INTERVIEW: Unlocking PS3's Cell Power

[tenchi86]

Interview resulting from what Vivendi Games and IBM did last week in regards to the Cell convention. It's a pretty good read IMO.

Unlocking the power of the PlayStation 3’s Cell processor is a difficult task, but how much so? High Moon Studios' (Darkwatch) technical boss Clinton Keith tells Next-Gen how much the Cell has to offer and how his studio plans to bust the processor wide open.
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4801&Itemid=2

[FudgeNuggets]

That was a nice article. I would prefer that he would’ve gone into more detail though. It’s good to see that his studio isn’t taking the approach that a lot of others have in saying “ The cell is too hard to program for, let’s not waste so much time on it and just port it from the 360 or PC.” Maybe the cell is a good idea, but I think that the payoff for it will be too far down the road and the developers for the most part will not have the patience that Vivendi does unless they get as many PS3s into consumers’ hands as they did PS2 which again is probably not likely to happen because of the soaring popularity of the Wii and the head-start the 360 has. I agree that the developers will probably be experimenting with using snippets of power from the SPEs instead of trying to max everything out from the get go. IF the Sony doesn’t lose so much money on the PS3 that they bail-out then the PS4 will probably by one helluva system because they’ll have had a huge jump on learning to program for it, IBM will probably quit making the traditional PPC CPUs that are in the 360 and Wii and Microsoft and Sony will either be forced to go to Intel programming or learn to program for the Cell, which may be just as likely seeing as how Xbox1 switched from x86 to PPC. I dunno….. we’ll see I guess.

[rainless]

Just be cause the Wii is popular doesn't necessarily put it into "everybody's hands." If they keep having real, or fictitous production problems, they never release online games, and they don't secure more developers themselves, they could be in a lot of trouble.

As far as "developers having the patience" you'd have to remember a took a while for developers to get around the 360's architecture as well. And it took even longer to maximize the potential of the PS2 (though some things were figured out early. Remember Tekken Tag in Japan with all the Jaggies? Then the US and EU versions wound up looking better than the arcade.)

As I've already mentioned, the PS3 already has a large stable of developers in their pocket from the success of the PS2. And I have yet to see most of those developers (seen any Konami games on the 360?) jump over to either the 360 or Wii. I believe they are ALL working on "the PS3 problem."

And once one company figures it out, they'll ALL know how its done.

[FudgeNuggets]

I'm not arguing with you ;) but Winning Eleven is a Konami game on the 360 as is Castlevania (although it's a LIVE game) but there is a Catlevania in development for the 360, don't know if it's exclusive or also being developed for PS3 though. Also remember consumers and developers will turn their backs QUICKLY on a console ie: the Sega Saturn, the Atari 5200, the Nintendo 64. Loyalty is left to the fanboyz who are not the majority.

Don't forget IBM just announced those courses and books to help the programmers get more familiar with the Cell. I personally think Sony should've stuck with a traditional PPC CPU until they could've given the developers more hands-on time with the Cell oe delayed the PS3 for a while longer. They couldn't due that though due to the 360 already being on the market for a year and Nintendo releasing their console. They were already 12 months "behind" Microsoft and couldn't afford to be 24.

I myself would've preferred to have had staggered console releases so that the games on the 360 and PS3 wouldn't be merely clones of each other or having one just be slightly better/faster than the other like the Xbox was to the PS2. I found myself torn in those days, the Xbox had better graphics and load times but the controller was horrendous compared to the PS2.

It'll take a bit to work out, probably about a year, not every console was an instant flop like the 5200 and Jaguar, some languished around a while before they died like the 7800 and some became popular after they'd been around a while like the ColecoVision and the DreamCast but the parent companies were too impatient and dumped them too early. I don't think Sony will make that mistake.

[tenchi86]

Sony didn't really give time for the Devs to work on the PS2 and it worked out fine. Pound for Pound I dare say it was easily the best system of the last gen graphically. Of course it did not look the best, but considering it was a 300Mhz CPU, with 32Mbs ram I think it ended up looking rather good graphically (God Of War 2 = Impressive). What am I saying by this, well simply I think Sony is often looking to the future and though it may start off rough it so far has payed off well for them. As for developers leaving I just don't see that really happening besides rumors. I have seen countless interviews where people in the end say after they started to wrap their head around the PS3 they started to become very excited with it and what it can do. Sony is also reportedly introducing new Dev kits at GDC that should help out the process a bit. In the End I am very happy Sony went with the Cell, it's power just waiting to be unearthed is a very tempting feature, and as my Sig says "What makes Mankind unique is that it never settles for what it has achieved already. The human being is always searching for more" which I think Sony is truly trying to do. (Not talking about the PS3 in particular here just the Cell in general.)

[FudgeNuggets]

I agree, for once, with you Tenchi, but would like to point out that the CPU for the PS1 was not so radically different from the processor in the PS2 as the PS3 is to not only the one and two but to everything else. Lest us not forget how difficult a time the developers had with the multiple processors in the Sega CD/Genesis, the Jaguar and the TG16/Duo, rather than accomodate those, they simply gave up. I think there's too much to lose to simply give-up on the PS3, but Sony will definately have to drag them kicking and screaming. I fear that the full power of the Cell may not be utilized until the PS3 is in its' last days or the PS4 is on its' way.

[rainless]

I agree, for once, with you Tenchi, but would like to point out that the CPU for the PS1 was not so radically different from the processor in the PS2 as the PS3 is to not only the one and two but to everything else. Lest us not forget how difficult a time the developers had with the multiple processors in the Sega CD/Genesis, the Jaguar and the TG16/Duo, rather than accomodate those, they simply gave up. I think there's too much to lose to simply give-up on the PS3, but Sony will definately have to drag them kicking and screaming. I fear that the full power of the Cell may not be utilized until the PS3 is in its' last days or the PS4 is on its' way.


However... reaching the "full power" of the PS3 could indefinately delay the arrival of a PS4...

Look at the PS2 for example: At full power you have God of War, God of War II, and Final Fantasy XII. NO home console game could match those three in terms of sales. Those are the three games (along with that weird japanese game and guitar heroes) that are still selling PS2s today. The 360 will be unable to rival the PS3... at peak power... without MAJOR hardware addons. (i.e. a built in HD-DVD drive, more hdd space, and possibly more ram.) The PS3 can *already* match the best that the 360 can do, and the 360 has been out for a year already and nobody even knows what the hell they're doing with the PS3 yet.

I like Tenchi's idea of "headroom". Even though development for the console is in its infancy, the PS3 still has rooms to grow. Developers will not grow impatient because they can already make 360-grade games and put them online (this cannot be said of the Wii, for example), and, as I already pointed out, once one company figures out how to do it, the rest will pick up from there.

Still the major concern... far more than development... is the price of the console. Though I still reason that... once high demand titles are released... gamers will do whatever necessary (pay in installments, credit, credit cards, etc.) to get their hands on the consoles.

Street Fighter 2 on the SNES, at the time being the first 12 Meg cart (Strider was the first 8 meg)... was damned expensive. But what WOULDN'T a gamer have paid to get it?

I don't think you'll ever see that level of demand for a video game ever again (just like you'll never see insane prices for comic books again...) but what exists now, that didn't then, is a MAINSTREAM enthusiast's market. It's not just teenage kids anymore. It's those kids that bought SF2 in '92... then grew up, got tech support jobs, made start-ups and are now buying for their kids AND themselves.

That's how all those DS Lites got sold (I swear I saw it happen: I was in target... guy bought two DS Lites, one pink, one black, for his kids and a 360 for him and the wife. This was in Target) and this is the very same crown that's out buying those 42inch plasma and LCD TVs.

The Old Ways of video gaming no longer apply. Sega was just a "video game company." Sony and Microsoft are "Multimedia Conglomerates." There are both financial and political considerations to be acknowledged.

You can't judge a modern supreme court case using the Articles of Confederation.

[OC Noob]

Uh, yeah. The whole "unlocking the power" thing comes up with most hyped high profile PC/console hardware including and its pretty much developers trying to get people to buy their game or the hardware guys trying to create more hype.

Games will get better like they always do, but theres no magical switch someone is going to throw to change the 7800gts or whatever it is into an 8800 like performing system.

[FudgeNuggets]

True Noob but the architecture of the consoles isn't the same as the PCs and they can do more tricks with them to squeeze more power out of them through processing as the processor and memory aren't tasked with non-gaming related duties as a PC is.

[tenchi86]

The GPU is most likly pretty slow, it's full specs have not yet been released. However the Cell is deisnged in a way that it can handle graphics and at one point was going to be the only GPU in the system, so it can probably pick up the slack. Anyway back to the Cell, personally I agree with you Fudge that the best looking games won't be out till the end of the systems life, but the PS2 was around the same. I mean just look at God of War II. This is a bad thing in terms of console sales, however it's nice for people who own the system as they always can look forward to something prettier. In all honesty though I cannot say the GPU will not hold back the Cell, or the Ram won't as I do not know, but the Cell in general seems to be a very promising platform. (a 6Ghz version is out soon)

[OC Noob]

True Noob but the architecture of the consoles isn't the same as the PCs and they can do more tricks with them to squeeze more power out of them through processing as the processor and memory aren't tasked with non-gaming related duties as a PC is.

I whole heartedly agree, I should have explained better. I don't believe in the notion that there is this untapped potential that can be unlocked with the flip of a switch.

Just like when there was a rumor that the 360 was going to get a 20% performance boost from a live update around the time the PS3 was launched.

First gen 360 games to second gen, there was a nice increase in performance and I expect a nice jump for PS3 games, just not a 7800gts to 8800 type graphics overnight.

So when do we get PS3's for $400??? Thats when I make my move:D

[FudgeNuggets]

I'd say you'll have at least a year's wait, longer if they start selling better. The PSP is getting a price cut this summer though due to lackluster sales and how long has it been out, almost 2 years?

[rainless]

I'd say you'll have at least a year's wait, longer if they start selling better. The PSP is getting a price cut this summer though due to lackluster sales and how long has it been out, almost 2 years?

I don't remember the CONSOLE having lackluster sales... The GAMES aren't selling... but that's only because most of them (at least the UMD games :) ) suck...

Tekken's good... Killzone is good... Lumines is awesome... but it was like the FIRST FRIGGIN GAME.

Nobody ever really understood the psp. They should've had a new wave of developer come up with a new type of game... like they did for the DS Lite. Locco Rocco was a great game. More people should've followed in its footsteps.

[tenchi86]

Offtopic: Sales wise last Holiday it was under 10% behind the DS if memory servers correct, there are also some good games coming out later like Final Fantasy that should help it. All and all though it's doing pretty good considering who it is up against.

[FudgeNuggets]

You're right Rainman, it IS the games that are not selling at least not NEW games. According to Jackass Tretton people are waiting until the games drop down to $20 or Blockbuster starts selling them off before they buy. Who can blame them really? I like my DS and all but I've only bought ONE new game for it. I can't really justify paying $30-$40 for a game that has inferior graphics (at least to the 360, Wii and PS3) and is so much shorter than a regular non-handheld console game. Then again, I am a cheap ass ******* and RARELY ever buy a console game new either.

[Falcon-K]

Offtopic: Sales wise last Holiday it was under 10% behind the DS if memory servers correct, there are also some good games coming out later like Final Fantasy that should help it. All and all though it's doing pretty good considering who it is up against.


It was a bit higher than that

http://www.gamesarefun.com/news.php?newsid=7404
http://www.gamesarefun.com/news.php?newsid=7318

In november, the DS outsold the PSP 918k to 412k ~ 120%
In December, the DS outsold the PSP 1.6m to 953k ~ 68%


In January though the PSP did gain a little momentium only being down by 13% to the DS.

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=15294&ncid=AOLGAM000500000000021

[John G]

While I expect games to improve a lot on the PS3 over the life of the console, I also expect nearly the same out of games on the 360. Improvements in games over the life-cycle of a console are usually a whole lot more about software than they are about hardware. All the same limitations continue to exist, and even if there are more practical ways to use the Cell processor in the PS3, there will still be the same limitations with memory and GPU (which are more frequently the bottlenecks in modern games, anyway.)

Reality is, the 360 and the PS3 are very close in practical, real world hardware performance. It is seen in the games now, and even though perceived positioning will jocky around as people adjust with each new, big title they see, they will never truely be far apart other than in the minds of fan-boys. I wouldn't look forward to improved performance in the PS3 any more than I did with any other major console. (It's always something to look forward to.)

This generation is consoles isn't going to be won or lost because of hardware performance. The last 2-3 generations weren't, and they had bigger performance gaps than this one.

:)

[tenchi86]

It was a bit higher than that

http://www.gamesarefun.com/news.php?newsid=7404
http://www.gamesarefun.com/news.php?newsid=7318

In november, the DS outsold the PSP 918k to 412k ~ 120%
In December, the DS outsold the PSP 1.6m to 953k ~ 68%


In January though the PSP did gain a little momentium only being down by 13% to the DS.

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=15294&ncid=AOLGAM00050000=0000021
Must have been thinking of January, really though that gap comes from Japan. In America the DS is up by around 3million, in Japan its up by 10million. Of course not saying Japan does not matter, just pointing out in America at least they are a bit closer.

While I expect games to improve a lot on the PS3 over the life of the console, I also expect nearly the same out of games on the 360. Improvements in games over the life-cycle of a console are usually a whole lot more about software than they are about hardware. All the same limitations continue to exist, and even if there are more practical ways to use the Cell processor in the PS3, there will still be the same limitations with memory and GPU (which are more frequently the bottlenecks in modern games, anyway.)

Reality is, the 360 and the PS3 are very close in practical, real world hardware performance. It is seen in the games now, and even though perceived positioning will jocky around as people adjust with each new, big title they see, they will never truely be far apart other than in the minds of fan-boys. I wouldn't look forward to improved performance in the PS3 any more than I did with any other major console. (It's always something to look forward to.)

This generation is consoles isn't going to be won or lost because of hardware performance. The last 2-3 generations weren't, and they had bigger performance gaps than this one.
We are really not talking though about if it will win the race for it. We are talking about the power in the Cell, which so far has shown to be very good. As Rainless said people claim to have no idea how to use it yet the games are still looking close to the best of what the Xbox360 has got.

[FudgeNuggets]

I'm not arguing that Tenchi, but I think GOW is the only 360 game thus far to take advantage of all 3 cores in the 360. Wait until Forza2 hits :drool: I must admit though, if the game actually looks like the demos, MotorStorm appears to be impressive.

[PYROMANIAC]

I'm not arguing that Tenchi, but I think GOW is the only 360 game thus far to take advantage of all 3 cores in the 360. Wait until Forza2 hits :drool: I must admit though, if the game actually looks like the demos, MotorStorm appears to be impressive.

the in store demos of motostorm don't look near as good as the demo ps3 owners can download from the ps store, also the in store demo gets poor framerate. the game will be pretty impressive and not only that, it's a blast to play. don't forget the 12 player online action, trying to push other people off the cliff is going to be great

[tenchi86]

Offtopic: Apparently the real game looks even better and plays much better then the Demo. Still though I don't think we will be seeing games that really max out the Cell for a few years.

[rainless]

Offtopic: Apparently the real game looks even better and plays much better then the Demo. Still though I don't think we will be seeing games that really max out the Cell for a few years.

A *few* years is a bit presumptuous. Then again "max" is sort of a loaded word, too... But I think we'll be seeing games that take the PS3 where Gears of War took the 360 within the year (sorry Fudge... Konami wasn't busting their asses over Castlevania for the Live! Arcade...)

A number of developers have been working ceaselessly on PS3 solutions, and they will prevail... with a vengeance.

[tenchi86]

When I said max though I did mean Max it out. The same could probably be said for the 360. They will both reach their sweat spot much sooner then that but even past that games will slowly increase visually.

[tenchi86]

Well not to poke a dead horse but figured this will have some effect on how fast the Cell is used to its fullest. Apparntly Sony is ranked 3rd in 1st party developers failing to match Ubisoft and EA in the number of workers they have. Of course I am not saying this means quality, but with those numbers Sony certainly does have a lot of people working on the Cell. Which could help increase just how fast it's unlocked. Looks like the future may really be purely First party exclusives with 3rd parties going Multi platform to save money like a lot of people have been claiming.

Sony = 2,200
Ubisoft = 2,400
EA = 5,500

http://spong.com/article/11947?cb=300

[FudgeNuggets]

Any idea how many Microsoft and Nintendo have in just the game development departments? I think Nintendo will likely have the most and Microsoft the least.

[tenchi86]

No but according to that article Nintendo and Microsoft combined do not have as many as Sony.

[FudgeNuggets]

That's a lot of cash they're spending when they release FAR less in-house titles than Nintendo does.

[tenchi86]

Yeah, I would guess the difference in numbers comes from the fact the Sony is working on more large scale titles while Nintendo is trying to pump out fun games that are relitivly easy to make.

[rainless]

Yeah, I would guess the difference in numbers comes from the fact the Sony is working on more large scale titles while Nintendo is trying to pump out fun games that are relitivly easy to make.

There's really no contest. A Mario Kart or Super Smash brothers are sort of like those games you could program into a TI81 in comparison to something like God of War II. Then you have things like Mario Tennis, and Mario Golf... The only things that really take any effort are maybe the Metroid games and zelda games.

It's been years since I've seen anything as complete as Mario 64 was.