CONFIRMED: PS3 to use "Nvidia-based Graphics processor&

Status
Not open for further replies.
Inane_Dork said:
I'm not saying this will happen, and I don't want it to happen but it might: nVidia and Sony may butt heads in the future. They're both headstrong companies eager to fill shoes bigger than their own. It's possible the two will have problems if they seriously want to develop an XNA alternative.

They might, like any partnership, but ATM at least for each party they're better together than not.
 
loekf2 said:
McFly said:
function said:
I find it interesting that the GeForce GPU he mentions is their "next generation" GPU. Could it be that he literally means the generation after the Nv4XX? Is that expected to be a particularly revolutionary architecture? Would separate vertex shaders in a console with a CPU as fast as Cell even be necessary?

They completly canceled their next GPU (NV50) not long ago, so this new (Cell?) GPU will be their real new GPU.

Fredi

Hmm... could it be a last minute action.. so NV50 = PS3's GPU ?

The Xbox GPU is essentially a beefy version of the GeForce 3. Will the PS3 (or whatever it will be called) GPU be based on forthcoming desktop GPU architecture or will it be its own entity entirely?

David Roman: It is a custom version of our next generation GPU
[source: http://gear.ign.com/articles/571/571598p1.html ]
 
Do I get a t-shirt of some sort for fully reading all 17 pages of this topic and getting to the end before the day was over? :D

Personally, I think this news cannot be seen as anything but positive for PS3. It's functionally as ideal as the mixing of peanut butter and chocolate with the credence of n-brandnames who have a clear history established that they know how to get the job done. No bizarre conspiracies of last minute manuevers, failed internal designs, or recycled GPU tech that was rejected from a competitor- just Sony cultivating the best business partners, comprehensive expertise, and vast resources to make this product the very best it could be on multi-different levels. This is not going to be a product that will simply be beat by its competitor(s) on some random/single (or even multi) advantage or odd turn of events. This has been thought out to the T on absolutely every level from the technology to the business strategy with billions in cash flow hanging in balance. Just thinking about the sheer number of immense projects that were kept in syncronization to allow them to get as far as they have already (with what seems to be a smoothly running plan as so far) seems staggering to me.

With that said, it is amazing to see the varied and even wildly contrasting responses and stances that have been given in this topic to date. Much like the presidential elections, it is evermore so clear that people will still see what they want to see all the way to the very "end". Therein lies varied fascimiles and bits and pieces of what is truly reality. As clear as the future may be to some, there will always be the potential for wide-eyed surprise once all is said and done. Not one of us can ever know or be sure until we have actually passed that point in time to observe it with our own eyes (and even then, personal perception will reign). ;)
 
Personally, I think this news cannot be seen as anything but positive for PS3. It's functionally as ideal as the mixing of peanut butter and chocolate with the credence of n-brandnames who have a clear history established that they know how to get the job done. No bizarre conspiracies of last minute manuevers, failed internal designs, or recycled GPU tech that was rejected from a competitor- just Sony cultivating the best business partners, comprehensive expertise, and vast resources to make this product the very best it could be on multi-different levels. This is not going to be a product that will simply be beat by its competitor(s) on some random/single (or even multi) advantage or odd turn of events. This has been thought out to the T on absolutely every level from the technology to the business strategy with billions in cash flow hanging in balance. Just thinking about the sheer number of immense projects that were kept in syncronization to allow them to get as far as they have already (with what seems to be a smoothly running plan as so far) seems staggering to me.


:oops:

whoa, I cannot wait to read what you will say when the PS4 effort is at this same stage of development that PS3 is now at. 8)
 
I'll say, "Ahh- this Playstation thing is so 2010-ish! Now where did I put my virtual Laurie Dhue pleasure android?! I need to hear the news and then have sex." :p

Jesus, we are staring down 2010 already, aren't we? As in that movie 2010 (the sequel)? We seem a might bit behind schedule for making trips to Jupiter, no? Either this Cell stuff will get us caught up on this interstellar travel some how or result in mechanized Terminators extinguishing mankind. Can't quite tell as of yet. Either way, I better get my Laurie Dhue pleasure android, if I actually make it to 2010. :LOL:
 
also,
Will NVIDIA's GPU work be tied into the Cell architecture, or will it be a separate chip in the PS3?

David Roman: It will be a separate chip
Means the GPU is just NV5/6PS and not relate much to cell architecture? Who is David Roman?
 
Cell Graphics

Also, if the Cell is really supposed to be so super fast (1 Tflop) then why does it need a GPU (and not just another cell chip to act like a GPU)?

If the NV50 is 2x NV40 then it is ~400 Gflops (or so using nVidia flops)

Does this imply that the PS3 CPU is < 400 Gflops?

If it really could dole out more flops than an NV50 then wouldn't the NV50 become a decelerator to such a massive CPU?
 
Means the GPU is just NV5/6PS and not relate much to cell architecture? Who is David Roman?

good question. hmmm. this IGN interview with this David Roman guy seems to contradict the press release(s) if i am not mistaken. didn't the press release indicate that Sony and Nvidia are jointly developing a GPU using Nvidida next gen GeForce *and* also Sony's technolgies ? well, at least there is no more speculation that Nvidia has something to do with PS3. it's all real now. we just have to now find out what the GPU really is. I'm not sure I trust this IGN interview. need clarifications.
 
pahcman said:
also,
Will NVIDIA's GPU work be tied into the Cell architecture, or will it be a separate chip in the PS3?

David Roman: It will be a separate chip
Means the GPU is just NV5/6PS and not relate much to cell architecture? Who is David Roman?


in gpu 32 pixelpipeline , no vertexshader
with 32 MB embended dram
800 MHZ
 
Megadrive1988 said:
this IGN interview with this David Roman guy seems to contradict the press release(s) if i am not mistaken. didn't the press release indicate that Sony and Nvidia are jointly developing a GPU using Nvidida next gen GeForce *and* also Sony's technolgies ?
Its not necessarily contradictory as Sony technologies doesn't imply just the CELL it could be any number of things including communication between CELL and PS3 GPU.
 
version said:
in gpu 32 pixelpipeline , no vertexshader
with 32 MB embended dram
800 MHZ
Apologies for the tone of the reference :oops: . I don't think we have verified the authenticity of version as a dev, or involved with Cell somehow. But we haven't refuted it either. So... can keep this post in mind.
 
DopeyFish wrote:
CELL will be very expensive.

I believe that was the main purpose for them alliancing with both Toshiba and IBM in the first place. With the three of them dividing the cost amongst themselves, it would only cost each individual about a third to build the Cell. This also explains why Sony wants to implement the architecture into consumer devices: it would help them turn a profit much, much faster while competing with heavy competition than it would if it were only in a console. In other words, it allows them the flexibility to price-match if need be.
 
Megadrive1988 said:
good question. hmmm. this IGN interview with this David Roman guy seems to contradict the press release(s) if i am not mistaken. didn't the press release indicate that Sony and Nvidia are jointly developing a GPU using Nvidida next gen GeForce *and* also Sony's technolgies ?

he said "a custom version of our next generation GPU", it doen't exclude the fact it could integrate some sony technology.
 
Vysez said:
cybamerc, let me ask you that; what are you complaining about?
Are you complaining about people speculating about future and hypothetical performances based on paper thin bits of info, on thoses very B3D boards? People over B3D, speculating on PS3 hardware?
Come on cybamerc, you know the board, that's the name of the game. :)
I have nothing against thoughtful speculation. I just think some people are jumping to conclusions.
 
Re: Cell Graphics

PZ said:
Also, if the Cell is really supposed to be so super fast (1 Tflop) then why does it need a GPU (and not just another cell chip to act like a GPU)?

Cause PS3 Cell isn't gonna be 1 tflops.
 
wco81 said:
And I submit that a big part of the Xbox marketing was superior HW/graphics. Especially at launch because how else were they going to justify people buying their box over the PS2 or the GC, which both came with established game franchises?

Remember, MS could have launched in 2000 but they would not have had HW parity with the PS2 and Gates was quoted as saying he wanted 2 or 3 times the performance of the PS2.

Other than Halo, KOTOR and a handful of other titles, the superior HW/graphics remains the main value proposition for the Xbox. XBL to a certain extent too but only a small percentage of Xbox gamers have signed up for XBL.

People were not too confident about Xbox because MS was a newcomer. Xenon OTOH will be very different with solutions gleaned from their past mistakes. I don't see developers suddenly and mysteriously abandoning Xenon.
 
Re: Cell Graphics

PZ said:
Also, if the Cell is really supposed to be so super fast (1 Tflop) then why does it need a GPU (and not just another cell chip to act like a GPU)?
Cause if you know how a GPU work you also know a CELL CPU can't be an efficient GPU.
There are really tons of reasons why a CELL CPU wouldn't be a competetitve GPU for a given transistors budget:
1) no support for GPU remaining fixed functions pipeline (scissor, stencil, alpha, z tests..) no clipping planes, no primitives assembly, no ROPs, no primitives walking and rasterization, no primitves clipping, etc etc etc..
2) even if one wants to use SPUs as pixel shaders engines as far we know SPUs are not well suited to hide big latencies due to texture sampling.
Modern GPUs hide latencies in pixel shaders switching from a pixel to another one at per clock basis, thus hiding the time needed to fetch and filter a group of texels.

There is nothing dictating that one can't code a pure sw rasterizer on a CELL architecture.
will it be fast? Sure! will it be competetitive? no, imho.
If the GPU NVIDIA is developing for Sony is CELL based I've no doubt they customized their APU design. Moreover I'm 100% confident they implemented in silicon all that stuff you need to make a fast GPU. If you remember the infamous Visualizer scheme you know what I'm talking about.

If the NV50 is 2x NV40 then it is ~400 Gflops (or so using nVidia flops)
Does this imply that the PS3 CPU is < 400 Gflops?
If it really could dole out more flops than an NV50 then wouldn't the NV50 become a decelerator to such a massive CPU?
That's not the case, you can't rate a GPU just from gigaflop/s.
Like I just wrote above there a lot of things a GPU does very fast that a CPU wouldn't do so well..even a CELL based CPU.
At least if we are talking about 'classic' GPUs.
IF this PS3 GPU is a customized/bastardized version of the next generation GPU NVIDIA is developing for the PC market..I don't think it will be really much more exotic (regarding how rasterization work..) than current GPUs.
Shaders wise it could be even a totally new architecture, it doesn't matter at all.

ciao,
Marco
 
Does this mean the GPU in PS3 will need a snow blower? :p

I can already see a big advert poster with the Top 500 Supercomputer list on it where 9/10 is covered with "Playstation 3".

Yeah and conveniently leaving out efficiency numbers while adding the fact the GPU can be used for rendering nuclear simulations. :LOL:
 
Out of interest how do MS and Sony stack up in terms of financial muscle?

All I'm alluding to is that it's not wise to count MS out of the "living room" PC experience. They are SERIOUSLY after "Windows xxx" in every living room and in reality Xbox 1 and 2 are just stepping stones to what they really want......Windows everywhere on virtually every device. I don't really think they are bothered about what hardware runs it so long as their software IP is on it.

Of course Sony have the same ultimate goal too (world domination :devilish: ) so I'm shit scared of any one of them achieving any kind of pre-eminance. What Sony don't have though is OS software experience (afaics) so will that be a hinderance to them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top