Support NeoGAF

[cybamerc]

Panajev2001a:

> The pictures of games in development that have recently come out (Armored Core) did
> look pretty nice: no difference between the PlayStation 2 and the PSP shots really.

They're nearly half the size of the PSP display and heavily compressed. How can you tell?

 

[Panajev2001a]

They did not look that badly compressed to me, but of course you have to hang on something don't you ?

Polygon count did not seem reduced, draw distance did not seem reduced, lighting quality did not seem reduced, particle effects did not seem reduced.

 

[cybamerc]

Panajev2001a:

> They did not look that badly compressed to me, but of course you have to hang on
> something don't you ?

Look at the edge enhancement.

> Polygon count did not seem reduced, draw distance did not seem reduced, lighting
> quality did not seem reduced, particle effects did not seem reduced.

Seriously... how can you tell? And and I'm hardly impressed by the PSP's ability to render a flat terrain and a skybox.

http://pspmedia.ign.com/psp/image/a...ored-core-formula-front-20040730014848436.jpg

 

[Panajev2001a]

Panajev2001a:

> They did not look that badly compressed to me, but of course you have to hang on
> something don't you ?

Look at the edge enhancement.

> Polygon count did not seem reduced, draw distance did not seem reduced, lighting
> quality did not seem reduced, particle effects did not seem reduced.

Seriously... how can you tell?

Maybe because I do not have anti-Sony goggles on my eyes... ?

I see the same level of lighting and polygonal detail on the mechs and in the scene.

Considering that is the same stuff PlayStation 2 is rendering, but then again we know how you feel about PlayStation 2.

Dreamcast >> PlayStation 2 so if PSP < Dreamcast PSP might still be ~= PlayStation 2 .

LOL

 

[Acosta]

I would love to see a 150 $ PSP, the reaction from GA would be hilarious

And no, at least Sony has magical powers I don´t believe that priece. But hey, everything is possible...

 

[Doom_Bringer]

some nice ownage there pana

 

[teiresias]

I'm totally not expecting anything below a $200 launch price for PSP, but if by some huge chance the thing did launch at $150 I'd have to agree I'd like it not because of the price, but because of the ensuing riot that would happen here at GAF.

 

[Gattsu25]

hell, $150 would be nice...but I'm not believing this news

at any rate: I agree with doom_bringer

 

[Shogmaster]

To be quite specific, Dreamcast peaked at 6.7MPP/s(limited by the GPU) - that's the number equivalent to 66/75 for the PS2.
N64 peaked around 500Kpoly/sec IIRC.

How? 66/75M is just the EE transform peak isn't it? Are you telling me that GS could set up and render 66/75M triangles?

I was told by Andrew Carter (Melbourne House) that SH-4 peaked at 12M triangles for transform. How many games did you make for Dreamcast BTW?

 

[Panajev2001a]

The PVRDC/Holly/PowerVR2 CLX triangle set-up engine seems to be the one peaking at 6.75 MTriangles/s.

 

[Shogmaster]

The PVRDC/Holly/PowerVR2 CLX triangle set-up engine seems to be the one peaking at 6.75 MTriangles/s.

We all realise that.

What I'm saying is that perhaps 6M for DC is not equivilent to 66/75M for PS2 if we are talking raw transform numbers of the CPU. Raw transform for SH-4 was 12M according to Melbourne House.

 

[Phoenix]

I can't believe people in this day and age are arguing about polycount. Polygon count is meaningless if your fillrate is poor, or your bus is slow, or you don't have enough texture memory. Most all platforms out there can draw more than enough polygons - its when it comes to putting stuff on them, having enough time to do effects in the frame buffer, being able to do 6-8 passes on a polygon to achieve effects - etc. when things start to break down. You can fake high polygon count with sufficient mapping, shadding, blending texture passes.

If your texture combiners and rasterization pipeline suck however - you're boned.

 

[Shogmaster]

I can't believe people in this day and age are arguing about polycount. Polygon count is meaningless if your fillrate is poor, or your bus is slow, or you don't have enough texture memory. Most all platforms out there can draw more than enough polygons - its when it comes to putting stuff on them, having enough time to do effects in the frame buffer, being able to do 6-8 passes on a polygon to achieve effects - etc. when things start to break down. You can fake high polygon count with sufficient mapping, shadding, blending texture passes.

If your texture combiners and rasterization pipeline suck however - you're boned.

You have to realise that polycount talk is just plain old boasting. PS2/PSP gang don't care about balanced rendering pipeline. It's all about throwing raw numbers in your face.

Now with PSP, these guys can talk down to great past consoles like DC just using the polycount numbers.

 

[doncale]

To be quite specific, Dreamcast peaked at 6.7MPP/s(limited by the GPU) - that's the number equivalent to 66/75 for the PS2.
N64 peaked around 500Kpoly/sec IIRC

Dreamcast's SH4 CPU can calculate at least 10 million polygons a second. I've heard figures from 10 million all the way to 20 million.

 

[Lord Error]

Are you telling me that GS could set up and render 66/75M triangles?

Yep. I'm not sure, if the 66M limit is on CPU or GS, but one of them could render 75M untextured/unlit polygons if the other could keep up. As it is, the theoretical limit is 66M.

 

[Lazy8s]

If we're breaking down the ratings of isolated parts like the GS's 75 mpps, then the SH-4's T&L performance of over 10 mpps could be mentioned.

 

[kaching]

Now with PSP, these guys can talk down to great past consoles like DC just using the polycount numbers.

Giving other fellas an excuse to express their seemingly inexhaustible supply of bitterness at the DC's untimely demise. I mean, kudos to you I guess for keeping the polycount boasting alive by inflating the DC polycount as much as possible.

 

[jarrod]

So real world performance, what can we expect out of PSP? Am I right in assuming most DC games were 700k-2M pps, most PS2 games are 3-5M pps and GC/XBox games usually 3-6M pps? Where does PSP fit in there?

 

[Shogmaster]

Giving other fellas an excuse to express their seemingly inexhaustible supply of bitterness at the DC's untimely demise. I mean, kudos to you I guess for keeping the polycount boasting alive by inflating the DC polycount as much as possible.

I didn't inflate shit. 12M Transform is what MH got out of SH-4 (Notice I didn't say DC). Realise, all we've been talking about is theoretical numbers, not in game. I'm just playing their game.

So real world performance, what can we expect out of PSP? Am I right in assuming most DC games were 700k-2M pps, most PS2 games are 3-5M pps and GC/XBox games usually 3-6M pps? Where does PSP fit in there?

DC: 500K-4M
PS2: 3M - 20M
GC: 4M - 12M
XBox: 6M - 20M
PSP: 1M - 8M

Those are out of my butthole guesses (which should be good as anyone else's here ),

 

[doncale]

Yep. I'm not sure, if the 66M limit is on CPU or GS, but one of them could render 75M untextured/unlit polygons if the other could keep up. As it is, the theoretical limit is 66M.

the Emotion Engine CPU had the 66 million polygon per second (or vertices per second) calculation/transform limit. the Graphics Synthesizer rasterizer has the 75 million polygon per second draw/display limit.

As Panajev has mentioned, the Emotion Engine CPU can actually be made to transform over 100 million polygons (or vertices) per second if doing nothing else. (using both VUs and the FPU i think)

 

[kaching]

Shog, If you're just playing "their game" then you should know full well that throwing out a number meaningless to a system's actual in-game performance is a tactic commonly referred to as inflating the numbers.

 

[Shogmaster]

Shog, If you're just playing "their game" then you should know full well that throwing out a number meaningless to a system's actual in-game performance is a tactic commonly referred to as inflating the numbers.

Obcourse. But I hate how falafel and his man servant Pana uses cheap tactics to badmouth my little DC every chance they get! *Grrrrrr*

There there baby. Don't mind the bullies. *pats his JP DC*

 

[kaching]

Yes, but all you did was defend the SH-4. You left the rest of the DC to fend for itself

 

[doncale]

poor rest of the DC

 

[Shogmaster]

SHHHHH! She can hear you!!

 

[Gerber]

There is a big difference in quality, especially in the lighting dept.

 

[Squeak]

Speaking of compression, does anyone know what kind of texture compression PSP is using? Is it still "good" old CLUT, or have Sony finally made it practical to use the mpeg decoder for texture decompression?

 

[cybamerc]

Panajev2001a:

> I see the same level of lighting and polygonal detail on the mechs and in the scene.

Of course you do.

> Dreamcast >> PlayStation 2 so if PSP < Dreamcast PSP might still be ~= PlayStation 2 .

That was lame, even for you.

 

[Fafalada]

Shogmaster,
the jest about inflating SH4 power that Pana starded was an inside joke aimed at certain B3D posters, it had nothing to do with the hardware.

And the peak numbers I mentioned were brought up as a reference to PSP, as that is the only currently publically available info. If someone wants to turn this into yet another thread about DC fine, but don't blame Me for it.

How PSP polygon numbers translate to realworld will depend on specs for other operations (lights, skinning etc.). If the lighting pipeline happened to be horribly slow for instance, the peak number could be Less applicable then for PS2.

Anyway that aside...

Are you telling me that GS could set up and render 66/75M triangles?

GS can setup and draw 75M triangles(untextured) yes.

How many games did you make for Dreamcast BTW?

I only quoted Katana SDK numbers, I wasn't making any assumptions outside that.
I'm also quite aware of what SH4 can do, and I think it's a nice little chip. Which is exactly why I don't want to go into debates about comparing its transform speed against solutions with far more dedicated and standalone resources for the same task.

I can't believe people in this day and age

It's called "available" info - or what's publically available anyway.

 

[Shogmaster]

Shogmaster,
the jest about inflating SH4 power that Pana starded was an inside joke aimed at certain B3D posters, it had nothing to do with the hardware.

And the peak numbers I mentioned were brought up as a reference to PSP, as that is the only currently publically available info. If someone wants to turn this into yet another thread about DC fine, but don't blame Me for it.

Making inside jokes about DM or other B3D joke character in a GA thread? What the hell for? Kind of wierd, no? Maybe you two should just get a room.

GS can setup and draw 75M triangles(untextured) yes.

Ah. nevermind then.

 

[Fafalada]

[quote="Shogmaster]Making inside jokes about DM or other B3D joke character in a GA thread?[/quote]
Well many people read and even post on both forums, so I played along. Won't deny it was probably uncalled for anyway.

But speaking of DM though, don't sell him off like that. He is a GA original, he's been here even before my time I think.

 

[Shogmaster]

DM pre-dates GA. I remember him from before GA. DM is older than Jesus!

 

[teiresias]

DM is probably the one that started the whole GENESIS IS 32-BIT debate on Prodigy!

 

[tenchir]

nm

 

[maharg]

But speaking of DM though, don't sell him off like that. He is a GA original, he's been here even before my time I think.

He has, since, however, gone rather insane.

 

[Defensor]

He has, since, however, gone rather insane.

He's arguing at the www.PS3insider.com forums since B3D banned him... LOL

 

[Warm Machine]

Why even use a per second benchmark? Most games are playable at 30fps or 60fps.

 

[Panajev2001a]

We all realise that.

What I'm saying is that perhaps 6M for DC is not equivilent to 66/75M for PS2 if we are talking raw transform numbers of the CPU. Raw transform for SH-4 was 12M according to Melbourne House.

Raw Transform of the Emotion Engine is about 102.85 MVertices/s, 66 MVertices/s is the GIF-to-GS bus bandwidth limited number.

In their literature 1 polygon = 1 Vertex (which kinda works out with optimized triangle strips and fans) except for GS's Set-up numbers.

 

[Panajev2001a]

He's arguing at the www.PS3insider.com forums since B3D banned him... LOL

I am an admin there, I shall ban him for no reason.... grrr no I cannot do that, but do you think he will not give me a reason ?

 

[Panajev2001a]

There is a big difference in quality, especially in the lighting dept.

No, you are noticing a 640x448 image (PlayStation 2) shrunk down by a big factor and a 480x272 image (PSP) shrunk down by a much smaller factor.

On the PlayStation 2 image there was also motion-blur being used (the two screenshots were not identical).

Those two reasons cause definately more FSAA (blur-filters are a form of FSAA, ask nVIDIA) on the PlayStation 2 screenshot which explains the better Image Quality (edge and texture aliasing wise).

Anyways, I still do not see this major lighting difference.

 

[Panajev2001a]

the Emotion Engine CPU had the 66 million polygon per second (or vertices per second) calculation/transform limit. the Graphics Synthesizer rasterizer has the 75 million polygon per second draw/display limit.

As Panajev has mentioned, the Emotion Engine CPU can actually be made to transform over 100 million polygons (or vertices) per second if doing nothing else. (using both VUs and the FPU i think)

No, using only the two VUs.

Using the FPU of the RISC core you could technically do another 15 MVertices/s (never tried it myself with the FPU, I assumed 20 cycles per vertex for a simple perspective transform).

Edit:

Multiplying a matrix with a Vector, with the FPU... each row you could do one FMUL and three FMADD for a total of 4 FMULs and 12 FMADDs for the whole Matrix... pipelined (the throughput is 1 cycle [you can issue the same instruction again next-cycle] for FMADD and FMULs, but not the latency IIRC) we should be able to do that 18 cycles ( we can do all the FMULs, srtarting from the last row and going up, then start from the end [going up] and do the FMADDs [one FMADD per row] ro reduce data dependency related stalls).

We still need to take care of the division by W (FDIV's speed is one of the limiters of VU0 which does not have the EFU).

We can divide 1 by W (1 FDIV instruction, latency is normally 7 cycles IIRC) and then multiply the result to the Vector we just obtained (broadcast FMUL for the VUs, 4 different FMULS for the FPU).

With the way we did the Matrix Multiplication we have W (in Homogeneous coordinates) ready to be forwarded (I am not sure 100% regarding the 5900i's FPU in the Emotion Engine, but in a lot of pipelined FPUs the result can be forwarded to another instruction before it is written back to the register) right when we have finished the Matrix Multiplication (not a cycle after IIRC ) and we can issue the FDIV instruction and start doing the FMULs right after that.

We can launch the FDIV instruction right after we start the FMADD instruction which computes W in the Matrix Multiplication, it will stall before executio, but it will already be in the pipeline.

7 cycles for the divide (we are processign asingle vertex and not multiple vertexes at the same time which would speed up the transform so mine is not an optimal case) and 4 cycles for the four FMULs.

Total ~= 18 + 11 ~= 29 cycles.

So the actual number for the FPU is closer to 10 MVertices/s.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Now it is about 10.4 GB/s while before it was advertised as 5.2 GB/s.

They went from a 256 bits bus to a 512 bits bus.

 

[Defensor]

I am an admin there, I shall ban him for no reason.... grrr no I cannot do that, but do you think he will not give me a reason ?

Well, he has changed his name from Deadmeat to Deadmeat2 to Deatmeat3 to Deadmeat4...and I think now he is using Dead_Meat as his SN. I only browse the forums there but people are asking for a IP Ban if possible on DeadMeat

 

[tenchir]

Speaking of compression, does anyone know what kind of texture compression PSP is using? Is it still "good" old CLUT, or have Sony finally made it practical to use the mpeg decoder for texture decompression?

Why the hell would you want to do texture compression with mpeg decoder? Just because it's possible(but useless since it will just get decompressed into VRAM unlike GC/XBOX TC) with PS2, doesn't mean you would use it with PSP. PSP will probably support S3TC/DXTC like compressions because it uses something like OpenGL ES right?

 

[Panajev2001a]

Well many people read and even post on both forums, so I played along. Won't deny it was probably uncalled for anyway.

Cybamerc has hit lower than that before... ok ok I was a bit evil...




just a bit...




.