yeah, I have heard about the PS3 OS footprint reduction. That just means they had some sloppy coding they removed or cleaned up.
In reality, it's probably the enchanced BC support they removed (since the hardware is not present, why bother lending more OS support then needed to support it?). Though that is just my opinion. For all we know, the Wii and xbox360 might already have smaller OS footprints, just MS and NT don't care to release that info... (I know the XNA dev site has no info on this). @ MAD BEAST. My theory is a bit simpler. At launch, consoles are the fastest systems out there, no exception (the xbox360 can run 6 threads of instruction-rich code - something even the PS3 cannot do), as no system on the market could overtake them at the time. This was 2006. Now it's 2010, and even optimising the crapper out of these systems will not get more realisitic looking graphics, not even with all kinds of dirty tricks (like using shaders to emulate geometry to hide texture detail limitaton - like using the tesselator in the xbox360 or the 6 (game accessible) SPE in the PS3 for additional geometry setup) could make the appearance of games look any more real. So near the end of each consoles' lifespan, games will ever more be developed for consumer systems... a majority of which don't have HD5970 or GTX480 in them. We'd be lucky if most had a simple GTS250 in them, or even DX10 cards to begin with (if the Steam HW survey is accurate). So even then, developers are limited by what people chose to stick with, not what companies "artificially limit" consumers to. Yeah, Intel might be the biggest, however, that was mostly from one of the dirtiest frauds in the tech industry (Dell settles with the Gov't, HP is settling, iirc. more to come, for sure). That is why we have companies like AMD, who *don't care* what Intel has to say on what a "PC" should be. Yes, MS and Intel are in an alliance, and that alliance has kept netbooks as a weak and crappy device, but that was at the request of notebook manufactures, who were seeing ASUS' EEEpc destroy their low-end notebook market. Intel sure as hell wouldn't care about selling one of it's cheapest to manufacture CPU, since it helps it recover it's 90nm/130 (intel poulsbo chipset for the Atom, and the southbridge used this) fab costs, in addition to the fact that it could make just above 1000 of these on a 300mm wafer @ 45nm, rather than a more costly to manufacture 65nm CPU that had to be specially binned for "low power" purposes. Anyhow, gotta go :( On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:18 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Jeremy, you heard about the reduction in the PS3 OS footprint? > Seems there are now more resources available to the system, a thing > that xbox 360 and the wii can't do, as they had a fixed OS footprint. > > On Aug 4, 5:19 am, Jeremy Shaw <[email protected]> wrote: > > For the PS3 comparison, there are two important things: > > > > extremely tight (low latency) and large "CPU" to "GPU" interconnect > > bandwidth. It's the traditional advantage of a console (no PCIe interface > to > > mux through), along with the RISC instruction set of the Cell. Of course, > > Intel would say they have instruction rich CPU that easily overpower a > Cell, > > however, the Cell used in the PS3 has 7 FPU (basically large vector > units, > > akin to something inbetween a Streaming Multiprocessor and a Shader in a > > nVidia G80 GPU), which gives it a decent boost in geometry setup power, > > depeding on how it's used. That, and the fact it has a bluray drive (some > > games like God of War 3 use massive texture sets [30GB+] that are > streamed > > straight off of it), in addition to having balls to the wall minimal > OS/API > > overhead, lead it to have greater *useable* power. > > > > The GT335m is no slouch, however, it's not going to give world's better > > performance over the PS3, which has one of the more unique architectures > for > > game devs to exploit (I still beleive the xbox360 Xenon/Xenos > architecture > > is far more unique). > > > > That being said, my trusty HP DV2 is on the fritz, and I have already > > ordered a m11x (core i5, the i7 is too expensive to justify). :) > > > > That will be *two *steps leaving the GMA950 behind :D > > > > On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 6:56 PM, MAD_BEAST <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Nin-lil-izi > > > > > if you trust me... go for the M11X with no doubts, in my opinion is > > > the best commercial personal computer on earth. > > > > > why? > > > > > becuase there is nothing so powerful and so small at the same time. > > > there are smaller, true... there are more powerful, true, but nothing > > > that combine both characteristics at the same time and thats all what > > > we are chasing on la laptop portability and power. > > > > > how much? around 2000 USD with a range of 200 of under or overprice > > > for a i7 2.66ghz+ 8GB DDR3+ SSD 256GB+ Nvidia m335 gt, youll get a > > > higher performance than a PS3... thats all you need to know and you > > > will run everything you want at highest settings for the next 2/3 > > > years, becuase the market is going to stop the commercial development > > > of shader model and Directx renderization... trust me > > > > > -- > > > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > > > > > -- > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
