The more I read about the current generation CPU's and GPU's and also looking back at the PS2 it seems what Sony is trying to achieve, goes against current trends in graphics. Because I just get the impression that Sony still stuck on the idea that the more polygons a system can push the better the graphics.
For example with the first PS2 Sony designed a CPU that was extremely powerfull for its time, could push a lot of geomtery, yet did not account for the GPU intensive developing that began taking place in the PC world. Graphics depended quite a bit more on the abilities of the GPU than the CPU. They forgot to add a number of features to their GPU that not only left them behind, but also bottlenecked a very powerfull CPU.
With the PS3 it looks like they were trying to do the same thing at first. They wanted to design a chip so powerfull, that it could push out trillions of polygons but didn't care too much to spend the same amount of money on a GPU as powerfull or at least make sure the CELL had the same capabilites as well. It's like they're trying to make a system where instead of using textures, vertex and pixel shader effects, they are trying to get to the point where they can just model every little bump on a road surface with real polygons. However when they realized CELL just wasn't going to be able to do the features needed in a GPU, they went to Nvidia.
It seems as if Sony is still trying to make pretty graphics with a CPU instead of a GPU.
I'm sure eventually we'll get to a point where we have so much power that we CAN individually model every single ridge, crack and chip of every single brick of a wall. But even when we do, the fact still remains, it's a waste of resources in the first place, and second it's a LOT more time consuming than using other methods of achieving the same thing through textures, bump mapping, displacement mapping, etc. Whose going to sit there and develop things like that when they can just let the GPU do it for them automatically?
Discuss please.
For example with the first PS2 Sony designed a CPU that was extremely powerfull for its time, could push a lot of geomtery, yet did not account for the GPU intensive developing that began taking place in the PC world. Graphics depended quite a bit more on the abilities of the GPU than the CPU. They forgot to add a number of features to their GPU that not only left them behind, but also bottlenecked a very powerfull CPU.
With the PS3 it looks like they were trying to do the same thing at first. They wanted to design a chip so powerfull, that it could push out trillions of polygons but didn't care too much to spend the same amount of money on a GPU as powerfull or at least make sure the CELL had the same capabilites as well. It's like they're trying to make a system where instead of using textures, vertex and pixel shader effects, they are trying to get to the point where they can just model every little bump on a road surface with real polygons. However when they realized CELL just wasn't going to be able to do the features needed in a GPU, they went to Nvidia.
It seems as if Sony is still trying to make pretty graphics with a CPU instead of a GPU.
I'm sure eventually we'll get to a point where we have so much power that we CAN individually model every single ridge, crack and chip of every single brick of a wall. But even when we do, the fact still remains, it's a waste of resources in the first place, and second it's a LOT more time consuming than using other methods of achieving the same thing through textures, bump mapping, displacement mapping, etc. Whose going to sit there and develop things like that when they can just let the GPU do it for them automatically?
Discuss please.
