Why did it fail?

File: pepe-crying-and-smiling.jpg (20KB, 388x388px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 388x388px

too advanced for its time

sony bros, we were amazing.

cuz no gaems lol

>>60956089
then why PS3 multiplat looked worse than x360's counterpart?

File: snippy.gif (2MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3072x1728px

>>60956079

>>60956079
It came out around the same time GPGPU usage started booming. Plus the dev tools were shit and you had to go low-level to get full utilization. Hard to program for.

>>60956104
Too hard to program for.

>>60956154
Are you perhaps retarded?

>>60956079
It launched with zero dev tools, not even a debugger, everything had to be built up from scratch by Sony's first-parties. This being on top of an inherently more complex design.
Too little memory that was also split in half for the CPU and GPU, and part was locked off for the OS, although they gradually patched the memory footprint to almost nothing.
The GPU was less powerful than what would have been preferred, forcing devs to offload graphics processing to the CPU, which luckily was a compute monster.
Being an IBM POWER architecture, it naturally also ran fucking hot as hell, more than half of the original Phat PS3 internals was the cooling system.

>>60956128
GPU compute only launched with CUDA some 2 years after the PS3 was designed (June 2007), so a CPU with insane floating-point computational power still made sense at the time. If these aspects weren't gimped or bottlenecked by poor choices in almost every other aspect of the console, it would've been a monster.

>>60956154
It's the argument that killed every VLIW architecture ever.

>>60956154
https://www.cnet.com/news/sony-ps3-is-hard-to-develop-for-on-purpose/
>the PS3 is a huge pain in the ass
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_%28microprocessor%29
>Cell is widely regarded as a challenging environment for software development.
http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2009/02/22/the-ps3-cell-broadband-engine-demystified/
>The reason that early on the PS3 gained a reputation for being more difficult to program for is due partly to the combination of both PPE and SPE. It takes a little more work to get the PPE to offload tasks to and manage the SPEs.

>>60956181
>GPU compute only launched with CUDA some 2 years after the PS3 was designed (June 2007), so a CPU with insane floating-point computational power still made sense at the time. If these aspects weren't gimped or bottlenecked by poor choices in almost every other aspect of the console, it would've been a monster.
Wasn't the cell meant to be the PS3 gpu initially? I remember the original plan was you could combine multiple cells together to scale performance as needed. Then they realized they didn't have the resources to write the software needed for gpu tasks and got an nvidia gpu late in development, because it was grafted on it didn't share memory with the cpu.

>>60957009
>GPU compute only launched with CUDA
bullshit, it most certainly was already a thing before CUDA

>>60957009
Yes. The original plan was to use 2 cells inside the PS3 but they scrapped that when they saw how shitty the performance was and switched to nVidia.