Support NeoGAF

[Lazy8s]

kaching:

The only proof that such a solution is truly viable is in becoming available to the market to subject it to real world, uncontrolled conditions. Otherwise, its vaporware.

The MBX is being used for real product.

Lazy, I can stick an Xbox in a SUV with an LCD screen but that doesn't mean that an Xboy is feasible anytime soon? The design requirements for something you can integrate in a car vs. something you can take with you are very different.

I understand what MBX was developed to address, but implementation matters more than intent.

MBX solutions are leading the market in design wins for architectures targeting a wide range of mobile applications, including handheld game consoles. That solution from Renesas is both comparable to the PSP in requirements and competitive in performance. Would you like links for research to MBX providers and manufacturers?

 

[DCharlie]

yup, MBX is in the same boat as Cell at the moment.

 

[Lord Error]

Flawed how?

Well, twofold. First of all, from what I've seen and heard, PSP's graphics specs are still better than any MBX chip, and I expect PDA handhelds that utilize it to appear on the market about the same time as PSP. Second, PSP's mobile technology is not limited only to it's graphics chip. When you can point out a handheld in the near future that has such graphics or better, such screen or better, has an integrated mass-media device that allows for cheap gaming, and why not, a nice analog stick implementation - then you have the right to say that PSP is not moving mobile device technology forward.

 

[DCharlie]

"When you can point out a handheld in the near future that has such graphics or better, such screen or better, has an integrated mass-media device that allows for cheap gaming, and why not, a nice analog stick implementation - then you have the right to say that PSP is not moving mobile device technology forward."

Cheap gaming...
PSP...
in the same sentence???

as great as i think it'll be , early adopters are going to get it right up the chuff.

 

[GaimeGuy]

It's ok to use "PSP" and "cheap gaming" in a sentence, as long as it's in a negative context.

 

[Lazy8s]

Marconelly:

First of all, from what I've seen and heard, PSP's graphics specs are still better than any MBX chip,

MBX solutions are competitive: both the PSP and MBX have respective performance advantages.

I expect PDA handhelds that utilize it to appear on the market about the same time as PSP.

That Renesas solution competes and is already available.

When you can point out a handheld in the near future that has such graphics or better, such screen or better, has an integrated mass-media device that allows for cheap gaming, and why not, a nice analog stick implementation - then you have the right to say that PSP is not moving mobile device technology forward.

The reference was meant to be regarding whether its capabilities for game processing would be proficient. Other aspects of the machine do sound nice.

 

[Lord Error]

Cheap gaming...
PSP...
in the same sentence???

What I mean, is the device that is able of playing the high capacity, yet cheap media.

 

[Lord Error]

That Renesas solution competes and is already available.

Yeah, while I understand that it's technically it, you'll also have to understand that I'll first want to wait to see at least some kind of PDA that uses that high-specced MBX before making any comparisions.

 

[DCharlie]

Agreed, although it remains to be seen how much of the media saving gets passed on to consumers. I'd still imagine we'll be asked for 5800 yen a game.

 

[GDGF]

Bumpity.

 

[kaching]

The MBX is being used for real product.

MBX solutions are leading the market in design wins for architectures targeting a wide range of mobile applications, including handheld game consoles. That solution from Renesas is both comparable to the PSP in requirements and competitive in performance. Would you like links for research to MBX providers and manufacturers?

I've scanned the PowerVR site and all I've found in terms of "real product" is the announcement of cores and processors which incorporate MBX. I don't want links to research, I want a link to someone to committing to a product that are preparing to put in my hands. What I want is a link to an announced portable device that incorporates MBX, with an estimated launch date no later than March 2005 and an estimated price in the same range anticipated for the PSP (about $300). It needs to manage PSP-level graphics performance and at least a reasonable subset of the rest of the features that the PSP will offer - dedicated gaming, media playback, support for some form of high capacity removable and wireless networking.

The reference was meant to be regarding whether its capabilities for game processing would be proficient.

Again, that proficiency depends largely on real world deployment.

 

[Lazy8s]

kaching:

I don't want links to research, I want a link to someone to committing to a product that are preparing to put in my hands. What I want is a link to an announced portable device that incorporates MBX, with an estimated launch date no later than March 2005 and an estimated price in the same range anticipated for the PSP (about $300). It needs to manage PSP-level graphics performance and at least a reasonable subset of the rest of the features that the PSP will offer - dedicated gaming, media playback, support for some form of high capacity removable and wireless networking.

You've already been pointed toward everything that would be needed for judging the issue here - whether the PSP's performance will be adept considering the availability of other proven technologies.

Again, that proficiency depends largely on real world deployment.

The technologies that were brought up as examples for the comparison have been deployed in the real world and have performed.

 

[Kobun Heat]

What is this about again?

 

[Lazy8s]

With the prospect that the PSP could slip into 2005, I questioned the proficiency of its rendering capabilities considering that competitive mobile technologies like the PowerVR MBX have already been seeing delivery to licensees since the end of 2003.

 

[Kobun Heat]

Is that gonna matter?

 

[Lazy8s]

Performance isn't critical to marketability, no. The discussion was simply of technological interest and not implying anything more.

 

[jarrod]

Wait, why are people arguing against MBX as a viable effiecent "real world" solution when PSP has yet to prove any such merit in that regard either. Right now wouldn't both qualify as vaporware? Why extend PSP courtesies you're not willing to deliver to MBX?

 

[Lazy8s]

To be fair, discussing the future like this is speculative by nature. But the MBX doesn't need to be given any benefit of the doubt since it's already successfully launched and performing.

 

[ypo]

Stop talking out of your ass and show us a mobile product that can do PSP level graphics already. A link to the actual device will suffice.

 

[kaching]

I'm willing to extend appropriate courtesies to each technology, and I agree they are both vaporware at this point, but I don't think that puts them on equal footing because there's clearly been more progress made towards turning PSP tech into a real world implementation for handheld gaming. Myself and Marco have asked after confirmation of ANY MBX licensee preparing something similar for a similar time frame with similar performance and with the expectation of being delivered in a similar price range. Besides some misdirection towards a solution meant for incorporation into automobiles, nothing has been revealed.

MBX sounds like a great core/GPU solution that I certainly hope to see make its way into future products but the reports of its real world performance seem greatly exaggerated.

whether the PSP's performance will be adept considering the availability of other proven technologies.

So the possible availability of other comparably adept technologies would make the PSP seem less adept? How about the other technologies? If PSP is now considered lacking but MBX only compares and doesn't exceed, is MBX now lacking in this regard too? You can't have your cake and eat it too, Lazy.

 

[Lazy8s]

ypo:

show us a mobile product that can do PSP level graphics already. A link to the actual device will suffice.

PowerVR doesn't supply the chips to product; they supply intellectual property for the underlying architecture.

Here:
http://www.renesas.com/eng/news/2004/0223/

kaching:

Besides some misdirection towards a solution meant for incorporation into automobiles, nothing has been revealed.

It's an architecture that could be used for car information systems, handheld gaming consoles, or anything requiring the efficiencies of a mobile solution. Look up the OMAP-2 platform from Texas Instruments and various other MBX-based architectures to see the technology being targeted at handheld game devices.

but the reports of its real world performance seem greatly exaggerated.

What reports?

So the possible availability of other comparably adept technologies would make the PSP seem less adept?

Around a year in advance? Yes. Time brings better technology, like potentially a Series 2 of sorts for MBX in 2005.

 

[kaching]

Your reports, Lazy. You're still just pointing to chips and vague intentions, nothing as concrete as a PSP or DS, or even the Gizmondo.

 

[Lazy8s]

It's a discussion about staying current to a certain level of technology, and what's been provided are examples of technology. There is no interdependency to anything related to implementation for such a focus.

 

[kaching]

Actually, you're the one that established the interdependency with implementation in your first post in this thread, by suggesting that a delay into 2005 for the PSP (which implies its implementation as a real world product) would make it not so remarkable in relation to other technologies in the mobile sector. But you're not holding these other technologies to the same rigorous standards that you're holding Sony to for implementation.

 

[Lazy8s]

The indication that the PSP might slip its 2004 release comes from the fact that Sony was late in getting development kits made because chip production had not ramped up enough. From their first announcement of a late 2004 release in Japan which was miraculously ahead of when the mass volumes would role in for the worldwide launch, it seemed a bit of a vain attempt like their holiday 1999 projections for the PS2 in Japan. It's delays in the availability of the technology that holds them up.

 

[kaching]

That's just implementation again, Lazy. Make up your mind whether you think there's any interdependency between implementation and technological viability or not

 

[Lazy8s]

The technology is not viable for 2004 if it can't be produced adequately for release in 2004.

 

[sohka88]

Lazy8s what exactly are you arguing? I do not get your point.

 

[Lazy8s]

I'm questioning whether the PSP will be high-performance in game rendering for mobile technologies in 2005.

 

[Lord Error]

The technology is not viable for 2004 if it can't be produced adequately for release in 2004.

Produced or *mass* produced? It's a big difference between lauching something like PSP , that need millions of units at launch AND software support (that alone can be a primary reason for a launch delay even though hardware technology is all there and ready to go) and making a release of something like a car navigation system.

 

[Lazy8s]

By definition, any product coming off of the production lines of a modern fab is mass produced. Certainly, though, coordinating a larger launch is far more involved, yet manufacturers are well versed at making concurrent preparations as the technology ramps up to readiness and can start shipments surprisingly soon (within a couple of months as revealed by their own reports) after volume production has begun. Launches for smaller markets don't begin until volume production is reached either.

The difference in the volume of a small market product launch and a large market one is mostly attributable to the size of its simultaneous production run.

 

[ypo]

lol, still no link to a product that's producing PSP level graphics. So tell me where are the pictures or movies in that link showing off the graphics? Show us a link that actually shows off the nagivation system doing PSP level graphics. Talk is cheap.

 

[Lazy8s]

ypo:

lol, still no link to a product that's producing PSP level graphics.

The hardware at that link is admirably competitive to the PSP in performance with those specs.

So tell me where are the pictures or movies in that link showing off the graphics? Show us a link that actually shows off the nagivation system doing PSP level graphics. Talk is cheap.

The discussion is about the technology, and pictures would irrelevantly reflect implementation: only one of the two solutions is in a product receiving strong game development support, so only that one will really have its performance exploited.

Besides, "talk" is pretty much all that the PSP showing amounted to, lest you forget that almost its entire demonstration wasn't even produced or running on the actual hardware.

Anyway, here are shots from a curved surface demo rendered by the MBX and showing off that hardware-accelerated LOD support of its Vertex Geometry Processor (VGP) unit, as used in that Renesas architecture:

 

[Panajev2001a]

Lazy, unless you can affirm that the Rensas chip can push those and better ( a single teapot in front of a flat background is not what you should consider as peak of PSP graphical quality ) graphics then the point is moot still.

33 MVertices/s from the PSP's GPU T&L unit + all the polygons you can process with the 2.6 GFLOPS VFPU and 664 MPixels/s of fill-rate wiht more features than the GS rendering core has do not look too old and outdated also for 2005 portable standards.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Besides, "talk" is pretty much all that the PSP showing amounted to, lest you forget that almost its entire demonstration wasn't even produced or running on the actual hardware.

All the SCE tech demos were produced on final hardware and were running on final hardware, you can believe me or you cannot: it is up to you.

 

[Lazy8s]

Panajev2001a:

Lazy, unless you can affirm that the Rensas chip can push those and better

The demos are for representing the MBX technology in general; MBX-based architectures are targeting handheld game players just as well as PDAs, wireless phones, car nav systems, and anything else mobile. That demo was running on an ARM Versatile development platform for prototyping systems operating at bus speeds up to 90MHz and with the ARM926EJ-S core at excess of 230MHz. That Renesas part integrates a 400MHz SH-4A at 720MIPS and 2.8GFLOPS.

( a single teapot in front of a flat background is not what you should consider as peak of PSP graphical quality )

I didn't make any absolute claim as to the PSP's potential. In fact, I specifically mentioned that there hasn't been much in the way of demonstration for that yet and also that such examples go to implementation which isn't very relevant here in the first place.

All the SCE tech demos were produced on final hardware and were running on final hardware, you can believe me or you cannot: it is up to you.

I said "almost its entire demonstration" - not the whole thing. Sony's big PSP unveiling was PSP in name alone for the most part.

 

[ypo]

"Besides, "talk" is pretty much all that the PSP showing amounted to, lest you forget that almost its entire demonstration wasn't even produced or running on the actual hardware."

Don't be retarded. There were playable games demoed on the PSP.

All this bullshit and you still haven't produce shots or movies of that navigation device outputing PSP level graphics. Some ambiguous shots of a teapot is not going to cut it. I don't know if you know this but there's more to a system than just the graphics chips.

 

[Shoryuken]

"Besides, "talk" is pretty much all that the PSP showing amounted to, lest you forget that almost its entire demonstration wasn't even produced or running on the actual hardware."

Don't be retarded. There were playable games demoed on the PSP.

All this bullshit and you still haven't produce shots or movies of that navigation device outputing PSP level graphics. Some ambiguous shots of a teapot is not going to cut it. I don't know if you know this but there's more to a system than just the graphics chips.

Yes but most/all of these playable demoes weren't using actual PSP hardware (Some Sony First party games could be exceptions.) Also, I think this argument has gone on long enough, we should get back to the main point of the report, PSP's possible delay.

If Sony delay's the Japanese launch past the holiday shopping season I think it will be a tremendous missed opportunity. During this time any supply they had would have been guaranteed to sell out (not saying it wouldn't sell out during any times of the year). However most importanlty it would give Nintendo comple control of the handheld industry for another shopping season, which is not good.

 

[ypo]

"Yes but most/all of these playable demoes weren't using actual PSP hardware (Some Sony First party games could be exceptions.) Also, I think this argument has gone on long enough, we should get back to the main point of the report, PSP's possible delay."

How so? Because the units were bolted down? In that case I guess all DS games weren't running off the actual hardware either since they were bolted down as well. I did hear that some videos were captured running off emulators. Do you think that Sony were trying to fool developers by sending them an emulator that's actually more powerful than PSP, and piss off developers by increasing development time?

 

[jarrod]

"Yes but most/all of these playable demoes weren't using actual PSP hardware (Some Sony First party games could be exceptions.) Also, I think this argument has gone on long enough, we should get back to the main point of the report, PSP's possible delay."

How so? Because the units were bolted down? In that case I guess all DS games weren't running off the actual hardware either since they were bolted down as well. I did hear that some videos were captured running off emulators. Do you think that Sony were trying to fool developers by sending them an emulator that's actually more powerful than PSP, and piss off developers by increasing development time?

From what I understand, the playable DS units housed real chipsets inside the actual units running the software while the playable PSP units were empty and wired to development systems running the software. Not that I expect PSP not to be capable of those visuals (in fact I suspect it's capable of much more) but using E3 as some sort of "proof" of real world hardware demonstration strikes a bit far. It was more an approxomation of PSP hardware than actual PSP hardware.

 

[ypo]

"From what I understand, the playable DS units housed real chipsets inside the actual units running the software while the playable PSP units were empty and wired to development systems running the software."

Proof? Link?

"Not that I expect PSP not to be capable of those visuals (in fact I suspect it's capable of much more) but using E3 as some sort of "proof" of real world hardware demonstration strikes a bit far. It was more an approxomation of PSP hardware than actual PSP hardware."

Even if it's true regarding PSP at E3, what's the difference? Development systems have the same hardware as consumer versions. Same chipsets, same capabilities. Only difference is probably extra memory used for development purposes.

 

[Lord Error]

From what I understand, the playable DS units housed real chipsets inside the actual units running the software while the playable PSP units were empty and wired to development systems running the software.

It has been strongly hinted that both PSP and DS were empty shells wired to a hardware behind the wall. Which is a perfectly common thing for the first unveiling of hardware. Neither the DS or PSP playable units could have been lifted away from the consoles where they were bolted, and noone during E3 has ever reported them to be functioning as a separate, non bolted unit. The only demonstration of such kind was the PSP playing the video, but that could have been a video playing only, non final hardware.

 

[Alcibiades]

didn't that EGM guy have one unbolted in his hand on CNN, I wonder if it was just the thing or if he played a game on it...

it was Dan Hsu...

 

[Panajev2001a]

From what I understand, the playable DS units housed real chipsets inside the actual units running the software while the playable PSP units were empty and wired to development systems running the software. Not that I expect PSP not to be capable of those visuals (in fact I suspect it's capable of much more) but using E3 as some sort of "proof" of real world hardware demonstration strikes a bit far. It was more an approxomation of PSP hardware than actual PSP hardware.

Again, there was real Hardware inside the PSP shells as you say: the interactive demos that were developeed on final hardware ran quite smoothly, too smoothly to be using the slow emulators.

 

[Panajev2001a]

The demos are for representing the MBX technology in general; MBX-based architectures are targeting handheld game players just as well as PDAs, wireless phones, car nav systems, and anything else mobile. That demo was running on an ARM Versatile development platform for prototyping systems operating at bus speeds up to 90MHz and with the ARM926EJ-S core at excess of 230MHz. That Renesas part integrates a 400MHz SH-4A at 720MIPS and 2.8GFLOPS.

Interesting, a Dreamcast++ returns with that Renesas part: SH-4 at 400 MHz, 2x the speed of the Dreamcast chip, it could be a very nice battle.

I winder how fast is the PVR MBX core they have chosen and the performanc eof the VGP in that configuration.