PS3?

[Quadriflax]

I found this while looking for drivers. Dunno how accurate it is, but maybe people would be interested in these specs.

Playstation 3 Specs

- Name: Sony Playstation 3

- MPU (Microprocessor Unit): code name "Cell" Chip

- Graphics Synthesizer (GS): sub-0.10 micron chip

- CPU Clock Frequency: 2Ghz AMD Processor

- Transistors: 287.5 million transistors per second

- DRAM Memory: 256Mb.of DRAM

- Pixels: 1.2 & 2.6 gigapixels per second

- Actual Display Capability: 75 million polygons per second

- Internal Bus: 2Kb internal bus provides a bandwidth of 48GBps

- Embeded Memory: 32Mb

- Release Date: TBA (rumored for 2004-2005)

(source: http://www.geforcezone.com/ )

 

[Xavier]

Originally posted by Quadriflax@Dec. 08 2002, 8:42 am

Playstation 3 Specs

- Name: Sony Playstation 3

- MPU (Microprocessor Unit): code name "Cell" Chip

- Graphics Synthesizer (GS): sub-0.10 micron chip

- CPU Clock Frequency: 2Ghz AMD Processor

- Transistors: 287.5 million transistors per second

- DRAM Memory: 256Mb.of DRAM

- Pixels: 1.2 & 2.6 gigapixels per second

- Actual Display Capability: 75 million polygons per second

- Internal Bus: 2Kb internal bus provides a bandwidth of 48GBps

- Embeded Memory: 32Mb

- Release Date: TBA (rumored for 2004-2005)

Now I dont believe piracy killed the dreamcast I believe it was sony's false leak of lies from the PS2 , stuff like it was going to be 1 gighz(I laughed a computer wasn't even that fast at the time ) 20 gig hard drive 500 megs of ram ect .

 

[Zziggy00]

I'm tired of people always comparing specs and boasting about them... Granted graphics and speed are a huge part of gaming, but the stories and/or game play is what it's all about.

For instance I've got friends that just bought Mortal Kombat Deadly Alliance for Xbox. I brought over MK Trilogy to show them all about what the games were originally like and all the multiple combos/moves the characters had. Before I even turned it on they chuckled about how bad the graphics probably were. After turning it on, and starting a match, only probably a min. in they both almost automatically said this is crap, it looks horriable, turn it off....

It's sad that some people can't recognize a good game unless it's flashly and stunning to the eye.

 

[Taelon]

Quadriflex: I have several questions regarding your "specs"... here goes.

1. So what if the CPU is called "Cell chip"? What's that even supposed to mean?

2. Since when is a video chip referred to as a "graphics synthesizer"? Already I'm thinking that someone dreamed up a load of crap and didn't even bother to use correct terms...

3. 2GHz AMD processor? What processor, an Athlon XP or a new, custom-made one? Will that be *true* 2GHz, or effective speed according to AMD? Isn't 2GHz already going to be old by the time the PS3 is actually released on the market?

4. "Transistors: 287.5 million transistors per second" - huh?? What, do we use a synthesizer to manufacture transistors per second now? What is this PS3 really supposed to do? LOL ...

5. 256MB of DRAM, nice, but what kind? DDR? Rambus? What's the clock speed and bandwidth? How much of this is system RAM, video RAM, sound RAM?

6. "Pixels: 1.2 & 2.6 gigapixels per second" - which is it? 1.2 or 2.6? Can't be both... Also, no word whether that's theoretical maximum fill rate or what, and whether that's with per-pixel shading/texturing/light sourcing etc...

7. "Actual Display Capability: 75 million polygons per second" - that's exactly the theoretical maximum that the PS2 currently achieves, except it's being bottlenecked and really puts out much less polygons per second than this. And what of resolutions and colors? HDTV and VGA output?

8. "Internal Bus: 2Kb internal bus provides a bandwidth of 48GBps" - how do you measure a bus in Kbytes? Unless you're telling me it's going to have a bus that's 2048 BYTES!!! wide, which I'm not going to believe on a cold day in hell, this just doesn't make any sense.

9. And finally, what's this embedded memory of 32MB for?

Embedded where? CPU cache, maybe? Again, extremely unlikely...certainly not 32MB of it...Haha, no. Never.

All these specs are idiotic and ridiculous and nobody with any knowledge about computing technology can take these seriously. I know I can't.

 

[Gear]

This is bullshit to keep people (non decided buyers) waiting for the new sony console instead of going to buy one of the existing non-sony ones. Remember what happened when dc was the only 128bit console in the market.

 

[SkankinMonkey]

You realize that this was a joke, correct? If you can't figure it out just by reading the specs, then please, kill yourself.

 

[Gear]

Originally posted by Zziggy00@Dec. 08 2002, 6:32 pm

I'm tired of people always comparing specs and boasting about them... Granted graphics and speed are a huge part of gaming, but the stories and/or game play is what it's all about.

For instance I've got friends that just bought Mortal Kombat Deadly Alliance for Xbox. I brought over MK Trilogy to show them all about what the games were originally like and all the multiple combos/moves the characters had. Before I even turned it on they chuckled about how bad the graphics probably were. After turning it on, and starting a match, only probably a min. in they both almost automatically said this is crap, it looks horriable, turn it off....

It's sad that some people can't recognize a good game unless it's flashly and stunning to the eye.

That happened to me once when I was trying to show radiant silvergun to a friend.

 

[Gear]

Originally posted by SkankinMonkey@Dec. 08 2002, 9:19 pm

You realize that this was a joke, correct? If you can't figure it out just by reading the specs, then please, kill yourself.

Well, dc was killed by "jokes" like this one

That's why I hate them so much.

 

[Curtis]

The rumor I heard was that Sony would be experimenting with distributed computing - using broadband technologies to share the workload of the CPU around all connected PS3s. Probably complete bollox.

 

[Quadriflax]

Originally posted by Taelon@Dec. 08 2002, 7:43 pm

Quadriflex: I have several questions regarding your "specs"... here goes.

Pssh... you think I can answer those? I didn't say they were legit, I just found them and posted them. I have zero interest in the whole thing. But it WAS video game related. Yes, sometimes I like to be on topic

So don't shoot the messenger. I could care less about it.

Oh, and it's Quadriflax. :

:

 

[Taelon]

Well, OK, OK, so you're the messenger

so carry that message of mine back to the source and have them answer it ok

that said... QuadriFLAX?? I swear it was always QuadriFLEX. Did you just change your nickname or am I going nuts?

 

[Quadriflax]

Originally posted by Taelon@Dec. 09 2002, 5:29 pm

Well, OK, OK, so you're the messenger

so carry that message of mine back to the source and have them answer it ok

that said... QuadriFLAX?? I swear it was always QuadriFLEX. Did you just change your nickname or am I going nuts?

You're not going nuts, you are nuts. But it's okay, I am too...

I only brought it up because someone else did that not too long ago. It might have been you though...

At least you didn't tell me to kill myself.

 

[Cloud121]

Yeah I hate Sony for their empty hype (like that), lies (again, like that) and shoddily built hardware (Overheating and freezing problems on initial PSX's. DVD Incompatibilities, Drive not ejecting, and games not reading on the initial PS2s, etc.). I love the PSX, and the PS2 is starting to grow on me somewhat. But it's the games that make me like them. Sony's pack o' lies, loads of empty hype, and shoddy workmanship are the reasons why I dislike Sony.

 

[gameboy900]

I still love the great power of the ps2 that sony hyped. It's an amazing system. Heck it can do 75 million polygons per second...that's like 25 times the max of the DC. Too bad it can't actually show them...BUT IT CAN CALCULATE THEM!!!

 

[antime]

Like no-one else is guilty of hyping. Who was it again marketing a "128-bit" console?

 

[SimSonic]

NEW SONY BULLSHIT! Like when they were releasing PS2...that Emotion Engine crap...2 GHz and 256mb would

be prehistorical at 2004 or 2005. Dreamcast & Xbox rulez!

 

[antime]

Originally posted by SimSonic@Dec. 10 2002, 10:01 pm

2 GHz and 256mb would be prehistorical at 2004 or 2005.

Depends on the CPU. A 2GHz x86 would indeed not be cutting-edge, but a 2GHz MIPS CPU would be something else. (On a sort-of-related note, with the purchase of Alchemy Semiconductor AMD is now a MIPS licensee and has reportedly licensed the MIPS64 architecture as well.)

 

[DBOY]

Whatever "bit" a system claims to be is almost always a lie. Especially when it's the new thing coming out.

Anyone remember the Jaguar or the NeoGeo MVS?

 

[ExCyber]

The rumor I heard was that Sony would be experimenting with distributed computing - using broadband technologies to share the workload of the CPU around all connected PS3s. Probably complete bollox.

It's probably closer to the truth than a 2GHz AMD processor. There have been fairly persistent "rumors" (to the extent that nothing's been formally announced, but bits and pieces are showing up in official releases) that PS3 could be something along the lines of a "cluster on a chip" derived from PS2's architecture, much as a bunch of the PS2's functions are actually housed in a souped up "PSX on a chip". This is supposedly going to be enabled by electron beam lithography (a technique that's been around for decades, but traditionally applied in ways that don't work well for mass production).

One thing that's known about the console market is that incremental upgrades just don't sell - if there's not an immediately obvious difference in what the system is capable of, it's not going to be considered "next-gen". A point of diminishing returns has been reached with the current development model - PS2, Gamecube, and Xbox are the Genesis, SNES, and PC Engine of their time, realizing the promise of the previous generation rather than really breaking new ground. I can't claim to know for sure what PS3 will be, but I do feel confident in saying that it's got to find a way to make a pretty big leap if it's going to be successful...

Whatever "bit" a system claims to be is almost always a lie. Especially when it's the new thing coming out.

Anyone remember the Jaguar or the NeoGeo MVS?

The lie is not the number itself, but the underlying idea that an entire computer has some characteristic "number of bits". There are a bunch of numbers that have an equal basis in fact, and manufacturers pick different ones all the time; some are just more creative than others. :

:

 

[Taelon]

Little anecdote on the side

I'm getting back into vinyl records (still own a small collection) and so I recently bought a turntable made by Sony. It needs a new cartridge/stylus, so while browsing for one on the Web I came across another turntable, also made by Sony long ago.

It's model number is PS-3.