Because apparently everybody but you knows that it should have read NGP at one point in that sentence?
Sony's Next Generation Portable unveiling - PSP2 in disguise
- Thread starter Farid
- Start date
Because apparently everybody but you knows that it should have read NGP at one point in that sentence?
if you read the whole thing you can see that they are saying that Wipeout NGP is "the WipEout HD PS3 engine running on PS3 with no changes to the art platform"
What I mentioned is the total system power, not the power of core chipset. I think when we discuss the heat problem of a handheld machine we should consider the whole system power as well.
The original PSP-1000 has a battery of 1800mAh@ 3.6V, which means 6.5Wh. The offcial minimum battery life is 4 hour, therefore we can have
6.5Wh/4hr = 1.6W of total system power.
However, in reality when we use the ADHOC mode, the actual battery life is way less than 4 hr (in my personal experience, 3hr). Therefore the original PSP-1000 has 6.5Wh/3 hr = 2.16 Watt of total system power.
Therefore a larger NGP may be feasible of 2.5~3W. I'm very curious about
the performace of such a high-power handheld device, especially at 28 nm.
My questions to anyone who can answer.
1) Does the Cortex A9 processors used by this device have both the NEON and FPU?
2) How can Neon be used to work with the GPU?
3) Is the NGP as powerful as the PS3?
4) What are the clock speeds?
5) What would the clock speeds need to be to match the power of the PS3?
1) Does the Cortex A9 processors used by this device have both the NEON and FPU?
2) How can Neon be used to work with the GPU?
3) Is the NGP as powerful as the PS3?
4) What are the clock speeds?
5) What would the clock speeds need to be to match the power of the PS3?
Why do you keep asking the same question(s) that were already answered? Do you expect the answers to change somehow without any official information released? Specifically question 3 and the follow up 5. I suggest you ask these questions to Sony.
Really? AFAIK, we've only ever had extremely vague hints. Anything about the clock speed was only confirmed with the GCM/linux readout. Exactly what secrets are there.
Vortex cache? If that's a typo, that's an epic typo. But if it's not a typo, then this is just EPIC!
As for the Cortex-A9, DeanA said it had NEON, and ARM forces all NEON implementations to also have FPU on the A9 (unlike on the A8 where they were not even allowed to have it) so it nearly certainly has both unless Sony asked and ARM made an exception (which seems very unlikely but who knows).
As for the Cortex-A9, DeanA said it had NEON, and ARM forces all NEON implementations to also have FPU on the A9 (unlike on the A8 where they were not even allowed to have it) so it nearly certainly has both unless Sony asked and ARM made an exception (which seems very unlikely but who knows).
Cortex-A8 has scalar FPU, it's just unpipelined and slow.
The extra logic can be deduced from the larger die size of RSX compared to G71 (~40mm^2 larger @ 90nm). Not exactly shocking when you consider that Sony had slides indicating the ability of RSX to communicate with Cell/XDR.
And if you're referring to the larger caches on RSX, that was leaked by a member who wasn't under NDA nor a game developer.
so it does have 128MB of VRam?
I said the source is mistaken if they are saying that the next kits have the final GPU. But then this is probably the same source babbling about battery life when there's *no battery in the devkits*.
When it comes to the actual specifications of the GPU (or CPU, for that matter), clearly I can't say anything beyond that which was disclosed at the PlayStation Meeting in Tokyo.
Dean
Please do not ban me or delete this post.
The SGX 543 has the following capacity at 200MHZ.
http://www.imgtec.com/news/Release/index.asp?NewsID=428
"The new POWERVR SGX543 delivers real-world performance of 35 million polygons/sec and 1 Gpixels/sec fillrate at 200MHz"
The NGP is claimed to use a quad core POWERVR SGX 543. This chip can be clocked up to 400MHZ utilizing the 65nm process. It is likely Sony may wait and try to use a smaller process. This would make speeds of 400MHZ and even faster possible. At 400MHZ this chip would be capable of a fill rate of 8gigapixels and 280m polygons/sec.
This surpasses the specs of the PS3 which is claimed to have a fill rate of 4.4gigapixels and 250 million vertex setup limit.
In addition, the NGP may have more than 512 megabytes of RAM. This could allow for better textures.
If the specs are possibly better than the PS3 then why is it impossible for the NGP to be as powerful as the PS3?
Why is it IMPOSSIBLE for the NGP to be as powerful as the PS3? I do not understand this.
I understand that it might be LIKELY the NGP is not as powerful, but I do not understand how it is impossible.
Is there something else about this system that would make it weaker than the PS3?
Could this be the A9 Cortex cores?
Could this be the bus speed?
Could this be the fact that power consumption will force Sony to underclock everything?
Could it be the NEON and FPU parts of the A9 are horrible?
The SGX 543 has the following capacity at 200MHZ.
http://www.imgtec.com/news/Release/index.asp?NewsID=428
"The new POWERVR SGX543 delivers real-world performance of 35 million polygons/sec and 1 Gpixels/sec fillrate at 200MHz"
The NGP is claimed to use a quad core POWERVR SGX 543. This chip can be clocked up to 400MHZ utilizing the 65nm process. It is likely Sony may wait and try to use a smaller process. This would make speeds of 400MHZ and even faster possible. At 400MHZ this chip would be capable of a fill rate of 8gigapixels and 280m polygons/sec.
This surpasses the specs of the PS3 which is claimed to have a fill rate of 4.4gigapixels and 250 million vertex setup limit.
In addition, the NGP may have more than 512 megabytes of RAM. This could allow for better textures.
If the specs are possibly better than the PS3 then why is it impossible for the NGP to be as powerful as the PS3?
Why is it IMPOSSIBLE for the NGP to be as powerful as the PS3? I do not understand this.
I understand that it might be LIKELY the NGP is not as powerful, but I do not understand how it is impossible.
Is there something else about this system that would make it weaker than the PS3?
Could this be the A9 Cortex cores?
Could this be the bus speed?
Could this be the fact that power consumption will force Sony to underclock everything?
Could it be the NEON and FPU parts of the A9 are horrible?
A basic consideration of thermal design limits makes it clear that NGP can't possibly be faster than a PS3.
It's a portable system that'll draw a couple of watts of power and will have very strict thermal limitations.
You are comparing it to a system that draws ~100W, is significantly larger and has a 120M fan.
As a number of members have stated already; with such a flexible GPU architecture achieving similar visual results will be possible - but that's just a question of where you spend your performance. Will you see as complex physics, or shader complexity? of course not! will you see cheap tricks and hacks employed to get approximately the same results? most certainly.
Also, I do not appreciate you trying to contact me via skype. If you want to contact a moderator or have a complaint, please use the official forums channels. If you have a complaint about a post, that's what the
button is for. Thanks.
It's a portable system that'll draw a couple of watts of power and will have very strict thermal limitations.
You are comparing it to a system that draws ~100W, is significantly larger and has a 120M fan.
As a number of members have stated already; with such a flexible GPU architecture achieving similar visual results will be possible - but that's just a question of where you spend your performance. Will you see as complex physics, or shader complexity? of course not! will you see cheap tricks and hacks employed to get approximately the same results? most certainly.
Also, I do not appreciate you trying to contact me via skype. If you want to contact a moderator or have a complaint, please use the official forums channels. If you have a complaint about a post, that's what the
Thanks for answering my question without deleting my post or banning me.
You make a very good point I would like to discuss.
I realize that the NGP only utilizes a couple of watts. However, can better processor/GPU design and a smaller process make up for that?
For example, I'm sure a computer 20 years ago with the power of a cell phone might have used kilowatts of power. However, the cell phone today is as powerful as a computer 20 years ago. Better processor design and a smaller process has made that happen.
If this is not enough for the NGP then how much of a factor is it? How much performance per watt could it get compared to the PS3?
I apologize for contacting you on Skype. I saw that on your profile. I did not think you would mind. I am sorry.
You make a very good point I would like to discuss.
I realize that the NGP only utilizes a couple of watts. However, can better processor/GPU design and a smaller process make up for that?
For example, I'm sure a computer 20 years ago with the power of a cell phone might have used kilowatts of power. However, the cell phone today is as powerful as a computer 20 years ago. Better processor design and a smaller process has made that happen.
If this is not enough for the NGP then how much of a factor is it? How much performance per watt could it get compared to the PS3?
I apologize for contacting you on Skype. I saw that on your profile. I did not think you would mind. I am sorry.
