[RudeCurve]

I think you guys are confused. The way PowerVR technology works is everything is done on chip so you don't need massive external bandwidth to "connect separate nodes" like in a render farm. All "nodes" in a PowerVR GPU communicates at full chip speed.

[hoho]

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

I think you guys are confused.

Considering how little I know about PowerVR tech you are quite definitely right. I just tried to apply what I know about regular AMD-NV GPUs to them

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

The way PowerVR technology works is everything is done on chip so you don't need massive external bandwidth to "connect separate nodes" like in a render farm. All "nodes" in a PowerVR GPU communicates at full chip speed.

So how many of those "cores" or "nodes" can you add to the full GPU before you hit some nasty bottleneck? How much work will be duplicated in those nodes (triangle setup?)?

[Simon F]

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

I think you guys are confused. The way PowerVR technology works is everything is done on chip so you don't need massive external bandwidth to "connect separate nodes" like in a render farm. All "nodes" in a PowerVR GPU communicates at full chip speed.

Interestingly enough,

• the very first (non-FPGA) PowerVR system used multiple chips (1+ ISP(s), 1 TSP)
• we did experiment with a PC system with a pair of PCX1/2 boards, and
• there was the Naomi-II system that had the T&L "Elan" chip driving multiple CLX2 renderers

but, yes the vast majority are single chip systems.

[upnorthsox]

Originally Posted by Simon F

Interestingly enough,

• the very first (non-FPGA) PowerVR system used multiple chips (1+ ISP(s), 1 TSP)
• we did experiment with a PC system with a pair of PCX1/2 boards, and
• there was the Naomi-II system that had the T&L "Elan" chip driving multiple CLX2 renderers

but, yes the vast majority are single chip systems.

So then a split chip (say 2 quads per split with a total of 16 cores) should be a real possibility then. What are the downsides?

[Rodéric]

You have some documentation for PowerVR:

http://www.imgtec.com/powervr/inside...8.External.pdf

[Ailuros]

Originally Posted by hoho

So how many of those "cores" or "nodes" can you add to the full GPU before you hit some nasty bottleneck? How much work will be duplicated in those nodes (triangle setup?)?

For the current generation of Series5XT cores one could theoretically connect up to 16 cores (MP16).

From the whitepaper Roderic posted above section 4.7:

The SGX-MP architecture is designed to scale as close to linearly as possible as more graphics cores are used. In typical real-world performance conditions (running well known game engines, graphics applications, benchmarks etc), each additional core runs at 95%+ the efficiency of a single core. Additionally, adding another core to the system only increases the overall memory bandwidth for a frame by <1%.

A SGX543 or 544MP16@200MHz would result on paper to Xenos XBox360 graphics performance.

Their new up to DX11.x generation Series6/Rogue, hasn't been fully announced yet and details over it are sparse. However from the two so far announced cores G6200 & G6400 the latter should be roughly on the fore mentioned MP16 level. Cores should be quite more efficient this time and probably scalable to higher amounts than with Series5XT.

[Dominik D]

Originally Posted by Ailuros

For the current generation of Series5XT cores one could theoretically connect up to 16 cores (MP16).

Also, if contents of the initial post in this thread are to be trusted, Rogue should be able to go MP32+.

[Ailuros]

Originally Posted by Dominik D

Also, if contents of the initial post in this thread are to be trusted, Rogue should be able to go MP32+.

I'm not so sure if that should read MP or rather MP+MC. So far they've announced the G6200 and G6400 "multi-cluster" designs for which they claimed can scale up to 1 TFLOP. It seems that you can get 200GFLOPs out of a 4 cluster G6400. To reach that TFLOP you'd need a G6400MP5 (MC4*MP5= Mn20 )

[Dominik D]

Originally Posted by Ailuros

I'm not so sure if that should read MP or rather MP+MC.

I wouldn't know.

[onQ]

Could it be?




A New, $99 Console Called Ouya Is Real and Radically Different From Xbox, PlayStation and Wii

[RudeCurve]

If it's not powered by PowerVR why are you posting that in this thread?

[onQ]

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

If it's not powered by PowerVR why are you posting that in this thread?

I said could it be?

since it's a android console it would seem that the GPU would be PowerVR (or Mali) . unless you know for sure that it's not PowerVR because I haven't been able to find the specs.

[RudeCurve]

Aren't there other GPUs made by Nvidia and other companies like Mali that run on Android?

[onQ]

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

Aren't there other GPUs made by Nvidia and other companies like Mali that run on Android?

Yeah but I was just speculating.

[Shifty Geezer]

Whatever it is, it's not going to be a next-gen console. Not even a this-gen console at $99 running download games.

[antwan]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

Whatever it is, it's not going to be a next-gen console. Not even a this-gen console at $99 running download games.

Is it not going to be a next-gen console at $99???? How could you think that?

But with all due respect, the iPad1 and iPhone 4 can run infinity blade at around 25 fps;
the resolution being 1024*768 and 960*640 or something. They are powered by the PowerVR SGX 535.
The 540 is already present in low-low budget android tablets. It's more powerful btw.
If it were the 540 powering this $99 dollar console, then it could have the potential to destroy the this-gen wii, even at higher resolutions.

If people can stand the wii (where art matters a lot, for example: mario games look gorgeous, even with the low polycounts and resolution). Then this $99 console could compete, at least with that.

Although I am 98% sure that the android games can never compete; the budget and artists are not there.

[Sonic]

Originally Posted by antwan

Is it not going to be a next-gen console at $99???? How could you think that?

But with all due respect, the iPad1 and iPhone 4 can run infinity blade at around 25 fps;
the resolution being 1024*768 and 960*640 or something. They are powered by the PowerVR SGX 535.
The 540 is already present in low-low budget android tablets. It's more powerful btw.
If it were the 540 powering this $99 dollar console, then it could have the potential to destroy the this-gen wii, even at higher resolutions.

If people can stand the wii (where art matters a lot, for example: mario games look gorgeous, even with the low polycounts and resolution). Then this $99 console could compete, at least with that.

Although I am 98% sure that the android games can never compete; the budget and artists are not there.

Yes, you are quite correct that thus machine should be able to compete with Wii (Gamecube 1.5 with extra memory) that is 2 generations old tech. But why would this machine want to compete with a current gen extender?

[RudeCurve]

Originally Posted by onQ

I said could it be?

since it's a android console it would seem that the GPU would be PowerVR (or Mali) . unless you know for sure that it's not PowerVR because I haven't been able to find the specs.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...21&postcount=1

Would've been cool if it had a Rogue in it instead of a Tegra.

[onQ]

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...21&postcount=1

Would've been cool if it had a Rogue in it instead of a Tegra.

Yeah I seen that, Dreamcast Dreamcrushed!

but I guess Tegra 3 is cool but I'm not as excited as I was before, well there is still hope for the Apple Console.