You get what you pay for.

[Shockeye]

AnandTech has a very interesting write-up on why the Xbox 360 and PS3 processors are crap.

Here's a taste:

While Microsoft and Sony have been childishly playing this flops-war, comparing the 1 TFLOPs processing power of the Xenon CPU to the 2 TFLOPs processing power of the Cell, the real-world performance war has already been lost.

Right now, from what we’ve heard, the real-world performance of the Xenon CPU is about twice that of the 733MHz processor in the first Xbox.  Considering that this CPU is supposed to power the Xbox 360 for the next 4 - 5 years, it’s nothing short of disappointing.  To put it in perspective, floating point multiplies are apparently 1/3 as fast on Xenon as on a Pentium 4.

The reason for the poor performance?  The very narrow 2-issue in-order core also happens to be very deeply pipelined, apparently with a branch predictor that’s not the best in the business.  In the end, you get what you pay for, and with such a small core, it’s no surprise that performance isn’t anywhere near the Athlon 64 or Pentium 4 class.

The Cell processor doesn’t get off the hook just because it only uses a single one of these horribly slow cores; the SPE array ends up being fairly useless in the majority of situations, making it little more than a waste of die space.

We mentioned before that collision detection is able to be accelerated on the SPEs of Cell, despite being fairly branch heavy.  The lack of a branch predictor in the SPEs apparently isn’t that big of a deal, since most collision detection branches are basically random and can’t be predicted even with the best branch predictor.  So not having a branch predictor doesn’t hurt, what does hurt however is the very small amount of local memory available to each SPE.  In order to access main memory, the SPE places a DMA request on the bus (or the PPE can initiate the DMA request) and waits for it to be fulfilled.  From those that have had experience with the PS3 development kits, this access takes far too long to be used in many real world scenarios.  It is the small amount of local memory that each SPE has access to that limits the SPEs from being able to work on more than a handful of tasks.  While physics acceleration is an important one, there are many more tasks that can’t be accelerated by the SPEs because of the memory limitation.

That's right, boys and girls, the PC is still better.

Did I mention Sony continues to piss off developers?

We of course asked the obvious question: would game developers rather have 3 slow general purpose cores, or one of those cores paired with an array of specialized SPEs?  The response was unanimous, everyone we have spoken to would rather take the general purpose core approach.

Citing everything from ease of programming to the limitations of the SPEs we mentioned previously, the Xbox 360 appears to be the more developer-friendly of the two platforms according to the cross-platform developers we've spoken to.  Despite being more developer-friendly, the Xenon CPU is still not what developers wanted.

The most ironic bit of it all is that according to developers, if either manufacturer had decided to use an Athlon 64 or a Pentium D in their next-gen console, they would be significantly ahead of the competition in terms of CPU performance.

I guess Microsoft doesn't get off the hook either. Sure it's a better approach IF THEY HAD DONE IT RIGHT.

Save us Revolution, you're our only hope.

[stray]

I find it a bit....Shortsighted. There's more to take into account for console performance than just raw specs.

Yes, the PC is still better.

But the PC is a heck of lot more inefficient.

The most ironic bit of it all is that according to developers, if either manufacturer had decided to use an Athlon 64 or a Pentium D in their next-gen console, they would be significantly ahead of the competition in terms of CPU performance.

This statement is funny. "Who" exactly is the competition?

[Shockeye]

This statement is funny. "Who" exactly is the competition?

If Microsoft or Sony had opted for a P4 or Athlon, they would have been head and shoulders above the other in performance.

[MrHat]

This statement is funny. "Who" exactly is the competition?

If Microsoft or Sony had opted for a P4 or Athlon, they would have been head and shoulders above the other in performance.

Yes, but who the fuck is going to buy a $600 box to play games on.

[Stormwaltz]

Yes, but who the fuck is going to buy a $600 box to play games on.

Presumably the same people who are going to buy a $600 HDTV in order to get the full measure from their PS3 or 360.

[MrHat]

Yes, but who the fuck is going to buy a $600 box to play games on.

Presumably the same people who are going to buy a $600 HDTV in order to get the full measure from their PS3 or 360.

I bought a $600 HDTV, and I can say that it was the best purchase I've ever made.

[Xanthippe]

Yes, but who the fuck is going to buy a $600 box to play games on.

Presumably the same people who are going to buy a $600 HDTV in order to get the full measure from their PS3 or 360.

I bought a $600 HDTV, and I can say that it was the best purchase I've ever made.

Really - I'm surprised.  I've been putting off buying a HDTV because I didn't think it would add that much value to watching movies, TV or playing games.

The best purchase I've ever made to date is my TiVo.

[schild]

I bought a $600 HDTV. A Phillips no less. And it is probably one of the best purchases I ever made.

[sinij]

I was considering posting link to this article when I first read it but I decided not to since people might dismiss it as console-hating on my part. Well seems consoles this time around will be outdated POS hardware-wise from day one, instead of getting there within few months of release. Enjoy your pixelated crap while PC gamers will soon hit photo-realistic graphics.

[Joe]

Shit, I'd throw it all away for good sprite-based SNES gaming. I dislike photorealism and polygons. Half-Life 2 can suck me; Super Punch-Out was more fun and didn't cost me $300 to play (thanks, Nvidia!).

[schild]

We'll see. It takes a few years to get maximum performance out of a console. Look at God of War vs anything from the first year of the PS2. Look at the backgrounds (particularly the final battle against Tengu) in DOAU vs anything - including DOA3 - in the first year of the Xbox.

Look at Luigi's Mansion and Resident Evil 4.

That article does not mean shit to me. 

[Teleku]

Save us Revolution, you're our only hope.

You do realize that the Revolution is suppose to be the most developer unfriendly device ever created, right?

Puting faith in Nintendo is a very bad idea in almost any event.

[schild]

BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT. ITUNES FOR ROMS YOU ALREADY HAVE. 


Rocks. The emoticon for any occasion.

[Margalis]

You do realize that the Revolution is suppose to be the most developer unfriendly device ever created, right?

Why is that? The Gamecube was very easy to develop for. Nintendo is tough because of the license issues and difficulty in getting dev kits. From an engineering perspective the Gamecube was a relative breeze compared to the PS2.

[Teleku]

I just seem to remember the head of Nintendo publicly stating he was a bit worried since the Revolution would be so REVOLUTIONARY that it would be hard for 3rd party developers to work on, which Nintendo is already in short supply of.  When the head of the company is even saying that, it probably means in reality that the programmers are going to have to code in hieroglyphics while hanging upside down.

But I could be wrong, maybe I just misread that interview/press release.  I can’t seem to find it.  Still, if you factor into how much of an asshole shitball company Nintendo is to work with, on top of any difficulties you might have developing for the system, the Revolution will probably be the biggest headache for developers to work with.  This is why Nintendo has steadily been losing 3rd party developers over the years, and it will probably get worst.

Quite frankly, I wish Nintendo would just drop out of making consoles and concentrait on making games, like Sega.  At this point people just buy Nintendo consoles to play the next iterations of Zelda, Metroid, Mario, ect.

[Margalis]

The world certainly doesn't need 3 consoles at any given time, but hardware wise I'd take the N64 over the PSX and the Cube over the PS2. Nintendo still has the attitude that you have to beg to develop for them, which might have been ok in the days of NES/SNES but those days are long over.

As far as being too Revolutionary to program for, I find that hard to believe. Maybe hard to use the controller or whatever else in the way it was intended, but whatever. The Cube had pretty friendly APIs that were essentially OpenGL derivatives from what I understand, so I can't imagine it being too bad.

[Sky]

I bought a $3300 hdtv. Best gaming purchase I've ever made.

BF2...omg. And I have no need to go to a movie theater ever again. Not cheap, but it's my main hobby and cheaper than a snowmobile or boat (which are seasonal hobbies, anyway). I have zero regrets about buying what even I admit is a pretty ridiculously expensive set. It was more than worth it! (which is why I hop onto the fanboi box every time we mention hdtv...)

It's funny hearing the complaint about the Cell architecture - same complaints as the Emotion Engine. Same claims by Sony, to a degree, and the PS2 was very craptacular imo. Playing BF2...I'm a pc gamer for life, yo. Especially contrasting it against the other game I'm playing, which was tragically hobbled by console development: GTASA. Great game, shitbag graphics.

[shiznitz]

This statement is funny. "Who" exactly is the competition?

If Microsoft or Sony had opted for a P4 or Athlon, they would have been head and shoulders above the other in performance.

Yes, but who the fuck is going to buy a $600 box to play games on.

You think the Xbox 360 is going to debut at $299? No fucking way. $359.

This is, of course, just rank speculation on my part because Microsoft is just arrogant enough to try it.

[schild]

I'm still betting on $299. If they do bring it out at $350, they'll drop the price to $300 when the PS3 is released.

[Yegolev]

I paid ~$1500 for my 34" CRT HDTV 3 years ago.  Recently got a HD DVR (DirecTV TiVo combo).  The HD DVR is a very close second to the HDTV as best A/V purchase.  HDTV makes bacon taste better.

Regarding the console power, I already knew that they were not going to be as powerful, in general computing, as a PC.  That's fine.  The PS3 will be harder to develop for, according to various sources, but Sony doesn't care and maybe they don't have to.  They will make tweaks to the dev kit and optimizer, and people will learn to program for it over time.  The X360 should be pretty easy if you already know how to program for Windows, or so we think.  The Rev, I have heard, is being made with ease of development in mind.  I think the concern from N is the controller and game-design hurdles this presents, not chips and programming difficulty.  They are more into design than technical specs, you know... which is why I like them so much.

I don't care about power, in general.  Maybe someone here cares more about GFX than game, and that is fine, but I don't.  Sudeki looks (relatively) great but isn't a lot of fun.  Bushido Blade looks like abused ass but is incredibly engaging.  It's about design.  It bothers me that Advent Rising runs like shit in some places, sure, but I blame the designer.  The Xbox is not a new machine and holds no surprises for devs.  Maybe Advent will run better on the 360.  Tee-hee.

[Pococurante]

Yes, but who the fuck is going to buy a $600 box to play games on.

The way I look at I just bought a $1k development system with a $600 gaming module.

I can't recall when consoles ever matched a contemporary affordable buildout on a PC.  The cost/performance equation for consoles was always on the content end and so only of interest to console developers.  Maybe the next round of consoles towards the end of this decade...

[HaemishM]

Wow, too bad it'll still be much more profitable to develop for a console than a PC, meaning you're going to see LESS AND LESS purely PC games. Enjoy it while it lasted. Don't believe me? Look at your local EB's PC section, as compared to how much of the rest of the store is devoted to some form of console.

Embrace the niche, bitches.

[Yegolev]

I do love me some niche.  Now, about my 500-player MMORPG idea....

[Aenovae]

The Gamecube was almost as difficult to program for as the PS2 was.  Nearly half the available RAM was in a separate partition that had to be copied back and forth to main RAM just to be usable.  You just don't hear as many complaints since relatively few Gamecube games were made.  The Xbox and Xbox 360 are the preferred development platforms BY FAR over any other console.

The PS3 is even MORE difficult to program for than the PS2, if you can fathom that.  The running joke is that deep down inside, Sony hates developers.  Xbox 360 is indeed as easy to work with as the first Xbox.  As for Revolution, basically no one cares.  Revolution isn't even part of the equation. 

[ahoythematey]

Interesting.  I seem to recall the accepted wisdom of the time saying that the gamecube was, according to a good many dev teams, very developer friendly compared to the other two, one of the proofs being that Rogue Leader was made into the graphical frenzy it is in the short course of something like 9 months, from concept to product.  Not saying that you don't know crap, but that was just the general consesus they had seemed to adopt concerning it.

[Morfiend]

I'm still betting on $299. If they do bring it out at $350, they'll drop the price to $300 when the PS3 is released.

Slashdotted...

Merrill Lynch Japan has conducted research that indicates that the PlayStation 3 will retail for $399. According to Gamespot's coverage of the paper, the unit will cost $494 to manufacture. Sony will thus be taking an almost $1 Billion loss in the first year of the PS3's lifespan. From the article: "It is normal for game companies to take a loss on hardware whenever a new console launches, since they typically focus on acquiring market share rather than generating a profit during the first year. During the second year and afterward, they can recover the losses with the savings that come from mass production and with licensing fees from publishers." Meanwhile, Press the Buttons is reporting on a Pro-G article in which SCEE Chief David Reeves states that "I feel proud that E3 went well from the presentations that they did...I feel very happy about that, but I told the troops: OK now we go underground. The PS3 goes underground until it comes out next year."

[Nebu]

Wow, too bad it'll still be much more profitable to develop for a console than a PC, meaning you're going to see LESS AND LESS purely PC games. Enjoy it while it lasted. Don't believe me? Look at your local EB's PC section, as compared to how much of the rest of the store is devoted to some form of console.

Embrace the niche, bitches.

I wish I could argue, but I know you're 100% correct here.  When consoles render PC games extinct, that's when I stop gaming.

[Stormwaltz]

Embrace the niche, bitches.

You can have my C64 when you pry it out of my cold, dead hands.

[HaemishM]

Ahhhh, the frosty chill of a geek's death grip. 

[Jain Zar]

Shit, I have Alien Syndrome and Montezuma's Revenge coming in the mail for my Sega Master System.
Nothing wrong with the old stuff.  Now if only I could have a working Atari 5200 and some space to hook the Amiga 500 up...

[Abel]

Ahhhh, the frosty chill of a geek's death grip. 

I don't know about that. Maybe it's different overthere but in the shops I frequent the PC department is still almost as big as the console department.

Also looking closer on those hyped "much higher console sales" it actually seems that most of the gap is due to the omnipresent Playstation 2. XBOX and GC don't dominate PC that much in terms of sales and I believe profit marges on PC games are bigger then on console games.

[Pococurante]

Embrace the niche, bitches.

Bah.  If a young forest grows up around a stand of redwoods the redwoods still command more attention.

Nothing relevant I just like redwoods.

Still though I disagree - this suggests convergence cuts both ways, not just "single use" appliances.

[HaemishM]

Ahhhh, the frosty chill of a geek's death grip. 

I don't know about that. Maybe it's different overthere but in the shops I frequent the PC department is still almost as big as the console department.

Also looking closer on those hyped "much higher console sales" it actually seems that most of the gap is due to the omnipresent Playstation 2. XBOX and GC don't dominate PC that much in terms of sales and I believe profit marges on PC games are bigger then on console games.

Profit margins are better per unit on console games than on PC games, according to Warren Spector on the decision to develop Deus Ex 2 and Thief 3 for the X-Box as well as the PC. It was apparently such a difference, even on a mediocre-selling game like the both of them, that the games made a profit despite really lackluster sales.

[sinij]

Profit margins are better per unit on console games than on PC games, according to Warren Spector on the decision to develop Deus Ex 2 and Thief 3 for the X-Box as well as the PC. It was apparently such a difference, even on a mediocre-selling game like the both of them, that the games made a profit despite really lackluster sales.

I was under impression this is due to support from MS in order to boost Xbox popularity. AFAIK Xbox is still loosing money and they don’t plan on making any for another decade.

[HaemishM]

Which means fuckall to the DEVELOPER, who is making money on the deal and thus can make more good new games. Whereas there is no such guarantee on the PC, thus you see many traditionally PC dev companies making X-Box games, either exclusively or in conjunction with a PC version. Jade Empire is a good example.