PDA

View Full Version : if the PS3 gave full access to videocard and CPU would you buy one (for Linux)



billdotson
March 13th, 2007, 08:35 PM
if the PS3 allowed Linux to use the entire power of the Cell processor and full access to the videocard would you buy one?

darkhatter
March 13th, 2007, 10:05 PM
would it still be 600 dollars....

the_darkside_986
March 13th, 2007, 10:10 PM
I would if the optional Linux OS could and would properly use rsx chip and Cell to outperform my cheap $350 PC. From what I've read, it is as slow as my my old PC running Redhat 9 with only 300 Mhz and 128 MB of RAM. My cheap but modern system is 10x more powerful than that :P

But of course, I would only buy it if it had 100% pure, unrestricted access to the hardware, not the lame virtualization of the OS, or even virtualization of any gfx card (limited 3d). If I buy something, it should be mine to install whatever I want on it. If they don't like to sell things with that business model, then they should just keep it in their store houses. No locked-down, anti-user hardware is worth $600.

seuaniu
March 13th, 2007, 10:22 PM
No way. the ps3's interface can't currently run as a service on linux. When I first started hearing the "ps3 will run Linux" stories last year, i got really excited about how powerful the ps3 could be. Then I found out that you can install it, but it isn't linux underneath the ps3 shell. That really sucks because the ps3 could have been an all-in-one home media device taking advantage of mythtv and everything else available for linux. Oh, it could play video games too. as it stands right now, the ps3 doesn't even multitask, which seems like a waste of such good hardware. Sony really dropped the ball on that idea, unfortunately.

billdotson
March 13th, 2007, 10:27 PM
personally if the PS3 gave FULL access to all of it's hardware for Linux to use then I might have gotten one if I didn't already have a PC and an Xbox360. Paying $600 for both a console and a PC = awesome. the X360 costs $400 and a barebones PC costs $400-500. Paying $600 for both would be an incredible deal.

BTW why doesn't Sony give Linux full access to the hardware.. what could they possibly be losing by allowing that? Anyone that wants a pretty powerful PC to run Linux on and is also looking for a game console (plus a Blu-ray player) would easily look to the PS3 as an excellent deal. Allowing Linux to have full hardware support would probably sell a lot more PS3s than they are currently selling for IMO.

Anyone want to start some sort of "suggestion box" for Sony about this? or is there a place where I/others could post this idea?

Lord Illidan
March 13th, 2007, 10:41 PM
No way. the ps3's interface can't currently run as a service on linux. When I first started hearing the "ps3 will run Linux" stories last year, i got really excited about how powerful the ps3 could be. Then I found out that you can install it, but it isn't linux underneath the ps3 shell. That really sucks because the ps3 could have been an all-in-one home media device taking advantage of mythtv and everything else available for linux. Oh, it could play video games too. as it stands right now, the ps3 doesn't even multitask, which seems like a waste of such good hardware. Sony really dropped the ball on that idea, unfortunately.

it does multitask. All you have to do is dualboot...but when you are under linux, it is like using a normal computer.

The problem is the RAM, though...256 mb of ram are not much.

mcduck
March 14th, 2007, 12:21 AM
I'll probably buy one, and I'll also run Linux on it like I do on my PS2 :)

Honestly, if anybody imagines that even with full access to every piece of silicon inside the PS3 it would somehow turn into a cheap replacement for a PC, I'm sorry to destroy your dreams, it's not like that.

First, it's not x86 compatible. So it's not a PC and it won't run any of your binary files. Second, it's only partly based on PowerPC, so even PowerPC stuff won't really use the Cell CPU properly. And finally, the architecture is different enough from any other in use so to actually use it you need to make the software for it. It's not enough to just compile the existing code for it, to use any other part of the Cell than the PowerPC coreyou actually need to write the software to use SMP's in the first place. This far most programs used on desktop machines can't even use 2 cores of your CPU. So don't even dream of playing WoW with Wine on a PS3 ;)

PS2 has even more limits to hardware access than PS3 will have, only 32MB of memory, the DVD drive doesn't read any other than Sony's disks, but still it's a fun platform to run Linux in if you like some challenges or want to do some 3D or assembler programming with some rather interesting hardware. Only some rare people were actually prepared to do some ASM code, so for anybody else it didn't actually mean anything that you didn't get full access to the hardware, for most programmers it didn't make any difference as they don't know how to use it anyway..

dasunst3r
March 14th, 2007, 12:27 AM
I'll buy it if it comes with a rootkit </sarcasm>

I wouldn't buy anything Sony now taking into consideration how much they care for the consumer.

%hMa@?b<C
March 14th, 2007, 02:02 AM
Absolutely. If sony allowed the PS3 to be like a regular PC (but 256 MiB of ram... come on) I would like up to get one!

Choad
March 14th, 2007, 02:06 AM
if the PS3 allowed Linux to use the entire power of the Cell processor and full access to the videocard would you buy one?
yes. hell yes. yes, yes and a thousand more yesses

rsambuca
March 14th, 2007, 02:14 AM
BTW why doesn't Sony give Linux full access to the hardware.. what could they possibly be losing by allowing that?

They will never give access like you want. As soon as that happens, then it becomes way to easy to hack and then run pirated games. Game sales is where they make their money, and they have to protect that as much as possible. Personally, I don't have a problem with that at all. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

I will wait til I see the 2nd round of these players come out, and then decide which one I am getting. I just want a console for the games, anyways.

Choad
March 14th, 2007, 02:27 AM
They will never give access like you want. As soon as that happens, then it becomes way to easy to hack and then run pirated games. Game sales is where they make their money, and they have to protect that as much as possible. Personally, I don't have a problem with that at all. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

I will wait til I see the 2nd round of these players come out, and then decide which one I am getting. I just want a console for the games, anyways.
thats not the reason i dont think. you still need to be running sony's firmware to run games. you could never get a game to run on linux without effectively making a ps3 emulator run on a ps3... and that aint gunna happen for a number of obvious reasons

homebrew games with real graphical grunt will directly compete with sony's online games marketplace. thats the real reason. imo

billdotson
March 14th, 2007, 02:46 AM
the homebrew games remark and about how the architecture isn't x86 compatible are good points and I didn't think about those when starting this thread. Too bad though.. could've been a cheap capable PC.. if only..

Doesn't matter to me though as I have a x360 and a PC but if I had neither it would be cool.

mcduck
March 14th, 2007, 09:59 AM
homebrew games with real graphical grunt will directly compete with sony's online games marketplace. thats the real reason. imo

I don't think that's the reason. I wouldn't except homebrew coders to be able to games made with millions of dollars and hundreds of developers, when they first have to learn to use the hardware (and even experience on OpenGL programming is not going to take you long way with PS3 architecture)..

Anyway, getting more coders with experience on their hardware is rather good thing for Sony. With the PS2 Linux kit that was pretty much what they were hoping to get.

What are the actual restrictions on PS3? From what I've read PS3 is fairly open, and I would still believe it's not going to be more restricted than PS2 was. And with PS2 Linux kit we got full access (with full manuals) to eveything but the I/O chip that handled disk access, controllers and copy protection on PS2. (and that wasn't really a problem as libraries to use disks and controllers were provided with the kit)

aprice2704
March 14th, 2007, 10:31 AM
If .... as specified. Then yes. :)

graabein
March 14th, 2007, 10:47 AM
I think it's pretty expensive and I don't need it for video games but if I had the dough I'd be more inclined to buy it with full access than without. A friend of mine is getting it and he's more into GNU/Linux, open standards and hardware than I am. And he's less of a gamer, except for the Tony Hawk series.

Tomosaur
March 14th, 2007, 11:29 AM
I would if I could afford it, which I can't. I think the PS3 will be a slow burner. Sony ****** up quite a lot the past year or so, but I think it still has a lot of brand loyalty - and that developers WILL start churning out great games. All playstation consoles have taken a while to 'build up' - Sony has a nasty habit of making things difficult to achieve, the developers need to get used to the new machine and its capabilities.

billdotson
March 14th, 2007, 05:25 PM
yeah the Cell is quite an odd processor to code for I assume.

Kateikyoushi
March 14th, 2007, 05:29 PM
I already have one, so I guess yes ? Not that I really need the Gpu for linux.
If it were an ATI and could run folding on it now that would make a difference.

maniacmusician
March 14th, 2007, 06:13 PM
yeah the Cell is quite an odd processor to code for I assume.
Yes, it is. Which is why the XBox360 has comparatively better games for it in large amounts.

Technically speaking, the PS3 architecture is superior, but it's just too damn hard to code for. It'll either be 2-3 years before the really good games start coming out, or they will just never come out. What use is all of the PS3's power when it takes so much more effort to get it to spit out something comparable to the Xbox360? Getting it to make things that are even better is a far way off.

That being said, I'm not optimistic about any of the new-gen consoles except for the Wii. While it's not as hardcore or intense, it's easier to have a good time on it, and that's what I really need. I need to be able to come home after a long day, relax, and have a generally good time.

G Morgan
March 15th, 2007, 01:27 AM
First, it's not x86 compatible. So it's not a PC and it won't run any of your binary files. Second, it's only partly based on PowerPC, so even PowerPC stuff won't really use the Cell CPU properly. And finally, the architecture is different enough from any other in use so to actually use it you need to make the software for it. It's not enough to just compile the existing code for it, to use any other part of the Cell than the PowerPC coreyou actually need to write the software to use SMP's in the first place. This far most programs used on desktop machines can't even use 2 cores of your CPU. So don't even dream of playing WoW with Wine on a PS3 ;)

As I understand it the PPE is a complete 64-bit PPC architecture. If it was that much different we wouldn't already have working Linux distros on it.

WRT the RAM. The PPC is a RISC architecture with a lot more registers than x86 junk. Generally such architectures can be configured to run with less RAM than standard. To compare to the UltraSPARC. Sun recommends 512MB of RAM to run Solaris on x86 but 128MB on RISC UltraSPARC. Essentially huge amounts of RAM are a feature of x86 being rubbish rather than a general problem with CPUs.

Kateikyoushi
March 15th, 2007, 03:16 AM
Yes, it is. Which is why the XBox360 has comparatively better games for it in large amounts.

It more likely because they had 1 year headstart.

The same things about the hardware were said when the PS2 came out, people learned to program it.

maniacmusician
March 15th, 2007, 04:51 AM
It more likely because they had 1 year headstart.

The same things about the hardware were said when the PS2 came out, people learned to program it.
not really. The PS2 architecture was much more straightforward than the PS3's and the documentation for it was much better. It was definitely a lot easier to code for.

Talk to any software developer and he/she will tell you that utilizing the power of an architecture like the PS3's is a nightmare. That doesn't mean its less powerful or worse than the 360. In time, people may learn to program it like you said, and I didn't disagree with that (actually, thats what I said), but it will take a few years. Whereas, the 360 is easier to deal with and that's why it's getting better games sooner. The 1 year head start helps a little, but that's really only a small part of it. Game devs have had basic PS3 architecture and programming kits available to them for a while now.

billdotson
March 15th, 2007, 05:40 AM
maniacmusician: so your opinion as to why the PS3 isn't doing so great right now is due to how difficult to program for the architecture is? I know I know there are other reasons: price, availbility and most importantly current game selection but that sounds like it could be an annoying factor for the game developers.

IMO the PS3 is a superior piece of technology compared to the X360 and the Wii (Wii is kind of obvious though) because it has a pretty powerful CPU (although difficult to code for) AFAIK a pretty good videocard, and a bunch of media ports that make it pretty useful as a multimedia center.

The biggest thing for me is.. the X360 was out first so I got it.. the X360 supports all my non-PC exclusives so I am happy. A few killer apps isn't going to get me to shell out $600. Actually if the X360 hadn't been a gift.. I probably wouldn't have gotten it. Even when I did receive it I actually pondered if it was actually worth the investment or should I get $400 back for it. As of right now.. I think keeping it was a bit of a mistake. Although it seems it is going to save me money in the long run as all the games that I want to play that aren't PC exclusive I can rent for it. If the only game platform I had was the PC I would have to buy all the ones I wanted to play.. so after ~7-8 games I could've already gotten a X360.

maniacmusician
March 15th, 2007, 05:43 AM
Technically speaking, yeah the PS3 is a superior piece of technology.

I don't really like either the 360 or the PS3. One based on principles, and the other on practicality; the Wii, I think, would probably be my choice if I had to choose a system to get. But, I don't have to :) got better things to spend money on

billdotson
March 15th, 2007, 06:05 AM
I have always liked computers, even since I was a little 5 yr. old kid I liked being on a PC and tinkering w/ it. I was w/o a PC of my own for about ~2 years when I was doing a sport that required almost all of my time and I am sure glad I quit that because as soon as I did I got back to using a PC again. I started out just playing flash and java games on it and then that got me to get my own about 6 months later (I was ignorant and downloaded and installed software from some sketchy sites and botched my Dad's Windows install) I played Halo:CE at one of my friends houses and was hooked. I bought a cheap-o nVidia FX5500 to play Halo on to practice up until the release of Halo 2. Then I got into more games and got a 6600GT. Then I built my custom PC for games. So videogames actually led me to getting to know how to build my own PC.

After a bout of frustration w/ Windows (my DVD drives wouldn't burn anything.. and even though I later fixed it by installing the JMicron driver [so it really wasn't Windows at all]) I decided to try this thing called Linux. I had heard about Linux in a beginning networking class (which at the time seemed like this mysterious, odd OS I had never heard of) I took back a couple years ago and tried the most popular distro.. Ubuntu [this was 6 weeks ago]. Ever since I started Ubuntu I have become more interested in computers than I ever have been. I have started to want to learn how to program, make web sites, and more technical stuff. I have lately been reading the intro to programming book on wikiversity and a creating web pages book. So now I mostly spend all my time learning, doing something in Ubuntu, recording TV shows and cutting out the commercials.

Although if I feel if I try to learn too much/ mess w/ computers too much and don't play games or do anything relaxing (even though learning programming, learning @ computer concepts, doing stuff with computers, etc. is fun) I will get tired of that stuff and just end up doing who knows what. I feel that moderation is the key and I am going to spend alot of my time doing stuff w/ computers but I will play some games so I don't get burnt out. It is pretty cool.. you could say that starting Ubuntu led me to wanting to get my major in Computer Science which is pretty cool. Although, if I had never started playing games a few years ago I might have just been an internet and word processor guy and not ever wanted to do anything interesting w/ computers.

So I guess apart from playing some games occasionally as a mental relief I feel I owe them a bit of time as I wouldn't have started using computers again w/o them. Granted I do not feel like spending the $ to upgrade to a Direct3D10 videocard for the next-gen of PC gaming I should still be able to play the PC-exclusive games I want to and the X360 can save me money on all the non-exclusives I want to play by allowing me to rent them.

So in the end I guess I could hand Ubuntu and videogames sme credit for getting me into wanting to get my BS in CS. Pretty cool when I think about it.. I really like programming and the other technical stuff so far I have been learning

mcduck
March 15th, 2007, 08:07 AM
As I understand it the PPE is a complete 64-bit PPC architecture. If it was that much different we wouldn't already have working Linux distros on it.

WRT the RAM. The PPC is a RISC architecture with a lot more registers than x86 junk. Generally such architectures can be configured to run with less RAM than standard. To compare to the UltraSPARC. Sun recommends 512MB of RAM to run Solaris on x86 but 128MB on RISC UltraSPARC. Essentially huge amounts of RAM are a feature of x86 being rubbish rather than a general problem with CPUs.
Yes, the main core is almost a normal PPC CPU, only difference is that in Cell it has no Altivec support. But if you only use the main core you are not going to get any real power out of Cell, as all the real kick comes from the vector units. And there's the main difference to other CPU architectures, and also the thing that forces programmers to code for Cell in a different way from what they are used to with x86.

maniacmusician: PS2 may have had simpler architecture, but at the time of release it didn't have any programming libraries or other stuff to make coding games easier, forcing game houses to learn how to do the stuff with ASM coding.. I have understood that PS3 uses stuff like OpenGL to avoid this problem, making it easier to code than PS2 is. The only hard part is to learn to use Cell properly.

kopinux
March 15th, 2007, 08:27 AM
How about watching the GDC 2007 Yellow Dog Linux Interview, so we can be enlightened about the PS3 RSX full access.

Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ggf1y-GbvU

In High Definition:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=17785&type=mov
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=17785&type=wmv

In the end of the statement, if or when, but they are trying hard for GPU access.
I have some savings for a PC upgrade and Vista but im cancelling that now and getting the PS3 computer. What more would i want, Desktop Linux + Games.

Kateikyoushi
March 15th, 2007, 09:35 AM
not really. The PS2 architecture was much more straightforward than the PS3's and the documentation for it was much better. It was definitely a lot easier to code for.

Please check back at the time the PS2 was released, it got the exact same reaction as the PS3, the architecture was very radical, quite new, just the fact that to bring out the maximum of it took 5 years for the biggest companies behind videogames proves it.

Yeah probably it is a lot more easy to code for PS2 now after all these years, PS3 will be the same in 5 years.

I feel so back at the good old days...


I think it was the Saturn that had two processors and became a nightmare to program (which is why PSX won the 32-bit wars). Which doesn't leave much hope for programming for the PS2 over the X-box

Yeah right... :lolflag:

Leeghoofd
March 15th, 2007, 11:17 AM
[QUOTE=Kateikyoushi;2301254]Please check back at the time the PS2 was released, it got the exact same reaction as the PS3, the architecture was very radical, quite new, just the fact that to bring out the maximum of it took 5 years for the biggest companies behind videogames proves it.

Yeah probably it is a lot more easy to code for PS2 now after all these years, PS3 will be the same in 5 years.

/QUOTE]


Comparing current situation with the past would be a big mistake.

1. The market for gaming has become far more competitive. There once was a time were the only real options were Atari and Nintendo. ( altho there were some others, most were not even available due to poor distribution. ) From those two Atari did not have the financial power it needed to survive, eventually it also suffered from distribution troubles. Current market situation: three major competetors. More or less equal when it comes to financial, production and distribution capacity.

2. The market is more globally focussed these days. Where in the past Japan and the US have been dominant in acceptation for new gaming systems, one should do good not to forget that a lot of new gamers emerge in both China and to a lesser extent in Europe. Even Playstation 3 that allways had a solid japanese customerbase now partly depends on sales from abroad. If for instance PS3 would sell bad in europe, china ( or the US ) this would mean less of a customerbase for companies like Square Enox, that in the past has been fairly succesfull in selling games outside of JAPAN. IT salesfigures needs to grow like any healthy company, thus it would have to take into consideration what systems are most popular around the globe.

3. Gamingsaturation. Gaming has come a long way ever since "PONG" first entered our lives. There was room for alot of improvement from that day one. squares that symbolised tennisplayers have now been replaced with full 3d animated personalities.
One has to wonder how much more we can improve now. HD is nice thing, ofcourse, but it not per definition required to play some fun games. Look at the PSP, great graphics, but when you do a marketanalysis it turns out most people want short and simple games for their handhelds, as these are used for short periodes when people are not at home ( generally speaking )


Please do not take this as a PS3 bashing post, I have nothing against any given console ( be it Wii, xbox360 or PS3 ), each has its own pro's and cons.
However stating that the ps3 will be succesfull simply by comparing it with the ps2 seems awfully wrong to me...

billdotson
March 15th, 2007, 06:41 PM
wait.. so Sony is changing their mind and allowing the PS3 specific version of Yellow Dog Linux full access to the hardware?! If so, all I can say is "Wow" (MS Vista commercial.. haha)

Seriously.. the PS3 running as both a dedicated-game platform and a desktop computer is awesome. If more people knew about this (considering it is true) and didn't write off Linux people could see this as a cheap way to get a gaming platform and a PC. IMO this sounds like it could be a blow below the belt to Microsoft. Think.. "hey buy a PS3 and use it as your PC too" as opposed to buying a PC and an x360 to play games. x360 and a barebones PC together will be @ least $800. The PS3 could be a multimedia station as well.. think Mythbox maybe (too bad the PS3 doesn't have a TV tuner.. haha)?

If I didn't already own a PC and a x360.. I would seriously consider a PS3 computer.

Also I have a ?.. about the Cell processor the guy in the video said that it was in some high-end IBM PCs and that it ran much faster than the Intel WoodCrest.. is that the name of the processor for the PS2 or what??

Also, technically speaking.. compared to say an Intel Core 2 Duo or an Intel Core 2 Quad how does the Cell stack up? Is the Cell really as advanced as the guy being interviewed says or is he just promoting their product?

bocmaxima
March 16th, 2007, 02:06 AM
Honestly I am waiting for Linux to become viable on the PS3. As long as it can run the equivalent of my current computer (Athlon 2500+ 1 gig of ram) then I would get a PS3 and change over to a dual boot PS3/Linux. My main problem is that Yellow Dog is the main backer of the PS3, and I much much prefer Debian based Distros and especially Ubuntu to the Fedora Core distros. Wether or not the Ubuntu community can integrate the YDL progress on the Cell and RSX is a different story.

So really, if I can have my Beryl setup running as well as a 4 year old machine, and drivers for all the native PS3 stuff (Wifi, DVD/BluRay read support, RSX 3D acceleration) I will totally be down.

I would really like this

Kateikyoushi
March 16th, 2007, 02:34 AM
Please do not take this as a PS3 bashing post, I have nothing against any given console ( be it Wii, xbox360 or PS3 ), each has its own pro's and cons.
However stating that the ps3 will be succesfull simply by comparing it with the ps2 seems awfully wrong to me...

I agree with most part of what you wrote, I did not write anywhere how it relates to the future of PS3. I brought it up as an example how were people thinking about programming the PS2 at that time.

I wrote Xbox360 came out before the PS3 and this going the make a huge difference between the two generations. Especially if Sony tries to get into a direct fight with MS.

billdotson
March 16th, 2007, 03:14 AM
Personally I have never used anything other than a Debian-based OS (Ubuntu) but I would not care about the YDL being on the PS3 as oppossed to a debian-based OS because any functional Linux distro that takes advantage of the hardware of the PS3 is great. And if all the major packages were installed by default you wouldn't have to do much anyway.

burgerbee
April 18th, 2007, 10:16 AM
Not atm, but maybe if the price drops 50%.

Running Ubuntu 7.04 on my Xbox 360 and that works great for now.

Still missing a PPC64 port of Ubuntu. There is an unoffical one for Debian. Another thing is recompiling with ppu-gcc for better performance.

Rob_Quads
April 23rd, 2007, 10:31 PM
Not atm, but maybe if the price drops 50%.

Running Ubuntu 7.04 on my Xbox 360 and that works great for now.

Still missing a PPC64 port of Ubuntu. There is an unoffical one for Debian. Another thing is recompiling with ppu-gcc for better performance.

Looks like its available now.. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/PlayStation_3