Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
Yes.Magic Sam said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Our New Machine, Pandora
- Thread starter WarmFluffyUK
- Start date
- Status
KeyboardCommando
Still Fresh
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 9
The forum doesn't seem too thrilled with how many quote tags were in my post. So here's some adorable italics. Enjoy.
Exophase spouted in a needlessly hostile fashion:
Now that's just dead wrong. Do some research on ARM Cortex-A8. Not only is it clocked a good 3x faster at LEAST, but it's more superscalar (can actually execute two ALU ops at once) and it has 4-way SIMD (as opposed to the SH4's two way, which is where it gets its "remarkable" floating point performance). What was impressive 8 years ago isn't today, even in cutting edge handheld CPUs.
Perhaps I missed some remark by a party involved in development of this handheld, but given that cost concerns were being cited over mention of even the i.MX31, a chipset that's been available for years now, I would find it unlikely it would be in use. I'll admit I overstated things-- there are mobile CPUs able to meet the task of performing on the same playing field, or outperforming the SH-4. However, not all of them are feasible for use in such a project. For example, you could throw a Pentium-M ULV chip out there as a possibility. And while the battery life and size of the unit would be horrendous, this could be considered as a 'mobile' processor suitable for use in a handheld. Within the reasonable range of chipsets likely to be chosen for a sub-$300 device, unless serious comprimises are made in the rest of the unit, DC-equivalent CPU performance is unlikely.
All decent emulators of powerful RISC platforms use dynarec, nothing new, although I doubt even a highly clocked Cortex-A8 could pull it all off. Maybe at 1GHz..
We're agreed there. While we're debating if the highest-end of mobile CPUs (short of x86 architecture-based parts) are even capable of meeting the Dreamcast CPU's raw computational ability, it's pretty obvious that once you factor in emulation overhead as a whole the performance just isn't there, dynarec or not.
And you know this how... especially in terms of "capabilities", a mobile GPU with modern shaders will wipe the floor with the Dreamcast's abilities.
Again; all assertions made are with a reasonable end consumer price point in mind. You're not likely to see a device with a 1 GHz Cortex-A8 and top-of-the-line mobile GPU .. much less with shader units .. in a device under $300. With a touchscreen. And respectable amounts of DDR RAM, and flash storage ... and a built-in Li-Ion battery. While it's possible to do, the company would turn very little to no profit, and I'd worry about where the corners were cut. Sony wasn't even turning a profit on the PSP for a while, and its hardware is far from cutting-edge. It's just impressive compared to what the DS has its under the hood. And while anecdotal evidence mars much of such a debate, the PSP's reliability from a mechanical sense indicates what happens when you're operating on razor-thin profit margins.
PowerVR SGX has much higher "whitesheet specs"
Acknowledged; see above for rationale.
Not everyone is Sony you know. Just go look at some SGX demos. They clearly meet or surpass Dreamcast level.
Nor do I assume them to be. It's typical to state the raw potential of hardware rather than its real world specifications. It's a marketing thing. The Dreamcast's raw specifications are much higher than what the actual games could muster from the unit; this dates back to the Saturn, too. I'm not trying to say the SGX can't accomplish what it shows in its demos. But as before, is the consumer willing to pay for it? With such small market share would a small company be willing to stake their business on selling a machine with such expensive hardware at a loss? Probably not.
It's slightly less practical than PS1 games, which everyone is current crazy over. SD card costs will continue to drop all the time. This argument sucks too.
I've never been able to relate. Personal preference, I suppose. The performance was never compelling enough for me to bother with it outside of experimentation, and that lost its appeal rather quickly.
Now that's bogus, go look at what the GD-ROM specs provides and compare it to the SD card spec.
I don't expect it would be a problem, properly managed-- but you need to take into account differing card speeds and the multiple possible interfaces to that card. Right know, knowledge on that front is terribly lacking. I assumed, when the GP2X was released, they wouldn't miss such a critical feature as DMA transfers for the SD interface. Unfortunately, the good people at MagicEyes did miss it.
RAM cache, DMA from SD card... I remember getting into an argument with someone once about how CD-less handheld platforms would struggle to emulate SegaCD, then Picodrive comes along with it on a GP2X.
Such logic has yielded some awful posts regarding emulation of the N64 or PSP (!) on the GP2X 'if you just believe'. You're looking at streaming a lot more than just a little CDDA audio in a high end Dreamcast game. Most pertinent content will be pre-loaded to RAM, as on the Sega CD, but these issues always need to be addressed. Otherwise you just paint an overly-rosy future in which anything is possible.. "so long as you believe". We'll be emulating the XBox 360 and running Gears of War in no time.
Primitive? Moving along slowly? Either you have standards that put DaveC to shame or you haven't been paying attention to DC emulation on PC at ALL.
And that's why I have the latest version of the useful emulators for the Dreamcast on the scene? My standards encompass the emulation scene as a whole, and when compared to much older systems, Dreamcast emulation is quite primitive. Not as bad as Saturn emulation, DS emulation, etc. But still in need of some serious work.
Yes, repeat what everyone has said a million times in a million places and is common knowledge now (but be more detailed to impress people).
You seem hostile today. It can't be good for your blood pressure. I'm sure there are other things in your day to day life that deserve the invested energy more than arguing with geeks like me over the internet.
At any rate, where the hell do I get off discussing emulation when it's brought up as a topic of conversation. And how dare I compare it to Dreamcast emulation. What nerve.
I pick: get your facts straight, this handheld is probably using ARM Cortex-A8
You seem really convinced of this .. I'd like to see your reference for it. It's good news if nothing else.
Exophase spouted in a needlessly hostile fashion:
Now that's just dead wrong. Do some research on ARM Cortex-A8. Not only is it clocked a good 3x faster at LEAST, but it's more superscalar (can actually execute two ALU ops at once) and it has 4-way SIMD (as opposed to the SH4's two way, which is where it gets its "remarkable" floating point performance). What was impressive 8 years ago isn't today, even in cutting edge handheld CPUs.
Perhaps I missed some remark by a party involved in development of this handheld, but given that cost concerns were being cited over mention of even the i.MX31, a chipset that's been available for years now, I would find it unlikely it would be in use. I'll admit I overstated things-- there are mobile CPUs able to meet the task of performing on the same playing field, or outperforming the SH-4. However, not all of them are feasible for use in such a project. For example, you could throw a Pentium-M ULV chip out there as a possibility. And while the battery life and size of the unit would be horrendous, this could be considered as a 'mobile' processor suitable for use in a handheld. Within the reasonable range of chipsets likely to be chosen for a sub-$300 device, unless serious comprimises are made in the rest of the unit, DC-equivalent CPU performance is unlikely.
All decent emulators of powerful RISC platforms use dynarec, nothing new, although I doubt even a highly clocked Cortex-A8 could pull it all off. Maybe at 1GHz..
We're agreed there. While we're debating if the highest-end of mobile CPUs (short of x86 architecture-based parts) are even capable of meeting the Dreamcast CPU's raw computational ability, it's pretty obvious that once you factor in emulation overhead as a whole the performance just isn't there, dynarec or not.
And you know this how... especially in terms of "capabilities", a mobile GPU with modern shaders will wipe the floor with the Dreamcast's abilities.
Again; all assertions made are with a reasonable end consumer price point in mind. You're not likely to see a device with a 1 GHz Cortex-A8 and top-of-the-line mobile GPU .. much less with shader units .. in a device under $300. With a touchscreen. And respectable amounts of DDR RAM, and flash storage ... and a built-in Li-Ion battery. While it's possible to do, the company would turn very little to no profit, and I'd worry about where the corners were cut. Sony wasn't even turning a profit on the PSP for a while, and its hardware is far from cutting-edge. It's just impressive compared to what the DS has its under the hood. And while anecdotal evidence mars much of such a debate, the PSP's reliability from a mechanical sense indicates what happens when you're operating on razor-thin profit margins.
PowerVR SGX has much higher "whitesheet specs"
Acknowledged; see above for rationale.
Not everyone is Sony you know. Just go look at some SGX demos. They clearly meet or surpass Dreamcast level.
Nor do I assume them to be. It's typical to state the raw potential of hardware rather than its real world specifications. It's a marketing thing. The Dreamcast's raw specifications are much higher than what the actual games could muster from the unit; this dates back to the Saturn, too. I'm not trying to say the SGX can't accomplish what it shows in its demos. But as before, is the consumer willing to pay for it? With such small market share would a small company be willing to stake their business on selling a machine with such expensive hardware at a loss? Probably not.
It's slightly less practical than PS1 games, which everyone is current crazy over. SD card costs will continue to drop all the time. This argument sucks too.
I've never been able to relate. Personal preference, I suppose. The performance was never compelling enough for me to bother with it outside of experimentation, and that lost its appeal rather quickly.
Now that's bogus, go look at what the GD-ROM specs provides and compare it to the SD card spec.
I don't expect it would be a problem, properly managed-- but you need to take into account differing card speeds and the multiple possible interfaces to that card. Right know, knowledge on that front is terribly lacking. I assumed, when the GP2X was released, they wouldn't miss such a critical feature as DMA transfers for the SD interface. Unfortunately, the good people at MagicEyes did miss it.
RAM cache, DMA from SD card... I remember getting into an argument with someone once about how CD-less handheld platforms would struggle to emulate SegaCD, then Picodrive comes along with it on a GP2X.
Such logic has yielded some awful posts regarding emulation of the N64 or PSP (!) on the GP2X 'if you just believe'. You're looking at streaming a lot more than just a little CDDA audio in a high end Dreamcast game. Most pertinent content will be pre-loaded to RAM, as on the Sega CD, but these issues always need to be addressed. Otherwise you just paint an overly-rosy future in which anything is possible.. "so long as you believe". We'll be emulating the XBox 360 and running Gears of War in no time.
Primitive? Moving along slowly? Either you have standards that put DaveC to shame or you haven't been paying attention to DC emulation on PC at ALL.
And that's why I have the latest version of the useful emulators for the Dreamcast on the scene? My standards encompass the emulation scene as a whole, and when compared to much older systems, Dreamcast emulation is quite primitive. Not as bad as Saturn emulation, DS emulation, etc. But still in need of some serious work.
Yes, repeat what everyone has said a million times in a million places and is common knowledge now (but be more detailed to impress people).
You seem hostile today. It can't be good for your blood pressure. I'm sure there are other things in your day to day life that deserve the invested energy more than arguing with geeks like me over the internet.
At any rate, where the hell do I get off discussing emulation when it's brought up as a topic of conversation. And how dare I compare it to Dreamcast emulation. What nerve.
I pick: get your facts straight, this handheld is probably using ARM Cortex-A8
You seem really convinced of this .. I'd like to see your reference for it. It's good news if nothing else.
KeyboardCommando
Still Fresh
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 9
hlide said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
You should read this thread.KeyboardCommando said:
Are capable of far exceeding. I would wager that even an i.MX31 at 533MHz or higher can beat a 200MHz SH4. i.MX31 also has a VFPU.KeyboardCommando said:
Who knows. I've seen more impressive feats.KeyboardCommando said:
You should read this thread.KeyboardCommando said:
I never saw exaggerations in the graphics specs of either, you must be thinking of PS1/PS2KeyboardCommando said:
With 8GB+ cards people will gladly reserve some of that space for a GB sized game or two. No one said performance would have to suffer.KeyboardCommando said:
Dude, don't compare me to those "just believe" people. When it comes to emulation I have a more informed opinion of these things than you do. "A little CDDA audio" is still constant streaming. Given that Dreamcast actually has a sufficient amount of RAM it wouldn't have to stream.KeyboardCommando said:
Right, your standards are ridiculous. There's a huge gap between "needs some serious work" and is "primitive, moving along slowly."KeyboardCommando said:
Ahahah, that's wonderful coming from you. I'm just tired of seeing the same thing posted over and over again, you could have just said what everyone knows, that Saturn has X chips, you didn't have to go into yet another detailed (but largely irrelevant) explanation. I think you like making people think you know a lot about this.KeyboardCommando said:
Sarcasm, good one XD XDKeyboardCommando said:
You should read this thread.KeyboardCommando said:
Last edited by a moderator:
KeyboardCommando
Still Fresh
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 9
Meh. We'll see. I'll leave it at that since this is a pretty tiresome argument (as hypotheticals always are.) GamePark had a lot of good ideas too, mixed in with a lot of bad ones. Discussions like these are pretty pointless until some actual hardware exists. Maybe we'll pick this up again once I've trudged through all 153 pages of this thread, most of which are about the migatory patterns of swallows and preference in strudel topping.
Oh, before you psychoanalyze my motivations for typing such long posts down to "He wants people to think he knows what he's talking about!" you should know I'm this verbose all the time. I'm not going out of my way to impress you people. Believe me, that's not even close to getting on my to-do list. Regardless providing some supporting details rather than leaving your arguments vague and ambiguous, open to numerous invalid interpretations, can give a whole new level of depth and superior expression of your point. Take that into consideration. You know, or write it off as meaningless jargon; whichever floats your boat.
Oh, before you psychoanalyze my motivations for typing such long posts down to "He wants people to think he knows what he's talking about!" you should know I'm this verbose all the time. I'm not going out of my way to impress you people. Believe me, that's not even close to getting on my to-do list. Regardless providing some supporting details rather than leaving your arguments vague and ambiguous, open to numerous invalid interpretations, can give a whole new level of depth and superior expression of your point. Take that into consideration. You know, or write it off as meaningless jargon; whichever floats your boat.
sam fisher
Well-Known Member
Epicentre, A guy from TI hooked up with Craig via this topic and then Craig announced that with the OMAP it would be about £200.
atomicthumbs
I am the king of the collectors, with hospital bed
javaJake
Jacob Godserv
atomicthumbs said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Vorporeal
Yes, no, I, this is.
javaJake said:
Last edited by a moderator:
javaJake
Jacob Godserv
Vorporeal said:javaJake said:atomicthumbs said:Some PowerVR demos for the hungry:
http://www.imgtec.com/PowerVR/insider/Demos/index.asp
OK, just so I don't get confused, are these demos explaining what the new device can do, or just what PowerVR processors/chips/videothingys/whatever can do?
They just show what the graphics chip can do. They aren't videos from a prototype of the device.
EDIT: I think only the first four are for the SGX (the one in the OMAP3430). The others are for lower-end chips. Look at those 4 to see the power of the Craiginator (if he uses the 3430).
:blink:
And here I was thinking BZFlag on this thing was a dream...
Last edited by a moderator:
Javacat
Founder of the WarmFluffyUK fan club
atomicthumbs said:
Last edited by a moderator:
OMFG, the PowerVR demos are..... increadible.
Where do i order the craiginator?
Also, a while back people were speculating on touchscreen buttons for savestate loading and saving. The emulators for the Tapwave Zodiac had them, and they worked really well.
Where do i order the craiginator?
Also, a while back people were speculating on touchscreen buttons for savestate loading and saving. The emulators for the Tapwave Zodiac had them, and they worked really well.
icurafu
The Hallucinogenic Elf
Pay no attention to the demos.
They don't even tell you which GPU they were produced on. The SGX comes in 3 catagories for Mobile, UMP and IGP. I just wish TI would release the real specs of the OMAP including which SGX they are using, and PowerVR released some demos stating that they were produced on the mobile SGX.
They don't even tell you which GPU they were produced on. The SGX comes in 3 catagories for Mobile, UMP and IGP. I just wish TI would release the real specs of the OMAP including which SGX they are using, and PowerVR released some demos stating that they were produced on the mobile SGX.
dodgyville
Member
I just tuned into this thread for the first time since page 3 or something and I'm like ... "what the hell is it about now?"
javaJake
Jacob Godserv
This. The demos mentioned above may show what the device is capable of, however we have yet to learn what the real specs are, so no assurances on that.dodgyville said:
We need someone to tell us what the GPU is, or at least if these demos are for "us"...icurafu said:
Craig?
Last edited by a moderator:
sam fisher
Well-Known Member
Clearly the demos were not produced on the Craiginator as it's not built yet. Squidge, care to divulge whether you have an OMAP3430 dev board?
Magic Sam
Forever Homebrew
Hi,
I just would like to know how many 3D artists do we have in the "community" who could use efficiently the new handheld's 3D capabilities ? It's hard and it takes time to make 3D homebrew games, for free...
Or is 3D only to be used for emulation / ports / demos ?
Bye !
Magic Sam
I just would like to know how many 3D artists do we have in the "community" who could use efficiently the new handheld's 3D capabilities ? It's hard and it takes time to make 3D homebrew games, for free...
Or is 3D only to be used for emulation / ports / demos ?
Bye !
Magic Sam
Squidge
Certified Guru
No, I don't. Also, I only know as much as you guys regarding the OMAP chip too, so don't know what PVR chip it has.sam fisher said:
Craig may know more, but he's most likely under NDA, so can't say a great deal.
Last edited by a moderator:
Eolair
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds
The OMAP3430 is probably using the PowerVR SGX 530 which was the first SGX available. This is also what the PowerVR wiki claims. The SGX 530 has a maximum effective fillrate of 1200Mpix/s and polygon throughput of 13.5Mpoly/s. Pretty good IMO, even if it's just theoretical numbers.
- Status
Similar threads
