• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

The state of PS3 emulation

Oct 16, 2017
1,852
3,049
445
I wonder if all that happened would result on a significant push of RPCS3.

And Sony could easily come up with an emulator. They gave all the documentation and the manpower.
Sony would love to fully emulate PS3, because then they could finally stop using CELL chips in their PS Now servers. The second they could, they would. But right now it doesn't work well enough compared to just use Cell chips.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

Guilty_AI

Member
Apr 12, 2020
5,387
10,994
770
Many of the most popular games still aren't properly emulated because part of its hardware can't be emulated at full speed and no glitches with the hardware available on current PC and consoles, and won't be in many years.
They already made good progress in emulating the ps3 special cpu archtechture. You can already play classic titles like gow3, motorstorm, demon souls or RDR with just some ocasional issues pretty much. Also, they're making steady progress so expect even more improvements over time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EDMIX

MrFunSocks

Banned
Jul 9, 2020
4,993
8,977
665
Sony would love to fully emulate PS3, because then they could finally stop using CELL chips in their PS Now servers. The second they could, they would. But right now it doesn't work well enough compared to just use Cell chips.
Sony absolutely could emulate the PS3 well. RCPS3 is made by a bunch of people with zero knowledge or documentation of the PS3 hardware and its amazing where they've got it so far. Sony have no excuse for not having full BC via emulation.
 

01011001

Gold Member
Dec 4, 2018
8,578
13,411
750
Sony would love to fully emulate PS3, because then they could finally stop using CELL chips in their PS Now servers. The second they could, they would. But right now it doesn't work well enough compared to just use Cell chips.

lol, so a bunch of fans can make an emulator and already run a bunch of games better than on original hardware, but Sony can't emulate PS3 at all?

yeah sounds very plausible
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MrFunSocks
Oct 16, 2017
1,852
3,049
445
lol, so a bunch of fans can make an emulator and already run a bunch of games better than on original hardware, but Sony can't emulate PS3 at all?

yeah sounds very plausible
Right now it is still cheaper for Sony to run Cell Chips. Probably because it is literally made in their own factories with hardware that couldn't be repurposed for anything else. (Sony bought out Toshiba's share of the tech and own all the production equipment.)

On the other hand, most other console chips are made by outside companies, and as such once the chips are no longer being produced it makes no sense to keep trying to sell old hardware.
 

dave_d

Member
Jan 31, 2005
2,224
899
1,580
What's the point of FSR or DLSS in an emulator?

Aren't all emulators CPU dependent? The GPU is always going to have an easier time as it's not doing any emulation work, it just displays the graphics. And PS3's graphics should be a piece of cake for any GPU. Even something like a GTX 1050 should be more than enough to easily display PS3 stuff at 4K native.

At least that's how every other emulator works for me, i haven't tried this particular one yet.
As far as I know they are. I suppose parts of the emulator could be coded in CUDA or OpenCL but I have no idea if that would make sense for emulating the Cell processors or not.
 

ReBurn

Member
Dec 6, 2008
14,067
5,986
1,405
SC USA
Right now it is still cheaper for Sony to run Cell Chips. Probably because it is literally made in their own factories with hardware that couldn't be repurposed for anything else. (Sony bought out Toshiba's share of the tech and own all the production equipment.)

On the other hand, most other console chips are made by outside companies, and as such once the chips are no longer being produced it makes no sense to keep trying to sell old hardware.
Sony bought back the Cell manufacturing plant they sold to Toshiba, but they didn't buy it to make Cell processors for consoles. Toshiba was trying to use Cell in graphics and video processing applications but they failed. They bought it back for like 40 billion yen less than they sold it for with the intention of retooling the factory to make image sensors for their high end digital cameras and smartphones. The processors used in PS3 consoles were manufactured by IBM. It was IBM moving from 90nm to 65nm to 45nm manufacturing processes that enabled Sony to reduce the cost of the PS3. It was IBM's 45nm chip in the PS3 slim when it launched and IBM confirmed they were still making chips for Sony in 2012.
 

SlimeGooGoo

Party Gooper
Jun 29, 2020
3,991
10,741
745
They don't do it because most people don't care a lot about BC.
The don't do it because then they can resell the same game with a "Remaster" or "Definitive" label on it for another $60 or $50.
Also, Sony has their plans with PSNow to make people pay to play games from past generations.

They *know* most people CARE about BC. But at the same time they want to monetize it somehow.
So props to Microsoft for making the Series X at least compatible with some games from all past generations.
 

MrFunSocks

Banned
Jul 9, 2020
4,993
8,977
665
Right now it is still cheaper for Sony to run Cell Chips. Probably because it is literally made in their own factories with hardware that couldn't be repurposed for anything else. (Sony bought out Toshiba's share of the tech and own all the production equipment.)

On the other hand, most other console chips are made by outside companies, and as such once the chips are no longer being produced it makes no sense to keep trying to sell old hardware.
It’s in no way cheaper to make and use proprietary hardware than to have a software emulator.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
Apr 12, 2020
5,387
10,994
770
This is a load of bullshit.

Random lock ups plague RPCS3, even in games that are marked as 'Green' & fully playable.
Complain to the guy in the video, not me.
All problems regarding this that i've found are either from years ago or are issues with windows settings
 
Last edited:

Cryio

Member
May 18, 2021
163
163
215
5700 XT / R5 3600

Tomb Raider: Legend: 4K30 pretty easily. Needs faster CPU + faster Shader Caching from the emulator for 4K60

Tomb Raider: Anniversary: 4K60 pretty easily. Needs faster CPU for 4K120.
 
Last edited:

FingerBang

Member
Jan 17, 2020
286
665
315
lol, so a bunch of fans can make an emulator and already run a bunch of games better than on original hardware, but Sony can't emulate PS3 at all?

yeah sounds very plausible
Already runs a bunch of games, yes, but it's far from perfect and definitely not ready to be released as a paid product.

Sony could do a better job than the devs working on the emulator, absolutely, but the amount of time (and money) required to do so might not be worth it. You can say most people care about BC, but most people end up buying the consoles without BC (PS4 and Switch)
The idea that Sony isn't doing this because they prefer to sell you a remaster/remake is also stupid. They would be able to sell you MORE games if they had a working emulator. You'd be able to buy all of those old games (and they have a 30% cut) without them doing much, just testing it works properly.
Emulating these machines is HARD. If emulation of old stuff brought in big money, they'd all be doing that.
 

rodrigolfp

Member
Jan 27, 2017
2,212
1,449
480
Brazil
Yeh it's pretty frustrating that games like God of war 3 still run between 25-40 fps on my Ryzen 7 5800/RTX3070 machine. Killzone 2 is almost a nice stable 30fps. I've got lots of games that run perfectly though, but they're mainly the less demanding ones like the God of war remasters and games like Ni no kuni etc. TLOU is still terrible, so was one of the uncharteds last time I checked.
There are patches to GoW run better that you can download through the emulator itself...
 

rodrigolfp

Member
Jan 27, 2017
2,212
1,449
480
Brazil
5700 XT / R5 3600

Tomb Raider: Legend: 4K30 pretty easily. Needs faster CPU + faster Shader Caching from the emulator for 4K60

Tomb Raider: Anniversary: 4K60 pretty easily. Needs faster CPU for 4K120.
Buy why would we emulate games that have native pc versions???
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
9,836
12,202
815
God of war 3:


Anyway about DLSS vs FSR

FSR is more important then DLSS, because it covers all cards. DLSS would be a nice bonus but not really relevant to spend time on as features only locked to a select gpu range.

Last of US.

 
Last edited:

MrFunSocks

Banned
Jul 9, 2020
4,993
8,977
665
God of war 3:


Anyway about DLSS vs FSR

FSR is more important then DLSS, because it covers all cards. DLSS would be a nice bonus but not really relevant to spend time on as features only locked to a select gpu range.

Last of US.

I prefer devs use the significantly better tool, which is DLSS. Not to mention that nvidia had offered the same upscaling that FRS is for all games for years.

FSR doesn't look great. It's not doing anything special. With a low base resolution game using FSR it just looks like watching a 480p TV show on a 1080p TV. Yeh it's displayed in 1080p, but you can tell it's not native.

Literally the only thing FSR has going for it is it works on AMD cards and DLSS doesn't.
 

evanft

Member
Dec 25, 2009
898
1,486
1,140
I've been using RPCS3 a lot recently. Most games I've tried outside of the core exclusives that really pushed the hardware run beautifully.
 

SSfox

Lies about why mods reply ban and warn me.
Jan 7, 2018
3,313
11,366
685
Jim Ryan and Hermen Hulst will make sure that Steam Deck will be success and will have enough of great games.
 

chaseroni

Member
Nov 27, 2018
415
584
370
I'm sure you will! But not the full library, like some people would have you believe 🙂
Dude of course it wont play the full library.
Not even the most powerful PC's can play the full library on RPCS3.
"Some people" will always get things wrong, who cares
 

Epic Sax CEO

Member
Nov 4, 2019
800
1,602
405
I prefer devs use the significantly better tool, which is DLSS.

Like Nvidia solution in the beginning, right now FSR is to improve performance, NOT quality.
But naturally new versions will focus on improving quality (at the coast of now being supported on all hardware).
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
9,836
12,202
815
I prefer devs use the significantly better tool, which is DLSS. Not to mention that nvidia had offered the same upscaling that FRS is for all games for years.

FSR doesn't look great. It's not doing anything special. With a low base resolution game using FSR it just looks like watching a 480p TV show on a 1080p TV. Yeh it's displayed in 1080p, but you can tell it's not native.

Literally the only thing FSR has going for it is it works on AMD cards and DLSS doesn't.

Doesn't matter what u prefer.

DLSS is useless for emulation unless there is nothing else to do anymore which for PS3 emulator there is plenty.

Here are the reasons:

- Almost no cards support it as 3000 series are unicorns or extremely expensive to buy which limits the userbase to basically non existent.
- 2000 cards are more found now, but frankly even those cards are expensive which again limits.
- Both 2000 and 3000 users have enough performance anyway and FSR works for it.
- FSR is a global setting that can effect every single game, instead of specific game by game optimization.
- FSR is almost as good as native hard to even notice the difference even at 1080p unless u zoom in 400% + compare screen for screen which nobody cares for. 30% performance increase ultra quality = everybody notices.
- DLSS, gives a bit better then native picture quality and that's all it gives over FSR really which isn't particulaire something anybody in emulation cares for unless u are in the end stage of the emulator and everything runs perfectly fine already.
- Lower end GPU's hurt the most from emulation which means DLSS is not a option for that anyway FSR is.
- Steamdeck is coming out and will support FSR no DLSS's so even more people to enjoy it.

It's clear with your 1080p > 480p comment for FSR that you never used FSR in your life as u have no clue what it even does it seems like. I tested it out with anno and that other game and posted results in that anno thread or FSR thread and posted a bunch of pictures at 1080p and frankly unless u zoom in 400% and have the screens right next towards each other u won't notice a difference.

But if you want DLSS in the emulator, feel free to give them a sign on there discord and lend your skills to push it into the emulator for them with support for its 2k games. Good luck.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Paulistano

MrFunSocks

Banned
Jul 9, 2020
4,993
8,977
665
Doesn't matter what u prefer.

DLSS is useless for emulation unless there is nothing else to do anymore which for PS3 emulator there is plenty.

Here are the reasons:

- Almost no cards support it as 3000 series are unicorns or extremely expensive to buy which limits the userbase to basically non existent.
- 2000 cards are more found now, but frankly even those cards are expensive which again limits.
- Both 2000 and 3000 users have enough performance anyway and FSR works for it.
- FSR is a global setting that can effect every single game, instead of specific game by game optimization.
- FSR is almost as good as native hard to even notice the difference even at 1080p unless u zoom in 400% + compare screen for screen which nobody cares for. 30% performance increase ultra quality = everybody notices.
- DLSS, gives a bit better then native picture quality and that's all it gives over FSR really which isn't particulaire something anybody in emulation cares for unless u are in the end stage of the emulator and everything runs perfectly fine already.
- Lower end GPU's hurt the most from emulation which means DLSS is not a option for that anyway FSR is.
- Steamdeck is coming out and will support FSR no DLSS's so even more people to enjoy it.

It's clear with your 1080p > 480p comment for FSR that you never used FSR in your life as u have no clue what it even does it seems like. I tested it out with anno and that other game and posted results in that anno thread or FSR thread and posted a bunch of pictures at 1080p and frankly unless u zoom in 400% and have the screens right next towards each other u won't notice a difference.

But if you want DLSS in the emulator, feel free to give them a sign on there discord and lend your skills to push it into the emulator for them with support for its 2k games. Good luck.
FSR is nowhere near as good as native lol.

DLSS doesn’t have to be programmed and trained per game anymore. There’s a public SDK that all devs can use, no ML training needed.

you seem to really hate nvidia and/or DLSS for some reason. FSR is better than nothing, but it’s not even remotely in the same league as DLSS or native resolution.
 
Last edited: