Support NeoGAF

[D'ultimate]

Hmm...highly arguable Dreamcast, anyone?

Doesn't that contradict yours and many others main argument that the PS3 will be released later and therefore way more powerful.

While it can be argued, and it very well might be a fact, that the PS2 is more powerful, relative to the difference in time between the two releases the graphics are comparable. It could be argued that Dreamcast graphics would still be comparable today as developers would be able to squeeze more out of it.

Also, it seems that some people are taking for granted that its a rather simple process to just change these hardware specs on the whim, in a matter of weeks. "The XBOX2 comes out first so Nvidia can take a look at ATI's chipset and just go in a change whatever to make theirs exponentially better!"

Companies can just change the the months and months of developing and compatability issues, just like that! *(snaps fingers)*

 

[kaching]

How about we wait until both systems come out to the public before we state which is better than which console in hardware specs.


Some of you are forum drama queens and really need to take a step back
and realize that really none of this makes any difference. It's like arguing just to argue.

It's a speculation thread. Maybe the better idea would be that people who exhibit allergic reactions to such threads should simply stay away, rather than act like your exposure to their contents is being forced.

Speculating about the future of the industry is just as meaningful as discussing opinions about its past or present.

 

[sarusama]

Well after reading 5 pages I'll definately post something.

This is a little OT, since I'm not commenting on a reaction from MS (IHMO there's nothing to react to). I just wanted to say to all those that say games are the most important factor: this is actually something of a dissadvantage for MS.

Here's the thing: both the Xbox and the Playstation target the same audience. In the US for example it's all about the Sports and FPS games. If you look at it at a more abstract level there's little difference in the types of games on both consoles, neither in gameplay than in art. The only exception is that the Playstation'll have more japanese titles. And to all those that will cry out about XBLive, they should consider what percentage the XBL users are out of the 70+15+15 = 100 million gamers.

The Xbox is in direct competition with the Playstation on every level. If you remove the 3rd party games up on both (and assuming there's little to no difference between them on Xenon vs PS3 or actually improvement in favor of the PS3) and also the PC-ports (since you can usually get them somewhat improved on PC) there isn't much left. The truely unique games on both systems are not what's going to persuade gamers in one or the other way. Something else has to give. MS used their "more power" card and XBL to convince gamers last time. Xenon might not have the "power up" over PS3 and the pull of XBL can most certainly be matched by Sony announcing Blu-Ray recording features on PS3.

It seems to me that if Sony play their cards right with the PS3 (like offering some good Blu-Ray based features) they will probably have the most attractive platform, since they have the brand recognition and *sigh* marketing/hype/cool-factor.

For all the bashing Nintendo takes, one thing that still does wonders for them, is that peeps buy their hardware for their software. Whoever owns a Nintendo machine prolly has 90% Nintendo published games (especially if it's not his sole console). People are going to buy the Revolution if they... no, *because* they want to play Nintendo games. PS3 and Xbox compete with the same 3rd party titles. If by some miracle Rev had access to all those 3rd parties also, and was backed with the same marketing (I know it's impossible because of brand-power that PS has) then you'd have something more like this:

Revolution = Nintendo games + whatever the revolutionary feature is (most certainly gaming related, like say tilt-sensor controllers or integrated "eye toy" )

PS3 = Blu-Ray features (Blu-Ray movie playback and maybe recording)

Xenon = ?? Xenon-live?

 

[jarrod]

There will be enough information to act on months before XBOX 2's actual release on the market.

Sure, but that's not really what you said. And honestly, there likely won't much of a window between PS3 & Xenon anyway... I don't think we can really expect one camp to radically change plans to counter the other unless they plan a substantial delay.

The clock will start ticking from the moment when launch Xenon games development begins.

So... 12-18 months ago?

 

[Izzy]

The moral of the story is: if you launch early, you'll have the starting advantage, but you'll also have considerably weaker hardware than the competition. You can't have your cake and eat it.

 

[gofreak]

Doesn't that contradict yours and many others main argument that the PS3 will be released later and therefore way more powerful.

No, I wasn't referring to DC being technically better than PS2. PS2 was clearly more powerful. I was referring to it as a whole, its games versus PS2s at the time etc.

Also, it seems that some people are taking for granted that its a rather simple process to just change these hardware specs on the whim, in a matter of weeks. "The XBOX2 comes out first so Nvidia can take a look at ATI's chipset and just go in a change whatever to make theirs exponentially better!"

Companies can just change the the months and months of developing and compatability issues, just like that! *(snaps fingers)*

NVidia are aware of ATi are up to, in a high-level, general sense. They'll be aware in a more detailed sense soon. They'll have had in total 6-8 months more to work on the PS3 GPU, and that will probably be enough time imo to act on any "surprising" details of ATi's chip, as I doubt there'll be much that is significantly different from what they expect. Again, look at the the difference 6 months can make in PC graphics.

 

[mashoutposse]

Sysgen: You know what's shortsighted and stupid?

and to an extent that is exactly why they are launching early. Again, it's all about the games. Blow your userbase away with great playing gorgeous looking games before the PS3 hits. It also works the other way. How long will people wait.

So, your strategy is to:

1. Release your console six months early.
2. Sell to the early adopters who don't need much convincing (if any at all).
3. Watch helplessly as the market leader releases a superior piece of hardware that will sit alongside yours for the rest of the generation, free for the other 90 million gamers who haven't bought anything yet to compare to yours for the next four years.

You're a genius

 

[mashoutposse]

Sure, but that's not really what you said. And honestly, there likely won't much of a window between PS3 & Xenon anyway... I don't think we can really expect one camp to radically change plans to counter the other unless they plan a substantial delay.

Well, barring minor alterations, consoles are usually 95% finalized by their first major public showing. This showing can be up to 12 months prior to launch. Lots of time for the competition to lock up hardware superiority for the generation.

So... 12-18 months ago?

I doubt hard Xenon development is 12-18 months old at this point. I'm not really talking abuot conceptualizations.

 

[jarrod]

Well, barring minor alterations, consoles are usually 95% finalized by their first major public showing. This showing can be up to 12 months prior to launch. Lots of time for the competition to lock up hardware superiority for the generation.

Well, the public unveiling will also only be a good 3-5 months. Honestly the window just isn't big enough.

I doubt hard Xenon development is 12-18 months old at this point. I'm not really talking abuot conceptualizations.

Well using that standard, I'm guessing PS3 has yet to start software R&D, and PSP started last May-June?

 

[mashoutposse]

Well, the public unveiling will also only be a good 3-5 months. Honestly the window just isn't big enough.

XBOX 2 will be out within 5 months of its first major public showing? I highly doubt that.

Well using that standard, I'm guessing PS3 has yet to start software R&D, and PSP started last May-June?

???

The fact that I don't agree that Xenon development is 12-18 months old doesn't mean that I don't think it has started at all, or that I think it will start at the unveiling. I think that it is probably just starting right now, and probably only at close-to-the-chest developers like Bungie and Rare.

 

[Scottlarock]

looks at this board today.
looks at this board a year ago.
looks at this board 2 years ago.

Xbox is doing alright.

 

[jarrod]

XBOX 2 will be out within 5 months of its first major public showing? I highly doubt that.

No, Xenon & PS3 will have their public showings only 3-5 months apart (in tune with their releases). The point at which you said hardware should be 95% finalised.

???

The fact that I don't agree that Xenon development is 12-18 months old doesn't mean that I don't think it has started at all, or that I think it will start at the unveiling. I think that it is probably just starting right now, and probably only at close-to-the-chest developers like Bungie and Rare.

Well that depends. Do you really consider EA, Starbreeze, Bizarre Creations, Critertion, Bethesda, UbiSoft, Tecmo, Climax, Sega or Namco to be "close-to-the-chest developers" for Microsoft. Because it seems most of them are knee deep in Xenon development right now.

 

[LAMBO]

PSX2 at $100 or less is gonna be a tough console to beat as well.

 

[CrimsonSkies]

"You're a genius "

After your tripe you're criticizing someone's speculation on this board? :lol

 

[sarusama]

Xenon Live (best online network so far), HD-DVD playback is a possibility, Keep in mind the possibility of there being a Xenon HD with its own set of hard-drive features (remembered the 3 tiered console release rumor), and excellent first party games from Bungie, Rare, Day 1 studios and others.

okay, I'd have to fix my post like this then:

Revolution = Nintendo games

PS3 = ??

Xbox = ??

There's no way, with the information currently at hand, to put HD features in with Xbox only, since for all we know one might be included in both the Rev and the PS3.

I was trying to point out the substantial truely exclusive/differentiating features of each platform. Just out of curiousity, do others agree that I can put "Nintendo games" in there as an abstraction for a kind of play-experience that will be truely exclusive/differentiating? Because I mean you can always list 1st party studios for each platform... but I'd say Nintendo games are more differentiating (also through the numbers) than what you can list for the other platforms... or does GranTourismo cover that?

 

[Che]

okay, I'd have to fix my post like this then:

Revolution = Nintendo games

PS3 = ??

Xbox = ??

There's no way, with the information currently at hand, to put HD features in with Xbox only, since for all we know one might be included in both the Rev and the PS3.

I was trying to point out the substantial truely exclusive/differentiating features of each platform. Just out of curiousity, do others agree that I can put "Nintendo games" in there as an abstraction for a kind of play-experience that will be truely exclusive/differentiating? Because I mean you can always list 1st party studios for each platform... but I'd say Nintendo games are more differentiating (also through the numbers) than what you can list for the other platforms... or does GranTourismo cover that?

This "head start" didn't help Nintendo last time, did it? I sincerely hope Nintendo wakes up form it's decade sleep and do something drastic this gen cause I'm afraid that PS4 won't have a competitor. And I also hope that MS realizes that they have to delay the console till it's ready to compete with PS3. A couple of rare games (in case they are good) and Halo won't save the console. Stubbornness is what killed Sega and brought Nintendo is the last position. My logic says that if Sony creates a monopoly we'll all lose.

 

[mashoutposse]

No, Xenon & PS3 will have their public showings only 3-5 months apart (in tune with their releases). The point at which you said hardware should be 95% finalised.

If MS and ATi hit a homerun relative to the PS3 project (entirely possible), Sony isn't necessarily compelled to introducing the system on that particular schedule. That's the benefit of not having to go first.

Well that depends. Do you really consider EA, Starbreeze, Bizarre Creations, Critertion, Bethesda, UbiSoft, Tecmo, Climax, Sega or Namco to be "close-to-the-chest developers" for Microsoft. Because it seems most of them are knee deep in Xenon development right now.

I'm sure all of those companies have started work on projects lined up for XBOX 2. To clarify, I believe that XBOX 2 projects are probably just recently being worked on in earnest and with a relatively clear vision of the final hardware. I mean, tools have been available since the Spring (XNA, I believe), but I don't think that many people outside of MS' and ATi's own engineers knew much about XBOX 2 at that time.

 

[mashoutposse]

"You're a genius "

After your tripe you're criticizing someone's speculation on this board? :lol

You had a couple of gems in the PS3 thread yourself :lol

 

[xexex]

No, Xenon & PS3 will have their public showings only 3-5 months apart (in tune with their releases). The point at which you said hardware should be 95% finalised.

yea. CES in January or GDC for Xenon. PS3 at E3.

 

[sarusama]

This "head start" didn't help Nintendo last time, did it?

It's not about a "head start" it's about a unique appeal. There's a complete fanbase that will buy the Revolution solely because they want to have the Nintendo games, regardless of when it actually launches.

That's why I said, if you put all things equal, that is not consider 3rd party games and yet unknown extra features, PS3 >= Xbox just simply because of branding/popularity/user-base. For a vast majority (that is where online is negligable... and besides PS3 might have it's own counterpart to XBL) both consoles offer the same thing.

 

[soundwave05]

The Revolution might have an so-so shot at garnering a decent userbase if it has enough different types of functionality, even if it is of the crazy/zany variety along with very strong launch titles.

When you think about it, the GameCube really brought nothing new to the table ... the PS2 already had next-gen graphics, so from the P.O.V. of the gamer the GCN brought ... digital click buttons? The XBox had many more bells and whistles.

The DS has touchscreen/WiFi/twin LCD/instant messaging, and I think that's a reason why its selling well. The N64 also had that same "wow, check this out" factor with the SGI graphics hype, the unique three-pronged analog controller, 4 controller ports, etc.

People want to feel excited about the hardware they're taking home and I think Nintendo failed in that regard with the GameCube. They should've maybe "upriced" it to $299.99 and added other features like that Game Eye camera and a slot for Game Boy cartridges (no GB Player neccessary), as well as of course optional DVD playback.

 

[DCharlie]

"I believe that XBOX 2 projects are probably just recently being worked on in earnest and with a relatively clear vision of the final hardware. I mean, tools have been available since the Spring (XNA, I believe), but I don't think that many people outside of MS' and ATi's own engineers knew much about XBOX 2 at that time."

PS3 and Xbox 2 dev has been taking place on PCs for some time now (over a year in some cases)

 

[SHOCKIE]

It's not about a "head start" it's about a unique appeal. There's a complete fanbase that will buy the Revolution solely because they want to have the Nintendo games, regardless of when it actually launches.

That's why I said, if you put all things equal, that is not consider 3rd party games and yet unknown extra features, PS3 >= Xbox just simply because of branding/popularity/user-base. For a vast majority (that is where online is negligable... and besides PS3 might have it's own counterpart to XBL) both consoles offer the same thing.

That complete fanbase you speak of,seems to get smaller each generation.

 

[imastalker co.]

we may even get a Ridge Racer for JP launch.

that's a gigantic maybe. actually i know for a fact that that's not gonna happen. PS3 launch, yes. in development since july. maybe even longer. but not gonna happen on xenon apparently.

 

[sarusama]

That complete fanbase you speak of,seems to get smaller each generation.

true, but that's not entirely the point. I have to apologize for my bad wording. Let me try it one last time

Nintendo machines are bought for the primary purpose of playing Nintendo games. Everything else is secondary (DVD-playback and what not... personally I like that Nintendo tries to stay game centric). That is the 15 million cubes out there most likely relate to 15 million "Nintendo-branded" consumers, that have a very high probability of getting the Rev.

Of the 15 million Xboxs owners can you truely say that the quasi-totality have one because they want the "Microsoft-brand"? XBL only makes a small part of that. Better graphics, HD-features, DVD-features all contribute to that user-base, but are these things intrinsically Microsoft? What is to keep Sony from implemeting a great online-network, HD-features and Blu-Ray features, etc. in PS3.

Sony & Microsoft have the same audience, and for Microsoft to gain market share from Sony they have to convince former PS-users, that is users that now look for Sony-brand in addition to extra features.

Damn I'm bad at this (prolly why I don't post much). So in essence for Sony to match or better what Microsoft offers on a hardware-feature base (includes HD-DVD/Blu-Ray, online-net, gfx performance, etc.) is more damaging to Microsoft than it would for example be to Nintendo. Because once you remove all those features that are very likely to be in both platforms the differences are marginal, the basic appeal is the same. So you have 70 million PS-influenced against 15 million XB-influenced.

I believe someone once posted a sales graph that depicted how XB sales influenced PS sales and vice-versa, where the Cube stayed constant, albeit a relatively small constant.

Hardware will definately have a greater influence over directing consumers to go with PS3 or rather Xenon than it will to decide for Rev.

 

[gofreak]

EETimes report: http://www.eetimes.com/sys/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=55300584

Engineering teams have completed the design for the graphics processor, but details have yet to be disclosed.

Didn't another site report that development wouldn't wrap up till Jul-Sep 05? This also wouldn't tally with the idea of them only recently signing a letter of intent to develop a "next-gen GPU" etc.

Might try and ask a NVidia rep about that. Otherwise we'll probably be waiting a while for the full story..

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Sounds like PS3 GPU= NV2A. Difference in capability, barring some real big advances, will be minimal between the custom R500 in the Xenon and custom (most likely)NV50 in the PS3.

 

[gofreak]

Sounds like PS3 GPU= NV2A. Difference in capability, barring some real big advances, will be minimal between the custom R500 in the Xenon and custom (most likely)NV50 in the PS3.

If the design was finished recently, I'd agree that on an architectural level things would be similar, if Nvidia have stuck to a more traditional approach. But 6 months between manufacturing start times could let Sony/NVidia eek out an edge in performance, if not in features.

As I see it, there are two possibilities:

1) A custom version of a more "traditional" approach more in line with ATi's, but with possible speed advantages over ATi's chip

2) A custom version of a very different approach, not comparable to ATi's (i.e. something like REYES as speculated by some etc.)

The latter probably has more potential for delivering a very noticeable visual difference, but is probably less likely.

But we really don't know enough..God damnit, hurry up Mar-May 2005!

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I'd say number one...though, anything's possible. There's as good a chance that ATI's solution for Xenon will be better-integrated into the CPU and surrounding hardware design, since it was the choice from the beginning. Or not.

 

[gofreak]

I'd say number one...though, anything's possible.

I'd agree, it seems far more likely. But it is interesting to note that nVidia apparently canned the NV50 they had been working on before, which probably was tracking ATi's R5xx development in terms of features and what they were aiming for etc.:

WE ARE told that Nvidia's next gen chip NV50 has been canned as well as the NV48 chip we reported on earlier in the week. I guess both were not fitting well into Nvidia's picture.

We don’t have any idea as yet what lead to such a decision, but Nvidia does apparently think it's now time to make its next breakthrough chip.

All we know is that Nvidia made a huge u-turn or a right turn in its roadmap as Intel describes it, and we don’t yet know where that leads.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20034

That certainly could read in a more interesting way in light of the PS3 announcement, if true. But again, that's just me speculating.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Yeah...if true, didn't nVidia do the same thing with the NV2A, though?

 

[gofreak]

Yeah...if true, didn't nVidia do the same thing with the NV2A, though?

I thought I read something like this before, but I'm not sure of the history - care to fill us in?

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I don't know much...just recalling something that I read...perhaps just speculation. I'm probably all wrong. In my memory, I had read this on numerous boards at the time, though. Basically...the XGPU was a somewhat quickly souped-up GF3, but was already in development as a PC card before nVidia got the contract with MS...so they just moved it over to the XBOX part and cancelled the PC part, instead taking that extra vertex shader unit in the already done work and adding more to create the GF4 class.

 

[McFly]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20034

If only posted at the inq, then it's just a rumor and most likely not true or just partialy true.

Fredi

 

[gofreak]

If only posted at the inq, then it's just a rumor and most likely not true or just partialy true.

Fredi

Not sure if it was reported elsewhere, the Inq was just the handiest link when i was posting. Apparently NVidia didn't want to talk about it at the recent Editior's Day, so we may never get a second source on it.

It was interesting timing to run such a report

 

[McFly]

It was interesting timing to run such a report

Yeah, very interesting timing.

Fredi

PS: All other news or forum posts I've found link to the inq.

 

[jarrod]

If MS and ATi hit a homerun relative to the PS3 project (entirely possible), Sony isn't necessarily compelled to introducing the system on that particular schedule. That's the benefit of not having to go first.

So again... a substantial delay for PS3 would be the case, correct?

I'm sure all of those companies have started work on projects lined up for XBOX 2. To clarify, I believe that XBOX 2 projects are probably just recently being worked on in earnest and with a relatively clear vision of the final hardware. I mean, tools have been available since the Spring (XNA, I believe), but I don't think that many people outside of MS' and ATi's own engineers knew much about XBOX 2 at that time.

Well, there's also IBM on the hardware side. From my understanding though, Microsoft's been rather fourthcoming with Xenon information and support for quite a while now. Early documentation coming out as far back as late 2003 iirc (there was even a premliminary plan that Xenon might release in late 2004, though that was obviouslly pushed back and the spec upped).

that's a gigantic maybe. actually i know for a fact that that's not gonna happen. PS3 launch, yes. in development since july. maybe even longer. but not gonna happen on xenon apparently.

Will the game still be hitting Xenon though? I'd like to see RR go multiplatorm without NST's help for once.

Also, do you know if the current RR team is still the Racing Evolution team (essentially the Moto GP team with what's left of the RR5 team), or has Namco successfully snagged back enough of the old staff? Who's making RR PSP exactly?

 

[imastalker co.]

Will the game still be hitting Xenon though? I'd like to see RR go multiplatorm without NST's help for once.

i don't see it happening, at all. it's in development for PS3. i guess Namco and Sony want to make sure that the game has a nice long development time. it's not planned for xenon at the moment. maybe way the hell down the line. but like i said, not at the launch, and definitely not when the PS3 hits.

i can't answer your other questions. not now atleast.

 

[Phoenix]

I take you up on that, go ahead and supply me with a shader code in SM2 that my ATI part can't run. This should be amusing.

Quite. Just so you'll know what you are about to receive I'll explain it to you (because I'm going to give you an easy, obvious, and well known example). ATI 9700 series doesn't support hardware accelerated perspective correct anisotropic texture mapping. Just so you'll know what that shader does since I'm not sure you'll follow it. There is a reason why there is something called a Unified Shader Model in development - its not just to change the name of the technology.

What you are missing is that high end parts account for about 1% of annual graphics hardware sales for the PCs and games are developed with mainstream cards in mind.

Doom3 was developed with Mainstream cards in mind? Have you tried running it on a 5200Fx (a common mainstream card)?

Every home out there with a PS2/XBOX in it is more than likely to also have a PC with a DX8+ level discrete graphics hardware in it these days, and it does not cost a limb to actually buy a graphics card beyond the capabilities of this generation's consoles.

Really? I think you might want to poll the folks here. There are plenty PCs in the world that don't even have 1Ghz processors that are used just for email, surfing and AOL. Meanwhile those homes have a PS2, XBox, etc. So go ahead, just take a poll here on GAF. We play games here so that should be a good representative sample.

It also shows in the number of discrete graphics solutions being sold by both competitors in the market increasing every fiscal year - the market for PC gaming is not shrinking, it's expanding. I am not saying that PCs are even as cost effective in gaming as consoles are - but rather, I'd like to point out that they NEVER WERE that way, yet PC gaming thrived during the previous generations. It was only after it started to get bloody annoying to develop for the PC that companies started to desert.

So EA, Activision, THQ, etc. all moved over to consoles because it was difficult to develop for the PC? Is that your assertion?

DirectX 3? Cheers man, you live far behind even the last decade and still boast about it. Hillarious. You sound like a WW1 veteran who still polishes his decorations and talks like he knows about modern warfare.

You know what, I'm not even going to trade insults with you. Your posts speak for themselves. Your shader code is on its way.

 

[Panajev2001a]

EETimes report: http://www.eetimes.com/sys/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=55300584



Didn't another site report that development wouldn't wrap up till Jul-Sep 05? This also wouldn't tally with the idea of them only recently signing a letter of intent to develop a "next-gen GPU" etc.

Might try and ask a NVidia rep about that. Otherwise we'll probably be waiting a while for the full story..

development = not only design.

 

[gofreak]

development = not only design.

Can you expand a little bit? What comes after design, and when does development end?

I guess I'm ultimately wondering what it means for PS3's GPU design to have finished up recently v. Xbox2's GPU taping out recently..what the difference is.

 

[Panajev2001a]

RISC architectures were hyped to be the best new way for processors to go, and for a while they did have an advantage but now CISC designs have surpassed them.

POWER5, BlueGene/L, Itanium 2, EV7 and derivatives, etc...

They all look pretty much non-CISC to me .

Even the Pentium 4 is hardly a real CISC design .

 

[Panajev2001a]

Can you expand a little bit? What comes after design, and when does development end?

I guess I'm ultimately wondering what it means for PS3's GPU design to have finished up recently v. Xbox2's GPU taping out recently..what the difference is.

Xenon's GPU design ended earlier, for starters.

After design, you have to go implementing the actual silicon. Testing yelds and performance fo the chip, testing for bugs, fixing bugs, doing optimizations to the design in areas that need it, etc... as well as preparing the transition from 90 nm technology to 65 nm technology.

 

[gofreak]

Xenon's GPU design ended earlier, for starters.

After design, you have to go implementing the actual silicon. Testing yelds and performance fo the chip, testing for bugs, fixing bugs, doing optimizations to the design in areas that need it, etc... as well as preparing the transition from 90 nm technology to 65 nm technology.

That makes sense, thanks.

 

[HyperionX]

POWER5, BlueGene/L, Itanium 2, EV7 and derivatives, etc...

They all look pretty much non-CISC to me .

Though POWER5 and BlueGene use the same ISA, Itanium is not RISC, and EV7 is dead.

Even the Pentium 4 is hardly a real CISC design .

Depends on what you mean by "CISC."

 

[Panajev2001a]

Though POWER5 and BlueGene use the same ISA, Itanium is not RISC, and EV7 is dead.

Is Itanium CISCier or RISCier ?

Itanium is hardly CISC (its fixed-instruction lenght, wide register size and load-store architecture with non destructive instruction format do not seem to me very close to your classical CISC design such as a 486 or a Motorloa 68xxxx chip) and although being its own ISA (EPIC, HP's expansion and development over VLIW then further refined with Intel's help)

The Alpha thing is still politics. Alpha EV7's 130 nm final incarnation remains the fastes MPU in that manufacturing's procsess history.

Depends on what you mean by "CISC."

Pentium 4 decouples instruction decoding even further from what the Pentium Pro started:the core does nto even feed itself with x86 instructions any-longer (except in rare cases in which rarely used x86 instruction are handled by the microcode ROM as a reference is passed in the trace cahce at trace creation time). It feeds from a pre-decoded instruction stream from the Trace-Cache.

You might call u-ops ("units" of work x86 instruction are broken into) hardly the jump to RISC philosophy, but you cannot disagree that Intel's and AMD's engineers learned a big lesson from the RISC field and saw the potential behind the RISC principles such as somewhat fixed-instruction length: the Pentium 4 is basically a fully u-ops based execution core, from instruction fetch to retire phase.

Yes, it retains a nice code-size advantage, but ARM in the embedded sector (along with Hitachi/Renesas) and POWER/PowerPC and EPIC/IA-64 (as well as the now dying SPARC and PA-RISC lines) in the higher-end sector show that it might not be enough for x86 as it is to expand that much beyond the PC/low-end Workstations+Servers space.

Did Thumb make the ARM chips CISC ? Did 16 bits instruction encoding in Hitachi/Renesas's Super-H chips make them CISC ?

Yes, the instruction set is still a very evolved version of the original IA-32 ISA, but number of instructions in the ISA or code density does not make a design any more or any less RISC/CISC.

 

[Phoenix]

You know what, I'm not even going to trade insults with you. Your posts speak for themselves. Your shader code is on its way.

Sorry. I was detained in the hospital with my wife, but I never forgot about you. Here is your code. Make it perspective correct on all the ATI parts:

In your DirectX device setup

device.SamplerState[0].MinFilter = TextureFilter.Anisotropic;
device.SamplerState[0].MagFilter = TextureFilter.Anisotropic;

...

In your shader

ps_2_0
dcl_2d s0
dcl t0.xy
texld r1, t0, s0
mov oC0, r1

 

[Vortac]

DirectX/XNA != OpenGL

OpenGL is only comparable to DirectX Graphics subset of DirectX. DirectX also has loads of other functionality (input, multiplayer, etc) that OpenGL just doesn't provide. It's hard enough to get an Xbox Live game working well, nearly impossible on Ps2

 

[jarrod]

Isn't XNA somewhat comparable to Sony's OpenMAX (OpenGL based) solution though?