Well... What a show.PS3 = very sexy.
controller = not hot, but remember Sony is in middle of dispute with controller company, so thats why thay could not show DualShock 3.
Please watch the PS3 live event video at gamespot. The specs are absolutly kikass and makes xbox360 look like xbox 1.5.
If youre to buy a similar spec PC in a year, it would cost 2500$, but could get ps3 for maybe $299!!
I defenetly like xbox360 live.
Whats up with 3 ethenet ports on ps3?
1080p will look kikass on my 24inch Dell 1920x1200!!
and ya.
no god but god
mohomad god messanger.
Mohammad was good man.
But dont forget moslems like Jesus and Moses as much as Mohammad. Moslems belive in Virgin Mary, Jesus's reserection etc. Did you know?
Anonymous - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
#49, Agreed! The XB360 vs. PS3 really boils down to an ATI vs. nVidia debate for hardware enthusiasts and we know which of the two companies is paying the bills here!Anonymous - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
Anand:Just looking at the title of your PS3 article, "Sony introduced the Playstation 3 today...and wow..", shows your pro-nVidia bias. Where was the emotion in the XB360 article title?
So, I guess it's safe to assume your pro-nVidia bias spills into consoles now too?
RZaakir - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
I have two words about why 24 was off the chain last night...Mia Kirshner AKA Mandy
Masamura - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
wtf do god have to do with PS3?oh wait a minute...
PS3 IS GOD.
bluefish - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
#34The PS3 has 256MB of vram & can use any part of the 256MB main memory (thru memory sharing of somesort).
360 - eDRAM 10MB + 512MB shared with main memory
PS3 - 256MB GDDR3 + 256MB XDR main memory shareable with GPU
not a big difference here it would seem. Obviously the way PS3 uses its memory is not neat & VERY costly, but it is effective.
BTW, if u wanna know how the Cell (PPE/SPE) works , just check www.research.scea.com
#45
Toshiba just announced a new 3-layer HD-DVD that's supposed to solve the capacity problems HD-DVD had vs Blu-Ray. Talks? ah.....WHAT TALKS?
www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2005_05/pr1002.htm