| Jan Lucas 2005-04-18, 8:30 pm |
| yyyyyyyy schrieb:
quote:
> [the following is a new article, based on old information that has been
> known for months. but I thought interesting enough to post]
>
>
> http://consoul.blogspot.com/2005/04...sps-future.html
>
> [clockspeed currently limited to 2/3 max]
Just removing the cap wouldn't really help, while you would have a more
powerful PSP, you also would have the crappy battery life which is why
the lock was put in the first place. So removing the lock helps only if
we get either better batteries or developers learn to save battery power
somewhere else so they can switch to full clockspeed without ruining the
battery life. One solution would be mixing complex and less complex game
scenes, so you can render the less complex ones at, let's say, 111 Mhz
to conserve battery power and the use that saved power to render a few
complex scenes at 333 mhz. Or you could try to design memory effective
levels, so you can load a whole level into the ram and switch off the
UMD drive most of the time and conserve power that way. Sure unlocking
the full clockspeed will help developers a bit but don't expect a huge
leap like you would expect it from a 33% increase of cpu and gpu power.
I also heard the PSP is easy to develop for, so I wouldn't expect a huge
jump like it happend from early PS2 to 2-3. gen PS2 titles. We sure will
some improvements, but they won't be huge imho. (Not that they are
needed anyway.)
And last but not least there is one problem that troubles me with that
clock speed increase. In a few years when we have PSPs with die shrinken
to 65nm or smaller and maybe better batteries, these second generation
PSPs could have a good battery life when running constantly at 333mhz.
Developers then could start designing games using 333 mhz constantly,
and while they would look really good, first gen PSP owners would get
the super short battery life some critics predicted.
Jan
|