Posted by
CmdrTaco
on from the stuff-to-poke-at dept.
Yousef writes "GameSpy has an interesting article about a presentation given by Sony's head of R&D for Entertainment. It appears that there are some very interesting things in store for the PS3, plus a complete Red Hat Linux installation for the PS2 and many other toys too. An interesting read."
Insert Joke Here
by
Linuxthess
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Insert the mandatory "Reuters study of Linux on Sony's PS2 to cause mutations in thumbs."
--
I sig, therefore I was.
PS2 and PS3 processors
by
Bloody+Bastard
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Today we have Linux distros running from a single CD, without HD install at all. And the processors used in these PS are very fast.
I think it is possible to build nice Beowulf clusters with PS2/3 running Linux, using a server with disk as a file server.
Has anybody tryed it before?
Re:PS2 and PS3 processors
by
Decimal
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Today we have Linux distros running from a single CD, without HD install at all. And the processors used in these PS are very fast.
The PS2 uses a CPU that runs at 300 MHz. Would you scoff at an ad in the paper that is selling a "very fast" x86 machine at 300 HMz these days? I would.
Console CPUs at lower speeds than PCs used to have higher performance because they were customised for gaming. That's becoming less and less true as newer consoles come out that are closer relatives to PCs.
Now the hardware to handle graphics runs quite a bit faster. And we can expect the PS3 CPU to be "very fast". But is a 300 MHz PS2 processor really all that amazing as compared to a 200 MHz Dreamcast processor?
Re:PS2 and PS3 processors
by
Bloody+Bastard
·
· Score: 3, Informative
MHz is not everything. The number of instructions executed by cycle (IPC) and the number of pipeline stages are very important. For example, if a processor can delivery 10 IPC with a 200 MHz clock and another processor delivery 1 IPC with a 1 GHz, which one is the fastest? (a) The first one (right answer) (b) The second one (c) The CowboyNeal one
Of course it is not so simple, but just to think about: how do you compare an Athlon 1.6 GHz to a Pentium 4 at 2 GHz?
Re:PS2 and PS3 processors
by
HanzoSan
·
· Score: 2
Thats the excuse Apple uses for being fast than P3/4, however its not the instructions per clock, or the mghz, its the overall design.
having fast mghz can make up for low instructions per clock (P4)
but theres alot of other tricks to make things faster
-- If you use Linux, please help development ofAutopac
It mentions RedHat. It doesn't mention the PS3.
It mentions the GSCube, a cluster of PS2 machines set up as a technology demo. That was shown a year ago; it's not a future product.
The PS3 is PowerPC-based, and won't have the wierd vector units of the PS2. Those are generally conceded to have been a mistake. They're hard to program, and required considerable tool development. The competitive effect was that for the first year, PS2 games sucked. (The Xbox is more vanilla; it's basically a PC running Win2K with a GeForce 3, which simplifies development. I know people who had to port a physics engine to the PS2 vector units. Not fun.)
he PS3 is PowerPC-based, and won't have the wierd vector units of the PS2.
Umm, Altivec anybody?
Very different beasts.
Altivec is more or less just another functional unit tacked on to the G4 chip (like SSE or 3DNow on Intel/AMD chips). It's controlled directly by instructions in the main execution stream, like another add or divide unit would be.
The vector coprocessors on the PS2 were independent processor cores tied to the main core's co-processor bus (MIPS does funky things with coprocessors). They had their own program memory (if I recall correctly), which more or less made them big, bizzare CISC units with completely programmable microcode as far as the main processor was concerned. Program them, then send them data, trigger them, and watch them go as they run their embedded code.
For PC enthusiasts, this would be like breaking out a soldering iron and tacking a couple of completely independent DSP chips north of the northbridge in a PC. Powerful, but they'd be tricky as hell to use, because they'd have to be working on memory that the CPU wasn't modifying, and you'd have to set up the software all three chips are running so that all working data is processed and then passed on by each in turn without anyone stepping on anyone else's toes.
In theory, you can do this by pipelining your graphics data flow and having each module deal with a different part of it. This is how the PS2 was supposed to be used. In practice, this is a PITA to do, and Sony didn't pre-build developer libraries that did it (why is beyond me).
So, programming a G4 with AltiVec is much easier:).
Maybe not. Back in mid-2001, we were seeing reports like this.
But Sony announced some changes in direction at GDC. (I knew I should have gone Friday, but I had a bad cold.)
The fraction of the main CPU devoted to graphics in games has been dropping. More CPU time is being used for character control, AI, and physics.
Much of the graphics work is offloaded to the GPU. The graphics are good enough that it's now very noticeable that the movement is lousy. So the need is not for more graphics power as much as for more general-purpose CPU power.
Of course, we can always use more texture memory.
Distributed PS* computing
by
Razor+Sex
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I don't get quite how this would work. Sure, you can get massive power for your console by harnessing the power of 15 others, and that sounds fine and dandy until you start thinking about the whole picture. What about those 15 other consoles? These 16 consoles can't all be getting power from eachother at the same time; that wouldn't get you any better performance than one console. Do you only draw power from consoles not in use? Does that mean that the PS3 or whichever version, if any, comes to implement this system, has no off switch? What happens when you become active?
Re:Distributed PS* computing
by
silkySlim
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I got to play with the GSCube first hand last year. It is essentially 16 PS2's in a single box. The workload is distributed by dividing the screen up into tiles and having a PS2 dedicated to rendering 1/16th of the screen. Distributing this workload over a network sounds a little far fetched to me.
FWIW, the Dreamcast used this "tile based" rendering as well.
Re:Distributed PS* computing
by
WildBeast
·
· Score: 2
but this will cost an arm and a leg
Re:Distributed PS* computing
by
rtaylor
·
· Score: 2
Nope.. Arms and legs are quite common, and of low value. What Sony requires is a torso. You're welcome to keep your legs, but they'll be strictly for cosmetic purposes (won't function).
The torso you sell to them will be used in the RealDoll playstation addon due out shortly. They're expected to be low in volume, and quite high in price -- especially for the female version.
-- Rod Taylor
Re:Distributed PS* computing
by
Magila
·
· Score: 2
The bit about distributed computing an the PS3 has been going around for a while now. It is almost certainly either flat out false or not what everyone thinks it is. What it most certainly does not mean is they're going to distribute the load over a WAN (namely the internet) to other people's PS3s. Games are one of the most realtime critical apps out there, you could never get the latency over the internet down to a point where you could send some calulation to another machine and get it back in time to be useful. What it more likely means is the PS3 will use a processor with some new method of processing things in parallel and "distributing" the load to keep the pipes full.
"Maybe Playstation 6 or 7 will be based on biotechnology...with protein," [Okamoto] quipped.
When that time comes by, I guess biologists will be the ones to develop mod chips and the like. Maybe a real "virus" will infect it. What an interesting day that will be.
Back of box: For external use only. If Playstation 6 contacts skin, flush with water for 15 minutes. Do not stare directly at Playstation 6. If Playstation 6 breaks open, run and take cover.
-- I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
I think consoles are the key to Linux being successful on the desktop, because Consoles are the desktop of tomorrow.
-- If you use Linux, please help development ofAutopac
Re:Sony, Toshiba & IBM are creating an OS
by
TotallyUseless
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
"...Consoles are the desktop of tomorrow." Maybe if all you do is play games. If consoles get to the point that they can do everything a computer can, have (standard) firewire/usb ports, pci slots for expansion options, room for extra drives and whatnot, and you hook them up to a crt or lcd monitor on your desk, guess what.... its a computer, not a console. Until a 'console' has all of those things, and probably more, it wont be replacing any of my desktops. On the other hand, my PS2 rocks for a quick game of GTA3 or whatever, and I appreciate it for that.
Re:Sony, Toshiba & IBM are creating an OS
by
HanzoSan
·
· Score: 2
yes but consoles are easier to use by far, macs are the console computers but soon linux may have a market with ps3, nintendo, etc
-- If you use Linux, please help development ofAutopac
Re:Sony, Toshiba & IBM are creating an OS
by
TotallyUseless
·
· Score: 2
Consoles are easier to use because they are one trick ponies, for the most part. i think of consoles as dedicated hardware, that are for the most part single purpose machines. If you use your computer mainly for games/surfing/email, then a console is probably a viable replacement, or will be at some point. My point is by the time there is a console that can do everything my Mac can, it is in my point of view, no longer a console. Once I can hook up my lcd/crt to it, hook up a firewire cam and edit video, rip mp3s, burn cds, dvds, etc... why should it still be considered a console? Cause it has a 'Playstation 9' badge on it? If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then yada yada yada...
Re:Sony, Toshiba & IBM are creating an OS
by
HanzoSan
·
· Score: 2
Multi Purpose Machines designed for Single purposes = Easy to use.
A Console doesnt overwelm a user with 100000 icons, it keeps its simple, like Tivo and others.
It may do many tasks, but its simple because of how it presents itself, the GUI, the style.
-- If you use Linux, please help development ofAutopac
Re:Sony, Toshiba & IBM are creating an OS
by
newbiescum
·
· Score: 3, Informative
The irony is that the PS2 does have firewire/usb ports, expansion slots for a hard drive, network addons, and the ability to hook up to CRT monitors (don't know about LCDs). The PS2 Linux Kit available for preorder will basically be a desktop computer. It's already out in Japan, and you can do quite a few things with it if you are dedicated. Want to play MP3s, type up documents, use external CD burners/hard disks (via USB), use it as a NFS server/client, program games for it, or browse the web? It's pretty much all there.
As for buying a computer, the majority of people hardly upgrade anything more than RAM and maybe a hard disk, so a console could conceivably be the next wave of computers. It sure would make programming "easier" with a non-moving hardware platform much like how Apple's computers are.
Re:Sony, Toshiba & IBM are creating an OS
by
HanzoSan
·
· Score: 2
Notice PC sales are down and console sales are up?
-- If you use Linux, please help development ofAutopac
Sony IBM & Toshiba Cell Chip Technology Info
by
HanzoSan
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Sony Cell technology NEWS IBM, Sony, and Toshiba announced a partnership today in Tokyo to develop new, faster, smaller chips code-named Cell. Over the next 5 years the companies will spend US$400 million to break the 0.10 micron barrier. Cell chips will be targeted for use in high-speed Internet access and network-based computing.
Sony Computer Entertainment (the gaming folks) is the Sony division involved in the partnership, and it already has working arrangements with Toshiba--the two companies formed a joint venture to design and produce the PlayStation 2's chip. Adding IBM to the mix helps all three companies reduce development costs... and Sony also gets to license IBM's 0.10 micron processing technology, which will probably be used in the PlayStation 3 (PS2 chips are currently at 0.18 and 0.25 microns, though Sony has announced a move to 0.13 micron technology) and other upcoming devices from Sony Computer Entertainment. Development work on the new Cell chips will take place in an Austin, Texas IBM facility and will eventually be produced at a new IBM fab in East Fishkill, New York, slated for completion next year.
IBM will also announce today that it is joining the Extreme Ultra Violet Consortium, another group working to shrink micron processes. Industry watchers think IBM's move may help boost the EUV technology's chances of success.
-- If you use Linux, please help development ofAutopac
Interesting facts about official Sony Linux
by
Arker
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
It sounds more like it emulates linux in a VM rather than actually loading it as the actual machine OS. This allows them to use all kinds of proprietary code without violating the GPL, and to build in all sorts of copy and "ip" "protection."
Fair use quote:
This is how the Runtime Environment (RTE) works. In order to get Linux running on your PS2, you must boot the system using the PS2 Linux DVD. During boot, after all the copy-protection stuff is taken care of, the system lays down the Runtime Environment. This is basically a layer that hides access to the SPU2 (Sound Processing Unit), the input/output processor, the hard drive, the CD/DVD-ROM system, the controllers, memory cards, USB, i.Link and other peripherals. The RTE does supply hardware looking hooks, an educated guess being faux-memory address and registers. Then the Linux kernel is loaded on top of this. There are Linux device drivers that accesses the Runtime Environment that are open source, but it's just a device driver calling in all actuality, another device driver that's closed.
What you can and can't do with the system is limited.
You have no ability to read a normal PSX or PS2 memory card directly. For example you can't open a Final Fantasy X save, edit how much cash you have, and save it again. Through the RTE you can format a whole memory card(!) and mount it like an 8 meg hard drive, but that card would be worthless for saving normal PS2 games. Once you put the Linux formatted card without Linux running (i.e. you are in the browser) it asks to reformat the card.
The RTE also not allow audio CDs to be identified. It also can tell if you have put in a CD-R or not (it can see a wobble track, which all CD-Rs have ) and likewise not allow the disk to be seen. A PS2 can read CD-Rs fine, the RTE is just doing copy protection first to make sure you can't. You will also have no access to the CSS portion of the MPEG decoder, but you can decode raw MPEG-4. Direct access to the Dolby subsystem is also denied. Anything dealing with region locks are also restricted.
The first DVD (The boot disk) has a Linux boot loader and the RTE on it. This disk is not allowed to be copied. It also has the manuals on it too, which I'm sure are also copyrighted and not allowed to be publicly distributed. The Linux kernel is on the second disk and also on the hard drive after it's installed. In order to use a monitor, you must one that is "Sync on Green". This means that the refresh rate is only in the green channel. The monitor must use that sync pulse to sync red and blue channels so they all get painted in the screen at the same time. The reason why you have to use that is because a PS2 can turn it's sync on green ability on and off. If you try and use the monitor adapter for playing PS2 games or watching DVDs, sync on green will be turned off and only the green channel will show up. Direct video output defeats Macrovision. Sony doesn't want you making copies of DVDs to tape. Keep in mind that your network adapter is going to have a MAC address that Sony, no doubt, knows. Also removing the PS2 hard drive and attempting to mount in a PC will also likely not work and possibly damage the drive.
-- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Re:Interesting facts about official Sony Linux
by
WasterDave
·
· Score: 2
Keep in mind that your network adapter is going to have a MAC address that Sony, no doubt, knows.
I doubt it since rewriting a MAC address is dead simple - a bridging firewall with no rules will do the trick. Do, however, bear in mind that it's entirely likely that PS2's all have a hardware identifier that sony will know.
Interesting Concepts, but,,,
by
mgrochmal
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The developer responded that the realistic real-time rendering they wanted to do would require 18,000 times more processing power than what was available with the PSOne.
It's difficult to imagine what sort of rendering in a game would require this much power behind it. Then again, I remember when a 1 Gigabyte server was huge. I also wonder that, if the plan for distributed processing is to be successful with multiple PlayStation consoles, how many users would be willing to leave their PlayStation(#)s running all the time for other people to use. On top of that, how would Sony propose to network the consoles togeher? The networking prospects for the current-generation PS2s have occasional problems running the software it already has for networked gaming beyond a jury-rigged LAN.
In regards to why would Sony want Linux on their PSx consoles... An audience of avid PS2 users experimenting with a robust TCP/IP (Internet communication) protocol. Fans will also receive complete documentation with the kit, which includes all the technical details of the PS2 hardware. Normally this info is only available to game developers. Again, Linux for PSx isn't going to rake in millions for Sony, but there may be different benefits for hobbyist developers. It won't be for everyone, but if you're into trying new things, then feel free.
The "Gestural Interface" seems to be the most interesting out of what the article offered. It might be a step closer to a virtual reality interface without needing an expensive headset. It might change gaming for the console. Then again, it depends on the games that use said hardware. It'll be interesting to see how many of these ideas actually come to fruition, and how many of them become Vaporware.
I didn't see any mention of Redhat in that article at all
-1, Illiterate
Re:Oh, God...someone mod this up!
by
Arker
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
From the article.
"Of course, the TV set is not so great for Linux," Okamoto explained, smiling. So the kit will also include a converter cable to allow you to hook your PS2 to a high-resolution monitor. The kit will run about $200. And yes, it was running Linux, completely compatible with all Linux software and able to compile anything. The kit is mostly for non-commercial hobbyists. What does Sony gain? An audience of avid PS2 users experimenting with a robust TCP/IP (Internet communication) protocol. Fans will also receive complete documentation with the kit, which includes all the technical details of the PS2 hardware. Normally this info is only available to game developers. An interesting project indeed.
Now I'm not a bit surprised that Sony wants to keep control over how people use their consoles. I'm not even surprised that Sony is dead set on using hardware to prevent their customers from being able to assert their legal rights under copyright law. But I am a little bit surprised that their representative and/or the journalist who wrote that story will blatantly lie and claim to be giving people "complete documentation" and the like, when obviously they aren't going to do anything of the kind.
And I do think that potential buyers of the product, many of whom may read this article, deserve to know the truth. It may or may not make a difference in whether or not any given person will buy it, but at the very least you should know the truth before you make that decision.
-- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Not a bad move..
by
garglblaster
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Well folks, looks like the Sony managers are thinking in the right direction: What is the long-term threat to the PS? Of course it's MS's xbox.
And enabling linux on the PS is just a logical step - because: It's MS who is the competior.
And what is MS's only strength today? No, it's not MS windows by itself, its the combination of Windows and MS office. So what is the threat to the PS?
I can tell you: Eventually MS will come out with some sort of "Word for the xbox" or stuff..
Now, would you consider that a possibility?
Just wondering..
And what would be the consequences for the market..
Or Linux doesn't require hefty licensing fees and already has a wealth of software available for it in source form which makes porting relatively easy. I don't think Sony gives a fuck about Microsoft, if it wasn't for MS Sony would have no PCs to sell anybody. Enabling Linux on the PS2/3 is logical because it is a fully functional OS that doesn't require obscene licensing fees which makes the cost to distribute it virtually nil. This anti-Microsoft hopefulness crap is just stupid.
How much do those drugs you're taking cost? Technological revolution, get off that short bus at the next stop and look around. Linux is no technological revolution. It must be nice to live in the purple haxe shrouded world you come from where Sony uses Linux because they are with the program. Linux has no licensing costs, Sony can distribute it to a bajillion PS2s and not have to pay a dime to anyone other than their own developers. If Sony jammed some proprietary OS on the PS2 with a licensing fee on the software itself they would NOT release it to customers, only to developers. Why is that so fucking hard to understand?
The concept is quite basic, Sony wants to release a development environment for the PlayStation. The PS2 has enough power it can run much of the same software a full fledged PC could, especially with the addition of a hard drive. They want to make say 30% markup on each dev kit they sell (hard drive and software). Linux makes the job simple because it comes in source form and has an open license meaning no royalty fees have to be paid to anyone. This signifigantly reduces the cost of releasing a dev kit for the PS2 and 3. Sony's Linux dev kit doesn't have anything on it that directly competes with Microsoft software. I don't know where in the hell you get this from. Linux on the PS2 doesn't deny Microsoft anything at all. If Sony stuck QNX or CP/M on the damn thing it still wouldn't matter.
What is it with people of your ilk accusing everyone lacking a bleary eyed retarded devotion to the Linux religion Microsoft sell-outs? The world is not nearly so binary as you're either with Linux or with Microsoft. That line of thinking is absolutely ridiculous. Linux is not a religion, the fate of the souls of the world do not depend on Linus fucking Torvalds. Stop being ao accusatory towards thosewho don't share your stupid fanatical devotion. The Force is not fucking with you even if you wear that Darth Vader helmet to protect your head when you fall down.
Strange... since the official PS2 linux isn't Redhat Linux, but Kondara MNU/Linux... On the RedHat site, they already showed the PS2 in their showcase... as provider of the embedded developement platform: http://www.redhat.com/about/success/showcase/ps2la rge.html
-- F/OSS & IT Consultant
And this PS2 Linux is useful how?
by
Rayonic
·
· Score: 2
It looks like this will be useless for creating your own PS2 games, what with the VM and all that copy-protection built in. Why in the world are they restricing access to the memory card anyway? And what's up with all that monitor bullshit?
Making halfway-decent games on the PS2 requires direct hardware access in order to take advantage of their kooky architecture. Can we even stream data off the hard drive to the video memory during gameplay? Probably not.
And of course we can't read CDR's with it, just in case we actually make something useful and want to easily share it with our friends. I understand the piracy issues, but in light of all the lockdowns they put in place, I need to ask: Why did they bother porting Linux to the PS2 anyway?
For example, if a processor can delivery 10 IPC with a 200 MHz clock and another processor delivery 1 IPC with a 1 GHz, which one is the fastest?
If you can get an IPC average of 10, sell your idea to Intel before they send a group of thugs over to torture it out of you.
In the real world, the best sustained IPC you'll ever get is in the 2-2.5 range. The universe conspires against you - control hazards, cache and memory latencies, dependencies, misspeculation penalties, and all other brands of evil.
Trust me. I've been studying this for years, and will be making a career out of teaching it in a few more.
A 300 MHz modified MIPS core and a 200 MHz SH-4 core could go toe to toe with each other, but neither holds a candle to a current desktop.
All of the heavy lifting in *any* console produced in the past 5-10 years is done by the graphics chipset, and that gets stale pretty quickly too.
Origin of the PowerPC
by
Fnord
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Actually the PowerPC is a processor designed by IBM for their RS/6000 class of machines. When apple decided to base macs off of them IBM gave motorola a licence to manufacture them for apple. Until the G4 the mac/motorola versions were direct copies of the IBMs (603 and 604 were models of RS/6000 and the G3 was actually a direct copy of the IBM Power 750). The G4 however was the first branch that motorola made (altivec was completely their creation). At the same time IBM was developing the Power4 which is completely different. The whole infamous screwup didn't lead ibm to make the g4s, it prompted apple to consider the Power4 to be the G5 (nothing has come of it yet).
That was kind of what I meant. Sorry for being vague. And the Power4 is only 2 cpu's on one die, with four of those chips being used on one NUMA module in IBMs biggest machines. The individual chips aren't THAT expensive. Even so, most likely they'd just have IBM make a scaled down version (like they did with the first powerpcs which were a scaled down version of the POWER architechture). Still, the apple using power4s for the G5 was just a rumor, nothing's come of it yet.
The Otherside Of the Story
by
Iron+Chef+Japan
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Well I was excited about all the Cell development and this PlayStation 2 stuff, but Ken Kutargai (the guy behind playstation and SCEI president) recently made some very grim statements at the South Korean PlayStation 2 launch. On the topic of PS3 Kutaragi-san said "Nothing has been started yet." He made some very grim statements about online gaming too saying; "If broadband connections capable of delivering 10Mb/s are affixed to game consoles, the industry as we know it will be over. By that time, perhaps 2005 or later, games would be available for download rather than sold in stores." This news came right after many analyst's came out saying how skeptical they were about Sony's online plans. This comes right after the Nintendo-Square and Nintendo-Capcom deals, which by the way Kutaragi mad, summoning top Square officials to the SCE headquarters to explain the deal, as he was out of town when the deal was made (the Square one) and had no prior knowledge about it. The memory card shortage doesnt help much either.
Anybody remember Iraq being blocked from PS2?
by
NanoGator
·
· Score: 2
I vaguely remember some marketing blurb when the PS2 was released saying that 4000 PS2's were shipped to Iraq to be netted together as a 'super-computer', and that China was being blocked from recieving these also.
Personally, I believe these to have been simply marketing rumors intentionally set to make the PS2 seem more powerful than it is. I am curious, though, does anybody have better insight into that than I do? My memory is very fuzzy about it.
Anybody remember 'Enos Lives'? If you rearrange the letters just a little, you get 'Sones Evil' or 'Sony's Evil'. Part of a marketing gag that people spent months trying to decode when the PS1 was launched.
Don't ever expect Sony to support the idea of people making games for Linux without paying royalties to them. Remember them shutting down the Aibo hacking site?
In any case, I wouldn't expect a whole lot from Sony releasing a product to run Linux on their machines. I think they're worried that people will use it to exploit their machines to do things that Sony doesn't think is appropriate. I'd be much more comfortable with a 3rd party doing it.
The PS2 uses a CPU that runs at 300 MHz. Would you scoff at an ad in the paper that is selling a "very fast" x86 machine at 300 HMz these days? I would.
Yes, as well you should. However, this is a straw man argument and has absolutely no bearing on your following statement, since a 300MHz x86 is hardly the same as a 300MHz emotion engine.
Console CPUs at lower speeds than PCs used to have higher performance because they were customised for gaming.
Repeate after me: All MHz are not the same. I have a 200MHz StrongARM in my Gameboy Advance. The SNES had a 3MHz processor. The GBA is a bit more powerful than the SNES, but not by the same delta as a 4MHz 8086 and a 200MHz Pentium! All MHz are not the same! In fact, MHz are about as useful for gauging performance these days as BogoMIPS, which is to say not at all.
That's becoming less and less true as newer consoles come out that are closer relatives to PCs.
Gross overgeneralization. The XBOX is the only thing that's a repackaged PC. The PS2, which currently dominates the market by a huge margin, is quite far from a PC architecturally. The GameCube, while using something resembling a PPC, is otherwise architecturally quite remote from a PC. The XBOX may take all its RAM from the same pool (which as has been discussed isn't really a good thing), but that's not much different from what we do now (I've seen cheap SiS motherboards with onboard video that use system RAM for video RAM. Big deal, XBOX.)
Now the hardware to handle graphics runs quite a bit faster. And we can expect the PS3 CPU to be "very fast".
Again, "very fast" is completely relative. The XBOX may have a 700MHz Celery (which is kinda slow anyway, but an OK general-purpose CPU), but take away its graphics accelerator and you'll be lucky to rival a SNES or PSX. The PS2's core is rather tied together, but even though it's 300MHz, it can push a decent amount of polys. Lesson for today: All MHz are not the same!
Oh, and to be somewhat on topic, anything Sony says about the PS3 is likely complete hype at this point. I like Sony (well, no I don't, but I like the PS2;-)), but I know just as well as the next guy how the marketting deal works.
But is a 300 MHz PS2 processor really all that amazing as compared to a 200 MHz Dreamcast processor?
All MHz are not the same! All MHz are not the same! All MHz are not the same!
--
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
> I have a 200MHz StrongARM in my Gameboy > Advance. The SNES had a 3MHz processor. The GBA > is a bit more powerful than the SNES, but not > by the same delta as a 4MHz 8086 and a 200MHz > Pentium!
Whereas the sentiment of the note is correct, I suggest you follow through with some fact checking. The processor in the GameBoy Advance is an ARM7 TDMI, running at 16.78 mHz.
Even so, it should be noted that the Emotion Engine's IPC and so forth (as IPC and mHz aren't everything either, no matter what AMD's webpage told you) aren't as impressive as everyone here seems to think they are.
What's important about the PS2 with regards to speed are a few things: bandwidth (it's just sickening), two reconfigurable vector computation engines (VU0 and VU1 - seems like they might be great for a lot of beowulfish stuff, but then, I have no idea how those clusters really run, so take that with a grain of salt), and the following slap in the face: because all of the comparsions you read were using the DreamCast as the watermark at the time.
The machine, if used aggressively, can still tangle with the GameCube. How it fares against the XBox is the subject of debate; my personal belief is that with careful use it could surpass the XBox, but many people disagree (some feel the higher instruction processing rate is the deciding factor, which would give the issue to the XBox; others feel that the cache problems of an instruction-oriented architecture outweigh the benefits when considered against the bandwidth oriented architecture, which would give it to the PS2, at the cost of being very difficult to write to.)
Moreover, there are facets of the XBox like realtime Dolby 5.1 compression of generated audio which the PS2 has to dedicate a VU to hope to match (this is a significant chunk of the PS2's processing power, making this a Bad Thing).
> [The GameCube ] is otherwise architecturally > quite remote from a PC.
Not really. Certainly not as far as the PS2, and arguably not even as far as a PS1. Whereas the bus layout and memory maps are completely different, you'll find that things like a normal opcode list make a bigger difference in the long run anyway - I mean, really, nobody in the industry uses magic numbers; it's all a macro called VRAM anyway. On the other hand, you really do use assembly, and quite often.
> Again, "very fast" is completely relative.
Not really. The SNES was "really fast" when it came out, and now it's dog slow. It's relative to what the consumer expects. The judgement made solely on experience, while not being hindered by expectations regarding numbers, operating system concerns, et cetera, is a better measure (in my mind) of "really fast" than anything else.
I mean, we've had Crays which pound your box (whatever it is) into the ground for probably 20 years. Is your box still really fast? Yes: Quake gets three digit frame rates, and even IE doesn't lag.
Now quit doting so much on numbers for subjective judgements. "Fast" doesn't have a number attatched to it in the dictionary, does it?
> The XBOX may have a 700MHz Celery (which is > kinda slow anyway, but an OK general-purpose > CPU),
For someone talking about the relativity of speed, you're certainly not thinking about it much. Consider the previous generations of chip, and the current. A celery 700 is more than plenty fast.
> but take away its graphics accelerator and > you'll be lucky to rival a SNES or PSX.
I don't honestly believe you have any idea what you're talking about, no offense. My 486/33 was able to emulate the SNES in DOS mode, which means it was eating the CPU, graphics cards, sound cards, and so forth all on its lonesome.
If you can't tell the difference between a 486/33 and a Celery 700, you're not qualified to be talking about relative machine speeds. No offense. And, hey: go have alook at Bleem!'s requirements.
> The PS2's core is rather tied together, but > even though it's 300MHz, it can push a decent > amount of polys.
The Emotion Engine doesn't push any polys at all, ever. Did you do any research before claiming to know what was going on under the hood? Vertex pushing is almost always solely the province of the Graphics Synthesizer, and sometimes the VU units.
> Oh, and to be somewhat on topic, anything Sony > says about the PS3 is likely complete hype at > this point.
It's been in development for almost two years. I bet they have a general idea of how it's going to work.
> I know just as well as the next guy how the > market[t]ing deal works.
Re:Oh, God...someone mod this up!
by
JohnG
·
· Score: 2
But I am a little bit surprised that their representative and/or the journalist who wrote that story will blatantly lie and claim to be giving people "complete documentation" and the like, when obviously they aren't going to do anything of the kind.
According to the PS2 Linux FAQ you get 6 of the 7 manuals that licensed developers get. The only one missing is the one for stuff covered by the RTE. The graphics system is not a part of the RTE and so you do get the manual for that, the main processor and the Vu's.
Only on Slashdot would anybody complain that that is not enough information about a type of computer system which is historically completely closed to all but those who spend $20,000 and are hand picked by the manufacturer.
Only on Slashdot would anybody complain that that is not enough information about a type of computer system which is historically completely closed to all but those who spend $20,000 and are hand picked by the manufacturer.
Me complaining? Hardly that. I don't care whether they release it, one way or the other, I don't have one and I don't plan to get one so why would I care?
Why would anyone care? Well if I were a stockholder I'd care, because this will probably get them some free (as in beer) R&D. Would I care if I owned one? No, I'd play games on it so I wouldn't care. If I wanted a supercomputer I'd buy a decent rackmount. I'm not sure why anyone should care about this unless they own a PS2 and no PC and want to learn about TCP/IP? Which can't be a great big audience really.
If you want one, and you care, by all means, go ahead. I wasn't challenging your right to be excited about whatever you want to be. I was just pointing out some facts not covered in the article.
-- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
I'm not sure why anyone should care about this unless they own a PS2 and no PC and want to learn about TCP/IP?
I'm not saying you should be excited about it, but the reason most people are (including me) is that the PS2 is a very different beast from what we are used to working with. Different enough to send most less patient developers running for the hills. I personally can't wait to develop for such a system.
While most of your post was spot-on you left some remnants of the PS2 fanclub around. I'll help you clean them up:
Gross overgeneralization. The XBOX is the only thing that's a repackaged PC. The PS2, which currently dominates the market by a huge margin, is quite far from a PC architecturally. The GameCube, while using something resembling a PPC, is otherwise architecturally quite remote from a PC. The XBOX may take all its RAM from the same pool (which as has been discussed isn't really a good thing), but that's not much different from what we do now (I've seen cheap SiS motherboards with onboard video that use system RAM for video RAM. Big deal, XBOX.) The Xbox is, actually, less of a PC than the Gamecube is. Not many PCs have a Unified Memory Architecture. The Gamecube doesn't. It's got dedicated system RAM, dedicated video RAM, etc. Like a PC.
The Gamecube uses a modified G3 (PowerPC 750, whatever). The Xbox uses a modified Pentium III (NOT a modified Celeron. Pentium III's have 8-way L2 caches, Celerons 4-way, a performance difference of ~10%).
I'd actually go as far as saying as the GC and Xbox are both architecturally fairly close to PCs, but that doesn't matter. They don't function the same, and they're specialized to run games better.
The PS2's is a lot different from a PC, you're right. But it's generally accepted that Sony/Toshiba made a huge mistake with the Emotion Engine. The Vector units are WAY too hard to program for, not to mention all of the obvious bottlenecks in the system (4MB VRAM?)
Consoles/Computers/Convergence
by
MsGeek
·
· Score: 2
Actually if the Dreamcast had a port for a hard drive of some sort it could be a pretty good mini-desktop, y'know. ^_^
I think all of us might do well to perhaps consider that stuffing Linux down the throat of a Playstation (or even a Dreamcast, despite my sentimental attraction to the idea) might not be the best possible way to create a Linux-based console. Sadly Indrema wasn't the way to go either...actually manufacturing consoles is a business best left to huge megacorporations.
The Nvidia Nforce Athlon chipset is very, very interesting indeed. There are decent ATX and mATX motherboards available featuring this little gem. This may very well be the first all-in-one mobo that will provide decent gaming performance. A buddy of mine just built a box using an Abit NV7M motherboard with the chipset and he is blown away...he was prepared to "help the board along" by adding a sound card, etc, but no need. Throw the thing in a case like the Casedge 1123 or 1300 and you might have the beginnings of a happening Linux gaming box.
I think this is more along the lines of what we should be thinking about. Certainly something like this would be easier to lug to LAN parties, that's for sure...
-- Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Slashdot Mirror
re-read it.
The R&D team booted up a PS2 running RedHat.
Insert the mandatory "Reuters study of Linux on Sony's PS2 to cause mutations in thumbs."
I sig, therefore I was.
Today we have Linux distros running from a single CD, without HD install at all. And the processors used in these PS are very fast.
I think it is possible to build nice Beowulf clusters with PS2/3 running Linux, using a server with disk as a file server.
Has anybody tryed it before?
The PS3 is PowerPC-based, and won't have the wierd vector units of the PS2. Those are generally conceded to have been a mistake. They're hard to program, and required considerable tool development. The competitive effect was that for the first year, PS2 games sucked. (The Xbox is more vanilla; it's basically a PC running Win2K with a GeForce 3, which simplifies development. I know people who had to port a physics engine to the PS2 vector units. Not fun.)
I don't get quite how this would work. Sure, you can get massive power for your console by harnessing the power of 15 others, and that sounds fine and dandy until you start thinking about the whole picture. What about those 15 other consoles? These 16 consoles can't all be getting power from eachother at the same time; that wouldn't get you any better performance than one console. Do you only draw power from consoles not in use? Does that mean that the PS3 or whichever version, if any, comes to implement this system, has no off switch? What happens when you become active?
"Maybe Playstation 6 or 7 will be based on biotechnology...with protein," [Okamoto] quipped.
When that time comes by, I guess biologists will be the ones to develop mod chips and the like. Maybe a real "virus" will infect it. What an interesting day that will be.
I'm betting its a Linux based OS, for the PS3 and other appliances.
IBM Sony & Toshiba
I think consoles are the key to Linux being successful on the desktop, because Consoles are the desktop of tomorrow.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Sony Cell technology
... and Sony also gets to license IBM's 0.10 micron processing technology, which will probably be used in the PlayStation 3 (PS2 chips are currently at 0.18 and 0.25 microns, though Sony has announced a move to 0.13 micron technology) and other upcoming devices from Sony Computer Entertainment. Development work on the new Cell chips will take place in an Austin, Texas IBM facility and will eventually be produced at a new IBM fab in East Fishkill, New York, slated for completion next year.
NEWS
IBM, Sony, and Toshiba announced a partnership today in Tokyo to develop new, faster, smaller chips code-named Cell. Over the next 5 years the companies will spend US$400 million to break the 0.10 micron barrier. Cell chips will be targeted for use in high-speed Internet access and network-based computing.
Sony Computer Entertainment (the gaming folks) is the Sony division involved in the partnership, and it already has working arrangements with Toshiba--the two companies formed a joint venture to design and produce the PlayStation 2's chip. Adding IBM to the mix helps all three companies reduce development costs
IBM will also announce today that it is joining the Extreme Ultra Violet Consortium, another group working to shrink micron processes. Industry watchers think IBM's move may help boost the EUV technology's chances of success.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Here's a good link if you're interested in this - http://www.execpc.com/~halkun/PS2/
It sounds more like it emulates linux in a VM rather than actually loading it as the actual machine OS. This allows them to use all kinds of proprietary code without violating the GPL, and to build in all sorts of copy and "ip" "protection."
Fair use quote:
This is how the Runtime Environment (RTE) works. In order to get Linux running
on your PS2, you must boot the system using the PS2 Linux DVD.
During boot, after all the copy-protection stuff is taken care of, the system
lays down the Runtime Environment. This is basically a layer that hides access
to the SPU2 (Sound Processing Unit), the input/output processor, the hard drive,
the CD/DVD-ROM system, the controllers, memory cards, USB, i.Link and other
peripherals. The RTE does supply hardware looking hooks, an educated guess
being faux-memory address and registers. Then the Linux kernel is loaded on top
of this. There are Linux device drivers that accesses the Runtime Environment
that are open source, but it's just a device driver calling in all actuality,
another device driver that's closed.
What you can and can't do with the system is limited.
You have no ability to read a normal PSX or PS2 memory card directly. For
example you can't open a Final Fantasy X save, edit how much cash you have,
and save it again. Through the RTE you can format a whole memory card(!)
and mount it like an 8 meg hard drive, but that card would be worthless
for saving normal PS2 games. Once you put the Linux formatted card
without Linux running (i.e. you are in the browser) it asks to reformat
the card.
The RTE also not allow audio CDs to be identified.
It also can tell if you have put in a CD-R or not (it can see a wobble track,
which all CD-Rs have ) and likewise not allow the disk to be seen. A PS2 can
read CD-Rs fine, the RTE is just doing copy protection first to make sure you
can't. You will also have no access to the CSS portion of the MPEG decoder,
but you can decode raw MPEG-4. Direct access to the Dolby subsystem is also
denied. Anything dealing with region locks are also restricted.
The first DVD (The boot disk) has a Linux boot loader and the RTE on it.
This disk is not allowed to be copied. It also has the manuals on it too,
which I'm sure are also copyrighted and not allowed to be publicly distributed.
The Linux kernel is on the second disk and also on the hard drive after it's
installed.
In order to use a monitor, you must one that is "Sync on Green". This means
that the refresh rate is only in the green channel. The monitor must use that
sync pulse to sync red and blue channels so they all get painted in the screen
at the same time. The reason why you have to use that is because a PS2 can turn
it's sync on green ability on and off. If you try and use the monitor
adapter for playing PS2 games or watching DVDs, sync on green will be turned
off and only the green channel will show up. Direct video output defeats Macrovision.
Sony doesn't want you making copies of DVDs to tape. Keep in mind that your
network adapter is going to have a MAC address that Sony, no doubt, knows.
Also removing the PS2 hard drive and attempting to mount in a PC will also
likely not work and possibly damage the drive.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
It's difficult to imagine what sort of rendering in a game would require this much power behind it. Then again, I remember when a 1 Gigabyte server was huge. I also wonder that, if the plan for distributed processing is to be successful with multiple PlayStation consoles, how many users would be willing to leave their PlayStation(#)s running all the time for other people to use. On top of that, how would Sony propose to network the consoles togeher? The networking prospects for the current-generation PS2s have occasional problems running the software it already has for networked gaming beyond a jury-rigged LAN.
In regards to why would Sony want Linux on their PSx consoles... An audience of avid PS2 users experimenting with a robust TCP/IP (Internet communication) protocol. Fans will also receive complete documentation with the kit, which includes all the technical details of the PS2 hardware. Normally this info is only available to game developers. Again, Linux for PSx isn't going to rake in millions for Sony, but there may be different benefits for hobbyist developers. It won't be for everyone, but if you're into trying new things, then feel free.
The "Gestural Interface" seems to be the most interesting out of what the article offered. It might be a step closer to a virtual reality interface without needing an expensive headset. It might change gaming for the console. Then again, it depends on the games that use said hardware. It'll be interesting to see how many of these ideas actually come to fruition, and how many of them become Vaporware.
This
I didn't see any mention of Redhat in that article at all
-1, Illiterate
From the article.
Now I'm not a bit surprised that Sony wants to keep control over how people use their consoles. I'm not even surprised that Sony is dead set on using hardware to prevent their customers from being able to assert their legal rights under copyright law. But I am a little bit surprised that their representative and/or the journalist who wrote that story will blatantly lie and claim to be giving people "complete documentation" and the like, when obviously they aren't going to do anything of the kind.
And I do think that potential buyers of the product, many of whom may read this article, deserve to know the truth. It may or may not make a difference in whether or not any given person will buy it, but at the very least you should know the truth before you make that decision.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
And enabling linux on the PS is just a logical step - because: It's MS who is the competior.
And what is MS's only strength today? No, it's not MS windows by itself, its the combination of Windows and MS office. So what is the threat to the PS?
I can tell you: Eventually MS will come out with some sort of "Word for the xbox" or stuff..
Now, would you consider that a possibility?
Just wondering..
And what would be the consequences for the market..
perl -e 'printf("%x!\n",49153)'
Strange... since the official PS2 linux isn't Redhat Linux, but Kondara MNU/Linux ... On the RedHat site, they already showed the PS2 in their showcase... as provider of the embedded developement platform: http://www.redhat.com/about/success/showcase/ps2la rge.html
F/OSS & IT Consultant
It looks like this will be useless for creating your own PS2 games, what with the VM and all that copy-protection built in. Why in the world are they restricing access to the memory card anyway? And what's up with all that monitor bullshit?
Making halfway-decent games on the PS2 requires direct hardware access in order to take advantage of their kooky architecture. Can we even stream data off the hard drive to the video memory during gameplay? Probably not.
And of course we can't read CDR's with it, just in case we actually make something useful and want to easily share it with our friends. I understand the piracy issues, but in light of all the lockdowns they put in place, I need to ask: Why did they bother porting Linux to the PS2 anyway?
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
For example, if a processor can delivery 10 IPC with a 200 MHz clock and another processor delivery 1 IPC with a 1 GHz, which one is the fastest?
If you can get an IPC average of 10, sell your idea to Intel before they send a group of thugs over to torture it out of you.
In the real world, the best sustained IPC you'll ever get is in the 2-2.5 range. The universe conspires against you - control hazards, cache and memory latencies, dependencies, misspeculation penalties, and all other brands of evil.
Trust me. I've been studying this for years, and will be making a career out of teaching it in a few more.
A 300 MHz modified MIPS core and a 200 MHz SH-4 core could go toe to toe with each other, but neither holds a candle to a current desktop.
All of the heavy lifting in *any* console produced in the past 5-10 years is done by the graphics chipset, and that gets stale pretty quickly too.
Actually the PowerPC is a processor designed by IBM for their RS/6000 class of machines. When apple decided to base macs off of them IBM gave motorola a licence to manufacture them for apple. Until the G4 the mac/motorola versions were direct copies of the IBMs (603 and 604 were models of RS/6000 and the G3 was actually a direct copy of the IBM Power 750). The G4 however was the first branch that motorola made (altivec was completely their creation). At the same time IBM was developing the Power4 which is completely different. The whole infamous screwup didn't lead ibm to make the g4s, it prompted apple to consider the Power4 to be the G5 (nothing has come of it yet).
Well I was excited about all the Cell development and this PlayStation 2 stuff, but Ken Kutargai (the guy behind playstation and SCEI president) recently made some very grim statements at the South Korean PlayStation 2 launch. On the topic of PS3 Kutaragi-san said "Nothing has been started yet." He made some very grim statements about online gaming too saying; "If broadband connections capable of delivering 10Mb/s are affixed to game consoles, the industry as we know it will be over. By that time, perhaps 2005 or later, games would be available for download rather than sold in stores." This news came right after many analyst's came out saying how skeptical they were about Sony's online plans. This comes right after the Nintendo-Square and Nintendo-Capcom deals, which by the way Kutaragi mad, summoning top Square officials to the SCE headquarters to explain the deal, as he was out of town when the deal was made (the Square one) and had no prior knowledge about it. The memory card shortage doesnt help much either.
Spilled.net
I vaguely remember some marketing blurb when the PS2 was released saying that 4000 PS2's were shipped to Iraq to be netted together as a 'super-computer', and that China was being blocked from recieving these also.
Personally, I believe these to have been simply marketing rumors intentionally set to make the PS2 seem more powerful than it is. I am curious, though, does anybody have better insight into that than I do? My memory is very fuzzy about it.
"Derp de derp."
Anybody remember 'Enos Lives'? If you rearrange the letters just a little, you get 'Sones Evil' or 'Sony's Evil'. Part of a marketing gag that people spent months trying to decode when the PS1 was launched.
Don't ever expect Sony to support the idea of people making games for Linux without paying royalties to them. Remember them shutting down the Aibo hacking site?
In any case, I wouldn't expect a whole lot from Sony releasing a product to run Linux on their machines. I think they're worried that people will use it to exploit their machines to do things that Sony doesn't think is appropriate. I'd be much more comfortable with a 3rd party doing it.
"Derp de derp."
Yes, as well you should. However, this is a straw man argument and has absolutely no bearing on your following statement, since a 300MHz x86 is hardly the same as a 300MHz emotion engine.
Repeate after me: All MHz are not the same. I have a 200MHz StrongARM in my Gameboy Advance. The SNES had a 3MHz processor. The GBA is a bit more powerful than the SNES, but not by the same delta as a 4MHz 8086 and a 200MHz Pentium! All MHz are not the same! In fact, MHz are about as useful for gauging performance these days as BogoMIPS, which is to say not at all.
Gross overgeneralization. The XBOX is the only thing that's a repackaged PC. The PS2, which currently dominates the market by a huge margin, is quite far from a PC architecturally. The GameCube, while using something resembling a PPC, is otherwise architecturally quite remote from a PC. The XBOX may take all its RAM from the same pool (which as has been discussed isn't really a good thing), but that's not much different from what we do now (I've seen cheap SiS motherboards with onboard video that use system RAM for video RAM. Big deal, XBOX.)
Again, "very fast" is completely relative. The XBOX may have a 700MHz Celery (which is kinda slow anyway, but an OK general-purpose CPU), but take away its graphics accelerator and you'll be lucky to rival a SNES or PSX. The PS2's core is rather tied together, but even though it's 300MHz, it can push a decent amount of polys. Lesson for today: All MHz are not the same!
Oh, and to be somewhat on topic, anything Sony says about the PS3 is likely complete hype at this point. I like Sony (well, no I don't, but I like the PS2 ;-)), but I know just as well as the next guy how the marketting deal works.
All MHz are not the same! All MHz are not the same! All MHz are not the same!
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
According to the PS2 Linux FAQ you get 6 of the 7 manuals that licensed developers get. The only one missing is the one for stuff covered by the RTE. The graphics system is not a part of the RTE and so you do get the manual for that, the main processor and the Vu's.
Only on Slashdot would anybody complain that that is not enough information about a type of computer system which is historically completely closed to all but those who spend $20,000 and are hand picked by the manufacturer.
Me complaining? Hardly that. I don't care whether they release it, one way or the other, I don't have one and I don't plan to get one so why would I care?
Why would anyone care? Well if I were a stockholder I'd care, because this will probably get them some free (as in beer) R&D. Would I care if I owned one? No, I'd play games on it so I wouldn't care. If I wanted a supercomputer I'd buy a decent rackmount. I'm not sure why anyone should care about this unless they own a PS2 and no PC and want to learn about TCP/IP? Which can't be a great big audience really.
If you want one, and you care, by all means, go ahead. I wasn't challenging your right to be excited about whatever you want to be. I was just pointing out some facts not covered in the article.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
While most of your post was spot-on you left some remnants of the PS2 fanclub around. I'll help you clean them up:
Gross overgeneralization. The XBOX is the only thing that's a repackaged PC. The PS2, which currently dominates the market by a huge margin, is quite far from a PC architecturally. The GameCube, while using something resembling a PPC, is otherwise architecturally quite remote from a PC. The XBOX may take all its RAM from the same pool (which as has been discussed isn't really a good thing), but that's not much different from what we do now (I've seen cheap SiS motherboards with onboard video that use system RAM for video RAM. Big deal, XBOX.)
The Xbox is, actually, less of a PC than the Gamecube is. Not many PCs have a Unified Memory Architecture. The Gamecube doesn't. It's got dedicated system RAM, dedicated video RAM, etc. Like a PC.
The Gamecube uses a modified G3 (PowerPC 750, whatever).
The Xbox uses a modified Pentium III (NOT a modified Celeron. Pentium III's have 8-way L2 caches, Celerons 4-way, a performance difference of ~10%).
I'd actually go as far as saying as the GC and Xbox are both architecturally fairly close to PCs, but that doesn't matter. They don't function the same, and they're specialized to run games better.
The PS2's is a lot different from a PC, you're right. But it's generally accepted that Sony/Toshiba made a huge mistake with the Emotion Engine. The Vector units are WAY too hard to program for, not to mention all of the obvious bottlenecks in the system (4MB VRAM?)
I think all of us might do well to perhaps consider that stuffing Linux down the throat of a Playstation (or even a Dreamcast, despite my sentimental attraction to the idea) might not be the best possible way to create a Linux-based console. Sadly Indrema wasn't the way to go either...actually manufacturing consoles is a business best left to huge megacorporations.
The Nvidia Nforce Athlon chipset is very, very interesting indeed. There are decent ATX and mATX motherboards available featuring this little gem. This may very well be the first all-in-one mobo that will provide decent gaming performance. A buddy of mine just built a box using an Abit NV7M motherboard with the chipset and he is blown away...he was prepared to "help the board along" by adding a sound card, etc, but no need. Throw the thing in a case like the Casedge 1123 or 1300 and you might have the beginnings of a happening Linux gaming box.
I think this is more along the lines of what we should be thinking about. Certainly something like this would be easier to lug to LAN parties, that's for sure...
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.