Analyst Speak: NVIDIA in PS3...!

Ooh-videogames said:
You guys speak as if Nintendo can't compete, I believe they have already sealed the deal with ATI for a GPU. Nintendo has a great relationship with ATI and it would only seem obvious for them to continue working together. Microsoft and Nintendo really have no choice but to work with their previous GPU partners because if their gonna release along side Sony's PS3. Backwards compatibility is the only way they can make sure they don't alienate gamers by releasing their systems a year earlier than the normal cycle.
Click to expand...


NO ONE is talking about Nintendo because:

1) no one knows what they're gonna do next gen, apart from *putting out a console*, and even then, we don't know what target they will have (see: low cost like GC or hi-end hi cost like ps3)
2) everyone, including me, don't expect Nintendo to throw as much money into their next generation hardware as Sony did or Microsoft is expected to do
3) the war has always been between MS and Sony, since they are in direct competition, unlike Nintendo which always seem to do their own thing, and when they don't, they still have to get rid of the good old image they have.
4) we're talking about IBM-Nvidia etc which have nothing to do with Nintendo

how do u know they already signed a deal with ATI for their next GPU? although i personally think that is the route they will be taking, i have not heard anything with regards to that.
 
Nintendo can't afford to not match Sony and Microsoft technically, they might as well drop out of the next-gen race. Sony and MS are gonna do what they usually do and is hype the numbers. I can go in any videogame store and find out what XBox's raw polygon performance is, because its on display. Wasn't the PS2 considered as high-end when its specs were first announced.

I didn't say I know Nintendo is working with ATI but I believe that it would be some what obvious that Nintendo would rather work with ATI who they have a great relationship with because of the ArtX team. Nintendo will choose not to include all the bells and whistles that Sony and MS are going to put in their systems. All you need to make a next-gen system is what Nintendo put in the GC( CPU,GPU).

Nothing is clear-cut, MS may have a lot more money than Nintendo but, if they lose Nvidia that doesn't mean that ATI is automatically the next inline. Nintendo has already stated that development of GC successor is underway.
 
Ooh-videogames said:
Nothing is clear-cut, MS may have a lot more money than Nintendo but, if they lose Nvidia that doesn't mean that ATI is automatically the next inline. Nintendo has already stated that development of GC successor is underway.
Click to expand...

Microsoft has a few options besides ATI. Such as 3d labs or Power VR.
 
ALSO, THINKING ABOUT THIS a bit more in depth, it would be extremely weird if Nvidia does power Xbox2.

let me get this straight...

Nvidia are going to get their GPU's done at IBM from NV40 on...

IBM is co-powering PS3, but if NV powers the Xbox2 then IBM would play a part in the GPU manufacturing of the XBOX2..... IBM would have to cook Cell chips for PS3 AND the GPU for the next XBOX... a bit too much if u ask me...

isnt that too complicated? is it not much more reazlistic having IBM and NV playing a part in only one console, PS3?
Click to expand...


I agree with this.


It would be a bit weird for Nvidia to help Sony in the design of PS3's GPU and also design the XBox2 GPU. As it would for IBM to be producing both the PS3 Cell CPU and the XBox2 GPU.

Not to say that Nvidia can't or won't do both, but it makes for a conflict of interest that I think just wont happen.

that said, I think ATI could design the XBox2 GPU, to be manufactured by TSMC or maybe Intel if ATI gets a deal similar to Nvidia with IBM. And the Nintendo GC sucessor's GPU as well, which would be manufactured by NEC. much less conflict of interest. because both Nintendo GC sucessor and XBox2 would be targeting somewhat different markets assuming Ninty does not change their ways. And also the manufacturing would be done by different companies (TSMC or Intel for XB2, NEC for GC2)
 
london-boy wrote:
SONY alwyas like to develop their own tech, true, but they do so with the help of other companies such as Toshiba and IBM for example. what's to stop Sony to get some help from Nvidia for certain aspects of the rasterizer?
Click to expand...


I agree wholeheartedly here. Sony was looking at certain partners for PS2's graphics. but then rejected them in favor of their own. E&S was on the list I believe.


personally, i think they could do well even without Nvidia's help, but everyone seems to think it would be a good thing...
Nvidia would not design the GPU in Ps3 simply because the idea of GPU is not right for an architecture like PS3. what they could do is assist them in what concerns the shaders side of things and supporting drivers/libraries... now that would be cool...
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. Sony could well design their own GS3. actually with the same partners they designed GS with, Simplex Solutions, but would be much better off if they brought in an expert (compared to Sony) in rasterization, hardwired features, and pixel shaders. Nvidia has great IP. (SGI, Real3D, 3Dfx, GigaPixel and others) - I'd actually like to see Nvidia design 50% of GS3. the whole rasterizing side.

I would love to see what could be done with Nvidia's IP combined with the massive bandwidth & parallelism/transistor budget of Sony PS3, on IBM's manufacturing process.
:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:


but that's just what I'd like to see.


It could be that Nvidia plays a smaller role, like you mentioned, focusing just on the IQ side of things. perhaps Nvidia will only design/help with say, 1-10% of PS3's GPU.
 
This is a bit embarrassing, :oops: but what exactly does IQ stand for?
I can figure out it has something to do with overall image quality but how? :D
 
Most Analysts have a habit of talking out of their behinds so me will put this in the recipe marked 'add a huge Mt Everest sized grain of salt and simmer for a while.'
 
Squeak said:
This is a bit embarrassing, :oops: but what exactly does IQ stand for?
I can figure out it has something to do with overall image quality but how? :D
Click to expand...



yeah it's Image Quality. by that i mean all those aspects that make games *easier* on the eye, like filtering, AA, AF, resolution and things like that. i guess an help from someone as expert in those areas as NV or ATI would be a great help for Sony, even though they do have extremely powerful designs. remember PS2... sometimes the sheer power of it was somewhat outshined by the sub-standard IQ, be it filtering, jaggies etc... it's not that PS2 doesnt have *the power*, it's just that if only Sony got a bit more in depth in that area, some games would be much easier on the eye... of course u have games with perfect IQ like Tekken4 in proscan, but they're the vast minority. NV could provide a standard for every game to comply. a bit like the Xbox, which has 480p by standard in NTSC territories and PAL60 by standard in europe...
PAL60 is still hard to find in european versions of PS2 games, let alone pro-scan.... :rolleyes:
 
by that i mean all those aspects that make games *easier* on the eye, like filtering, AA, AF, resolution and things like that. i guess an help from someone as expert in those areas as NV or ATI would be a great help for Sony,
Click to expand...

Why would one need NV or ATI for that? The premises behind AA and AF are pretty straight forward...

NV could provide a standard for every game to comply. a bit like the Xbox, which has 480p by standard in NTSC territories and PAL60 by standard in europe...
Click to expand...

Again, why would one need NV for this? I mean Sony could've easily made 480p a requirement for every title if they had wanted to (I dunno about the PAL60 timings though)....
 
archie4oz said:
by that i mean all those aspects that make games *easier* on the eye, like filtering, AA, AF, resolution and things like that. i guess an help from someone as expert in those areas as NV or ATI would be a great help for Sony,
Click to expand...

Why would one need NV or ATI for that? The premises behind AA and AF are pretty straight forward...

NV could provide a standard for every game to comply. a bit like the Xbox, which has 480p by standard in NTSC territories and PAL60 by standard in europe...
Click to expand...

Again, why would one need NV for this? I mean Sony could've easily made 480p a requirement for every title if they had wanted to (I dunno about the PAL60 timings though)....
Click to expand...


well i never said they necessarely need NV... but i'm sure NV and ATI know more about how to make use of those features efficently, they are after all the best in that regard... and after PS2, sony doesnt really have the image of *IQ experts*, even to me... and thats saying something...
 
well i never said they necessarely need NV... but i'm sure NV and ATI know more about how to make use of those features efficently, they are after all the best in that regard... and after PS2, sony doesnt really have the image of *IQ experts*, even to me... and thats saying something...
Click to expand...

I'm not even sure how to quantify an 'IQ expert'... I mean NV and ATI don't make reference grade displays, HD capture, edit, filtering and rendering hardware. One could argue that they're less qualified 'IQ' folks than Sony (and been at it for a shorter amount of time).

It seems to me as though you're using the GS (a design that'll be nearly 5 years old this fall), that had a totally different engineering focus that obviously set a different set of priorities for the design team as a standard of what the company can and can't do...
 
archie4oz said:
It seems to me as though you're using the GS (a design that'll be nearly 5 years old this fall), that had a totally different engineering focus that obviously set a different set of priorities for the design team as a standard of what the company can and can't do...
Click to expand...


YEAH i probably am.... psychologically i think that that is what intrinsecally thinks.... u know it's a whole "label" thing... u know, u get the label and it's hard for people to look at u in a different way.... i'm not being particularly clear am i.... :D
 
YEAH i probably am.... psychologically i think that that is what intrinsecally thinks.... u know it's a whole "label" thing... u know, u get the label and it's hard for people to look at u in a different way.... i'm not being particularly clear am i....
Click to expand...

I think you just described your self as the f@n-boy. :LOL:

Anyway with alot of things going bad with NVIDIA lately, (nearly one year now), I think they better concentrate on what they have, before going else where.
 
archie4oz said:
well i never said they necessarely need NV... but i'm sure NV and ATI know more about how to make use of those features efficently, they are after all the best in that regard... and after PS2, sony doesnt really have the image of *IQ experts*, even to me... and thats saying something...
Click to expand...

I'm not even sure how to quantify an 'IQ expert'... I mean NV and ATI don't make reference grade displays, HD capture, edit, filtering and rendering hardware. One could argue that they're less qualified 'IQ' folks than Sony (and been at it for a shorter amount of time).

It seems to me as though you're using the GS (a design that'll be nearly 5 years old this fall), that had a totally different engineering focus that obviously set a different set of priorities for the design team as a standard of what the company can and can't do...
Click to expand...


As far as IQ quality goes I've always thought the Dreamcast was better than the PS2 by a signifigant margin. Although the average consumer probably can't tell much of a difference between a PS 2 and a Gamecube or X Box game.
 
Brimstone said:
As far as IQ quality goes I've always thought the Dreamcast was better than the PS2 by a signifigant margin.
Click to expand...

Although the average consumer probably can't tell much of a difference between a PS 2 and a Gamecube or X Box game.
Click to expand...

How is that possible??

DC>PS2 by significant margin!!
PS2 apprx = GC/XB

that means...

DC> PS2/GC/XB.....

now how is that possible??? :LOL:
 
One of the most disapointing days for me as far as gaming goes was the day my Playstation 2 arrived. For a system that was much more powerful than a Dreamcast the graphics were poor. I'll take Soul Caliber on the Dreamcast anyday over any of the Tekken games for the PS 2. Dreamcast image quality to me is smooth while I would describe PS 2 image quality as sandpaper. The PS 2 is more powerful but the quality in the Dreamcasts IQ just shows how good the Power VR technology is.

And Deeppak re-read what I wrote very carefully. One is my personal opinion and the other is how I think the average consumer views image quality. Note how I use the word "probably". I don't consider myself or the people that post here average consumers of video games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top